CIl.l\.

PTER I

INTRODUCTION

General Considerations

The Peruvian precerarnic is a subject of study of the

last 35 ye~rs. While it is true that preceramic culturGl

remains had been previously discovered and reported in Chile

by Mux Uhle (1919) and in Peru by C. Barrington Brown (1926),

these works had little impact on Peruvianist studies. It

was not until the work of Junius Bird at Huaca Prieta that

the existence of life in Peru before pottery began to be

recognized and accepted. Part of the explanation for this

fi'1ilure lo comprehend what was being fonnd can be se",n in

the central role that ceramic studies -- often of isolated

museum collections -- have played in building onr conceptions

of Peruvian prehistory. AllhouCjh I do not want to belii.:t:le

the importance and utiJ.ity of ceramic studies, since they

hiJ.ve been essenti"l in b,-,ilc.1in~J the fri:llTi8lvork on which mar",

sophisticated cultural reconstructions are now being hung,

the emphasis that pottery has received has often been at the

expense of otllcr aspects of the ancient cultures; indoed, at

times it h2.(; se8med tha·t nolhing existed in Peru before the

etllnohistorically documonterl Incas atller than pottery.

Aspero provides nn interesting case study of this

- 1 -
 - 2 -

phenome~on, since the work there spans the interpretive

generations, with the middle work subject to a later re-

evaluation by one of the site's excavators (Hoseley and

\'lilley 1973). Willey's work, though undertaken in 1941, was

not published until 1954. In the interim, Bird conducted

thorough excavations at preceramic sites in the Chicama and

Viru valleys as part of the Institute of Andean Research's

"Viru Valley Project." Willey, as a member of the same

project, was aware of Eird's work, yet failed to make the

connection between Rird's conclusions and his own earlier

work at. I,spero.

In 1941 there was no concept of a Peruvian

coastal preceramic period, horizon, or stage.
I Presumably,such would have been conceded on
theoretical grounds as a possibility, or even
probability; but the idea was not a foremost
research consideration in the minds of most
investigators who were operating in the frame-
",ork of the Uhle-'Kroeber chronology (Kroeber
1927) and were concerned with ceramic cultures
... it was not thclught conceivable that thes~
central coastal sllell middens could have had
such features lIS sizable artificial platform
mounds. (Moseley and Willey 1973:453).

Thl'S, it can be seen that the concept.ual. frome within

which Peruvian prehistory was portrayed did not allow lhe

real nature of Aspero to bc seen. And, while times and

interpn,tiv8 moJc~; have chanCJcd, certain 'videly held eon-

ceptions still bend and shape our thinking about the cour~B

of prehistory.

The first conception is a lingering holdover from the

19th centli"-y un.; lineal evolutionary scheme of Le",is Henry

. .~",.. _:eo = : & =....,

z
 - 3 -

'Morgan (1877), a conception that still equates social

developments ''lith technological ones: most importantly for

'
for t h.1S paper, su b slstencD
. .]
agrlcu,ture 1 an'd pottery.

The second is an obsession with origins, with finding

"the first" or "the oldest" known example of an artifact or

institution, as if the mere discovery will in itself explain

(or obviate the necessity of explaining) the processes in-

valved. (Such non-explanations often make appeal to the

first misconception by equating technological developments

with social evolution.) The search for origins is not

necessarily "bad" -- indeed, this thesis indulges in it

too -- if it is remembered that the trait did not exist in a

vacuum, but ral:her w"s part of a cultural whole and as such

was intimately tied to other aspects of the culture. 'rhus,

a search for origins should try to discover the processes

that led to the development of the trait, the ways it inte-

grated into the culture, and the effects it had on subseq'lent

IFollol'ling ~loselcy (1975b), a division is made here

between agricultural produce that can be eaten and that
which i.s llS2d for the rnnIlu[actllrc of artifRcts, e.g. r Inaiz~
versus cottUl1. The hislo):ie" of the development nnd sprc"a
of culLegen" of the 2 groups arc diffc·r"'1t, and it is
impo,rtill1t, to J;ec[.' this distinction in mind. llencefoJ:l.h ,en
this papE.~r I " aCj1'iculture will be usecl uS a less C\.1mb'?r~;OT:l.~!
ll

design~t.i.on for "subsistence agriculture," or the cUltiv~tioJJ

of plants fO): t:he inm,cdiatc- purpose of obtaining food. 'l';h~
inhabi t.'ints of l\sI:Jero cuI ti vatecJ cotton and go l1:Cclrr , f.l 5 h.H.l
their ,mceston3 for hun(lr.ec1s of years. Thus, when it is
said that l\speJ.-o \,:.:\s "non-,J.9J:icul tural, this phrase: should
II

be taken to mean that the cultivation of plants for foo<1 use

was not practiced.
 - 4 -

cultural developmellts. We should not be content merely to

note the presence of a trait, but should try to understand

how thut trait functioned within the social system. Con-

versely, if a trait, such uS agriculture, was available but

not utilized, we should try to determine what obviated or I

prevented its acceptance.

The combined effect of these 2 misconceptions is that

I
once a trait has been found in the archaeological record,

any number of additional features are often assumed to have

I
been present from that date fonlard. For example, the

presence of maize at a site -- however small the amount

I
recovered -- is often assumed to indicate that the subsis- I
tence of the site was based on efficient maize farming.

110re complex traits, such as a well developed art style or

I
large populat.ioI! concentrations, are also incorrectly asso-

ciated with specific levels of development in other areas of

the culture. This is not to say that such associations are

entirely without validity, but they must be judged in

specific cases, with attention paid to additional traits

that support or refute the inference. For the Moehe, a

highly developed art style is but 1 indi.catiol1, alen,r with a

wide geographic range, truly massive and organized public

constructions! and oth~r fe~tures! of a central state or-

I
ganiz~tion. Cun we make a sinlilar inference front tIle art of

Chavill? Or ",ust we say that while Moche was a politically

or milit"rily sprei1ct state, th", earlier (i.e. "simpler")

 - 5 -

Chavin was a loose network of cult centers spread by reli-

gious missionaries? The answer is to be found not il' n

priori judgements or the finding of 1 or 2 supposedly key

traits, but in a study of many factors. In the study of

Preceramic Aspero that follows, we must weigh the evidence

with an open mind, and on the basis of what was found, not

what we think should be present.

Architecture as an Artifact

Both arts and crafts -- be they in pottery, textile,

stone or some other medium -- and architecture are artifacts

of human culture. As such, they reflect features of culture

that arcl.aeologists, as anthropologists, should be interested

in; both should receive thorough analysis. Unfortunately,

this is rarely the case. '1'00 often the art takes precedence

over the architecture. On reading much of the litel:ature,

one coul.d '.Jet the impression that technology lived in a

vacuum, unmolest.ed by people and the disorder they can

bring.

In sowe \'lays, architecture is more revealing of the

form of the society: nll artifacts have technological facets,

but pottery, stone too) s, and othex' comJOon artifacts reflect

technoloqical recjui.relllents to a greater extcmt. The functio"

of pottery is to contain; potlery first reflects cooking ilnd

storage techniques and secondarily can be given, as till addi-

tional nOJ1-C!~Scllr.i.rll fCilt.urc, decorative tl·eatrncnt. 'l'hc

function of n !itorlC point is to pierce, cut, or scrape;

 - 6 -

while the form may be aesthetically pleasing, function pre-

dominates. The function of architecture is to contain

not food or water, but people -- or to display. Public

architecture is a direct reflection of the structure of the

~o society, in the sume way that domestic architecture is a

direct reflection of the structure of the family uni~.

This paper, then seeks to examine the architecture and

art from a particular site -- Aspero -- from the point of

view of what the architecture first, and then the art, can

tell us about the mobilization of forces within a society,

about how people began to control each other and to organize

the foundations of a civilization.

Useful concepts for this study are those of "corporate

labor" and "corporate labor architecture" (Moseley 1975:79-

80). Corporate labor is group labor that draws its work

force from a number of separato households, either from

,,/ithin a sin']le c:olIU1,unity or from separate communites. The

luborers ,·/or){ to<jcther. in il c:ollecti ve, integrateOd miwner

for il specific purpose, which is defined and sanctioned by

an authoritiltive body that coordinates the project and to

which tll<' \Vill of the indi v:ioduilJ laborer is subservicmt

while pi1rticipatin<j in the project. Corporate labor is an

organizational concept that implies the existence of an

authority °that 11ees t.h"" rights and ability to mobilize people

and direct their ac:tions.

Al though ~losclcy does not say from where he derived his

 - 7 -

term "corporate group," it corresponds most closely to Max

weber's concept of Verban~, translated by Talcot Parsons as

"corporate group" (Weber 1947:145). The main characteristics

of a Weber ian corporate group are that it is a closed group

(or open unJer certain rules) governed by order enforced by

a "chief" and administrators (Dow 1973:905) . In Dow's

analysis of the use of the term, it should not be confused,

as some have done, with a lineage or a legal corporation,

the fictive "person" through vlhom joint possessions can pass

irrespec·tive of the death of individual members. Dow con-

siders Verb and to be

a special type [of group] based on the

structure of roles rather than on re-
cruitment rules. -It describes a social
group which is governed by an administra-
tive subCjr0t,lJ2. (ibici.:90G; emphasis added).
"Corporate group" signifies that there
are group lcadership roles that imply
ri~lts to direct the actions of people
(ibid:907l .

This definition clcar1y corresponds \'lith the W<:lY Moseley

used the concept of "corporate·· and is the way it will be

uscd in this paper.

Corporate labor Ilrchitecture is 1 artifact produced

by a corporate labor group, and, as such, can provide in for-

mation about t.he niltul"C of the corporate ;:luthori ty involved.

The usc/fullction of corporl\te 11:lbor architecture need not be

ject, settlcnll!Ilts, can~ls, nne1 terraces for crops or hOUSC3

can '11,;0 be built by corporilte Jubor.

r
- 8 -

Recogriizing corporate labor architecture is easy at the

recent end of the time scale and at the larger end of the

size scale, but it is much morc difficult at the earlier and

smaller extr"mes. Identification there depends on the

nature of the architecture, its design, material, and de-

coration -- or lack thereof.

Another line of analysis ranks and compares sites and

constructions of a single time period. If we look at all

Chimu settlements, for example, we see that Chan Chan

(Moseley 1975a; 1978a; J. Topic 1977) is distinctly larger

in size and amount of labor invested th~n any other contem-

porary settlement. The same could also be said of Incn

Cuzco (Rovce 1967) or the MochE, Iluacas (T. Topic 1977).

These sites stand out from their contemporaries as obviously

important centers, the capitals of large states.

Wha t more can \Y'e say about these sites? In each case

the resident population especially what might bQ referred

to as the "proletariat" is not large; it certainly is not

at all in proportion to thc size of the site. We learn from

the ethnogrilpllic sources th~t, for CUzco, the expI~nation

lies in cor-veE> labor, which provided lurge non-resident or

tell1pOJ:,:lry work fOrCE'!·;. 'rile sit uation appears to be simi lar

at Chail etlan. If we assum~ that a mitra-like tax and the

corv6e 1.abor systcln extended hnck in tj.rne beyond Cu~co and

Chan Chiln, we can begin to explain disporportionally large

sites as foci of political power that were able to command

 - 9 -

the labor of a la):98 work force drawn from a considerablc

area.
While I would be hesitant to extend the institutions of

the mit'a tax and corv6e labor back to the preceramic, the

perspective they give certainly is applicable.

In the late Cotton Preceramic period there are a

number of sites on the coast with corporate labor archi-

tecture: lluaca Prieta (probably), Alto Salaverry, Salinas de

Chao, Las Haldas (possibly), Los GavilaneG, Culberas I,

Aspero, Piedra Parada, Bandurria, Rio Seco de Leon, El

Paraiso, and probably others (See Figure 1). At most of

these sites, the amount of corporate labor architecture is

not large; further, the ratio of the "mount of archi teet.ure

to the amount of midden is low. llowever, at a few sites the

situation is reversed: Culebras II Aspero, Piedra P8r~da,

and El Par"iso shn~ incre',singly more architecture and a

highee architecture to midden ratio. One can interpret

these changes as reflecti.ng increasi.ng power of the corporate

authority, culminiltin<j with its ability to command an almost

entirely non-resident JuLer force. If Lanning's (19671

interpretation of th" Culcbras I architecture as domestic is

correct, then its ID~or force was probably aln~st entirely

resident, everl thou~h the architecture to midden ratio is

fairly higll. At Anpero, the large and deep midden probably

also indicateG a rcsi.dcnt labor force. nut Piedra P"rnd"

has il very J.iltlited midden cJ.nd res.i.d(~nt i~ll area I certainly

 - 10-

~
/ CH!cama
~UACA
PRIE T.l
ORA-MALOTE A V.och«

L
ttUAC.A t-lEGR,\ A

SALINAS
DE CHAO Peru

CHIMBOTE
LOS CHlNOS
SECHIN
\ LIMA
LAS HALDAS
PAIUCAi
CULEBRAS
HUARMEY

ASPERO
PIEDRA PARADA

BAHDURRIA

RiO SECO

lANI< SI,E

El PARAISO
LA FLORIOA

ASiA
C ~I'. tc
TOpAra

~an Jusn

~/
r-~~ Pisco

OlUMA ~~'
~<a
\

F1GU RE I. Early coastal settlements. The locations of archaeological siles arc indi-
cated by small triangles. The names of the settlements, in capital letters, are on the left;
the names of the coastal valleys are on the right. (Adapted from Moseley, 1975)
 - 11 --

not enough to hav" provided the labol: force needed for its

architecturill complexes. Piedra Parada likely commanded the

labor of ,_spero'" last resic1t!nts and that of people living

fill'ther- inland. El Paraiso, wj.th its large areas of arch i-

tecture, has illrnost no mic1dcn: its labor force must have

been drawn almost entirely from outside the site, very

likely from several diff'2rent communities. Comparison of

sites thus allows us to guugc the developments at each site.

Finally, analysis of the patterning of a structure

allows us to make statements about the people who built it.

While the dictum of "form follows function" has its draw-

backs, it is noneth~)less a useful genernlization; we ~

illfer functional pattern,; from formal architectural pntterns.

These functional pnttnrns in turn reflect the structure of

the underlyin,j society. As ~,ill be demonstrated in "'hat

follows, the architecture at Aspero SIIOWS patterns of

restricted acces~, non-([ornestic: use, and "11on-functj.onal'l

rebuilding, which arc interpreted as evidence of a non-

egdlitarian society, with a small central authority con-

trolling the resources of the society and the labor of the

others. The architcct\lrn --- supported ~y othe~ aspects of

the !oatcrial culture -- sho~s Afipcro to have Leen il cllj.(!fdom.

9i t.e_l,ocati(l.!2......0.r.~~!.-~~!~x~i.5~~.!._
Condi tions

The sit.e of Aspcro (7,('44'L2 11 w. Longitlldl?, 10°48 1 38 11

S. Latitude) is located on the southeastern edge of a group

of 101,' hills (t,he Lom,~s d01 ~'l'.crto) that /TIarK the northern
 - 12 -

limi t of the lower Supe Valley (Figures 2,4). The hills form

a rockhy head -- Punta el Aspero -- that gives its name to

the archaeological site and shelters the harbor of Puerto de

Supe, about 2 km to the north of the site. The Aspero mid-

den spreads north-south for about 1/2 km over several ad-

joining shallow, basin-like quebradas formed by folds in the

weathered Lomas del Puerto. The quebradas open out towards

the east, onto the plain of the valley; the area immediately

in front of the site is presently swampy, but in the past

was ocean beach (Plate 2).

About 3 km east of Aspero is the isolated hill of

Chimucupac, Ivi th its ceramic stage fortifying walls and the

Middle Horizon cemetery of San Nicolas (Uhle 1925). The

intervulley hills begin about 5 km north of Aspero, separated

from the Lomas del Puerto by a 2 krn gap (Plate 3).

The Rio Supe presently flows into the ocean about 5 km

southeast of ASplCl·O. Less than 1 km south of the site

begins a long sweep of sandy beach that stretches southeast

for 6.5 km to the headlands that form the southern side of

the valley (Pl,·,t.E' 4).

The Peruvian coast is noted for its extreme lack of

rainfaill, and the Supe Valley is no exception, with an

avera,;e annual precipit.ation on the order of less than 6 rom

(Purmacana, at 170 m.a.s.l., and 14 km inland, reports an

average of 5.7 mm [ONERN 111:35]). The station at Hacienda

Paramon9i: (Forte1cZil Valley), which is closer to the ocean

 -14-

FIGURE 3

ey to Wi ure 2

rchaeoloalcal !SIte

River

odern Settlement

1·'• Circular &31 za Site

•
odern Cultivation

ContoUi" Linen Every 100 • "terti,

El(cept Flnt line at SO Meters

 -15-

fIGURE 4

SITE LOCATION MAP

ZONE OF

PUERTO DE SUPlE
ASPEno
t:::m:::
:-;.:.;.:-:.:
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE Limil

• MODERN SETTLEMENT

o 0.5 1
KILOMETERS

••
u
o

u
•
Cl.
 - 16 -

(1.5 km) and lower (36 m.a.s.l.), averages only 0.2 rom.

Relative humidity on the coast ranges from 75-100%, averaging

87-92% by month and 89% annually. Cloudiness ranges from

4/8 to 7/8 by month, with about 1,600 hours of sun a year,

an average of less than 4.4 hours per day (ibid:33-34).

But even with the high relative humidity and cloudiness,

rain, as noted, is rare. This condition results from the

juxtaposition of the cold Peruvian (or Humboldt) Current,

the warmer landmass, and the sheltering effect of the Andes.

'l'he latter effectively block the moisture-laden winds that

cross South America from the Atlantic, leaving the coast in

a rain shadow. Winds on the Pacific coast, blowing from the

south or southeast, combine with the force of the earth's

rotation to skim off the warm surface waters to the north

and west. Deep water upwells to fill the vcid left on the

surface; this deep water cools the surface and brings a rich

supply of nutrients that support an enormous food chain that

inclu~cs about 15 to 20 million metric tons of anchovy

(Engx·aulis !:In'leJls) (Jdyll 1973). The other main effect of

the cold Welter (avcl:<Jqe ,ll1lluill ·temperature" of about 17°C

[Sclll,oigger 1947: 42'1]) i.s to cool the moisture-laden winds

off the Paci.fic, ,;0 that I·,hen· thoy warm up over the land

(average tomp: 18"C near coaflt, 20° slightly inland [ONEHN

111:33-31,]), t hE-i. 1: tlbil.ity to h,-,ld the l'1oisture increases,

r.laking ruin virtually .i.mpos~;i..b] c unt.il the air mass ha~; been

cooled again ~y risillg in altitude as it pushes against the

 - 17 -

,,'estern slopes of the Andes. There, above 2,000 meters,

rain falls, feeding the eoast~l rivers.

'l'he Supe Valley is not a large valley. Its watershed

2
of 1,008 km (ONERN 1:12) is not sufficient to keep the

river flowing year-round: the maximum discharge is 49.44

m3/ sec, mll11.mUrn

., d'l.SC h arge is 0, with a yearly average of
3
only 1.52 m /sec (ibid:38). The total (average) amount of

water that flows in the Rio Supe in one year is 47,967,522

3
m ; yearly flows have varied from 146,653,000 to 8,329,000

10
3 (ibid:263~. In contrast, the valley of the Rio Pativilca,

the next river to the north, covers an area oj 4,788 km 2

(ibid:37). The average discharge of the Rio Pativilca

3
varies from 490.00 In /sec (almost 10 times that of the Rio
3
Supe) to 9.12 m /see; the average discharge is 46.58 m3 /sec.

The total discharge of the Rio Pativilea 1,501,510,608 m3

is over 30 times tllat of the Rio Supe (ibld:37).

The Rio Supe follows a Sj.11UOUS course tl1rough a narrow,

steep sided valley in its upper part; at its mouth, the

valley is only about 6.5 km wide. The total flood plain

2
nrea of the rive.r is abont 3.7.2 km (ibid:128). Of the
2 2
1,008 km of land in the Supe Valley, only abont 56.8 kin

(S.G3~) is presently clussificd (.IS u3able for agriclllturci

of this, 24 Ja/ of fi:\rmlanc1 gets its \~at.er fronl the Supe,

2
while the rcmai.l.ill'J 32,8 1:.m uses W.:ltcr brought by canal

from the Rio Pativilca (lbid:259), Mnch of the lower plain

of the valley is Affectad by poor drninage And problems of

 - 18 -

salinity, making present-day agriculture difficult (ibid:134).

However, it is likely that this area would have been produc-

tive for either non-agricultural peoples (gathering marsh or

wetland products) or simple-technology farmers.

A complicating factor in interpretating the physical

conditions of the valley is the probability of both physical

and climatic changes in the 4,000 years since Aspero was

occupied. A number of researchers (Bird 1948; Craig and

Psuty 1971; Kautz 1976; Richardson 1974; personal communi-

cation from Fred Nials) have noticed repeated episodes of

geological uplift along the Peruvian coast. Uplift would

have a number of effects on the physical setting, changing

surface and groundwater flow putterns, altering drainage,

and modifying coastal lagoons und beaches (Feldman 1977).

11easurec1 uplifts both north (Moche Valley: Nials) and south

(Otuma: Craig and Psnty) of Aspero have been large enough to

have caused significant changes. Reversing an uplift of

only 8 meters would put the marshy area at the foot of

Aspero back under seil level and would change the location of

the river mouth by about a kilometer. The general result of

uplift has been to increase the area of farmable land in the

vC'.lley at the expcilse, of coastal marsh ilnd lagoonal habitats.

More about the cultural effccts of uplift will be said later

(Chapter VI).

The SUbject of climatic change is more difficult, as

the physical evidence is less distinct than thut left by

 - 19 -

coastal uplift. Lanning (1963, 1970) postulated significant

climatic shifts, resulting in increasing dessication, as

causes for the move from lomas gathering to coastal fishi.ng

and shellfish gathering in the lithic preceramic. Lanning's

thesis has met with numerous objections (Craig and Psuty

1968; Pung, et al. 1972; Lynch 1974a; Osborn 1977; and

others). There is general agreement that the factors that

govern the present coastal climate -- ocean currents and

wind directions -- have existed since at least the late

Pleistocene. Whether lesser changes (but ones still signi-

ficant to the delicately balanced coastal ecosystem) have

taken place is still debated. Recently Richardson (1976)

has argued that Lanning was correct about climatic change,

but for the wrong reasons. Richardson cites evidence from

various points along the coast as indicating a warmer and

wetter climate prior to 3,000 to 5,000 Dr, a date that falls

in the period of interest Ilcre. The different authors'

dates are not consistent enough, however, to rule out the

possibility that conditions stabilized by the ti.MC of the

Aspero occupation. It will bc assumed here that no signifi-

cant climatic changes have taken place in the last 4,000

years and that the present climate is similar to that faced

by the people of hspero.

That climatic conditions IIBve remained stable does not

mean that micro-environmental shifts have not occurred.

Prior to the introduction of Old World grazing animals the

 - 20 -

coast supported a lusher lomas vegetation: grazing by sheep,

cattle, and goats can denude a loma~ in a few weeks time

(Robert Benfer, personal communication). Further damage WaS

done to the lomas and valley bottoms by logging for charcoal

and for home and railroad construction (Claude Chauchat,

personal communica"tion; Hugo Ludena, personal communication).

The combined effects of grazing and logging have been to

lOwer thp. humidity of the air near the ground and reduce the

moisture available to the lomas plants. Reforestation

projects, such as Lomas Lachay, have shown that even sparce

tree groves act to collect water and support a more "lush"

ground growth around their trunks. Thus, even with no

changes in overall climate, human intervention since conquest

has altered the environment, making it drier today and

reducing the land resources.

Recent work by Field l1useum of Naturul History's

"Programa Riego l>ntiguo" has shmvn the importance of 2 other

factors influencing site location and distribution: sedimen-

tation and erosion. Significunt amounts of wa"ter-born

sediment have built up on the Valley floor, eusily enough to

I completely bury all but. the largest architecture (Feldm<tn

and KolJta 1978). Aeolean de~osits have further buried

<treilS both outside and within the river valley (Moseley

1978h). working in the opposite direction have been periodic

episodes of intense erosion, pr"obably cau,<ed by El Nino

r"ins (Nials, et a1., l'179a, 1979b). The desLructive effects

j
 - 21 -

of such erosion are clearly visible on the Salinas de Chao

preceramic site, for example, were the preserved architecture

is restricted to an uneroded remnant of the old surface.

Thus, the burial and/or erosion of sites has served to

reduce the number of preceramic sites, their individual

size, and probably the range of environmental niches occupied.

Previous Work at Aspero

The first archaeological work at Aspero and in the

vicinity of Puerto de Supe was undertaken in 1905 by Max

Uhle. At that time, Uhle excavated Early Horizon burials in

the Lighthouse Site and in a small quebrada at the north

edge of Aspero, tested the Aspero midden (which he called

"Cerro Prieto"), and excavated numerous later burials at San

Nicolas, Chimucapao, and Piedra Parada.

Uhle's main focus was on burials. In regards to Aspero,

Uhle wrote in his notes:

From a distance, the settlement appears

black, like an old foundry site. nut no
further indications appear, and in walking
over the ground one sees nothing more tl,an
ashes and blackened stones. Only when one
begins to dig, do worked fragments of
stones and small sher.ds of very simple
pottery begin to appear. The enigma hidden
in the scanty remains could be solved only
by the discovery of graves (Uhle 1925:261).

UIlle found the graves he was looking for just north of

the Aspero midden. (Uh1e said that the cemetery was in tI,e

hills cast of the midden, but, as noted by Willey and Cor-

bett [1954:23], Uhle was turned by 90·, as the cemetery is

 - 22 -

on the north side of the midden, and the midden on the east

side of the Lomas del Puerto.) The sherds that Uhle says

were found by digging in the midden most likely came from a

later (Early Horizon) component located at the south end of

Aspero, contiguous with the preceramic deposits but visibly

different in surface appearance; this component was part of

Willey and Corbett's southern outlying site.

Uhle erroneously dated the Aspero midden by burials

in the adjacent cemetery. The pottery that he found there

was some\."hat of an enigma: it was similar to \."hat he had

found in the earliest levels at Ancon (Strong 1925), but at

both sites the pottery did not fit into Uhle's developmental

scheme. Uhle considered these "shell mound people" to be

"barbaric" and "primitive" (Uhle 1925:262), cannibals· who

lived "at the dawn of Peruvian civilization, by which they

were annihilated" (ibid:263). The finer objects found in

the graves, such as an engraved bone, were explained away

as being of a design "so perfect that I must assume it to

have been made by a member of a superior people like that

livi.ng near Chancay at the b,~ginning of Peruvian civiliza-

tion proper" (ibid: 263) .

The next arch~co~gist of note to visi.t the Supe area

was Julio C. Tello, \vho stopped there on his way from Lima

to Casma in 1937, prior to his work at Cerro Sechin. Tello's

party vi5ited Asperc) ('IIDS ruinas del 'Cenizal', en Cerro

Aspero" [Mejia Xcsspc 1956:322], also called "Boca Negra" by

 - 23 -

Tello [Willey and Corbett 1954:21)) and excdv~ted a 1.4 m

deep pit in the Lighthouse Site, finding a little pottery

and becoming "cubiertos con fino y ncgruzco polvo de 1a waka;

solo dientes y ojos blanqueaban al mirarnos unos a otros"

(Mejia Xesspe 1956:322-323).

Tello had earlier (1926-1927) noted the similarity of

the Ancon and Supe "primitive ware" to the ceramics from

Chavin de Iiuantar (Tello 1943:136). '['he precise relation-

ship was unclear due to the scanty sample and lack of se-

quences. It was to fill these gaps that the Institute of

Andean Research decided to have Gordon Willey and John Cor-

bett reexcavate some of Uhle's sites at Ancon and Supe.

Their small excavations were designed to get more data on

the early pottery and the stratigraphic sequences of its

development in order to determine the cultural and chrono-

logical affiliations of Early Ancon and Early Supe, as the

material was called (Willey and Corbett 1954:xii).

Willey and Corbett spenot about a month at the end of

1941 working in the Supe area. During that time, excava-

tions were made in the Lighthouse Site and associated

cemetery, the Aspero midden and "Aspero Cemetery," ~nd Li-31,

an Early Ancon-Early Supe midden site just north of Aspero.

Only 3 strata-test pits and 1 structure were excavated

in Aspero proper. These test pits were done in 25 em arti-

ficial levels without screening; very few artifacts were

found and pottery was a~sent. The artifacts, such us grollved

 - 24 -

stones, basin-shaped metate~ and a hafted stone point, were

unlike the material from other Early Ancon-Early Supe sites,

suggesting that the Aspero midden was not of the same cul-

ture. Other artifacts, such as corncobs, cotton, and gourds,

were seen as linking Aspero to the chavinoid sites. The

interpretation was further complicated by the finding of a

circle-and-dot decorated bottle (a style that is late in the

Early Anco-Early Supe sequence) in an Aspero cemetery grave,

which was again erroneously associated with the midden occu-

pation (ibid~15l-l52). Aspero was thus vim"ed as aceramic

yet agricultural, advanced in ceremonialism (it did have a

"t.emple" structure with two "altars") yet primitive in

technology. It could not be ignored, because it had too

much that was of interest, but it could not be grasped

because it had too little in conwon with other known sites.

It is the last factor -- the lack of a convenient place

for Aspero wi thin the framCl."ork of Peruvian archaeology --

that was particularly important, for it led to an under-

representation of both th~ size and complexity of the site.

Willey and Corbett describe the midden as being about

2';0 m<?ters long at the quebrada mou·th by about 300 meters

wide (ibid:23). using this data and their Hap IV, it is

cle<:1r that. only the northern part of the site was recorded:

the part of Aspero southward to the "oth<?r ou·tlying site"

was missed or ignored. This pilrt of the site shows the

greatest ali10unt of large--scale construction activity. '1'he

 - 25 -

surface is pitted and littered with large stones, but is the

same dark color and ashy texture as the rest of the site.

The corporate labor mounds, prominent because of their

lighter color, were explained as natural "hillocks" or as

spurs of the "sand hills" that backed the site (ibid:Map

IV ; Figure 5; Compare to Ficrure 6).

In their paper reexamining Aspero, Moseley and Willey

(1973) attributed the misidentification of Aspero to inade-

CJuacies in the theoretical framework used at that time. In

1941, the possibility of a preceralnic stage in Peru was not

generally recognized. since the preceramic did not exist,

the possibility of pre ceramic mounds or pUblic architecture

was even more of an impossibility. Further, Uhle (1913,

1925) and Kroeber (1925) held that the Early Ancon-Early

Supe people were "primitive" and of "simple fishing cultures,"

and therefore were not capable of anything -- such as large

mounds -- that was "civilized."

These two "sets" in attitude about central

coast Peruvian archaeology -- the absence
of a preceramic horizon and the lack of
temple-type or "corporate labor platforms"
in Ancon-Sure shel]. midden contexts -- clearly
conditioned the observations and conclusions
of Willey and Corbett in their 1941 work
(Moseley and Willey 1973:453).

Still, it seems hard to explain how about half the site

was missed, sincu the part overlooked has as much or more

shell scatter, more rocks, and more pitting. Perhaps it \vas

the last set of factors, which combine to produce a very

irregul;:,r ground sm:fRce, thRt confused \·;i11ey and Corbett.

 - 2.6-

FfGURE 5
/-- -)
SAND HILLS I I
( D ~/T r I
\
\ Li.31I
\ MIODU'l'
\ ARJ!A

\ I
\ II)
.-'11
...i
'1 '"
I
"..... I
:- ••'PIT
}
Jr I
(S7~1-.
/;. .}
4" •...
I~
I

OPlr
JZ Sf./PE
VALLEY
ASPEIlO

SAND HILLS

MAP IV. ASPERO AND LI-3I, PUERTO DE SUPE

Locations of 1941 excavatioN.

(From Willey and Corbett, 1954)

 ---

- 27-

. '"' .....
"
. ". . . .' .
. ' ..... ,. " ..

,.
. . . )
'/;
/
/
/' ';
.//
.. _.
~-

/ . ':
.r.'..
/ " .. ' --
 - 28 -

The surface of this part of the site is almost entirely

artificial, that is, the produce of human earthmoving rather

than natural deposition. The scope of construction at

~spero, even with today's understanding of the Preceramic

and Formative cultures of Peru and Ecuador, is hard to com-

prehend.

It is evident from Plate IV, center, left, of Willey

and Corbett (1954), that the looter's pit in Huaca Alta

(Mosely and Willey's Mound 1) had already been dug by 1941.

In 1973, the pit exposed wall and fill construction in 3

places. Why these walls were not recognized in 1941 is not

clear, except perhaps they were not exposed at that time but

became visible at a later date.

After publications in 1943 (Strong, Willey and Corbett)

and 1954 (I'iilley ,md Corbett) Oil the 1941 excavations, ref-

erences to Aspero began to appear in discussions of Coastal

Chavin and early agriculture. The size of the site was

rarely mentioned: attention focused on the maize and the

temple found in the midden area and on the ceramics found in

the Aspero and Lighthouse cemeteries. Little distinction

was made between the various sites and their different com-

ponents, all of them being lumped together as "Puerto de

Supe" (viz. Dennett 1946: 8B-91) .

With a dawning recognition of Peruvian preceramic cul-

tures bet'veen the lithic sta'1e and ceramic stage, prompted

mainly by the work of Bird (1948) at Iluaca Prieta and Huaca

 - 29 -

Negra, the true nature of Aspero slowly began to be realized.

However, even Lanning, one of the major workers in the pre-

ceramic, while recognizing the temporal position of Aspero,

wrote that

the site is apparently a large, shallow midden

deposit. Aspero, then, was a typical late
preceramic village, linked to the Culebras
Complex through maize cultivation and to the
central coast by the presence of a local
shrine (Lanning 1967:68).

It was not until Moseley and Willey, while touring

coastal sites in 1971, revisited Aspero that. the nlagnitude

of the corporate construction was recognized. Prior to see-

ing Aspero again, Willey had first seen the excavations into

the mounds at Rio Seco de Leon (Wendt 1964). Thus, when he

saw the mounds at Aporo, "I·jilley recognized them immediately

as being similar to those of Rio Seco" (Moseley and Willey

1973:455). To follow up their new discovery, Moseley re-

turned to Aspero with 2 members of the Chan Chan project.

Toge-ther, the 3 of them spent a day mapping the site and

measuring and examining the mounds. From thi~ short survey

the I\Il1er5.can AntiqLI1. ty article (ibid.) was developed.

Moseley was hampered in his interpre-tation by bein<J

restricted to a rather quick surface survey. Willey's pits

were still open, though t.he w<llls had slumped some; addi··

ticnal vicws of the middcll were available along a reccnt

canal cut and in the large looter's pit in Huaca Alta. From

observations of these exposures, Moseley was able to get a

fairly complete qualitative listing of the midden components

 - 30 -

(his Table 1). However, it was not as easy to get good data

on the mound features. Perhaps in part due to a conserva-

tism left as a residue from the earlier mind sets that

influenced lvilley, Moseley undercstimated the complexity of

Aspero's corporate constructions (compare his Figure 2 with

Figure 30 here).

Spurrcd by his findings, Moseley enlisted Feldman to do

excavations at Aspero, which are the subject of this paper.

If there is 1 certain conclusion of the present work, it is

that more complexities remain to be found and explained.