Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Anthropological Archaeology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jaa

Regional perspectives on Wari state inuence in Cusco, Peru

(c. AD 6001000)
R. Alan Covey , Brian S. Bauer, Vronique Blisle, Lia Tsesmeli
Department of Anthropology, Dartmouth College, 6047 Silsby Hall, Hanover, NH 03755, United States

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 26 February 2013
Revision received 3 September 2013
Available online 11 October 2013
Keywords:
Wari
Settlement patterns
State expansion
State canons
Cusco

a b s t r a c t
The archaeological reconstruction of ancient states requires consistent regional measures of state-directed power and inuence. This paper presents data from a series of systematic archaeological surveys in
the Cusco region of highland Peru to evaluate patterns of inuence by the Wari state during a period of
colonization from ca. AD 6001000. We discuss interpretive debates over the nature and intensity of Wari
social power, suggesting that site-based studies can be contextualized meaningfully using our large-scale
dataset, which offers settlement patterns at varying distances (070 km) from Pikillacta, a Wari administrative center. We discuss local settlement patterns before and during Wari colonization, as well as the
distribution of Wari pottery and local Wari-inuenced wares. We then use a geographic information systems analysis of travel time from key sites to evaluate the broad regional distribution patterns of local
and Wari ceramic styles. Although the regional survey data do not inform us reliably about all kinds of
social power, we conclude that the Wari cultural, economic, and political inuence over the Cusco region
was limited and discontinuousan example of colonization that resembles the practices of other early
states.
2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.

Introduction
How powerful were ancient states? Answering this question depends on how one denes power and the state, as well as the
broader geographic and temporal context within which states
operated (e.g., Feinman and Marcus, 1998; Lull and Mic, 2011).
Western conceptualizations of the state, including those of neoevolutionary theory, tend to contextualize its power in relative
termsthe state is more powerful than those societies that preceded it, as well as those that lie beyond its domain. What makes
states more powerful is not just their centralization, but also their
internal specialization and proliferation of institutions and ofces.
An emphasis on institutionalized centralization has implications
for modeling the internal organization of states, as well as the
external projection of state power and inuence (e.g., Flannery,
1972). Internally, the ruling elite of states seeks to monopolize
power, so that state institutions under their control replace the
power of kin groups, and state power encompasses that of society
as a whole. Externally, the state can dominate non-state neighbors,
and is only constrained by a culture of isolationism or by the

Corresponding author.

inevitable decay of state power at increasing distances from the

capital (Stein, 1999). Such unitary approaches to state power
undergird core-periphery models of ancient statecraft, including
portrayals of direct and indirect rule.
The internal specialization of states raises questions about the
sources and distribution of power across regions that experience state
formation and expansion. Rather than thinking of power as a singular
social phenomenon that one entity (the state) absorbs and distributes, some (e.g., Glatz, 2009; cf. Mann, 1986) treat social power as
originating in multiple sources and being distributed across multiple
regional networksonly some of which are developed or managed by
state institutions. Centralization and institutionalization are processes that never fully articulate absolute state sovereignty (Hinsley,
1966), promoting conceptual models where the power of the state is
irregularly distributed across space and uctuates over time. Individual actions shape institutional congurations, although within constraints of existing social practices and values (e.g., Giddens, 1984).
Treating state power as differentiated and negotiated within a broader regional and chronological context encourages the distinction between whether a manifestation of state power represents the hard
power of coercive economic or military institutions, or the attractive
inuence of the soft power of the states cultural practices or ideological values (Nye, 2004).
Recognizing the cultural legacies of the theoretical stances
outlined above, archaeologists face the challenge of testing and
improving conceptual models developed from expectations about

E-mail address: r.alan.covey@dartmouth.edu (R.A. Covey).

0278-4165 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaa.2013.09.001

R.A. Covey et al. / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

the centralized and specialized power of ancient states. Most frequently, a focus on state power as both centralized and institutionalized seeks material evidence of state institutions with the general
expectation that state-afliated canons reect direct rule. The distributions of constructions and material culture associated with
state cultureseven if they cannot always be unambiguously associated with state institutions or ofcialshelp to chronicle evidence of the state, and researchers continue to identify new
examples of these canons. Although excavations in state-afliated
contexts can contribute to understanding how extensively state
institutions dominated networks of social power in areas under direct rule, additional data are needed to understand the external
limits of the power of the state as it waxed and waned. Focusing
solely on the distribution of certain canons associated with a state
or the people of its heartlandfor example, temples, tombs, and
luxury goodscannot fully distinguish formal and continuous state
administration from more ambiguous stylistic distributions or the
local adoption or emulation of cultural practices and technologies
(Stein, 2002: 907).
Beyond the state capital and administrative centers, state
power can be contextualized by critically assessing the distribution
of state canons and their association with changes in local settlement patterns and material culture. Distributions of artifacts and
architecture can serve to reconstruct regional networks of social
power (Smith, 2005), and then to evaluate the extent to which
state power or inuence may have altered local societies over time.
It is important to note that different aspects of state power and
inuence should not be expected to be continuous or coterminous,
and that canons associated with a state society do not always represent state institutions. With sufcient data resolution, regional
patterns can identify where states exercised different forms of
power and inuence, and where local populations resisted or bypassed state institutions, or were largely unaffected by the rise
and fall of these large political entities.
Survey archaeology and GIS analysis are well-suited to collect
and analyze the regional distributions of state-associated canons,
especially durable ones like ceramic styles and architecture. Now
conducted across the globe, systematic archaeological surveys
can develop robust settlement databases in multiple regions to address general administrative and political goals of the state, as well
as how the cultural inuence of the state and its people manifests
across different domains (e.g., Hingley, 2005; Kantner, 2008;
Kowalewski, 2008: 236237, 242243; Parker, 2003; Sinopoli,
2006; Smith and Montiel, 2001; Wilkinson, 2000). In this paper,
we use regional data to assess the power and inuence of the Wari
state (ca. AD 6001000) in the Cusco region of what is today highland Peru (Fig. 1). We present a quantiable, GIS-derived analysis
of the divergent patterns of Wari inuence over a broad
2200 km2 region that includes hundreds of contemporaneous settlements. Our regional database shows strong, but not absolute,
Wari state afliations in the area directly adjacent to a major Wari
administrative center, but much more diffused, discontinuous, and
irregular inuence across the rest of the Cusco region, with large
areas exhibiting limited or no evidence of Wari inuence, even at
the height of state power in the region.

Archaeological perspectives on the Wari state

The Wari state emerged in the Ayacucho Valley by AD 600, unifying the valley and surrounding areas and enduring until AD
10001100 (Bauer and Kellett, 2010; Williams, 2001). Waris
capital covered 200300 ha and is associated with several square
kilometers of outlying settlement (Isbell, 2008; Schreiber, 1992:
80). The urban core presents evidence of craft specialization, elite
compounds, and royal tombs (Benavides, 1991; Isbell et al.,

539

1991). Regional settlement patterns and excavation data from

other Ayacucho Valley sites indicate the emergence of a centralized
state with a hierarchical settlement system, a political economy
based on hydraulic agriculture, and a complex religion and cosmology (e.g., Isbell and Schreiber, 1978). Wari settlers or state representatives began to establish new colonies and administrative
sites outside the Ayacucho region sometime after AD 600. The
scale, duration, and intensity of Wari colonization varied from region to regionsome sites were abandoned before construction
was completed, whereas others apparently outlasted the decline
of the Wari capital region (e.g., Williams, 2001; Topic and Topic,
2000).
Scholars continue to debate the extent of Wari state power (e.g.,
Jennings, 2006a, 2010), but the prevailing interpretive model is
Katharina Schreibers (1992: 267)mosaic of control, which presumes the simultaneous practice of direct and indirect administration in different Andean regions. Schreiber (2012: 41) identies
Wari infrastructureadministrative centers, roads, and the
likeas the material evidence of direct rule. Remains of canonical
Wari architecture, especially orthogonal compounds, represent
pockets of direct control (Schreiber, 1992: 267), although there
is no archaeological consensus regarding how large these might
be. Reconnaissance work and small surveys have tended to investigate the areas immediately surrounding known or suspected
Wari architectural compounds, but systematic regional data rarely
extend beyond 10 km from such sites (e.g., Glowacki, 2002; Jennings, 2006b; McEwan, 1984; Schreiber, 2005). Where systematic
survey data have been collected at a distance from known or suspected Wari sites, they reveal a highly uneven distribution of Wari
canons, with large areas in which they appear to be completely absent (e.g., Bauer et al., 2010; Browne, 1992; Dean, 2005; Heffernan,
1996; Parsons et al., 1997, 2000, 2013; Silva, 1996; Vivanco and
Valdez, 1993; Wernke, 2003; Wilson, 1988).
Whereas the mosaic of control model expects direct Wari rule
in regions lacking existing local political complexity (Schreiber,
1992: 1726; Jennings and Craig, 2001), it associates indirect rule
with centralized regional authority supported by identiable infrastructure (Schreiber, 2012: 42). The state architectural canon is absent or of very modest scale in such regions, and archaeologists
might encounter more subtle clues of imperial control such as
changes in settlement locations as people were resettled or moved
around to serve imperial purposes, shifts in the production and distribution of local crops and resources, and modications in diet or
patterns of violence, which indicate disruptions in daily life caused
by the presence of the empire (Schreiber, 2012: 42). It is important to note that the mosaic of control model posits degrees of control that range from direct to indirectrather than from absolute
state power to complete absence of state inuencewhich limits
the potential to identify archaeological contexts where there was
no state rule, or local life changed for reasons unrelated to Wari
administrative strategies. Schreiber (1992: 23) notes that there
may be areas within the broader territory of a statesome of them
located near to state-administered populationswhere low populations, limited political hierarchy, or restricted resource potential
contribute to an absence of state power. However, few archaeological projects to date have investigated the scope of such areas during the period of Wari expansion.
The mosaic of control model has improved the conceptualization of Wari state power, but the use of different material measures
to distinguish direct control (administrative architecture) from
other local relationships with Wari institutions and people raises
important questions regarding the actual scope of direct rule, the
negotiation of indirect rule, and the extent to which Wari power
was completely absent in certain areas. To establish an interpretive
context for Wari infrastructure in the Cusco region, we analyze the
distribution of local and Wari-style pottery in local settlement

540

R.A. Covey et al. / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

Fig. 1. Recent estimates of Wari stylistic inuence and imperial limits, redrawn from Jennings (2006b) and Schreiber (2004), respectively.

systems found along a range of distances from Pikillacta, the largest Wari state installation outside of Wari heartland. In doing so,
we consider the extent to which Wari statecraft inuenced longterm changes in the settlement hierarchies, ecology, and material
culture distribution in the Cusco region.

Wari inuence in the Cusco region

The monumental site of Pikillacta dominates reconstructions of
the Wari occupation of the Cusco region (e.g., Bauer, 2004; Barreda
Murillo, 1973; McEwan, 2005) (Fig. 2). Located in the Lucre Basin
roughly 30 km southeast of the city of Cusco, this 47 ha site consists of multiple rectangular enclosures surrounded by a massive
outer wall. The site plan and internal architecture conform to Wari
state architectural canons and its construction required several
million worker-days (McEwan, 2005). Construction continued over
at least two centuries, and although this was the largest architectural complex in the south-central Andes at the time, the site
was incomplete and only partially occupied when it was abandoned near the end of the rst millennium (McEwan, 1996). In
addition to the administrative complex at Pikillacta, archaeological
research in the nearby Huaro Basin, 15 km southeast of the Lucre
Basin, has encountered elite burials (Zapata, 1997), minor administrative architecture (Glowacki, 2002), and a series of Wari residential sites (Skidmore, 2012).
From their investigations in the Lucre-Huaro area, Glowacki and
McEwan (2001: 42) conclude that the Wari state imposed direct
administration on the region rather than crafting a more indirect
administrative strategy using existing local infrastructure. They
view Wari imperial control as emanating from the Lucre-Huaro
area and extending across most of the Cusco region, completely

Fig. 2. Aerial view of Pikillacta, facing toward the Cusco Basin. Negative number
334819, courtesy Department of Library Services, American Museum of Natural
History.

dominating local populations (McEwan, 2006: 42). This vision

has been developed using excavation data recovered within a limited number of Wari state installations or colonial contexts in the
Lucre-Huaro areain other words, work within a Wari pocket of
direct rule in the sense discussed above. Our survey results, which
include the entire occupation sequence of the Lucre Basin and a
number of other areas of the Cusco region, offers a broader dataset
for evaluating Wari state power in local societies located across a

R.A. Covey et al. / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

541

Fig. 3. The Cusco region, with areas of full-coverage surveys reported in this paper.

broad range of environmental zones and at varying distances from

Pikillacta.
Archaeological surveys in the Cusco region
We have completed six survey projects (19842007) in the Cusco region (Fig. 3) (Table 1), covering an area of 2200 km2, with
approximately 3000 registered sites. These projects employed the
same basic eld methodology: full-coverage survey of all passable
areas at intervals of approximately 50 m, with general collections
of diagnostic artifacts. The eastern edge of the combined region includes the Lucre Basin, where Pikillacta is located, and borders the
Huaro Basin. The western limit, located some 75 km away aerially,
is the Vilcaconga Pass leading to the Apurmac River. The north
south axis stretches about 85 km from the well-known Sacred Valley in the north to the province of Paruro in the south. Our regional
settlement pattern data are augmented by excavations at more
than 20 archaeological sites (e.g., Bauer, 1992, 1999, 2002, 2004;
Bauer and Jones, 2003, 2012). Most excavations have been test
units to clarify local artifact sequences and enhance the regional
chronology, although several horizontal excavations have addressed theoretical questions derived from the settlement patterns
(Blisle, 2011; Covey, 2006; Davis, 2011). These excavations have
generated more than 60 radiocarbon dates, linking absolute chronology to relative artifact and architectural sequences.
Ceramic styles and chronology
All research reported here uses Bauers (1999, 2002, 2004; Bauer and Jones, 2003, 2012) relative chronology, which is based on
ceramic stylistic designations that have been isolated in stratigraphic excavations with absolute dates. We offer a brief description of the most common Cusco styles pertaining to the Early
Intermediate Period (i.e. the period preceding Wari colonization,
henceforth EIP) and Middle Horizon (i.e. Wari times, henceforth
MH) to place survey results into a clearer context. The principal
ceramic styles include Qotakalli, Wari, Arahuay, Muyu Orqo, and

Ccoipa (Fig. 4). As Table 2 shows, our survey work has identied
approximately 550 site components containing one or more of
these styles.
As the Wari state developed in the Ayacucho region, the dominant local ceramic style of the Cusco Basin and neighboring areas
was a cream-slip ware now called Qotakalli (Barreda Murillo,
1982; Glowacki, 1996; Bauer, 2002). The production of Qotakalli
ceramics continued after Wari colonists arrived in the Cusco region, although at a diminished scale of production and distribution
in some areas (Bauer and Jones, 2003). The pre-Wari establishment
of ne polychrome pottery in the Cusco region corresponds to signicant settlement pattern shifts in many areas, which may indicate an increased role of maize agriculture in some local
economies (Bauer, 2004: 53; Covey, 2003: 51). Our surveys collected Qotakalli pottery at approximately 250 sites in the Cusco
region.
Researchers generally infer direct Wari administration of the
Cusco region from the monumental scale of construction at
Pikillacta, but some also suggest that the distribution of Wari
and Wari-inuenced pottery reects similar dominance
(McEwan, 1987, McEwan, 1996; Glowacki, 1996). Because differences between Wari and Wari-related material are sometimes
elided to promote arguments for strong state control (e.g., McEwan,
2012: 254255), it is important to clarify how our research employs
these terms. Our survey work consistently restricts the use of the
category Wari to non-local pottery that conforms to MH decorative canons identied in Ayacucho and at major Wari state installations (e.g., Glowacki, 1996, 2005; Knobloch, 1991; cf. Menzel,
1964).1 As Owen (2007: 288) notes, many Wari scholars employ stylistic designations based on differences between ne Wari polychrome ceramics bearing state iconography (e.g., Chakipampa,
Conchopata, Ocros, Pachacamac, Viaque) and categories encom-

1
Neutron activation analysis (NAA) of selected Wari ceramic sherds recovered in
the Cuzco Valley indicates that some were produced in the Wari heartland and then
imported into the Cusco region (Montoya et al., 2003). Wari pottery manufactured in
the Cusco region has also been identied in small quantities in the Ayacucho region,
signaling bidirectional exchanges (Montoya et al., 2009).

542

R.A. Covey et al. / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

Table 1
Systematic survey projects by authors.
Project

Dates

Paruro Archaeological Project (Bauer)

19841987

250

Cusco Valley Archaeological Project (Bauer)

1994,
19971999
2000

1200

20042005

630

2006

170

2007

150

Sacred Valley Archaeological Project (Covey and

Ypez)
Xaquixaguana Plain Archaeological Survey
(Covey and Ypez)
Oropesa-Andahuaylillas Archaeological Survey
(Bauer and Araz Silva)
Calca-Yanahuara Archaeological Survey (Covey,
Araz Silva, and Bauer)

Sites

410

Description
600 km2 south of Cusco Valley, including parts of Apurmac Valley (Bauer, 1992, 1999,
2002)
350 km2 in Cusco basin and areas to the west and east (Bauer, 2004; Bauer and Covey,
2002)
400 km2 in Vilcanota-Urubamba Valley (Calca-San Salvador) and tributary valleys (Covey,
2006)
600 km2 to west and northwest of Cusco Valley, including survey of high grassland around
Lake Qoricocha (Blisle and Covey, 2010)
100 km2 to southeast of Cusco Valley survey, including Lucre basin
100 km2 in Sacred Valley below Calca (Covey et al., 2008). Data combined with SVAP
results

Fig. 4. Local EIP/MH ceramic styles from the Cuzco region: Qotakalli (top), Arahuay (middle), and Muyu Orqo (bottom).

passing less ne variants of the same style (Huamanga [Wamanga]). While treated as a style, the assemblage of less ne Wari pottery encompasses a broad range of ceramic materials, including
folk traditions from Ayacucho, lower-status imperial wares from
a number of production locations, and hybrid local styles that bear
some sort of technological, formal, or stylistic Wari inuence. We
classify the local Wari-inuenced pottery of the Cusco region as Arahuay (below) and argue that the archaeological evidence for its production and distribution does not constitute strong evidence for state
aesthetic or economic power. Based on this distinction, we have identied Wari pottery (e.g., Chakipampa, Conchopata, Ocros, Pachacamac, Viaque) at 54 sites in the Cusco region.
Although the presence of Wari pottery in certain contexts
indicates some aspect of Wari economic power, locally produced
pottery that incorporates or adapts Wari technology, forms, or
iconography offers a more ambiguous marker of Wari inuence.
Neutron activation analysis by Delgado and colleagues (2007:

410) indicates that while the Wari may have inuenced the production of some local ceramic styles, they did not control local Cusco pottery production or its use. Our survey projects use the
stylistic designation Arahuay to refer to Wari-inuenced pottery
produced in the Cusco region during the Middle Horizon (Bauer,
1999, 2002). Glowacki (1996, 2005) has written that Arahuay pottery resembles the Huamanga ceramics of the Ayacucho region, but
as noted above, the broad denition of the Huamanga style reects a perceived divergence from state canons rather than Wari
administrative dominion. Compositional analysis has shown that
Arahuay ceramics are made from Cusco clays (Montoya et al.,
2003).2 We have identied Arahuay pottery at 162 sites in our Cusco
surveys.
2
Some ne wares recovered at Pikillacta imitate Okros ceramics of the Wari
homeland, but were produced in the Cusco region (Knobloch 1991: 253254;
Glowacki, 1996; Montoya et al., 2003).

543

R.A. Covey et al. / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

Table 2
Selected EIP and MH ceramic components.
Region

Qotakalli

Arahuay

Wari

Ccoipa

Muyu Orqo

Total

Paruro
Cusco Valley
Oropesa-Andahuaylillas
Sacred Valley
Xaquixaguana
ALL

14
112
20
45
47
238

7
72
7
42
34
162

9
23
18
2
2
54

28
11
6
0
0
45

10
17
3
1
16
47

68
235
54
90
99
546

Note: This sample excludes local imitations of Qotakalli and Arahuay, probable stylistic identications of styles, and 7 sites with problematic coordinates. The latter sites are
included in regional site counts presented below.

Survey research identied sizable components of two other EIP/

MH ceramic stylesMuyu Orqo and Ccoipa (Bauer, 1989, 1999,
2004). Both have far more limited distributions than Qotakalli or
Arahuay. Muyu Orqo ceramics are decorated with bright white,
black, and orange colors painted over a polished, dark red background, which may reect southerly, Altiplano artistic inuences.
This style dates to the EIP and the early MH (Blisle, 2011). While
a relatively uncommon ceramic type, it is widespread across parts
of the Cusco region, where it has been found at numerous sites in
the Xaquixaguana, Cusco Valley, Paruro, and Lucre Basin regions.
Ccoipa is a red-and-black-painted style that was produced during
the EIP and continued to be used in the MH.3 Its distribution is
mostly limited to the Paruro area, south of Cusco. Our surveys have
recovered Muyu Orqo and Ccoipa ceramics in about 50 sites across
the Cusco region.

Settlement patterns in the Cusco and Oropesa Basins

The Cusco Valley survey recorded approximately 115 sites containing Qotakalli ceramics. The greatest site density appears at the
western end of the Cusco Basin, around the modern city.4 Once
established, the largest sites were occupied continuously to Inca
times. Qotakalli sites were also scattered along the lower valley
slopes, concentrated near areas of easily irrigable agricultural land.
While most of the sites with Qotakalli ceramics are small, we estimate that at least 14 Qotakalli sites in the basin were villages measuring 15 ha. Another village lay just outside of the Cusco Basin,
approximately mid-way between Cusco and Pikillacta. Ccoipa pottery appeared at a relatively small number of sites (n = 11), mostly
located on the southern edges of the valley, nearest to Paruro. Muyu
Orqo ceramics were recovered at 17 sites distributed across the lower slopes of the entire valley. All Muyu Orqo pottery and most Ccoipa
components were found in association with Qotakalli pottery.
Our survey recovered Arahuay pottery at 75 sites in the Cusco
Valley and 24 sites with Wari pottery. Several important points
can be made concerning these sites. First, no general surface collection from the Cusco Valley survey contained more than 10 Wari
pottery fragments, even though second visits were made to all
EIP/MH sites to determine whether a Wari component was present. The largest Wari collections (78 fragments) are small compared to Arahuay components at the same sites, and even
smaller when compared to Qotakalli components. Across this
study region, Qotakalli sherds were found to be about 20 times
more abundant than Wari fragments. Second, no Middle Horizon
site in the Cusco Basin is a good candidate for a Wari administrative center. While several 34 ha villages have been identied
(including the site of Tankarpata, used in the GIS analysis below),
3
Ccoipa ceramics are a local ceramic style with a limited regional distribution that
appears to be directly related to a location of manufacture in the Paruro province
(Bauer, 2002).
4
In recent decades, Cuscos rapid urban growth has destroyed many archaeological
sites, making the reconstruction of settlement patterns in this area especially difcult.

Table 3
Co-occurrence of Qotakalli, Arahuay, and Wari Pottery at Cusco Valley sites.
Style and size

Qotakalli

Arahuay

Wari

Large Qotakalli (1 ha and larger)

Small Qotakalli (smaller than 1 ha)
Large Arahuay (1 ha and larger)
Small Arahuay (smaller than 1 ha)

15 [100%]
100 [100%]
9 [90%]
35 [56%]

14
33
10
63

11 [73%]
13 [13%]
6 [60%]
11 [17%]

[93%]
[33%]
[100%]
[100%]

Note: Size estimates not available for two Arahuay sites.

no higher order Wari settlements have been found in the Cusco Basin. Perhaps the largest Middle Horizon site in the Cusco Basin was
the now-destroyed site of Coripata (Cumpa Palacios, 1988), which
may have measured around 5 ha.
Understanding changing settlement patterns in the Cusco Valley study region over time is complicated by the co-occurrence
of the Qotakalli, Arahuay and Wari styles after AD 600. One way
to approach settlement continuity is by looking at stylistic cooccurrence at large (one hectare and larger) and small (less than
one hectare) sites with Qotakalli and Arahuay pottery (Table 3).
Only one large Qotakalli site (of a total of 15 large sites) lacked
an Arahuay component, and 73% of these sites contain traces of
Wari pottery as well. In contrast, only one large Arahuay site (of
a total of 10 large sites) lacked Qotakalli potterythe exception
was a 3 ha village with a small Middle Horizon component and a
much larger occupation after AD 1000. Small samples of Wari pottery were collected at 60% of the large Arahuay sites. Of the 100
small Qotakalli sites, 33 have Arahuay components, whereas Wari
pottery was recovered at only 13% of these sites. Qotakalli pottery
was present at a higher percentage of small Arahuay sites (56%, or
35/63), and small samples of Wari pottery were found at 17% of the
small Arahuay sites.
The above gures suggest considerable settlement continuity at
village level sites. The apparent discontinuity between small
Qotakalli and small Arahuay sites may either indicate that hamlets
shifted location over time, or that styles like Arahuay and Wari
were simply less likely to reach the smallest settlements. Broad
continuities in settlement location and hierarchy suggest that no
major settlement reorganization occurred in the Cusco Basin and
nearby areas during the period of Wari colonization.
Settlement patterns in the Lucre Basin
Our survey data from the Lucre Basin, the area surrounding
Pikillacta, reveal stylistic and settlement distributions for populations living in close proximity to the Wari center.5 Using the same
eld methods and analytical protocols employed in other parts of the
Cusco region, we recorded approximately 25 sites dating to the EIP,
5
Our survey methods were more intensive than those used in McEwans (1984,
1991) reconnaissance around Pikillacta, and our settlement pattern maps differ
signicantly. McEwan encountered 32 archaeological sites across a region of about
30 km2, about half of which had EIP or MH occupations.

544

R.A. Covey et al. / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

with Qotakalli representing the most common style in the Lucre

Basin.6 Five of these sites (Minaspata, Chokepukio, Mama Colla,
Piipampa, Patawasi) were disproportionally larger than the others,
and at least four of these were established prior to the EIP. All ve of
the largest EIP sites continued to grow through time, remaining as
major settlements in subsequent periods. Although most of the largest sites clustered near Lake Huaypar, a substantial part of the population lived in homesteads or hamlets scattered across the
surrounding area. In addition to Qotakalli pottery, the Muyu Orqo
style was identied at two large sites (Minaspata and Piipampa),
while Ccoipa pottery was found at 7 small sites, primarily in the
areas closest to Paruro.
Our survey of the Lucre Basin recovered Wari ceramics from 18
sites and collected Arahuay pottery at 7 sites. Wari pottery was
roughly as ubiquitous as Qotakalli in the Lucre Basin, whereas Arahuay was found only in very small amounts. Given that some
researchers interpret Arahuay as a Wari style (Huamanga), it is
signicant that Arahuay was identied at only four sites with Wari
pottery; this includes excavations at Pikillacta, where Arahuay constitutes 5.5% of the excavated assemblage (Glowacki, 1996). Wari
pottery is more prevalent in the Lucre Basin than any other survey
region, but Arahuay has a limited distribution there.
Our survey results diverge sharply from McEwans (1984, 1991;
cf. 2005) interpretation of the Lucre Basin as a unied metropolitan
region reorganized and dominated by an urban, Wari population at
Pikillacta. Instead, we interpret the nearby villages as ancient and
independent communities that continued to be occupied during
the period of Wari colonization and long afterwards. It is also
worth noting that while the large-scale, Wari-directed canal construction in the Lucre Basin may have altered the local subsistence
economy (Valencia Zegarra, 2005), it did not lead to major changes
in the overall settlement pattern. Some of the local villages, such as
Chokepukio, have evidence of Wari-style architecture, and Wari
pottery is much more prevalent, but there is also evidence that
many aspects of village life continued from earlier times.
Settlement patterns in the Xaquixaguana region
The Xaquixaguana survey identied two distinct clusters of EIP/
MH settlements. A settlement hierarchy is identiable for the
southern part of the Xaquixaguana study region, with one large village site, Akawillay, covering at least 10 ha (Blisle, 2011). Of the
other 46 EIP/MH sites in this area, about half (n = 25) were smaller
than 0.5 ha, while another 21 sites were classied as small villages
with a mean size of 1.4 ha. Most sites were situated close to valleybottom lands. A second area of EIP/MH sites is around Maras,
where 32 small sites are scattered across the landscape. These include several minor Arahuay components at sites that were large
villages after AD 1000. In general, the northern part of the Xaquixaguana region shows a tapering off of the distribution of EIP/MH
styles from the Cusco Basin.
In terms of site counts and overall abundance, Qotakalli pottery
is much more common than Arahuay in the Xaquixaguana region
(see Blisle, 2011), and there is far less co-occurrence of the two
styles than is seen in the Cusco Basin. This is explained by the more
limited distribution of Arahuay pottery and its association with
new settlements established around AD 1000. Local imitations of
Qotakalli and Arahuay pottery are more common than actual fragments of these styles at many sites. Muyu Orqo ceramics represent
a small component at 17 sites in the southern part of the area,
where they are strongly associated with Qotakalli pottery. Wari
pottery is exceedingly rare in the Xaquixaguana region, recovered
6
Our survey work did not make surface collections at Pikillacta or Chokepukio
instead, we reference excavation results to identify the presence of EIP and MH styles
at these two sites (Glowacki, 2005; McEwan et al., 1995).

in small quantities at only two sites. One of these is Akawillay,

where a grid of 80 intensive collection units (a total collection area
of 4000 m2) recovered a large component of Qotakalli (n = 155),
smaller samples of Muyu Orqo (n = 35) and Arahuay (n = 16), and
a single Wari fragment. Extensive horizontal excavations at
Akawillay have conrmed the paucity of Wari material in both
domestic and public contexts, and the continuity of local architectural and mortuary traditions during the MH (Blisle, 2011; Blisle
and Covey, 2010).
The Xaquixaguana survey laid out grids of 50 m2 intensive collection units at large sites across the region, permitting a degree of
control over the relative quantity and co-occurrence of EIP/MH
styles. Of nearly 1000 collection units, EIP and MH styles appeared
in more than 100. Only 14 units contained both Qotakalli and Arahuay pottery. More than 70 units yielded Qotakalli pottery (186
fragments), whereas Arahuay appeared in 32 collection units (46
fragments). Muyu Orqo pottery was almost as common as Arahuay,
with 39 fragments collected from 24 units. The lone fragment of
Wari pottery collected at Akawillay represents the only example
of this style encountered in intensive collections. The intensive collection data substantiate the conclusion that Qotakalli pottery is
found more widely and in greater quantities than Arahuay. Muyu
Orqo was well distributed in the region, while Wari was almost
completely absent.

Settlement patterns in the Paruro Region

As noted above, the Paruro regions most widely distributed EIP/
MH pottery is the locally produced Ccoipa style (Bauer, 1989,
1999: 7578), found at 35 sites, especially along the Apurmac River and its tributaries. In contrast, Qotakalli ceramics from the Cusco
Basin are distributed almost exclusively to the north of the Apurmac River and are rarely the most abundant component collected
at a site (Bauer, 1999: 7075). Ccoipa and Qotakalli are found together at only seven sites. Muyu Orqo pottery was identied at
12 Paruro sites, the majority of which (67%; n = 8) have Ccoipa
components. Ccoipa and Qotakalli sites consist of various small villages, hamlets and homesteads scattered across mid-valley elevations. Although settlements varied somewhat in size, they were
all relatively small and there is no evidence of a settlement
hierarchy.
Middle Horizon settlement in the Paruro region shows less stylistic overlap than has been described for other survey regions, perhaps because of the small size of the sites in question and limited
quantity of decorated pottery present on the surface. Wari ceramics were identied at only 9 sites (Bauer, 1999: 6367), and these
are largely conned to areas closest to the Lucre Basin. The distribution of Wari pottery does not correlate strongly with any other
EIP or MH styles. Arahuay ceramics were present at just 8 sites
concentrated in the northern part of the study region, closest to
the Cusco Basin (Bauer, 1999: 6770). Arahuay pottery is found
in association with Qotakalli and Ccoipa components more frequently than with the Wari style, which co-occurs with it at only
one site.
Muyu Roqo, a 2500 m2 site located on a hillside near Paruro,
was the only site in the Paruro study region with a dominant Wari
assemblage (Bauer, 1999). Test excavations at the site yielded an
unusual assemblage of fancy pottery, limited mostly to drinking
vessels and bowls, and quantities of camelid bone suggestive of a
non-domestic context. Nevertheless, the Paruro region shows no
evidence of Wari-directed settlement pattern shifts or architecture.
Furthermore, the production and distribution of the local ceramic
style (Ccoipa) appear not to have been affected by Wari activities
in the Lucre Basin.

R.A. Covey et al. / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

545

Table 4
Distribution of ceramic components within 3-hour travel intervals from Pikillacta.
Travel hours from Pikillacta
Less than 3 hrs
36 hrs
69 hrs
912 hrs
1215 hrs
1518 hrs
Total

Qotakalli

Arahuay

Wari

58
41
71
44
23
1

21
31
63
29
17
1

27
9
12
3
3
0

238

162

54

Table 5
Distribution of ceramic components within 3-hour travel intervals from Tankarpata.
Travel hours from Tankarpata
Less than 3 hrs
36 hrs
69 hrs
912 hrs
1215 hrs
1518 hrs
Total

Qotakalli

Arahuay

Wari

95
83
54
5
1
0

63
57
35
5
1
1

18
21
12
1
2
0

238

162

54

Settlement patterns in the Sacred Valley

The Sacred Valley region lacks distinct local EIP and MH styles,
indicating instead strong stylistic ties to the Cusco Basin (Covey,
2006). Qotakalli pottery is present at 47 sites, virtually all of which
lie between Cusco and the Vilcanota-Urubamba River. Sites registered more than 15 km from the Cusco Basin have signicant components of what appear to be local imitations of the Qotakalli and
Arahuay styles. Qotakalli sites are usually located in well-watered
side valley areas suitable for small-scale agriculture production.
Small villages and hamlets are dispersed widely throughout the region, with low levels of population in the Sacred Valley proper.
Because of its close proximity to the Lucre Basin and the site of
Pikillacta, the Sacred Valley offers important insights into the nature of Wari imperial inuence in the greater Cusco region. A direct
Wari administration of the Cusco region might be expected to develop economic power through intensication projects in the famously productive Sacred Valley. Nevertheless, our surveys have
documented that the EIP/MH settlement in the valley proper was
sparse and that settlements were typically located 200300 m
above the valley oor. Wari pottery was identied at only two sites
in the Sacred Valley region, whereas Arahuay ceramics were present at 42 sites, with a distribution largely restricted to areas south
of the Vilcanota-Urubamba River. The distribution of Qotakalli and
Arahuay ceramics suggests exchange relationships with the Cusco
Basin, with a slight tendency toward greater nucleation over time
(Covey, 2006).7
GIS analysis of stylistic distributions
We have created distribution maps based on how many identied components of a given EIP/MH ceramic style lie within a given
walking interval from two important sites, Pikillacta and Tankarpata. Pikillacta was selected for analysis because it is a large Wari
installation in the survey region. Tankarpata is a modest sized village site located in the largest known concentration of EIP/MH settlements in the Cusco Basin. We selected it as being representative
of villages in the center of the basin. Regional analysis modeled
7
As in the Xaquixaguana study region, Arahuay pottery occurs at some Sacred
Valley sites with a prominent LIP occupation, suggesting a regional settlement
balkanization beginning before AD 1000.

Fig. 5. Distribution of key ceramic components based on walking time from

Pikillacta and Tankarpata.

foot travel across the survey area, assuming that travelers are
aware of the terrain conguration and avoid barriers, such as crossing waterways that could potentially slow down the trip. This terrain analysis uses Toblers algorithm to calculate an anisotropic
surface depicting the difculty of passing through an undulating
landscaping while accounting for terrain slope as its cost surface
(Tobler, 1993). Toblers original function is:

Speed : km=h 6  e3:5jSlope0:05j

To calculate travel time estimates and produce isolines of sametime routes, the above function translates into the inverse of the
slope/speed relationship8:

Travel Time : h=m 1=6000  e3:5jslope0:05j

Data from the Instituto Geogrco Nacional del Per provided
different digital contour datasets at 1:100,000 scale that were combined together and clipped to the limits of the survey area. Geographic Information Systems software ArcGIS 9.2 aided in
merging the geographic datasets and the analysis of survey data.
The path distance surface is a heuristic means of representing
the anisotropic movement in terms of units of time,9 and served
as the basis for the creation of isolines every three hours distance
from Pikillacta and Tankarpata. The most distant components from
each site were between 15 and 18 hours travel time (Tables 4 and
5, respectively).
8
This formula assumes that on a downward sloping surface the walker will
advance faster than when walking an upward slope. For at surface or zero degree
slope, Toblers function computes speed of 5.037 km/h. The greatest speed according
to this function would be for a walker to cover 1 km of about 3 degree downward
slope at 9.6 min.
9
The path distance surface was calculated with Toblers walking time formula by
supplying the function with a customized text le (Vertical Factor) that contained
degree slope values in the rst column and the corresponding value from Toblers
formula in the second column.

546

R.A. Covey et al. / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

Fig. 6. Distribution of Qotakalli pottery identied through survey, with 3-hour walking intervals from Pikillacta and Tankarpata.

The results of the GIS analysis reveal some important patterns

in the distribution of Qotakalli, Arahuay, and Wari pottery as a
function of distance from key sites (Fig. 5). At the outset, it is
important to recognize that the locations of Pikillacta and Tankarpata in relation to the survey regions inuence how much of the
area within a given walking interval has been systematically investigated. Our data offer a very strong portrait of the region within 9
hours of Tankarpata, whereas the same region represents a smaller
sample of the area within six hours of Pikillacta, since that site is at
the southeast margin of our region. Based on nearby regional studies (e.g., Glowacki, 2002; Kendall, 1994: 63; Kosiba, 2010: 318), we
expect that additional Wari components should be encountered
within about 6 hours or so of Pikillacta, especially in easterly directions in areas farther from the Cusco Basin than those analyzed in
this article (e.g., along routes to Ocongate, Quiquijana, and
Pomacanchi).
The distribution of Qotakalli pottery (Fig. 6) supports earlier
studies (Bauer, 1999; Montoya et al., 2003) that identify the Cusco
Basin as the center of production and distribution of this ceramic
style. Qotakalli ceramics appear throughout the modest settlement
hierarchies of the basin and its immediate surroundings, with most
examples recovered in valley-bottom villages and hamlets within a
days round-trip walk of Tankarpata. Pikillacta lies at the margin of
this distribution limit and produces a travel-based distribution that
makes it unlikely that the site was a major distributor of Qotakalli
pottery. The large Xaquixaguana village at Akawillay lies at
roughly the same distance from Tankarpata, in the opposite direction. Qotakalli ceramics appear at sites that are more than a days
walk distance from Tankarpata, but locally produced pottery seems
to be more common at distant EIP/MH sites, including the Ccoipa
style and local imitations of Qotakalli. This distribution pattern

supports the interpretation that a single Cusco Basin polity did

not establish formal hierarchical control over the greater Cusco region, and that the power of local elites did not extend much beyond regular face-to-face contacts.
The distribution of Wari pottery (Fig. 7) is also limited in terms
of site components, sherd counts, and geographical scope. With the
notable exception of Pikillacta, Wari pottery does not appear in the
context of new settlement locations or a more pronounced regional
hierarchy that would suggest a network of imperial administrative
sites. Wari ceramics are largely restricted to village sites and are
rare at small sites. Almost all Wari site components are found
within a days round-trip walk of Pikillacta. Not surprisingly, there
is greater distribution along the axis of valley-bottom settlements
that run from the Lucre Basin to the Cusco Basin. Some of this pottery could have been distributed through direct exchanges between Wari colonists and locals, or through down-the-line
trading. The regional distribution of Wari pottery supports the
interpretation that the style was used by Wari colonists and exchanged with their neighbors, but was not something that was
associated with state-directed changes to the everyday life of most
people living in the Cusco region during the MH.
The distribution of the Arahuay style (Fig. 8) offers a more subtle portrait of Wari inuence, and it may help to clarify some of the
interpretive controversies surrounding the Wari occupation of the
Cusco region. Arahuay is uncommon within about 3 hours walk of
Pikillacta, where it is negatively correlated with the distribution of
Wari pottery. Rather than being a local Wari style emanating out of
the Lucre-Huaro area, Arahuay appears to be a local Cusco Basin
style that has nearly the same geographic scope as Qotakalli, but
in smaller amounts and a more limited presence in lower-order
settlements. The distribution of Arahuay does not correspond to

R.A. Covey et al. / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

547

Fig. 7. Distribution of Wari pottery identied through survey, with 3-hour walking intervals from Pikillacta and Tankarpata.

regional changes in settlement location or hierarchy, nor does it

indicate different exchange patterns that would spread the style
beyond the bounds described for Qotakalli pottery. Although a
Wari decorative inuence has been noted on Arahuay pottery, settlement and distribution patterns suggest that this soft power
was not accompanied by signicant changes to local social organization or economic exchange systems (Bauer and Jones, 2003: 14).

Discussion
The synthesis of EIP and MH settlement patterns across our
combined study regions offers insights into pre-Wari settlement
patterns and the degree of transformation that followed the colonization of the Huaro-Lucre area around AD 600. Wari colonization
targeted areas with small local populations, where major investments had to be made to establish productive farmland and
sources of water. There is no evidence of state administrative centers in areas with modest settlement hierarchies, such as the Cusco
Basin or Xaquixaguana Valley, which are the expected locations for
establishing direct rule. These areas also lack the kind of evidence
of indirect rule predicted by the mosaic of control modelsmall
imperial installations, settlement pattern shifts, and evidence of
changes in subsistence priorities. Overall, the survey data suggest
that the pocket of direct rule established by the Wari state in the
Cusco region was surprisingly small, whereas much of the region
lacks convincing evidence for even indirect state rule.
Our theoretical approach emphasizes diverse forms of power
many of which do not necessarily ow from state facilities, so it
is important to consider our regional data in terms of how they
might reect dynamic networks of social power. Given that

standing architecture and other material remains are not uniformly distributed across the region, our discussion limits itself
to ceramic distributions, acknowledging that these data do not reect all kinds of social power potentially wielded by local populations or Wari colonists and state ofcials.
Everyday social practices
Local settlement pattern continuity suggests minimal alterations to subsistence practices during the MH. Importantly, the persistence of multiple local ceramic styles from the EIP into the MH
indicates that local material culture continued to be produced, exchanged, and consumed during the Wari occupation. In other
words, the diffusion of Wari social inuence did not reach all populations of the region or all levels of local social hierarchies. Nevertheless, it is also apparent that the presence of Wari populations in
the Lucre Basin had sufcient cultural inuence that some local
potters adopted Wari stylistic elements in their production of the
Arahuay style.
Religion
SSurvey data generally do not provide representative regional
perspectives on religious change, but a few site-based observations
hint at the existence of Wari patronage and inuence in certain
locations. Bauers (1999) test excavations at Muyu Roqo in the Paruro region suggest Wari involvement in a local festival event,
although such patronage is not evident at other sacred locales. Furthermore, excavations at the local EIP/MH center at Akawillay reveal continuity of local ritual practices with little evidence of Wari
state inuence (Blisle, 2011; Blisle and Covey, 2010). In contrast,

548

R.A. Covey et al. / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

Fig. 8. Distribution of Arahuay pottery identied through survey, with 3-hour walking intervals from Pikillacta and Tankarpata.

the burial remains recovered by Glowacki (2002) in the Huaro area

provide notable examples of Wari ritual paraphernalia and iconography (cf. Zapata, 1997). Clearly, additional excavation work is
needed throughout the region to gauge the nature and extent of
Wari religious inuence.
Economy
Local populations throughout the Cusco region already practiced valley-bottom agriculture, including the cultivation of maize,
before Wari colonization. Wari settlers may have organized the
construction of the impressive Lucre Basin canal and terrace system (Valencia Zegarra, 2005), but otherwise our survey data do
not indicate signicant intensication projects or economicallyoriented settlement shifts. More excavations and geochemical
analyses are needed to approach questions of craft production
and long-distance exchange relationships, but it is worth noting
that the distribution of Wari pottery is generally restricted to the
areas closest to large Wari sites, whereas the ceramic components
found farther away suggest exchange patterns among different
parts of the Cusco region. It is also important to note that about
10% of the pottery analyzed by Glowacki (1996) at Pikillacta was
identied as Arahuay (5.5%) or Qotakalli (4.5%), indicating that economic inuence was not strictly unidirectional.
Military
Pikillacta was built with high perimeter walls and controlled access patterns, but no other contemporaneous sites of the region
possess defensive features, and very few EIP or MH sites are found

in what might be considered defensive locations. There are also no

clear settlement shifts between EIP and MH patterns that suggest
the abandonment of undefended villages and productive farmlanda shift that is clearly in evidence in many parts of the Cusco
region after AD 1000 and has been interpreted as an increase in regional hostilities (Bauer and Covey, 2002). These patterns suggest
that Wari colonization did not take place under regional conditions
of large-scale intergroup conict.
Politics
Wari political inuence is obvious in the Huaro-Lucre area, and
the scale of construction and adherence to Wari canons marks
Pikillacta as an unprecedented state project in the south-central
Andes. Construction techniques and the huge labor requirements
needed to carry out such a project suggest that multiple work
groups labored at Pikillacta during construction episodes that
occurred over several generations (Bauer, 2004: 6162; McEwan,
2005: 6383). It seems reasonable to infer that Pikillactas
construction reects a Wari state strategy to govern local
populations directly, an attempt to refashion an outlying colony
into a state-administered region. Despite the political ambitions
communicated by the great enclosures at Pikillacta, construction
was abandoned in the midst of the project, and only a small part
of the site was ever occupied (McEwan, 2005).
Settlement patterns beyond the Lucre Basin area also reect the
incomplete realization of state dominance. The Cusco Basin shows
evidence of closer contact with the Wari centers in Lucre and
Huaro than other parts of the region, although survey data suggest
that it lacked a Wari administrative center, or even the emergence

R.A. Covey et al. / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

549

Fig. 9. Schematic map of Wari state inuence, emphasizing the discontinuous nature of state social power. Note that not all Wari architecture has been conrmed
archaeologically.

of a more hierarchical regional settlement pattern.10 Other parts of

the Cusco region exhibit similar continuity of existing patterns of
settlement hierarchy (or lack thereof) over time, with no clear indication of Wari state administration.
Overall, the patterns of Wari power and inuence indicate that
while populations living in the vicinity of the Wari sites in the
Huaro-Lucre area experienced extensive changes, state inuence
was variable and limited throughout most of the Cusco region.
Nearby areas of greater population density, social complexity, or
specic resources appear to have had closer interactions with the
Wari colonies, and it may be that higher status individuals in these
places were in more contact with and inuenced by Wari culture.
However, large areas lying at a distance from the Wari colonies and
localities with low populations levels do not exhibit evidence of
Wari inuence. In short, the regional settlement picture indicates
a signicant difference between Wari state policies (reected in
the investment in construction at Pikillacta) and actual regionwide state power.
Such distinctions lend important insights into the nature of
Wari power in the Cusco region and elsewhere in the Andes. Despite the huge investment displayed in the construction of Pikillacta, there is little regional evidence for the state exercise of
economic, military, or political power within the hundreds of MH
communities included within our regional surveys. It is reasonable
to infer that most Cusco populations did not signicantly alter

10
Although it is possible that a regionally important Wari site underlies modern
Cusco, no signicant deposits of EIP/MH pottery have been reported in excavations in
the city, and the regional settlement pattern in areas immediately surrounding the
city yields signicant samples of local EIP/MH styles, with no clear evidence of a
concentration of Wari pottery (Bauer, 2004).

their subsistence systems to meet state demands. Instead, Wari

populations may have attracted local support through well-established long-distance exchange networks and craft production systems. In addition to a degree of economic power, Wari ofcials may
have established some measure of ideological power in local contexts by underwriting elaborate ritual activities, encouraging local
elites to participate in state institutions that seemed effective in
promoting order and prosperity among the populations of Wari
colonies. Despite such advantages, it should be noted that local
goodwill was insufcient for establishing direct rule throughout
of the Cusco region.
Conclusions
Our results lead us to several signicant conclusions regarding
colonization and the regional expression of different kinds of state
power and inuence. Wari interactions with local populations in
Cusco were very limited beyond a few hours walk from key settlements or state installations. The data suggest an archipelago of colonies and strategic installations, with restricted areas displaying
high delity to Wari canons surrounded by regions with little or
no evidence of Wari inuence (Fig. 9). Such a viewpoint is consistent with settlement patterns in other regions of the Andes. For
example, surveys in the Moquegua region indicate intensive Wari
colonization in the vicinity of Cerro Bal, where new large-scale
hydraulic works were built (McEwan and Williams, 2012), with
limited distribution of Wari architecture or pottery at sites more
than a few kilometers away (Goldstein, 2005; Owen, 1996; Owen
and Goldstein, 2001; Stanish, 1985). The scale of our study region
helps to illustrate why small surveys conducted around conrmed
or suspected Wari installations often identify Wari inuence,

550

R.A. Covey et al. / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

whereas surveys around non-Wari centers often fail to encounter

such evidence (cf. Jennings, 2002, 2006b; Doutriaux, 2004:
212220; Sciscento, 1989; Wernke, 2003). Regional surveys in
the Nasca region and nearby south coast valleys present a
comparable disjunction between directly occupied Wari locales
and areas with no apparent Wari inuence (Browne and Baraybar,
1988; Edwards, 2010; Proulx, 2007; Schreiber, 1999; Schreiber and
Lancho Rojas, 1995; Silverman, 2002; for survey data from nearby
valleys, see Canziani, 1992; Menzel and Riddell, 1986).
The regional data expose problems in interpreting macro-regional distribution patterns of Wari architecture, ceramics, and other
material culture. As art historians move to describe Wari craft
goods formally (e.g., Bergh and Jennings, 2012), it is important to
draw the distinction between regional archaeological data and
the interpretive potential of museum objects. Looted tombsespecially those of the coastal desertdemonstrate the elite consumption of ne Wari-style craft goods, but it is problematic to infer
direct state administration from poorly-provenanced objects with
no other cultural context. The spectacular mortuary remains recently reported in the Vilcabamba region represent a rare instance
where high status Wari mortuary offerings have been excavated
and afliated with state architectural and burial canons (Fonseca
Santa Cruz and Bauer, in press), although the regional expression
of state power and inuence remains to be determined.
Without a systematic regional context, it is problematic to assume that the conditions at or immediately near a state settlement,
architectural compound, or tomb are representative of the entire
region. Furthermore, the identication of portable objects in a
state-afliated styleceramic vessels, textiles, and other craft
goodsshould be considered as evidence of interregional exchange
networks only, unless clear indicators of state domination are evident. This is particularly true for mortuary assemblages and museum pieces that lack a clear excavation context. In a similar
vein, it is important to acknowledge that continuous imperial domination is not needed for portable goods to be moved across great
distances, and when objects change hands their use and signicance can also be reinterpreted. Technology and iconography can
be diffused in even more complicated ways.
The regional scope and intensity of the Wari occupation of Cusco encourages comparisons with the footprint of early states in
other world regionsUruk, Old Kingdom Egypt, Monte Albn, Teotihuacn, Tiwanakuwhere colonies or enclaves met economic demands and fullled civic and strategic functions for centuries as
the state developed the motivation and means for creating institutions to govern foreign populations (Covey, 2003: 4546, 6263;
cf. Goldstein, 2005). A colonization rst interpretation of early
Wari expansion encourages the reconsideration of motivations
for expansion, shifting from military conquest and economic
exploitation of subject populations to issues such as demographic
relief and strategic expansion of trade routes or natural resource
access. Such resettlement could be state-directed, or initiated by
groups other than the ruling elite. Based on the incomplete construction and occupation proles of the largest Wari peripheral
installations, it appears that the Wari state did not successfully
transition most colonies into directly ruled provinces.
Wari was clearly a centralized state whose people settled outside of the Ayacucho region. Wari can also be considered to have
aspired to establish direct control over local populations surrounding some of its colonies, although the state may have overextended
as it embarked on its rst programs to do so. Andean archaeologists should consider the modest scale of the Wari state in the context of contemporaneous states from other world regions. The
most generous estimates of the population of the Wari capital
reach 70,000 (Glowacki and Malpass, 2003: 432; Isbell et al.,
1991: 24; cf. McEwan and Williams, 2012: 65), a small fraction
of the size of state capitals such as Constantinople, Baghdad, and

Changan. The area encompassed by colonies and state architectural compounds outside the Ayacucho region reaches only a few
hundred hectares at most.11 Given that the largest of these appear
in the Lucre-Huaro area, it is reasonable to hypothesize that pockets
characterized by high degrees of state power are correspondingly
small elsewhere in the Andes. This suggests that population directly
governed by Wari state institutions in the Ayacucho region was substantially larger than that of areas under the dominion of Wari colonies, which could have been administered using the same
institutions and practices brought from the Ayacucho region. Such
an observation encourages archaeologists to reconsider the role of
colonies as a civic outgrowth that might or might not lead to the creation of institutions for the direct and formal administration of
peripheral regions (e.g., Stein, 2005), and it underscores the limits
of state power across space and time, despite the messages inscribed
on state monuments and in ofcial histories.
Acknowledgments
Bauer received support for the Paruro survey from a FulbrightHays DDRA fellowship, as well as the Skaggs Foundation and the
Organization of American States. Bauers Cuzco survey was funded
by the National Science Foundation (BCS-9806971), the National
Geographic Society (NGS), the National Endowment for the
Humanities (NEH), and the John Heinz III Charitable Trust. Coveys
Sacred Valley survey received funding from a Fulbright-Hays DDRA
Fellowship and related grants from the Wenner-Gren Foundation
(#6604) and the NSF (BCS-0135913). Grants from the NSF (BCS0342381) and NEH (RZ-50818-07) supported Coveys Xaquixaguana survey, and the NGS funded the Qoriqocha survey. The lower
Sacred Valley was surveyed with support from the John Heinz III
Charitable Trust. We are grateful for the material support for the
extended eldwork, as well as for the collegial input of the anonymous reviewers who read and commented on the initial draft of
this article.
References
Barreda Murillo, L., 1973. Las culturas inka y pre-inka de Cusco. Licensiatura Thesis.
Department of Archaeology, Universidad Nacional de San Antonio Abad del
Cusco.
Barreda Murillo, L., 1982. Asentamiento humano de los Qotakalli del Cuzco. In:
Oberti Rodrguez, I. (Ed.), Arqueologa del Cuzco. Instituto Nacional de Cultura,
Cusco, pp. 1321.
Bauer, B.S., 1989. Muyu Orqo y Ccoipa: Dos nuevos tipos de cermica para la regin
del Cuzco. Revista Andina 7 (2), 537542.
Bauer, B.S., 1992. The Development of the Inca State. University of Texas Press,
Austin.
Bauer, B.S., 1999. The Early Ceramics of the Inca Heartland. Fieldiana Anthropology,
n.s. 31, 1156.
Bauer, B.S., 2002. Las antiguas tradiciones alfareras de la regin del Cuzco. Centro de
Estudios Rurales Andinos Bartolom de Las Casas, Cusco.
Bauer, B.S., 2004. Ancient Cuzco: Heartland of the Inca. University of Texas Press,
Austin.
Bauer, B.S., Covey, R.A., 2002. Processes of state formation in the Inca Heartland
(Cuzco, Peru). American Anthropologist 104 (3), 846864.
Bauer, B.S., Jones, B.M., 2003. Early Intermediate and Middle Horizon Ceramic Styles
of the Cuzco Valley. Fieldiana Anthropology, n.s. 34, 165.
Bauer, B.S., Jones, B.M., 2012. Estilos cermicos del periodo intermedio temprano y
el horizonte medio en el valle del Cuzco. In: Bauer, B.S. (Ed.), Estudios
Arqueolgicos sobre los Inca. Centro Bartolom de las Casas, Cusco, pp. 127
209.
Bauer, B.S., Kellett, L.C., 2010. Cultural Transformations of the Chanka Homeland
(Andahuaylas, Peru) during the Late Intermediate Period (A.D. 10001400).
Latin American Antiquity 21 (1), 87111.
11
This gure is heavily weighted by large size estimates for Cusco Wari sites (47 ha
for Pikillacta and 150 ha for Huaro [Glowacki and Zapata, 1998; McEwan, 2005]). It
also includes the incomplete site of Viracochapampa (32 ha), disputed sites such as
Achachiwa (35 hasee Doutriaux, 2004), and unconrmed sites identied using air
photos, such as Pariamarca and Tocroc. See Jennings (2006a: 269270) for discussion
of assumed lower-order Wari sites.

R.A. Covey et al. / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

Bauer, B.S., Kellett, L.C., Araz Silva, M., 2010. The Chanka: Archaeological Research
in Andahuaylas (Apurmac), Peru. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Los
Angeles.
Blisle, V., 2011. Akawillay: Wari State Expansion and Household Change in Cusco,
Peru (AD 6001000). Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan,
Ph.D. Dissertation.
Blisle, V., Covey, R.A., 2010. Local settlement continuity and Wari impact in Middle
Horizon Cusco. In: Jennings, J. (Ed.), Beyond Wari Walls: Regional Perspectives
on Middle Horizon Peru. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 78
95.
Benavides, C.M., 1991. Cheqo Wasi, Huari. In: Isbell, W.H., McEwan, G.F. (Eds.),
Huari Administrative Structure: Prehistoric Monumental Architecture and State
Government. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington,
DC, pp. 5569.
Bergh, S.E., Jennings, J., 2012. The history of inquiry into the Wari and their arts. In:
Bergh, S.E. (Ed.), Wari: Lords of the Ancient Andes. Thames and Hudson, New
York, pp. 527.
Browne, D.M., 1992. Further archaeological reconnaissance in the Province of Palpa,
Department of Ica, Peru. In: Saunders, N.J. (Ed.), Ancient America: Contributions
to New World Archaeology. Oxbow Books, Oxford, pp. 77116.
Browne, D.M., Baraybar, J.P., 1988. An archaeological reconnaissance in the Province
of Palpa, Department of Ica, Peru. In: Saunders, N.J., de Montmollin, O. (Eds.),
Recent Studies in Pre-Columbian Archaeology. BAR International Series No. 421,
British Archaeological Reports, Oxford, pp. 299325.
Canziani, A.J., 1992. Patrones de asentamiento en la arqueologa del valle de
Chincha, Per. In: Eiroa, J.J. (Ed.), II Curso de prehistoria de Amrica hispana.
Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, pp. 87123.
Covey, R.A., 2003. The Vilcanota Valley (Peru): Inka State Formation and the
Evolution of Imperial Strategies. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of
Anthropology, University of Michigan.
Covey, R.A., 2006. How the Incas Built Their Heartland: State Formation and the
Innovation of Imperial Strategies in the Sacred Valley. University of Michigan
Press, Ann Arbor, Peru.
Covey, R.A., Araz Silva, M., Bauer, B.S., 2008. Settlement patterns in the Yucay
Valley and neighboring areas. In: Covey, R.A., Amado Gonzlez, D. (Eds.),
Imperial Transformations in Sixteenth-Century Yucay, Peru. Memoirs of the
Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, 44. University of Michigan
Museum of Anthropology, Ann Arbor, pp. 317.
Cumpa Palacios, C.V., 1988. Prospeccin arqueolgica en Qoripata. Licensiatura
Thesis. Department of Archaeology, Universidad Nacional San Antonio Abad del
Cusco.
Davis, A.R., 2011. Yuthu: Community and Ritual in an Early Andean Village.
University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology Memoirs, 50, Ann Arbor.
Dean, E.M., 2005. Ancestors, Mountains, Shrines, and Settlements: Late
Intermediate Period Landscapes of the Southern Vilcanota River Valley, Peru.
Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of Anthropology, University of California,
Berkeley.
Delgado, M., Olivera, P., Montoya, E., Bustamante, A., 2007. Building a bridge to the
past: archaeometry at the IPEN reactor. Archaeometry 49 (2), 403412.
Doutriaux, M.A., 2004. Imperial Conquest in a Multiethnic Setting: The Inka
Occupation of the Colca Valley, Peru. Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of
Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley, UMI, Ann Arbor.
Edwards, M.J., 2010. Archaeological Investigations at Pataraya: A Wari Outpost in
the Nasca Valley of Southern Peru. Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of
Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara.
Feinman, G.M., Marcus, J. (Eds.), 1988. Archaic States. School of American Research
Press, Santa Fe.
Flannery, K.V., 1972. The cultural evolution of civilizations. Annual Review of
Ecology and Systematics 3, 399426.
Fonseca Santa Cruz, J., Bauer, B.S., 2013. Dating the Wari Remains at Espritu Pampa
(Vilcabamba, Cuzco). Andean Past 11 (in press).
Giddens, A., 1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of
Structuration. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Glatz, C., 2009. Empire as network: spheres of material interaction in Late Bronze
Age Anatolia. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 28, 127141.
Glowacki, M., 1996. The Wari Occupation of the Southern Highlands of Peru: A
Ceramic Perspective from the Site of Pikillacta. Ph.D. Dissertation. Department
of Anthropology, Brandeis University.
Glowacki, M., 2002. The Huaro archaeological site complex: rethinking the Huari
occupation of Cuzco. In: Isbell, W.H., Silverman, H. (Eds.), Andean Archaeology I:
Variations in Sociopolitical Organization. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers,
New York, pp. 267285.
Glowacki, M., 2005. Pottery from Pikillacta. In: McEwan, G.F. (Ed.), Pikillacta: The
Wari Empire in Cuzco. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City, pp. 101113.
Glowacki, M., Malpass, M., 2003. Water, huacas, and ancestor worship: traces of a
sacred Wari Landscape. Latin American Antiquity 14 (4), 431448.
Glowacki, M., McEwan, G.F., 2001. Pikillacta, Huaro y la gran regin del Cusco:
nuevas interpretaciones de la ocupacin Wari en la sierra sur. Boletn de
Arqueologa PUCP 5, 3149.
Glowacki, M., Zapata, J., 1998. The Wari Occupation of Cuzco: Recent Discoveries
from the Huaro Valley. Paper Presented at the 38th Annual Meeting of the
Institute of Andean Studies, Berkeley.
Goldstein, P.S., 2005. Andean Diaspora: The Tiwanaku Colonies and the Origins of
South American Empire. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
Heffernan, K., 1996. Limatambo: Archaeology, History, and the Regional Societies of
Inca Cusco. BAR International Series 644. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.

551

Hingley, R., 2005. Settlement in Brittania. In: Ochoa, C.F., Daz, P.G. (Eds.), Unidad y
diversidad en el arco atlntico en poca romana. BAR British Series 1371.
Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 267278.
Hinsley, F.H., 1966. Sovereignty. CUP Archive, Cambridge.
Isbell, W.H., 2008. Wari and Tiwanaku: international identities in the Central
Andean middle horizon. In: Isbell, W.H., Silverman, H. (Eds.), Handbook of South
American Archaeology. Springer, New York, pp. 731759.
Isbell, W.H., Brewster-Wray, C., Spickard, L.E., 1991. Architecture and spatial
organization at Huari. In: Isbell, W.H., McEwan, G.F. (Eds.), Huari Administrative
Structure: Prehistoric Monumental Architecture and State Government.
Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, DC, pp. 1953.
Isbell, W.H., Schreiber, K.J., 1978. Was Wari a state? American Antiquity 43, 372
389.
Jennings, J., Craig, N., Polity-Wide Analysis and Imperial Political Economy: The
Relationship between Valley Political Complexity and Administrative Centers in
the Wari Empire of the Central Andes. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology
20, 2001, 479-502.
Jennings, J., 2002. Prehistoric Imperialism and Cultural Development in the
Cotahuasi Valley. Department of Anthropology, University of California, Santa
Barbara, Peru. Ph.D. Dissertation.
Jennings, J., 2006a. Understanding Middle Horizon Peru: hermeneutic spirals,
interpretive traditions, and Wari administrative centers. Latin American
Antiquity 16, 265286.
Jennings, J., 2006b. Core, peripheries, and regional realities in Middle Horizon Peru.
Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20, 479502.
Jennings, J. (Ed.), 2010. Beyond Wari Walls: Regional Perspectives on Middle
Horizon Peru. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Kantner, J., 2008. The archaeology of regions: from discrete analytical toolkit to
ubiquitous spatial perspective. Journal of Archaeological Research 16, 37
81.
Kendall, A., 1994. Proyecto arqueolgico Cusichaca, Cusco: Investigaciones
arqueolgicas y de rehabilitacin agrcola, tomo I. Southern Peru Copper
Corporation, Lima.
Knobloch, P.J., 1991. Stylistic date of ceramics from the Huari centers. In: Isbell,
W.H., McEwan, G.F. (Eds.), Huari Administrative Structure: Prehistoric
Monumental Architecture and State Government. Dumbarton Oaks Research
Library and Collection, Washington, DC, pp. 247258.
Kosiba, S.B., 2010. Becoming Inka: The Transformation of Political Place and Practice
during Inka State Formation (Cusco, Peru). Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of
Anthropology, University of Chicago.
Kowalewski, S.A., 2008. Regional settlement pattern studies. Journal of
Archaeological Research 16, 225285.
Lull, V., Mic, R., 2011. Archaeology of the Origin of the State: The Theories. Tr. P.
Smith. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Mann, M., 1986. The Sources of Social Power: A History of Power from the Beginning
to AD 1760, vol. I. Cambridge University Press, New York.
McEwan, G.F., 1984. The Middle Horizon in the Valley of Cuzco, Peru: The Impact of
the Wari Occupation of Pikillacta in the Lucre Basin. Ph.D. Dissertation.
Department of Anthropology, University of Texas.
McEwan, G.F., 1991. Investigations at the Pikillacta Site: a provincial Huari center in
the Valley of Cuzco. In: Isbell, W.H., McEwan, G.F. (Eds.), Huari Administrative
Structure: Prehistoric Monumental Architecture and State Government.
Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, DC, pp. 93120.
McEwan, G.F., 1996. Archaeological investigations at Pikillacta, a Wari Site in Peru.
Journal of Field Archaeology 23 (2), 169186.
McEwan, G.F. (Ed.), 2005. Pikillacta: The Wari Empire in Cusco. University of Iowa
Press, Iowa City.
McEwan, G.F., 2006. The Incas: New Perspectives. ABC-CLIO, New York.
McEwan, G.F., 2012. Indicators of possible driving forces for the spread of Quechua
and Aymara reected in the archaeology of Cuzco. In: Heggarty, P., BeresfordJones, D. (Eds.), Archaeology and Language in the Andes: A Cross-Disciplinary
Exploration of Prehistory. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 247263.
McEwan, G.F., Gibaja, A., Chateld, M., 1995. Archaeology of the Chokepukio Site: an
investigation of the origin of the Inca civilization in the Valley of Cuzco, Peru.
Tawantinsuyu 1, 1117.
McEwan, G.F., Williams, P.R., 2012. The Wari built environment: landscape and
architecture of empire. In: Bergh, S.E. (Ed.), Wari: Lords of the Ancient Andes.
Thames and Hudson, New York, pp. 6581.
Menzel, D., 1964. Style and time in the Middle Horizon. awpa Pacha 2, 1105.
Menzel, D., Riddell, F.A., 1986. Archaeological Investigations at Tambo Viejo, Acar
Valley, Peru, 1954. California Institute for Peruvian Studies, Sacramento.
Montoya, E., Zapata, J., Mendoza, P., Glowacki, M., 2003. Chemical Characterization
of Archaeological Ceramics Using K0-Based Instrumental Neutron Activation
Analysis: A Study in the Production and Distribution of Middle Horizon Pottery
of Cuzco, Peru. Reporte Tcnico presentado al Instituto Peruano de Energa
Nuclear, Lima.
Montoya, E., Glowacki, M., Zapata, J., Mendoza, P., 2009. Caracterizacin de
cermicos wari mediante anlisis por activacin neutrnica. Revista de la
Sociedad Qumica del Per 75 (4), 473478.
Nye Jr., J.S., 2004. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. PublicAffairs,
New York.
Owen, B.D., 1996. Inventario arqueolgico del drenaje superior del Ro Osmore:
informe de campo e informe nal. Unpublished report presented to the National
Institute of Culture. <http://bruceowen.com/research/researchperu.htm>.
Owen, B.D., 2007. The Wari Heartland on the Arequipa Coast: Huamanga ceramics
from Beringa, Majes Valley, Peru. Andean Past 8, 287373.

552

R.A. Covey et al. / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 32 (2013) 538552

Owen, B.D., Goldstein, P.S., 2001. Tiwanaku en Moquegua: Interacciones regionales

y colapso. Boletn de Arqueologa PUCP 5, 169188.
Parker, B.T., 2003. Archaeological manifestations of empire: Assyrias imprint on
southeastern Anatolia. American Journal of Archaeology 107 (4),
525557.
Parsons, J.R., Hastings, C.M., Matos, M.R., 1997. Rebuilding the state in highland
Peru: herdercultivator interaction during the late intermediate period in the
Tarama-Chinchaycocha region. Latin American Antiquity 8 (4), 317341.
Parsons, J.R., Hastings, C.M., Mendieta, R.M., 2000. Prehispanic Settlement Patterns
in the Upper Mantaro and Tarma Drainages, Junn, Peru. Volume 1: The TaramaChinchaycocha Region, Part 1. Memoirs of the University of Michigan Museum
of Anthropology, 34. University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology, Ann
Arbor.
Parsons, J.R., Hastings, C.M., Mendieta, R.M., 2013. Prehispanic Settlement Patterns
in the Upper Mantaro and Tarma Drainages, Junn, Peru. Volume 2: The Wanka
Region. Memoirs of the University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology, 34.
University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology, Ann Arbor.
Proulx, D.A., 2007. Settlement Patterns and Society in South Coastal Peru: Report on
a Survey of the Lower Rio Nasca and Rio Grande, 1998. Unpublished Report.
<http://people.umass.edu/proulx/online_pubs/1998_Nasca_Survey_Report.pdf>.
Schreiber, K.J., 1992. Wari Imperialism in Middle Horizon Peru. Anthropological
Papers of the University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology No. 87.
University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology, Ann Arbor.
Schreiber, K.J., 1999. Regional approaches to the study of prehistoric empires:
examples from Ayacucho and Nasca, Peru. In: Billman, B., Feinman, G. (Eds.),
Settlement Pattern Studies in the Americas: Fifty Years since Vir. Smithsonian
Institution Press, Washintgon, DC, pp. 160171.
Schreiber, K.J., 2004. Sacred landscapes and imperial ideologies: the Wari empire in
Sondondo, Peru. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological
Association 14 (1), 131150.
Schreiber, K.J., 2005. Imperial agendas and local agency: Wari colonial strategies. In:
Stein, G.J. (Ed.), The Archaeology of Colonial Encounters: Comparative
Perspectives. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe, NM, pp. 237
262.
Schreiber, K.J., 2012. The rise of an Andean empire. In: Bergh, S.E. (Ed.), Wari: Lords
of the Ancient Andes. Thames and Hudson, New York, pp. 3145.
Schreiber, K.J., Lancho Rojas, J., 1995. The puquios of Nasca. Latin American
Antiquity 6, 229254.
Sciscento, M.M., 1989. Imperialism in the High Andes: Inka and Wari Involvement
in the Chuquibamba Valley, Peru. Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of
Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara.
Silva, J.E., 1996. Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Chilln River Valley, Peru.
Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor, UMI, Ann Arbor.
Silverman, H., 2002. Ancient Nasca Settlement and Society. University of Iowa Press,
Iowa City.

Sinopoli, C.M., 2006. Imperial landscapes of South Asia. In: Stark, M.T. (Ed.),
Archaeology of Asia. Blackwell, New York, pp. 324349.
Skidmore, M., 2012. Domestic Activity and Daily Life at Hatun Cotuyoc, Huaro: A
Few Reections on the Wari Presence in the Cusco Region of Peru. Paper
Presented at the 31st Northeast Conference on Andean Archaeology and
Ethnohistory, Boston, Massachusetts.
Smith, M.E., Montiel, L., 2001. The archaeological study of empires and imperialism
in pre-Hispanic Central Mexico. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20,
245284.
Smith, M.L., 2005. Networks, territories, and the cartography of ancient states.
Annals of the Association of American Geographers 95 (4), 832849.
Stanish, C., 1985. Post-Tiwanaku Regional Economies in the Otora Valley, Southern
Peru. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Chicago.
Stein, G.J., 1999. Rethinking world-systems: power, distance, and diasporas in the
dynamics of interregional interaction. In: Kardulias, P.N. (Ed.), World-Systems
Theory in Practice: Leadership, Production, and Exchange. Rowman & Littleeld
Publishers, Lanham, MD, pp. 153177.
Stein, G.J., 2002. From passive periphery to active agents: emerging perspectives in
the archaeology of interregional interaction. American Anthropologist 104 (3),
903916.
Stein, G.J. (Ed.), 2005. The Archaeology of Colonial Encounters: Comparative
Perspectives. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.
Tobler, W., 1993. Non-isotropic geographic modeling. Three Presentations on
Geographic Analysis and Modeling. Technical Report 93-1. National Center for
Geographic Information and Analysis, University of California, Santa Barbara.
Topic, J.R., Topic, T.L., 2000. Hacia la comprensin del fenmeno huari: una
perspectiva nortea. Boletn de Arqueologa PUCP 4, 181217.
Valencia Zegarra, A., 2005. Wari hydraulic works in the Lucre Basin. In: McEwan,
G.F. (Ed.), Pikillacta: The Wari Empire in Cuzco. University of Iowa Press, Iowa
City, pp. 8597.
Vivanco, P.C., Valdez, C.L., 1993. Poblados Wari en la cuenca del Pampas-Qaracha,
Ayacucho. Gaceta Arqueolgica Andina 23, 83102.
Wernke, S.A., 2003. An Archaeo-History of Andean Community and Landscape: The
Late Pre-Hispanic and Early Colonial Colca Valley, Peru. Ph.D. Dissertation.
Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, UMI, Ann
Arbor.
Wilkinson, T.J., 2000. Regional approaches to Mesopotamian archaeology: the
contribution of archaeological surveys. Journal of Archaeological Research 8,
219267.
Wilson, D.J., 1988. Prehispanic Settlement Patterns in the Lower Santa Valley, Peru:
A Regional Perspective on the Origins and Development of Complex North Coast
Society. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.
Williams, P.R., 2001. Cerro Bal: a Wari center on the Tiwanaku frontier. Latin
American Antiquity 12 (1), 6783.
Zapata Rodrguez, J., 1997. Arquitectura y contextos funerarios Wari en Batan Urqu,
Cusco. Boletn de Arqueologa PUCP 1, 165206.