CERROBAUL:A WARICENTERON THE TIWANAKUFRONTIER

PatrickRyan Williams

Andean scholars have long debated the nature of the relationship between two Middle Horizon (ca. A. D. 750-1000) Andean
states; many assumed TiwanakudominatedWariand preceded Wariin time. Recent research at the Wariadministrativecenter
of CerroBaul in the only knownregion occupied by both states (the MoqueguaValleyof southernPeru) indicates that Tiwanaku
may not predate Wariin Moquegua and that, contrary to previous assertions, both states occupied the valleyfor the last three
centuries of the Middle Horizon. In support of this position, I review recent excavations at CerroBaul. ThenI present eight new
14C dates and summarizethe evidencefor two major construction episodes at Cerro Baul. I interpretthe local Wariconstruction chronology based on the 12 14C dates now available from excavation contexts and I suggest that the new data, in comparison with 24 published 14C dates from other Waricenters, support a later date for Middle Horizon IB Wariexpansion than
previously postulated.
Los arqueologos andinistas han venido discutiendodesde hace mucho tiempo la naturalezade las relaciones entre los dos estados andinosprincipales del HorizonteMedio (750-1000 d. C.) asumiendomayoritariamenteque Tiwanakudominoa Wariy que
lo precedio en el tiempo.Investigacionesrecientes en el centroadministrativoWaride CerroBaul, en el valle de Moqueguaen el
sur del Peru, la unica region conocida por haber sido ocupadapor los dos estados, indican que Tiwanakuno precedio a Warien
Moqueguay, contrariamentea aserciones previas, que los dos hablan ocupado el valle durantelos ultimos tres siglos del HorizonteMedio. En apoyo de esta posicion, evaluo excavaciones recientesen CerroBaul que incluyenexploracionesen los sectores
publicos y residenciales. Las investigacionesrevelan evidencias de fuertes conexiones con la capital Wari,y evidencias en contextos ceremonialesde interaccionentreWariy Tiwanaku.Presentoa continuacionocho nuevasfechas 14C y resumola evidencia
de dos episodiosprincipales de construccionen CerroBaul. Interpretola cronologla constructivaWarilocal en base a 12 fechas
14C disponibles de contextos excavados en el sitio y sugiero que los nuevos datos, en comparacioncon 24 fechas 14C publicadas
de otros centrosWari,apoyanfechas mas tardlaspar la e.rpansiondurantela Epoca IB, con una duracionde inf uencia imperial
Warihastaftnes del primer milenio d. C.

The

relationshipbetweenthe MiddleHorizon
polities of WariandTiwanakuhas long perplexedAndeanscholars.They sharedmajor
motifs andperhapssharedsimilarbeliefs. Yet, they
occupied distinct geographic areas, with Wari
expandingthroughoutthecentralsierrafromits capital in Ayacucho,andTiwanakucenteredin the Titicaca Basin colonizing valleys east and west of the
altiplano.TraditionalchronologieshaveplacedWari
afterTiwanakustatedevelopment,witha laterimperialexpansionyet earliercollapsethantheTiwanaku
state.The late expansionof Warihas led to speculationthatWariiconographywas deriveddirectlyfrom
Tiwanaku(PonceSangines1980;Posnansky1945).
Recentresearchis revisingthisspeculation,however,
andmorerecentexplanationssuggestcoeval developmentof MiddleHorizonideology,a sharediconographicandbelief systemthatcharacterizebothWari

and Tiwanaku(Cook 1994; Isbell and Cook 1987;

Schreiber1992).
A uniqueperspectiveon the natureof the WariTiwanakurelationship
canbe gainedfromCerroBaul,
theonlyWariadministrative
siteknowntodatethatoverlapsspatiallyandtemporally
withTiwanaku
settlement
systems.AlthoughTiwanaku
ceramicshavebeenrecoveredfromotherWariprovincialareas,as theyhavein
Cusco,archaeologists
havenotyet demonstrated
overlappingsettlementsas theyhavein Moquegua.In this
paper,I presenttheresultsof my excavationsat Cerro
Baul,andI evaluatetheexcavation
dataandsitechronology in relationto Tiwanakusettlementin thevalleyas
well as to Wariimperialism.l
Relations Between Wari and Tiwanaku
Wariwas firstdefinedas the sourceof a majorcultureby Tello in the 1930s (Tello 1942). Before that

Patrick R. Williams * Departmentof Archaeology,Boston University,675 CommonwealthAvenue #347, Boston, MA 02215

LatinAmericanAntiquity,12(1), 2001, pp. 67-83
Copyright(g3
2001 by the Society for AmericanArchaeology
67

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

68

LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY

time, most archaeologistsbelieved that there were

differences between the ceramics called "coastal
Tiahuanacoid"and classic Tiahuanaco.However,
most scholarsbelievedthe Peruvianmaterialswere
somehow derivedfrom the altiplanoTiwanakutradition(Schreiberl992:75;Uhlel903).Later
researchdescribeda style emanatingfrom the Wari
capital that extended all over Peru, evidently the
resultof rapidexpansion.Menzel's (1964) ceramic
chronologylinkedWariexpansionto the spreadof
Middle Horizon Epoch 1A and especially 1B
ceramicstyles into the Ica Valleyof southernPeru.
Thisperiodof expansionis usuallydatedtoA.D.600
to 700. The followingWariceramicPhase,Epoch2,
has more secularmotifs thatMenzel (1964:69-70)
attributesto a crisis andreorganizationin Wariculture and dates to A.D. 700 to 800. Epochs 3 and 4
representthe collapseandaftermathof Wariandthe
developmentof regionalceramicstylesbasedon previous Waristyles andaretraditionallydatedto A.D.
800-1000.
Tiwanakuceramicchronology,while not as well
definedas thatof Wari,is postulatedto representan
organizedpolity thatemergedin the late fourthcenturyA.D.andenduredintotheeleventhcenturyA.D.
and perhapsslightly later (Ponce Sangines 1972).
TheTiwanakuchronologyhasbeendividedintofive
phases. The last two of these, TiwanakuIV and
TiwanakuV,arefoundlocally in the MoqueguaValley andareknownas theOmoandChenChenPhases
respectively (Goldstein 1989). The Moquegua
sequencebegins later (A.D. 500-725 for the Omo
Phase) and ends earlier (A.D. 725-950 for Chen
Chen)thanits altiplanosource(Goldstein1993),but
therearestillveryfew absolutedatesforthesephases.
New evidenceis likely to shiftthe absolutedatingof
these phases substantially,perhapseven nullifying
the existence of a TiwanakuIV Omo Phase.
Giventheseestablishedchronologicalsequences,
it is temptingto see Warias short-lived,with a rise
and fall all withinthe time spanof Tiwanakuhegemony. The similaritybetween Wariand Tiwanaku
iconographyis also very strong,withbothtraditions
depictingthe FrontFacedDeity or the Staff God as
theparamount
beingorsacredfigure.Intennsof both
style andform,WariandTiwanakuceramicsaredistinct assemblagesand are segregatedspatiallyon a
regional level (Lumbreras1974; Schreiber1992).
Thus,it is stilltemptingto see Tiwanakuas thesource
of muchof theWariiconography,perhapscross-fer-

[Vol. 12, No. 1, 2001]

tilized with influences from the central sierraand

Nasca, and then spreadby Wari warriorsmoving
acrossthe Andes (Menzel 1964).
Despitethe manyshareddesignsin iconography,
each polity had its own style of monumentalarchitecture.Tiwanakuemphasized sunken courts and
massive mounds with masonryadornment,megalithic gateways, and imposing stelae (Posnansky
1945). Rarelyornamentedwith carvedstone, Wari
building focused upon grandcompoundsof stone
masonrywithhigh walls andmultistoryinteriorgalleries, courts, corridors, and rooms (Isbell et. al
1991).Althoughprovincialcentersserveddifferent
functions,their monumentalarchitectureprovided
visible statementsof the political power of their
respectivecapitalsandreflectedthe canonsof architecturein theprincipalcity.Furthermore,
changesin
architectural
stylesin thecapitalareevidentthroughout each of the imperialrealms.Wariarchitecture
included the patio-group style (Schreiber 1978;
Spickard1983) and D-shapedtemplesin the heartland and at Honco Pampa and CerroBaul (Cook
2000).TheTiwanakutemplemoundsfoundthroughout the altiplanoandthe provinceof Moqueguaare
constructedin the style of the principalpyramidsof
the city of Tiwanakuitself (Bermann1993; Goldstein 1993).
Waricorporatearchitecturalstyles are reflected
in imperialadministrativecentersin the provinces,
especially in areaswhere directcontrolwas established. The level of politicalcomplexityof the conqueredregionwas ofteninstrumentalin determining
whetheranadministrative
centerin theimperialstyle
was established.Areas characterizedby little local
politicalcomplexitycalled for more directformsof
control,whileadministrative
structures
in morepolitically complex societies met the need for administrativecenters with existing social institutionsand
facilities.However,otherfactorsbesidesthe level of
local politicalcomplexitymay have been important
in the establishmentof administrativecenters.Border zones, transportationhubs, and resource-rich
locales also received special attention(Schreiber
1992:30). Frontier provinces, especially, often
receive a disproportionateamountof attentionand
directcontrolin orderto defineimperialboundaries
andpromotepoliticalintegration(Doyle 1986).
Empiresaredynamicentities,andthe functional
roles of imperialadministration
can changethrough
time. Imperialreorganizationand recentralization

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

69

Figurc 1. Map of thc Moquegua Vallcy and thc locations of Ccrro Baul and thc major Tiwanaku settiemcnts.

may leadto the reformof the administrativesystem,

andthusto changesin thematerialcorrelatesof political control(Doyle 1986).Alterationsin the manner
of politicalcontrolmay be reflectedin the archaeological recordthroughchangesto imperialadministrativesites (Schreiber1992). In the case of Wari,
theseadjustmentsmaybe reflectedin theemergence
and perpetuationof the patio-grouparchitectural
style (Schreiber 1978; Spickard 1983), but the
absolutedatingin boththe capitalandthe provinces
for this phenomenonremainsuncertain.
The introductionand continuationof corporate
architecturalstyles throughoutthe geographical
realmof a polity is not uniqueto the Middle Horizon in the Andes. Chimururaladministrativecenterscontainedthe samearchitecturalcomponentsas
the capitalat ChanChan,andthe U-shapedaudiencia appearsin predictablelocations as a symbol of
statepower (Keatinge1982). The precedentfor the
audiencia and storeroom architectureof Chimu
is foundin the MocheV components
administration

of sites like PampaGrande(Day 1982) and Pacatnamu(Keatinge1975).

Inka provincialarchitecturealso is markedby
elements
internalconsistency,andsomearchitectural
show they followed the canons of the capital.The
kanchaand the kallancaare found throughoutthe
Inkaimperialrealm,andit is quiteprobablethatthe
formerdevelopedout of Wariinfluencesand local
developmentsin the Cuzco region (Hyslop 1990;
Topic 1986). In referenceto provincialWari,it is
imperativethat both architecturalform and constructionstyle be tracedback to its developmentin
the heartlandas a corporatestyle (Moseley 1979).
Some of the most significantfindingsthat bear on
these issues come from the only shared frontier
betweenthetwo MiddleHorizonpolitiesof Waiiand
Tiwanaku forexample,theMoqueguaValley(Figure 1).
TheTiwanakuoccupationof Moqueguahas been
the subjectof intensivestudy,most notablyby Paul
Goldstein (1989, 1993). Tiwanaku settlement

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

70

*r

ST-

Ms

LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY

lVol. 12, No. 1, 2001]

Figure2. 3D GIS modelof the architectural(white)and agricultural(black)remainsassociatedwith the Waricolonyat

CerroMejia(left)and CerroBaul(center).

focused in the middle valley (1000-1500 masl)

wherea three-tiersettlementhierarchycompletewith
relict field systems has been identified(Goldstein
1989;Williams1997).TheTiwanakuoccupationdid
breachthe high sierra,as Bruce Owen (1998) has
recentlyreported,but its largestsettlements,monumentalworks, and agrarianfields were all concentratedin themiddlevalley.Untilrecently,we believed
that Tiwanakucolonists arrivedin the Moquegua
Valleyfirst,perhapsaroundA.D. 500. A briefhiatus
betweenphasesIV andV has beenpositedby Goldstein( 1989),buttheTiwanakuoccupationof thevalley was fairlycontinuousuntilthetenthcenturyA.D.
MostarchaeologistsbelievedthatWariarriveda centurylaterand occupiedthe high sierrafor no more
thana century(Moseley et al. 1991). Recentradiocarbondates from CerroBaul do not supportthis
proposition,but ratherindicatethatthe Warioccupationwas nearlyas long as the Tiwanakupresence
in the valley.
Excavations on Cerro Baul
Excavationof theWarioccupationson the summitof
CerroBaul,the administrative
andceremonialcenter
of theWaricolony in the MoqueguaValley,has providedinsightinto 1) the durationof Warioccupation
of theregion,2) therelationshipbetweentheprovincial centerandthe Waricapital,and 3) the natureof
interactionwithTiwanakucoloniesin theregion.This
Waricolony is located on a high sierraintervalley
ridgebetweentheRio Moqueguatributaries
of Torata
ana lumllacatrlgure z. The Warlsltes were lmked

by thelongestcanaleverbuiltin theMoqueguasierra,
and the settlementsystem is crownedby the Wari
administrative
centeron the high mesa (2590 masl)
of CerroBaul.The flanksof CerroBaulandthe adjacent mountain,CerroMejia, were coveredby agriculturalfields, remnantsof which exist today.The
fields aroundCerroBaul probablydid not support
agrarianproductionforexportoutsidethecolony,but
mayhaveproducedenoughto supporttheextantWari
population(WilliamsandSims 1998).
The remainson the summitof CerroBaul can be
divided into two distinct types of architecture:
masonrypublic architectureon the very summitof
the mesa and smallerhouseholdswith stone foundationson theeasternslopes.Themasonrybuildings
are large, similarto the buildingsin administrative
centersto the northandto buildingsat the capitalof
Wariitself. The latterare elaborateversions of the
domesticterracesthatgracethe slopes of the mountain and the adjacentCerrosMejia and Petroglifo.
Thearchitectural
differencesbetweenthesetwo areas
are important;constructionof the public buildings
likelyrequireda mandateof the state,or atleastlocal
leadership.Due to the greatervarietyof resources
andthebureaucracy
involved,reorganization
of large
public worksshouldtakeplace less frequentlythan
minor changes in domestic architecture.The residentialarchitectureis organic,andcontinualremodeling can be organized at the household level.
Domestic architectural revisions involve fewer
resources,andcan be undertakenmore frequently.
The summitof CerroBaul is the centerof public

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

contour

interval:

25

dg

iS

REPORTS

71

12

Sector B

Sector C

<.Un4
t

2590 m

t.:

30 meters

Figure 3. Map of the summit architecture at Cerro Baul, documenting the 5 summit sectors and the location of all excava-

buildingsof thisadministrative
centerof theWarisettlement.Thisadministrative
sitecontainspatio-group
architecturein the Waristyle, a D-shapedstructure,
andcraftproductionhabitation
areas.TheCerroBaul
ExcavationProjectoverthepastthreeyearshas identifiedthreedistinctsectorsin thearchitectural
coreon
the summit (Figure 3). The eastern sector (A) is
referredto as Uminaniyoq,the artisanresidencearea,
becauseartifactsassociatedwithlapidaryworkwere
recoveredfromexcavationshere.The centralsector
(B) of the architectural
core is referredto as Willka
kancha,theceremonialsector,giventhenatureof the
constructionsin units1 and5. Thewesternsector(C)
of the architecturalcore, named HatunKancha,is
composedof largerectilinearplazasflankedby galleries.Twouninvestigated
sectorslie to thewest.SectorD is anarchitectural
compoundsurrounding
a large
boulderatthehighestpointon themountain,andsector E is a raisedplatformtowardthe westernend of
thehill separatedfromthemainarchitectural
componentof the site by morethanthreehundredmeters.
Public Architecture
Excavations in the public architectureat the site
includethreeunits in the ceremonialsectorB (1, 5,
and 8) andtwo units in sectorC (3 and6). Unit 1 is

a 12 m by 8 m trapezoidalplazasurroundedby halls
on three sides in sector B (Figure4). RobertFeldman's 1989 excavationsin structures1 and 2 were
the basisforhis assertionthatthislocale was the site
of ritualizedreciprocitybetween elites in the form
of large-scaleconsumptionof an intoxicatingbeverage (Feldman1998).
In our excavations of structure4 in 1997, the
accoutermentsof this ceremonialdrinkingevent
finewareservingandstoragevessels in the formsof
keros,cups, andurns were foundbrokenin an ash
layeruponthefloor.Thisdepositionlayerrepresents
a single episode that I interpretas a ritualoffering
thatceremoniallyinterredthis hall at the end of the
Warioccupationof thecerro.Theexcavationsin unit
1 provideevidencefor activitiesof high-levelritual
importance,as well as documentingthe longevityof
Warioccupationon the summit;evidence indicates
that the structurewas significantlyremodeledduring the Warioccupationof the summit, and the 4
radiocarbondatesprocessedfrom this unit reflecta
distributionfrom cal A.D. 530-1220 (see Table 1).
Located20 m to the northeastof unit 1, unit 5 is
also locatedwithin sectorB. This architecturalfeatureis one of two D-shapedstructuresatthe site.The
principalroom is a 10 m diametercircularhall with

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

72

[Vol. 12, No. 1, 2001]

LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY

__

6meters

er
z

excavated area

G
_

Phase 2 wall
Dismantled phase 1 wall

Figure 4. Plan of the standing walls in excavation unit 1, including the foundations of disassembled phase 1 walls.

an entrancein the centerof its straightnorthwestern

wall.Itsformparallelssimilarstructuresin theMonjachayoq,VegachayoqMoqo, andCheqoWasisectors of Wari, as well as D-shaped structures at
ConchopataandHonco Pampa.All these D-shaped
hallshaveapproximately10 m diameters,exceptfor
VegachayoqMoqo (20 m) and Cheqo Wasi (5 m)
(Cook 2000).
Excavationsin unit 5 focused on the northeasternhalf of the interiorof the D-shapedstructure,the
frontexteriorface of this Hall, andthe agglutinated
rooms to the northeast(Figure5). Burningevents
were associatedwith the abandonmentof areaD2
andtheexteriorof sbructure
GN, andtheagglutinated
roomswereintentionallyfilledwith sandandwhole
ceramicvessel offeringsupon the unit's abandonment. A radiocarbondate processedon a charcoal
samplefromAreaD2, originallypartof the lastroof
of that structure,dates to cal A.D. 770-1000, calibrated2 sigma.A second carbondatefrom a wood
postfoundon thefloorof theinteriorof theD-shaped
hall datestoA.D.770-1020, calibrated2 sigma(see
Table 1). These dates,which are statisticallyequivalent, combine to provide a date range of A.D.

780-990, calibrated2 sigma.Althoughthesedatado

not precludean earlierconstructiondate for the Dshapedtemplecomplex,theydo indicatethatits final
use was contemporarywith the last phase of occupationin unit 1 andbasedon radiocarbonage would
be datedto Middle HorizonEpoch 3, althoughthe
architectural
formis one thatis classic Wari-Ayacucho style (Cook 2000).
Offeringsof ritualartifactswere also associated
withthe constructionof the complex.A metallicfoil
camelid,approximately2 cm across,was recovered
from fill beneaththe floor in the center of the Dshapedhall. A cache of gourdbowls, one of them
engraved with designs featuring a lizard and an
anthropomorphicbeing with antennae and avian
headhands,was excavatedfroma subfloorpit on the
westernexteriorside of the circularwall. Furthermore,theinteriorof thecircularwall wascoatedwith
a plastersurfaceandpaintedvarioustimesin shades
of red, white, and blue-gray.The dedicatoryconstructionofferingsandthe treatmentof the complex
at its abandonmentreflect the importanceof this
space to the rituallife of the community.
A thirdexcavationareaattheborderbetweensec-

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

73

Table 1. 14CDates from CerroBaul.MonumentalSectors.

1

Lab ID
Beta-36967a
Beta-36968a

TX-9278
TX-9279
TX-9280
TX-928 1
GX-24706
GX-24707
GX-24709

Date cal A. D.2s

Date B.P.
1090 + 70 B.P.b
1400 + 60 B.p.c
1150 + 50 B.P.b
1150 + 50 B.P.b
1070 + 50 B.p.c
900 + 40 B.P.
1400 + 45 B.p.c
1180 + 50 B.P.b
1140 + 55 B.P.b

770-1160
530-780
770-1000
770-1000
780-1030
1030-1220
540-710
710-990
770-1020

aljc

NA
NA
-27.0 %
-23.2 %
-27.1 %
-26.7 %
-24.9 %
-23.9 %
-27.8 %

Material

Context

charcoal
charcoal
charcoal
charcoal
charcoal
charcoal
charcoal
charcoal
wood

Unit 1-2 ash above floor

Unit 1-2 ash above floor
Unit 3A burntbeam
Unit 5D ash above floor
Unit 1-4 ash above floor
Unit 1-4 ash above floor
Unit 3E hearth 1
Unit 3E hearth2
Unit 5 beam on floor

Residential Sector

Beta-36969a 1370+ 60 B.p.c

55s780
NA
charcoal
Unit2 ashabovefloor
Beta-36970a 1270+ 60 B.P.
65s900
NA
charcoal
Unit2 fill beneathfloor
GX-24708
1220+ 60 B.P.
670-970
-26.0 %
charcoal
Unit7B ashabovefloor
aAll datesprocessedby BetaAnalyticwereorifinallypublishedin Moseleyet al. 1991andarenot613 corrected.
Thisis the
firstpublication
forall otherdatesandall are6 C corrected.
b Oneof the 15 datesusedin thecalculation
of thephase2 Wariconstruction
style.
cOneof 10 datesusedin thecalculation
of thephase1 Wariexpansion.

torsB andC was investigatedas surfaceremainssuggestedthe possibilityof a ceramicworkshop.Unit 8

didnot provideconclusiveevidenceof ceramiccraft
productionon CerroBaul,butit didindicatethemost
substantialinformationto dateforthecomplexarchi-

tecturalremodelingof the site duringof the Wari

occupation(Figure6). Walls 1 and2 werevisible on
thesurface,andWall3 formeda terracefacingsouth.
Excavationrevealedan occupationsurfaceaffiliated
with these threewalls. On this surfacewe encoun-

Figure5. Planof the standingwallsin excavationunit5.

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

1'

LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY

74

I
-

Wall2
_

:_
_-

4 2t:g0Sitruttuxr:23

:1:

.f

a
l:

S
]

tn

: ]d

F:

f::
:d

::

[21

excavatedarea

Phase 2 wall
Dismantiedphase1 waii

2 meters

Figure 6. Plan of the standing walls in excavation unit 8,

including the foundations of disassembled phase 1 walls.

tereda smallhearth,a concentrationof a reddishcolored soil, and a large flat stone apparentlyused to
grindpigments.
Beneaththis floor,the top surfaceof severalearlier walls appeared,indicatinga priorarchitectural
configurationcompletelydistinctfromthe architecturevisible on the surface.Althoughwe lackedthe
resourcesto completelyexcavatethis earlierarchitecturalphase,it is clearthatit was intentionallyfilled
in orderto providea platformforthenew occupation
surface,andthatpartsof whatwere originallythree
distinctarchitecturalspaces were coveredto create
one largeplatform,presumablyopen to the air.
Seventy-fivemeterswest of unit8, in sectorC, is
one of the largeplazas and associatedgalleriesthat
comprisethis sector.Unit 3 (Figure7) is an open air
patio,25 m on a side, with a complex of four2.5 m
by 6 m roomsin thesouthwestquadrant.
A 12 m long
hall with dual entrancesis locatedin the northwest
cornerof the plaza. Excavationsin the complex of

[Vol. 12, No. 1, 2001]

fourroomsin the southwestcorneruncoveredrooms

with an elevatedfloor thatwas set upon poles protrudingfromtheeasternandwesternwallsata height
of 70 cm abovethe rusticearthenfloor.The few culturalmaterialswere recoveredfromthis excavation
included a small quantity of plainware ceramic
sherdsand gourdseeds.A radiocarbondateof A.D.
77>1000, calibrated2 sigma was obtainedfrom a
piece of a burntwoodenpole thatsupportedthe elevated floor of this structure.The lack of associated
culturalmaterialmakesfunctionalinterpretations
of
thesestructuresdifficult,butourpreliminaryhypothesis is thatrooms A and C were storagestructures
whoseraisedfloorskeptproductselevatedabovethe
earthensurface.Furtherexcavationsin structuresB
andC andsimilararchitectural
formsin sectorC will
need to be undertakento evaluatethis theory.
Across the plaza in structureE, the architecture
is constructedof a morerefinedmasonrystyleincorporatingdoublewalls, interiorbenches,anda finely
finishedstuccointerior.Therewas no evidenceof a
raisedfloor,nor was any roofingmaterialrecovered
in the excavationof structureE as was identifiedin
upper levels of structuresA and D. Few cultural
materialswere associatedwith the floors of structureE, althoughtherewere some late firepits associated with the latest floors in the structure.Two
radiocarbonsamples extractedfrom these hearths
datedto cal A.D. 54s710 andA.D. 71s990, calibrated2 sigma.The earlierdateis likely wood from
a veiy earlyconstructioncontextthatwas burnedin
a secondaryuse context.The laterdatelikely representstheperiodin whichthe fireswereburntandthe
surficialstructurewas constructed.It is statistically
similarin dateto the wood froma constructioncontext in the four-roomcomplexin the southwestcorner of unit 3.
Structuresof similarmasonryconstructionstyle
andsimilardimensionsto structureE arelocated20
m to thenortheastof unit3 in unit6 (Figure8). Three
rooms, 10 m by 3.3 m, sit side by side facinga plaza
thatmeasuresS0 by 25 m. Excavationsin the eastern half of the centralroom, structureB, revealed
interiorbenches thatranthe length of eitherwall 1
m abovethe well-madefloor.Unlikeunit3 structure
E, this room originallyhad two stories.A fallen lattice of 1>20 cm diameterpoles was discovered
within the structure'swall fall matrix.k one small
area,a floormadeby placingflatstoneslabscovered
withclay overthelatticewaspreserved,clearlydefin-

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

75

Figure 7. Plan of the standing walls in excavation unit 3.

excavated area

Phase 2 wall

/'
:

\\

o=

Figure 8. Plan of the standing walls in excavation unit 6.

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

6meters

76

LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY

[Vol.12, No. 1, 2001]

halls of sectorC, however,openedonto plazas S to

10 times as largeas the open airpatios of sectorB.
What these areas sharedwas a common construction style andsimilarbasicarchitectural
elaboration.
Theresidentialarchitecture
differssignificantlyfrom
this pattern.
-

4 meters

excavatedarea

Phase 1 wall

Figure 9. Plan of the standing walls in excavation unit 2.

ing the latticeworkas a floorratherthana roof. The

secondstorymusthavebeengreaterthan1.5m above
the earthenfloor,since the side walls are preserved
to thatpoint andthereis no evidence thatthe poles
were securedbelow thatpoint. The position of the
fallen poles also indicatethatthey must have been
securedwell abovethe 1 m bench.Basedon the volume of wall fall excavatedfrom the structure,its
originalheight is estimatedto have been between4
and S m.
The excavationsin the public architectureat the
site exhibit a clearly ritualor ceremonialnaturein
some areas, while other areas were apparently
cleanedout butnot rituallyinterred.The differential
treatmentupon abandonmentbetween units in the
ceremonialsector(whichwere intentionallyburned
or filled with ceramicofferings)and in the sectors
of the large plazas is significantand thereis a substantialdifferencein the use of space and architectural forms. D-shaped halls and long galleries
fronting1>12 m long plazas is the normin sector
B. These spaceswerenot designedto accommodate
large numbersof people, but they are clearly superior in qualityand scale to the residentialarchitecture at the site. The large, sometimes multistoried

ResidentialArchitecture
Two unitswereexcavatedin the residentialsectorA
(2 and7), andone additionalunit(4) was locatedoutside of the surfacearchitectural
remainsto the south
of the site in orderto obtaincontextinformationon
a cache of 93 obsidian points recovered from a
looter'sback-dirtpile in 1993. Unit 2 is an areaoriginally excavatedby Feldmanin 1989 and amplified
by ourexcavationsin 1998(Figure9). It is comprised
of 4 excavatedrooms,designatedA throughD from
northto south.Thenatureof constructionsin thisarea
were of a substantiallydifferentstyle andscale than
in the publicarchitectureat the site. StructureA was
a S m by S m open plazathatwas ultimatelyused as
a trashdump,butwas originallyan outdooractivity
space associated with structureB (2 m by 5 m),
which is connectedto A througha doorwayon the
south side of the plaza.The southwall of structure
B servesas a retainingwall for structureC an 8 m x
6 m open air plaza that is elevated 1 m above and
doesnotcommunicatewithstructures
A andB below
andto the north.StructureC does interfacewith the
originallyroofed structureD (7.5 m x 4 m) through
a doorwayon the southeastcornerof the plaza.
Differentliving levels are common in sectorA,
with adjacentarchitecturalspaceshavinglargeelevationdifferences.These altitudedifferences,however,do not imply separatehouseholds.Unlike unit
2, the 5 m by 5 m open airplaza (A) in unit 7 does
not articulatewith the 3 m x 5 m roofed room (B)
with which it sharesa wall to its east (Figure 10).
Instead,structureB communicateswith an unexcavatedplazabelow andto theeast,while a smallstaircase leads up andto the northto a higherlevel from
structureA.
Although manipulationsof elevation vary, the
basic architecturalunit in sectorA is distinctive:a
small (S to 8 m on a side) open airplazathatarticulate with an smaller(2 to 4 m by 5 to 7 m) roofed
room.The interiorroofedroomtypicallycontainsa
raisedplatfolm1by 2 m coveredwithflatstoneslabs
thatformsa tableorgrindingsurfaceandlargequantities of undecoratedceramicwares, botanicaland

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

-b

:
l

[2
a

--

excavatedarea
Phase 2 wall

4 meters

Figure 10. Plan of the standing walls in excavation unit 7,

including the foundations of disassembled phase 1 walls.

animalremains,and the debrisof residentialactivity. The plazas have similarmaterials,althoughnot

as densely distributed.Furthermore,evidence for
stone workingin lapis, onyx, andobsidianwas discoveredin theseresidencesin the formof polishing
stones,debitage,anda few finishedstonebeadsand
obsidianprojectilepoints.Thus,theresidentialareas
of sectorA housedvery differentactivitiesthanare
documentedin the monumentalarchitecturehigher
on the summit.The scale of plazas and associated
rooms is appreciablysmallerthan in either sectors
B or C, and the masonryconstructionstyle is more
rusticthanis noted on top. Publicmonumentaland
privateresidentialarchitectureare clearly differentiated on Cerro Baul based on constructionstyle,
scale, andthe variedactivitiesthatthey housed.
EvidenceFor TwoBuildingPhases
In threeof the excavationareasin the monumental
constructionson the CerroBaul summit,evidence
foranearlierconstructionphasein theformof deconstructedwall foundationshasbeenrecovered.In sector B, unit 1, structure3, a well-preservedand very
finely made floor was discoveredin the 1989 excavations.Thisgallerywas composedof anintentional
fill of earthand rocks predatingthe ultimateuse of
the unit. In structure2, a segmentof the floor was

77

constructedin thishighestqualitymanner,while the

majorityof the room containeda stratigraphically
higher,morerusticfloor.Herewe also notedthatan
earlierset of walls existedin this areain association
withthe well-madefloor.Thus,theconstructionevidence indicates two phases, the second of which
involvedpartialdeconstructionof the first.Based on
the availableevidence,thefirstphasewas apparently
a U-shaped gallery surroundinga plaza. Interestingly, the areas in which the full widths of these
rooms are preservedvary between 2.3 and 2.35 m.
The second phase involved the constrictionof the
plaza size, the deconstructionof certainwalls, the
intermentof the finely made floors, and the constructionof a new set of galleriesin a trapezoidalpattern,all with a widthbetween2.3 and 2.35 m.
Just50 m southwestof unit 1, excavationsin sector B, unit 8 revealeda set of wall foundationsthat
formeda 1.75m widegalleryorientedapproximately
30 degreesoff theWariarchitecturethatis preserved
on the surface.The earliestphase of occupationin
this unit is representedby walls 3, 6, and 7, which
form the boundariesof structures1, 2, and 3. During a majorremodelingevent,thesethreewalls were
partiallydismantledto createa new activity space.
Walls 1, 2, and 4 were constructedto enclose this
new space, and the floors and wall foundationsof
the originalrooms were interredwith fill and coveredby a new floor surface.Thus,the threeoriginal
structureswere concealed by a large platformor
plazaenclosed on the northandeast by walls 1 and
2 and open to the south and east, except for wall 4,
overlookingthe TumilacaValley600 m below.
In additionto the evidence for a reconstruction
event in two unitsin sectorB, excavationsin sector
C, unit 3 also indicatean earlierconstructionphase
that is not representedon the surface.StructureE,
the 12 m long hall with dualentrances,sits uponthe
foundationsof an earlierstructurethatwas oriented
east-westinsteadof north-south.Below thefloorsurface associatedwiththewallsof structureE, thefootings of an earlierstone masonrywall thathad been
disassembledwereexposedby excavation.Thiswall
was bisectedby structureE andits foundationscontinueunderstructureE's westernwall into the later
phasepatio.An earlyphasefloorthatabuttedthiswall
to the south was revealedduringexcavation,and it
is probablethatthe southernwall of structureE may
have also served as the southernwall of this early
phasestructure.If so, theearlyphaseroommeasured

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

78

LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY

Year A.
h)
O

re
0

ibr-atF

9lA

ne)

cn

h)
o
o

re
o
o

Figure 11. Distributions of calibrated 14Cdates from Wari

sites. White highlights indicate the minimum overlap
between the 95% confidence intervals for all dates of each
site.

morethan5 m in lengthandwas 2.3 m wide.

Twelve radiocarbondates have been processed
from CerroBaul to date (Figure 11). Of these 12,
threeemanatefrom the residentialsectorA. These
threedatesrepresentthe organichouseholdremodeling thattook place throughoutthe habitationlife
of these structures.They do not representthe stateinstitutedconstructionprojectscharacteristicof the
monumentalcore of the site. The remainingnine
datesfromthe areaof publicarchitecture
bearon the
issue of constructionandreconstructionat an institutionalizedscale. All radiocarbondates are from
wood beams, most from an intact,but burnt,constructioncontext and othersfrom the final burning
episodes in small hearthswithin the architectural
compounds.Itis imperativeto rememberthatwe are

[Vol. 12, No. 1, 2001]

datingthe time the wood was harvestedandnot the

date the wood was burned.Wood is scarce in the
region and the site is severalhundredmetersabove
the meagerwood sourcesnearthe valley floors.Due
to resourcescarcityand accessibility,it is unlikely
thatwood was broughtto the site exclusivelyforuse
as fuel, or othernonconstructioncontexts.Thus, it
is likely thatall the beams were originallybrought
to the site as constructionmaterialandradiocarbon
dates best representepisodes of constructionactivity.
An examinationof the radiocarbondate distributionswithinthemonumentalsectorsof thesiteindicate thatthe majorityof dates representtwo major
phases. Based on the evidence for earlierconstruction phasesat the site, it is likely thatthe datedistribution represents two separate episodes of
tree-fellingassociatedwith the majorconstruction
events.One felling episode was associatedwith the
foundingof thesettlementandtheotherwitha period
of reconstructionduringwhich the large plazas on
the easternhalf of the architecturalcore were most
likely constructed.These constructionepisodescan
be more accuratelydatedby combiningthe radiocarbondatesfrom each constructionphase in order
to contractthe rangeof standarddeviationinherent
in the analysis.
The three first-phase radiocarbon samples
(includingone samplefromsectorA)producea combined,calibrateddatewitha two sigmarangeof A.D.
600 to 685. These datesrepresentthe firstconstructions on CerroBaul and indicatethatthe establishment of the site almost certainlytook place in the
seventhcenturyA.D., and likely took place around
the middle of that century.The six second-phase
dates produce a combined, calibratedtwo sigma
range of A.D. 780 to 990 with a one sigma range
between A.D. 885 and 965, and all second-phase
datesproceedexclusivelyfromthemonumentalsectors of the site. The two sets of dates areconsistent
with two episodalconstructionevents;the probability thata single phenomenonis being datedpasses
a chi-squaretest at the .05 confidence intervalin
eachcase. ThephasetwoT-valueis 1.9 withaT-critical value of 11.1 at the .05 level. The phase one Tvalue is 0.3 with a T-criticalof 3.8.
It is also interestingto note the contextinformationfromeachof theseradiocarbon
phases.Thethree
earlydatesall come fromsecondaryuse of thewood
beams,in constructionfill, in a hearth,or in a burnt

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

offeringcontext,one from each investigatedsector

of the site. Of the six samplesthatdateto the second
constructionphase,threearein primaryconstruction
contexts roof or floor beams thathave collapsed,
one was burntin a shallowhearth,andthe othertwo
are partof an offeringevent in the ceremonialsectorunit1.Theselattertwo samplesalsoprobablyrepresentprimaryconstructioncontextssince it appears
thatthe fuel for this offeringevent was probablythe
lastconstructedroof of the structure.One additional
late date was also collectedfromthe unit 1 offering
context and may representan erroneous secondphase date or could representthe youngest combustiblematerialincludedas partof theofferingfuel.
All of the second-construction-phase
l4C dates
come fromsectorsB or C of the site.The lackof late
dates from sectorA suggests it was not involvedin
the later massive constructionevent, presumably
becauseof the lack of publicarchitecturein this sector of the site. If these interpretationsare correct
therewas a massivereconstruction
eventaroundA.D.
900 at CerroBaul. Furthermore,this event mirrors
changestakingplace elsewherein the Warirealm.
Construction Events at Other Wari Sites
The phase 2 constructionevent from which half of
Baul's l4Cdatesarederivedis manifestedin the ceremonial buildings and the patio groups, both of
which conformto the D-shapedstructuresandpatio
groupsfoundat otherWariprovincialcenters.At the
siteof Jincamoccoin theSondondoValley,Schreiber
documentsa Warioccupationof Epoch 1B thatcontinues into Epoch 2. The constructionstyle follows
the patio groupcanons seen in MH 1B in the capital, and an earlierWari(1A) presenceis not in evidence, althougha local village did exist at the site
beforetheadministrative
centerwasbuilt.Tworadiocarbon samples were processed to date the constructionof the Waricomplex (see Figure 11). One
datecame frombelow a well-preservedplasterfloor
in a room that containedfancy WariPolychrome
ceramicsandreturnedcal A.D.350-1000 calibrated
two sigma.The seconddatefroma piece of wood in
the mortarof a subfloor canal dated to cal A.D.
65s1250 calibratedtwo sigma.A carbondatefrom
a secondarytrashdeposit of Warirelatedmaterials
datedto 61s1030 calibratedtwo sigma (Schreiber
1992: 193). The largererrorrangeson these dates
make them statisticallycomparableto one another
and representthe airivalof the patio-groupstyle as

79

is seen in phase2 at CerroBaul.The combinedcalibrateddaterangeoverlapsquite well with the second constructionphasefrom CerroBaul, with a cal
A.D. dateof 66s980 calibratedtwo sigma.Itis also
interestingto note thatSchreiberfindsevidencethat
MiddleHorizon1B Ocrospotterymay havecontinued to be used into Epoch 2, a trendalso noted at
CerroBaul (Schreiber1992:229).
In the Wariheartlandat Azangaro,Andersindicates thatWariconstructionand occupationof this
planned,administrative
centerwas confinedto Epoch
2. The threeradiocarbondatesfromthe site (Anders
1991)(seeFigure l l)produce acombinedcalibrated
dateof cal A.D.890-1030 A.D., calibrated2 sigma,
closely comparableto the set of six datescombined
fromthesecondconstructionphaseatCerroBaul(cal
A.D. 78s990, calibrated2 sigma). Furthermore,
Anders(1991) notesthepresenceof two trapezoidal
structuresin the south sectorof the site, representing one of the ultimatephasesof constructionin the
formalarchitectural
compounds.Thisformparallels
the trapezoidalstructuresformedby new wall constructionsin the second phase of constructionboth
in units 1 and 8 at CerroBaul, significantlyaltering
the patterncomparedto earlierphase walls in both
units.
At Wari itself, Isbell (1997) has proposed a
chronologyfor the capitalcity, but furtherabsolute
dates must be obtainedto test the veracity of this
model. However,if the model is accurate,the length
of occupationand the majorimperialchanges taking place in the ninth and tenth centuries A.D.
throughoutthe CentralAndes were also reflectedin
the architectureof the imperialcenter.
Besides CerroBaul,the only Warisite with more
thanfiveproveniencedradiocarbon
datesis Pikillacta
in the Cuzco region (McEwan 1991). Radiocarbon
date distributionsfromPikillactamanifestthe same
four-centuryoccupationas is evidentat CerroBaul
(see Figure 11). If the dates from Pikillacta constructioncontexts are isolated from other types of
dates,theydo fall intoan earlyandlate phase.However,earlyandlatedatescorrespondto thesamestructures in some instances and the phases are not as
tightlydefinedas at CerroBaul.The analogto Cerro
Baul'smonumentalsectorC Pikillacta'ssector2hasproducedsix radiocarbon
dates,fourof whichrepresentsecureconstructioncontexts.Excavationunit
37 (Structure17-2B) producedan earlycarbondate
associatedwithwoodfromanupperstoryof cal.A.D.

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

<

80

<

<

<

LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY

[Vol. 12, No. 1, 2001]

Table 2. 14Cdates from WariAdministrativeCentersMentionedin the Text.

Date cal A. D.2s
Context
Source
Uncalibrateddate
Site
550-780
Semi-Sub.Temple(SST) fill
Isbell et al. 1991:30
WariMoraduchayoq 1370 i 60 B. P.
660-960
SST fill between floors
Isbell et al. 1991:31
WariMoraduchayoq 1230 + 60 B. P.
350-1000
1405 + 135 B. p.a
beneathplasterlayer T2/3
Schreiber1992:193
Jincamocco
650-1250
1070 + 125 B. p.b
Schreiber1992:193
Corr. 1 canal wall mortar
Jincamocco
610-1030
Schreiber1992:193
1220+ 115 B. P.
midden in patio 3
Jincamocco
680-990
Anders 1991:185
hearthin complex IV
1190 + 75 B. p,b
Azangaro
1070 + 50 B. p.b
860-1040
Anders 1991:185
midden Cr.20e
Azangaro
970-1230
Anders 1991:185
960 + 65 B. p.b
constructionfill complex II
Azangaro
600-870
1330 i 60 B. p.a
McEwan 1996
wood from 17-2BC
Pikillacta
680-990
1180 + 60 B. p.b
McEwan 1996
charcoalfrom 17-2BC
Pikillacta
1290 + 60 B. P.
650-890
McEwan 1996
wood from lintel 39-2BC
Pikillacta
1060 i 50 B. p.b
880-1160
McEwan 1996
wood from 39-2BC
Pikillacta
1150 + 80 B. p.b
680-1030
McEwan 1996
charcoalon floor 33-2BC
Pikillacta
llOOi60B. p.b
770-1030
vine on wall of 104-4BC
McEwan 1991:112
Pikillacta
1140 + 60 B. p.b
770-1000
McEwan 1991:112
vine on wall of 104-4BC
Pikillacta
1430 + 370 B. p.a
400 B.C.-1300
McEwan 1991:112
hearthfrom 24-4DC
Pikillacta
1350 + 60 B. p.a
560-810
McEwan 1991:111
midden outside arch.core
Pikillacta
420-780
1430 + 90 B. p.a
McEwanl991:111
wood on floor of 12-2AC
Pikillacta
1700 + 80 B. P.
130-540
Topic 1991:159
NA
Viracochapampa
750-1450
820 i 180 B. P.
Topic 1991:159
NA
Viracochapampa
1240+90B. P.
650-990
Isbell 1989:112
AC-5 floor
Honco Pampa
1330 + 100 B. p.a
530-970
Isbell 1989:112
Honco Pampa
AC-5 subfloorstratum
1380 + 70 B. p.a
530-820
Isbell 1989:112
hearthin early floor AC-8
Honco Pampa
1280 i 70 B. P.
640-40
Isbell 1989: 112
AC-2 floor pit
Honco Pampa
890-300
896 i 115 B. P.
Buse
Honco Pampa
NA
956 i 210 B. P.
650-400
Buse
Honco Pampa
NA
991illOB.P.
640-80
Buse
Honco Pampa
NA
a One of 10 dates used in the calculationof the phase 1 Wariexpansion.
b One of the 15 dates used in the calculationof the phase 2 Wariconstructionstyle.
c note that all Pikillactacontext informationrefers to structuredesignationsand not excavationunit numbers.The numberafter
the hyphen refers to the sector in which the structureresides. All samples are on charcoalunless otherwise noted.
-r

--

600 870, calibrated2 sigma, and a laterphasedate

of charcoalfromanupperstoreycontextof cal.A.D.
680-990, calibrated2 sigma.In unit43, a wood sample from a door lintel producedan earlyphase date
of cal.A.D.650-890, calibrated2 sigma.,whilea later
phasedateof cal.A.D.880-1160, calibrated2 sigma
was obtainedfromcarbonizedwood fromthe upper
story(McEwan1996).
Combiningthe two early phase Pikillactadates
resultsin a calibrated2 sigmarangeof A.D.640-810
as comparedto theearlyphaserangeof A.D.60(}685
atCerroBaul.Thecombinationof thetwo laterdates
fromPikillactasector2 resultsin a two sigmarange
of A.D. 780-1020, whereasthe CerroBaul secondphase combinedtwo sigma rangeis A.D. 780-980.
It seems thatthe broadpatternchangesseen at Cerro
Baulwiththesecondphaseof constructionwereperhaps reflectedin structuralremodelingon a more
modest scale at Pikillacta.It is neverthelesssignificantthatchangesin the use of Pikillacta,very likely
an actualdecline in new constructionsand invest-

mentsat the site (Glowacki1996),weretakingplace

at aboutthe same time as the second construction
phasewas occurnngat CerroBaul.
Radiocarbondates of the architecturalremodeling in Wariimperialstyle seem to be slightlyearlier
in the northernWarirealm.JohnandTheresaTopic
(1985) have suggestedthatnorthernsierraarchitectural styles are presentin the Waricenter at Viracochapampaat an early date. The two radiocarbon
datesfromthatsite (cal A.D. 130-540, calibrated2
sigma andA.D. 750-1450, calibrated2 sigma) are
not vew informative(Topic 1991:159) (see Figure
11). However,dates from otherprobableWarisites
in the region indicate a predominancenumberof
samples in the range of A.D. 500 to 700 (Topic
1991:159). Schreiber(1992:271) arguesthatViracochapampawas neverthefocus of formalWaricontrol;thusrelyingonViracochapampato
informabout
changesin Wariadministrationis problematic.
At Honco Pampa,anotherWariAdministrativo
centerin thenorthernrealmin theCallejonde Huay-

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS
81

las,Isbell'sexcavationsproduced4 radiocarbon
dates
thatcombine to producea two sigma rangeof cal.
A.D.640-780 (see Figure11).Wariimperialceramic
styleswerescarce,butcanbe predominantly
ascribed
to Epoch2 (Isbell 1989:112).It thusappearsthatthe
northernsierra experienced the expansion of the
architectural
reorganization
beforethecapitalandthe
southernprovinces,a phenomenonconsistentwith
theideathatWariadoptedcertainarchitectural
organizationsof the northsierra(Schreiber1992;Topic
1991;TopicandTopic 1985) as partof the imperial
reorganization
associatedwithphase2 atCerroBaul.
The 10 radiocarbondateswith securecontextual
information,whicharestatisticallycomparableto the
phase 1 buildingevent, yield a combinedcalibrated
2 sigma rangeof A.D. 615490. If thelS radiocarbondatesstatisticallysimilarto theCerroBaulPhase
2 dates are all combined,the resultingcalibrated2
sigma range for this event is A.D. 890-980 (see
Tables 1 and 2). It should be noted thatboth these
ranges overlap with all the combined date ranges
from within specific sites and significantlynarrow
the windowin which these eventstook place if they
were partof the same phenomenon.It seems most
likely that the architecturalconstructionsthat constitutedthepatio-groupstyle in sites like CerroBaul
andAzangaroemergedthereearly in the tenthcenturyA.D.
Discussion

At CerroBaul, a preponderance
of MiddleHorizon
1B ceramicsis associatedwith the standingphase2
architecture
in sectorsA andB. This associationcorrelatesfairlywell with the datafrom Wariitself. In
fact, therehave been very few vessels with Middle
Horizon2 ceramicstylesrecoveredfromCerroBaul,
althoughEpoch 2 styles are presentat Jincamocco
(Schreiber1992)andatMoraduchayoq
inWari(Wagner 1981), and are exclusively used at Azangaro
(Anders 1991). A numberof Andeanistshave suggested thatthe patio-groupstyle representsa major
imperialreorganization,
andit now seems evidentat
CerroBaul.The amazingaspectof the phase2 Baul
buildingevent is that althoughit falls in the same
ceramicperiodas the otherWariexamples,radiocarbon dates are much later than most Warischolars
would attributeto MH 1B or MH 2. The clearassociationof a potterycache containingpredominantly
Chakipampa-style
ceramicswith the latestradiocarbon datesat the site indicatethatWaripeoples were

at Baul in the tenthcenturyA.D. using Chakipampa

ceramics,at least in a ceremonialcontext. Further
ceramicanalysisand excavationsmay indicatethat
Epoch2 styles wereat use on CerroBaulat thistime
as well, althoughnone haveyet been identified.
I will not arguethatthese data suggest thatMH
Epoch 1B andEpoch2 styles were in simultaneous
use in the Wariheartland.Furtherradiocarbondates
fromsites like Warithatbearon thepatio-groupconstructionstyle andthe imperialreorganizationassociated with it need to be processedto addressthis
issue. Whatthe datesfromCerroBaul datesdo suggest, however,is thatsignificantnew questionsabout
therelationshipbetweenthe southerncolony andthe
Waricapital need to be addressed.Are sweeping
imperialreorganizations
beingreflectedat Baul,and
if so, what is the relationshipbetween their introductionin the capitalversusin the provinces?
One possible explanationfor the architectural
remodelingatCerroBaulis thatit is anentirelylocal
event.PerhapsBaul was firstestablishedas a defensive outpost,as has been the assumptionby scholars workingwith the issue to this point (Moseley et
al. 1991). The architecturalreorganizationat Baul
may signal a change in its role from defensiveoutpostto a pointof ideologicalandeconomicexchange
betweenWariandTiwanaku.Recentresearchon and
aroundCerroBaulcertainlysuggeststhatin thelater
phases(ca. A.D. 800-1000) of the MiddleHorizon,
therewas significantinteractionbetween Wariand
Tiwanaku,includingcohabitationof theuppersierra.
The emergingdata from otherWariadministrative
sites,of whichmuchmoreneedsto be collected,suggest that some major changes of a similar nature
weretakingplacethroughouttheWarirealmatabout
the same time as the Baul remodeling.The radiocarbondatesrepresentingthese changesat multiple
sites may coincidentallyfall withinthe same range
as the second constructionphase at CerroBaul, but
thepreliminarydatafromthese sites is supportiveof
a polity-wide reorganization.Additionaldata need
to be collected to providethe evidence to test this
hypothesis.
Perhapseven more importantly,what does this
new information suggest about the relationship
betweenWariand Tiwanaku?The dates from Baul
clearly demonstratea long co-occupation of the
Moqueguasierraby the two groupsof people.Some
of theearlyinterpretations
of the Baulceramicssuggested a Tiwanakuinfluenceon some pieces. Given

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
LATIN

82

new dates and associationswith unit 1 ceramic

the
perhaps this influence may reflect a
offerings,
of anestablishedMH 1B assem"Tiwanakuization"
Could it be that a principal ideological
blage.
between Wariand Tiwanakuwas taking
exchange
late in the MiddleHorizon?We also note that
place
abandonmentof Baul roughlyconformsto colthe
of Moquegua'sTiwanakucolonies and perlapse
to the end of the MiddleHorizonall together.
haps
related?
theWariandTiwanakuabandonments
Were
that
noted
have
Moquegua
in
working
Scholars
Tiwanakusitesin thevalleyweredeliberately
several
systematicallyrazed.It has been suggestedthat
and
was involved in the vast destruction of
Wari
ChenChen-stylesitesin thevalley(MoseTiwanaku
The firstdatesfrom CerroBaul and
1991).
et al.
ley
interpretationsbased on those limited data and
the
have
theestablished ceramic chronologies would
early
thisinvolvement;accordingto those
prohibited
had
Wari left MoqueguabeforeChenChensetdata,
hadevenoccupiedthelowervalley,aroundA.D.
tlers
the
750.The new datafromCerroBaul indicatethat
propositionis chronologicallypossible,but
original
theplausibilityof this scenarioandthe relationship
colbetweenpeer polity interactionand imperial
lapseawaitsfurtherstudy.
This researchwould not have been possible
Acknowledgments.
the John H.
withoutthe supportof the G. A. BrunoFoundation,
and the
Foundation,
Family
Heinz
the
of
Heinz III Fund
Copper
Peru
Southern
Asociacion Contisuyo funded by
financialsupport
and
logistical
provided
has
which
Corporation,
would also like to
forresearchin Moqueguafor many years. I
Baul Excavation
Cerro
the
of
assistance
the
acknowledge
JohnyIsla
Project'scodirectorduringthe 1997 & 1998 seasons,
Mujica.
Elias
and
Moseley
Michael
advisors,
C., and the project
Arqueologiaof the
Thanksalso goes to the ComisionTecnicade
comments and
InstitutoNacional de Culturaof Peru for their
of both seasuggestions during the permit and reportprocess
Nash,
Donna
Moseley,
Mike
acknowledge
to
sons. I would like
paperand gave
and Joyce Marcuswho read early draftsof this
reviewers
invaluablecommentaryas well as severalanonymous
of this paper
whose commentswere instrumentalin the revision
appreciationto
for publication. I wish to express my great
and discuscomments
KatharinaSchreiberfor the insightful
gracious
most
my
give
I
Finally,
chronology.
sions of Wari
field hands who
thanks to the archaeologists and Peruvian
Peru for
assisted in the field, and to the people of Moquegua,
welcoming us into theircommunity.

References Cited
Anders,MarthaB.
of Azangaro:
1991 StructureandFunctionatthe PlannedSite
a Centralized
CautionaryNotes for the Model of Huarias
PrehisSecular State. In Huas^iAdministrativeStructure:
edited
Govesnment,
State
and
toricMonumentalArchitecture

12, No. 1, 2001]

[Vol.

pp. 165-197.
by WilliamH. Isbell andGordonF. McEwan,
DC.
Washington,
Oaks,
Dumbarton
Marc
Bermann,
atLukurmata.
1993 ContinuityandChangein HouseholdLife
In DomesticArchitecture,Ethnicity,and Complementarity
Aldenderfer,
in the South-CentralAndes,editedby MarkS.
City.
pp. 114-152. Universityof Iowa Press,Iowa
AnitaG.
Cook,
PontificaUni1994 Wariy Tiwanaku:entreestilo y imagen.
Lima.
Editorial,
Fondo
Peru
del
Catolica
versidad
Offeringsand
2000 HuariD-Shaped Structures,Sacrificial
Peru:New
Divine Rulership.In RitualSacrificein Ancient
Bensonand
Discoveriesandlnterpretations,editedby Betty
AnitaG. Cook. Universityof TexasPress,Austin.
Kent
Day,
In Chan Chan:
1982 Ciudadelas:TheirFormand Function.
and Kent
AndeanDesert City, edited by Michael Moseley
AlbuPress,
Mexico
New
of
University
87-117.
Day, pp.
querque.
Michael
Doyle,
NY.
1986 Empires.CornellUniversityPress,Ithaca,
Robert
Feldman,
Moquegua. In
1998 La ciudadela Wari de Cerro Baul en
by Karen
Moquegua:los primeros doce mil anos, edited
Wise, pp. 5946. Museo Contisuyo,Moquegua.
Mary
Glowacki,
Highlands of
1996 The Wari Occupationof the Southern
of Pikillacta.
Peru:A Ceramic Perspectivefrom the Site
of AnthroDepartment
Dissertation,
D.
Ph.
Unpublished
University.
pology, Brandeis
Paul
Goldstein,
Moquegua,Peru.
1989 Omo,aTiwanakuProvincialCenterin
of AnthropolDepartment
Dissertation,
Ph.D.
Unpublished
ogy, Universityof Chicago.
A Tiwanaku
1993 TiwanakuTemplesand State Expansion:
American
Sunken-CourtTemplein Moquegua,Peru.Latin
4(1).
Antiquity
Hyslop,John
of Texas Press,
1990 Inka SettlementPlanning. University
Austin.
Isbell,WilliamH.
Center.In
1989 Honcopampa:Wasit a HuariAdministrative
Horizon
TheNatureof Wari:A Reappraisalof the Middle
R. Michael
Period in Peru, edited by FrankM. Meddens,
BAR InterCzwarno,andAlexandraMorgan,pp. 98-113.
nationalSeries 525, Oxford.
for the
1997 ReconstructingHuari:A CulturalChronology
Early Urban
in
Change
and
Emergence
In
City.
Capital
Plenum,
Societies,editedby LindaManzanilla,pp.181-227.
New York.
Isbell,William,andAnitaG. Cook
of Expansionist
1987 IdeologicalInnovationsandthe Origin
40(4):27-33.
Archaeology
Peru.
Statesin Ancient
and LindaSpickard
Isbell,William,ChristineBrewster-Wray,
atHuari.InHuari
1991 ArchitectureandSpatialOrganization
ArchiAdministrativeStructu)e:PrehistoricMonumental
Isbell
H.
William
by
edited
Government,
tectureand State
Oaks,WashandGordonF.McEwan,pp.19- 53. Dumbarton
ington,DC.
Keatinge,Richard
on a Pre1975 Fromthe Sacredto the Secular:FirstReport Peru.
Coastof
historicArchitecturalTransitionon the North
Archaeology28:128- 129.
Cultural
1982 The ChimuEmpirein Regional Perspective:
AntecedentsandContinuities.InChanChan:AndeanDese)-t
pp.87-117.
City,editedby MichaelMoseleyandKentDay,
Albuquerque.
Press,
Mexico
New
of
University

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

83

Lumbreras,Luis
Tello, Julio
1974 The Peoples and Culturesof AncientPeru. Smithson1942 Origeny desarrollode las civilizacionesprehistoricas
ian InstitutionPress,Washington,DC.
Andinas. 27'h InternationalConference of Americanists,
McEwan,Gordon
1939, 1:589-723, Lima.
1991 Investigationsat the PikillactaSite:A ProvincialHuari Topic,John
Centerin theValleyof Cuzco.InHuariAdministrative
1986 A Sequence of MonumentalArchitecturefrom HuaStructure:Prehisto7ic MonumentalArchitectureand State Govmuchuco,NorthPeru.InPerspectivesonAndeanPrehistory
e7nment,editedby WilliamH. IsbellandGordonF.McEwan,
and Protohisto7W,
editedby Daniel Sandweissand D. Peter
pp. 93-119. DumbartonOaks,Washington,DC.
Kvietok,pp.63-84. CornellUniversityLatinAmericanStud1996 ArchaeologicalInvestigationsat Pikillacta,a WariSite
ies Program.
in Peru.Journalof FieldArchaeology23: 169-186.
1991 HuariandHuamachuco.InHuariAdministrative
StrucMenzel, Dorothy
ture:PrehistoricMonumentalArchitectureand State Gov1964 Style and Time in the Middle Horizon.Nawpa Pacha
ernment,editedbyWilliamH. IsbellandGordonF.McEwan,
2:1-105.
pp. 141-164. DumbartonOaks,Washington,DC.
Moseley, Michael
Topic,John,andTheresaTopic
1979 Peru'sGoldenTreasures.FieldMuseumof NaturalHis1985 El HorizonteMedioen Huamachuco.Revistadel Museo
tory,Chicago.
Nacional 47:13-52.
Moseley, Michael, Robert Feldman,Paul Goldstein, and Luis Uhle, Max
Watanabe
1903 Pachacamac:Reportof the WilliamPepperExpedition
l991 Colonies and Conquest: Tiahuanaco and Huari in
of 1896. Universityof Pennsylvania,Philadelphia.
Moquegua..In HuariAdministrativeStructure:Prehistoric Wagner,Lida
MonumentalArchitectureand StateGovernment,editedby
1981 InformationExchangeas Seen in MiddleHorizonTwo
William H. Isbell and GordonF. McEwan, pp. 121-140.
Ceramicsfrom the Site of Huari,Peru.UnpublishedPh.D.
DumbartonOaks,Washington,DC.
Dissertation,Departmentof Anthropology,Universityof
Ponce Sangines,Carlos
Wisconsin.
1972 Tiwanaku:espacio, tiempo,y cultura.PublicacionNo. Williams,PatrickRyan
30. AcademiaNacionalde Cienciasde Bolivia, La Paz.
1997 The Role of Disasterin the Developmentof Agricul1980 Panoramade la ArqueologiaBolivana.Libreriay Editureand the Evolutionof Social Complexityin the Southtorial"Joventud",La Paz.
CentralAndes.UnpublishedPh.D.Dissertation,Department
Posnansky,Arthur
of Anthropology,Universityof Florida.
1945 Tihuanacu:TheCradleof AmericanMan (Tihuanacu: Williams,PatrickRyan,and KennethSims
La cuna del hombreamericano,2 vols. J. J. Augustinand
1998 ArchaeologicalPopulationEstimatesandAgrarianProMinisteriode Educacionde Bolivia, New YorkandLa Paz.
ductivity.Paperpresentedat the 97thAnnualMeetingof the
Schreiber,KatharinaJ.
AmericanAnthropologicalAssociation,Philadelphia.
1978 PlannedArchitectureof Middle HorizonPeru:Implicationsfor Social and PoliticalOrganization.Unpublished
Note
Ph.D. Dissertation,Departmentof Anthropology,SUNY
1. All calibrationsand combinationswere performedwith
Binghamton.
1992 Warilmperialismin MiddleHorizonPeru.Anthropo- the Oxcal v3.0d radiocarbonprogramusing the intcal98.14c
logical PapersNo. 87, Museumof Anthropology,Univer- calibrationdataset (Struiverand Kra 1986).
sity of Michigan,AnnArbor.
Spickard,Lynda
1983 The Developmentof HuariAdministrativeArchitecture.In lnvestigationsof theAndeanPast, editedby Daniel
Sandweiss,pp.136-60. CornellUniversityLatinAmerican
StudiesProgram.
Struiver,Minze, andRenee S. Kra
Received October8, 1999; acceptedFebruary28, 2000;
1986 Oxcal v3.0d. Radioca^bon28(2B):805-1030.
revisedSeptember20, 2000.

This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Wed, 12 Mar 2014 22:32:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions