{"title":"Ideological and cultural continuities between the ancient Tiwanaku and the ancient Inca Empire","authors":"M. Pärssinen, A. Korpisaari","doi":"10.36447/estudios2023.v43.art8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The extent to which the Inca Empire was built on knowledge, experiences, and ideology inherited from one or both of its Middle Horizon predecessors – the Tiwanaku and the Wari States – is a long-debated topic in Andean studies. In this article, we review the relevant discussions regarding ceramics, architectural styles, iconographical patterns, radiocarbon dating, and historical sources. We then proceed to discuss the new insights, especially into the Tiwanaku-Inca continuity issue, that our own archaeological research in the Lake Titicaca area offers. On the one hand, even though the Tiwanaku State probably collapsed around AD 1000, its legacy continued in ceramic iconography until the 13th century AD in the Lake Titicaca area, in Northern Chile, and in Southern Peru, probably indicating some ideological continuity as well. On the other hand, even though the traditional chronology of the Inca expansion, established by John H. Rowe, argues for a very late expansion into the southern part of the Empire (that is, for expansion after AD 1471), mounting radiocarbon (and thermoluminescence) evidence firmly indicates that Inca-style ceramics and architecture were already present in the Lake Titicaca area in the 14th century AD. Even though many kinds of changes undoubtedly occurred, especially ca. AD 1250–1350, iconographical and ideological continuity, as well as a trajectory of similar architectural developments, can be established from the Tiwanaku to the Inca in the Lake Titicaca area (and probably also in southern Peru, northern Chile, and northwestern Argentina). Thus, our results challenge the dominant Cuzco-centered view of the early political and ideological development of the Inca Empire.","PeriodicalId":33833,"journal":{"name":"Estudios Latinoamericanos","volume":"79 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Estudios Latinoamericanos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36447/estudios2023.v43.art8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The extent to which the Inca Empire was built on knowledge, experiences, and ideology inherited from one or both of its Middle Horizon predecessors – the Tiwanaku and the Wari States – is a long-debated topic in Andean studies. In this article, we review the relevant discussions regarding ceramics, architectural styles, iconographical patterns, radiocarbon dating, and historical sources. We then proceed to discuss the new insights, especially into the Tiwanaku-Inca continuity issue, that our own archaeological research in the Lake Titicaca area offers. On the one hand, even though the Tiwanaku State probably collapsed around AD 1000, its legacy continued in ceramic iconography until the 13th century AD in the Lake Titicaca area, in Northern Chile, and in Southern Peru, probably indicating some ideological continuity as well. On the other hand, even though the traditional chronology of the Inca expansion, established by John H. Rowe, argues for a very late expansion into the southern part of the Empire (that is, for expansion after AD 1471), mounting radiocarbon (and thermoluminescence) evidence firmly indicates that Inca-style ceramics and architecture were already present in the Lake Titicaca area in the 14th century AD. Even though many kinds of changes undoubtedly occurred, especially ca. AD 1250–1350, iconographical and ideological continuity, as well as a trajectory of similar architectural developments, can be established from the Tiwanaku to the Inca in the Lake Titicaca area (and probably also in southern Peru, northern Chile, and northwestern Argentina). Thus, our results challenge the dominant Cuzco-centered view of the early political and ideological development of the Inca Empire.