Other sites

No structure directly comparable to the Chiripa Upper House structures has been excavated at any other site. It would be a mistake, however, to interpret this fact as indicating the Chiripa was in some way exceptional during this period. On the contrary, three other sites are of equal size in the Late Chiripa phase, and two of these have surface indications of substantial corporate constructions.

A monumental terrace, very similar to the terrace on which Chiripa Upper House complex was situated, is located at the site of Yanapata (T-130) . This terrace measures approximately 50 by 40 meters, and is located against the base of the hill behind the site. That is, it occupies a location within the site analogous to that of the Chiripa mound, with the habitation areas mostly downslope. This terrace was apparently once faced with stone on its downslope side. One large limestone pillar remains in place in approximately the center of the terrace wall. I was informed by the landowner that a great deal of worked stone was pulled from this area and taken by truck to Taraco to be used in repairs to the church there. There is no indication of summit structures, but the top of the terrace has been extensively damaged. It had recently been tractor-plowed for the first time when I visited in 1998, exposing many large sherds and a few nearly-complete vessels. Some burned adobe was also encountered, perhaps indicating burned structures. Nothing further can be said without excavation, however. Based on its similarity to the Chiripa mound, I believe the Yanapata terrace to be late Middle Formative in date.

The site of Achachi Coa Kkollu (T-225), which, as mentioned in Chapter 5, seems to have been a ceremonial precinct associated with Kala Uyuni (T-232), also has evidence of corporate construction. It is located high on a hill overlooking the habitation sectors of Kala Uyuni below. This site clearly contains a terrace, faced with limestone blocks, though it is smaller than those at Yanapata and Chiripa. There may also be a sunken court present, though this is uncertain. No summit structures are in evidence, though again I would not expect them to be given the effects of millennia of erosion and agricultural tilling. The stone-faced terrace almost certainly dates to the Late Chiripa phase, since this is the only phase in which there is a substantial occupation of the site.

Some smaller Late Chiripa sites - those in the second tier of the settlement size hierarchy - have similar corporate constructions. Most notable is Chiaramaya (T-3), which has a very large monumental terrace, perhaps as large as that of Chiripa. In 1998 I observed informal excavations on this feature when the community constructed a new meeting hall. Dense cultural debris was unearthed, including many large chunks of burned adobe. This is suggestive of burned summit structures, though excavation or geophysical survey would be necessary to confirm this. The form of this terrace, like that of the Yanapata terrace, suggests contemporaneity with the Upper House complex.

Another similar terrace, though smaller, was found at the site of Alto Pukara (T-430). This terrace is quite small, perhaps 20 x 20 meters. This feature was excavated in 2000 by Robin Beck (pers. comm. 2001). He encountered 2 structures arrayed on either side of an open plaza area. The structures were detached, and although they did have interior niches, lacked the bins, stepped entries and other elaborate features characteristic of the Chiripa Upper House structures. It should be noted that no sunken court was encountered in the plaza area. This group of structures may be contemporaneous with the Upper House complex or slightly earlier. More details will be forthcoming in Beck's dissertation.

The site of Quiswarán (T-303) also seems to have a small terrace, perhaps similar to the Alto Pukara feature. Verification will require excavation, however. Tilata (T-368) has a true mound, though this probably dates to a later period of the site's long occupation span. One of the landowners at Tilata informed me that he had a sculpted stone piece in his house. I was unable to view this at the time, however, since it was covered by his annual dung fuel reserves, it being early winter. I have as yet not returned to photograph the piece.

Two other small sites potentially have sunken courts without terraces. At one of these, Sunaj Pata (T-268), a possible court was identified by a rectangular stain in the topsoil of a tractor-plowed field. This is the same manner in which we initially identified the Llusco structure at Chiripa in 1992. Sunaj Pata has only Early Chiripa and Late Chiripa occupations, so the court - if it is a court - is almost certainly Middle Formative in date. The other, Millón Jawira (T-476), is a small but very dense scatter of which Late Chiripa is the only Formative occupation. There is a rectangular sunken area near the middle of the sherd scatter. Local residents informed me that very large stones are frequently removed from this area while plowing.

It is clear, then, that terraces and sunken courts - and perhaps elaborate architectural enclosures - are quite widespread in the Middle Formative. Even relatively minor sites like Chiaramaya or Alto Pukara have impressive monumental architecture. The scale of corporate features seems to coincide roughly with site size; larger sites have larger constructions. This is far from a neat correlation, however, and is complicated especially by the case of Chiaramaya.

In short, there is no one site which is clearly exceptional in terms of the scale or elaboration of its public architecture in the Middle Formative. This realization directly contradicts a common assumption in the literature that - due to its elaborate public architecture - Chiripa was in some way exceptional for its time, a ceremonial center or locus of paramount chiefly power. For example, Mathews, in his survey of the middle Tiwanaku Valley, noted that Middle Formative sites were not randomly distributed, but rather were clustered. Thus:

...the Chiripa-associated sites do not appear to be random settlements, but rather suggest a higher degree of settlement organization, possibly directed by the administrative leadership of Chiripa itself. The exact nature of their control is unclear ... Given Chiripa's manifestation of the earliest public architecture in the region, however ... a scenario of direct contiguous control of the Tiwanaku Valley by the Chiripa polity is not outside the pale of possibility. ([Mathews 1992]: 68)

Stanish arrives at a similar conclusion:

I argue that the construction of this major corporate architecture [the Upper House complex] correlated with the development of a complex chiefdom at Chiripa. ([Stanish et al. 1997]: 115)

Browman sees Chiripa as a center similar in principle to Pukara and Tiwanaku:

Pucara dominated the area north of Lake Titicaca ... while first Chiripa and later Tiwanaku dominated the area immediately south of the lake. ([Browman 1981]: 413)

What has become clear from this investigation is that a number of other sites very like Chiripa existed at the same time, and that Chiripa was in no way unique in having elaborate public architecture. The preservation of the Middle Formative architecture at Chiripa is exceptional - owing to its burial and protection by a subsequent mound construction episode - but on present evidence it seems as if the architecture itself was not unusual in the context of the contemporaneous Taraco Peninsula villages. Chiripa was one - not first - of many.