of 30/30
INDIANA 31 (2014): 291-320 ISSN 0341-8642 © Ibero-Amerikanisches Institut, Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving in the Northern Peruvian Andes Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramón Joffré Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima, Perú Abstract: The findings of an ethnographic comparison of pottery and weaving in the Northern Andes of Peru are presented. The project was carried out in villages of the six southern provinces of the department of Cajamarca. The comparison was performed tak- ing into account two parameters: technical uniformity or diversity in ‘plain’ pottery and weaving, and presence or absence of lexical items of indigenous origin – both Quechua and pre-Quechua – in the vocabulary of both handicraft activities. Pottery and weaving differ in the two observed domains. On the one hand, pottery shows more technical diver- sity than weaving: two different manufacturing techniques, with variants, were identified in pottery. Weaving with the backstrap loom (telar de cintura) is the only manufacturing tech- nique of probable precolonial origin in the area, and demonstrates remarkable uniformity in Southern Cajamarca, considering the toolkit and the basic sequence of ‘plain’ weaving. On the other hand, weaving nomenclature clearly retains more Quechua and pre-Quechua terms than pottery vocabulary, and also shows more lexical diversity, in spite of the afore- mentioned technical uniformity. In order to explain these differences, the distinct distribu- tion and dynamics of pottery and weaving production must be taken into account: while pottery is concentrated in some specific and specialized villages, weaving is disseminated as a household activity throughout the region, especially in rural areas. Keywords: Pottery, weaving, toolkits, cultural lexicon, Andes, Cajamarca, Peru, 21 st century. Resumen: Presentamos los resultados de una comparación etnográfica de la textilería y la alfarería tradicionales en los Andes norteños del Perú, en localidades de las seis provincias sureñas del departamento de Cajamarca. La comparación se establece sobre la base de dos parámetros: la uniformidad o diversidad de la técnica utilizada para productos ‘llanos’, y la presencia o ausencia de términos quechuas y prequechuas en el vocabulario artesanal. Observamos que alfarería y textilería contrastan en los dos aspectos evaluados. Por un lado, la alfarería presenta mayor diversidad técnica que la textilería: mientras que en alfarería hemos identificado dos técnicas de manufactura distintas, con variantes internas, el tejido en telar de cintura es la única técnica de manufactura de probable origen precolonial, y es bastante uniforme, a juzgar por el conjunto de herramientas y la secuencia básica del tejido llano. Por otro lado, la nomenclatura textil retiene claramente más términos quechuas y prequechuas que el vocabulario alfarero, y muestra mayor diversidad léxica, a pesar de la mencionada uniformidad técnica. La explicación de este contraste debe partir por atender la distinta distribución y dinámica de la producción alfarera y textil en el territorio investigado: mientras que la alfarería se concentra en algunos poblados muy definidos y especializados, la textilería está diseminada como una actividad doméstica por toda la región, especialmente en las zonas rurales. Palabras Clave: Alfarería, textilería, herramientas, léxico cultural, Andes, Cajamarca, Perú, siglo XXI.

Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of

  • View
    216

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Text of Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of

  • INDIANA 31 (2014): 291-320 ISSN 0341-8642

    Ibero-Amerikanisches Institut, Stiftung Preuischer Kulturbesitz

    Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving in the Northern Peruvian Andes

    Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Per, Lima, Per

    Abstract:The findings of an ethnographic comparison of pottery andweaving in theNorthernAndesof Peruarepresented.Theprojectwascarriedoutinvillagesof thesixsouthernprovincesof thedepartmentof Cajamarca.Thecomparisonwasperformedtak-ing into account two parameters: technical uniformity or diversity in plain pottery andweaving,andpresenceorabsenceof lexical itemsof indigenousoriginbothQuechuaandpre-Quechua in thevocabularyof bothhandicraft activities.Pottery andweavingdifferinthetwoobserveddomains.Ontheonehand,potteryshowsmoretechnicaldiver-sitythanweaving:twodifferentmanufacturingtechniques,withvariants,wereidentifiedinpottery.Weavingwiththebackstraploom(telar de cintura)istheonlymanufacturingtech-niqueof probableprecolonialorigininthearea,anddemonstratesremarkableuniformityinSouthernCajamarca,consideringthetoolkitandthebasicsequenceof plainweaving.Ontheotherhand,weavingnomenclatureclearlyretainsmoreQuechuaandpre-Quechuatermsthanpotteryvocabulary,andalsoshowsmorelexicaldiversity,inspiteof theafore-mentionedtechnicaluniformity.Inordertoexplainthesedifferences,thedistinctdistribu-tionanddynamicsof potteryandweavingproductionmustbetakenintoaccount:whilepotteryisconcentratedinsomespecificandspecializedvillages,weavingisdisseminatedasahouseholdactivitythroughouttheregion,especiallyinruralareas.Keywords:Pottery,weaving,toolkits,culturallexicon,Andes,Cajamarca,Peru,21stcentury.

    Resumen:PresentamoslosresultadosdeunacomparacinetnogrficadelatextileraylaalfareratradicionalesenlosAndesnorteosdelPer,enlocalidadesdelasseisprovinciassureasdeldepartamentodeCajamarca.Lacomparacinseestablecesobrelabasededosparmetros: launiformidadodiversidadde la tcnicautilizadaparaproductos llanos, ylapresenciaoausenciade trminosquechuasyprequechuasenelvocabularioartesanal.Observamosquealfareraytextileracontrastanenlosdosaspectosevaluados.Porunlado,la alfarera presentamayor diversidad tcnica que la textilera: mientras que en alfarerahemosidentificadodostcnicasdemanufacturadistintas,convariantesinternas,eltejidoentelardecinturaeslanicatcnicademanufacturadeprobableorigenprecolonial,yesbastanteuniforme,ajuzgarporelconjuntodeherramientasylasecuenciabsicadeltejidollano. Por otro lado, la nomenclatura textil retiene claramentems trminos quechuas yprequechuasqueelvocabularioalfarero,ymuestramayordiversidad lxica,apesarde lamencionadauniformidadtcnica.Laexplicacindeestecontrastedebepartirporatenderladistintadistribucinydinmicadelaproduccinalfareraytextilenelterritorioinvestigado:mientrasquelaalfareraseconcentraenalgunospobladosmuydefinidosyespecializados,latextileraestdiseminadacomounaactividaddomsticaportodalaregin,especialmenteenlaszonasrurales.Palabras Clave:Alfarera,textilera,herramientas,lxicocultural,Andes,Cajamarca,Per,sigloxxi.

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 292

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Introduction This article presents the results of an interdisciplinary project that documents andanalysesthetechniquesandlexiconof potteryandweavinginthesouthernprovincesof thedepartmentof Cajamarca,intheNorthernAndesof Peru.1Ourresearchques-tionsarethefollowing:(1)Dopotteryandweavingdifferwithrespecttothepossibilityof retaininglexiconof indigenousorigin?(2)If so,howisthisdifferenceexplained? (3)Isitpossibletorelatethedistributionanddiversityof potteryandweavingtechniquesof probableprecolonialoriginwiththeresearchonindigenoussubstratalanguagesintheanalyzedregion?

    Inthisproject,anarchaeologistanda linguistworkedtogether in theCajamarcaprovinces of Contumaz, San Miguel, San Pablo, Cajamarca, Cajabamba, and SanMarcos,whichcoverthesouthernareaof thedepartmentof Cajamarca(goingwest-east).Wepresentapreliminaryanalysisof thesimilaritiesanddifferencesbetweenpot-teryandweavinginthiszone,focusingonplainproducts(seeadetaileddefinitionof thisconceptinsection3).Althoughourdataweremainlycollectedinthementionedprovinces,throughoutthetextwewillalsorefertoinformationwehaveeachgatheredpreviouslyfromdifferentpointsacrosstheNorthernPeruvianAndes(seeMap1).

    This article is structured as following: after the introduction, in the second sec-tion,wepresentareviewof theliteraturethataddressesthelinguisticlandscapeof theregion,bothinprecolonialandcolonialtimes,andtheweavingandpotterystudiesthatarerelevantforourproblem.Inthethirdsection,weexplainourmethodologyandourcomparativecriteria.Inthefourthsection,wedescribetheremarkabletechnicaldiver-sityof potteryinSouthernCajamarca,whileinthefifthsectionweaddressthediversityintheterminologyof traditionalweaving(backstraploom)anditstechnicaluniformity.

    Pottery, weaving and language history in the Northern Peruvian Andes Currently, theNorthernPeruvianAndesarealmostfullSpanish-speakingareas,withtheexceptionof theQuechuaenclavesof ChetillaandPorcn,locatedintheprovinceof Cajamarca(departmentof Cajamarca);somelocalitiesintheprovinceof Bamba-marca(departmentof Cajamarca);thetownof LaMacaaintheprovinceof Pataz(departmentof LaLibertad);thedistrictsof IncahuasiandCaarisintheprovinceof Ferreafe(departmentof Lambayeque);andPenachintheprovinceof Salas(depart-mentof Lambayeque).

    1 WithNorthernAndesof Peruwemeantheregionthatextendsfromtheprovincesof theso-calledCallejndeConchucosinthesouth,tothemorenorthernprovinceof thehighlandsof Cajamarca(Cutervo)inthenorth.TheeasternboundarywouldbeformedbytheMaranRiver,whilethewest-ernonewouldbedefinedbytheslopesof theAndesinthedepartmentsof Piura,Lambayeque,LaLibertad,andncash.Thus,theregionincludesthehighlandprovincesof Cajamarca,Piura,Lamba-yeque,LaLibertad,andNorthernncash.

  • 293Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Map 1.Localitiesof theNorthernPeruvianAndesmentionedinthearticle(map:MarthaBell,ArdillaMaps).

    TheselatterdistrictsaredialectallylinkedtosomeQuechua-speakinglocalitiesof theCajamarcaprovincesof CutervoandJan,and,accordingtorecentaccounts,alsotothe town of Chilcapampa, in the district of Huarmaca, province of Huancabamba(departmentof Piura).2Thereisastrongpossibilitythattheseenclavesarerelictsof

    2 OnCajamarca and LambayequeQuechua, see Cerrn-Palomino (1987: 238-239),Quesada (1976:27-28), Adelaar (2004: 186; 2012). On La Macaa, Vink (1982). On Chilcapampa, El Comercio,3/8/2013,A-20.WethankWillemF.H.Adelaarforgivingusacopyof Vink(1982).

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 294

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    awiderareaof Quechuadiffusion.Middendorf stated,attheendof the19thcentury,thattheIndiansof thesurroundingregion[of Cajamarca]speaktheoldlanguageof thecountry,andmanyof themhavenoknowledgeof Spanish,butinthecityitself only the lower classesof thepopulationunderstandQuechua (Middendorf 1973:129-130).Adelaar (2012)statedrecently thatCajamarcavarietiesof Quechuacanbeconceivedof astheoutcomeof thenorthwardsmilitaryexpansionof theHuaridur-ingtheMiddleHorizon.Whilebasedonmeticulousdialectalandhistorical linguisticanalysis,thesuccessof thishypothesisstillfacesthelackof soundcriteriaforlinkinglinguistic statements andprecolonial archaeologicalmaterial.An important force forthecolonialdiffusionof Quechuaintheregionwereprobablytheeffortsof theCath-olicauthoritiestowardsevangelization,ashasbeenstatedfortheAmazonia(Cerrn-Palomino1987:344).

    Map 2.Pre-QuechualanguagesintheNorthernPeruvianAndes accordingtoTorero(1989)(map:MarthaBell,ArdillaMaps).

  • 295Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Krzanowski&Szeminski(1978)conductedpioneeringresearchinthedirectionof ourinterest,byidentifyingthelinguisticdiversityof thetoponymyintheNorthernPeru-vianAndes along thebasinof theChicamaRiver, in the currentdepartmentof LaLibertad.Althoughonsomeoccasionstheirsuggestionof themorphologicalisolationof geographicnamesprovedincorrect,overalltheymanagedtoidentifyaclearpresenceof theextinctCullelanguageintheregion.Followingthisresearch,Andeanlinguisticshavebeenabletomakeprogressontheidentificationof theterritorycorresponding tothatlanguage,alsoduetotoponymy,mainlyanalyzedbyAdelaar(1990)andTorero(1989),aswellaswiththeexaminationof colonialandpost-independencedocumentarysources.BesidesCulle,theexistenceof otherlanguagesintheCajamarcaregionwasclaimedon thegroundsof toponymy.Taking into account thecharacteristic endingcomponents of geographic names, Torero (1989: 229-238) named den and cat twoidiomaticsourcesapparentlydistinctfromCulle,whichweredisseminatedinpartiallycomplementaryareasthroughouttheNorthernAndes,withthemoderndepartmentof Cajamarcaastheircorezone(seeMap2).AlthoughbothCulleandthesehypotheticallanguageshavebecomeextinct,beingovercomebyQuechuaorbySpanish,theyhavelefttracesinthelexicon.NorthernAndeanSpanishshowsaseriesof itemsof indige-nousoriginthatdonotcorrespondtoQuechua.Inthecaseof Culle,thisinfluencehasalsoaffectedthegrammar,especiallythephonology,andsomespecificbutnoteworthyunitsof morphology,e.g.,theaugmentative-enque,asinfuertenqueverystrong,sabienque verywise,chinenquebiggirl,andthediminutive-ash,asincholasholittleboy,bebasho littlebaby,andgatashokitten(Andrade2012:188-193,202-208).

    Identifyingthelexicalfieldstowhichthemajorityof theindigenousnon-Quechuawords intheSpanishof theNorthernPeruvianAndescorrespond isanopenques-tion.Withthisbroadobjectiveinmind,weaimedatassessingtheextenttowhichthehandicraftfieldsof potteryandweavingwereconservative,i.e.,towhatextenttheyareactivitiescapableof retainingQuechuaandpre-Quechuaterms.Asbothactivitieslikelyimplyprecolonialknowledgeandtechniques,andarestronglyassociatedwithruralandpeasant-agriculturallifeintheregion,weidentifiedthemassuitablecandidatesforthisexamination.Inaddition,itmustbesaidthatinalmostalltheterritoryof Cajamarca,LaLibertad,andthenorthernsectionof Ancash,theso-calledbasiclexiconhasbeenoverriddenbySpanish.Thus,wethoughtthatexaminingculturallexiconcouldaidinthereconstructionof thelinguisticlandscapepriortothedisseminationof Spanish.3

    3 Wedefinebasiclexicon,assuggestedbySwadesh(1953),asthesetof wordsmorestableandresis-tant to borrowing among the lexicon of different languages, while cultural lexicon is the set of wordsmoreculturally-attached,and,therefore,perceivedaslessstableandmoresubjecttoborrowingbetweendifferentlanguages.Forarecent,empiricalapproachtosuchdistinction,seeTadmor,Haspel-math&Taylor(2010).

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 296

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Intheaforementionedwork,Krzanowski&Szeminski (1978)didnotonlyanal-ysethetoponymicdistributioninordertoidentifylinguisticareas,butalsoaddressedhandicraftactivitiesintheregion,morespecifically,pottery.Thiswaspossiblebecausetwoyearsbefore,Krzanowska&Krzanowski(1976)hadpublishedadetailedreportonthepotterytownof Caulimalca(Usquil,Otuzcoprovince,departmentof LaLibertad),whichallowedthemtosuggestthepresenceof CoastalChim-Incatraditionsinthehighlands (Krzanowski& Szeminski 1978: 37). Five years later,Krzanowska (1983)published a detailed inventory of pottery techniques and villages with potters in theAndes.Thesethreestudiesnotonlysynthesizedpreviousresearchdatingbacktotheendof the19thcentury,butalsosetupanewinterdisciplinarystage(archaeology,ethnography, and linguistics) that constitutes the basis for our exploration.4Broadlyspeaking,wecansignaltwofeaturesof theethnographyperformedbyarchaeologistsintownswithAndeanpotters.First,giventheiraimof documentingcontinuitiesandchanges, theywere remarkably careful to record pottery terminology, although theygavelessattentiontotools(seevariousexamplesinRavines&Villiger1989).Secondly,researchwascommonlyfocusedonspecifictowns.Hence,detailedcomparisonswererarelyperformed(suchastheoneaccomplishedbyKrzanowska1983).Eveninmorerecentdecades,thefewcasesof regionalresearch,suchasSillar(2000)onCuzcoandBolivia,haveshownlittleinterestintoolkits.Onlywhenscholarsrecognizedthevalueof techniquesasculturalindicators,amoresystematicstudyof toolsandtheirnamesbegantobeundertaken(seeRamn1999:228-230;2008a:63-93;2008b;2013).ThisrecentinterestonpotteryartifactsisnotlimitedtotheAndes;seeacomparableworkforNigerinGosselain(2010).Inourresearch,weareinterestedinregionaldifferencesinbothpotteryterminologyandweavingnomenclature.

    Asforweaving, inthemid-seventies,Varesecollectedthenamesof thetoolsof thebackstraploomorwaistloom(telar de cintura) indifferentregionsof Peru(Varese1963-1964).Althoughhedidnotaddresstheweavingtechniques,thisworkprovidedlexicalinformationonMonsef(departmentof Lambayeque),Chota(departmentof Cajamarca),Huancavelica(departmentof Huancavelica),Suyo(departmentof Cuzco),Ichu(departmentof Puno),andthePautiriver(intheGranPajonalzone).Therewasnoefforttolinktheterminologyof Chotawithaspecificindigenouslinguisticsource,buttheauthorclearlystatedthat,inCajamarca,Spanishhasreplacedalmosttotallythevernacularlanguage.Nevertheless, the names of the different parts of the loom preserve interesting linguistic traces,suchascungallpus, putij, andtheQuechuatermsillahua, kallua, andminikero

    4 Two of the three mentioned works (Krzanowska & Kraznoswki 1976; Krzanowska 1983) werepublished inPolish;hence, theirdiffusion amongAndean scholarshasbeen scarce.We are grate-ful toAndrzejKrzanowski for giving us the Spanish translation of the firstwork. Interdisciplin-aryapproachesareakeyfeatureof historicalresearchonmaterialculturefromscholarsof EasternEurope,whichwasstillpartof theSovietsphereinthoseyears.

  • 297Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    (Varese1963-1964:337,ouremphasis).LarcoHoyle(2001)alsoprovidesethnograph-icalinformationonweavingof thehighlandsof thedepartmentof LaLibertadanditsnomenclature,indialoguewithMochicacoastaliconographyonthismatter,with-outspecifyinghisareaof study.Andrade(2011)offersapreliminaryaccountof thebackstraploomnomenclature intheNorthernPeruvianAndesthat isbasedondatacollectedinthedistrictof Agallpampa(Otuzcoprovince,departmentof LaLibertad).Thisworkassesses thepossibilityof relatingweavingnomenclaturewith indigenoussubstratalanguages,withoutaddressingthetechnicalprocesses.

    Literature aimed at examining the traditional textiles of theNorthern PeruvianAndesfromanethnohistoricalpointof viewalsorecordtheweavinglexicon(FernndezLpez2007;Meisch2007).Theprimaryconcernof theseworks is to analyze tech-nical processes and outcomes as precolonial survivals. Besides the backstrap loomterminology,thetwoaforementionedprojectsalsorecordQuechuaandpre-Quechuatermsrelatedtothedesignof traditionalstraps(fajas),themainfocusof theiranalysis.CastrodeTrelleswork(2013)oncolonialtextileworkshops(obrajes) intheprovincesof SantiagodeChucoandHuamachuco(departmentof LaLibertad)focuses,amongitscontemporaryconcerns,onthepedalloom(telar de pedal), of Hispanicorigin,andnotonthebackstraploom,althoughitalsoregistersthenomenclatureof thelatterandpro-videsatextileglossary.Fromasociologicpointof view,Quiroz,Rivas&Guerra(1977)presentageneralviewof textileproduction inSanMigueldePallaques (SanMiguelprovince,departmentof Cajamarca), and theyaddress technicalaspectsof weaving,andregisteritsnomenclature.Nevertheless,noneof theseapproacheslinksthelexicalandthetechnicaldimensionsintheirmainresearchquestions.Thus,thereisagapinthestudyof NorthernPeruvianAndeanweavingthatstilldeservesacomprehensiveethnographicanalysis,suchastheonesdevotedtoBoliviabyArnold&Espejo(2013)andtotheEcuadorianAndesbyRowe,Miller&Meisch(2007).

    Thedetailedinventoryof Rowe,Miller&Meisch(2007)alsodealswithlanguagematters.Theseresearchershighlightfourfactsrelevanthere.Thefirsttwofactshaveto dowith lexicon, the latter, with technique. Firstly, they acknowledge themarkedvariabilityof weavingterminologyintheregion(2007:xvi,43);secondly,theysignalthepossibilitythatmanyof thesewordsrelatenottoQuechuabuttotheindigenouslanguagesspokenbeforeQuechuadiffusion(2007:xiv,43).Theauthorsgofurthertorelatesomeof thesewordswithspecificlinguisticsubstrata,suchasPuruh,Cayambi,andCaar(2007:45-46).Furthermore,theysuggestthattracingwordsandsometech-nical featurescouldalsorevealpre-Incabordersormigrationsproducedafterwards(2007:xiv),buttheydonotperformthisexercisethemselves.Withrespecttotechnol-ogy,theauthorsexplainthatincontrasttotheNorthernPeruvianAndes,inEcuadorweaversaremainlymen(2007:xiii,14-16),andtheyshowdifferencesintheshapeof theEcuadorianandPeruvianlooms.Regardingthispoint,theysuggesttheexistence

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 298

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    of aPeruvian-Ecuadorianfrontierthatranparalleltothenarrowingof theEcuadorianAndeanvalleyattheborderwithPeru(2007:2).

    Apointworthstressingisthelackof scholarlywork,intheAndesasawhole,aimedatdevelopingacomparativeaccountof theprocessesandtechniquesinvolvedinpot-teryandweaving,tosaynothingof therelatedvocabulary.Thus,ourstudystemsfromaninterdisciplinarytraditionof Andeanstudies,derivedfromlinguistics,ethnography,andarchaeology,anditisinnovativeintwosenses:first,initsobjectiveof performingtheaforementionedcomparativeanalysis,andsecond,initsassumptionthatanalyzing lexiconindialoguewithtechniquescanbeproductiveforstudyingAndeanlanguages,culture,andhistoryinamorecomprehensivefashion.

    Methodology Ourethnographicmethodhasfourbasiccomponents:(1)informedsiteselection,(2)open-endedinterviewscripts,(3)parallelinterviews,and(4)definitionof comparisonparametersbetweenpotteryandweaving.Duringtheinformedsiteselection(compo-nent1),westartedby identifying,ataregionalscale,wherepotteryandweavingarepracticed.Wethennarrowedourfocustoexamineseveralspecifictownsinmoredetail.Forexample,inthedistrictof SanMigueldePallaques(SanMiguelprovince),afteraseriesof interviews,wewereabletoselectthevillagemostsuitableforourgoals:thehamletof Jangal(half anhourwalkingfromthecity),wheretwopotterytechniquesareperformedandweavingispracticedinthetraditionalruralway.Intheprovinceof SanPablo,wedecidedtoworkinthevillageof Cuzcudn,alsoknownasMangallpa,alocalitywithastrongpotterytradition.Intheprovinceof Contumaz,weobservedhandicraftactivitiesintwolocalities:Totorillas(weaving)andSantiago(pottery).Intheprovinceof SanMarcos,wechosethetownof Socchagn(weavingandpottery),afterdiscardingthemorepopularPomarongo,andweperformedashortvisit toCursqui(pottery).Intheprovinceof Cajabamba,ourobservationof weavingwasconcentratedonthelocalityof Pingo.Intheprovinceof Cajamarca,ourworkonpotteryfocusedonMollepampaandShudal,whiletheweavingobservationwascarriedoutinthetownof Cumbico,inthedistrictof Magdalena.

    Anopen-endedinterviewscriptorquestionnaire(component2)helpedustoplanthedialoguewithourinterviewees,yieldedcomparativematerial,andmadeorganizedimprovisationpossible,i.e.,toaddresstopicsnotpreviouslyplannedbutalwaysrelatedto a thematic core (thebasic guidelinederives fromwork inpottery,Ramn2008a:385-389).Asanexampleof organizedimprovisation,if duringaninterview,apotterstarted to talkabouthisbeliefsondreams,wecouldaskhimabout themeaningof oneiricactivityaboutpottery.Theparallelinterviewtechnique(component3)allowedustocomparevisualandverbaltestimoniesaboutmaterialculture.Wepaidspecificatten-tiontorecordingstylesandtechniquesusedtoproduceobjects,aswellastohowthese

  • 299Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    activitieswereexplained.Forexample,weobservedandphotographedhowaweaverof Totorillas,intheprovinceof Contumaz,madeabedspread,andafterwards,weaskedhertoexplaintheprocess.Bothversionswerenotalwaysidentical,buttheyenrichedeachother.Inthecaseof weaving,weexaminedgraphicandaudiovisualmaterialwithtworenownedweaversof SanMigueldePallaques,inordertoconfirmtechnicalsim-ilaritiesanddistinctionsbetweenthedifferentzones,andtoadequatelyinferthebasicsequencefortechnicalcomparison(seeAcknowledgements).

    Taking into account our previous fieldwork in the Northern Peruvian Andes(Andrade2011;Ramn2008a;Ramn&Bell2013)andspecificallyintheCajamarcaregion(Andrade2010),wepreliminarilyconcludedthatthemostsuitablegroundforestablishingcomparisonsbetweenpotteryandweavingwas,firstly,theexistenceof oneormorebroadmanufacturing techniquesof probableprecolonialorigin in thearea,and,secondly,thetypeof productsusuallyknownasplaininbothactivities(productsmadebyolleros andtejido llano).Inthecaseof pottery,plainwareisdefinedasdomesticitemsusuallyemployedforfoodandbeveragepreparationorstorage.Thesepotsaremorefrequentlyundecoratedthandecorated,withtheexceptionof potteryproducedwithmoldsthatalreadyincludedecoration.Inthislattercase,decorationdoesnotimplyanextrasteporadditionaltools,butitisalreadyincludedinthebasicprocedureandtoolkit.Inthecaseof weaving,wenarrowedourtarget toproductswithoutdesignsthat are elaboratedwith traditional looms.These products are usually consumedbythehouseholdmembersandarenotintendedforexternalpurchase.Previousresearchshowsdiversityeveninthistypeof textilegoods, intheproductivesequence, inthetoolkit, and in the broadmanufacturing technique employed (Andrade 2010;Rowe,Miller&Meisch2007).Thisfocusalsohastheadvantageof allowingobservationevenin those localitieswithout a strong traditionof weavingwithdesignsor labores (e.g.,Cajabamba).

    Technical diversity in pottery manufacture In theNorthernPeruvianAndes,potterymanufacture ischaracterizedby its techni-caldiversity, that is, thevarietyof waysof makingvessels that are employed in thedifferentvillageswithpottersintheregion.Generally,eachof thesevillageshasapre-dominantmanufacturingtechnique,which, inturn, is linkedtoaspecifictoolkitandtomorphometric and stylistic featuresof thefinalproducts.For instance, followingthepreviouscriteria,inthehighlandsof thedepartmentof Piura,fourdifferentwaysof manufacturingpotteryvesselswere identified (Ramn2008b).Asimilar situationwasfoundinthehighlandsof thedepartmentof LaLibertad,wherepottersusethreedifferentmanufacturing techniques: (1)paddling (paleteado)witha thickwoodpaddleandastone,occasionallyhelpedwiththefeet,inHuacaday(Otuzco,Otuzcoprovince);(2)thehorizontalbivalvemold,usuallywithdecoration,inCaulimalca(Usquil,Otuzco

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 300

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    province);(3)paddling(paleteado)withanincisedwoodpaddleandstone(bothsmallerthanthoseusedinHuacaday),whilesupportingthevesselonaraisedbasemadeof awoodpolewithaflattopof stone,inSanagorn(Sanagorn,SanchezCarrinprov-ince).Additionally,inthevillageof ElAltodeMollepata,alsolocatedinthedepartmentof LaLibertad,butontheborderwiththedepartmentof Ancash,asimilartechniquetothatof Caulimalcaispracticed,albeitwithslightvariations,suchasaddingpre-firingpainting(Ramn&Bell2013:601,604).Inallof theabovecases,potterslearntomakepotsusingonemanufacturingtechnique(usuallyinadolescence)andcontinuetousethissametechniquethroughoutlife.Inotherwords,theyaretrainedtouseaspecifictoolkit,nottopracticepotteryinanabstractsense.

    SouthernCajamarcasharesallthefeaturesmentionedabove,includingthediver-sityof potterymanufacturing techniques.Tobegin, in the southwesternpartof thedepartment,twotechnicalgroupscanbeidentified,onecharacterizedbythepresenceof ahorizontalbivalveceramicmold(Jangal,SanMiguelprovince)andtheotherbythewoodenpaddleandstoneanvil,aidedbythefeet(Cuzcudn,SanPabloprovince).In both villages, potters aremen (Figures 1 and 2). In central Cajamarca province,therearepotterswhouseseveralmanufacturingtechniques, including:paddlingwithan anvil stone, bivalve plastermold, plaster casts, and even the potterswheel.Thisrangeisespeciallyapparentinthevillageof Mollepampa,locatedontheoutskirtsof thecityof Cajamarca.Pottersof bothsexes live in thisvillage(Figure3;Ravines&Villiger1989:95-104).Inthesoutheasternpartof Cajamarca,technicaldiversitywasalsoobserved.Forexample,inthevillageof Socchagn(Chancay,SanMarcosprov-ince),maleandfemalepottersemploythepaleteadowithmallet(mazo)andstone,but,unliketheirCuzcudncolleagues,theyresttheirvesselsonanelevatedsurface(which canbeachair,oraclothoverthelegs)formuchof theproductionprocess(Figure4).Near Socchagn in the lower Chancay valley, there is another village with potters,Cursqui,wherethetraditionaltechniqueispaleteadowithawoodenpaddleandastoneanvil,complementedbyapotbeingturnedupsidedownandcoveredwithaclothwherethevessels rest.Thus, overall, in SouthernCajamarca there arediverse villageswithmanufacturingtechniquesthatcanbeclusteredintotwomaingroups:paddlingwithananvilstoneandbivalvehorizontalmold,which,inturn,canbesubdividedintovariants(Figure5).

  • 301Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Figure 1.CesreoMedinafillingthemold.Jangal,SanMiguelprovince(Photo:GabrielRamnJoffr).

    Figure 2.scardelaCruzshapingthebottomof thevesselwiththemallet.Cuzcudn,SanPabloprovince(Photo:GabrielRamnJoffr).

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 302

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Figure 3.MaraSantaHuacchaCachifillingthebottomof themold.MollepampaAlta,NuevaCajamarca,Cajamarcaprovince

    (Photo:GabrielRamnJoffr).

    Figure 4.RaimundoCotrinapaddlingthebottomof thevessel.Socchagn,SanMarcosprovince(Photo:GabrielRamnJoffr).

  • 303Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Figure 5. Cajabambamarketstallwithpotsof differentorigins(Photo:GabrielRamnJoffr).

    Asforthenomenclatureof thetoolswithinthistechnicaldiversity,thefirstthingtonoteistheoverwhelmingpresenceof theSpanishlanguage.Althoughinmanycasesthesetoolkitshavelargenumbersof items,itisdifficulttofindtermsfortheobjectsinotherlanguages.Agoodexampleisthetoolkitof RaimundoCotrinaPazfromSocchagn,whoallowedustoobservehimpotting.Thefollowingchartpresentshistoolsbytypesandcitingtheirnamesaccordingtohisindications(Chart1,Figure6):

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 304

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Tools TypesChungo Fortheupperpart,forthebottom,fortheupper

    part(big),forthebottom(big),fortheupperpart(small),forthebottom(forjarsandpitcher)

    GolleteroMallaCuchillo FortheneckPalito Forthebeakof thejarCuadreador ForeverythingPalmeta Fortheupperpart(6),forthebottom(2)

    Chart 1.Nomenclatureof potterytoolsinSocchagn, SanMarcosprovince,departmentof Cajamarca.

    Forthemanufacturingtechniqueof bivalvehorizontalmold,thepresenceof Spanishisalsosignificant in thenomenclatureof tools.Forexample, in Jangal (SanMiguelprovince),themaintoolsarethemolds,thebadanita (smallpieceof leather),thechungo (round stone), knives, and sheep leather for the base (tools of the potter CesreoMedina).Amongthese,oneof thenotableexceptionswouldbe chungo,which is thestoneusedasananvilagainstthepaddleormallet.ThewordchungocomesfromtheCulle language (Adelaar1989:87)andhasbeenadoptedgenerally in theSpanishof theregionwiththemeaningroundstone;itisnotanexclusivetermusedforpottery.Otherindigenouslanguagetermsrelatedtopotteryproductioncanbefoundinareasslightlybeyondthisstudysfocusarea.First,insomevillagesof SouthernCajamarca,theQuechuatermmitowasusedtorefertoatypeof rawmaterial(Druc2013:318,325).Second,sometimes,somestepsof theproductionprocesshaveQuechuanames;e.g.inSocchagn(Chancay,SanMarcosprovince)thereisaphasecalledllushpiadito(

  • 305Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Figure 6. Toolkitof RaimundoCotrinaPaz,Socchagn,SanMarcosprovince(Photo:GabrielRamnJoffr).

    Lexical diversity and technical uniformity in the backstrap loomPrevious research,basedmainly in thehighlandsof thedepartmentof LaLibertad(Andrade2011),suggestedthatweavingwithabackstraploomisanactivitywithpoten-tialinterestforstudiesaimedatreconstructingthelanguagehistoryof theregion,asVarese(1963-1964)hadforecastedinhispioneeringarticle.Duringthefieldworkper-formedinSouthernCajamarca,thisproposalwasconfirmed.Thedifferentnamesof thebackstraploomtools(Figure7), inthesixprovincesof SouthernCajamarca,arecomparedinChart2.InFigure7thenamesaregiveninEnglish.

    As we see in Chart 2, there are some names that are identical throughout thesouthernprovincesof Cajamarca(itemsd,e and h),anditisworthnotingthatthesearetermsof QuechuaorQuechua-Aymaraoriginincasesdande (kallwa,Quechua,andillawa, Quechua-Aymara),andof uncertainindigenousoriginincaseh (cungallpo).5Otheritemsshowanindigenouslexicalrootinsomeprovinces,butintheremainingones,aSpanishoptioniswidespread(itemsbandi).OnlyonehasaSpanishrootexclusively(itemj),whiletoolsa, candfshowvariabilitybetweendifferentindigenousoptions.6 The twonamesforitema comefromaQuechuasource,andtheyapplytothesametool,highlightingitsfunctioninthecaseof aparina(lit.[object]forcarrying),andthepartof thebodywhereitisplacedinthecaseof siquicha, sequicha(littlebase,littlebackside).

    5 Butseenote9foradiscussiononapossibleQuechuaetymologyforcungallpo.6 Wediscard itemg in thisanalysisbecause itspresence isnotcommonthroughout thezone, ithas

    merelyanauxiliaryfunction,anditlackslexicalinterest(ithasnotevenaname,besidesthegenericwordpalostick).

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 306

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Figure 7. Thebackstraploominthesouthernprovincesof Cajamarca(modelof Jangal,SanMiguelprovince)(drawing:ClaudiaDelgado).

    Locality (Province)/

    Tool

    Totorillas (Contu-maz)

    Cuzcudn (San Pablo)

    Jangal (San Miguel)

    Cumbicos (Caja-marca)

    Socchagn (San Marcos)

    Pingo (Caja-bamba)

    (a) Siquicha Siquicha Sequicha Aparina Aparina Aparina

    (b) Piedecabra Cungallpo Cungallpo Cungallpo Cungallpo Cungallpo(c) Tipe,tipina Chana Chana Tipe,tipina Tipe,tipina Tupu(d) Kallwa Kallwa Kallwa Kallwa Kallwa Kallwa(e) Illawa Illawa Illawa Illawa Illawa Illawa(f) Saj,saque Saj,saca Putij,putig Shongo Shongo Shongo(g) Palo Palo Palo Notused Notused Notused(h) Cungallpo Cungallpo Cungallpo Cungallpo Cungallpo Cungallpo(i) Soga Chamba Chamba Chamba Chamba Soga(j) Tramador Tramador Trama Tramero Tramador Tramero

    Chart 2. Namesof thetools/componentsof thebackstraploominthesouthernprovincesof Cajamarca(thetoolcolumnmatchesthelettersof Figure7).

  • 307Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Thesearedifferent formsof labelinganobjectwithin thesame language. Incase c,weobservealso twodifferentQuechuaoptions (tupu broochand tipi-tipina [object]forpinning),alongwithanon-Quechuaname(chana).Non-Quechuaoptionsarealsosaj-saque-saca andputig-putij for tool f,while shongo is theQuechuanamefor thesameinstrumentinthesoutheasternprovinces.Shongo, whichmeansheart,canbeapplied,inQuechua,notonlytohumanandanimalbodies,butalsototheinnerpartof treesandwoods.Since tool fwas traditionallymadeof the innerpartof acactus,namedsango, thenamecanbeexplainedstraightforwardlyasacaseof metonymy.Incontrast,weignorethemeaningof chana, saj-saque-saca, putig-putij, aswellascungallpo (items b and h) andchamba (itemi), whicharenotof Quechuaorigin,butwecanrelatethemtothepre-Quechuaindigenoussubstrataidentifiedbypreviousaccounts(Adelaar1989and2004:401-405;Torero1989).

    Variabilityinthenamesforitemscandf isworthnotingif wetakeintoaccounttheclearsimilarityof theweavingtoolkitthroughoutthesixprovincesanalyzed.Incon-trastwithpottery,onlyonemanufacturingtechniqueof probableprecolonialoriginisperformedinthearea,namely,backstraploomortelar de cintura.Inotherregions,astheEcuadorianAndes,thebackstraploomcoexistswithothermanufacturingtechniques,suchastheverticalloom(Rowe,Miller&Meisch2007,chapter1).Thus,intechnicalmatters,uniformityappears as themain feature forweaving inSouthernCajamarca,althoughthereareareaswithremarkablycomplexanddiverseproduction.7Evenwithregardstothebackstraploomtoolkititself,thereisanelementabsentinthewholeareawhichispresentintheneighboringhighlandsof LaLibertadandAncash,asobservedinAgallpampa,Otuzcoprovince; San Ignacio,Otuzcoprovince; SantiagodeChucoprovince;andTauca,Pallascaprovince(Andrade2011;FernndezLpez2007;Castrode Trelles 2013; Andrade 2012: 129-131).This element is an auxiliary pointed stick,named roque inAgallpampa,which theweaver usually keeps in her pocket or tucksbehindherearuntil it is required in theweavingprocess.Thisstick,madeof woodorof ananimalbone,hasthefunctionof strummingthewarpyarnsbeforepassingtheshuttle throughtheshed, inorder tokeeptheminorderandavoid irregularitiesinthefabricwhileitisbeingformed(Figure8).InSouthernCajamarcathisfunctionisperformedwiththehandsof theweaverwithacharacteristicpiano-likemovementof thefingertips.Hence,wehaveageneralabsenceinthebackstraploomtoolkitthatdistinguishesthewholeareafromtheneighboringzonestothesouth,andalsofromtheEcuadorianAndestothenorth(Rowe,Miller&Meisch2007:18).8TheEcuadorian

    7 For instance, the anthropologistHaydeQuiroz has identified sevendifferentweaving techniqueswithin the backstrap loomonlyinSanMiguelprovince(personalcommunication,12/09/2014).

    8 Thisisnottosaythatthespreadof thisstickisuniformintheremainingAndeanzones.Ithasbeenreportedforseveralregionsof Bolivia (Arnold&Espejo2013:99-103), for the islandof Taquile,Puno(HuamnCarhuaricra2009:31,77),forCuzco(Rowe1978),forApurmac(Andrade2011:58),

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 308

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    toolkithasanadditionalitemthatisabsentinSouthernCajamarca:arollerbarthatisinsertedneartothefrontloombarinordertosecurethewarp(Rowe,Miller&Meisch2007:18).Intheirdiagramsof thePeruvian-stylebackstraploom,Rowe,Miller&Meisch(2007:15)seemtoassignthisrollerbaralsotothePeruviantoolkit,butwehavenotobserveditinSouthernCajamarca,norinanyotherlocalityof thePeruvianAndes.

    Regardingthebackstraploomtoolkit,onlytwoformaldifferenceswereobservedwithintheanalyzedarea,thefirstbetweenthevillageof Totorillas(Contumazprov-ince)andthehamletsof theremainingfivesouthernprovincesof Cajamarca,andthesecondbetween thevillageof Socchagn (SanMarcosprovince) and the remainingfivehamlets.Firstly,theendsof thebackloombarareroundedinContumaz,withasortof narrowneckthatholdstheropethatsustainsthewholeloomtoatree,beamorpost.Intheotherfivevillages,theendsof thisrodshowazig-zagstylethathelpsperformthesamefunction(Figure10).Inthesefiveprovinces,theformof thefrontand theback loombars is identical, though the former isusuallynarrower than thelatter;inContumaz,onlythefrontloombarshowsthecharacteristiczig-zagstyle.Itisnoteworthythatthenameof bothrodsisthesameinthefiveremainingprovinces(cungallpo),whileinContumazonlythebackloombarbearsthisname,inspiteof itsdifferent,roundedform.9InContumaz,thefrontloombarisnamedusingtheSpanishphrasepie de cabra(goatfoot),whichgivesagooddescriptionof itsangularshape.AsecondminordistinctioninthetoolkitwasfoundinSocchagn(SanMarcosprovince).Inspiteof themarkedlyruralprofileof thislocality,itsshuttleshowsasemi-industrialstyle,resemblingtheoneusedinthepedalloom(naveta inSpanish).Intheremainingfivelocalities,theshuttleisformedbyastickaroundwhichtheweftisrolled(Figure9).Althoughthiscontrastissuggestiveof technologicaltransferinthecaseof Socchagn,nopedal loomworkshopswere foundcurrently functioning there, as theywere, forexample,intheprovincesof Cajabamba(villageof Machacuay)andCajamarca(villageof Porcn).

    andforHuancavelica(Varese1963-1964),butitisabsentintheHunucoarea(MendizbalLosack1990:151).ThreenameshavebeenregisteredforthistoolthroughouttheAndes:roque-ruqui-ruque (fromSouthernQuechuaruki),chocche(perhapsfromCentralQuechua),andwichua(fromAymara).

    9 Theformof theContumazitemreinforcesapossibleetymologyforcungallpobasedintheQuechuarootkunga(

  • 309Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Figure 8. Roque,anitemabsentfromtheSouthernCajamarcatoolkit.ThepicturewastakeninAgallpampa,Otuzcoprovince,departmentof LaLibertad

    (Photo:Luis Andrade).

    Figure 9. TheshuttleinSocchagn(SanMarcosprovince)andinJangal(SanMiguelprovince).Jangal(right)representstheremainingfivevillages

    (Photo:Luis Andrade).

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 310

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Figure 10. Formalvariationof itemhbetweenTotorillas(Contumazprovince)intherightandJangal(SanMiguelprovince)intheleft.Jangalrepresentsthe

    remainingfivevillages(drawing:ClaudiaDelgado).

    Thereisalsorelativetechnicaluniformityregardingtheproductivesequenceof plainweavingwiththeSouthernCajamarcabackstraploom(butseenote7regardingmorecomplextextileproduction).Inmacroterms,therearedifferentbroadstagesthatrecurthroughouttheregion:torcido(spinning),ovillado(makingof theball),urdido (warping),entablado (settingthewarpintheloom),whatwecancall strictweavingor weavinginthestrictsense,andacabado(finaladjustments).Wemustaddthecomplexstepof escogido(selection)inthecaseof weavingwithlabores(designs).Inthisstep,theweaversignals,withthread,insuccessivesecondaryrods(illahua-querosorillahuas de labor designheddlerods),theseparationof thewarptreadsthatwillformeachrowof thedesign;thus,shewillbeabletorepeatthewholedesignwithouthavingtoreselectthewarpthreadsineachnewoccasion.Thisstepisnotperformedinthedifferentlocalitiesthatweanalysed,hence,itwasnotusefulforcomparisonmatters.10Inordertomakethe

    10 Nevertheless,wemust highlight that the stage of escogido should be taken into account in furtherresearchaboutweavingtechniqueinSouthernCajamarca,sinceitseemstobearelevantdifferentialfeatureincomparisonwiththebackstraploomof theSouthernAndes.Asamatterof fact,weaversthathaveinteractedwiththeirpeersfromCuzcostatethatthelatterdonotselectthewarpthreadswithillahua-querosorsomethingsimilar,butthattheydoitmanually,ineachoccasionthatthedesignisiterated.Ontheotherhand,theyreportedthatinChota(acentralprovinceof Cajamarca,renowned

  • 311Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    comparisonfeasibleatamicrolevel,wefocusedonthestageof strictweavingforaplainweave,i.e.withoutdesigns.Thus,wewereabletoobserveasequenceof tenbasicandtwointermediatestepsthatarecommonthroughoutthesixsouthernprovincesof Cajamarca.Thebasicsequenceispresentedbelow,withthepremisethatthefirstthreadof wefthasalreadybeenpassed.ThedescriptionusestheEnglishtranslationsof toolnames,duetothepreviouslymentionedvariabilityinthisnomenclature.Foradditionalclarity,inFigure11wediagramthepositionof eachtoolduringthedifferentsteps.

    Firstly,(1)theshedrod(aroundedrodtraditionallymadeof thetrunkof anagave)ismoved close to the heddle, so that thewarp threads thatwere in the upper facepass down andvice-versa, a crossingmovement that is essential for theprocess. Inorder to initiate this crossing, theSouthernCajamarcaweaverusesherfingertips tostrumthewarpthreadsfirmly,inapiano-stylemovementtheactionisnamedsobar tohandleortableartobeatwithaplankinlocalSpanish.Thus,anempty,triangularspacewillbeformedbetweenthecrossedfacesof thewarpthroughwhichthesword(kallwa) fits.Secondly,(2)theswordisintroducedthroughthisemptyspace,and(3)itisbeatentowardstheweaver,soastostretchtheweavethatisbeingformed.Inthisstep,theweaverbendsslightlybackwardssoastohelpproducethistension.(4)Theshuttleispassedforthefirsttimetheactioniscalledechar tramathrowoutshuttleinlocalSpanishthroughtheshed,anemptyspaceformedbyputtingtheswordinaverticalpositionbetweenbothfacesof thewarp.Inthemeanwhile,theweaverholdstherecentlyformedlinesof theweavewiththethumbandtheforefingerfingertips,soastoensurethatthefabricisnotoverstretchedorexcessivelyloose,henceguaranteeingthe regularity of the selvedges (the borders of the fabric). (5)The sword is turneddownagaintoaplainpositionandisbeatentowardsthewovenedge.(6)Theheddlerodisliftedupwithonearmand,thus,onefaceof thewarpgoesup,whileothertoolscarrytheotherfacedown.Thisformsanemptytriangularspacefortheswordtopassthrough.Inthisstep,theweaverleansforwardsoastoloosenthetensionof theset.(7)Theswordispassedagainthroughthetriangularemptyspace,and(8)itisbroughttowards theweaver inorder tobeat and adjust the fabric.Theweaver leans slightlybackwardsinordertostretchtheweaving.Forasecondtime,(9)theheddleispassedthroughtheshedthat is formedbyputting thesword inaverticalpositionbetweenthetwofacesof thewarp.Asbefore,theweaverholdsthelastthreadsof thefabricwithherfingertips,takingcarethatitisnotexcessivelytightorloose.Finally,(10)theswordisturnedagaintoaplainposition,andtheweaverbeatsthewovenedgewithitindirectionof herbody.

    forthequalityof itstraditionaltextiles),anothertechniqueof escogidoisfoundtheselectionof thewarpthreadswithametallicwire.Withthistechnique,theweavercanpassdifferentcolorthreadsof weftinthesamerow,insteadof onlyone,asintraditionalescogido.WethankIrisHuangalandBarbaritaMendozaforthisinformation.

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 312

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Figure 11. Positionof thedifferent tools in thebasic sequenceof plainweave(drawing:ClaudiaDelgado).

    Thisseriesof tenstepsisrepeatedsuccessivelyuntiltheentirefabriciswoven.11Itisonlyinterruptedbytwointermediatestepsbetweenthemacroandthemicrolevel:(1)theadjustment,viasmallnails,of thetenter,anarrowstickof reedthatholdsthewoven fabric underneath andguaranteesuniformity in thewidthof theweave, and(2)therollingof thewovenfabricandtheconsequentadjustmentof thebackstraptothewaistof theweaver,soastohaveanadequatedistancebetweenherbodyandtheworkingarea.12Boththetenmicrostepsandthetwointermediateactivitiespreviouslydescribedrecurinthesixvisitedprovinces.Thereare,certainly,someminordifferencesthatdonotbreakthisuniformity.However,twodistinctionsareagainworthmention-ing:themethodusedtoputtheswordinverticalpositioninsteps(4)and(9)iswiththesharpedgefacingupinSocchagn(SanMarcosprovince)andCumbicos(Cajamarcaprovince),whileinJangal(SanMiguelprovince)andTotorillas(Contumazprovince),thesharpedgefacesdown.Accordingtotheweavers,thisvariationdoesnotindicatea

    11 ThissequenceisverysimilartotheonedescribedbyRowe,Miller&Meisch(2007:20)fortheEcua-dorianAndes, thathasnine steps, and to theone registeredbyMendizbalLosack (1990) for theHunucoarea.

    12 BothintermediatestepsareradicallydifferentintheEcuadorianAndes:thesuccessiveadjustmentof theworkingareaisachievedinEcuadorbymeansof adifferentelementarollerrod,whilethetenter,intheEcuadoriancase,goesoverthewovenfabric,notunderneath(Rowe,Miller&Meisch2007:17-19).

  • 313Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    functionaladvantage.Secondly,thetoolsthathelpliftuptheheddlerodinstep6aretheshedrodwiththeswordinSanMarcos,Cajamarca,andCajabamba,whileinthethreeremainingprovincesanauxiliaryrodisusedalongwiththeshedrod(itemg,Figure7),while thesword isalwayskeptnear theweaver.Thesedifferencescanbedeemedasdetailsthatdonotbreakthebroaduniformityof thesequence.

    If ahandicrafttechniquecanbedefinedasafunctionof (a)itstoolkitand(b)thebasic sequence followed to produce its artifacts, and if we recall that the backstraploom is theonly indigenousmanufacturing technique found in the region, it canbestatedthatweavinginSouthernCajamarcaismarkedbyrelativetechnicaluniformity.Thisfactcontrastsremarkablywiththevariabilityfoundinthetoolkitnomenclature,whichpointstoahighstabilityinthisportionof theculturallexicon.Anexplanationsuggestedpreviouslyforthiscontraststemsfromthefactthat,intheNorthernAndes,weaving ismostlya feminineactivity (Andrade2011:65), and,asAndean linguisticstraditionsuggests,womenintheAndestendtobethemostloyalgatekeepersof thenativelanguagesandcultureswhenaprocessof languageshiftisincourse,evenwhennothingelsecanbedonetostoplanguagedeath,asinthecaseof Mochica(Cerrn-Palomino1995:193;2004:98).However, thissuggestion isnotcompatiblewith theobservationthat intheEcuadorianAndesweaversaremostlymen,whilethetoolkitterminology is equally conservative as judged by the presence of indigenous terms,someof thempossiblyof pre-Quechuasources(Rowe,Miller&Meisch2007:xiii-xiv,14-16,43,45-46).Thus,anexplanationnotbasedmainlyongendermustbesoughtinordertoaccountfortheaforementionedcontrastonaregionalscale.

    DiscussionThenomenclatureof loomparts inSouthernCajamarcashowsapronouncedvaria-bilitydespitetheexistenceof onlyonemanufacturingtechniqueof probable indige-nousoriginthebackstraploomandtherelativeuniformityof theplainweavingsequence.Inthebackstraploom,thesametoolsandfunctionswerefound,butwithdif-ferentindigenousnames,whichinseveralcaseswerenon-Quechua.Thisinformationmoderatelysupportsthehypothesisthatpostulatesthepresenceof idiomaticsubstratadifferentfromQuechuaforthestudyregion.InSouthernCajamarca,wefoundlexicalevidence in favorof at leastone additional idiomatic substratum.Here, the caseof saque-saj-sacaversusputij-putig couldsupporttheexistenceof twodifferentpre-QuechualinguisticbackgroundsinCajamarcabesidesCulle,aswasoriginallysuggestedbyTorero(1989).Nevertheless,thismaybealsointerpretedastheresultof lexicalvariationwithinthesamelanguage,suchaswasobservedinQuechuaterminologybycaseslikeaparina andsiquicha,thenamesusedforthebackstrap.

    Inthecaseof thepotteryfromthecentralpartof theConchucosregioninthedepartmentof Ancash (between thevillagesof Chinlla,provinceof Asuncin, and

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 314

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Llumpa,MariscalLuzuriagaprovince),azonecorrespondingtothevarietyof QuechuaknownasConchucano,therearethreenamesforthesametappingtool:kutana (rapper,basedonthefunction),tukllu(mushroom,basedontheform)andbrokishu(fromtheSpanishbrocaandQuechuasuffix-ishu,characterizedasderogatory)(Ramn2013:79;for-ishu,JulcaGuerrero2009:40).Canweusethisevidencetoapplyasimilarinter-pretationtothetextileterminologyvariationinSouthernCajamarca?Inotherwords,does thecase saque-saj-sacaversusputij-putig show twowaysof referring to the sameinstrumentwithinjustoneindigenouslanguage?Giventhelimitedinformationonthishypotheticallanguage,whichisrestrictedtoplacenamesanddocumentaryevidence,itisstillimpossibletopostulateprecisemeaningsfortheseterms,beyondtheirfunctionaselementsof acraftnomenclaturethatispresumablyprecolonial.However,thegeo-graphicaldistributionof bothtermsisstrikinglyfragmented.Inthepresentstateof ourknowledge,however,wearenotabletoadvancebeyondthesimpleobservationof thisvariation.Nevertheless,itcanbestressedthatsaque-saj andputig-putijintegrate,alongsidewithcungallpoandchana,aCajamarcanindigenousvocabularydifferentfromQuechuaandCulleinthetextilefield.Furtherresearchintothecatarea,asCelendnprovince(seeMap2),wouldbeadvisabletoclarifythispoint.Itisworthnoting,inanycase,thatinaregionalmostentirelydominatedbytheSpanishlanguage,indigenoustermsof thislexicalsubsystemremainstable,aspointedoutbyVarese(1963-1964:337).Thisgoeshandinhandwiththesituationof northernPotos,whereAymaraisbeingsubsumedbyQuechuaandthislatterlanguage,inturn,isinadiglossicsituationwithSpanish.Inthatcase,however,ithappensthatintraditionalweavingAymaratermsprevail(Howard1995:159-161).

    InSouthernCajamarca, technicaldiversity inpottery standsoutmore than lexi-caldiversity.Asnoted,theevidencecollectedinpreviousyears(Ramn2008a)showsthateachvillagewithpotterscanbecharacterizedbyaspecific technique.However,SouthernCajamarcaposesachallenge,showingvillages likeMollepampa,wheretwotechniquesarepracticed;Jangal(SanMiguelprovince),where,despitetheprevalenceof themoldtechnique,thereisalsoapotterworkingwithadifferenttechnique;andCursqui(SanMarcosprovince),wherealthoughpaddlingisidentifiedasthetraditionaltechnique,apotteralsousesthepotterswheelandthemold.Theadvantageof com-paringresultsfrompotteryandtextileproduction lies in theirdifferences.While thetextileevidencesuggests thepresenceof different linguisticsubstrata, it isharder toarguethesameusingpotterylexicalevidence.Acomplementarymethodologywouldbetoreconstructpotterytechnicalareasthatis,toidentifyhowvillageswithsimilarproductiontechniquesaregeographicallydistributedinCajamarcaandestablishtheirrelationshipswithareascorrespondingtolinguisticsubstrata.Thecorrelationbetweentechnique,cultureandpotentiallylanguagehasoftenbeenassumedintheAndesasaclassificationprinciple,buthasneverbeendemonstrated.

  • 315Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Howshouldweexplainthediscrepancybetweenthedegreeof conservatismof theceramicsandtextileterminologiesinSouthernCajamarca?Anobservationaboutthedistributionof theproductionsitesof bothactivitiesprovidesakeytointerpretingthissituation.MiguelRodrguezSnchez,anativeof Ichocn(SanMarcosprovince)andacurrentresidentof Cajabamba,aswellasanexpertontheregionandalocalmuseummanager,stated:Nowadays[textilecraft]isageneralhorizon,butacenter,asinthecaseof pottery,Ihavenotseen[...].Textilecraftisfamiliar,thereisnocenter(personalcommunication).Whiletextileproductionisawidespreadactivity,potteryisrestrictedtocertainpartsof theregion,concentratedinspecificvillages.Thisisconsistentwithourpreviousobservationsindifferentpartsof theNorthernPeruvianAndes(Ramn2008a;Ramon&Bell2013).Thedifferentialdistributionof thecentersof potteryandtextilemanufacturingimpliesdifferentstrategiesof productionanddistributionof rawmaterials,differentscalesof production,greateror lesser interventionfromcomple-mentaryagents(localand/orforeignintermediaries),andgreaterorlesserinteractionwithexternalconsumers.Thiscontrastbetweenthepotteryandtextilenetworkscanexplainthevariableimpositionof Spanishonthenamesof crafttools.IncasessuchasthosedescribedbyRodrguez,textilesaremadeforconsumptionbutnotforexchange.Therefore, the technical vocabulary from the substrate language couldbepreservedmoreeasily,whiletheoppositewouldhappenwithpottery,whichisnearlyalwayssoldorexchangedindifferentlinguisticscenarios,acontextthatwouldtriggertheuseof Spanish(andpreviouslyQuechua)asalinguafranca.Thisexplanationavoidsfallinginto essentialism, such as the supposed feminine conservatism,which is associatedwith thefact that the textile industry in thenorthernPeruvianAndes isusuallyper-formedbywomen.Rodriguezsobservationalsoallowsustorelateourhypotheseswithformsof socialorganizationof thecraftanditsregionaldistribution.

    Thecomparativestudyof potteryandtextilesinSouthernCajamarcashowsthatthe contrast between technical variability and lexical conservatism can only be ade-quatelyexplainedinaregionalscale.Inaddition,distinctionswithinthewholeculturallexiconshouldbemade,regardingthestabilityandresistancetoborrowingof somelexicalfields.Therearecultural lexicalfields,suchasweaving,whichmaybesourcesof datatoobtainlexicalinformationfromextinctindigenouslanguages,andthuscon-tributetobetterunderstandingsof thelanguageandculturalhistoryof aregion.Inthecaseof theNorthernPeruvianAndes,whereindigenouslanguagesarealmostentirelyoverriddenbySpanish,withtheexceptionof afewenclavesof Quechua,itiscrucialtoidentifywhichlexicalfieldscanhelptorecoversometracesof theoldsubstrates.

    Identificationof thelexicalfieldsusefultorecoverthesetracesrequiresadetailedethnographicalknowledgeof theregionunderstudy.Theexaminationclearlyshowsthe utility of combining lexical studieswith a detailed observation of the technicalprocesses. In thecaseof textiles, forexample, itwouldbe insufficient torecordthe

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 316

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    namesof the loomtoolsexclusively,notonlybecausethiswouldhaverestrictedtheoverallunderstandingof thetextilecraft,butbecauseitwouldhavealsomeantthelossof importantlexicalinformation.Forinstance,thenarrowstickof reedthatholdsthewovenfabricunderneathandguaranteesuniformityinthewidthof theweave(Figure7,instrumentc)iscalledtipe,tipina,tupu,timbeorchanaaccordingtothelocality.Thisinstru-ment,whichisunappealingfromafunctionalpointof view,wasoverlookedinpreviousrecords (for example, inVarese 1963-1964), despite the interesting variability of itsindigenousnomenclature.Onlyadetailedobservationof the technicalprocesses ledtoconsiderthepresenceandfunctionof thistool,andtorecoverthecorrespondinglexicaldata.

    Conclusions Arelationshipbetween the indigenous loomterminologyandancient linguistic sub-stratesfromthenorthernAndeswasassessed.AlthoughthisrelationcanbeidentifiedintheareacomprisedbytheCulleregionandSouthernCajamarcaasawhole(Andrade2011), it cannot be stated among the sixCajamarca provinces that formed the areaof study. If words derived fromQuechua or Spanishwithin the loom terminologyare removed from consideration, it is possible to isolate a non-Quechua, non-Culleindigenoussubstrate inCajamarca, inwhichasharpvariation isobserved.Althoughnoteworthy,thisvariationcannotbeexplainedasanoutcomeof twodifferentlanguagesourcesasTorero(1989)stated;however,atleastoneindigenoussubstratumdifferentfromCulleandQuechuastillholds.Incontrast,nosimilarrelationshipswere identi-fiedbetweentheterminologyof traditionalpotteryandancientlinguisticsubstratesof Cajamarca.

    A sharp contrast betweenpottery andweavingwas observed regarding the twoparameters under study: while pottery shows more technical diversity and a lessobservablepresenceof lexicalitemsof indigenousorigin,weavingistechnicallymoreuniform, but its nomenclature retains lexical items of pre-Quechua languages. Thiscontrastshouldbeexplainedinregionaltermsandaccordingtothevariousnetworksof production anddistribution involved in eachof these activities.Finally, the con-trastshowsthattheconservatismof theculturallexiconmayvarybytypeof activity.IdentifyingpotentiallexicalareasformaintainingQuechuaandpre-Quechuatermsisimportantforextendingtheinvestigationof multilingualismintheAndeanpast,aswellasthelegacyof thenowextinctindigenouslanguages,likethenon-Quechualanguagesof SouthernCajamarca.

  • 317Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    AcknowledgementsThistextstemsfromaresearchprojectfundedbytheVice-chancellorof ResearchatthePontificiaUniversidadCatlicadelPer(pucp).Wethankthepottersandweaversinterviewed,aswellasourinterlocutorsinthevisitedprovinces:therenownedweaverBarbaritaMendozaandherdaughter,teacherIrisHuangal,inSanMigueldePallaques;theteacherMiguelRodrguezSnchezandhisson,teacherMiguelRodrguezRoncal,inCajabamba;andVictoriaVilcainCajamarca.ThanksgoalsotoZacarasVerstegui,inCuzcudn,SanPablo;andMarielaMonteza,officialof thehealthfacilityinSocchagn,SanMarcos.WearealsogratefultoMarthaBell,of ArdillaMaps,formakingthemaps,aswellasproof-readingourtext,toClaudiaDelgado,whoworkedontheillustrations,andtotheanonymousreaderforthecomments.

    References cited

    Adelaar,Willem,F.H.1990 Enposde la lenguaculle.In:Cerrn-Palomino,Rodolfo&GustavoSolsFonseca(eds.):

    Temas de lingstica amerindia.Lima:ConsejoNacionaldeCienciayTecnologa/GesellschaftfrTechnischeZusammenarbeit(gtz),83-105.

    2004 The languages of the Andes. With the collaboration of PieterMuysken. Cambridge, U.K.:CambridgeUniversityPress.

    2012 Cajamarca Quechua and the expansion of the Huari state. In: Heggarty, Paul &DavidBeresford-Jones (eds.):Archaeology and language in the Andes. A cross-disciplinary exploration of prehistory. Proceedingsof theBritishAcademy,173.NewYork:TheBritishAcademy,OxfordUniversityPress,197-217.

    AndradeCiudad,Luis2010 ContactosyfronterasdelenguasenlaCajamarcaprehispnica.In:Kaulicke,Peter,Rodolfo

    Cerrn-Palomino, Paul Heggarty & David Beresford-Jones (eds.):Lenguas y sociedades del antiguo Per: hacia un enfoque interdisciplinario.BoletndeArqueologade laPUCP, 14.Lima:FondoEditorialdelaPontificiaUniversidadCatlicadelPer,165-180.

    2011 El lxicodel telar de cintura en la sierra nortedelPer. In:Adelaar,WillemF.H.,PilarValenzuela Bismarck & Roberto Zariquiey Biondi (eds.): Estudios sobre lenguas andinas y amaznicas. Homenaje a Rodolfo Cerrn-Palomino. Lima: Fondo Editorial de la PontificiaUniversidadCatlicadelPer,53-72.

    2012 El castellano andino norperuano: contacto lingstico, dialectologa e historia. PhDdissertation.Lima:PontificiaUniversidadCatlicadelPer.

    Arnold,Denise&ElviraEspejo2013 El textil tridimensional: la naturaleza del tejido como objeto y como sujeto. LaPaz:InstitutodeLengua

    yCulturaAymara.

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 318

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    CastrodeTrelles,Lucila20132 Los tejedores de Santiago de Chuco y Huamachuco. De cumbicus a mitayos, obrajeros y mineros.Lima:

    MineraBarrickMisquichilca.

    Cerrn-Palomino,Rodolfo1987 Lingstica quechua.Cuzco:CentrodeEstudiosRuralesBartolomdeLasCasas.1995 La lengua de Naimlap (reconstruccin y obsolescencia del mochica). Lima: Fondo Editorial de la

    PontificiaUniversidadCatlicadelPer.

    Druc,Isabelle2013 Tradiciones alfareras en el valle de Cajamarca y cuenca alta del Jequetepeque.Bulletin de

    lInstitut Franais dtudes Andines 40:307-331.

    FernndezLpez,Arabel2007 Elanaku,lallikllaylasfajassaraypata:supervivenciasincaenlacomunidaddeSanIgnacio

    de Loyola, Sinsicap-Otuzco. In:La trama y la urdimbre. Textiles tradicionales del Per. Lima:UniversidadRicardoPalma/InstitutoCulturalPeruanoNorteamericano(icpna),149-159.

    Gosselain,Olivier2010 EthnographiecomparedestroussesoutilsdepotiersausudduNiger.Bulletin de la Socit

    Prhistorique Franaise 107:667-689.

    Howard,Rosaleen1995 PachamamaisaSpanishword.LinguistictensionbetweenAymara,Quechua,andSpanish

    inNorthernPotos(Bolivia).Anthropological Linguistics37(2):141-168.

    HuamnCarhuaricra,Angelina2009 Tejemos nuestra vida. Testimonios sobre el arte textil de Taquile. Lima:InstitutoNacionaldeCultura.

    JulcaGuerrero,Flix2009 Quechua ancashino. Una mirada actual.Lima:care-Per/FondoEditorialdelPedaggicoSan

    Marcos.

    Krzanowska,Roma1983 Peruwianskaceramikaludowa.Etnografia Polska27:173-201.

    Krzanowska,Roma&AndrzejKrzanowski1976 GarncarstwoludowewdolinieAltoChicamawplncnymPeru.Etnografia Polska20:185-214.

    Krzanowski,Andrzej&JanSzeminski1978 LatoponimiaindgenaenlacuencadelroChicama(Per).Estudios Latinoamericanos4:11-51.

    LarcoHoyle,Rafael2001[1938]Los mochicas.Vol.II.Lima:MuseoArqueolgicoRafaelLarcoHerrera.

    Meisch,LynnA.2007 Fajas sara: supervivencia de una tradicin textil inca en el norte del Per. In:La trama y

    la urdimbre. Textiles tradicionales del Per.Lima:UniversidadRicardoPalma-InstitutoCulturalPeruanoNorteamericano(icpna),183-191.

    MendizbalLosack,Emilio1990 Continuidad cultural y textilaria en Pachitea andina. Lima: Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y

    Tecnologa(conytec).

  • 319Toolkits and Cultural Lexicon: An Ethnographic Comparison of Pottery and Weaving

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Middendorf, ErnstW.1973 [1895] Per. Observaciones y estudios del pas y sus habitantes durante una permanencia de 25 aos. Vol.3.

    Lima:UniversidadNacionalMayordeSanMarcos.

    QuesadaC.,Flix1976 Gramtica quechua: Cajamarca-Caaris. Lima:MinisteriodeEducacin-InstitutodeEstudios

    Peruanos.

    Quiroz,Hayde,ElenaRivas&GladysGuerra1977 La artesana textil de San Miguel de Pallaques.Lima:UniversidadNacionalMayordeSanMarcos,

    SeminariodeHistoriaRuralAndina.

    Ramn,Gabriel1999 ProduccinalfareraenSantoDomingodelosOlleros(Huarochir,Lima).Bulletin de lInstitut

    Franais dtudes Andines28:215-248.2008a Potters of the Northern Peruvian Andes: a palimpsest of technical styles in motion.PhDdissertation.

    SainsburyResearchUnitfortheArtsof Africa,Oceania&theAmericas.Norwich:Universityof EastAnglia.

    2008b ProduccinalfareraenPiura(Per):estilostcnicosydiacrona.Bulletin de lInstitut Franais dtudes Andines37:477-509.

    2013 Lasfuentesdelestilo:distribucinregionaldecanterasy tcnicasalfarerasenConchucos(ncash,Per).Bulletin de lInstitut Franais dtudes Andines42:49-90.

    Ramn,Gabriel&MarthaBell2013 Re-placingplainware:Productionanddistributionof domesticpottery,andthenarrationof

    thepre-colonialpastinthePeruvianAndes.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology32:595-613.

    Ravines,Rogger&FernandoVilliger(eds.)1989 La cermica tradicional del Per.Lima:LosPinos.

    Rowe,AnnePollard1978 PrcticastextilesenelreadelCusco.InRavines,Rogger(comp.):Tecnologa andina.Lima:

    InstitutodeEstudiosPeruanos,369-398.

    Rowe,AnnePollard,LauraM.Miller&LynnA.Meisch2007 Weaving and dyeing in highland Ecuador. Austin:Universityof TexasPress.

    Sillar,Bill2000 Making pots and constructing households: an ethnoarchaeological study of pottery production, trade and use

    in the Andes. BARinternationalseries,883. Oxford:J.andE.Hedges.

    Swadesh,Morris1953 Archaeologicalandlinguisticchronologyof Indo-Europeangroups.American Anthropologist

    55(3):349-352.

    Tadmor,Uri,MartinHaspelmath&BradleyTaylor2010 Borrowabilityandthenotionof basicvocabulary.Diachronica27(2):226-245.

    Torero,Alfredo1989 reas toponmicas e idiomas en la sierra norte peruana. Un trabajo de recuperacin

    lingstica.Revista Andina 7(1):217-257.

  • Luis Andrade Ciudad and Gabriel Ramn Joffr 320

    Indiana 31 (2014): 291-320

    Varese,Stefano1963-1964 NomenclaturadealgunostelaresindgenasdelPer.Folklore Americano11-12:335-342.

    Vink, Hein1982 LxicodelquechuadeMacaa(Pataz).Leiden.Ms.

    Weber,David,FlixCaycoZambrano,TeodoroCaycoVillar&MarleneBallenaDvila1998 Rimaycuna. Quechua de Hunuco.Lima:InstitutoLingsticodeVerano.