Distant Provinces in the Inka Empire: Toward a Deeper Understanding of Inka Imperialism

Ten - Inkas and Yumbos at Palmitopamba in Northwestern Ecuador

Editors’ Introduction The research by Lippi and Gudiño provides an important window into the poorly understood issue of the Inka conquest of northern Ecuador. We know from the chroniclers that the local groups provided fierce resistance , and their conquest took many years. Yet the exact nature of the relationship between the Inkas and these groups after conquest has yet to be firmly established. This chapter indicates that the Yumbos, who occupied the transitional zone between the highlands and tropical forest to the west of the Quito Basin, were unusual in that they were not annexed as a typical province. Salomón (1997) notes a lack of significant change in Yumbo settlement patterns and other aspects. The authors point out that this region was importantintradebetweentheQuitogroupsandtropicalforestgroupsprior to the Inkas, and suggest that the Inkas simply maintained this special relationship to continue access to valued exchange goods. In fact, they makethepointthattheInkasmayneverhaveactuallysettledintheregion until after the Spanish Conquest, at which point Inka nobility fleeing the Spaniards established a presence at the site of Palmitopamba. Ronald D. Lippi and Alejandra M. Gudiño Chapter Ten Inkas and Yumbos at Palmitopamba in Northwestern Ecuador Inkas and Yumbos at Palmitopamba, Northwestern Ecuador 261 This chapter examines possible ways through which the Inkas interactedwithgroupsatthemarginsoftheirempire .Theauthorsmakeaconvincing argument for why Palmitopamba was the most important Yumbo fort in the territory, hence the reason the Inkas selected it for their own uses. Yet they show how the Inka presence at the site reflects a respect for the Yumbos, considering the lack of Inka material culture at the summit, the most sacred part of the site. The evidence taken together shows how the Inkas could use respect and deference for a local group as a means to obtain valued resources in the absence of military might. The information stands in contrast to that discussed in chapter 2, where the Inkas built a fort and introduced plants and mitmaq to manifest symbolic and political control over the region in an area where trade relations were not of great importance. As with the otherchaptersinthisbook,theinformationprovidedgivesabroaderview of how the Inkas interacted with indigenous groups at the far reaches of the empire. Landscape Archaeology Palmitopamba in the western Ecuadorian rain forest was apparently the center of a Yumbo chiefdom and later was also occupied by Inka troops and possibly Inka nobility during the short resistance period after the SpanishConquest.Theaimofthischapteristounderstandtherole,function , and nature of the relation between Yumbos and Inkas. To do so we shall apply principles based on landscape archaeology as a mechanism to perceive and interpret the environment of past human activities. Joyce (1997) introduces us succinctly to a landscape perspective: “What makes a place distinctive—different from anywhere else? Landscape, language, occupations, customs, food, buildings, and spaces between buildings are someofthem.Combined, theydeterminetheidentityofaplace,thecharacteristics that become familiar and give people a sense of belonging.” Landscapes can be used in many ways in archaeology—including as tools of analysis, for hypothesis building, and as the focus of culture historicalreconstructions .Theburgeoningdomainoflandscaperesearch,as pointed out by Fisher and Thurston (2004), involves many scholarly disciplines , among which is archaeology. Landscape archaeology represents somethingofaspin-offofregionalarchaeologyprojectsthatareinterested 262 lippi and gudiÑo in the human use of a physical environment and the human conception of that environment. Furthermore, the approach posits that people do not just live somewhere but build a social landscape with symbolic value in addition to meeting their economic needs. This approach is delineated by Criado Boado in several publications (e.g., Criado Boado 1991; Criado Boado and Villoch Vazquez 2000) regarding symbolic spaces. Several otherscholarshaverecentlytriedalandscapeapproachinAndeanarchaeology , especially with regard to the southern periphery of Tawantinsuyu and in an attempt to identify ethnic boundaries and the impact of imperialism . Some notable examples regarding the Inkas include articles by Vitry (n.d.), Aldunate et al. (2003), Sánchez Romero (2004), and Herrera Wassilowsky (2005). The landscape is not simply the physical environment but also the “anthropogenic ecosystem” and “the manner in which these landscapes are conceptualized, experienced and symbolized” (Fisher and Thurston 2004). Archaeological sites are no longer isolated remnants but become focal points in a network involving a people’s relationship with the environment they occupy and conceptualize. Looking at archaeological sites in a regional context of physical landmarks that might have had special meaning to past occupants is one strategy of landscape archaeology. This involves trying to perceive the land in the same way that ancient peoples did. While this involves some speculation , it has...