Book
Reviews
Archaeology
The Moche.GarthBawden.Cambridge,
MA:BlackwellPublishers,1996.375 pp.
THOMAS
POZORSKI
University of Texas-Pan American
GarthBawdenhaswrittenthe firstgeneraloverviewof the
Mochecultureto appearin over20 years.As partof "ThePeoplesof America"
seriescurrently
beingpublishedbyBlackwell
Publishers,
thisbookis a verywelcomesynthesisof theMoche
culturethatis basedon iconographicanalysisof potteryand
otherMocheartifacts;recentspectacularfindsat Sipan,San
Josede Moro,Huacade la Luna,andHuacaEl Brujo;andless
wellknownsettlement
andartifactstudies.Thereis littlein this
volumethatis trulynew,at leastto scholarsfamiliarwiththe
Mocheculture.Therealstrengthof thebookliesinitscohesive,
and at timesprovocative,overviewgarneredfrompublished
sourcesandideasthathavebeenpresentedatvariousmeetings
overthepast15years.
Inchapter1,Bawdenpresentsthesourcesof information
(archaeological,ethnohistoric,
andethnographic)
thatprehistoriansuse to reconstruct
andunderstand
Mocheculture.Bawden
feels, withcertainjustification,thatpaststudieshaveoveremphasizedtheMoche"corearea"centeredaroundtheMocheand
ChicamaValleys,cloudingthe complexityof Mocheculture
thatis onlyrecentlybeginningtobeunderstood.
Onenotableerroris themaponpage9 thatshowsbothGalindoandtheHuaca
El BrujoComplexon the wrongside of theirrespectiveriver
valleys.
In chapter2, Bawdenincludesa ratherthoroughenvironmentaldescription
of the areasthatweredirectlyorindirectly
exploitedby the Moche.Themainflaw in thischapteris the
overemphasis
on environmental
changeanddisasters(tectonic
movements,tsunamis,andEl Ninorains)thathavesupposedly
plaguedthePeruvian
coastforcenturies,
periodically
disrupting
or destroyingvariouscivilizations.Thisenvironmental
determinismpointof viewbecamepopularin the 1980samongcertainAndeanists
butwasneverreallysupported
by solidarchaeologicalorgeologicalevidence.Earthquakes
andheavyrainsdo
occur,butpeopleandculturessurviveandaremoreresilient
thansomescholarsthink.
Mochesettlementsarediscussedin chapter3. Mostarebelievedtobe smallruralcenters,oftenhousinggroupsof specialists (farmers,fishermen,potters).Some archaeological
evidence supportsthis, but muchof the specializedcenteridea
comes from laterethnohistoricdocuments,the information
fromwhichis projected
backward
severalhundred
yearsandappliedtotheMoche.
Inchapters4 and5, Bawdendiscussesthesymbolsof power,
represented
by theiconography
on pottery,metalobjects,and
architecture,
thattheMocheeliteusedandmanipulated
during
reenactments
of sacredmythsto legitimizetheirelevatedpositionsinMochesocietyincontrast
tothemajorityof Mochepeople. Onecuriousfeatureof chapter4 is thediscussionof major
platformsitesthat,accordingto Bawden,wererathersparsely
populated
ceremonial
centersuntilMocheV times.WiththerecentexcavationsatCerroBlancorevealinga verydenseurban
settlement,thisclaimaboutemptyceremonialcentersmaybe
overstated.
Ironically,
thisideamaystemfromthelackof largescaleinvestigations
at mostmajorMochesites,a biasthathas
distortedsettlement
patterns
similartothebiasBawdennotesin
theoveremphasized
studiesof theMochecorearea.
Chapter6 containsa summary
of north-coast
archaeological
culturesbackto late preceramic
times.Culturalcontinuityis
emphasized,
i.e.,massiveInitialPeriodmoundspresaginglater
Mochepyramids.Onepointof contentionthatI haveconcerns
statements
madeaboutlarge-mound
construction,
beginningin
this chapterwithGallinazomounds(p. 188) andrepeatedin
laterchapters(pp.229, 294)forMochemounds.FortheGallinazoandMoche,largemoundsrepresent
thecapability
ofmobilizing largeregionallaborforces,implyingcentralizedrule.
However,suchcapabilityis deniedthe InitialPeriodpeople,
even thoughtheirconstructions
wereoftenmuchlargerthan
thoseof laterpeoples.I suspectthatBawdendownplaysthepossibilityof centralized
ruleduringtheInitialPeriodbecause(1)
noelaborate
burialshaveyetbeenfoundtosuggestclassstratificationand(2) strongcentralized
ruleat 1500B.C.doesnotcorrespondtotheoriesdictatingslowevolutionary
development
of
complexsocletles.
Inchapter7, Bawdennotestheproblemsinvestigators
have
hadwithLarco'sfive-phasesequence,particularly
in the valleys northof Jequetepeque.
HeenvisionstheMochecultureas
arisingoutof multiplesourcesalongthenorthcoast,nottheresult of a single sourceexpansionout of the Moche-Chicama
area.
Chapter8 concernstheflorescenceof Mocheculture,correspondingtoMocheIII-IV,andthedifferencesbetweentheindividualisticcentralized
ruleof theMoche-Chicama
areaversus
themyth-role-enactment
typeof rulein valleysto thenorth.In
Bawden'sview,thelattertypeofrulewasmoretiedtothecommunity,andas a result,duringMocheV andlatertimes,the
northern
valleyssufferedfarless dramatic
changethandidthe
valleysfromChicamaonsouth.
In chapters9 and10, Bawdenrecountsthecollapseandreconstitution
of MochesocietyduringMocheV andlaterin the
MiddleHorizon.Causesforthechangesin Mochesocietyincludeoutsidepressure(thoughnotconquest)bytheWari,envi<
.
.
AmericanAnthropologist101(2):437-470. Copyright(C)
1999, AmericanAnthropologicalAssociation
This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Fri, 14 Mar 2014 00:42:54 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
438
AMERICAN
ANTHROPOLOGIST
* VOL.1017 NO. 2 * JUNE1999
ronmentalproblems,and internalstress.Bawdenhandlesthese
two chaptersquite well, despite the diff1cultyof obtainingconcreteevidenceof internalstressandanoveremphasison the seriousness of environmentalfactors.Again, in his view, the northernvalleys faredbetterduringthis transitionalperiod.
In the final chapter,Bawden cites the legacy thatthe Moche
left on latercultures,includingmodern-dayPeru.Examplesof
this legacy include Chimu blackwarederived from Moche V
blackwareandreedboatsthatarestill used along portionsof the
northcoast. The most enduringlegacy, however,is the practice
of shamanism,which Bawden sees as directlytied to the Moche
rulers'roles as shamansin maintaininga balancebetween the
realworldandthe spiritworld.
In sum, GarthBawdenhas provideda thoroughandstimulating volume thatoffers muchfood for thoughtconcerningone of
ancientPeru's most interestingcivilizations. Overall,the book
is well done. My majorcomplaintis thatthe half-tonereproductions are of poor quality,often too darkto discernmuch detail.
Despitethisreservation,this book deservesa place on the bookshelves of all persons,scholars,and laypersonsalike who have
an interestin ancientPeru. *
ArchaeologicaPeruana: PrehispanicArchit
and Civilization in the Andes. ElisabethBonnierand HenningBischof;
eds. Mannheim,Germany:Reiss-Museum,1997. 236 pp.
JERRY
MOORE
California State University-DominguezHills
Sometimesthe best thing an archaeologistcando is to drawa
good map,andthis is amplyillustratedin PrehispanicArchitecture and Civilizationin the Andes. The outgrowthof a symposium at the 1988 InternationalCongress of Americanists,the
volume contains 11 papers in Spanish and English edited by
ElisabethBonnierandHenningBischof.
As Bonnierobserves in the introduction(p. 10), the symposium unintentionallyexposed two different trends in archaeological approachesto architecture:';lwheEuropeanarchaeologists were giving more attention to formal analysis and
definitionof constructionsequences . . . [whereas]theirAmerican colleagues . . . wouldratherfocus on settlementpatternsand
the social and economical aspects of the architecturalstudy."
Five authors(Wurster,Reindel,Fuchs,Bischof, andTellenbach
[unfortunately,most of Dr. Tellenbach's article was missing
from my review copy]) emphasize formal analysis and constrllctiontechniques, three authors (Shimada,Cavallaro,and
Greider)discuss social and economical aspects, and Bonnier
contributestwo articles, one from each approach.One article
falls outsideof this very loose frameworl;Eleraprovidesan excellent overview of the Peruvian Formative Cupisniqueand
Salinarcultures,butscarcelymentionsarchitecture.
Before discussing individualarticles, I must emphasizethe
high qualityof the publication.Architecturalstudiesdependon
theirillustrations,andthe authorsandthe Reiss-Museumareto
be thankedfor the excellent photographs,plans, and sections.
Some illustrationsare actuallybeautiful,and all the artworkis
competentanduseful to archaeologists.
The papers focusing on formal analysis and construction
techniques include Fuchs's detailed discussion of building
stages at CerroSechin in the CasmaValley, Peru.Long-known
for its bas-reliefsshowing ax-bearingwarriorsand theirmutilatedvictims,scantchronologicaldataaboutCerroSechinhave
been available. Fuchs's detailed constructionsequence spanning ca. 2500 2300 B.C. to 30S200 B.C. (pp. 157-159) is a
welcome additionto Andean archaeology.Similarin its focus
on building sequences,Reindel suggests a sequence for North
Coast monumentalarchitecturebased on changes in adobe
bricksand morphologicalchanges in buildingplans.Although
interesting,it does notproducea chronologicalalternativeto ceramicsequencs,whichis Reindel's statedgoal (p. 91).
Bischof's articleon the site of CerroBlanco, in the Nepena
Valley on Peru's coast, is an excellent photographicsurvey of
the site. Historic photographsculled from hacienda archives
show variousstages in the site's excavation andits deterioration. Bischof examines iconographicmotifs depicted in now
nearlydestroyedpolychromereliefs andarguesthatcoastalsites
like CerroBlanco contain importantinformationaboutthe religious and sociopolitical dimensions of the Early Horizon's
Chavintradition.
Bonnier,in her articleon constructionsequencesat the Late
Preceramic(ca. 300F1800 B.C.) site of Piruru,shows thecomplex historyof ritualarchitectureat the site andexpandsherdiscussion ofthe Mitoreligiousarchitecturalstyle. Bonnier'scomparisonof Piruruandothersites (Kotosh,La Galgada)suggests
the LatePreceramicMito religion unified the north-centralPeruvianAndes.
Wursterpresentsarchitecturaland settlementdata from the
little-knownToparaValley, located on the southcoast of Peru.
Wurster'sbriefarticleonly hints at the rich datahe andhis colleagues have obtained.The majorityof the ToparaValley sites
date to Late Intermediateperiod (ca. A.D. 90s1470) andLate
Horizon(ca. A.D. 147S1530). The largestsite, HuaquinaEste,
is an architecturalcomplex covering some 500 x 200 meters
with dwellings, public plazas, and multiroomcompoundsused
for both residentialfunctionsand funeraryrites. Wurster'ssuperbarchitectural
plansareanimportantcontributionto Andean
archaeology.
Cavallarocritiquesseriationsof the large royal compounds
(ci1ldadelas)
at ChanChan,the LateIntermediateperiodcapital
of the PeruvianChimuEmpire.AlthoughCavallaro'sresearch
has been publishedelsewhere,this versionis particularlyclear.
Cavallaroconcludesthatat best one can separatethe royalcompoundsinto Early,Middle, andLate ciudadelas,not a unilineal
sequence. This section of Cavallaro'sarticle is tightly argued,
butthereis no reasonto think as Cavallarodoes thatthe difficulties of seriatingChanChan's ciudadelasindicatedualpolitical organization.Thepenultimatesection of the articleoffers
an unconvincinganalysisof dualorganizationat the Inkasite of
Huanuco Pampa that does nothing to advance Cavallaro's
claims.
The weakestpaperin the volume is TerenceGrieder's article7
"On Two Types of Andean Tombs," which contrastsaboveground funerarystructures(chullpas)and subterraneanshaft
andchambertombs. In a free-formuse of SouthAmericanethnographythatblithelyhops acrossmillenia,Griederarguesthat
the shaft and chambertombs symbolized wombs and that the
chullpas arephalli, and thata supposedshift in funeraryforms
This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Fri, 14 Mar 2014 00:42:54 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions