Craig Et Al 2011 Qochas

7/29/2019 Craig Et Al 2011 Qochas

1/11

Geologic constraints on rain-fed Qocha reservoir agricultural infrastructure,northern lake Titicaca Basin, Peru

Nathan Craig a,*, Mark S. Aldenderfer b, Catherine A. Rigsby c, Paul A. Baker d, Luis Flores Blanco e

a Department of Anthropology, 409 Carpenter Bldg., Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USAb University of California Merced, School of Social Sciences, Humanities and Arts, Merced, CA 95343, USAc Department of Geology, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC 27858, USAd Nicholas School Division of Earth and Ocean Sciences, 301 Old Chemistry, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USAe Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:

Received 3 December 2010Received in revised form4 May 2011Accepted 13 May 2011

Keywords:

AndesAgricultureRemote sensingGIS

a b s t r a c t

This paper reports new data on qocha ponds from the Rio PucaraeAzngaro interfluvial zone, northernLake Titicaca Basin, Peru. Qocha are a little known form of Andean agriculture that developed around800e500 B.C. and remain in use today. Prior estimates suggested that in the study area, there were morethan 25,000 qocha. While most Andean sunken beds are excavated to reach groundwater, qocha are rain-fed ponds. How these rain-fed ponds functioned has been an open question, but one that is answered inpart by research presented in this paper. We suggest that a thick impermeable stratum of clay that waspossibly deposited by paleolake Minchin created a perched water table that makes rain-fed qochareservoir agriculture possible. Field geology shows that within the study area, this stratum only existsunder Terrace E. Based on this model, we hypothesized that persistently used qocha should only be foundon Terrace E. To test this hypothesis we used remotely sensed data to inventory qocha and to determinetheir distribution by each terrace present. We identified 11,737 qocha. By area 93.77% and by count94.33% of the qocha are located on Terrace E. These results strongly supported our hypothesis. This case

study illustrates that the long term viability of this form of agriculture is made possible by a physicalcontext that is beyond human control. 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

This paper reports new data from the northern Lake TiticacaBasin regarding a type of poorly understood precolumbian agricul-tural infrastructure that remains in use todaydthe rain-fed qochareservoir. Cultural processes suchas thedevelopmentand longtermuse of agricultural infrastructure must be considered in light of howthey are permitted and constrained by spatio-temporally variable

physical contexts that are beyond human control. We provide anexample of this relationship through a case study from the Pucar-aeAzangaro interfluvial area of the northern Lake Titicaca Basin. Wehypothesize that in this area, lacustrine clays formed by paleolakeMinchin create a perched water table, and this geologicphenomenon makes rain-fed qocha pond agriculture hydrologicallypossible. Given this model, we hypothesize that persistently used

qocha are restricted to those areas where the paleolake clays areextant. Wetest this hypothesis by using remotesensing to inventoryqocha and evaluate their distribution in relation to the extent of thepaleolake clays.First we introduce relevant backgroundinformationthat highlights the anthropological importance of the region understudyand summarize the relevant priorknowledge regarding qocha.We then continue by presenting our geologic model and specifyingthe hypothesis that derives from it. Following this we present our

methods and results. These data are then brought to bear on thehypothesis that derives from our model.

2. Background

With respect to geography, high resolution climate reconstruc-tions, the origins of agriculture, and the development of socio-political complexity, the Lake Titicaca Basindand the northernbasin in particulardis an extremely important region. By volume ofwater, Lake Titicaca is the largest lake in South America ( WWDR2003). Laminated sediments from the main basin of Lake Titicacaprovide a high resolution, long term, multi-proxy climate record

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 1 814 863 4388.E-mail addresses: [email protected] (N. Craig), [email protected]

(M.S. Aldenderfer), [email protected] (C.A. Rigsby), [email protected](P.A. Baker), [email protected] (L.F. Blanco).

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Archaeological Science

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : h t t p : / / w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / j a s

0305-4403/$ e see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.jas.2011.05.005

Journal of Archaeological Science 38 (2011) 2897e2907
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jashttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2011.05.005http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2011.05.005http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2011.05.005http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2011.05.005http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2011.05.005http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2011.05.005http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jashttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/11

(Baker et al., 2001a,b). Five major rivers drain into Lake Titicaca.Located in the northern basin, and formed at the confluence of theRos Pucara and Azngro, the Ro Ramis has the greatest dischargeof any of these five drainages (Fig. 1).

Recent studies indicate that the northern basin is a probablelocation for the domestication of potatoes and chenopods (Bruno,2006, 2008; Rumold, 2010; Spooner et al., 2005). Considered asa whole, the Lake Titicaca Basin is a largely autonomous area ofancient state formation (Stanish, 2001, 2003). Within this region, theearliest evidence for sustained socio-political complexity comesfrom the archaeological site of Pukara (Klarich, 2005, 2009), locatedin the northern basin to the west of the Ro Pucara. Immediately tothe south of the site of Pukara, in the area between the Ros Pucaraand Azangaro, lies the system of intensified agriculture that consistsof reservoirs or ponds that are known as qochas. Qochas from thisarea were initially described as occurring in the mesopotamia orchapwimayu of the Ros Pucara and Azngaro (Flores Ochoa and PazFlores, 1983a: 69, 72, 1984: 68, 88, 93). In Quechua, chapwi meansmiddle, center, or between and mayu means river. This chapwimayuis host to thesingle largest concentration ofqochas known anywherein the Andes (Erickson, 2000: 341), and this concentration ofqochashas been linked to therise of thePukara polity. This interfluvial zone,

from the confluence of the Ros Pucara and Azngro northward pastthe town of Pucara, forms our study area (Fig. 2).

Many physical and social facets of qocha agriculture are docu-mented in the pioneering work of Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores. Yet,

in 1999, qocha were still described as poorly studied infrastruc-ture infraestructura muy poco estudiada (Valdivia et al., 1999:147; authors translation), and it was argued that qochas werewithout doubt the least understood agricultural infrastructure ofthe Titicaca altiplano es sin duda la infraestructura agraria menosestudiada en el altiplano del Titicaca (Valdivia et al., 1999: 149;authors translation). To the best of our knowledge, since 1999, nonew empirical studies of qocha agriculture in the northern LakeTiticaca Basin have been conducted or published. As of the year2000, the origin and history ofqochas remained largely unknown,and a comprehensive inventory ofqochas in the PucaraeAzngarointerfluvial did not yet exist (Erickson, 2000: 341). In this paper, wereport an inventory of qochas that considers their distribution inrelation to landscape evolution. In doing so, we provide a refinedunderstanding of how natural and cultural processes interact withrespect to this agricultural technology. First we briefly reviewrelevant prior research on qocha. This reviewboth highlights earlierresults that our study refines and identifies the fact that how qochaponds are capable of holding water remains, up until now, anunanswered question. This question is answered by our newgeologically oriented model for qocha distribution.

2.1. Temporal context

It has been suggested that within the Lake Titicaca Basin, asso-ciated, temporally diagnostic artifacts indicate that all of the major

Fig. 1. Overview showing the location of the study area and areas that are mentioned in the text as places where qochas are reported. The schematic hypothesized extent of

paleolake Minchin clays is based on the presence of a ca. 40,000 year old lacustrine clay strata that is found 150 m above the modern level of Lake Titicaca ( Farabaugh and Rigsby,

2005: 25). This idealized representation of paleolake Minchin was estimated by drawing a contour line 150 m higher than the modern level of Lake Titicaca. This schematic does not

take into account the processes of tectonic tilting or isostatic rebound.

N. Craig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 38 (2011) 2897e29072898


3/11

agricultural techniques, including qocha, appear to have developedby as early as 800 B.C., and probably before (Stanish, 2007: 130,2006: 390). Qocha agriculture was first formally reported in the

early 1980s by Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores, (1983a,b). In the areawhere they examined qochas, they found few pieces of pottery butthose recovered were generally diagnostic Pukara type fragments.Near Llallahua, where there is a major concentration of qochas(Fig. 2), researchers have reported the presence of a Pukara stylecarved monolith located on top of Mount Kojra (Flores Ochoa andPaz Flores, 1986: 103; Rowe, 1942: 72). Flores Ochoa and PazFlores suggested that all the qocha in the PucaraeAzngaro inter-fluvial are located withina day toa day and a halfwalk fromthesiteof Pukara (Flores Ochoa, 1987: 286; Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores,1983a: 75, 1983b: 139, 1984: 95, 1986: 103, 1987: 96; Washingtonand Alvarez, 1991: 170). The close spatial association of theqochas to Pukara, the presence of Pukara style polychrome potteryin direct association with the qochas, and the location of a Pukara

style carved monolith near the qochas led these investigators to

suggest that qochas helped to supply the growing needs of thenewly emerging urban center at Pukara (Flores Ochoa, 1987:286e287; Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores, 1983a: 74e75, 1983b: 139,

1984: 95, 1986: 103e104, 1987: 95e96, 1992: 264; Flores Ochoaet al., 1996: 256; Washington and Alvarez, 1991: 171).Recent pedestrian survey in the PucaraeAzngaro interfluvial

sheds new light on associations between temporally diagnosticarchaeological materials and qocha reservoirs. Aldenderfer andFlores Blanco (2008) identified a carved stone monolith that islocated in the middle of a large qocha that is named Mara Huan-cane Qocha that is located adjacent to the Quechua community ofChiqchipani. The carvings on the monolith depict a stylized goggleeyed feline catfish water cat creature that is typical ofQaluyuePukara transitional (ca. 750e200 B.C.) early MiddleFormative motifs. Additionally, pedestrian survey of the PucaraeAzngaro interfluvial zone (Aldenderfer and Flores Blanco, 2008)revealed that Qaluyu (ca. 800e500 B.C.; Browman, 1980; Chvez,

1977), Qaluyue

Pukara transitional (ca. 750e

200 B.C.; Chvez

Fig. 2. Map showing the distribution of use zones as defined by Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores (Flores Ochoa,1987: 283; Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores 1983a: 69e70, Map 3; 1983b: 134,

151, Fig. 14, 1984: 89 Mapa 3; 1986: 97; 1987: 87, 89e90; 1992: 262; Flores Ochoa et al., 1996: 254, Fig. 122; Valdivia et al., 1999: 147, 148, Fig. 1).

N. Craig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 38 (2011) 2897e2907 2899


4/11

Justo, 2008a: Fig. 14) and Pukara (ca. 800 B.C.eA.D. 200;Stanish 2003: 85e89; Klarich, 2005: 242) styles are the earliesttypes of pottery that are found in direct association with qochas.These three styles span the Middle Formative period (Stanish 2003:90, Fig. 5.2).

Limited sub-surface testing was undertaken at two sites that aredirectly associated with qochas (Aldenderfer and Flores Blanco,2008): Tulani (RM621e622) and Laroqocha (RM1190, 1192,1194e1195). Tulani is a 1 ha dense surface scatter that containspottery, chipped stone debitage, obsidian, and stone hoe fragments.Followingthe typology ofChvez Justo (2008a,b), thesurface potteryassemblage from the site consists of Formative (ca. 800 B.C.eA.D.400), Early Huaa (ca. A.D. 100e600), Altiplano (A.D. 1100e1475),and Inca (A.D.1475e1532) styles. Three 1 1 m sub-surface test pitswere excavated into Tulani. These excavations revealed the presenceof stone hoe fragments, burned camelid bone, obsidian projectileponts, temporally diagnostic pottery, and numerous small ash filledpits. Following the typology of Klink and Aldenderfer (2005), theprojectile points are Type 5B and 5D forms. Excavations recovereda single Qaluyu sherd; QaluyuePukara transitional and Pukara werethe dominant pottery styles (Table 1). Early Huaa and Altiplanostyle fragments were present, but in much lower abundance than

either QaluyuePukara or Pukara materials.Laroqocha is a 3.2 ha scatter of artifacts that is composed of

pottery, chipped stone debris, and stone hoe fragments (Fig. 3).Surface pottery consists of MiddleeUpper Formative (ca.800 B.C.eA.D. 200), Early Huaa, Altiplano, and Inca styles. Three1 1 m sub-surface test units were excavated into Laroqocha. Thissub-surface testing revealed the presence of fragments of burnedcamelid bone, concentrations of burned clay, chipped stone debit-age, hoe fragments, and pieces of temporally diagnositc pottery.Excavations recovered eight Qaluyu sherds but the potteryassemblage is again dominated by QaluyuePukara and Pukarasherds; Huaa and Altiplano style materials were much lessabundant (Table 1). Excavations also exposed an earth oven inassociation with Pukara pottery. Together, Tulani and Laroqocha

reveal that significant amounts of Middle Formative pottery andagricultural implements are found in direct association with qochaponds (Fig. 3). Both Tulani and Laroqocha are located on riverTerrace E (see below).

While stylistically diagnostic pottery reveals associationsbetween QaluyuePukara transitional (ca. 800e500 B.C.) and theqochas of the PucaraeAzngaro interfluvial, somewhat later Pukara(ca. 800 B.C.eA.D. 200) style pottery is far more abundant. Thepresence of Qaluyu and QaluyuePukara pottery, both earlierMiddle Formative styles, in association with these qochas indicatesthat in the PucaraeAzngaro interfluvial this agricultural tech-nology likely predates the apogee of the Pukara polity. However,the greater abundance of Pukara pottery in association with theseqochas indicates that the ponds were probably used more inten-

sively during the height of the Middle Formative Period (ca.500 B.C.). Material from later traditions including Huaa, Altiplano,and Inca are also found in direct association with the Pucar-aeAzangaro qochas. These associations with later temporallydiagnostic styles indicates that qocha infrastructure remained inuse well after the decline of the Pukara tradition. However, thelower abundance of post-Pukara forms suggests that after thedecline of Pukara the intensity of qocha use probably declined.

Immediately to the east of the present study area, in theHuancanePutina river valley, and to the south in the JuliePomataregion, pedestrian survey indicates that qochas in these other areaswere also in use by the Middle Formative (Stanish and Steadman,1994; Stanish et al., 1997; Stanish, 1994, 2006: 384). Qochaslocated on the Huatta Pampa to the north (Erickson, 2000: 341) andin the Tiwanaku Valley to the south (Albarracn-Jordan, 1996) arereportedly associated with multicomponent occupations that spanfrom the Middle Formative to the present.

These multiple associations with temporally diagnostic artifactstyles indicate that prior to Spanish contact, qochas were used fora long period of time. Unlike other prehispanic agricultural tech-nologies that were abandoned after contact (i.e. raised fields), themodern indigenous inhabitants of the region continue to use qocha.This continued use of the technology is further indication that insome contexts qocha infrastructure can be used over the long term.However, we recognize that over time the nature and intensity ofqocha use may have shifted.

2.2. Qocha water Sources

It has been suggested that in the PucaraeAzngaro interfluvial

region, the groundwater is too deep for qocha to function as wells(Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores, 1983a: 57; 1983b: 130, 1984: 79;1986: 93; 1987: 82; Kendall and Rodrguez, 2002: 242; Valdiviaet al., 1999: 152; Washington and Alvarez, 1991: 166). FloresOchoa and Paz Flores (1987): 277 states that, [t]he substantialdepth at which the subterranean water table is encounteredeliminates the possibility of utilizing water from the water table foragriculture (authorstranslation). For those few wells that havebeen excavated in the region, the groundwater is found at a depthof 4e15 m. The fact that qochas do not function as wells stands incontrast to the majority of archaeological and contemporarysunken bed agricultural fields from Peru (Soldi 1982: 17; Denevan,1980: 631e632). These sunken beds are located along the coast ofPeru, and nearly all known examples of these are excavated to

groundwater or the phreatic zone. Examples of Peruvian ground-water wells include: hoyas, mahames, sachaques, totorales, balsares,melgas, canchones, and occasionally puquios, which are actuallysubterranean irrigation systems (Denevan, 1980, 2001; Moseley,1969; Parsons and Psuty, 1974, 1975; Rowe, 1969; Schreiber andRojas, 1988, 2003; Soldi 1982).

Rather than basins designed to tap into groundwater, the use ofqochas is based on rain water which is stored in and transferredbetween the reservoirs or ponds through open channels (FloresOchoa, 1987: 277; Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores, 1983a: 57e58;1983b: 130; 1984: 79; 1986: 93; 1987: 82; 1992: 255; Flores Ochoaet al., 1996: 247; Rozas 1987: 110; Valdivia et al., 1999: 152;Washington and Alvarez,1991: 166; Denevan, 2001: 163). Water canbestoredina qocha formonths after a rain.How it is possible to store

water in these ponds for extended periods of time without loss ofwater through percolation remains unspecified by previousdescriptions of qochas. Our geology-based model provides anexplanation as to why water can be contained in the qocha ponds forextendedperiodsoftime.Thismodelisbasedonthepremisethatthedistribution of rain-fed qochas is controlled by the presence ofa stratum of a buried, impermeable sediment. Before turning to ourmodel we discuss the results of prior attempts to count the totalnumber ofqochas andto estimatetheir density withinthe studyarea.

2.3. Estimates of the count and density of Qocha

Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores attempted to count qochas usinga combined approach of field visits, aerial photographs taken in

1961 by Servicio Aereofotogrfi

co Nacional (SAN), and 1:100,000

Table 1

Diagnostic pottery types recovered from excavations at Tulani and Laroqocha.

Site Qaluyu QaluyuePukara Pukara Huaa Alt iplano

Tulani 1 215 549 5 17Laroqocha 8 376 601 11 6



5/11

maps (Flores Ochoa, 1987: 282e283; Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores,1983a: 69; 1983b: 134; 1984: 88e89; 1986: 97; 1987: 87; FloresOchoa et al., 1996: 254). They estimate that the study region hasatotalareaof528km2, and thatabout384 km2 of this is suitable forcultivation and pasture. According to their classification scheme:larger qocha are >200 m dia and >31,400 m2 in area; the smallerand more numerous qocha have a mean area of 6500 m2.

Based on a 0.5 km2 sample, Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores esti-mated the total number ofqochas present in the chapwimayu of theRos Pucara and Azngaro (Flores Ochoa, 1987: 283e284; Flores

Ochoa and Paz Flores, 1983a: 71; 1983b: 135; 1984: 91; 1986: 98;1987: 89; 1992: 262; Flores Ochoa et al., 1996: 254). They countedclose to twenty qochas in 0.5 km2, and from this count they esti-mated that there are 80 qochas in 1 km2. They assumed that qochasare circular, and modeled qocha size as 60 m dia. This gave eachqocha an area of approximately 2863 m2 (We note that the correctsolution is 2827 m2. However, we also observe that given a round-ing operation that these authors later applied to the estimated totalnumber of qocha, the difference in area is insignificant). Based onthis estimate, there are 0.226 km2 of qocha area per km2. Theyassumed that the study area was 256 km2, and from their 0.5 km2

sample they calculated a regional total of 57.88 km2 ofqocha area.Dividing this by the estimated area of a single qocha (2863 m2)produced an estimated 20,215 qochas. The authors rounded thisfi

gure up to 25,000, and suggested it served as a conservative

estimate of the total number of qochas in the study area (FloresOchoa, 1987: 284; Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores, 1983a: 71; 1983b:135; 1984: 91; 1986: 98; 1987: 89; 1992: 263; Flores Ochoa et al.,1996).

Based on estimates of the density of qochas per km2, FloresOchoa and Paz Flores defined three different zones (Fig. 2; FloresOchoa, 1987: 283; Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores, 1983a: 69e70,Map 3; 1983b: 134,151, Fig.14, 1984:89Mapa3; 1986: 97; 1987: 87,89e90; 1992: 262; Flores Ochoa et al., 1996: 254, Fig. 122; Valdiviaet al., 1999: 147, 148, Fig. 1):

1) Disused or Damaged2) Spaced3) Numerous.

The Disused or Damaged zone is located to the west of the studyarea, and they suggest that this area has an extent of about 128 km2.Interpretation of aerial photographs led them to suggest that in thiszone, salinization may have led to the deterioration of the qochas.They also note that several haciendas are present in this areaincluding Qoa (Ccoa), Pichacani, and Cojempati. This led FloresOchoa and Paz Flores to offer the alternative hypothesis that agri-cultural intensification on the part of the haciendas and the use ofmechanized agriculture may have contributed to the deterioration

ofqochas in this zone. Byfl

attening and leveling the ground surface,

Fig. 3. Map showing the location of Laroqocha (RM1190 and RM1192) and a concentration of qocha. The boundary of Laroqocha is shown with dashed red lines. The background

imagery is a 1 m spatial resolution IKNOS-2 satellite scene that was captured on 20 June 2001. Qocha reservoirs are visible throughout the image as round features. Some of the

qocha contain water while other are dry. Also visible are small canals that connect various qocha reservoirs. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, thereader is referred to the web version of this article.)



6/11

mechanized agriculture can physically damage qochas. The Spacedzoneis defined by areas where there are100 qochasper km2, and this zone covers an estimated 160 km2. The NumerousZone is found around the communities of Iquilo, Mataro Grande,Llallahua, the former hacienda of Sullata, and in the Laro andCharamicaya pampas. Having reviewed prior attempts to count andestimate the distribution ofqocha we now turn to relevant aspectsof the geologic setting of the region.

3. Geologic setting and expectations forQocha location

Fluvial geomorphological research in the interfluvial or chap-wimayu of the Ros Pucara and Azngaro indicated the presence offive river terraces and three major facies associations (Farabaughand Rigsby, 2005). Termed AeE, A is the lowest terrace above theactive floodplain and E is the highest (Fig. 4). The entire modern

surface of the area between these two rivers is covered bya combination of braided and meandering fluvial sediments thatform two of the regions three major facies associations. Thedeposition and erosion of these two fluvial deposits is stronglycorrelated with periods of high and low precipitation respectively(Baker et al., 2001a). The third facies association is only foundunderlying Terrace E, and it is always found directly below theaforementioned fluvial deposits. This third facies association iscomposed of a meter-thick accumulation of thinly laminated grayto blueegray clays that bear gastropods, ostracods, and abundantorganic material (Fig. 5; Farabaugh and Rigsby, 2005: 19). Theseclays were deposited by the settling offine particles suspended ina lacustrine environment (Farabaugh and Rigsby, 2005: 20). Carbonfrom this clay stratum dates to 40,170 430 cal B P. Although near

the limit of finite radiocarbon dating, we trust that this singleradiocarbon date corresponds to a wetter period from46,000e36,000calyrBP(Clapperton,1993; Clapperton et al.,1997;Fritz et al., 2004) during which palaeolake Minchin extendedacross vast areas of the Andean altiplano (Baker et al., 2001a; Fritzet al., 2004). The blueegray lacustrine clay stratum underlyingTerrace E is today found 40 m above the current level of the Ro

Ramis and about 150 m above the modern level of Lake Titicaca(Farabaugh and Rigsby, 2005: 25). This implies that the water levelof paleolake Minchin was at least 150 m above the modern levelof Lake Titicaca (Fig. 1). We believe that subsequent tectonism,tilting due to folding and faulting, differentially elevated thenorthern shores of the Lake Titicaca basin since the originaldeposition of the lacustrine clay.

We hypothesize that the extant lacustrine clays deposited inpaleolake Minchin are responsible for creating a perched watertable, and it is this geologic phenomenon that makes rain-fed qochapond agriculture hydrologically possible. If our model is correct,then the large majority of qochas should be located on Terrace Ewhere the paleolake Minchin clay is present. Experimentationand attempts to expand this agricultural infrastructure may haveresulted in the presence of a few qochas on lower terraces.

4. Methods for inventoryingQocha and evaluating geologic

expectations for their location

To determine 1) the total number and density of qochas and 2)whether or not they are restricted spatially to Terrace E, the entire

lower interfluvial zone of the Ros Pucara and Azangaro wasexamined by inspecting satellite and aerial remote sensingimagery. In any remote sensing survey, the ability to detect featuresis a function of the size of the targets of interest and the spatialresolution of the imagery (Craig and Chagnon, 2006; Jensen, 1996;McGwire et al.,1996: 102e105, Fig. 6.2; Sabins,1987). In addition toprior publications, field survey and GPS data that we collected fromthe interfluvial region indicated that qochas were generally largerthan 30 m. We had access to 0.5 m spatial resolution aerialphotographs that covered the entirestudy area. Thus, the size of thefeatures and the resolution of the imagery rendered qocha reser-voirs well suited for mapping with satellite and aerial remotesensing imagery.

Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radi-

ometer (ASTER) level 3 orthorectified imagery covering the studyarea was obtained from the Land Process Distributed ActiveArchiveCenter (LP DAAC). An image captured on 15 August 2007 coveredthe entire study area in a single cloud-free scene. From thismultispectral dataset, a VNR 1,2,3N band false color compositeimage was created and inspected. Declassified CORONA imagerywas obtained from the USGS as a film positive. The CORONA image

Fig. 4. Schematic diagram illustrating the terrace sequence of the Rio Ramis valley. Figure adapted from Farabaugh and Rigsby (2005): Figs. 6 and 12.



7/11

was captured 30 June 1979 (mission number 1215-5, Ops desig-nation 00473). The image was taken with the KH-9 film camera,which has a reported spatial resolution of 20e30 ft (6e9 m). Thefilm was scanned at 3000 dpi and georeferenced to the orthor-ectified ASTER false color composite. We purchased 1 m spatialresolution IKONOS-2 satellite image that was captured on 20 June2001 (Fig. 3). Printed paper aerial photographs covering the studyarea from August of 1979 that are available through ProgramaEspecial de Titulacin Tierras (PETT) were scanned at 3000 dpi andgeoreferenced to the ASTER and CORONA images. Examination ofthe scanned PETT imagery indicated that the aerial photographs

had a spatial resolution of 0.5 m. This resolution is more than

sufficient to detect qochas (e.g. McGwire et al., 1996: 104). Fieldchecking showed that anomalies interpreted in these air photoswere in fact qochas.

The georeferenced IKONOS-2 scene and the PETT images werevisually inspected and all detectable qochas were digitized intoa geographic information system (GIS) as polygon features. In theimagery, qochas were identified based on two primary criteria: 1)the anomaly appeared to be a basin and 2) canals were visibleeither entering or exiting the basin-like anomaly. In most cases, thebasin-like anomaly bore evidence of recent cultivation. In somecases, the basin-like anomalies appeared to be no longer under

cultivation. These anomalies were interpreted as qocha which are

Fig. 5. Photograph showing the thick stratum of laminated gray to blueegray lacustrine clays. This photograph is from the Rio Iquilo B measured section reported by Farabaugh and

Rigsby (2005): Fig. 3. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)



8/11

no longer in use. Some of these basin-like anomalies wereextremely faint, and a conclusive identification could not be made.Field checking confirmed that these features likely representabandoned and badly eroded qocha. These extremely faint basin-like anomalies were not inventoried.

River terrace breaks were identified and defined through fieldgeology (Farabaugh and Rigsby, 2005). These terraces are largefeatures that are easily observed in the satellite and aerial imagery.The terraces were digitized from inspection of the ASTER, CORONA,IKONOS-2, and PETT images.

From the GIS polygon coverages we determined: qocha count,qocha area, terrace extent, and terrace area. This allowed us tocalculate: qocha count by terrace, qocha area by terrace, and meanqocha area. These calculations provide a test of the hypothesis thatpersistently used qochas should only be located on Terrace Ewhere the paleolake Minchin clay is present. We also providerevised density calculations that are based on both qocha countand qocha area.

5. Results of the inventory

Within the survey area, a total of 11,737 qochas were remotelyidentified and digitized as polygons (Fig. 6 and Tables 1 and 2). Interms of the area of these polygons, 99.5% of the qochas fall withintwo standard deviations of the mean. 57or 0.49%of the qochas haveareas that are larger than two standard deviations of the mean. Wecharacterize these as exceptionally large qocha (area>2s). In termsof either counts or proportions of the total survey area, it is useful toretain the exceptionally large qochas in the sample. Outlier removalhelps to reduce skew, and this operation is important for equationsthat assume a normal distribution. We present both transformedand untransformed data since they provide distinct insights intoqocha size.

Removing outliers, the mean declines by 178.43 m and it shiftstowards the median (Table 2). Outlier removal decreases thestandard deviation by 4903.92 m; the untransformed value is 3.45times this figure. Outlier removal reduces the skewness from 81.99

Fig. 6. Map showing the limit of the study area, thefi

ve river terraces, the qochas, and places mentioned in the text.



9/11

to 2.41. Even with outlier removal, the distribution remains posi-tively or right-skewed.

All of the qochas are located on Terraces CeE (Table 3). Togetherthese terraces constitute half (50.6%) of the total survey area.Terrace E is a little more than a third (34.7%) of the total surveyarea,but the limits of this terrace contain 94.33% of the total qocha countand 93.76% of the total qocha area. Thus, 35% of the study areacontains 94% of the qochas.

Considering qocha counts by terrace area, densities ranged from0.6e62 qochas/km2. Qocha density is highest on Terrace E (Table 4).With respect to their area, qocha constitute 6% of the study area. Interms of their area, qocha comprise >1% of Terrace C, 8% of TerraceD, and 17% of Terrace E. Exceptionally large qocha (area>2s) arefound on each of these three terraces.

6. Discussion of the results

The scanned PETT imagery that we used to detect the qochas hasa spatial resolution of 0.5 m, thus each pixel covers an area of0.25 m2. Once the exceptionally large outliers are removed, qochashave a mean area of 2672 m2. This indicates that typically a qocha isrepresented by about 10,000 pixels. Given that the distribution isstill positive or right-skewed even after removing outliers, mostqochas are probably represented by more than 10,000 pixels. At0.5 m spatial resolution, qochas are easy to spot and define. While,wedo not claim tohave defined the absolute total number ofqocha,we believe that our count is an extremely close approximation ofthe actual number ofqocha present in the study area.

Prior estimates suggested that there were over 25,000 qochas inthe PucaraeAzngaro interfluvial zone. Our remote sensing surveyof this area produced 11,737 qochas, or roughly half the prior esti-mate. Previously, it was estimated that >100 qocha/km2 werepresent in the Numerous Zone. The highest density of qochas

(62 qocha/km2) is located on Terrace E. Our inventory indicates thatqocha density by count is considerably lower than prior estimates.Even on Terrace E, the area of greatest qocha density, the pondscomprise less than 15% of the space. In light of this revised inven-tory, let us now return to our geologic model and the expectationregarding qocha distribution that derives from it.

In the remote past, palaeolake Minchin apparently extendedacross a large portion of the Altiplano including the interfluvial ofthe Ros Pucara and Azngaro (Baker et al., 2001a; Fritzet al., 2004).Within the PucaraeAzangaro interfluvial, palaeoake Minchin lefta thick deposit of laminar blueegray lacustrine clays (Farabaugh

and Rigsby, 2005). This deposit now underlies the highest TerraceE (Farabaugh and Rigsby, 2005: 24e26, Fig. 12). Elsewhere in theinterfluvial region, within the mapped boundaries of the surfaces ofTerraces DeA, river downcutting and erosion has removed thislacustrine unit.

With respect to our present study area, we believe that theimpermeable nature of the lacustrine clay deposit is responsible forcreating a perched water table that makes qocha agriculturepossible. If this hypothesis is correct, then qochas should be locatedon Terrace E. Experimentation by early agropastoralists may haveled to the expansion ofqochas into the lower Terraces DeA, but ourhypothesis dictates that the large majority of the qochas should belocated on Terrace E.

The distribution of qochas conforms well to our hypothesis.Whether considered by count or by area, more than 90% of theqochas are located on Terrace E. The existence of 553 qocha onTerrace D and 39 qocha on Terrace C might appear to stand incontrast to our expectation that qochas should be located on TerraceE. However, field observations and remote imagery indicate thatthe qochas on Terraces D and C are largely abandoned. Theextremely faint un-definable basin-like anomalies described earlierwere located within the limits of Terraces D and C. Notably, thesetwo terrace are within the Disused or Damaged Zone that wasdefined by Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores (compare Figs. 2 and 6). Inlight of this, we suspect that qochas were created on Terraces D andC during a period of agricultural expansion. Following this period,qochas within this zone were abandoned. Periodically, people mayre-attempt use ofqochas on these terraces. Yet compared to TerraceE, use ofqochas on Terraces D and C was limited in both scope and

duration. Further investigation of this zone is required to more fullyunderstand what we believe represents a fluctuating use ofTerraces D and C for qocha cultivation.

7. Conclusions

Qaluyu (ca. 800e500 B.C.; Browman, 1980; Chvez , 1977),QaluyuePukara transitional (ca. 750e200 B.C.; Chvez Justo,2008a: Fig. 14), and Pukara (ca. 800 B.C.eA.D. 200; Stanish, 2006:85e89; Klarich, 2005: 242) are the earliest pottery styles found inassociation with qocha ponds that are located on Terrace E. NearLlallahua, a Pukara style caved monolith was is found in associationwith qochas (Flores Ochoa and Paz Flores, 1986: 103; Rowe, 1942:

72). Recent pedestrian surface survey located a Qaluyue

Pukara

Table 2

Summary statistics of area for all qochas with and without outliers included.

Sample Outliers included Outliers excluded

N 11,737 11,680Min 67.9318 67.9318Max 682,474 16586.2Sum 33,456,500 31,210,100Mean 2850.52 2672.09

Std. error 63.7408 18.5206Variance 47,686,100 4,006,390Stand. dev 6905.52 2001.6Median 2095.67 2089.0825 prcntil 917.221 3243.475 prcntil 4641.52 1403.91Skewness 81.9947 2.41332Kurtosis 7998.25 8.25228Geom. mean 2186.08 2159.55

Table 3

Total survey area, individual terrace areas, qocha count, qocha area, and qocha countsand areas by terrace.

Feature Area (km2) Number % Total area % Total count

Survey zone 519.486 100Terrace A 4.478 0.862Terrace B 10.207 1.965Terrace C 61.357 11.811Terrace D 21.159 4.073Terrace E 180.405 34.728Qocha All 33.457 11,737 100 100Qocha by C 0.111 39 0.332 0.332Qocha by D 1.705 553 5.095 4.712Qocha by E 31.369 11,071 93.762 94.326

Table 4

Density values based on counts and areas.

Qocha Count/Survey Area 22/km2

Qocha Count/Terrace C 0.6/km2

Qocha Count/Terrace D 26/km2

Qocha Count/Terrace E 62/km2

Qocha Count/Terrace CeE Area 44/km2

Qocha Area/Survey Area 6%Qocha Area/Terrace CeE 13%



10/11

style stone monolith that was placed inside a large qocha namedMara Huancane Qocha which is located near the community ofChiqchipani. Excavations at Tulani (RM621e622) and Laroqocha(RM1190, 1192, 1194e1195) produced an abundance of MiddleFormative ceramics and stone hoes. Both of these sites are situatedon Terrace E and are found in very close association with a denseconcentration of qochas. Together, these associations suggest thaton Terrace E, use ofqochas began by at least 500 B.C. and probablyearlier. Within this same area, pottery diagnostic to all major timeperiods is found in association with qochas (Aldenderfer and FloresBlanco, 2008). Based on pottery styles, Pukara appears to representthe most intense use of qochas. Pottery styles that post-date theMiddle Formative are much less abundant. This suggests that qochawere used less intensively after the decline of Pukara. Yet, the qochaon Terrace E are still used today by modern Quechua agro-pastoralists. On Terrace E, the multiple associations with ancientand modern material culture indicate that qocha have been used,perhaps in different ways and probably with varying degrees ofintensity, over a period of 2500 years. Yet the capacity for theprolonged use of this agricultural technology is dictated by geologicconditions that are well beyond human control. Despite attempts toexpand qocha cultivation into Terraces D and C, in these contexts,

the viability of this agricultural technology appears limited. Thesuccess of long term qocha use is due in part to the presence of anancient lake that left a relatively impermeable strata of clay, andthis strata creates a perched water table that makes qocha agri-culture possible.

Qochas are known for other parts of the Andes (Fig. 1). Many ofthese qocha groupings are located in relatively flat areas nearmodern lakes. The techniques presented in this paper providea method for inventorying qochas in other parts of the Andes. If ourguiding perched water table hypothesis is correct, then otherpersistently used qocha may be found in areas that are underlain byancient lake clays or other relatively impermeable deposits.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Honorato Tacca, Albino PilcoQuispe, and Silvia Roman for their help with field work. We wouldalso like to thank the Quechua communities of the PucaraeAzngrointerfluvial for their gracious hospitality. We are also grateful toMatthew Riggle for help with digitizing the qochas. Field work wasperformed under the authority of the National Institute of Culture,Resolucin Suprema No 004-2000-ED. Research was made possibleby support from NSF grants BCS-0737793 awarded to Aldenderfer,EAR-0227999 awarded to Rigsby, and EAR-0227550 awarded toBaker. All computer processing took place at the Pennsylvania StateUniversity Anthropology Department GIS and Analytical Cartog-raphy Laboratory. Any errors or omissions are the sole responsi-bility of the authors.

References

Albarracn-Jordan, J., 1996. Tiwanaku: Arqueologa Regional y Dinmica Segmen-taria. Editores Plural, La Paz.

Aldenderfer, M. S., Flores Blanco, L., 2008. Informe Final: Reconocimiento Arqueo-lgico de la Cuenca del Rio Ramis, Sub-regin de Azangaro, Regin Puno. Reportsubmitted to Instituto Nacional de Culture.

Baker, P.A., Rigsby, C., Seltzer, G.O., Fritz, S.C., Lowenstein, T.K., Miklas Bacher, P.,Veliz, C., 2001a. Tropical climate changes at millennial and orbital timescales onthe bolivian altiplano. Nature 409, 698e701.

Baker, P.A., Seltzer, G.O., Fritz, S.C., Dunbar, R.B., Grove, M.J., Tapia, P.M., Cross, ScottL., Rowe, H.D., Broda, J.P., 2001b. The history of south american tropicalprecipitation for the past 25,000 years. Science 291, 640e643.

Browman, D.L., 1980. Tiwanaku expansion and altiplano economic patterns. Estu-dios Arqueolgicos 5, 107e120.

Bruno, M.C., 2006. A morphological approach to documenting the domestication of

Chenopodium in the Andes. In: Zeder, M.A., Bradley, D.G., Emshwiller, E.,

Smith, B.D. (Eds.), Documenting Domestication: New Genetic and Archaeolog-ical Paradigms. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp. 32e45.

Bruno, M.C., 2008. Waranq waranqa: ethnobotanical perspectives on agriculturalintensification in the lake Titicaca Basin (Taraco Peninsula, Bolivia). Ph.D.,Dissertation, Washington University.

Chvez, K.L.M., 1977. Marcavalle: the ceramics from an early horizon site in thevalley of Cusco, Peru, and implications for south highland socio-economicinteraction. Ph.D., Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.

Chvez Justo, C., 2008a. Anlisis de la Cermica del Sector Medio y Bajo de la Sub-Cuenca del Ro Huancan (Puno-Per).

Chvez Justo, C., 2008b. Anlisis de la Cermica de los Sitios RM-348, RM-621, yRM-1192 del Proyecto Arqueolgico Ramis 2007.

Clapperton, C.M., 1993. Glacier readvances in the Andes at 12,500e10,000 yr BP:implications for mechanisms of late glacial climatic change. Journal ofQuaternary Science 8, 197e225.

Clapperton, C.M., Clayton, J.D., Benn, D.I., Marden, C.J., Argollo, J., 1997. Latequaternary glacier advances and palaeolake highstands in the bolivian alti-plano. Quaternary International 38e39, 49e59.

Craig, N., Chagnon, N., 2006. Horticultural investment, transportation, and sitespacing: remote sensing of Yanomam landscape features as a test case. In:Sellet, F., Greaves, R., Yu, P.L. (Eds.), Archaeology and Ethnoarchaeology ofMobility. University of Florida Press, Miami, pp. 44e74.

Denevan, W., 1980. Tipologia de Configuraciones Agricolas Prehispanicas. AmericaIndigena 40 (4), 619e652.

Denevan, W., 2001. Cultivated Landscapes of Native Amazonia and the Andes.Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Erickson, C.L., 2000. The lake Titicaca Basin: a precolumbian built landscape. In:Lentz, D. (Ed.), Imperfect Balance: Landscape Transformations in the Pre-Columbian Americas. Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 311e356.

Farabaugh, R.L., Rigsby, C.A., 2005. Complex response to holocene climate and base-level changes in the Rio Ramis valley, Peru. Journal of Sedimentary Research 75,12e28.

Flores Ochoa, J., 1987. Cultivation in the qocha of the south Andean Puna. In:Browman, D. (Ed.), Arid Land Use Strategies and Risk Management in theAndes: A Regional Anthropological Perspective. Westview Press, ColoradoSprings, pp. 271e296.

Flores Ochoa, J.A., Paz Flores, P., 1983a. El Cultivo en Qocha en la Puna Sur Andina.In: Fries, A.M. (Ed.), Evolucion y Tecnologia de la Agricultura Andina. InstitutoIndigenista Interamericano, Cuzco, pp. 45e79.

Flores Ochoa, J.A., Paz Flores, P., 1983b. La Agricultura en Lagunas del Altiplano.awpa Pacha 21, 85e106.

Flores Ochoa, J.A., Paz Flores, P.,1984. El Cultivo en Qocha en la Puna Sur Andina. In:Masuda, S. (Ed.), Evolucion y Tecnologia de la Agricultura Andina. Universidadde Tokyo, Tokyo, pp. 59e100.

Flores Ochoa, J.A., Paz Flores, P., 1986. La Agricultura en Lagunas (Qocha). In: de laTorre, C., Burga, M. (Eds.), Andenes y Camellones en el Per Andino: Historia,Presente, y Futuro. Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia, Lima, pp. 85e106.

Flores Ochoa, J.A., Paz Flores, P., 1987. Agricultura en Lagunas (Qocha). In:Universo, E. (Ed.), Cultura y Tecnologa Altoandina, Corporacin de Fomento yPromocin y Exonmia de Puno, pp. 73e97. Lima.

Flores Ochoa, J.A., Paz Flores, P., 1992. Une (Re)dcouverte Rcente: La Culture entangs Temporaires (Qocha), sur LAltiplano. In: Morlon, P. (Ed.), ComprendreLagriculture Paysanne dans les Andes Centrales: Perou-Bolivie. INRA, Paris, pp.255e265.

Flores Ochoa, J.A., Paz Flores, P., Rozas, J.W.,1996. Un (Re-)Descubrimiento Reciente:La Agricultura en Lagunas Temporales (Qocha) en el Altiplano. In: Morlon, P.(Ed.), Comprender la Agricultura Campesina en los Andes Centrales: Per-Bolivia. Institut Franais dtudes Andines y Centro de Estudios RegionalesAndinos Bartolom de las Casas, Lima, pp. 247e256.

Fritz, S.C., Baker, P.A., Lowenstein, T.K., Seltzer, G.O., Rigsby, C.A., Dwyer, G.S.,Tapia, P.M., Arnold, K.K., Ku, T.-L., Luo, S., 2004. Hydrologic variation during thelast 170,000 years in the southern hemisphere tropics of south America.Quaternary Research 61 (1), 95e104.

Jensen, J.R., 1996. Introductory Digital Image Processing: A Remote SensingPerspective. Prentice Hall Series in Geographic Information Science. PrenticeHall, Upper Saddle River.

Kendall, A., Rodrguez, A., 2002. Las Qochas Andinas: Una Solucin para Mitigar elRiesgo Agropercuario y Domstico en la Sierra del Per. In: Viqueira, J.P. (Ed.),Antologa Sobre Qequeo Riego. : Sistemas de Riego no Convencionales, vol. III.Colegio de Postgraduados en Ciencias Agrcolas, Texcoco, MX, pp. 241e255.

Klarich, E., 2005. From the monumental to the mundane: defining early leadershipstrategies at late formative Pukara, Peru. Dissertation, University of California,Santa Barbara.

Klarich, E., 2009. Pukara: Investigaciones de la Temporada 2001 y un Nuevo Modelopara el Desarrollo del Sitio. In: Zi 1kowski, M.S., Jennings, J., Augusto BelanFranco, L., Drusini, A. (Eds.), Arqueologa del rea Centro Sur Andina: Actas delSimposio Internacional 30 de Junio-2 de Julio de 2005 Arequipa, Peru,, vol. 7.Instituto Francs de Estudios Andinos, Lima, pp. 283e304.

Klink, C., Aldenderfer, M.S., 2005. A projectile point chronology for the south-central andean highlands. In: Stanish, C., Cohen, A.B., Aldenderfer, M.S. (Eds.),Advances in Titicaca Basin Archaeology, vol. 1. Costen Institute of Archaeology,Los Angeles, pp. 25e54.

McGwire, K., Chagnon, N.A., Carias, C.B., 1996. Empirical and methodologicalproblems in developing a GIS database for Yanomam Tribesmen located inremote areas. In: Aldenderfer, M.S., Maschner, H. (Eds.), Anthropology, Space,



11/11

and Geographic Information Systems, Spatial Information Series. OxfordUniversity Press, New York, pp. 97e106.

Moseley, M.E., 1969. Assessing the archaeological significance of mahamaes.American Antiquity 34, 48e50.

Parsons, J.R., Psuty, N., 1974. Agricultura de Chacras Hundidas en el Antiguo Peru.Revista del Museo Nacional 40, 31e54.

Parsons, J.R., Psuty, N., 1975. Sunken fields and prehistoric subsistence on thePeruvian coast. American Antiquity 40, 259e282.

Rowe, J., 1942. Sitios Histricos en la Regin de Pucara, Puno. Revista del InstitutoArqueolgico 6 (10e11), 66e75.

Rowe, J., 1969. The sunken gardens of the Peruvian coast. American Antiquity 34,320e325.

Rozas, J.W.,1987. El Sistema ed Cultivo en Qocha. In: de la Torre, C., Burga, M. (Eds.),Andenes y Camellones en el Per Andino: Historia, Presente, y Futuro. ConsejoNacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia, Lima, pp. 107e126.

Rumold, C., 2010. Illuminating womens work and the advent of plant cultivation inthe highland Titicaca Basin of south America: new evidence from grinding tooland starch grain analyses. Ph.D., Dissertation, University of California, SantaBarbara.

Sabins, F.F., 1987. Remote Sensing Principles and Interpretation, second ed. W. H.Freeman and Company, New York.

Schreiber, K., Rojas, J.L., 1988. Los Puquios de Nasca: Un Sistema de Galeras Fil-trantes. Boletn de Lima 10 (59), 51e62.

Schreiber, K., Rojas, J.L., 2003. Irrigation and Society in the Peruvian Desert: ThePuquios of Nasca. Lexington Books, Lanham.

Soldi, A.M., 1982. La Agricultura Tradicional en Hoyas. Pontifica Universidad Catolicade Peru, Lima.

Spooner, D.M., McLean, K., Ramsay, G., Waugh, R., Bryan, G.J., 2005. A singledomestication for potato based on multilocus amplified fragment lengthpolymorphism genotyping. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences102 (41), 14694e14699.

Stanish, C., 1994. The hydraulic hypothesis revisited: lake Titicaca Basin raised fieldsin theoretical perspective. Latin American Antiquity 5 (4), 312e332.

Stanish, C., 2001. The origin of State Societies in south America. Annual Review ofAnthropology 30, 41e64.

Stanish, C., 2003. Ancient Titicaca: the Evolution of Complex Society in SouthernPeru and northern Bolivia. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Stanish, C., 2006. Prehispanic agricultural strategies of intensification in the TiticacaBasin of Peru and Bolivia. In: Marcus, J., Stanish, C. (Eds.), Agricultural Strategies.Cotsen institute of Archaeology, Los Angeles, pp. 364e400.

Stanish, C., 2007. Agricultural intensification in the Titicaca Basin. In: Thurston, T.,Fisher, C. (Eds.), Seeking a Richer Harvest. Springer, New York, pp. 125e139.

Stanish, C., Steadman, L., 1994. Archaeological survey in the Juli-Desaguadero area,LakeTiticaca basin, PeruFieldiana Anthropologica No23. FieldMuseum,Chicago.

Stanish, C., Steadman, L., Justo, C.C., Frye, K., Mamani, L.O., Seddon, M.T.,Chuquimia, P.C., 1997. Archaeological Survey in the Juli-Desaguadero Region ofLake Titicaca Basin, Southern Peru. Fieldiana p. 29.

Valdivia,R.F.,Reinoso,J.R., Elas,B.M.,1999. Descripciny Evaluacin de un Systema deQochas en la Cuenca Norte del Titicaca. Gaceta Arqueolgica Andina 25, 147e166.

Washington, J., Alvarez, R., 1991. Experiencias y Alternativas en la Tecnologia enQocha. Revista del Museo e Instituto de Arqueologia 24, 155e175.

WWDR, 2003. Lake Titicaca basin, Bolivia and Peru. In: Water for People Water forLife: The United Nations World Water Development Report. UNESCOPublishing, Paris, pp. 466e480.


Craig Et Al 2011 Qochas

Documents

Transcript of Craig Et Al 2011 Qochas