HOUSES, RESIDENTIAL BURIALS, AND IDENTITY IN THE RAPAYÁN

VALLEY AND THE UPPER MARAÑÓN DRAINAGE, PERU, DURING

LATE ANDEAN PREHISTORY

Alexis Mantha

The impressive multi-story funerary monuments found in the Upper Marañón Drainage of the northern Central Andes of
Peru have long fascinated people. Archaeologists and historians have studied their spatial distribution to define the identity
of the populations occupying the region during the Late Intermediate period (A.D. 1000–1450). Rather than focus on mon-
umental architecture, in this paper I explore group identity in the Upper Marañón by analyzing the shape and layout of
houses and evidence of residential funerary practices. Based on a regional comparative approach, I argue that diversity in
domestic architecture and mortuary customs reflects a constellation of distinct collective identities.

Los impresionantes edificios de varios pisos en la región del alto Marañón, en Perú, han cautivado la atención de la gente
desde hace tiempo. Arqueólogos e historiadores utilizaron su distribución espacial para definir la identidad cultural de las
poblaciones del alto Marañón durante el periodo del Intermedio tardío (1000–1450 d.C). En este artículo, en lugar de

T
enfocarme sobre la arquitectura monumental, analizo más bien la morfología y la organización espacial de las viviendas, así
como las evidencias de prácticas funerarias residenciales, para explorar cuestiones de identidad cultural en el alto Marañón,
en los Andes centrales del Perú. A partir de una perspectiva comparativa regional, mantengo que la diversidad morfológica
de las viviendas y las distintas prácticas funerarias residenciales reflejaban una constelación de identidades colectivas durante
los periodos tardíos de la prehistoria andina en el alto Marañón.

he usefulness of studying ethnic identity
in the Andes using household archaeology
has been advocated primarily by Stanish
in a series of influential papers (Stanish 1989,
1992; Stanish et al. 1993; see Aldenderfer and
Stanish 1993). Stanish argues that, because arti-
facts found in burial contexts result mainly from
interregional exchange ensuing from ritual, eco-
nomic, and political ties among groups, they are
not good indicators of local ethnic identity. He
maintains that domestic architecture, of which
the household represents the basic component, is
a better marker of ethnicity. House structures and
the materials found in association with them result
mainly from the production and consumption pat-
terns of local residents. Thus, they reflect the cul-
tural particularities and identities of these indi-
viduals (Stanish 1989:12–13). After reviewing
social, ecological, and economic factors that may
influence the particular form of a dwelling, Stan-
ish further argues that the overall shape of houses,
their spatial arrangement in a settlement, and the
layout of distinct functional rooms and activity
areas are determined primarily by conservative
cultural preferences (Aldenderfer and Stanish
1993:8; Stanish 1989, 2005:228–229; Stanish et
al. 1993).
The claim that the shapes and layouts of houses
represent a fairly conservative dimension of
culture—thus communicating a form of cultural
affiliation—is well documented in anthropology
and archaeology (e.g., Bawden 1993; Blanton
1994; Kent 1990; Van Gijseghem and Vaughn
2008:113). Nonetheless, the proposal that domes-
tic contexts are more indicative of ethnic identity
than funerary contexts is far more tentative. In-
deed, several Andean ethnographic and archaeo-
logical studies have shown that houses are the lo-

Alexis Mantha 䡲 Champlain College, Saint-Lambert Campus, 900 Riverside Drive, Saint-Lambert, Québec, Canada,
Office E-242, J4P 3P2 (amantha@champlaincollege.qc.ca)

Latin American Antiquity 26(4), 2015, pp. 433–451

Copyright © 2015 by the Society for American Archaeology
DOI: 10.7183/1045-6635.26.4.433

433
434 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
cus not only of everyday activities, but also of di-
verse and rich rituals (e.g., Candeler 1997;
Cutright 2013; Ramirez 2005:141; Salazar 2012;
Vaughn 2004:80). Furthermore, many archaeo-
logical studies have documented that burials are
often found within house structures and that the
latter may also contain a high proportion of foreign
exotic items, both in the Andes (e.g., Millaire
2004; Nash 2009:242; Vaughn 2005) and else-
where (Adams and King 2011; Gillespie 2000;
McAnany 1995; Hodder and Cessford 2004; Kuijt
2001; Laneri 2007). The distinction between do-
mestic and funerary contexts, although useful in
some circumstances (e.g., Aldenderfer 1993), nev-
ertheless obscures the fact that these two social
contexts are often interrelated and inseparable.
In this article, I examine the relationship be-
tween group identity, household architecture, and
residential burials within the Rapayán Valley, and
more broadly within the Upper Marañón
Drainage of Peru (Supplemental Figure 1) during
the Late Intermediate (A.D. 1000–1450; LIP) and
Late Horizon (A.D. 1450–1532; LH) periods. I
begin by discussing some theoretical and method-
ological problems related to the concept of an-
cestor veneration. I proceed by outlining previous
archaeological hypotheses concerning identity in
the Upper Marañón, after which I discuss data
on residential burials and house architecture in
the Rapayán Valley and the Upper Marañón. I
conclude with a discussion outlining a new per-
spective regarding identity in the Upper Marañón
Drainage during the latter periods of Andean pre-
history.
Residential Mortuary Practices, Ancestor
Veneration, and Identity
Several recent archaeological studies have em-
phasized the close relationship between burials
found in or near house structures, social memory,
and identity (Adams and Kusumawati 2011; Hod-
der and Cessford 2004; King 2011; Kuijt 2001,
2008; Joyce 2011). According to this perspective,
similarities in residential burial practices promote
shared experiences surrounding death and thus
the transmission of common norms, values, and
identity. Furthermore, several authors have con-
sidered the presence of residential burials as good
material indicators of “house societies” (Adams
[Vol. 26, No. 4, 2015
and King 2011; Adams and Kumsumawati 2011;
Gillespie 2000, 2011; King 2011; Joyce 2011). In
this conceptual framework, it is assumed that res-
idential burials materialize the efforts of the living
to maintain a strong connection to the past by
venerating, remembering, or commemorating im-
portant ancestors (Adams and King 2011:4–5).
By the same token, the connection between the
living and the dead through residential burial is
assumed to reflect one of the fundamental values
of “house societies”—that is, a desire for perpe-
tuity or an active effort to maintain continuity
with the past (Gillespie 2000:12–14).
Evidence of continuity with the past is best
seen through the degree of interactions the living
maintain with the dead (Thompson 2014). In
many societies, the most intense contact between
the living and the dead occurs through ancestor
veneration. These practices are based on the belief
that specific and unique deceased kin possess su-
pernatural powers that can directly affect, either
positively or negatively, their living descendants
(DeLeonardis and Lau 2004:78; Townsend
1969:23). Ancestor veneration should thus be dis-
tinguished from other funerary programs (e.g.,
Sheils 1975; Thompson 2014) such as the cult of
the dead (Morris 1991). For example, Christians
honor the dead. Nonetheless, unlike in the case
of ancestor veneration, the deceased are generally
not believed to be endowed with the power of
interfering in the affairs of the living (Ariés 1975;
Krauskopff 1991:66). To obtain the goodwill of
ancestors, the living must propitiate them peri-
odically or intermittently through rituals, offer-
ings, feasts, and prayers. Ancestor veneration thus
entails ceremonies that extend well beyond the
formal disposal of the dead (Fortes 1965; Lau
2002:281; Morris 1991). Repeated rituals focus-
ing on the veneration of a common ancestor are
particularly important events during which indi-
vidual and collective identities are asserted be-
cause the communicative performance of these
rituals is centered on the common genealogy of
participants. As a result, ancestor veneration pro-
motes a shared sense of origin and memory, and
hence of common identity (Dillehay 1990:226–
27, 235; Fortes 1965; Hastorf 2003:308; Kuijt
2001:81). It is noteworthy, however, that not all
the dead become ancestors (Thompson 2014;
Whitley 2002:122). A deceased person can reach
Mantha] HOUSES, RESIDENTIAL BURIALS, AND IDENTITY IN THE RAPAYÁN VALLEY
the status of ancestor initially because of excep-
tional qualities shown during his or her lifetime
(e.g., being the original founder of a group, a
leader, conqueror, possessor of wealth or knowl-
edge, etc.), and later by the conscious collective
acts of remembrance undertaken by his or her
living descendants (DeLeonardis and Lau
2004:80; Helms 1998:35; Krauskopff 1991:65).
Researchers are often faced with a challenge
when attempting to recognize ancestor veneration
in the archaeological record. Proposed material
correlates include grave reopenings, delayed buri-
als, more elaborate shrines located within lived
spaces, evidence of feasting near mortuary struc-
tures, secondary offerings and caching, and, most
compellingly, the postmortem manipulation of
the deceased. The latter includes, for example,
artificial mummification as well as the removal,
cleansing, and keeping of skulls and long bones
(DeLeonardis and Lau 2004:80–82; Helms
1998:50; Isbell 1997; Millaire 2004; Parker
1999:158–161; Thompson 2014).
In the absence of clear evidence, some re-
searchers have circumvented the problem of iden-
tifying ancestors by arguing that individuals
buried in residential contexts, and sometimes the
objects buried with or without them, were memo-
rialized, remembered, or commemorated by the
living (Gillespie 2011; Joyce 2011; King 2011).
In doing so, these archaeologists have, on the one
hand, inferred conscious efforts on the part of
the living to maintain a continuity with the past,
and, on the other, they have suggested that the
connection between the living and the dead re-
flected a supposed desire for perpetuity typical
of “house societies.” This line of thinking is prob-
lematic for several reasons. First, as Elizabeth
Arkush (2011:205) notes, just like ancestor ven-
eration, the concepts of social memory and, by
extension, remembrance and commemoration are
so broadly inferred that they have become ex-
tremely vague both in terms of meaning and in
terms of the procedure required for archaeologists
to recognize them materially. Second, using an-
cestor veneration (or remembrance and commem-
oration of the dead) as the sole criterion to identify
“house societies” is troublesome because other
kinds of corporate organizations, such as lineages,
ramages, and conical clans, are known to practice
ancestor veneration (Hageman 2004:65). Further-
435
more, ancestor veneration practices have been
documented within a wide range of political sys-
tems, from mid-range societies to empires (Lau
2002:281; McAnany 1995). Finally, and probably
most importantly, inferring the same memorial-
izing effect for diverse mortuary and funerary
practices within and between societies is likely
to result in oversimplified and homogeneous in-
terpretations of the social practices of the past.
In the following sections, I review previous
archaeological hypotheses regarding cultural
identity in the Upper Marañón during the LIP,
after which I present the diversity of house mor-
phology and residential burial practices in the
Rapayán Valley.
Previous Archaeological Hypotheses
Regarding Late Prehispanic Group Identity
in the Upper Marañón
The Upper Marañón region, located in the central
eastern Andes of Peru, encompasses both banks
of the Marañón River in the modern departments
of Huánuco, Ancash, and La Libertad, between
the Cordillera Blanca to the west and the Amazon
drainage to the east (Figure 1). The Upper
Marañón Drainage extends over 500 km on its
north-south axis and 250 km from east to west.
Ethnohistorical studies (León 2003; Mantha 2004;
Vallaranos 1959) suggest that this region was oc-
cupied by at least a dozen ethnic groups in early
colonial times (Figure 2).
Following early archaeological explorations
(e.g., Cardich 1958; Ribero 1841), the French
scholar Bertrand Flornoy became the first to con-
duct more systematic archaeological investiga-
tions in the Upper Marañón in the 1940s and
1950s. Flornoy (1955–1956, 1957) carried out
an archaeological reconnaissance over a vast area,
from the headwaters of the Marañón River in the
modern province of Dos de Mayo to the south,
up to Tantamayo to the north (Figure 1). Im-
pressed by tall and well-preserved multi-story
buildings at several LIP sites in the region (Sup-
plemental Figure 2), he suggested that the settle-
ments around Tantamayo were the center of a
culture that spread over a vast and unspecified
zone (Flornoy 1957:207).
Strongly influenced by the pioneering work
of Flornoy, Elisabeth Bonnier and Catherine
436 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
Figure 1. Map of the research area and its surroundings.
Rozenberg carried out a survey of the Tantamayo
Valley in 1980 (Bonnier 1981; Bonnier and
Rozenberg 1981; Bonnier et al. 1983). Within a
radius of 61 km around the modern village of
Tantamayo (Figure 1), they identified 81 sites
with well-preserved stone architecture that they
attributed to the LIP and the LH. Based on the
spatial distribution of tall multi-story buildings
and village architectural layouts, they suggested
that the “Tantamayo Culture” likely extended
south of Tantamayo on the western bank of the
Marañón River into the modern department of
Ancash, where the Rapayán Valley is located
(Bonnier et al. 1983:106, Note 8; Bonnier and
Rozenberg 1981:15–16).
By the end of the 1970s, Hernán Amat had con-
ducted several archaeological explorations in the
department of Ancash and Huánuco, with a focus
on the site of Rapayán (Figure 1). Amat places the
development of surface stone architecture at Ra-
payán and many other sites in the LIP. He suggests
the name “Alto Marañón Culture” for the settle-
ments bordering the Marañón River that shared
such attributes as multi-story buildings, defensive
[Vol. 26, No. 4, 2015
walls, above-ground mortuary structures, a partic-
ular construction technique (pachilla), ridge-top
locations, and LIP ceramics called estampado. The
“Alto Marañón Culture” would have covered a
large territory spanning from the department of
Amazonas in the north to the department of
Huánuco in the south. Amat singles out sites like
Kuélap in Chachapoya, Pajatén in San Martín, Ra-
payán, Tantamayo, and Ichu as part of the “Alto
Marañón Culture” (Amat 1971:50–51).
In a later publication, Amat substantially mod-
ifies his interpretations, as well as the chrono-
logical sequence identified at Rapayán (Amat
1980). Notably, he divides the LIP into two sub-
periods. In the first half of the LIP he places the
emergence, development, and fall of the Yaro
Empire (A.D. 1000–1200), followed in the second
half of the LIP by the development of the “Alto
Marañón Culture” (A.D. 1200–1450). Because
of lack of evidence, subsequent archaeological
investigations in the region have either rejected
(Ibarra 1999; Mantha 2004; Matos 1994) or ig-
nored (Bonnier et al. 1983; Salcedo 2012) Amat’s
arguments for the existence of the Yaro Empire.
Mantha] HOUSES, RESIDENTIAL BURIALS, AND IDENTITY IN THE RAPAYÁN VALLEY
Figure 2. Ethnic groups of the Upper Marañón in early Colonial times.
The Rapayán Valley
The Rapayán Valley is located on both banks of
the Upper Marañón River at the eastern border
of the department of Ancash and the western limit
of the department of Huánuco, in the provinces
of Huari, Huamalís, and Marañón (Figure 1). In
crossing the Andes from west to east, the steep
mountains of the Rapayán area are one of the
last physical barriers one faces before reaching
the tropical forests of the Amazon drainage. The
Marañón and the numerous small streams that
feed it have carved spectacular depressions in the
mountains through time. As a result, valleys in
the Upper Marañón such as Rapayán are largely
devoid of flat space. Altitude changes substan-
tially over short distances, varying thousands of
meters over the course of a few kilometers. In
this extremely rugged topography, agriculturally
productive lands are limited and tend to be con-
centrated on smoother hillsides.
437
The late prehispanic stone architectural re-
mains of the Rapayán Valley are among the best
preserved in the Andes. During three field seasons
held in 2001, 2002, and 2007, my team and I sur-
veyed a territory of 500 km2 and identified and
closely studied the surface architecture of 81 sites
(Figure 3). Based on excavations carried out at
the site of Rapayán in 2005 and surface ceramics
collected at the other sites, most of the settlements
with visible architecture were originally con-
structed during the LIP (A.D. 1000–1450) and
continued to be occupied during the LH (A.D.
1450–1532).
LIP/LH Intrasite Settlement Pattern
Without considering hilltop forts (indicated as
DCC in Figure 3), residential sites are the most
abundant type represented in the survey data set,
making up 58 of the 81 total sites recorded (Figure
3). They are located on top of hillsides between
2,400 m and 3,700 m of altitude in the quechua
438 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 26, No. 4, 2015

Figure 3. Map of the surveyed sites within the Rapayán area.

ecological niche. Their placement in the agricul-
turally favorable quechua zone, their association
with countless agricultural terraces, and the ab-
sence of corrals in the region before the arrival
of the Inkas suggest that the population of Ra-
payán had an economy based on farming.
The vast majority of residential sites displays the
same architectural pattern and can be divided into
three parts according to different types of mortuary
structures (Figure 4). They exhibit small above-
ground sepulchers (chullpas) in the lower end, houses
and residential burials in the middle, and one or
more multi-story buildings in the upper part.
House Structures of the Rapayán Valley
Before conducting excavations at the settlement
of Rapayán at the time of the first two surveys, I
had inferred the presence of house structures from
two of the three criteria defined by Stanish
(1989)—that is, segregated structures that repeat
themselves in each residential site. Despite the
fact that residential settlements include a variety
of stone constructions, house structures are by
far the most widely distributed architectural units
at these sites.
Since house structures are relatively homoge-
neous from one residential site to the other, I will
designate them from now on as the Rapayán
House Type. They have a roughly rectangular
shape and are built beside one another on long
horizontal terraces (Figure 4). They are usually
so densely constructed that, on occasion, the back
wall of a house also functioned as a retaining
wall for the dwelling constructed above it.
Mantha] HOUSES, RESIDENTIAL BURIALS, AND IDENTITY IN THE RAPAYÁN VALLEY 439

Figure 4. Map of Area II of the Rapayán site showing structure distribution and excavated house structures (Houses 15
and 30).
440 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
Table 1. Dimensions of Rapayán House Structures.
House
Structures Length Width
Number of Measurements 141 141
Mean 6.27 m 5.15 m
Standard Deviation 1.49 m 1.10 m
Based on measurements taken from a sample
of well-preserved constructions at the Rapayán
settlement, on average, house structures cover 33
m2 and measure 6 m in length by 5 m in width
(Table 1). Their plan and construction technique
are very homogeneous. Walls are invariably con-
structed of superimposed flat and finely polished
stones held together by a fine layer of mortar—a
construction technique commonly known as
pachilla (Figures 5 and 6; Supplemental Figure
3). Internal walls also possess many small niches.
Their number and spatial disposition within the
walls do not appear to follow any pre-established
pattern. Door frames are rectangular or slightly
trapezoidal (Figure 5 and 6; Supplemental Figure
3). They are built by superimposing alternating
horizontal and vertical flat stone blocks on each
external side of the frame. The voids left in the
middle of the frame are filled with small flat
stones (Figure 5; Supplemental Figure 3).
Some houses comprise up to four rooms, but
the great majority have only two. The wall that
divides the first and second (i.e., “front” and
“back”) rooms is very distinctive. On either side
of the door frame, there is a wide cavity in the
wall (Figures 5 and 6). These two spaces in the
wall are completely sealed, with the exception of
a small window above a vertically oriented flat,
circular piece of limestone. The openings face
the frontal room (Figure 6). A sample of 43 well-
preserved wall cavities from Rapayán averages
100 cm in width, 97 cm in height, and 101 cm in
length.
What function did those cavities serve? Father
Barnabé Cobo’s work, written around 1653, is
very instructive in this regard. While discussing
the mummification of the dead in different regions
of the Andes, Cobo informs us that “The embalmed
bodies were greatly venerated and sacrifices were
made to each one according to their resources.
Some kept the bodies of their relatives in their
own houses” (Cobo 1990:40 [1653], emphasis
added; see also p. 247 for a similar statement).
[Vol. 26, No. 4, 2015
Wall Width, Main Width, Back
Thickness Door Frame Wall Door Frame
141 141 128
46.3 cm 75.6 cm 65.3 cm
7.9 cm 10.5 cm 16.2 cm
As these observations from Cobo suggest, I
believe that the wall cavities served as mortuary
chambers used to keep the embalmed bodies of
the dead in the houses. It is interesting to note
that the primary school at the village of Rapayán
keeps a collection of a dozen mummies. They
are all placed in the fetal position, with their
hands and feet tied. Given their size, each of the
cavities could easily have held a mummy. The
small window giving access into the cavity would
also have allowed household members to make
offerings to the deceased (Ramirez 2005:30, 202).
The fact that most of the flat, vertical stones seal-
ing the cavities appear to have been deliberately
ripped out also suggests that these cavities once
contained important objects usually encountered
in tombs—such as mummies, ceramics, and
metals—which would have attracted looters from
the past and present. In fact, some of the best-
preserved household cavities still contain human
bones. Direct evidence comes from an amateur
video filmed in Huaraz in the 1990s to encourage
tourism in the Callejón de Conchuco. In a scene
set in the ruins of Rapayán, a group of looters
take a mummy out of a wall cavity, piece by
piece. Additionally, in a documentary film about
Rapayán (Delfour 2008), an elder of the present-
day village, Delia Achic Picón, reveals that her
cousin, an expatriate from the same village who
now lives in Huaraz, keeps a mummy in his sec-
ond house in Rapayán in order to protect it while
he is away. In the same documentary film, several
elders confess to having discovered mummies in
the ruins during their youth.
One of the objectives of our 2005 excavations
at Rapayán was to test the hypothesis that rec-
tangular constructions were indeed house struc-
tures. To this end, we systematically excavated
two presumed house structures (Houses 15 and
30; see Figure 4). Ceramic stratigraphy indicates
that the two structures were originally built during
the LIP and continued to be occupied during the
LH. Indeed, the occupational floor levels con-
Mantha] HOUSES, RESIDENTIAL BURIALS, AND IDENTITY IN THE RAPAYÁN VALLEY 441

Figure 5. Plan and elevation drawings of a house from Area II of the Rapayán site illustrating large wall funerary niches
and the pachilla construction technique.

Figure 6. Frontal view of the large funerary niches in the interior dividing wall of House 30, Area II of the Rapayán site.
The flat vertical stones sealing the cavities have been ripped out.
442 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
tained several sherds of Inka-style ceramics,
whereas the subfloor levels, which correspond to
the original construction of the houses, displayed
typical LIP ceramics and no Inka-style fragments.
In addition to this chronological data, the exca-
vations also revealed the presence of hearths, car-
bonized corncobs, llama and guinea pig bones, a
great quantity of ceramic fragments with carbon
residues, hoes, mace heads, mortars, pestles,
grinding stones, and a variety of other lithic and
bone tools at the floor level in both structures
(Figure 7, Supplemental Figure 4). This evidence
of domestic activities, the third criterion defined
by Stanish (1989), confirms that the rectangular
constructions were indeed residential.
In addition to domestic activities, our investi-
gations also brought to light evidence of ritual
practices. The two large niches within the back
wall of the front room of each house structure
were most likely used to keep human remains
and would have been related to rituals in honor
of the dead. However, as opposed to other mor-
tuary structures such as the chullpas and the tall
multi-story buildings (see Mantha 2009 for a
more complete discussion on these mortuary
structures) found within residential sites, the large
household niches reflect a ritual practice that was
much more exclusive and private in nature. The
fact that the cavities are sealed except for small
windows suggests that the mummified bodies or
bones were not meant to be moved. The deceased
kept in the household were thus venerated by a
limited number of people, most probably mem-
bers of the same family. The bodies held in the
wall cavities might thus have been the ancestors
from whom each family traced its most direct
origin. Since this pattern is repeated in every
dwelling, each house structure most likely hosted
co-residents composed of socially and biologi-
cally related family members.
The two excavated house structures displayed
further data indicating that they were the locus
of rituals. In House 30, we unearthed in the north-
west corner of the main room a small L-shaped
feature measuring 58 cm in height, 170 cm in
length, and 80 cm in width (Figure 7). It had four
openings near the floor level and a top covering
of stone slabs. Despite the fact that it had been
partially destroyed by looters, we recovered on
the inside floor human remains (three molars and
[Vol. 26, No. 4, 2015
a humerus) and several undecorated typical LIP
ceramic fragments.
We also recovered important data in one of the
two rooms located behind the wall containing the
two large niches. In Room A, still on floor level,
we unearthed two stone polishers, a claw from a
bird of prey, a dozen shell beads, and a silver
jewel (tupu), as well as human bones, including a
femur, an ulna, three vertebrae, and a sacrum (Fig-
ure 7). The association of what appear to have
been offerings with human bones—both in the
small L-shaped feature and in Room A—seems
to imply that they had a funerary function and
that funerary rituals took place inside House 30.
In House 15, among the several small niches
decorating the interior walls, we unearthed a
small, sealed niche in the north side wall (Sup-
plemental Figure 5). Located 2 cm above the oc-
cupational floor, it was buried under a meter and
a half of debris. The opening of the niche in the
interior wall measured only 10 cm wide and 15
cm high, but within the wall it extended 3.40 m
on its east-west axis and 40 cm north to south.
Inside we discovered a great quantity of car-
bonized maize grains associated with a polished
circular stone tool with a perforation in the mid-
dle. I believe the latter to be a mace head, but
others would argue that it was a farming imple-
ment. Some archaeological studies conducted
elsewhere in the Andes have established a close
relationship between niches and offerings made
in the context of ancestor veneration practices
(e.g., Hastorf 2003; McEwan 1998). In addition,
historical documents clearly mention that rituals
involved the burning of food, especially maize,
as a way to feed ancestors or mythical beings in
order to obtain their goodwill (Doyle 1988; Isbell
1997; Ramirez 2005). It is thus highly probable
that the Rapayán household niche offering was
related to an ancestor veneration practice. It can
be tentatively proposed that if the lithic tool was
a mace head, the household ritual involved pleas
for success in warfare or defense. On the other
hand, if it was a farming tool, it can be hypothe-
sized that the offerings were linked to an agricul-
tural fertility ritual. Finally, it is important to
mention that these offerings were discovered in
the only sealed niche context found to date at
Rapayán. When we consider the great number of
niches decorating the inside walls of households,
Mantha] HOUSES, RESIDENTIAL BURIALS, AND IDENTITY IN THE RAPAYÁN VALLEY 443

Figure 7. Plan view of House 30 at the floor level (Level 3), Area II of the Rapayán site.

it can be postulated that they were also used dur-
ing the course of specific rituals. In fact, people
today still make offerings in the form of coca
leaves, cigarettes, alcohol, squashes, sodas, and
flowers in house niches and near chullpas
(Delfour 2008). Houses were clearly the locus of
various rituals.
In sum, the people of the Rapayán Valley lived
in relatively homogeneous house structures that
hosted kin members. People also co-resided with
their own deceased kin, as demonstrated by a va-
riety of evidence for intra-household funerary
practices. Evidence of such household ritual prac-
tices at Rapayán includes bones found in house
niches, carbonized maize grains associated with
a lithic artifact in a small niche of House 15, and
several offerings associated with human bones
in House 30. Indirect evidence of ritual interac-
tions with the dead includes the conservation of
prehispanic mummies at the Rapayán elementary
444 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
school, testimonies made by present-day Rapayán
elders about the existence of mummies in local
ruins, the ongoing practice of placing offerings
in the niches of ruined houses, and abundant eth-
nohistorical evidence about late prehispanic an-
cestor veneration for the region under considera-
tion (e.g., Ramirez 2005). When considering the
crucial importance of the deceased in the con-
struction of group identity in the Andes (Ramirez
2005), the widespread pattern of families sharing
their living space with their mummified ancestors
suggests that the people of the Rapayán Valley
shared common practices of memory, origin, and
identity. Did the people of other neighboring val-
leys also share this pattern?
The Rapayán House Structures in Wider
Regional Context
The Southern Edge of the Survey Area:
Pampan I, Pampan II, San José, and Huata
Within the southern edge of the surveyed territory
(Figure 3), the residential settlements of Pampan
I, Pampan II, and San José share very similar ar-
chitectural features that differ substantially from
those of Rapayán. These three sites represent the
highest residential settlements of the survey area,
located at an altitude above 4,100 m in the puna
ecological zone. Their high elevation makes agri-
cultural production of certain crops such as maize
unsuitable. On the other hand, they represent the
only settlements associated with large corrals.
For example, Pampan I, the largest site of the en-
tire surveyed region with dense architectural con-
structions spreading over 15 ha, has a large corral
measuring up to 70 m long and 50 m wide at the
western edge of the settlement (Mantha
2004:197). The economy at these sites thus ap-
pears to have been largely based on agro-
pastoralism, as opposed to simply farming for
the Rapayán Valley as a whole.
The shape and spatial organization of the
house structures at San José, Pampan I, and Pam-
pan II also present clear differences compared to
those of Rapayán. I will refer to them as the Pam-
pan House Type. While a rectangular plan and
minimally two rooms characterize the Rapayán
House Type, the Pampan House Type has a D-
shaped or oval outline and no internal subdivi-
[Vol. 26, No. 4, 2015
sions. Moreover, many of Pampan house struc-
tures are organized in groups around an enclosed
patio (Figure 8), a type of spatial arrangement
not found at Rapayán, where house structures are
individually aligned on parallel terraces. Short
walls separate one group of houses from another
at Pampan.
Despite differences in form and arrangement,
the Pampan and Rapayán house structures nev-
ertheless share the large wall cavities or niches
presumably built to host the mummified bodies
or bones of deceased family members. Nonethe-
less, the wall cavities of the Pampan sites have a
different morphology. As opposed to Rapayán
house niches, constructed within the interior di-
viding wall, those of Pampan surround the upper
part of the single house wall (Figure 8; Supple-
mental Figure 6). As a result, they tend to follow
the oval contour of the structures. Most of the
Pampan dwellings have at least four large wall
cavities.
The ruins of Huata extend on 6 ha and occupy
a long ridge crest at an elevation of 3,800 m (Fig-
ure 3). Large agricultural terraces are located to
the south of the site, whereas a steep cliff forms
the northern border of the settlement. The pres-
ence of terraces and the absence of corrals in the
vicinity of Huata suggest that farming, as opposed
to herding, was the main economic activity. The
layout of Huata is typical of other Rapayán resi-
dential settlements: multi-story buildings in the
upper part, house structures in the middle, and
small above-ground sepulchers in the lower part
(see Mantha 2013:173, Figure 10.6).
Huata displays the most morphologically di-
verse house structures of the survey area. Two
house types coexist in relatively equal proportion:
the Rapayán and Pampan house types. Both of
them exhibit their own respective architectural
features and typical large wall niches. Yet, none
of the Pampan house types at Huata are organized
in groups around a common patio, as observed at
Pampan I, Pampan II, and San José. Rather, they
are individually aligned on long parallel terraces
like those of other Rapayán residential settle-
ments.
The Tantamayo Valley
The Tantamayo Valley is located on the eastern
side of the Marañón River, at about the same lon-
Mantha] HOUSES, RESIDENTIAL BURIALS, AND IDENTITY IN THE RAPAYÁN VALLEY
Figure 8. Pampan House Type structures organized around common patios, site of San José.
gitude as the settlements of Pampan I and II, Hu-
ata and San José, and only 20 km south of the
Rapayán village (Figure 3). At the conclusion of
their survey, Elisabeth Bonnier and Catherine
Rozenberg identified 81 sites with surface archi-
tecture. Based on radiocarbon dating and detailed
ceramic stratigraphy, these sites were all occupied
during the LIP and LH. Among these, 42 settle-
ments are classified as residential sites exhibiting
house structures and tall multi-story structures
(Supplemental Figure 2; Bonnier 1981; Bonnier
and Rozenberg 1981; Bonnier et al. 1983; Rozen-
berg 1982).
Bonnier and Rozenberg describe fairly homo-
geneous dwellings inside the enclosing walls of
the residential settlements. Tantamayo house
structures have no internal subdivisions and are
rectangular or square in plan, measuring on av-
erage 5 m long by 4 m wide (Supplemental Figure
7). Their roofs were likely gabled because the
opposing sustaining walls display a triangular
shape. Finally, these structures do not contain
any large niches within their walls.
The Areas South of Rapayán and Tantamayo:
Allauca Huánuco and Huamalí
To facilitate the description of areas located out-
side of the Rapayán and Tantamayo regions, I
will refer to the names of early historical ethnic
groups (Figure 2) to designate the geographical
445
zones under consideration. Nonetheless, the use
of these names implies nothing about ethnicity,
especially beyond the early colonial period.
Daniel Morales describes a dozen sites mainly
from the Huamalí area (Morales 1984). He pro-
vides several beautiful illustrations of the LIP sur-
face architectural features found in most settle-
ments, including house structures and multi-story
buildings. Houses are consistently described as
circular with various circumferences. They were
built mainly using the unworked stone pirka tech-
nique. Most of them are also linked to a corral (or
patio?) made with the pirka construction technique.
Luis Salcedo (2012) has studied nearly 70 set-
tlements both in the Huamalí and Allauca
Huánuco areas, with a specific focus on the site
of Garu (Figure 1). Most of the LIP and LH set-
tlements he reports are residential sites con-
structed on top of ridges between 3,400 and 4,300
m of altitude. Residential surface architecture
also includes circular house structures varying
from 4 to 9 m in diameter, as well as tall multi-
story buildings (see also Bruhns 1994:323;
Thompson 1968:180–181). The roofs were likely
conical in shape and made of thatched material
held by beams and a central pole (see also
Morales 1984:88). Internal walls display several
small niches, but no large wall cavities are re-
ported. House structures also possess a patio de-
limited by low walls. The former is either indi-
446 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
vidual or shared with other house structures. Fi-
nally, Thompson (1983:120–123) also briefly de-
scribes a few residential sites constructed on the
tops of ridges that consistently feature circular
or oval house structures as well as multi-story
buildings elsewhere in the Allauca Huánuco area.
Southeast of Rapayán and Tantamayo: Yacha,
Quero, and Chupachu
Northeast of Huamalí, Donald Thompson
(1968:179, 1977:19; Morris and Thompson
1985:154–158) and Matos (1972) describe two
settlements in Yacha territory (Figure 2): Wakan
and Wagrin. They report rectangular house struc-
tures roofed with flat stone slabs and grouped
around a common patio. Most rectangular struc-
tures were single-roomed, but a small number
displayed more than one room. According to
Matos, a few of them also exhibited large wall
niches in which he recovered human skulls and
long bones (Matos 1972:372).
The Chupachu territory is also located southeast
of Rapayán between the Marañón and Huallaga
rivers in the surroundings of the city of Huánuco
(Figure 2). Thompson investigated five Chupachu
sites located east of Huánuco in the Pachitea
province (Ichu, Watuna, Quero, Paco, Warpo).
House structures at these sites were organized
around a common patio and displayed a square or
rectangular plan. They measured on average 4.7
m wide by 5 m long and were surmounted by
gabled roofs, presumably made of poles and grass.
The unworked stone pirka technique was used
(Morris and Thompson 1985:119–142; Thompson
1967, 1968:181, 1977:17, 1983:124–125). No large
wall cavities inside houses are reported.
Sue Grosboll conducted a survey immediately
south and west of Huánuco in Chapachu and
Quero territories, where she identified some 30
sites of fairly small size with surface architecture
(Grosboll 1993). These settlements invariably ex-
hibit single-roomed circular house structures or-
ganized in patio groups and built with the pirka
technique. The shape of these house structures
conforms to those reported by Thompson (1967)
at the Chupachu site of Aukimarka, east of the
area surveyed by Grosboll.
Finally, Matos visited another Quero site con-
fusingly called Wamalli (1972:373–376). He de-
scribes quadrangular house structures containing
[Vol. 26, No. 4, 2015
between two and six rooms, as well as circular
house structures grouped around large corrals.
Both types were constructed with the pirka
method. They were not connected to patios and
had no large funerary niches.
Other Areas of the Upper Marañón
The data available for assumed LIP and LH set-
tlements in other Upper Marañón valleys are usu-
ally vague and tentative, but some summary ar-
chitectural descriptions are available.
West of Rapayán: Pinco. Bebel Ibarra (2001,
2003) conducted a systematic survey in the Pinco
area (Figures 1 and 2) on both sides of the Puchca
River. He identified 44 LIP settlements in this
area. As in many other regions during the LIP,
the residential sites were constructed at high alti-
tude, above 3,800 m. The dwellings are described
as being circular structures varying from 4 to 5
m in diameter and built with the pirka technique.
It is not clear, however, whether they were erected
individually or in patio groups. Noemi Castillo
(2003) describes similar circular house structures
at the site of Cerro Castillo near the municipality
of Uco in the Puchca drainage (Figure 1), which
represents the last stop to the west before reaching
Rapayán.
Northwest of Rapayán: Guari. With the ex-
ception of Thompson’s (1972:364–365,
1973:119–120) description of three LIP/LH hill-
top sites near the modern village of Llamellín,
little is known archaeologically about the area of
the Guari (Figure 2). The settlements Thompson
describes possess defensive walls, rectangular
house structures built with the pirka technique,
and gabled roofs. However, it is unclear whether
the dwellings were built individually or grouped
around a common patio. Orsini, who studied sev-
eral LIP sites west of Llamellín, states that LIP
house structures are best described as patio groups
organized around large corrals (Orsini 2006:158).
Northeast of Rapayán: Huacrachuco. The
Huacrachuco area is located about 20 km north
of Rapayán on the eastern edge of the Marañón
(Figure 2). Even though Huacrachuco covers a
vast territory, it remains poorly studied. The best-
known site in the area is Tinyash (Falcón and
Díaz 1998; Thompson and Ravines 1973), found
near the modern village of Huacaybamba and no
more than 25 km downstream from Rapayán (Fig-
Mantha] HOUSES, RESIDENTIAL BURIALS, AND IDENTITY IN THE RAPAYÁN VALLEY
ure 1). The settlement occupies the puna at an
altitude of 4,160 m. It contains several groups of
house structures enclosed by high walls. The
houses are rectangular in plan, have gabled roofs,
and, like at Rapayán, they were built with the
pachilla construction technique. Some of them
have more than one room and several display in-
ternal dividing walls. Many also possess rectan-
gular small niches in their interior walls, but ap-
parently no large wall cavities.
Discussion: Houses, Funerary Practices, and
Identity in the Upper Marañón
As outlined at the beginning of this paper, ar-
chaeological hypotheses regarding the cultural
affiliation of the populations inhabiting the Upper
Marañón during the LIP—be they Flornoy’s and
Bonnier and Rozenberg’s “Tantamayo Culture”
or Amat’s “Alto Marañón Culture”—do not im-
ply a political system of a given level of com-
plexity. Rather, they involve shared archaeologi-
cal traits, mainly the distribution of multi-story
buildings, which would entail a common cultural
identity among some populations of the Upper
Marañón.
While it is true that several collectivities of
the Upper Marañón used multi-story buildings,
these groups nevertheless differed significantly
when house plans and construction techniques
are compared. Houses in the Rapayán Valley are
rectangular, multi-roomed, constructed with
finely polished stones in the pachilla technique,
and individually aligned on narrow terraces. They
also have large wall niches to host the bones or
the mummified bodies of the dead. Houses in
Pinco, Allauca Huánuco/Humalí, and some areas
of Chupachu are described as being single-
roomed circular structures built with unworked
natural stones in the pirka technique. In Yacha,
the Chupachu of the Pachitea province, and Guari,
most houses appear to be rectangular or square
single-roomed structures organized in patio
groups. At the Quero site of Wamalli, some
dwellings are multi-roomed and rectangular,
while others are circular. In both cases, they are
constructed with the pirka technique. In Tanta-
mayo, houses have a square plan and are orga-
nized individually. Nonetheless, they possess only
a single room. In Huacrachuco, dwellings are
447
very similar to Rapayán. They are rectangular,
built with the pachilla construction technique,
and have more than one room with internal di-
viding walls. Nonetheless, as opposed to Ra-
payán, they do not contain large niches built to
host the mummies or bones of deceased family
members. In fact, none of the house structures of
the Upper Marañón, except those in the Rapayán
Valley, the area south of Rapayán (Pampan and
Huata), and the Yacha sites of Wakan and Wagrin,
display large funerary niches. Consequently,
household members in most regions of the Upper
Marañón do not appear to have shared their living
space with their mummified dead. I believe that
the observed differences in house morphology
and funerary practices between the areas of the
Upper Marañón reflect a constellation of different
local identities. If this scenario is accurate, then
a host of cultural groups would have occupied
the Upper Marañón Drainage during the LIP and
LH. In fact, cultural diversity during late prehis-
panic times appears to have been even more im-
portant than what early colonial documents imply.
Despite similarities among Rapayán, Huata,
San José, and Papam I and II in terms of house
funerary practices (house wall niches), they differ
considerably when house morphology is consid-
ered (Figure 3). Significant differences exist be-
tween houses at Rapayán and those at Pampan I,
Pampan II, and San José to the south. Pampan
and Rapayán house structures share the large wall
cavities or niches presumably built to host the
mummified bodies or bones of the deceased. But,
the wall cavities at the Pampan sites have a dif-
ferent morphology. In contrast to Rapayán, where
house niches were constructed within the interior
dividing wall, those at Pampan followed the upper
part of the single oval house wall. The Pampan
and the Rapayán people, despite their close geo-
graphical proximity, clearly had different con-
ceptions of what a house should be like. The ideal
house at Rapayán was rectangular with minimally
two rooms; the Pampan dwelling was D-shaped
or oval and possessed a single room. The spatial
organization of houses also differed in the two
areas. The Rapayán dwellings were individually
aligned on long and narrow horizontal terraces,
whereas those at Pampan were organized in
groups around a common patio. In sum, I believe
that the form and organizational differences ob-
448 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
served between Rapayán and Pampan house
structures reflected different cultural preferences
and hence different regional collective identities.
Nonetheless, future surveys to be held south of
Pampan should clarify whether these regional
differences were related to additional factors aside
from identity. For example, the fact that the two
groups occupied different ecological niches
(quechua vs. puna) may suggest that they had
distinct but complementary economies, such as
those seen with the historically documented
groups of Huari (cultivators) and Llacuaz
(herders) (Duviols 1973; Orsini 2006; Parsons et
al. 1997).
The site of Huata (Figure 3), near Pampan,
contained both Rapayán and Pampan house types.
Nonetheless, the Pampan houses at Huata were
not organized in groups around a common patio,
as observed at Pampan I, Pampan II, and San
José. Instead, they were constructed individually,
aligned on long terraces like those of other Ra-
payán residential settlements. The presence of
Rapayán and Pampan house types may suggest
that Huata was a bi-ethnic community, including
families of both Rapayán and Pampan, and that
close social and economic ties bound the two
groups together at some point in time. Whether
the bi-ethnic configuration at Huata is best ex-
plained by the vertical archipelago model (Stanish
1992:43–45, 2005:229), by the particular social
interactions between cultivators and herders (Du-
viols 1973; Orsini 2006), by Inka governing
strategies (Julien 1993:203–211), or by early
Spanish administrative imperatives will require
extensive excavations at Huata and Pampan in
order to obtain a fine-grained chronology through
radiocarbon dating.
Conclusion
In this paper, I have argued (following Stanish
1989) that house morphology, construction tech-
nique, and the spatial distribution of dwellings in
a settlement are a rather conservative dimension
of culture and a good material indicator of identity.
We have seen that the groups of the Upper
Marañón are characterized by distinct ways of
conceiving and building their houses. Nonetheless,
the idea that domestic contexts are better material
indicators of identity than funerary or ritual ones
[Vol. 26, No. 4, 2015
(contra Stanish) is contradicted by the evidence I
have presented from the Rapayán Valley as well
from the Pampan and Huata areas during the LIP
and LH. In these regions, house structures were
the locus not only of domestic activities but also
of important rituals and unique funerary practices.
In this context, the dwellings in the Rapayán and
Pampan areas represent cases in which the as-
sumption of a clear distinction between both do-
mestic/ritual and household/funerary spaces can
be misleading in the exploration of group identity.
When considering simultaneously the ritual and
domestic dimensions of house structures in the
Upper Marañón during LIP/LH, it becomes ap-
parent that identity varied tremendously from one
area to the other. The Upper Marañón appears to
have been peopled by a myriad of ethnic groups
during the LIP/LH. I also suggest that archaeolo-
gists should attempt to demonstrate the existence
of ancestors and memorizing practices rather than
simply assuming them a priori. Finally, archaeo-
logical investigations in the Upper Marañón
Drainage are extremely scarce and in their infancy.
Future surveys and excavations will certainly be
needed in order to better understand the domestic
economy, political ties, ideology, and household
organization of the groups living in this remote
zone of the Andes during the latter periods of An-
dean prehistory.
Acknowledgments. I am thankful to the Canadian Social Sci-
ences and Humanities Research Council, to the Fonds société
et culture du Québec, and to the Heinz Foundation Latin
American Archaeology Program for the financial support of
this research. I am grateful to Hernando Malca Cardoza, Jorge
Cortina Mauricio, Victor Peña, and Cesar Serna, who partic-
ipated or contributed to different stages of this investigation.
I am also thankful to the three anonymous reviewers whose
comments and suggestions were very thoughtful.
Supplemental Materials. Supplemental materials are linked
to the online version of this paper, which is accessible via the
SAA member login at www.saa.org/members-login:
Supplemental Figure 1. Map of the research area within
Peru (after Ogburn 2005).
Supplemental Figure 2. Multi-story building at the site of
Susupillo in the Tantamayo area.
Supplemental Figure 3. Doorframe and exterior façade
of a Rapayán House reaching over 5 m of height, Area IV
of the Rapayán site.
Supplemental Figure 4. Hearth (left) and grinding stone
(right) set into the occupational level of the floor of House
30 (Level 3), Area II of the Rapayán site.
Supplemental Figure 5. Small L-shaped funerary feature
Mantha] HOUSES, RESIDENTIAL BURIALS, AND IDENTITY IN THE RAPAYÁN VALLEY
on the occupational level of the floor of House 30 (Level
3), Area II of the Rapayán site.
Supplemental Figure 6. Funerary niches in an upper house
wall, Pampan House Type, site of Pampan I.
Supplemental Figure 7. Foundations of a typical Tanta-
mayo house structure, site of Susupillo.
Supplemental Figure 8. Map of the Rapayán Site illus-
trating Areas II, III, and IV (A and B) (Area I, located be-
low Area II to the East, is not shown on this map).
References Cited
Adams, Ron L., and Stacie M. King
2011 Residential Burial in Global Perspective. In Residential
Burial in Global Perspective, edited by Ron L. Adams
and Stacie M. King, pp. 1–16. Archaeological Papers of
the American Anthropology Association, Arlington,
Virginia.
Adams, Ron L., and Ayu Kusumawati
2011 The Social Life of Tombs in West Indonesia. In Res-
idential Burial in Global Perspective, edited by Ron L.
Adams and Stacie M. King, pp. 17–32. Archaeological
Papers of the American Anthropology Association, Ar-
lington, Virginia
Aldenderfer, Mark (editor)
1993 Domestic Architecture, Ethnicity, and Complementarity
in the South-Central Andes. University of Iowa Press,
Iowa City.
Aldenderfer, Mark, and Charles Stanish
1993 Domestic Architecture, Household Archaeology, and
the Past in the South-Central Andes. In Domestic Archi-
tecture, Ethnicity, and Complementarity in the South-
Central Andes, edited by Mark Aldenderfer, pp. 1–12.
University of Iowa Press, Iowa City.
Amat, Hernan
1971 Informe preliminar de las exploraciones del PEAE,
Zona II, Ancash. Arqueología y Sociedad Nº 5 Lima,
Museo de Etnología de San Marcos.
1980 Los Yaros, destructores del imperio Wari. Actas del
III Congreso del Hombre y la Cultura Andina 2:615–
636.
Ariés, Phillipe
1975 Western Attitudes Towards Death: From the Middle
Ages to the Present. Translated by Patricia M. Ranum.
John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
Arkush, Elizabeth
2011 Explaining the Past in 2010: The Year in Review.
American Anthropologist 113(2):200–212.
Bawden, Garth
1993 An Archaeological Study of Social Structure and
Ethnic Replacement in Residential Architecture of the
Tumilaca Valley. In Domestic Architecture, Ethnicity, and
Complementarity in the South-Central Andes, edited by
Mark Aldenderfer, pp. 42–54. University of Iowa Press,
Iowa City.
Blanton, Richard
1994 Houses and Households: A Comparative Study.
Plenum Press, New York.
Bonnier, Elisabeth
1981 Las ruinas de Tantamayo: Vestigios de una ocupación
tardía. Boletín de Lima, 14 (3):38–53.
Bonnier, Elisabeth, and Catherine Rozenberg
1981 Projet – Tantamayo – Piruru, 1er et 2em parties.
Mission préliminaire, juillet – novembre 1980. Centre
National de la Recherche Scientifique. Ministère des
449
Affaires Étrangères, Société des Explorateurs et des
Voyageurs Français, Paris.
Bonnier, Elisabeth, Howard Kaplan, and Catherine Rozenberg
1983 Recherches archéologiques, paléobotaniques et eth-
nolinguistques dans une vallée du Haut Marañón (Pérou):
le Projet Tantamayo – Piruru. Bulletin de l’Institut français
d’études andines 12 (1–2):103–133.
Bruhns, Karen Olsen
1994 Ancient South America. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Candeler, Kay
1997 Balanced Justly: A Quechua Household Ritual.
Journal of the Steward Anthropological Society 25(1–
2):79–96.
Cardich, Augusto
1958 Los yacimientos de Lauricocha: Nuevas interpreta-
ciones de la prehistoria peruana. Studia Prehishistorica
(1):3–65.
Castillo, Noemi
2003 Un asentamiento del Intermedio Tardío en la Provincia
de Huari. In Arqueología de la sierra de Ancash: Propuestas
y perspectivas, edited by Bebel Ibarra, pp. 417–427.
Instituto Cultural Runa, Lima.
Cobo, Barnabé
1990 [1653] Inca Religion and Custom. University of
Texas Press, Austin.
Cutright, Robyn
2013 Household Ofrendas and Community Feasts: Ritual
at a Late Intermediate Period Village in the Jequetepeque
Valley, Peru. Ñawa Pacha 33(1):1–21.
DeLeonardis, Lisa, and George F. Lau
2004 Life, Death, and Ancestors. In Andean Archaeology,
edited by Helaine Silverman, pp. 77–115. Blackwell Pub-
lishers, Oxford.
Delfour, Francis
2008 Rapayán. Arimage Film Productions, Montréal.
Dillehay, Tom
1990 Mapuche Ceremonial Landscape, Social Recruitment
and Resource Rights. World Archaeology 22(2):223–241.
Doyle, Mary
1988 The Ancestor Cult and Burial Ritual in Seventeenth
and Eighteenth Century Central Andes of Peru. Ph.D.
Dissertation, University of California, University Microfilm,
Ann Arbor.
Duviols, Pierre
1973 Huari y llacuaz. Agricultores y pastores, un dualismo
prehispánico de oposición y complementaridad. Revista
del Museo Nacional 39:153–191.
Falcón, Victor, and Patricia Díaz
1998 Representaciones líticas de Tinyash. Andesita 1(2):57–
64.
Flornoy, Bertrand
1955–1956  Exploration arquéologique de l’alto Marañón
(des sources du Marañón au río Sarma). Travaux de
l´Institut Français d´Études Andines 5:51–81.
1957 Monuments de la région de Tantamayo (Pérou).
Journal de la Société des Americanistes 46:207–225.
Fortes, Meyer
1965 Some Reflections on Ancestor Worship in Africa. In
African Systems of Thought, edited by Meyer Fortes and
G. Dieterlen, pp. 122–144. Oxford University Press,
Oxford.
Gillespie, Susan D.
2000 Beyond Kinship: An Introduction. In Beyond Kinship:
Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies,
edited by Rosemary Joyce and Susan Gillespie, pp. 1–21.
University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
450 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
2011 Inside and Outside: Residential Burial at the Formative
Period Chalcatzingo, Mexico. In Residential Burial in
Global Perspective, edited by Ron L. Adams and Stacie
M. King, pp. 98–120. Archaeological Papers of the Amer-
ican Anthropology Association, Arlington, Virginia.
Grosboll, Sue
1993 And He Said in the Time of the Ynga, They Paid
Tribute and Served the Ynga. In Provincial Inca, edited
by Michael Malpass, pp. 44–76. University of Iowa Press,
Iowa City.
Hageman, Jon B.
2004 The Lineage Model and Archaeological Data in Late
Classic Northwestern Belize. Ancient Mesoamerica
15(1):63–74.
Hastorf, Christine
2003 Community with Ancestors: Ceremonies and Social
Memory in the Middle Formative at Chiripa, Bolivia.
Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 22:305–352.
Helms, Mary W.
1998 Access to Origins: Ancestors, Affines and Aristocrats.
University of Texas Press, Austin.
Hodder, Ian, and Craig Cessford
2004 Daily Practice and Social Memory at Çatalhöyük.
American Antiquity 69:17–40.
Ibarra, Bebel
1999 Investigaciones arqueolólogicas en el Alto Marañón
(Provincia de Huari-Ancash). Boletín del Museo de Ar-
queología y Antropología, Universidad Mayor de San
Marcos:6–12.
2001 Análisis de las estructuras funerarias de Marcajirca:
Un sitio tardío de la cuenca del Puchca, Huari-Ancash.
Unay Runa 5:26–30.
2003 Arqueología del valle del Puchca: Economía, cos-
movisión y secuencia estilística. In Arqueología de la
sierra de Ancash: Propuestas y perspectivas, edited by
Bebel Ibarra, pp. 296–330. Instituto Cultural Runa, Lima.
Isbell, William
1997 Mummies and Mortuary Monuments. University of
Texas Press, Austin.
Joyce, Rosemary
2011 In the Beginning: The Experience of Residential
Burial in Prehispanic Honduras. In Residential Burial in
Global Perspective, edited by Ron L. Adams and Stacie
M. King, pp. 33–43. Archaeological Papers of the American
Anthropology Association, Arlington, Virginia.
Julien, Catherine J.
1993 Finding a Fit: Archaeology and Ethnohistory of the
Incas. In Provincial Inca, edited by Michael A. Malpass,
pp. 177–233. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City.
León Gómez, Miguel
2003 Espacio geográfico organización de los grupos étnicos
en el Callejón de Conchudos: Siglos XVI-XVII. In Ar-
queología de la sierra de Ancash: Propuestas y perspectivas,
edited by Bebel Ibarra, pp. 457–466. Instituto Cultural
Runa, Lima.
Kent, Susan (editor)
1990 Domestic Architecture and the Use of Space: An In-
terdisciplinary Cross-Cultural-Cultural Study. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
King, Stacie M.
2011 Remembering One and All: Early Postclassic Residential
Burial in Coastal Oaxaca, Mexico. In Residential Burial
in Global Perspective, edited by Ron L. Adams and Stacie
M. King, pp. 44–58. Archaeological Papers of the American
Anthropology Association, Arlington, Virginia.
[Vol. 26, No. 4, 2015
Krauskopff, Gisèle
1991 Ancêtres. In Dictionnaire de l’ethnologie et de l’an-
thropologie, edited by Pierre Bonte and Michel Izard, pp.
65–66. Presse Universitaire de France, Paris.
Kuijt, Ian
2001 Place, Death, and the Transmission of Social Memory
in Early Agricultural Community of the Near Eastern
Pre-Pottery Neolithic. In Social Memory, Identity, and
Death: Anthropological Perspectives on Mortuary Rituals,
edited by Mary Chesson, pp. 80–99. Archaeological
Papers of the American Anthropological Association No.
10, Arlington, Virginia.
2008 The Regeneration of Life: Structures of Symbolic
Remembering and Forgetting. Current Anthropology
49:171–197.
Laneri, Nicola
2007 Burial Practices at Titris Höyük, Turkey: An Inter-
pretation. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 66(4):241–26.
Lau, George
2002 Feasting and Ancestor Veneration at Chinchawas,
North Highlands of Ancash, Peru. Latin American Antiquity
(13):279–304.
McAnany, Patricia A.
1995 Living with the Ancestors: Kinship and Kingship in
Ancient Maya Society. University of Texas Press, Austin.
McEwan, Gordon F.
1998 The Function of Niched Halls in Wari Architecture.
Latin American Antiquity 9(1):68–86.
Mantha, Alexis
2004 Rapayán: une culture tardive du haut Marañón dans
les Andes centrales du Pérou. Unpublished Ph.D. disser-
tation, Université de Montréal, Montréal.
2009 Territoriality, Social Boundaries and Ancestor Ven-
eration in the Central Andes of Peru. Journal of Anthro-
pological Archaeology (28):158–17.
2013 Shifting Territorialities Under the Inka Empire: The
Case of the Rapayán Valley in the Central Andean High-
lands. In Territoriality in Archaeology, edited by James
Osborne and Parker VanValkenburgh, pp. 164–188. Ar-
chaeological Papers of the American Anthropology As-
sociation, Arlington, Virginia.
Matos, Ramiro
1972 Wakan y Wamali: Estudio arqueológico de dos aldeas
rurales. In Visita de la provincia de León de Huánuco en
1562, T II, edited by John. V. Murra, pp. 367–382. Uni-
versidad Nacional Hermilio Valdizan, Huánuco.
1994 Señorios de la sierra central. In Les royaumes préin-
caïque et le monde Inca, edited by María C. Bákula,
Duccio Bonavia and Laura Laurencich-Minelli, pp. 37–
48. Édisud, Aixe-en-Provence.
Millaire, Jean-François
2004 The Manipulation of Human Remains in Moche So-
ciety: Delayed Burials, Grave Reopening, and Secondary
Offerings of Human Bones on the Peruvian North-Coast.
Latin American Antiquity 15(4):371–388.
Morris, Craig, and Donald Thompson
1985 Huánuco Pampa. An Inca City and its Hinterland.
Thames and Hudson, New York.
Morris, Ian
1991 The Archaeology of Ancestors: The Sax/Goldstein
Hypothesis Revisited. Cambridge Archaeological Journal
(1):147–169.
Morales, Daniel
1984 Algunos sitios arqueológicos del reino de Guanuco.
Boletín de Lima (33):87–95.
Mantha] HOUSES, RESIDENTIAL BURIALS, AND IDENTITY IN THE RAPAYÁN VALLEY
Nash, Donna
2009 Household Archaeology in the Andes. Journal of Ar-
chaeological Research (17):205–261.
Ogburn, Dennis
2005 Dynamic Display, Propaganda, and the Reinforcement
of Provincial Power in the Inca Empire. Archaeological
Papers of the American Anthropological Association 14:
225–239.
Orsini, Carolina
2006 ¿Metáforas de complejidad social? Huari, llacuaz,
organización del territorio y especialización económica a
Chacas. In La complejidad social en la sierra de Ancash,
Perú, edited by Alexander Herrera, Kevin Lane, and Car-
olina Orsini, pp. 151–164. Castello Sforzesco, Raccolte
Extraeuropee, Milano.
Parker Pearson, M.
1999 The Archaeology of Death and Burial. Texas A&M
University Press, College Station.
Parsons, Jeffrey, Charles Hastings, and Ramiro Matos
1997 Rebuilding the State in Highland Peru: Herder-Cul-
tivator Interaction during the Late Intermediate Period in
the Tarma-Chichaycocha Region. Latin American Antiquity
(8):317–341.
Ramirez, Suzan
2005 To Feed and Be Fed: The Cosmological Bases of
Authority and Identity in the Andes. Stanford University
Press, Stanford.
Ribero, Mariano E.
1841 Antigüedades Peruanas. Lima.
Rozenberg, Catherine
1982 Le matériel archéologique de Piruru II : La collection
de Louis Girault. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Études
Andines 11(3–4):115–141.
Salazar, Julian
2012 Household Mortuary Practices in a South Andean
Village. Andean Past (10):295–302.
Salcedo, Luis
2012 Prehistoria Andina II: La ocupación Wamallí en las
cuencas de los ríos Lauricocha, Vizcarra y Alto Marañón,
Huánuco. ECOTEC, Lima.
Sheils, Dean
1975 Toward a Unified Theory of Ancestor Worship: A
Cross-Cultural Study. Social Forces 54(2):427–440.
Stanish, Charles
1989 Household Archaeology: Testing Models of Zonal
Complementarity in the South-Central Andes. American
Anthropologist 91(1):7–24.
1992 Ancient Andean Political Economy. University of
Texas Press, Austin.
2005 Discussion: Migration, Colonies, and Ethnicity in
the South-Central Andes. In Us and Them: Archaeology
and Ethnicity in the Andes, edited by Martin Reycraft,
pp. 226–232. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University
of California, Los Angeles.
Stanish, Charles, de la Vega Edumdo, and Kira Lawrence Frye
1993 Domestic Architecture on Lupaqa Area Sites in the
Department of Puno. In Domestic Architecture, Ethnicity,
and Complementarity in the South-Central Andes, edited
by Mark Aldenderfer, pp. 83–93. University of Iowa
Press, Iowa City.
451
Thompson, Donald
1967 Investigaciones arqueológicas en las aldeas Chupachu
de Ichu y Auquimarca. In Visita de la Provincia de León
de Huánuco en 1562, Tomo I, edited by John V. Murra,
pp. 357–362. Universidad Nacional Hermilio Valdizan,
Huánuco.
1968 Huánuco Peru: A Survey of a Province of the Inca
Empire. Archaeology, 21(3):174–181.
1972 Archaeological Investigations in the Eastern Andes
of Northern Peru. Actas del XL Congreso Internacional
de Americanista: 363–369. Vol. 1. Rome-Genoa: Interna-
tional Congress of Americanists.
1973 Investigaciones arqueológicas en los Andes orientales
del norte del Perú. Revista del Museo Nacional 39:117–
125.
1977 Habitantes del periodo Intermedio Tardío en la sierra
central del Perú. El Serrano 19(250):16–20.
1983 Buildings Are for People: Speculations on the
Aesthetics and Cultural Impact of Structures and Their
Arrangements. In Prehistoric Settlement Patterns: Essays
in Honor of Gordon R. Willey, edited by Evon Z. Vogt
and Richard M. Leventhal, pp. 115–128. University of
New-Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Thompson, Donald, and Roger Ravines
1973 Tinyash: A Prehispanic Village in the Andean Puna.
Archaeology 26(2):94–100.
Thompson, Scott
2014 Interactions with the Incorporeal in the Mississippian
and Ancestral Puebloan Worlds. Unpublished Ph.D. Dis-
sertation, Arizona State University.
Townsend, Norman A.
1969 Ancestor Worship and Social Structure: A Review of
Recent Analyses. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, McMaster
University, Hamilton.
Vallaranos, José
1959 Historia de Huánuco. Imprenta López, Buenos Aires.
Van Gijseghem, Hendrik, and Kevin Vaughn
2008 Regional Integration and the Built Environment in
Middle-Range Societies: Paracas and Early Nasca Houses
and Communities. Journal of Archaeological Archaeology
(27):111–130.
Vaughn, Kevin
2004 Households, Crafts, and Feasting in the Ancient
Andes: The Village Context of Early Nasca Craft Con-
sumption. Latin American Antiquity (15):61–88.
2005 Household Approaches to Ethnicity on the South
Coast of Peru: The Domestic Architecture of Early Nazca
Society. In Us and Them: Archaeology and Ethnicity in
the Andes, edited by Martin Reycraf, pp. 86–103. Cotsen
Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los
Angeles.
Whitley, James
2002 Too Many Ancestors. Antiquity (76):119–126.
Submitted November 6, 2012; Revised March 5, 2015;
Accepted October 14, 2015.