07-045-112 Prehist. Am y Arg.

II - 23 copias

Board of Trustees, Boston University

Early Horizon Architecture at Huambacho, Nepea Valley, Peru

Author(s): David Chicoine
Reviewed work(s):
Source: Journal of Field Archaeology, Vol. 31, No. 1 (Spring, 2006), pp. 1-22
Published by: Boston University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40024715 .
Accessed: 03/10/2012 09:34
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Boston University and Board of Trustees, Boston University are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Journal of Field Archaeology.

http://www.jstor.org

1 of 23

Early Horizon Architecture at

Huambacho, Nepeiia Valley,
Peru
DavidChicoine
University of East Anglia
Norwich, United Kingdom

Investigationsin 2003 and 2004 at Huambacho(PV31-103), lowerNepena Valley,

yieldedsignificantdata to assessthe nature of EarlyHorizon (900-200 B.C.)architecture
on the north-centralcoastof Peru. In Nepena, theInitial Period(1800-900 B.C.)
mounds,suchas CerroBlancoand Punkuri, are supersededbyseveralenclosurecomplexes,
and newconceptsof architectureappearin the archaeologicalrecord.Thispaperhighlights
the newarchitectural
forms and presentsevidenceregardingbuilding technology,
function, and spatialorganization.The researchindicatesthe existence,by 800 cal B.C.,of a
newarchitecturalcanoninspiredby the localInitial Periodtradition,and significantly
differentfrom that whichis knownat coevalsitesassociatedwith the so-called"Chavin
Cult."Data from Huambachocontributeto our understandingof the changesthat
occurredin the regionafter the demiseof Initial Periodcentersand our understandingof
the socialcomplexityand ceremonialvariabilitythat characterizedthe EarlyHorizon.

Introduction
In recent years, archaeologistsand anthropologists have
become increasingly aware of the dynamic and heterogeneous aspect of early complex societies. Research outside
large centers and core areas reveals insights into the variability that characterizesmore peripheralsociocultural formations and underscores the importance of their study for
understanding broader, supra-regionaldevelopmental trajectories (Schortman and Urban 1994; Schwartz and Falconer 1994).
In the Central Andes, scholars have applied different
models to explore inter-regional interactions and cultural
variability(Burger and Matos Mendieta 2002; Lau 2005;
Stanish 2003). Most attention has been given to polities
and the social and economic asymmetries between centers
and client communities. Archaeologists have emphasized
the role of political subjugation in the development of social complexity, exploring many aspects of core initiatives
and inter-regionalinteractions, such as territorialconquest
(Moseley et al. 1991), imperial expansion (Goldstein
2005), and religious proselytism (Patterson 1968). Meanwhile, case studies of groups outside or bordering core areas, criticalin shedding light on the unity and heterogeneity of prehistoricAndean societies, have remained a low researchpriority.

In Peru, issues of sociocultural unity and heterogeneity

are particularlyimportant to the study of the Early Horizon and the so-called Chavin phenomenon (Burger 1988).
The EarlyHorizon (ca. 900-200 B.C.)was a period of profound sociocultural reorganization and innovations in material culture.Various peoples in distant regions of Peru coalesced into a widespread religious and exchange network
tied to Chavin de Huantar, a ceremonial center in the
north-central highlands (Burger 1992: 192-202). While
our knowledge about developments at Chavin de Huantar
itself has improved (Burger 1984; Lumbreras 1977; Rick
2005), the role and geographical extent of the Chavin Cult
in other regions and Early Horizon cultural variabilityin
general, remain obscure. New data and revised models of
regional development are needed to account for the cultural variabilitythat characterizedthe Early Horizon outside the Chavin religious network. As argued here, it appears that certaincommunities were resistantto Chavin religious influence, as expressed in markedlydifferent forms
of architectureand public art. Public ceremonial buildings
are criticalas a focus of study for they often embody group
affiliations and stage activities perceived as intimately related to ideological concepts and religious practices
(Rapoport 1982: 191-192).
The resistanceto Chavin influence was tested by an examination of patterns of architecture at Huambacho, an

2 of 23

2 Early Horizon Architectureat Huambacho, Nepena Valley,Peru/Chicoine

Figure 1. Map of Peru locating the principal coastal river valleys and the archaeologicalsites mentioned in
the text.

Early Horizon community established in the lower

Nepena Valley of coastal Peru (fig. i). Earlierarchaeological work in this drainage suggested strong ties with
Chavin de Huantar (Tello 1933b, 1933c), but until recently excavationsyielded few Early Horizon architectural
contexts. Meanwhile, intensive research in neighboring
coastal valleys produced important data for Initial Period
(ca. 1800-900 B.C.) societies and, by the same token,

pushed back the dating of many Nepena sites considered

Chavin derivatives.
In 2003 and 2004, excavations by the Proyecto Huambacho yielded significant data on poorly known types of
EarlyHorizon architecture.Large-scalehorizontal clearing
brought to light material evidence on the building technology, the function, and the overallspatialorganization of
the site. I use this evidence to define Early Horizon archi-

3 of 23

Journal of Field Archaeology/Vol. 31, 2006

tecture at Huambacho and discuss its implications for understandingthe nature and affiliationsof public ceremonial settings in the lower Nepena Valley.
The findings at Huambacho indicate the existence, by
the beginning of the Early Horizon, of new architectural
conventions inspired by the coastal Initial Period tradition.
Strong differenceswith earlierreligious buildings, however, suggest important changes experienced by Early Horizon groups. I argue that Huambacho architecturalcanons
developed as an alternativeto and in relativeisolation from
the Chavin interaction sphere, thus forcing revaluation of
culturalvariabilityduring the Early Horizon and the characterof religion, authority,and interaction in earlyAndean
civilization.

Previous Research on the Early Horizon

In Peru, the term "Early Horizon'3 was introduced by
John Rowe (1960), in order to reduce the terminological
ambiguity that surrounded the so-called "Chavin Period"
or "Chavinhorizon" (Tello 1943; Willey 1945). By definition, the Early Horizon covers an arbitrarychronological
unit which began with the first intrusion of Chavin influence in the lea Valley and ended with the replacement of
resin painting by polychrome slip-painted pottery (Rowe
1962: 49). Notwithstanding a conspicuous lack of consistency in its use, the Early Horizon, unlike the term
"Chavinhorizon" (Burger 1993; Willey 1945), stands only for a block of time and is free of any implication of cultural homogeneity (Burger 1988: 106). It is used here to
steer clear of assumptions of widespread developmental
stages implicit in the alternative"Formative"terminology
(Lumbreras1974: 49).
The EarlyHorizon runs from approximately900 to 200
B.C. (Lanning 1967: 25; Willey 1971: 84-85), and corresponds to a period when an amalgam of regional developments became linked through intensified religious and
trade networks. Many technological advances were made,
either through innovation or improvement of Initial Period traditions (Burger 1988: 129-131; Kembel and Rick
2004: 54). The EarlyHorizon coincides with the spreadof
the Chavin Cult, and it is generally agreed that communities that participatedin the Chavin network exchanged objects, ideas, and possibly people. Ideological and religious
ties were expressed through similar ritual paraphernalia,
iconography, and public ceremonial architecture (Burger
1992: 191-203). Different regions participatedin various
ways, and to differing degrees, in the Chavin interaction
sphere. Indeed, Chavin religion could co-exist with other
coeval religious traditions (Burger 1988: 113-117).
As assertedby Richard Burger (1988, 1992), the influence of the Chavin Cult ranged, by the JanabarriuPhase

(390-200 B.C.)at Chavin de Huantar (Burger 1981: 596),

from Paracason the south coast (Tello 1943) to Pacopampa in the north highlands (Rosas and Shady 1970) (fig. i).
However, there are still many problems with the dating of
the ceremonial core at Chavin de Huantar (Kembel and
Rick 2004: 62) and, despite sustained efforts, the Chavin
phenomenon remains poorly understood, especially from
the standpoint of regional culturalvariability.
Discoveries at several coastal sites in the 1980s, as well
as revised dating for Chavin de Huantar itself (Burger
1981), raised questions about the presence of Chavin influence in certainregions and provoked debates on the value of the concept of the Chavin horizon (Burger 1993; Pozorski and Pozorski 1987a). The Nepena Valley was often
at the core of the discussions, because of evidence of strong
ties between the local populations and Chavin de Huantar.
In the 1930s, Julio C. Tello excavatedspectacularsculpted
friezes at Cerro Blanco and Punkuri (fig. 2), two sites he
considered Chavin temples on the basis of resemblancesin
architectureand public art (Antunez de Mayolo 1933; Tello 1933a, 1933b, 1933c). For instance, at Cerro Blanco, a
site composed of three platforms originally part of a single
U-shaped architecturalcomplex (Bischof 1997), Tello excavated a series of superimposed structures (Tello 1933a),
the earliestof which was decoratedwith painted clay sculptures in a style that he interpretedas Chavin. On top of that
structure, he found a second one made of conical mud
bricks or adobes which he associated with the decline of
Chavin influence in the valley.At Punkuri,Tello uncovered
a stepped mound composed of two platforms linked by a
centralstairwayinside of which he discovered an oversized
sculpted snarling feline head (Antunez de Mayolo 1933:
16). The walls were finely plastered and painted with lowrelief friezes highly reminiscent, Tello argued, of Chavin de
Huantar.
Overall, Tello used the presence of incised, fire-reduced
monochrome pottery sherds, in conjunction with the
iconographic content of the sculpted friezes, to promote
the idea of a pan-regional Chavin culture. In his view, the
sites of Cerro Blanco and Punkuriwere derivativesof highland developments and coeval with a time when the
Nepena Valley came under the influence of Chavin de
Huantar (Tello 1943: 136-138). Even though most archaeologists accepted Tello's ideas, which greatly contributed to the creation and acceptance of a Chavin horizon (Willey 1951: 11, 1971: 123), at least one archaeologist saw the Nepena-Chavin connection differently.Rafael
Larco (1941) opposed Tello's view and suggested that the
sites in Nepena predated the foundation of Chavin de
Huantar. Stylistically, Cerro Blanco and Punkuri were
linked more closely, for Larco, to the north coast Cupis-

4 of 23

4 Early Horizon Architectureat Huambacho, Nepena Valley,Peru/Chicoine

Figure 2. Map of the Nepena Valley with the location of the sites mentioned in text. The inset shows
rivervalleys of the north-centralcoast of Peru.

niqueculturewhichfirstdevelopedduringthe InitialPeri- (Pozorski1976: 239). Beyondstylisticevidence,recentexod.

cavationsat Cerro Blanco (Koichiro Shibata,personal
Whilethereis debateconcerningthe chronologicalpocommunication2005) and Punkuri(Samaniego1992)
sition and significanceof the Nepenamuralfriezes,Cerro have yielded stratigraphic,ceramic,and radiometriceviBlancoand Punkurican be datedto the InitialPeriodon
theirdatingto the InitialPeriod
dencewhichsubstantiates
architecturaland stylistic grounds (Daggett 1984:
and their apparenttemporalpriorityover the establish85-102). This interpretationis supportedby discoveries ment and developmentof Chavinde Huantar.Whilethe
made at severalInitialPeriodsites such as Limoncarroin
gapin our knowledgeproducedby this chronologicalclarthe JequetepequeValley (Pozorskiand Pozorski1987b: ificationhasattractedlittlescientificinterest(Burger1993:
43), CaballoMuerto(atHuacade los Reyes)in the Moche 55), in Nepena,it forcesarchaeologiststo reevaluateprevious models of Early Horizon culturaldevelopments
Valley(Pozorski1976: 170-187, 305-324, 1980: 107),
de
las
Llamas-Moxeke
and
Pozorski
(Pozorski
Pampa
(e.g., Daggett 1987).
1986: 400) and Cerro Sechin in the Casma Valley
TheNepenaValleywasvisitedby earlyexplorersandar1974:
1973:
and
30-35; Samaniego
(Bonavia
42-51),
chaeologists(e.g., Horkheimer1965; Kosok 1965; Midin
the
Rimac
Artwork
at
dendorf1973 [1896]; Soriano1941; Squier1973 [1877];
Garagay
Valley(Ravines1975).
Huacade los Reyes,for example,comparesfavorablywith Tello1933b, 1933c), but the most extensivesurveysof the
CerroBlanco and, like the Nepena temples, it was first valley were conductedby Donald Proulx (1968, 1973,
built of stone and mud and only later of conicaladobes 1985) and RichardDaggett (1984). They identifieda to-

5 of 23

Journal of Field Archaeology[Vol. 31, 2006

tal of 363 sites in the valley, more than 100 dating to the
Early Horizon. Based on surface evidence, their research
mainly focused on early cultural developments in order to
position sites chronologically and understand settlement
patterns, ceramics, and architecturaltraits. They suggested
the existence of at least two distinct phases of Early Horizon development in Nepena (Proulx 1985: 221-235).
While the validity of their chronological framework
awaits confirmation from excavated stratigraphic data,
Proulx and Daggett's work allows the identification of distinct types of architecture.A "megalithic"type of architecture (Daggett 1983), mainly distributed in the upper section of the Nepena Valley, is best exemplified at ridge-top
sites, such as Kushipampa, Huancarpon, and Quisque
(fig. 2). At Kushipampa, for example, large enclosure
structures were made of finely cut stone blocks, largerthan-human lintels, and double-faced walls (Proulx 1968:
96-99, 1985: 231). Daggett attributed at least three complexes of stone-wall enclosures to the Early Horizon:
Caylanin the middle valley, and Samanco and Huambacho
in the lower valley (Daggett 1984; Richard Daggett, personal communication 1999). Many features distinguish
them from megalithic architecture, notably the extensive
use of mud mortar,the smallerscale of the stonework, and
their valley floor location (Daggett 1984: 213-218). Surface evidence collected by Daggett shows a strong connection with similar complexes surveyed by Donald Collier
(1960), Donald Thompson (1961), and Shelia and
Thomas Pozorski (1987a) in the neighboring Casma Valley. For example, the sites of San Diego and PampaRosario
appearto share the same architecturallayout. Indeed, test
pit excavations have dated the sites to the Early Horizon
(Pozorski and Pozorski 1987a: 51-70). Apparent differences from Initial Period mounds like Las Haldas, Sechin
Alto, and Pampa de las Llamas Moxeke, led the Pozorskis
to suggest that the EarlyHorizon in Casma was markedby
a major culturaldisruption. They go further and argue that
Casma was conquered by highland invaders (Pozorski
1987: 25-28; Pozorski and Pozorski 1987a: 118-119; Pozorski and Pozorski 1987b: 45). This interpretationis also
used by Daggett to conclude that "Nepena was essentially
unoccupied at the start of the Early Horizon and... subsequently settled by highlanders"(Daggett 1987: 78).
While the decline of Initial Period coastal centers and
the origins of subsequent changes have provoked many
discussions (Burger 1992: 184-190), most archaeologists
agree that coastal societies experienced a deep social, and
possibly environmental, crisis (Elera 1998; Onuki 2001;
Pozorski and Pozorski 1987a). Burger (1992) and Wilson
(1988), for instance, see the extensive use of ridges and the
presence of several defensive fortifications as an index of

the instabilitytriggered by the collapse of Initial Period societies centered in the Casma Valley. Defensive structures,
they argue, represent the most important focus of public
building efforts during the Early Horizon (Burger 1992:
188; Wilson 1988: 104).

Field Research
The Proyecto Huambacho (2003-2004) was undertaken to better understandEarlyHorizon societies in the lower Nepena, especially their architecture and sociocultural
correlates. Many sites of that time period have been identified on the north-central coast, but very little evidence
comes from excavations such as those at Huambacho.
Large-scalesurveys (e.g., Wilson 1988), test pits, and limited excavations (e.g., Pozorski and Pozorski 1987a) were
preferred over extensive horizontal clearings and detailed
architecturalplans, making it difficult for archaeologiststo
interpret the architecture, internal spatial organization,
function, and dates of these sites (Moore 1996: 227).

TheSiteofHuambaeho
Huambacho, also known as Huambacho Viejo, occupies a flat sandy plain (Pampa el Cementerio or Pampa del
Inca) on the southern margin of the lower Nepena. Bordered to the south by hills, it is located 8 km from the Pacific shoreline and at approximately65 masl. The site lies
strategicallyat the limit of the cultivated valley floor and
consists of two distinct architecturalcompounds (the Main
Compound and the North Compound) connected by a
wall 75 m long. The two compounds originally covered an
area of more than 12 ha, but the recent encroachment of
cultivated fields has totally destroyed the North Compound.
A modern irrigation canal runs on the nw edge of the
site and has unfortunately destroyed part of the architecture. Some 80 m west of the canal runs an acequia (Rio
Viejo), a seasonal water source which probably represented the nw limit of the EarlyHorizon settlement. To the sw,
the site is delimited by a modern cemetery adjacentto the
Panamericanhighway, located some 200 m from the Main
Compound. Across the Panamerican highway is Cerro
Popo, a granite hill of conical shape which stands almost
200 masl. Structuresarepresent on top of the hill, but their
relation to the Huambacho site is unknown.
The Main Compound, which was the focus of the
Proyecto Huambacho, covers an areaof 8.4 ha (400 x 210
m) and is composed of a complex arrangementof courtyards, corridors, and raised mounds (fig. 3). These structures are remarkablefor their diversity in size, quality of
construction and finish, and internal design and complexity. Huambacho is dominated by two large sunken plazas

6 of 23

6 Early Horizon Architectureat Huambacho, Nepena Valley,Peru/Chicoine

andexcavationunits.
Figure3. Mapof the MainCompoundat Huambachoshowingarchitecture

and two complexes of raised platforms. The site contrasts

with Initial Period and Chavin-relatedceremonial centers
by its lack of overall symmetry and absence of a central
axis.
The archaeologicalsite of Huambacho was first reported by Augusto Soriano (1941: 267), who identified it as a
Chimu provincialcenter.The first plan of Huambacho was
drawn by Proulx in 1967 (Proulx 1968: 136, plan 20),
who sampled surface ceramics and identified Moche, Casma, and Chimu components. The abundanceof Casma Incised and Red-White-Blackpottery sherds, combined with
the style of the architecture, led him to suggest that the
main occupation was during the Middle Horizon (ca. a.d.
600-1000; Proulx 1968: 137). This interpretation was
reused by Wilson in his discussion of the so-called "RedWhite-Black"Middle Horizon state (Wilson 1988: 334),
and amended in 1995 by Daggett who recovered Early
Horizon ceramics(RichardDaggett, personal communication 1999).
Excavationresults at Huambacho substantiatethe multi-component nature of the site. Most architecturalstructures were built as part of a single initial occupation represented by 10 carbon samples (table i) dated to between
2490 70 b.p. and 2250 40 b.p. (all dates reported as
"b.p." are conventional uncalibrated radiocarbon years).
Thcprimary construction and occupation of Huambacho

can be placed in the Early Horizon, between 800 and 200

cal B.C., calibratedwith a two-sigma range (Bronk Ramsey 2001, 2003). The primary Early Horizon occupation
was followed by several subsequent reoccupations represented by intrusive burials (our excavations documented
20) and occasional squatter-likedwellings.

Methods
Most structures at Huambacho are still visible on the
surface. They are partially buried under a layer of windblown sand, but it was possible to make a plan of them. Architectural details such as entryways and pillars were subsequently added to the plan after excavation.Based on surface information, the Main Compound was divided into
five operative sectors: South (SS), Central (CS), North
(NS), North Extension (NE), and Huaca-A (HA) (fig. 3).
Distinct rooms were identified and given an area number
followed by the sector's abbreviation (e.g., A-l/CS for area
one of the Central Sector). For each sector, a distinct numbering sequence was used (e.g., A-2/SS and A-2/NE). Excavation units, delimited in order to investigate specific architectural features, were oriented after the site layout
(N41E).
A total of 29 units were excavated at Huambacho during 23 weeks of fieldwork over two seasons. Excavations
sampled an area of approximately4500 sq m and allowed

7 of 23

Journal of Field Archaeolqgy/Vol.31, 2006

Table 1. Radiocarbon assaysfrom the 2003-2004 fieldwork at Huambacho.

_

Proveniencewithin the main compound

analyticno.

Material

uqi2C
correction 14CyearsB.P.* One-sigmarangef

Two-sigmarangef

Maize(cobs) -11.6
197085
1850 60 a.d. 80-240
a.d. 20-340
Huaca-A,A-5/HA,Unit 23, Burial8
1960 40 20 b.c.-a.d. 110 50 b.c.-a.d. 130
197084+ Maize(cobs) -10.7
Huaca-A,A-l/HA, Unit 19, Burial6
2250 40 390-200 B.C.
400-200 B.C.
197087+ Maize(cobs) -12.3
Huaca-A,A-7/HA,Unit 26, Floor-2
Maize
185372
CentralSector,A-4/CS,
-9.1
2350 70 760-250 B.C.
800-200 B.C.
Unit 4, fill beneathFloor-1
197088
Charcoal
-23.0
2360 60 760-370 B.C.
800-200 B.C.
Huaca-A,A-5/HA,
Unit 23, beneathramp(Floor-2)
Plantmaterial -10.2
NorthExtension,A-l/NE (Plaza-B),
197089
2360 60 760-370 B.C.
800-200 B.C.
Unit 25, fill beneathFloor-1
Manioc
NorthExtension,A-l/NE (Plaza-B),
197090
-24.1
2370 70 760-380 B.C.
800-200 B.C.
Unit 25, fill beneathFloor-1
197091
Charcoal
-25.3
2370 70 760-380 B.C.
800-200 B.C.
Huaca-A,A-10/HA,Unit 19, Floor-2
Plantmaterial -9.8
2410 50 760-400 B.C.
CentralSector,A-3/CS,Unit 18, fill beneathFloor-1 185375
770-390 B.C.

Floor-1
Maize
Unit
185374
NorthExtension,A-2/NE,
-9.1
2420 60 760-400 B.C.
770-390 B.C.
15,
(cobs)
185373
Plantmaterial -23.6
CentralSector,A-3/CS,Unit 4, fill beneathFloor-1
2480 60 770-510 B.C.
790-410 B.C.
Maize(stalks) -12.0
2490 70 770-510 B.C.
790-410 B.C.
Huaca-A,A-7/HA,Unit 21, fill underneathFloor-1 197086
* Conventionaluncalibrated
correctionsapplied).
radiocarbon
years(13C/12C
datafromStuiveret al. 1998.
t Calendar
yearscalibrated
usingthe OxCalv3.9 software(BronkRamsey2001, 2003) afteratmospheric
MassSpectrometer.
XAnalyzedwithAccelerator

the investigation of 50 distinct rooms or areas.This represents more than 60% of the total number of rooms estimated for the Main Compound (ca. 80). Excavations focused on the horizontal clearing of specific architectural
structures in order to understand their organization and
layout. Layers of sand and debris were removed with the
objective of clearing occupation floors to allow the recording of architectureand associated artifacts.
At Huambacho, the bulk of the Early Horizon occupation floors were found less than a meter below the surface.
In most areas,they were set up directly on the sandypampa (plain) and were partially destroyed, especially around
the pillarsand the walls. The general stratigraphicsequence
from the top was windblown sand (ca. 15-20 cm), debris
of collapsed Early Horizon structures (a layer of stone,
mud mortar, and sand; ca. 50-100 cm), sand, dirt, and remains associated with occupational floors (ca. 10-15 cm),
and clay floors (ca. 5 cm). Contexts were carefullyexcavated and sifted using i/8-inch screen (ca. 3 mm). Test pits below the floor level were made to investigate the building
techniques. In the case of raised structures, excavations
were continued beneath the floor level in order to sample
construction fill materialsand techniques, as well as to document possible superimposed structures.On one occasion,
a superposition of three occupational floors was discovered. When natural or cultural layers could be delineated
within the architecturalfill stratum, their division was followed. Otherwise, or if greater accuracywas needed, the
fill was divided into arbitrarylayers of 10 cm.

Excavation Results
Excavationsat Huambacho yielded representativesam-

ples of Early Horizon architectureand cultural materials.

The latter mainly came from refuse deposits associated
with construction fill, but also from occupation floors.
They include broken ceramics(ca. 4000 diagnostic sherds),
mainly cooking and serving vessels (neckless jars or ollas
and open shallow bowls, respectively), grater bowls, panpipes, spindle whorls, and discs. Stone bowls, mortars and
pestles, war club heads, and jet mirrors were also recovered. Further, several blue and white woven textiles were
preserved along with Spondylus shell beads, bone implements, gourd containers (Lagenariasiceraria),and culinary
remains. Overall, preliminary analyses of the artifact assemblages are consistent with the architecturalevidence
and suggest that public ceremonial activities were carried
out at Huambacho.

Architecture
at Huambacho
The architecturedemonstrates the existence of well-defined building conventions. The majorityof wall structures
were constructed of granitic stone laid in silt-clay mortar.
The stones were likely quarriedfrom outcrops of the nearby Cerro Popo hill located some 350 m sw of the site.
Many stones feature a rectangularnotch removed from one
of the corners. In situ examples show that these notched
stones were laid in the corners of walls and pillars. The
foundations of the walls were set directly in the sand and
gravel of the valley plain. Walls themselves were consistently erected following the so-called "orthostatic technique" using stone slabs, or orthostats, set upright at the
base of a structureto form the lower section (Fleming, Honour, and Pevsner 1999: 416). The technique has been reported in coastal Peru in pre- and post-EarlyHorizon con-

8 of 23

8 Early Horizon Architectureat Huambacho, Nepena Valley,Peru/Chicoine

Figure 4. Decorative clay cones discovered on top of the east outer wall-platform of PlazaA. Note the step motifs sculpted into the bases of the cones (scale in the photo is 20 cm).

texts at Cupisnique and Salinar period sites, respectively

(Brennan 1980: 6; Campana 2000: 43; Cotrina et al.
2003: 9). At Huambacho, stone slabs (up to ca. 80 cm
long) were set vertically in the ground, with their lower
sections buried, in order to create a chamber. Slabs were
held together by mud mortar and the chamber was filled
with smaller stones and rubble. Subsequent layers of flat,
quarriedstone and mud mortar were then placed horizontally on top of the orthostats. The exterior facades of most
walls were smoothed and covered with white plaster,some
still bearing fingerprints. Specific areas were richly decorated with painted murals and sculpted clay friezes.
Four examples of adobe walls were documented during
the excavations.The adobe walls are uneven, unplastered,
and represent additions to, and modifications of, earlier
spaces.The adobe bricksare of rectangularshape, but most
specimens were cut and reduced to make them fit into the
wall matrix. No conical adobes, common at Initial Period
monumental sites, were discovered at Huambacho. Smaller unfired conical clay objects were used, however, to ornament some public spaces, notably the sunken plazas.
Though morphologically akin to conical adobes (see Shimada 1981: 417, fig. 15), the "decorativecones" discovered at Huambacho are unique in terms of their size and
function. They average 16 cm long and 13 cm in diameter
and have flat, smooth bases decorated with incised geo-

metric designs. The conical parts are poorly finished; imprints of canes and stone can often be identified on them.
Excavation results indicate that decorative cones were inserted in specific sections of wall and roof structuresin such
a way as to allow their motifs to be seen. More than 200
specimens of these decorative clay cones were recovered
during the excavation of collapsed structures (fig. 4).
The stonework at Huambacho shows a high degree of
formal continuity and, even though isolated examples of
roughly made walls were identified, good workmanship is
a characteristicof the architecture.Little variationwas noted in the dimensions, the orientation, or the organization
of structures. The use of a measurement system was confirmed by the discovery, in A-3/HA, of wooden stakes still
in place at the base of certainwalls and pillars. Similar survey devices have been reported from other early coastal
sites, where they were apparentlyused to align structures
and guide masons in their work (Grieder 1975: 102-103).
The high quality of the stonework at Huambacho contrasts
sharply with the domestic structures and habitation
dwellings documented at other EarlyHorizon sites such as
Las Haldas (Grieder 1975: 103; Matsuzawa 1978) and
San Diego (Pozorski and Pozorski 1987b: 54), suggesting
that the Main Compound at Huambacho represented an
architecturalcomplex of special significance for the local
population.

9 of 23

Journal of Field Archaeology/Vol. 31, 2006

Figure 5. Rectangularpillars found during the excavation of the se corner of Plaza-B.

ArchitecturalUnits
In terms of its internal spatial organization, Huambacho was organized as a complex of repeating, standardized
rectangulararchitecturalunits. In particular,it appearsthat
the builders had a strong understanding of architectural
conventions which they expressed in distinct and highly
recognizable room types with rigid internal spatial organization. The access system is one of the most striking examples of rigid planning; all excavatedexamples of entrances
were located in the corners of rooms. Moreover, entryways
were frequently baffled and/or complemented by a narrow
passageway.When necessary, wooden posts and/or stone
walls were built to prohibit visual access to certain areas
and to make the interior activities invisible to outsiders.
This helped to insulate the spaces from wind, sand, and
sound. It also illustratesan intention to control the movements and the flow of people within the Main Compound.
Architecturalunits at Huambacho are rectangular.Most
units are contiguous and typically organized as patio
groups with interior colonnades. The apparent absence of
typical, independent dwelling units with benches, sleeping
areas,or food processing facilities argues for the non-residential nature of most buildings. The Huambacho com-

munity could have extended outside the immediate vicinity of the Main Compound public ceremonial core, however. Unfortunately, Huambacho has suffered from modern
human activities and most of the surroundings are under
cultivation. Parallelscan nevertheless be drawn with other
early coastal centers. For instance, at Montegrande, a Cupisnique site in the upper JequetepequeValley,excavations
led by Michael Tellenbach(1986) have shown that the ceremonial core of the site was surrounded by fine elite residential architecturewhile commoner habitations, made of
perishable materials, were established on the periphery of
the site.
At Huambacho, four room types could be recognized:
colonnaded patio rooms, restricted storage facilities,
"backrooms,"and sunken plazas. A total of 18 colonnaded
patio rooms were excavated. The data indicate very rigid
spacing with colonnades of rectangularpillarsaveraging60
x 50 cm set at a distance of approximately2 m from the interior faces of the walls (fig. 5). These pillars supported a
roof structuremade of perishablematerialsas evidenced by
the numerous cane imprints found in the debris of collapsed roofs. Patio rooms were unroofed in the center and
one to four sides were roofed. The size of the patios varies

10 of 23

1 0 Early Horizon Architectureat Huambacho, Nepena Valley,Peru/Chicoine

Figure 6. Plan reconstruction of the Central Sector showing the architecturalorganization of Plaza-A and
the Main Platform Complex. Line thicknesses are indicative of wall thicknesses.

substantially.Some are small and made for only a few people at most (e.g., A-12/CS, 36 sq m), while larger ones
could have accommodated large numbers of people (e.g.,
A-2/NE, 1178 sq m). Finally, some of the patio rooms
were raised, creating different patio levels. This particular
building technique was widespread in ancient coastal Peru
and consists of filling retaining chambers with various
types of materialsin order to elevate buildings.
Storage facilities are representedby small rooms located
next to or directly within a patio room. These restricted
spaces were probably accessed from above as no entrances
could be identified. In one of these storage rooms (A2A/SS), eight gourd containerswere found; they were likely used to store, carry, and serve food and drink. Also,
smallerrectangularchambers, termed "backrooms,"are located at the back of patio rooms. The backrooms sampled
(e.g., A-4A/CS, A-6/HA) are each rectangularwith a single
access; the absence of pillars and restricted size suggest a
roof. The relativelocation of backrooms argues for a function complementary to the activities conducted in patio
rooms. Finally, two sunken plazas, organized with "outer
wall-platforms" (see below) surrounding a sunken area,
were the focus of public ceremonial gatherings within the
Main Compound. The monumental outer wall-platforms
were floored, roofed, and colonnaded with rectangularpil-

lars. These spaces were decorated with sculpted clay friezes

in a unique fashion; they are rather different in form and
content than Chavin-relatedceremonial architecture.

TheMain Compoundat Huambacho

The Main Compound represented the ceremonial core
at Huambacho. It is dominated by two sets of raised platforms (the Main Platform Complex and the Huaca-A
Complex) as well as two sunken plazas (Plaza-Aand PlazaB). Because of their location, the Main Platform Complex
and Plaza-A appear to have constituted the core of the
Main Compound (fig. 6). Excavation results indicate
these featureswere utilized in differentways, as settings for
public and private gatherings.
plaza-a
Plaza-A (A-l/CS) is a square sunken court, measuring
78 x 78 m which is the largest enclosed space at Huambacho. The bulk of the public gatherings at the site would
have taken place in this sunken area.Plaza-As monumental
walls can be referred to as "outer wall-platforms."They
measure approximately 8 m wide and surround a sunken
area of 3969 sq m (63 x 63 m). The outer wall-platforms
rise 2 m above the floor of the sunken area and they were
built using the filled-chambertechnique. No artifactswere

11 of 23

Journal of Field Archaeology/Vol. 31, 2006

11

Figure 7. View from the west of the ne corner of the sunken area of Plaza-A showing the outer wallplatforms, inset staircase,and low-relief clay friezes. Note the pairs of niches at the base of the pillars.

recovered from the sand fill; since later architecturaladditions at Huambacho contained large amounts of refuse,
this suggests Plaza-A was built prior to the occupation of
the site. Plaza-As wall-platformswere topped with a floor,
and covered with a roof structure. The roof was made of
perishablematerial, as evidenced by the remains of wooden beams, fragments of canes, cane imprints, and a row of
supporting rectangularpillars averaging 70 x 60 cm. Surface survey revealedtwo pairs of inset stairwayson the east
and west walls connecting the top of the walls with the
sunken area. One staircasewas excavatedin the ne corner
(fig. 7); it is 1.3 m wide and composed of seven steps, each
step averaging 55 cm in depth. The staircasewas erected
with finely cut stone slabs laid horizontally in the mortar
and covered with white plaster. It is well-preserved, even
though the edges of the steps show traces of use.
A pair of graffiti depicting linear hatched designs face
each other inside the staircase (fig. 8: k-l). Other examples of graffiti were collected from fragments of plaster
from the collapsed areas of Plaza-A (fig. 8: a-g). Among
these, various anthropomorphic and zoomorphic representations were noted, such as male anthropomorphs and
bird figures. Graffiti have been reported from other early
coastal sites in Peru such as Huaca Lucia and Huaca
Soledad in the La Leche Valley (Shimada 1981: 420-421,
1986: 177-179) and Cardal in the Lurin Valley (Burger

and Salazar-Burger1991: 281, fig. 4) where they were interpreted as evidence for ceremonial activities.
A series of rectangularpillars embedded some 50 cm in
the sand substrate were set into the floor. Pairs of rectangular niches were found near the base of each of the pillars
(fig. 7). The niches transectthe width of each pillar,creating "holes"through the supporting structures.Their exact
function and significance are unknown, but they could
have been decorative.
The excavation of the east and north walls yielded evidence of clay relief friezes. On the upper section of the interior wall, directly facing the sunken area, a series of stepand-rectanglemotifs were sculpted in low-relief. Study of
the west and south walls indicates that this decorativefrieze
ran around the entire sunken area.The destruction of most
of the upper section of the wall makes it impossible to
know if the designs were repeated or were part of a more
complex pattern. The iconographic content of the frieze
matches the designs from decorative clay cones found during the excavation of the debris of the collapsed walls, pillars, and roof structure of Plaza-A (fig. 4). Most of these
cones were found between the colonnades and the exterior
wall, suggesting they adorned either the exterior wall, the
roof structure, or both. Additionally, we discovered sections of collapsed walls with in situ specimens. Thus, the
motifs depicted on the cones were probably organized as a

12 of 23

12 Early Horizon Architectureat Huambacho, Nepena Valley,Peru/Chicoine

Figure 8. Graffitidiscovered in the debris of the collapsed walls of Plaza-A (A-G) and Huaca-A (H, I),
and in situ on a Plaza-Bpillar (J), and inside the ne staircaseof Plaza-A (K-L).

decorativeregister complementaryto the clay friezes of the

sunken areaand, possibly, the niches at the base of the pillars. Some variationwas noted in the geometric designs of
the clay cones, but most specimens depicted variants of
simple or double step motifs and zigzag motifs.
More mural decoration was noted on the south wall of
the corridorconnecting Plaza-Awith A-5/NS to the north.
We identified a poorly preserved wall mural, sculpted in
the wet clay, depicting a marine animal or a serpent complemented by several angular geometric forms. It is possible that the depiction was part of a larger and more complex mural scene.
Plaza-Aappearsto have been engineered to host a large
number of people involved in public activities. It stands
out as the largest enclosed space at the site and, accordingly, the elaboratefinish and decoration given by the builders
clearlysuggests that Plaza-Awas meant to be seen by visitors and to impress them, as has been reported from other
sites in coastalPeru (Pillsbury1996; Quilter 2001). An isometric reconstruction of Plaza-A shows how the sunken
areawas enclosed within the outer wall-platformsand how
the clay friezes, niched pillars, and decorative cones would
have been organized (fig. 9). The floors of Plaza-A, as

throughout the complex, were relativelybare but some artifacts were recovered. For example, directlyon the floor of
the north wall-platform, a broken black monochrome stirrup-spout bottle was collected (fig. 10). The lip of the bottle was thickened, and exhibited highly polished areas alternating with zones of punctation. This zone punctate
type of decoration has also been reported at other Early
Horizon sites on the north-central coast (Proulx 1985:
191-192, 194-196), as well as from Cupisnique Phase
sites on the north coast (Larco 1941; Pozorski 1983).
Complete specimens of this type of vessel are generallyencountered in funerarycontexts.
Inside the sunken area,evidence for the consumption of
food and drink came from the discovery of a broken neckless jar or olla with a lateralpouring spout. This rarevessel
type was also documented at San Diego in the CasmaValley (Pozorski and Pozorski 1987a: 57, fig. 33). In addition,
directly at the base of the ne staircase,two gourd receptacles were found on the floor of the sunken area.
MAIN PLATFORM COMPLEX

Excavations east of Plaza-A revealed that Huambacho

also had areas for more restricted, private gatherings. The

13 of 23

Journal of Held Archaeology/Vol. 31, 2006

13

Figure 9. Isometric reconstruction of Plaza-A.The inset shows the organization of clay friezes, niched
pillars, and decorative cones. Entrances and roof structuresare not shown.

Main Platform Complex contrastswith Plaza-Ain terms of

its higher degree of internal complexity, reflected in both
the number and smaller size of the rooms, and their tightly graded access. It consists of a series of contiguous colonnaded patios connected by corridors and dominated by
room A-3/CS, the least accessible patio and most elevated
structureat the site (figs. 6, n). A-3/CS measures 30 x 26
m and is organized as a patio with four colonnaded sides.
Study of collapsed structuresfrom the north section of A3/CS showed that the walls and pillars originally stood at
least 3 m high. The platform was built using the filledchamber technique and originally stood more than 5 m
above the base of the site. Just as for Plaza-A, the Main
Platform Complex was built directly on the sandy pampa
and no occupation floor was observed underneath the construction fill. The composition of the fill varied. Layers of
vegetal materials, mainly maize, alternated with layers of
sand mixed with gravel in order to reinforcethe stabilityof
unconsolidated components. No artifactswere recovered

from the construction fill of the raised areas, which suggests that, like Plaza-A, the Main Platform Complex was
built prior to the occupation of the site. Three carbon samples were collected from layers of vegetal remains contained in the architecturalfill and dated to 2480 60 b.p.
(Beta-185373), 2410 50 b.p. (Beta-185375), and 2350
70 b.p. (Beta-185372).
The Main Platform Complex provides important data
on the complexity of access patterns and spatial subdivisions at Huambacho. Accessed through A-10/CS, the
Main Platform Complex was subdivided into at least two
sub-compounds (fig. ii). One of these, Sub-CompoundA, located to the east of A-10/CS, is composed of at least
seven contiguous colonnaded patio rooms, while SubCompound-B is a series of agglutinated rooms which ultimately lead to A-3/CS, the most visible raisedfeature.This
room could hold few individuals and it is likely that the
Main Platform Complex represented a more private area
than the large Plaza-A. In contrast to Plaza-A, the colon-

14 of 23

14 Early Horizon Architectureat Huambacho, Nepena Valley,Peru/Chicoine

Figure 10. Broken reduced-firedstirrup-spout bottle found on the floor

of the north outer wall-platformof Plaza-A.

naded patios here lack interior architecturalornamentation, such as low-relief friezes, decorative clay cones, or
niches. In fact, the only evidence of wall decoration comes
from the excavation of A-13/NS where fragments of lowrelief clay modeling depicting zigzag designs were discovered in the debris of the collapsed north facade of A-3/CS.
This location suggests, in contrast to Plaza-A, that the decorative features of the Main Platform Complex were designed to be seen from outside, ratherthan from inside.
plaza-b
Plaza-B (A-l/NE) is a rectangularsunken court located
in the North Extension Sector (fig. 3) that provides important data on Huambacho's architecturaldynamics. Sections of its walls have been partly destroyed and it presently measures 56 x 59 m. Plaza-Bis adjacentto a complex of
courtyardsto the east and appearsto have constituted a discrete sub-compound, distinct from Plaza-A and the Main
Platform Complex. Excavation results demonstrate an initial occupation of the North Extension Sector coeval with
the construction of the Central Sector, while Plaza-B rep-

resents a later addition. Radiometric evidence dated the occupation of A-2A/NE, a patio room east of Plaza-B, at
2420 60 b.p. (Beta-185374). The sample came from a
pit filled with maize cobs. Carbon samples of manioc
(Manihotesculenta)and maize coeval with the construction
of the outer wall-platformsof Plaza-Bdated to 2370 70
b.p. (Beta-197090) and 2360 60 b.p. (Beta-197089), respectively.
The layout of Plaza-Bparallelsthat of Plaza-A.The outer wall-platforms are roughly the same width as those of
Plaza-A and the sunken area was accessed through two
pairs of aligned inset staircases.Our excavationsat Plaza-B
documented two superimposed phases of construction and
also recovered Early Horizon refuse materials used as fill.
Colonnades of rectangular pillars were excavated on the
south and east walls (fig. 5). The south pillars each had a
single niche near their base reminiscent of those found in
Plaza-A. A graffito depicting a sub-circular shape with
cross-hatchedlines (fig. 8: j) was also noted on one of the
south pillars.Overall, the materialevidence recoveredfrom
Plaza-Bsuggests another large enclosed public space, albeit
smaller and slightly later than Plaza-A. This architectural
pattern of adding and shifting public ceremonial spaces
contrastswith earlierceremonial centers, where renovation
programs often focused on "mounding" a single monument over a long period of time or, in other words, by
erecting larger buildings on top of previous ones.
HUACA-A COMPLEX

Investigations to the north of the Main Compound revealed another complex of raised patio rooms and corridors, called Huaca-A (fig. 3); it is similarto the Main Platform Complex. Fieldwork at Huaca-A highlighted Huambacho's distinctive renovation programs and provided important data on site chronology. Ancient burial practices,
recent looting, and agriculturalactivitieshave damaged the
architecturalremains. As a result, large amounts of shell
refuse and broken ceramics were found on the surface in
this area (see also Proulx 1968: 137). Also, a concentration
of large broken domestic jars some 90 m nw of Huaca-A
was observed. Excavations at Huaca-A cleared more than
400 sq m and revealed a complex building sequence characterized by a series of rebuilding and reuse episodes (fig.
12). Three superimposed construction episodes, which we
have provisionally divided into Early, Middle, and Late
Phases, were identified.
During the Early Phase, Huaca-A was dominated by a
centralroom, A-l/HA. EarlyPhase occupation floors were
usuallyvery well preservedand buried under large amounts
of refuse material,in some places more than 2 m thick. Several test pits excavated below Early Phase floors indicate

15 of 23

Journal of Field Archaeology/Vol. 31, 2006

15

Figure 11. Isometric reconstruction of the Main Platform Complex. The inset shows the access sequence
for Sub-Compounds A and B.

that structureswere built directly on the sterile sand stratum. With the exception of A-3/HA no examples of colonnaded architecture were documented from Early Phase
contexts. In the sw section, adjacent to patio room A3/HA, a restrictedrectangularroom (A-8/HA) measuring
approximately2.50 x 1.50m is interpreted as a storage facility.
Most EarlyPhase occupation floors were found without
significant traces of activity. One exception was a concentration of ash on the floor of the centralroom. The ash deposit, which provided a charcoalsample, belonged to a layer of refuse and corresponds to the abandonment of the
Early Phase floor and the first burying episode or Middle
Phase modifications of the Huaca-A Complex. The charcoal sample yielded an age of 2370 70 b.p. (Beta197091). The result is largely consistent with an age of
2360 60 b.p. (Beta-197088) obtained from charcoal
found beneath an access ramp that was built as part of the
Middle Phase remodeling of A-5/HA (fig. 13).
Middle Phase constructions at the Huaca-A Complex
began with raising the height of A-l/HA, and the building
of an access ramp on its east flank. Floors of the structures
were raised some 2.5 m and walls and rectangularpillars
were erectedon top of the architecturalfill, superseding the

Early Phase structures.The raised platform areawas divided into distinct spaces. A-l/HA became a colonnaded patio with a backroom, A-6/HA, directly to its south. During the Middle Phase, A- 1/HA, A-6/HA, and A-4/HA represented the highest structures of the Huaca-A Complex.
Excavation of A-3/HA, located directly south of A-6/HA
and A-4/HA, provided evidence that the south facade of
the raised complex was decorated with painted murals. In
the debris of the collapsed walls, red and yellow pigments
were observed on fragments of wall plaster. Evidence of
painting was also found on sections of collapsed walls. Incisions in association with the paintings were noted and a
step-and-fret motif was identified. In addition, graffiti
were depicted on wall plaster fragments from A-3/HA
(fig. 8: h-i), a large colonnaded patio linking the area
with the rest of the Main Compound.
At the Huaca-A Complex, the Late Phase architecture
was badly preserved. Surviving architecturalremains suggest that Late Phase remodeling principally involved raising the height of rooms A-5/HA and A-7/HA to enlargeA1/HA. The elevated structures of the Huaca-A Complex,
by the Last Phase, came to cover more than 800 sq m.
For the most part, radiocarbon evidence corroborates
the building sequence inferred from the architecturalevi-

16 of 23

16 Early Horizon Architectureat Huambacho, Nepena Valley,Peru/Chicoine

Figure 12. Map of Huaca-A Complex showing the three construction phases and the carbon sample findspots.

dence. Excavation of the corridor north of A-l/HA yielded a sample of maize cobs dated to 2250 40 b.p. (Beta197087). The cobs were secured from a layer of sand
trapped between the Middle Phase floor and the Late
Phase construction fill. The date is consistent with two
dates obtained from Middle Phase construction fill and indicates that the corridorwas still in use when Middle Phase
modifications took place. Further, a maize sample from a
more superficialsection of the fill in A-7/HA yielded an additional date of 2490 70 b.p. (Beta-197086).

Concluding Remarks: Perspectives on Early

Horizon Architecture at Huambacho
An evaluation of the Early Horizon architecturalvariability at Huambacho leads to a number of conclusions.
The site was built on a previously unoccupied fringe of the
lower Nepena plain. The Main Compound at Huambacho
representsa planned, coherent building project. No experimentation or significant changes in the technological aspect of the architecturewere observed. Consistency was
noted in the dimensions and alignment of a rathercomplex
layout of rooms, pillars, and baffled entryways, and the
same organizationalfeatureswere repeatedover both space
and time. Radiocarbon assayssuggest a period of no more
than 250 radiocarbon years for the entire Early Horizon
construction of the Main Compound. A two-sigma range
calibration of the radiocarbon evidence allows us to infer
that the Early Horizon construction of Huambacho is un-

likely to have begun before 800 cal B.C.,nor continued after 200 cal B.C.This interpretation was substantiated by
the discovery of intrusive Salinarperiod burials at HuacaA dated 50 cal b.c.-cal a.d. 130 and cal a.d 20-340
(table i). A time gap of almost 200 years thus appearsbetween the last Early Horizon occupation and the first reoccupations of the site.
At Huambacho, some small storage facilities and backrooms were documented, but the bulk of the architecture
consists of colonnaded patios. The excavationof severalof
these patios produced little evidence of domestic activities,
and occupation floors were for the most part bare of artifacts. In contrast, refuse deposits at Plaza-B and Huaca-A
yielded large amounts of serving vessels, ceramicpanpipes,
and culinary remains that point to the consumption of
food, mainly maize and shellfish, and drink, possibly maize
beer or chicha,as well as to musical performancesas part of
activities conducted at Huambacho. Although the analysis
of refuse materials is preliminary,it suggests that the enclosed spaces were designed to accommodate public gatherings of different sizes and composition.
The Huambacho architecturalcanon appears fully developed and is best illustratedby the use of the orthostatic
wall building technique and interior colonnade forms. In
Nepena, orthostatic walls and rectangularpillarswere also
documented by the Proyecto de Rescate Arqueologico
CHINECAS at VN-35 and VN-36 in the Sute Bajo area
(Cotrina et al. 2003 : 9). These architecturalforms were not

17 of 23

Journal of Field Archaeolqgy/Vol.31, 2006

17

Figure 13. South profile of the south section of A-5/HA, Huaca-A Complex, showing the superposition
of three occupation floors, the composition of the architecturalfill, and the location of a dated carbon
sample.

limited to the Nepena Valley; cases have been reported

from other Early Horizon sites on the north-central coast
of Peru. In the Santa Valley, as in Nepena, most Early
Horizon (CayhuamarcaPhase) sites were establishedin the
middle and upper sections of the valley (Wilson 1988:
100-140), but Las Huacas, a valley floor complex is located in the lower SantaValley (Cardenas1979: 10). Clearing
of the Edificio de las Pilastras,radiocarbondated to 1840
70 b.p. and 1930 70 b.p. (Ziolkowski et al. 1994:
399-402), revealedmore than 20 pillars built of stone and
mud mortar forming a large rectangularpatio room (Cardenas 1979: 11, fig. 12).
In Casma, the sites of San Diego and Pampa Rosario
were major settlements built around the beginning of the
EarlyHorizon. Test pits yielded ceramicsdiagnostic of the
Early Horizon and confirmed by radiocarbon dates. San
Diego is dated between 2510 115 b.p. and 2245 60
b.p. and Pampa Rosario between 2760 75 b.p., and
2400 70 b.p. (Pozorski 1987: 17). Interconnected units
of stone-walled enclosures, plazas, corridors, and low platform mounds have been described from these sites and excavationsrevealedthe presence of rectangularpillars at San
Diego. Also at San Diego, the remains of wattle and daub
dwellings suggest the site was an extensive habitation cen-

ter (Pozorski and Pozorski 1987a: 51-65). There may also

be architecturalsimilaritieswith Early Horizon sites in the
Huarmey Valley, directly south of Casma (Pozorski 1987:
29; Thompson 1966). Further south, excavationsand surface reconnaissanceat the site of Chimu Capac in the Supe
Valley have brought to light the remainsof pillars,dated to
the Early Horizon occupation phase of the site, and interpreted by Lisa Valkenier (1995: 275) as similar to those
found at San Diego.
The evidence availablesuggests that a number of Early
Horizon sites in coastal Peru, and especiallyin the CasmaNepena-Santa drainages, shared a typical architecturallayout of rectilinearinterior colonnades. Further connections
between these neighboring populations are evidenced by
strong similarities that exist between their artifact assemblages-notably ceramicpanpipes and discs, slate artifacts,
stone bowls, and anthracite mirrors. In Nepena, the evidence from Huambacho indicates many similarities with
the Initial Period tradition of architectureas exemplified at
Cerro Blanco and Punkuri; as outlined by Larco (1966:
52, 61), these two sites apparentlyhad close ties with north
coastal Cupisnique populations.
Many Cupisnique centers have been reported on the
north coast (fig. i): Huaca Lucia in the La Leche Valley

18 of 23

1 8 Early Horizon Architectureat Huambacho, Nepena Valley,Peru/Chkoine

(Shimada, Elera, and Shimada 1983); Purulen in the Zaria

Valley (Alva 1988); Puemape, Montegrande, and Tembladerain the Jequetepeque Valley (Elera 1998; Keatinge
1980; Tellenbach1986); Casa Grande in the ChicamaValley; and Caballo Muerto and Huaca de los Chinos in the
Moche Valley (Pozorski 1976; Watanabe 1979). Cupisnique ceremonial centers are generally organized around a
series of relatively low platform mounds with forecourts.
The most distinctive architecturalfeature of the Cupisnique tradition is probably the use of conical adobes, as
well as rectangularand/or cylindricalpillars. Examples of
Cupisnique colonnaded architecture have been reported
from Huaca Lucia (Shimada 1986: 168, fig. 8.3), Purulen,
Montegrande, Casa Grande, Caballo Muerto (or Huaca de
los Reyes) (Pozorski 1980: 101), and Huaca de los Chinos.
For example, excavations at Huaca de los Reyes revealed
that the access to the main ceremonial mound was complemented by colonnades of rectangularpillarswhich supported a roof and masked a doorway (Pozorski 1983). At
Casa Grande rectangularclay pillars decorated with polychrome relief paintings were photographed by Paul Kosok
(1965: 109, fig. 32). Similar examples have also been reported from Initial Period sites on the north-centralcoast.
In Nepena, Tello reported the existence of clay pillarsfrom
the earliest structures at Cerro Blanco and Punkurf. At
Punkurf,for instance, the pillarswere square-shaped,measuring 42 cm on a side, and decorated with painted reliefs
(Antunez de Mayolo 1933). Furthermore, recent fieldwork at Huaca Partidahas revealedcylindricalpillarsmade
of canes and clay, along with polychrome mural paintings
(Koichiro Shibata, personal communication 2005), reminiscent of those encountered at the Initial Period sites of
Taukachi-Konkan(Mound of the Columns) and Sechin Alto in Casma (Pozorski and Pozorski 2002: 25-31, 40-41).
By contrast, examples of colonnaded architectureare generally rare at sites in the highlands, limited to the monumental cylindrical stone pillars found at Chavfn-related
sites.
Preliminaryanalysis thus suggests a reconsideration of
the relationship between Initial Period local groups based
at Cerro Blanco and Punkurf and subsequent Early Horizon populations. Notwithstanding many differences from
previous Initial Period centers- such as the lack of conical
adobes, the disappearanceof a central axis and the absence
of feline-related motifs- Huambacho architects drew upon a number of earlier, local architecturalconcepts and
ideas. The most conspicuous are the use of the orthostatic
technique and the erection of rectangularpillars, but also
includes the innovative utilization of decorative clay cones
in public art. This analysis challenges previous interpretations about the origins of Early Horizon groups on the

north-central coast and suggests that Early Horizon patterns of architecturein Nepena are not without local antecedents.
In Nepena, the construction of Huambacho's distinctive interior colonnaded architectureapparentlyfollowed
the abandonment of the temples of Punkurf and Cerro
Blanco. This is paralleled in Casma where, by the beginning of the 1st millennium B.C., most Initial Period complexes had been abandoned (Pozorski 1987: 23). The Initial Period sites are best characterizedby massive central
mounds, central staircases,aligned circularsunken plazas,
and lateral mounds reminiscent of the U-shaped tradition
of the central coast (see Burger 1987; Williams 1985).
These were superseded by a multitude of enclosure complexes.
Initial Period centers, both on the coast and in the highlands, tended to focus on a single building or monument
which was rituallyentombed and renovated at differentintervalsin time (Burger 1992: 92). In contrast, the Huambacho data indicate an emphasis on multiple enclosed ceremonial spaces. Overall, the presence of multiple sunken
plazas, raised mounds with distinct sub-compounds, and
graded access suggests a fragmentation in the ritual practices of certain Early Horizon groups. Extensive sampling
could identify only three successive building programs at
any one locality, and the Proyecto Huambacho recovered
no evidence, such as offerings, attesting to the ritual entombment of earlier structures.Rather, the remodeling of
architecturalfeatures and the expansion of the ceremonial
complex utilized rubbish as construction fill. Compared to
those in the Initial Period, Early Horizon public building
projects were relativelymodest in size and probably served
only local needs; for example, the two sunken plazas at
Huambacho covered an area of less than 10,000 sq m
while one of the plazas at Pampa de las Llamas-Moxeke
covered almost 200,000 sq m (Moore 1996: 152, based
on Pozorski and Pozorski 1986: 384, fig. 2).
It is clear that the sociocultural landscape of the Initial
Period-Early Horizon cultural transition in Nepena is
more complex than previously envisaged. For instance, it is
apparentthat some communities in the lower Nepena did
not take part in the Chavfn religious network and developed very distinct patterns of ceremonial architecture
(Burger 1993: 67); as such, the north-central coast of Peru is a key area to study culturalvariabilityduring the Early Horizon. While some settlements had prominent
Chavfn ties, such as Pallkain the upper Casma Valley (Tello 1956), it is clearthat coeval neighboring centers, such as
Huambacho, show negligible evidence of Chavfn influence. Neither U-shaped structuresnor circularsunken pits,
the two principal Chavfn architecturaltraits, were docu-

19 of 23

Journal of Field Archaeology/Vol. 31, 2006

meritedduring the excavations.Clay friezes at Huambacho

have geometric motifs, such as steps and zigzag designs,
and marine-relatedthemes; no Chavin related iconographic elements could be recognized in mural sculptures and
paintings.
The Early Horizon is seen by many archaeologists as a
time of widespread socioeconomic and military insecurity
on the north-central coast (Daggett 1984; Pozorski and
Pozorski 1987a; Proulx 1985; Wilson 1988). Most sites
arelocated in the upper sections of valleys and researchhas
mainly targeted ridge-top settlements and defensive fortifications.These sites are often interpretedas an index of socio-political instability or as the single largest output of
public labor during the Early Horizon (e.g., Burger 1992:
188). At Huambacho, this view is supported by the focus
on the closing of space and more restrictive access to the
Main Compound. A basic concern for keeping people outside certain spaces seems to have existed, but Huambacho
cannot be considered a prototypical defensive site (Topic
and Topic 1987: 48-50). Despite apparentorganizational
differences with previous Initial Period centers, the presence of enclosed public spaces indicates that EarlyHorizon
societies in the lower Nepena did continue to build and
make use of monumental ceremonial architecturalcomplexes. Innovations in public architectureseem to mark a
clearshift in local ceremoniallife and probably reflectdeeper changes in the social organization.
This research shows the necessity for large-scale horizontal clearing as a means of defining and further understanding architectureand suggests the degree to which ceremonial and religious variability characterized the Early
Horizon. Excavations at Huambacho bring new insights
to a previously understudied architecturaltradition, and
provide evidence that expands our understanding of cultural variabilityand innovation in early coastal Peru.

Acknowledgments
This project was supported by grants from the Fonds
Quebecois pour la Recherche sur la Societe et la Culture,
the Sir Richard Stapley Educational Trust, the Gilchrist
EducationalTrust,the Sir Philip Reckitt EducationalTrust,
and the Sainsbury Research Unit for the Arts of Africa,
Oceania, and the Americas. Permission for excavationswas
granted by the Instituto Nacional de Cultura under the
Resolution Directoral Nacional 623-04/INC. I owe many
thanks to Victor Pimentel Spissu and Jeisen Navarro Vega
who co-directed the 2003 and 2004 field seasons respectively. I am also indebted to members of the field crew, especially France-ElianeDumais, AlexandraTaillon-Pellerin,
and Carol Rojas Vega. Fieldwork could not have been
completed without the support and participation of the

19

modern community of Huambacho El Arenal. Preliminary

versions of the manuscript benefited from insightful comments by George Lau, Jean-Francois Millaire, Richard
Deswarte, and Andrew Mills. Finally, suggestions from
Richard Burger and two anonymous reviewers were of
great value in shaping the final version of the paper.
David Chicoineis a Ph.D. candidateat the Universityof East
Anglia and has workedin coastalPeru since1998. His interestsincludearchitecture,the dynamicsof ancientpoliticalsystems,the developmentof socioculturalcomplexity,and visual
culturein theAndes.Mailing address:SainsburyResearch
Unit, Universityof EastAnglia, NorwichNR4 7TJ, United
Kingdom.E-mail: d.chicoine@uea.ac.uk

Alva,Walter
1988 "Investigacionesen el complejo Formativocon arquitectura monumentalde Purulen,Costa Norte del Peru (Informe preliminar)"Beitragezur Allgemeinenund Vergleichenden
Archdobgie8: 283-300.
Antiinez de Mayolo, Santiago
1933 "Lostrabajosarqueologicosen el vallede Nepena,"El Comercio,October 15.
Bischof,Henning
1997 "CerroBlanco, valle de Nepena, Peru: un sitio del Horizonte temprano en emergencia"in E. Bonnier and H.
Peruana2. Mannheim:Sociedad
Bischof,eds., Arqueologia
202-234.
Peruana-Alemana,
Arqueologica
Bonavia,Duccio
1974 RicchataQuellccani:PinturasMuralesPrehispdnicas.
Lima:
EditorialAusonia.
Brennan,Curtiss
1980 "CerroArena:EarlyCulturalComplexityand Nucleation
in North CoastalVtm"JournalofFieldArchaeology
7: 1-22.
BronkRamsey,Christopher
2001 "Developmentsof the RadiocarbonProgramOxCal,"Radiocarbon
43 (2A): 355-363.
2003 OxcalSoftwareVersion3.9. Oxford:Universityof Oxford
RadiocarbonAcceleratorUnit.
L.
Richard
Burger,
1981 "The RadiocarbonEvidence for the TemporalPriorityof
Chavinde YLuantar"
AmericanAntiquity46: 592-602.
1984 ThePrehistoric
Occupation
of ChavindeHudntar,Peru.Publicationsin Anthropology14. Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress.
1987 "TheU-shapedPyramidalComplex,Cardal,Peru,"National Geographic
Research3: 363-375.
1988 "Unityand Heterogeneitywithin the ChavinHorizon,"in
RichardW. Keatinge,ed., PeruvianPrehistory.
Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress,99-144.
1992 Chavinand the OriginsofAndean Civilization.New York:
Thamesand Hudson.
1993 "TheChavinHorizon: StylisticChimeraor Socioeconomic Metamorphosis?"in D. S. Rice, ed., Latin American
Horizons.Washington,D.C.: DumbartonOaks,41-82.

20 of 23

20 Early Horizon Architectureat Huambacho, Nepena Valley,Peru/Chicoine

Kembel,SilviaRodriguez,and John W. Rick

2004 "BuildingAuthorityat Chavinde Huantar:Models of Social Organizationand Development in the Initial Period
andEarlyHorizon,"in Helaine Silverman,ed.,AndeanArOxford:BlackwellPublishers,51-76.
chaeology.
Paul
Kosok,
1965 Life,Land and Waterin AncientPeru.New York:Long Island UniversityPress.
Lanning,EdwardP.
1967 PerubeforetheIncas.Englewood Cliffs,NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Larco,Rafael
1941 Los Cupisniques.Lima: Casa Editorial La Cronicay Variedades.
1966 Peru. James Hogarth, trans. London: FrederickMuller
Limited and Nagel Publishers.
Lau, George F.
Relationsin the RecuayHinterlands: Eco2005 "Core-Periphery
nomic Interaction at Chinchawas, Peru,"Antiquity 79:
78-99.
Lumbreras,Luis
1974 ThePeoplesand CulturesofAncientPeru.Washington,D.C.:
SmithsonianInstitution.
en el TemploAntiguo de Chavin(SectorR) :
"Excavaciones
1977
Informede la sextacampana"NawpaPacha15: 1-38.
Matsuzawa,Tsugio
1978 "The Formative Site of Las Haldas, Peru: Architecture,
Chronology and Economy," American Antiquity 43:
652-673.
Middendorf,Ernst
1973 Peru:Observaciones
y estudiosdelpaisysushabitantesdurante
una permanenciade 25 anos. (Originallypublished 1886.)
E. More, trans.Lima:UniversidadNacionalMayorde San
Marcos.
Moore, JerryD.
and Powerin theAncientAndes:TheArchaeolo1996 Architecture
gy of PublicBuildings.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press.
Elera,CarlosG.
1998 ThePuemapeSiteand the CupisniqueCulture:A CaseStudy
Michael
E., Robert Feldman,Paul S. Goldstein, and Luis
Moseley,
ontheOriginsandDevelopment
of ComplexSocietyin theCenWatanabe
tralAndes,Peru.Ph.D. dissertation,Universityof Calgary,
1991 "Colonies and Conquest: Tiahuanacoand Huari in MoCalgary.Ottawa:National Libraryof Canada.
quegua,"in William H. Isbell and Gordon F. McEwan,
Fleming,John, Hugh Honour, and Nikolaus Pevsner
eds., Huari AdministrativeStructure.Washington, D.C:
and Landscape
Archi1999 ThePenguinDictionaryofArchitecture
DumbartonOaks, 121-140.
tecture,5th edn. London: PenguinBooks.
Onuki,Yoshio
2001 "Una perspectivadel Periodo Formativoen la sierranorte
Goldstein,Paul
2005 AndeanDiaspora:TheTiwanakuColoniesand the Originsof
del Peru,"in Historiadela CulturaPeruana,Tomo 1. Lima:
SouthAmericanEmpire.Gainesville:University Press of
Fondo Editorialdel Congresodel Peru, 103-126.
Florida.
Patterson,Thomas C.
1968 "Chavin:An Interpretationof Its SpreadandInfluence,"in
Grieder,Terence
on Chavin.
E. P. Benson, ed., DumbartonOaksConference
1975 "ADated Sequencefor Building and Pottery at Las Hal29-48.
Dumbarton
D.C:
Pacha
13:
99-112.
Oaks,
Washington,
d^'Nawpa
Horkheimer,Hans
Pillsbury,Joanne
1996 "TheThorny Oyster and the Origins of Empire:Implicasitiosprehispdnicos
1965 Identificacidn
y bibliografiade importantes
tions of Recently Uncovered Spondylus Imagery from
en Peru. Arqueologicas8. Lima: Museo Nacional de
Chan Chan, Peru,"LatinAmericanAntiquity7: 313-340.
Antropologiay Arqueologia.
Pozorski,Shelia
Keatinge,Richard
1987 "Theocracyvs. Militarism:The Significanceof the Casma
1980 "Archaeologyand Development:The TembladeraSites of
7:
the PeruvianNorth Coast,"Journalof FieldArchaeology
Valley in Understanding Early State Formation," in
467-475.
Jonathan Haas, Shelia Pozorski, and Thomas Pozorski,
Burger,RichardL., and RamiroMatos Mendieta
2002 "Atalla:A Centeron the Peripheryof the ChavinHorizon,"
LatinAmericanAntiquity13: 153-177.
Burger,RichardL., and Lucy Salazar-Burger
1991 "TheSecond Seasonof Investigationsat the InitialPeriod
Center of Cardal,Peru,"Journal of FieldArchaeology18:
275-296.
Campana,Cristobal
2000 Tecnologias
constructivas
de tierraen la CostaNorte PrehisZonaNorte 6. Trujillo:Inpdnica.PatrimonioArqueoldgico
stituto Nacional de Cultura.
Cardenas,Mercedes
in AncientPeru.
1979 A Chronology
of the UseofMarineResources
PublicaciondelInstitutoRivaAguero 104. Lima: Pontificia
UniversidadCatolicadel Peni.
Collier,Donald
1960 "Archaeological
Investigationsin the CasmaValley,Peru,"
Akten des Internationalen Amerikanistenkongresses
34:
411-417.
Cotrina,Jorge,Victor Pena,ArturoTandaypan,and ElviaPretell
2003 "EvidenciasSalinar:Sitios VN-35 y VN-36, Sector Sute
Bajo, Valle de Nepena,"RevistaArqueologicaSIAN 14:
7-12.
Richard
E.
Daggett,
1983 "MegalithicSites in the Nepena Valley,Peru,"in Daniel H.
Sandweiss, ed., Investigationsof the Andean Past. Ithaca,
NY: CornellUniversityLatinAmericanProgram,75-97.
1984 The EarlyHorizon Occupationof the Nepena Valley,North
Central Coast of Peru. Ph.D. dissertation,University of
Massachusetts,Amherst. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International.
1987 "Towardthe Developmentof the State on the North CentralCoast of Peru,"in JonathanHaas, SheliaPozorski,and
Thomas Pozorski,eds., TheOriginsand Development
of the
Andean State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
70-82.

21 of 23

Journal of'FieldArchneology/Vol. 31y 2006

eds., TheOriginsandDevelopment
oftheAndeanState.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress, 15-30.
Pozorski,Shelia,andThomasPozorski
1986 "Recent Excavationsat Pampa de las Llamas-Moxeke,a
Complex Initial Period Site in Peru,"Journal of FieldAr13: 381-401.
chaeology
in the CasmaValley,Peru.
1987a EarlySettlementand Subsistence
Iowa City:Universityof Iowa Press.
2002 "The Sechin Alto Complex and Its Place Within Casma
Valley Initial Period Development,"in William H. Isbell
and Helaine Silverman,eds., AndeanArchaeology
I: Variationsin Sociopolitical
Organization.New York:KluwerAcademics/PlenumPublishers,21-51.
Pozorski,Thomas
1976 CaballoMuerto:A Complexof Early CeramicSites in the
MocheValley,Peru.Ph.D. dissertation,Universityof Texas,
Austin.Ann Arbor:UniversityMicrofilmsInternational.
1980 "The EarlyHorizon Site of Huaca de los Reyes: Societal
AmericanAntiquity45: 100-110.
Implications,"
1983 "TheCaballoMuerto ComplexandIts Placein the Andean
"
ChronologicalSequence Annals of the CarnegieMuseum
52: 1-40.
Pozorski,Thomas, and SheliaPozorski
1987b "Chavin,the Early Horizon and the Initial Period,"in
Jonathan Haas, Shelia Pozorski, and Thomas Pozorski,
eds., TheOriginsandDevelopment
oftheAndeanState.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,36-46.
Proulx,Donald A.
1968 An Archaeological
Surveyof theNepenaValley,Peru.Research
Report2. Amherst:Departmentof Anthropology,University of Massachusetts.
in theNepenaValley,Peru.Re1973 Archaeological
Investigations
searchReport13. Amherst:Departmentof Anthropology,
Universityof Massachusetts.
1985 An AnalysisoftheEarlyCulturalSequence
in theNepenaValley,Peru.Research
Report25. Amherst:Departmentof Anthropology,Universityof Massachusetts.
Quilter,Jeffrey
2001 "MocheMimesis: Continuityand Changein PublicArt in
Early Peru,"in Joanne Pillsbury,ed., MocheArt and Archaeologyin Ancient Peru. Washington, D.C.: National
Galleryof Art and New Haven, CT:YaleUniversityPress,
21-45.
Rapoport,Amos
1982 TheMeaning of the Built Environment.BeverlyHills, CA:
Sage Publications.
Ravines,Rogger
1975 "Garagay:un viejo templo en los Andes,"Textual10: 6-12.
Rick,John W.
2005 "The Evolution of Authority and Power at Chavin de
Huantar,Peru,"in Kevin J. Vaughn,Denise Ogburn, and
ChristinaA. Conlee, eds., Foundationsof Powerin thePreAndes.Archaeological
hispanic
PapersoftheAmericanAnthropologicalAssociation14. Berkeley:Universityof California
Press,71-89.
Rosas,Hermilio, and Ruth Shady
1970 Pacopampa,un centroFormativoen la SierraNor-Peruana.
Lima: Seminariode Historia RuralAndino, Universidad
NacionalMayorde San Marcos.

21

Rowe, John H.
1960 "CulturalUnity and Diversificationin PeruvianArchaeology," in Anthony F. C. Wallace, ed., Men and Cultures.
Philadelphia:Universityof Pennsylvania,627-631.
1962 "Stages and Periods in Archaeological Interpretation,"
Southwestern
18: 40-54.
JournalofAnthropology
Samaniego,Lorenzo
1973 Los nuevostrabajosarqueologicos
en CerroSechin.Trujillo:
EdicionesLarsen.
1992 Mow: Historiay Turismo.Chimbote:MunicipalidadDistrital de Moro.
Schortman,EdwardM., and PatriciaA. Urban
1994 "Livingon the Edge: Core-Periphery
Relationsin Ancient
Southeastern Mesoamerica,"CurrentAnthropology35:
401-430.
Schwartz,Glenn M., and StevenE. Falconer,editors
1994 Archaeological
Views
from theCountryside:
VillageCommunities in Early ComplexSocieties.Washington,D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.
Izumi
Shimada,
1981 "TheBatan Grande-LaLecheArchaeologicalProject:The
FirstTwo Seasons,*
8: 405^46.
"Journal
ofFieldArchaeology
1986 "BatanGrandeand CosmologicalUnity in the Andes,"in
CliffordEvans,RamiroMatos Medieta,SolveigA. Turpin,
and HerbertH. Eling, Jr.,eds.,AndeanArchaeology:
Papers
in Memoryof CliffordEvans.InstituteofArchaeology
Monograph 27. Los Angeles:Universityof California,163-188.
Shimada,Izumi, CarlosElera,and Melody Shimada
1983 "Excavacionesefectuadasen el centro de Huaca LuciaCholope, del Horizonte Temprano,Batan Grande,Costa
Norte del Vcru?Arqueolqgicas
19: 109-208.
Soriano,Augusto
194 1 "Monografiade Ancash: Nepena (Provinciade Santa)"RevistadelMuseoNacional10 (2): 263-277.
E.
Squier, George
1973 Peru:IncidentsofTravelandExploration
in theLandoftheIncas.(Originallypublished1877.) New York:AMS Press.
Stanish,Charles
2003 AncientTiticaca:TheEvolutionof ComplexSocietyin Southern Peru and NorthernBolivia.Los Angeles: Universityof
CaliforniaPress.
Stuiver,Minze, PaulaJ. Reimer,E. Bard,J.W.Beck,G. S. Burr,K. A.
Hughen, B. Kromer,G. McCormac,J. van der Plicht, and M. Spurk
1998 "INTCALRadiocarbonAge Calibration,24000-0 cal BP,"
Radiocarbon
40: 1041-1083.
Michael
Tellenbach,
1986 Lasexcavaciones
en el asentamiento
formativodeMontegrande,
Valledejequetepeque
en elNortedelPeru.MaterialienzurAllBand 39. Munich:
gemeinenund Vergleichenden
Archaologie
VerlagC. H. Beck.
Tello,Julio C.
1933a "Elpalaciode CerroBlanco,vallede Nepena,"El Comercio,
October 3.
1933b "Lasruinasdel vallede Nepena I" El Comercio,
October6.
1933c "Lasruinasdel vallede Nepena H?El Comercio,
October9.
1943 "Discoveryof the ChavinCulturein Peru,"AmericanAntiquity9: 135-160.
1956 Arqueobgiadel valle de Casma: CulturasChavin Santa o

22 of 23

22 Early Horizon Architectureat Huambacho, Nepena Valley^Peru/Chicoine

HuaylasTunga, y Sub-Chimu.Lima:UniversidadNacional
Mayorde San Marcos.
Thompson,Donald
1961 Architectureand SettlementPatternsin the Casma Valley,
Peru. Ph.D. dissertation,HarvardUniversity.Ann Arbor:
UniversityMicrofilmsInternational.
1966 "ArchaeologicalInvestigations in the Huarmey Valley,
Internacionalde
delXXXVJCongreso
cn\."Actasymemorias
Americanistas1: 541-548.
Topic,TheresaL., and John R. Topic
1987 "TheArchaeologicalInvestigationof Andean Militarism:
in JonathanHaas, Shelia
Some CautionaryObservations,"
Pozorski,and Thomas Pozorski,eds., TheOriginsand Development
oftheAndeanState.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,47-55.
Valkenier,LisaK.
1995 "New Evidencefor Chimu Capacand the EarlyHorizon
Periodin the Supe Valley,Peru,''
'Journalof theStewardAnthropological
Society23 (1-2): 269-281.
Watanabe,Luis
1979 "Arquitectura
de la Huaca de los Reyes,"in RamiroMatos
Mendieta,ed., ArqueologiaPeruana:Investigaciones
Arqueoldgicasen el Peru. Lima: Centro de ProyeccionCristiana,
17-35.
Gordon
R.
Willey,
1945 "Horizon Styles and Pottery Traditionsin PeruvianArAmericanAntiquity11: 49-56.
chaeology,"
1951 "TheChavinProblem:A Review and Critique,"SouthwesternJournalofAnthropology
7: 103-144.
1971 An Introductionto AmericanArchaeology.Vol. 2: South
America.Englewood Cliffs,NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Williams,Carlos
1985 "ASchemefor the EarlyMonumentalArchitectureof the
CentralCoast of Peru,"in ChristopherB. Donnan, ed.,
Early CeremonialArchitecturein the Andes. Washington,
D.C.: DumbartonOaks, 227-240.
David
J.
Wilson,
1988 PrehispanicSettlementPatternsin the LowerSanta Valley,
Peru:A RegionalPerspective
on the Originsand Development
of ComplexNorth CoastSociety.Washington,D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.
Ziolkowski,MariuszS., MieczyslawF. Pazdur,AndrzejKrzanowski,
andAdamMichczynski
1994 Andes:Radiocarbon
Databasefor Bolivia,Ecuadorand Peru.
Warsaw:AndeanArchaeologicalMission of the Instituteof
Archaeology,WarsawUniversity, and Gliwice Radiocarbon Laboratoryof the Instituteof Physics,SilesianTechnical University.

23 of 23