Inca+Ceramics

**Ceramic Production and Distribution: The Ubiquitous Presence of The Inca Empire** By:Sammi Pietruszewski

[[image:http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/images/hb/hb_1978.412.68.jpg width="270" height="305" align="center" caption="Figure 1 Inca Style Aryballus"]]
 Inca ceramic analysis has so far been able to determine that the beginnings of Inca ceramic production began in 1331 A.D.(Parssinen and Siirianen 1997:266). It was from the heartland of the Inca Empire that the standardized Inca motifs and types were spread to the provinces and outskirts of the empire. At the peak of this magnificent empire, 10 million people were controlled by the Inca within 4,000 sq km, all the way from North Peru to Argentina. Throughout all of this ethnically diverse empire, the consistent production and distribution of Incan Ceramics was found throughout, leaving the "Inca hallmark" on the conquered lands ( Bákula et al. 2000:219;  D’Altroy 2001:243). Although each region often had its own provincial ceramic style that was not of Incan origin, the Inca Empire used the production and distribution of specialized Incan ceramics to symbolize their ubiquitous presence and control in provincial affairs. Production **
 * 

Costin directly informs us, “the Incas sought to subjugate and integrate conquered populations through a series of economic, political, and social policies” one of which was the production of ceramics (Costin 2001:203). Ethnohistorically, from the writings of Rowe and Morris, scholars are aware that the Incas required tribute through labor overseen by provincial rulers (Hayashida 1998:314; Hayashida 1999:338). Tribute was also demanded in the form of laborers in “enclaves of internal colonists called mitmaqkuna” (D’Altroy et al. 1998:284). A mitmaqkuna was a group of people from across a provincial region who were forced to move to a certain location to produce ceramics (for the different types of ceramics refer to Figure 2) for the state and their province (D’Altroy et al. 1998:284). Their importance was so the empire could “control production... [partly] because it wanted to stamp those objects and [mitmaqkuna] buildings with its own identity” (Hayashida 1998:316). Ethnohistorically, ceramic mitmaqkuna production sites are documented at Cajamarca, Huánuco, and Lake Titicaca and archaeologically at several locations in North Peru: most famously Tambo Real, and El Potrero- Chiquiago in northwest Argentina (Costin 1996:218). It is at these sites that scholars archaeologically see the ubiquity of the Inca Empire in provincial affairs through the control of ceramic production. //Tambo Real- Leche Valley- North Peru //

At the site of Tambo Real (Figure 3), five locations have been identified, through land surveys and excavations, as Inca ceramic manufacturing areas (Hayashida 1999:340). In order to prove that these ceramic manufacturing locations were conducted under the “auspices” of the Inca Empire, Hayashida conducted research on sherds, over-fired sherds, and molds collected during excavation from “workshop one” (Hayashida 1999:342, Sidoroff 2005:100 ). This site was “dominated by a mound of sherds,” collecting 1,082 sherds from a 5x5m sample. It was within this sample that Inca wares were quickly identified due to the shape and iconography (Hayashida 1998:325). Other Incan ceramic manufacturing evidence found at this site and the five others includes, “large, shallow, burned depressions lines with ash, which were probably used for firing pottery”, raw materials such as clay, tools, and other by products of ceramics (Hayashida 1998:325). At Tambo Real, it was the abundantly found Inca styled ceramics, most commonly the ceremonially important aryballus (Figure 1), which were the most carefully finished products (Hayashida 1998:325). //Potrero- Chaquiago- North West Argentina //

According to D’Altroy’s archaeological research in Potrero-Chaquiago, this site was also a mitmaqkuna site identified by the archaeological findings of 12 different Provincial Inca forms and the abundant amount of local styles found amongst 27,085 sherds (D’Altroy et al. 1998: 298,300). Archaeologists believe that these empirically controlled peoples were from the Altiplano and transplanted in Argentina to produce Incan ceramics (Costin 1996: 218). This is determined for many non Incan sherds “exhibit decorative features that along, with translucent white inclusion in their pastes, make them appear related to ceramics from the Altiplano,” which also shows that mitmaqkunas were allowed to keep their identity by creating their own unique ceramics (D’Altroy et al. 1998:303). Other evidence for the site being a ceramic manufacturing center is in the abundance of raw materials, such as clay and sand, the discovery of ceramic making tools, and the locating of non-plastic materials (D’Altroy et al. 1998:302). When comparing the Inca ceramics with that of the regional ceramics, archaeologists find that 46.6% of the 27,085 sherds recovered were manufactured to be in the Inca style, showing their vast numbers and their vast importance (D’Altroy et al. 1998:299). All of this evidence was found in abundant quantities, giving no room for misinterpretation. //Bringing Production Together //

The archaeological data of the ceramic manufacturing centers points to the idea that these sites were Inca ceramic production sites for the empire, controlling the provinces' ceramic production through forced tribute (Costin 2001:240). Sidoroff concludes that not only was the production of Inca ceramics a symbolic control but also the production of provincial ethnic ceramics, for they “signaled Inca recognition of local…culture and satisfied the taste of the local population for the familiar appearance of traditional…ceramics” ( Sidoroff 2005:107 <span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif';">). This is determined by the large percentage of provincial ceramics recovered, which at Potrero-Chaquiago was 53.4% (D’Altroy et al. 1998:299). It was this integrating of other populaces’ ethnicity into the Inca culture that allowed the Inca Empire to avoid rebellion of the conquered peoples (Costin 2001:204). They allowed the peoples to keep who they were within the empire, but they also ensured that the constant symbolic meaning of the creation of Inca ceramics to be a part of provincial affairs, showing the empire to be in charge.
 * Distribution**

<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif';">In order to prove this idea of symbolism one must also look to the idea of distribution of the Inca ceramics. D’Altroy directly states, “The pervasiveness of Cuzco style polychrome ceramics in the residences of native society provides vivid evidence for the state’s role as material and symbolic sponsor of political relations, linking the state to the smallest social units” (D’Altroy 2001:263). This idea comes from the fact that Imperial, ceramics made within the heartland of the empire, and Provincial, Inca style ceramics made within the provinces, Incan ceramics are found in“2,000 state installations” from Argentina all the way to Ecuador (Figure 5), thousands of kilometers a part (D’Altroy et al. 1998:287; D’Altroy 2001:243). Clearly, the Inca had a set state distribution system of Inca ceramics to ensure the far locations of the empire received them (D’Altroy et al. 1998: 287).

The Imperial Incan ceramic that is most widely distributed, so that it consists of 52% of the distributed ceramics, is the aryballus (Bray 2003:18). From analyzing the shape, size, and ethnohistorical records, scholars know this form was probably used for the storage and transportation of chicha, which was an important political and social drink of the Incas (Bray 2003:18). The ability of the empire to control chica is a powerful symbol showing that the empire is in control of their provincial ceremonial life (D’Altroy 2001:257). To flip this idea around, even the use of provincial ethnic ceramics is an extremely symbolic political move by the Imperial Inca. To show the integration of the provinces into the Empire, archaeologists have found Chimú vessels within burials of Inca functionaries in the heartland, showing that the uniqueness of the provinces were important to those in charge (Hayashida 1999:347). //<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif';">Mantaro Valley //

<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif';">Mantaro Valley, where the Wanka society was once from, is one of the most extensively studied Inca provinces, excavated by the Upper Mantaro Archaeological Research Project (UMARP), and also where the above idea is vibrantly seen (D’Altroy 2001:203). This area consists of 3 main sites Hatun Xauxa, Maraca, and Hatun Maraca. At the site of Hatun Xauxa, the state administrative center for the region, 98.5% of its ceramics were Imperial Inca ceramics (D’Altroy et al. 1998:292,294; D’Altroy 2001:253). <span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif';">This was determined from UMARP's test of 135 ceramics using Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis (D'Altroy et al. 1998:294). From analyzing the clay materials that were used in manufacturing the ceramics, scholars were able to determine that they were compositionally from the heartland, distinguishing them from the provincially made Incan ceramics (D’Altroy et al. 1998:294). According to ethnohistoric accounts, m ost of these vessels were serving vessels which are associated with ceremonial and public feastings, such as bowls, plates (Figure 6), jars, and ollas, which expresses that the empire was a part of the political activity of the Hatun Xauxa (D’Altroy et al. 1998: 287,294; D’Altroy 2001:257). Also found at the site were two elite areas, distinguished by the distinctive architecture, where over 25% of the ceramics found were that of Imperial Incan ceramics. This “suggests that local lords had tight political links to the state and preferred access to some of the goods that signified high rank” (D’Altroy et al. 1998:294). The ceramics that were created by the empire were obviously prized for the elites possessed more, essentially showing that the state controlled the socio-political roles of the provinces.

Even at the non- administrative sites of the region, such as Maraca and Hatun Maraca, the ubiquity of the Inca power is seen. Just at Hatunmaraca, archaeologists estimated there to be 2,250,000 provincial Inca sherds, for they uncovered 9,040 Inca sherds from a partial excavation in a residential area (D’Altroy 2001:252). D’Altroy states in regards to these two sites, “the elite households contained more Inca pots, a higher proportion of jars, a greater variety of Inca forms, and a higher proportion of Inca ceramics in their assemblage than that of the commoners. Socio-political position thus conferred privilege and obligation” (D’Altroy 2001:263-264). It was these privileges and obligations that were underlined by the power of the Inca Empire, for the shape of the wares distinguish them as feasting wares used for ceremonial purposes (Bray 2003:3). At both Maraca and Hatun Maraca, archaeologists of the UMARP tell us that only about a fourth of the elite wares were of the Inca assemblage and the rest were of the local area (D’Altroy 2001:263). These two sites were forced more so into self sufficiency in the production of their ceramics, for they were clearly not as important in the regional hierarchy, as Hatun Xauxa demonstrated in the allocation of Imperial Incan Ceramics (Costin 2001:241). <span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif';"> The amount and types of Imperial and Provincial Incan ceramics that a site had is also believed to show the socio-political hierarchy in relation to the empire. Hatun Xauxa, being an administrative center, recovered 449 Imperial Inca ceramic rims, while at Maraca and Hatunmaraca only 237 rims were found (D’Altroy 2001:259). It is <span style="font-size: 12pt; color: black; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">interesting to note that all of the Imperial Inca ceramics given to all three sites, may have varied in amount, but the amount given was <span style="font-size: 12pt; color: black; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">proportional to the various types (D’Altroy et al. 1998:295). This obviously represents that the empire wanted to control the ceremonial activities through the allocated ceramics (D’Altroy et al. 1998:295). Although this is true, a hierarchy was created based off of how much of the Inca assemblage that a certain region possessed (D’Altroy and Bishop 1990:134). <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif';">D’Altroy and Bishop tell us that, “the extensive provision of pottery to the Wanka underscores the importance of the Mantaro region to the empire and the integration of its elites into the imperial bureaucracy,” and in the process of doing this they created a hierarchy within and outside the region (D’Altroy and Bishop 1990:134). The Inca Empire wanted to symbolically tie the provincial elites into the empire, so that the elites of the regions knew who was truly in charge, easily shown through the ubiquity of Inca style ceramics (D’Altroy 2001:264). **<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif';">Conclusion **

<span style="font-size: 12pt; color: black; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif';">Unquestionably, the Inca used the production and distribution of Incan ceramics to show the symbolic ubiquity and control of the empire in all provincial affairs. The manufacturing of ceramics was forced onto ethnically diverse peoples to integrate them into the empire without rebellion. The evidence clearly shows that the mitmaqkunas were still allowed to express their ethnicity through ceramics and it was valued by the empire, a political ploy to control the regions. These produced ceramics were then distributed so that the farthest reaches of the empire would be incorporated through the assimilation of ceremonial and high status symbols of the provinces, as seen in Mantaro Valley. It was the assimilation and uniqueness of Inca ceramics that allowed the empire to stay together, for it symbolized the control of the Incas, not just across the empire but within regions as well.

**Bibliography**

<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif';">Bákula, Cecilia, Laura Laurencich Minelli, and Mireille Vautier 2000 //The Inca world : the development of pre-Columbian Peru, A.D. 1000-1534.// English-language ed. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Bray, Tamara L. 2003 Inka Pottery as Culinary Equipment: Food, Feasting, and Gender in Imperial State Design. //Latin American Antiquity// 14(1):3-28.

Costin, Cathy L. 2001 Production and Exchange of Ceramics. In //Empire and Domestic Economy,// edit by D'Altroy, Terence, and Hastorf, Christine, pp. 203- 242. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Costin, Cathy L. 1996 Craft Production and Mobilization Strategies in the Inka Empire. In //Craft Production// //<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif';">and Social Evolution: in Memory of V. Gordon Childe, //<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif';">edit by Wailes, Bernard, pp. 211-225. University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology,Philadelphia D’Altroy, Terence N. 2001 State Goods in the Domestic Economy: The Inka Ceramic Assemblage. In <span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">//Empire and Domestic Economy,// edited by <span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif';">D'Altroy, Terrance, & Hastorf, Christine, pp. <span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">203- 242 <span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif';">. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. D'Altroy, Terence N., and Ronald L. Bishop 1990 The Provincial Organization of Inka Ceramic Production. //American Antiquity// 55(1):120-138.

D’Altroy, Terrance N., and Lorandi, Ana, and Williams, Verónica 1998 Ceramic Production and use in the Inka Political Economy In //Andean Ceramics:// //Technology, Organization, and Approaches,// edit by Shimada, Izumi, pp. 283-312. Philadelphia, PA: Museum Applied Science Center for Archaeology, University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. Hayashida, Frances M, 1998 New Insights into Inka Pottery Production. In //Andean Ceramics : Technology,// //Organization, and Approaches,// edit by Shimada, Izumi, pp. 314-335. Philadelphia, PA: Museum Applied Science Center for Archaeology, University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology.

Hayashida, Frances M. 1999 Style, Technology, and State Production: Inka Pottery Manufacture in the Leche Valley, Peru. //Latin American Antiquity// 10(4):337-352.

Parssinen, Martti, and Siiriainen, Ari 1997 Inka-Style Ceramics and Their Chronological Relationship to the Inka Expansion in the Southern Lake Titicaca Area (Bolivia). //Latin American Antiquity// 8(3):255-271. <span style="font-size: 12pt; color: black; line-height: 200%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman';"> Sidoroff, Maria-Louise 2005 The process behind form and decoration: Defining North Coast ceramic technological style, Peru. Ph.D. dissertation, Union Institute and University, United States – Ohio.