ARCHITECTURE.pdf

1 S. Nair Inka Architecture and Andean Stone Carving Traditions Stella Nair Inka architecture is intimately tied to the rugged An...

1 S. Nair Inka Architecture and Andean Stone Carving Traditions Stella Nair Inka architecture is intimately tied to the rugged Andean mountains. Running along the western rim of South America, the Andean mountain range is the longest and second highest mountain chain in the world. It is also home to a diversity of ecosystems and environmental zones. From the driest desert in the world, to some of the lushest jungles, the Andean range encompasses majestic glaciers, treeless barren planes, and densely packed forests. This highly varied landscape is often very difficult to build upon, as well as farm. Perhaps because of this environmental challenge, short and long-distance trade developed early in Andean history, as did a diversity of impressive architectural traditions. The most well-known of which today is Inka architecture. When most people think of Inka architecture, the first thing that comes to mind is stone masonry. For example, Machu Picchu, one of the most famous and thus well-known Inka sites today, is made up almost entirely of stone (see chapter by F. Astete). And not just any stones but granite, a hard stone that is difficult to work. At Machu Picchu, the Inka worked the granite blocks to fit perfectly together, one to another, with no mortar. Some of these stones are finely finished rectangular blocks, while others appear more natural in form as if they emerged from rugged outcrops. Yet all of these stones were carefully shaped to create buildings, terraces, walkways, waterfalls, and plazas. The result is a stunning lithic palace. The Inka were expert stonemasons and civil engineers who knew how to choose high quality stone that could be shaped to create a diversity of places. These stones were often found in quarries in or near a building site. But if the local stone did not meet their standards, the Inkas 1  2 S. Nair would go far distances and to great lengths to get the specific stones they wanted. For their finest masonry, the Inka preferred very fine grained stones as large mineral inclusions made cutting difficult. In addition the Inka sought out dense hard stones. While these take more time to work, they also allow skilled stone masons to have more control over the cutting and shaping process. Softer stones are more vulnerable to break in uncontrolled ways, as did stones that had cleavage planes and were brittle. For these reasons, the Inka often chose andesite and harder limestones to build their finest walls. The Inka were very systematic in how they harvested, transported, carved and laid their stones. Once a high-quality source of stone was found, the Inka rough shaped the blocks before transporting it to a construction zone. This rough shaping was done with large hammerstones which were chosen for their size, weight, and balance. Stone masons gripped these with two hands, turned them at a slight angle (for maximum impact), and then dropped the hammerstone onto the stone face that needed to be cut. If executed properly, the hammerstone would crush the stone face before bouncing back into the hands of the mason. Thus the rough shaping stage did not depend upon the mason using their muscles to carve stones, but rather, by letting the hammerstone (and thus gravity) do the work. This is a highly effective and very efficient way to carve and does not tire the skilled mason. The hammerstones, which are usually unworked river cobbles, do not need to be harder than the stone that is being worked, rather hammerstones only have to be as hard as the stone being worked. Once a block has been quarried and rough shaped, it was transported to a construction site. The Inka made roads to transport their stones. These roads were a subset of an impressive and complex road network that covered their empire. Many of these roads pre-existed the Inka empire. Hence the Inka took over roads and pathways originally made by others, but expanded 2  3 S. Nair and improved upon them. The core of this system was a series of highways, which the Inka called the Capac Ñan, as well as secondary and tertiary roads. The Inka used this road network to move their armies and supplies as well as to control (i.e., restrict) the movement of their subjects. One of the things moving on these roads were Inka stones on their way to a construction site. These were pulled by large groups of people using ropes. The Inka also built ramps so stones, with the aid of gravity, could travel quickly down a mountainside. The Inca harvested many stones directly on a construction site, but for those that came long distance, the Inca had the infrastructure needed to move them. Once the stones were brought to their construction site, the “dressing” of the stones began. For the Inka, no two stones were alike, rather each was worked to fit precisely in a single place. The Inka used a series of small hammerstones to carefully “dress” (carve) the stone. This is because the mason had to be careful and precise in terms of the cuts that needed to be made as these were the final carvings that had to be done to a block. And hence smaller, more easily controlled tools were needed. Round river cobles were often used, as these could be comfortably held in a single hand. The larger of these round hammerstone was used to work the faces of the stones, and the smaller hammerstones were used in more delicate areas such as on the edges or exterior corners of a stone. These exposed areas are the most fragile parts of a stone, as they can be easily knocked off by even slightly overhitting. Thus, as the corners get more refined, the tool size and the pressure used has to be reduced. This working process leaves its tracing on the stones, and thus are visible today. The hammer process leaves pits scars, and these scars reveal the size of tool used by the masons to hammer the stone’s faces. Large pit scars can be seen over the central portions of large Inka blocks, while smaller pit scars can be seen all along the edges or corners of the stone. Even the 3  4 S. Nair tiniest of pit scars can be seen in the interior angles of stones, as these areas (due to the narrow space a mason had to work) were worked by small oblong hammerstones, which could gently pound out interior angles. These angles are always rounded (i.e. never sharp interior angles) due to the form of the hammerstone used. This final shaping process occurred at the same time the stones were placed into an Inka wall. Specifically, when a block is placed on a wall, it is worked to fit the stone below it as well as the one already next to it. But the other sides are left rough shaped, until a block is eventually worked to fit next to it, and then both planes that will touch each other, are worked simultaneously. This creates the perfect fit that so captivates visitors to Inka sites today. Indeed, the results are stunning. Not only do finely worked Inka blocks fit perfectly together, but the unique shape and fit of each stone creates a wall (and thus a building) whose aesthetic is its unique construction details. These finely made (mortarless) Inka walls were made up of either polygonal or ashlar blocks. Polygonal blocks have many angles and are laid in irregular courses (Fig. 1). By contrast, ashlar blocks are rectangular, and they are laid in regular courses (Fig. 2). Today, it is the polygonal blocks with their many angles that fascinate tourists, who stop to count the angles of a single stone and take their pictures by them. Ironically, of the two types of masonry, polygonal is the easiest to make. As mentioned earlier, the corners are the most fragile parts of a block and if done incorrectly, a corner will break off. When carving a polygonal block, that is not a problem, as the stone to be placed next to it simply has to be carved to match this new angle. But, there is no such flexibility with carving ashlar blocks, as they are defined by their rectangular shape (which also enables the laying of these blocks in regular courses). If a mason makes a mistake when carving an ashlar block and a corner is broken off, the block is no longer 4  5 S. Nair rectangular (and thus no longer an ashlar) and cannot be used. Hence, the carving of polygonal blocks allowed masons to learn and improve as they carved, making mistakes and adjusting as they went, while the masons who works ashlar blocks had no such leeway. Instead, these masons had to be the most skilled since there was little room for mistakes. For the Inka, to work stone was not only about technical skill, but was also understood to be a deeply meaningful process. This is because for the Inka (and many Andeans) stone was understood to be a powerful and sacred material. Unusual outcrops in the highlands were often considered to be huaca, or sacred places. They were understood to have camay (the sacred breath) and were often seen as an expression of Pachamama (“earth mother”). Hence, the Inka ability to shape and move this powerful material made visible the Inka’s relationship with the sacred forces. The Inka’s lithic architecture sent a clear message to the newly conquered that the Inka and the sacred forces were working together. The Inka used architecture to magnify this relationship by blurring the line between what was “natural” (i.e., a manifestation of Pachamama and/or a huaca) and manmade (worked by the Inka). The Inka built walls that seems to emerge from sacred outcrops. They carved stones so that it was sometimes impossible to tell where the natural boulder ended and the Inka blocks began. In addition, the Inka used their construction process to celebrate their negotiated relationship with the sacred. For example, the Inka occasionally choose to leave the “boss” (protrusions on stones that allow for easy handling and moving on a finished wall. By not hammering away the boss (which is what most cultures do the world over) when it is no longer needed, the Inka left the bosses on the wall. The result is that the bosses serve as a visible reminder that the Inka carved and shaped this sacred lithic material. 5  6 S. Nair Stone was a key part of Inka architecture, not only as a material with which to build (and thus a visible signifier of their skill in stone masonry) but also as a form of sacredness (and an expression of the Inka’s relationship with the scared). This understanding and use of stone did not originate with the Inka, but rather comes from long standing Andean practices. In truth, the Inka are just the latest in a series of Andean skilled carvers, who were brilliant civil engineers and sculptural virtuosos who saw the sacred in stone. Stone Masonry and Mastery in the Andes Before exploring other aspects of Inka architecture, it is important to understand how Inka architecture fits within a larger Andean building history, particularly a lithic one. There are a diversity of distinct stone masonry traditions in the Andes, but three periods (sites) stand out, highlighting an exceptional mastery of stone. At Chavín de Huántar, Tiwanaku, and during the Inka empire, stone carving technology developed to a refinement that makes the Andes one of the global centers of stone masonry. These master masons created exquisitely detailed low relief sculptures, massive monolithic walls and gateways, and geometric motifs that were perfectly replicated to the millimeter in three dimensions. These builders used stone architecture to define their identity and create major centers of pilgrimage and exchange, as well as facilitate colonization. Stone Architecture and the Art of Transformation: Chavín de Huántar 6  7 S. Nair Chavín de Huántar was once one of the most important pilgrimage sites in the Andes. Its religious core was composed of a compact and diverse collection of lithic structures which were carefully sited in a sacred landscape. Nestled in a steep valley where the Andes mountain chain splits in two, Chavín was occupied for about seven centuries, between 1200-200 BCE (though its occupation may have begun as early as 3000 BCE). Chavín was defined by a monumental core that was filled with small, but densely packed groups of low-lying stone platforms and plazas, along with one massive stone structure. Beyond this monumental core were residential areas that housed Chavín’s residents and could accommodate the numerous pilgrims to the site. The monumental architecture of the ceremonial center is made largely from the granite. While the masons of Chavín were also masters of their craft, and deployed it for religious purposes (if not also other authorities), the architecture of Chavín was profoundly different than the Inka. For example, the main ceremonial (stone) structure is massive with many interior tunnels. These tunnels are made of impressive stone slabs. Placed around the main structure were a series of stone tennon heads. (Fig. 3) These projecting stone sculptures were set into wall sockets and depicted human, animal, and other heads in varying states of transformation. The evocatively carved stone heads not only depicted the imagined transformation of humans turning into animals and back, but they also show the very real physical changes associated with specific types of hallucinogens when inserted in the nasal cavities. Nearby was a sunken court laid out in a small perfect circle (approximately twenty meters in diameter) paved with yellow diatomite. A visitor would have been guided along the circumference of the circle via images on several courses of flat stone slabs, mainly of granite carved in low relief. Two courses were carved with images that wrapped around the circle. The 7  8 S. Nair upper course depicted humans, some transforming into animals, while the lower course depicted jaguars. Carved with expert precision and skill, Chavín’s sacred architecture was a monument to stone and their skilled carvers. The decorative slabs, the tennon heads, and the main structures in the ceremonial core of Chavín were all made of stone, most often granite. Despite this, Chavín masons were able to execute delicate, precise designs on a variety of stones. Master Stone Masons and the Architecture of Movement: Tiwanaku Andean architecture continued to develop in mired ways after the decline of Chavín, but there was not another site that displayed such lithic mastery until the rise of Tiwanaku. Tiwanaku is near the inland sea of Lake Titicaca located in the altiplano (high plateau) region straddling present day Peru and Bolivia. The Titicaca basin was an important region for cultural development in the Andes, with a distinctive iconography, architecture, and stone carving tradition (which drew from precedents from earlier, nearby sites such as Chiripa and Pukara). Tiwanaku was strategically located at the crossroads between the lush lowlands of the jungle to the east, and the dry coastal terrain to the west. This critical location allowed Tiwanaku to develop into one of the most important centers in Andean history, whose influences spread widely in the central and southern Andes. Finely carved fragments of buildings can be found throughout the site, testifying to the magnificence of the former city (Fig. 4). The first evidence of monumental architecture at the site began around AD 100, but most of the impressive structures were built between AD 400-800 (the site rapidly declined after AD 1000). Evidence suggests much of the domestic architecture was made of perishable materials while monumental civic structures were made of more durable materials such as stone. Research 8  9 S. Nair also indicates that the city planners had an extensive stone drainage system made from stone, both within monumental structures and around the city, a necessity given the dramatic deluge that can happen in the rainy season. Although the site was greatly damaged by numerous groups after its abandonment, the evidence that survives reveals the stunning stone carving ability of the masons. The complex of Puma Punku, set slightly beyond the monumental core, was one of the last major architectural complexes to have undergone considerable construction at Tiwanaku. It was a stepped platform structure encased with stones, whose carving are some of the finest ever executed in the world (ie. given the difficult of the task and the precision in the outcome). Puma Punku is an architectural marvel due to the magnificence and multitude of finely carved stone fragments that littered the site. Set in a geologically rich region, the builders of Tiwanaku had access to many stone types. For their finest work, they preferred a hard, fine-grained andesite. This carefully chosen material made stone carving slow and laborious, but also gave smooth, precise details in the hands of an expert mason. With this andesite, Tiwanaku's stone masons were able to make perfectly planar surfaces, exact right angles (in three dimensions), and sharp interior and exterior edges. They carved in the round and as well as in low relief. (Fig. 5). They also fitted stone perfectly together, though did so in a way that was very different than the later Inka. The Tiwanaku masons did their carvings without access to hard metal tools and were able to replicate their motifs to the millimeters across a variety of stones. The tool kit they had would have been very different than the one held by the Inka. The Tiwanaku toolkit would have used the Inca hammerstone, but would have also had a planar device (to measure flat surfaces) as well as chisels, point tools, and incisors. They likely also had a distinct polisher, such as degraded 9  10 S. Nair obsidian, that can be used to polish inside sharp interior angles. As experiments have shown, and evidence on the faces of the finely worked stones indicate, this remarkable tool kit could have been largely, if not entirely made up of stone tools (but a far more extensive and diverse one than held by Inka masons). The importance of facture, or the process of making, has a long history in the Andes, such that how something was made gave the object value. Tiwanaku's architecture is no exception. Much of the expert precision of the stone cutting would not have been noticeable to the average viewer, and was sometimes completely obscured from view (hence, only the stone masons knew of its existence). At Tiwanaku, stone cutting was as much about the process of making (and perhaps the religious significance of working with sacred materials) as it was in producing a final, visible product. Inka Architecture: Materials, Meaning, and New Directions For the Inka, stone was a critical aspect of their architecture, as the sacred natural landscape form which it came (and was a part). But the Inka were not unusual in this understanding and thus when we talk about the architectural achievements of the Inka in stone, we need to realize that Inka architecture emerged in a part of the world where there were many great achievements in stone carving. Chavín, Tiwanaku, and the Inka are the three most impressive of this lithic tradition, but there were many more. It is perhaps not surprising that culture that lived in the longest mountain chain in the world, understood stone as a vital and deeply meaningful material that could spur creative design and engineering innovation. 10  11 S. Nair While stone was a critical aspect of Inka architecture, it was only one part of the Imperial building cannon. In the early days of the Inka expansion, it likely had a very limited role. In particular, when we consider the architecture of the expanding state, such as its imperial encampments, stone architecture likely played no role at al. While early trade networks that reached their borders began early, the Inka Empire began late and expanded rapidly. In about 100 years the Inka transformed from a small polity in the Cusco valley (see chapter by S. Ramírez) to the largest indigenous empire in the history of the Americas. To conquer so much territory in so short a time, the ruler and his military units had to be away in battle for years at a time. Thus, the Inka developed an ephemeral architecture for warfare, where easily transportable tents could be rapidly set up to accommodate a few dozen as well as a few thousand men at a time. These textiles cities had to be deployed in the glaciated peaks of the high Andes, as well as across the parched deserts of the coast. They had to be easy to carry, readily assembled, and quickly dismantled. They also had to be flexible, so that they could be arranged in a variety of combinations to house a diversity of functions and people. But they also had to be distinguishable so that they could readily signify the hierarchies of power and authority that were central to Inka society. We know little of what this ephemeral architecture of the Inka was like, other than references by Iberians who described looking over valleys in awe at these immense tent cities. Textiles played a critical role in the development of Andean society and material culture, so it is not surprising that the Inka empire depended upon textiles to create their military cities. There were many types of ephemeral architecture in the Andes (as well across the Americas), and the lack of our knowledge about them is another reminder of the many lost chapters in the history of Andean architecture. 11  12 S. Nair But the trace of these ephemeral Inka cities can be found in the stone buildings of the Inka, for the mobile tent cities of the Inka likely informed how the Inka eventually built their permanent settlements. The most elites of these places were likely built of the fine, mortarless masonry discuss earlier, but the majority of Inka installations would have been built of other materials. These would have ranged from unworked rubble masonry to masonry that was minimally worked. These were often covered with stucco, so the rough state of the stone would not have been visible to visitors. Even more common however, was adobe (sun-dried mud brick) as a building material. The Andes has a very long and extensive history of working with earthen materials, from adobe blocks to rammed earth (known as tapia). While rammed earth is often found in the architecture built by cultures living along the Pacific coast,, the Inka preferred their earthen material in the form of adobe blocks. Inka adobe blocks were not form-made (i.e., using wooden-frame molds) and thus did not come in a standard size. Thus, Inka blocks could range widely in size, and tended to be longer and thinner than the adobe blocks (made in forms) that were later brought in by the Spanish. These adobe blocks, like rough stone masonry, was covered in stucco. Surviving structures, such as Tambo Colorado, and references in early colonial writing, suggest that elite adobe buildings were also frequently painted, with a preference for strong colors, such as black, red, yellow and white. These were done in large color blocks or geometric shapes, and must have made for very striking settlements that helped to proclaim the presence and power of the Inka. Inka permanent settlements varied from way-stations and military installations, to religious compounds and domestic settings. In each, the Inka used a simple, but highly flexible architectural tool kit that could be built quickly, adapt to a variety of environmental zones, and accommodate a diversity of functions. The Inka began with a very simple architectural form, the 12  13 S. Nair rectangle. While they varied its size, proportions, and openings, this simple form became the “building block” for all their settlements. This simple structure could be used to encircle courtyards, or be lined up along major causeways. This building type could be arranged in multiple ways to fit the specific functions demanded of a location (much like the military tents). This is just one example of the ways that the Inka developed an architecture that could be rapidly and effectively deployed as they swiftly colonized a region. The Inka also created a distinct design vocabulary to distinguish their architecture to aid in their conquest strategies. The Inka were a relatively small ethnic group, but to rule their vast empire, they needed to visually and materially articulate their presence. This distinctive design had to be easy to build, as the Inka relied upon a rotating and largely unskilled labor force (men who were called up by the Inka to do a labor tax; see chapter by T. D'Altroy). Thus, the Inka used simple design elements that consisted of seven core elements. The Inkas did not usually use all of these at once, but rather used a few in combination to convey an Inka architectural presence. These elements were 1) single room, rectangular buildings, 2) battered walls, 3) trapezoidal features (windows, doorways, and niches), 4), gabled and hipped roofs, 5) terraces, 6) relationship to natural features, and 7) stone architecture, such as polygonal and ashlar masonry already discussed. (Figs. 6-10). Once combined, in groups of 3 or more, allowed the Inka to quickly and easily build a diversity of sites to house their vast and rapidly expanding empire, that was also distinctively Inka and thus proclaimed the Inka presence across the western rim of South America. Inka walls were thick and battered and often made of adobe (sun-dried brick), but the most elite sites and the most important architecture tended to be made of quality stone. Fine stone masonry of ashlar or polygonal was used on high status buildings. This striking stonework 13  14 S. Nair amazed Iberian visitors and left them bewildered at how such impressive masonry could be carved. But this stone masonry was deceptively easy to make (unlike Chavín and Tiwanaku carvings) and fit well with the limitations of untrained, rotating labor forces. The stone carving system the Inka developed was simple, easy to teach to unskilled workers, and depended upon a very small tool kit. The Inka had construction specialists who trained the new recruits, oversaw the process of building, and provided guidance and quality control. These construction specialists (pircacamayoc, or “wall specialist”) worked for the state year-round. The Inka had their own categories for buildings, which give us insights into how the Inka gave value and meaning their built environment. For the Inka, some structures were defined by their unusual form. For example, the Inka had a tower (usual round but could also be square or rectangular in plan) that they called a suntur uasi. While they called any building or collection of buildings in which you could store something a colca, they gave a special name to a type of storage that was a series of interconnected squares, the churacona uasi. Another type of storage structure was the marca uasi, which was so named as it had a loft inside which aided in storing a variety of goods. The Inca were spatially very sophisticated so it is not surprising that they had special names for structures according to their spatial properties. For example, a pata, is a step and thus a staircase is a pata pata. This view of a riser (vertical element) combined with a runner (horizonal element) defining space meant that the Inka called special raised platforms upon which activities took place as a type of pata. For example, there were a paired set of open areas that were the center of Inka ceremony in the Inca capital. The Spanish called these plazas, but the Inca called them pata, specifically the Huakaypata and the Kusipata). Spatial relationship also defined another space that the Inka understood as being larger about its openness: the pampa. 14  15 S. Nair When the Spanish arrived, they glossed many of these pampa as “plazas” as they did the pata. And in doing so, overlooked the Inka way of noting special spatial qualities of these places. For example, the main performative space in the Inka estate at Chinchero is a raised spaces sitting on top of a series of terraces yet it was called a pampa (and not a pata). (Fig. 11) The feeling on this space is one of openness, as the name suggests, but is referred to as a plaza by non-Indigenous to the site today. Thus it is not only the Spaniards of the early modern period that misunderstood and misnamed Inka spaces, but also modern and contemporary outsiders who visit Inka places today. Indeed, even scholars today are guilty of glossing over (if not outright misunderstanding) Inka architectural categories in problematic ways. An example is the Inka usnu. The Inka built special viewing platform in many Inka cities, towns, and settlements. This is where the Inka or his representative would stand to be see and be seen during critical imperial visits and rituals. Some of these viewing platforms had special attributes, such as a rock outcrop and channels for liquid (though this is still debated) and because of this, this platforms took on special meaning and were called an usnu. However, the special nature of this type of viewing platform has been lost to many scholars, who can be found referring to most viewing platforms and even many carved outcrops as usnu. Another example of a misuse of Imperial Inka architectural terminology is the kallanka. For the Inka, a kallanka was a large rectangular block (ashlar) used in a foundation. Thus a kallanka is like a brick. The Inka called a structure built of these ashlar blocks a kallanka uasi (a house of kallanka). Yet starting the mid 1970s, scholars began using the term to define a rectangular Inka structures (often large but not always). And this modern definition has become associated with special functions, that reach back into early Iberian misunderstanding of Inka 15  16 S. Nair spaces. Thus, modern scholars, just like Iberians invaders, have created confusion and misunderstanding of Inka building types and categories of meaning. Fortunately, if we turn back to the original Inka terminology and definitions for architecture we can get great insights into how the Inka understood and gave value to their built environment. For example, the majority of names the Inka gave their architecture tell us about a structure's function. This is not surprising given that most Inka buildings were single room, rectangular structures and thus one could insert a variety of functions into the same type of space (or even a single building, as one structure could house different functions at different times). These functions ranged from that of service, such as the masana uasi (the house for drying clothes), to that of private family life, the punona uasi (the house of sleep and sex), and politics, such as the camachicona uasi (the house of the Inka officials, called the camachi). The final category of names is a reminder of how spatial practices were such a key aspect of Inka design, as they crafted carefully choreographed pathways of experience that lead from one space to another, or one site to another, framing what a person was to see and hear. For the Inka, architecture was considered to be relational and thus experienced in movement. We have already seen how the Inka did this with exterior spaces such as the pata and pampa. Hence, it is not surprising that the defining aspect in Inka building is not usually its plan (which is normally a simple rectangle) but rather a building's openings which defined ones spatial relationship and experience. This could be done in various ways, such as making a doorway (which is normally a single jamb) have a double jamb on one side. The Inkas often did this if they wanted the person approaching to know that the space that lay beyond the doorway (or window) was more important than the space upon which the person who is looking at the doorway stood. Double (and sometimes triple) jambs let a visitor know that the space that lay beyond the jamb was of 16  17 S. Nair the greater significance. (Fig. 12) In addition to jambs, the Inka made larger openings in buildings. And it is a subset of these that were so important the Inka gave them special names. The cuysumanco was a rectangular structure associated with the Inka royal estate and is described as having one very large doorway at gable end (the gable above is closed). Another of these buildings is called a carpa uasi, (house of the tent), also associated with the Inka ruler, that was described as a rectangular structure with one end entirely open (i.e., it has three walls, not four, so even the gable end of the roof was open). This buildings is also defined in the early writings as a “house for listening” so one wonders if this was a type of performance or speech hall associated with the ruler. These Inka categories provide critical insights into how we can begin to think of the meaning and use of Inka buildings, from an Indigenous perspective. Inka architecture was far more than individual buildings; it was an extensive "built environment" that was both conceptual and physical and was based in perceptions of the landscape shared by many Andean peoples. For example, the Inka viewed the landscape as sacred, in particular, in materials such as stone. They used architecture to articulate this lithic understanding, such as framing vistas to sacred mountain peaks or carving sacred outcrops. It also entailed using sacred stone materials to build Inka buildings. This architectural integration with the sacred, lithic landscape had important imperial implications. By integrating their architecture into places which local populations considered sacred, it was difficult to trace where the sacred landscape stopped and where the Inka building began. In doing so, the Inka built environment proclaimed their own entanglement with sacred status and power (see chapter by F. Acuto). This view of the landscape as sacred was impacted by the limited supply of agricultural lands. In the steep and often rocky vertical terrain of the Andes, finding flat, fertile lands that 17  18 S. Nair could be planted was not easy. Frequent mudslides and shifting topsoil compounded the problem. To build on this landscape, the Inka had to be skilled hydraulic, soil, and civil engineers. They excavated and stabilized sites before they built upon them and created extensive underground water channels to bring fresh water to households and grey water to fields (see chapter by F. Astete). When they rebuilt on the mountainous terrain, they created numerous terraces to raise crops and stable surfaces for new buildings. The quality of their work can be seen in the many Inka buildings which have survived despite massive earthquakes over the centuries. The Inka devised an easy to design and build architectural tradition that was also highly adaptive and flexible to the needs of a rapidly expanding imperial state. Its distinguishing features were a simple building form, battered walls, trapezoidal features, gabled and hipped roofs, ashlar and polygonal masonry, agricultural terraces, and an articulated relationship to the sacred and productive landscape. The Inka did not use all these features in all of these sites; instead, they chose a few elements, often just three or four, to make their architecture read as distinctly Inka. They also adapted local design and construction elements when needed, such as round structures and raised beds, to create an Inka architecture that spoke to its specific, highly localized, political, environmental, and cultural context. In this way, Inka architecture was as much a reflection of the Inka state and its imperial agenda, as it was a material expression of local cultural dynamics and history. Despite this flexibility and adaptability, Inka stone architecture served as a visible symbol of elite Inka status and presence, and it continues to live on in the imagination of visitors to the Andes, who see the Inka’s architectural achievements today. 18  19 S. Nair Diversity, Adaptability, and Shared Architectural Traditions: the Andes Materials were of utmost importance in the Andes and perhaps no architectural material was most widely recognized as sacred than stone. The master masons at Chavín de Huántar used stone to make their majestic monument as well as depict their intricate sacred images. With stones they created dynamic experiences that served the needs of a powerful pilgrimage center. Stone also played a key role in Tiwanaku, where they developed a technology and process of making that rivalled some of the finest stone carving ever created. For the Tiwanaku, facture, or the process of making, matched the sacredness of the stone materials. Tiwanaku and its architecture inspired the Inka’s own achievements, at least in critical narratives, if not in reality. The Inka developed their own stone carving tradition and with it they made a distinctive lithic architecture that was flexible, adaptable, and well suited to their changing imperial desires. Architecture symbolized Inka beliefs, housed their state and domestic needs, and facilitated their development into the largest Native American empire in the history of the Americas. The study of Andean architecture is a relatively young field. While we know the most about Inka architecture, there is still so much we do not yet know of their architecture, such as the details of the fascinating woven architecture that defined the Inka armies that conquered the western rim of South America. In addition, we have a lot more to learn, in terms of how Inka architecture changed over time, and across space. And we have not yet begun to grapple with the ways in which gender (in particular women) played a role in Inka architecture. And while we have a much better understanding of the role of stone in the Inka built environment, which defined many of the most important buildings of the Inka Empire, we still know very little about 19  20 S. Nair Inka adobe, which likely was used to make the vast majority of Inka structures. Hence, in many ways, our work has just begun. New studies will provide a fuller and more detailed understanding of the diversity of architecture in this part of the world. Unfortunately, with each day that passes, more of this rich tradition is lost, not just in the Andes, but across the Americas. Whether due to the destructive nature of time or man, in the form of expanding cities, or in the name of architectural “reconstruction” for tourist dollars, indigenous architecture of the Americas is highly threatened and endangered, much like the surviving Indigenous communities who live in the Americas today, and whose ancestors built these magnificent works. 20  21 S. Nair Figure Captions 1. Polygonal Inka wall at the royal estate of Chinchero. Photograph by Stella Nair. 2. Ashlar masonry and trapezoidal doorway at Machu Picchu. Photograph by Stella Nair. 3. Chavín de Huántar, Tennon Heads. Photograph courtesy of Izumi Shimada. 4. Scattered stones of finely worked Tiwanaku masonry. Photograph by Stella Nair. 5. Close up of finely worked Tiwanaku masonry. Note that fine, low relief chiseling and incising was not done in Inka masonry. Photograph by Stella Nair. 6. Battered (sloping) Inka walls. Photograph by Stella Nair. 7. Trapezoidal niches in Inka building at Pisac. Photograph by Stella Nair. 8. Gabled Inka roof projecting above surrounding buildings that once had hipped roofs at Machu Picchu. Photograph by Stella Nair. 9. Inka terraces at the royal estate of Chinchero. Photograph by Stella Nair. 10. Natural outcrops that have been purposely integrated into Inka terraces at Machu Picchu. Photograph by Stella Nair. 11. The main pampa at Chinchero, which is an extensive open space that is raised on a series of terraces. Note the scale of the people walking on the pampa. Photograph by Stella Nair. 12. Remains of a large double jamb (with double lintel) niche (left) next to a double jamb doorway (right) in the interior of a building at Chinchero. Photograph by Stella Nair. 21  22 S. Nair Suggested Reading 1. Jean Pierre Protzen. 1993. Inka Architecture and Constructure. New York: Oxford University Press. 2. Susan Niles. 1999. The Shape of Inka History: Narrative and Architecture in an Andean Empire. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press. 3. Gasparini, Graziano, and Margolies, Luise. 1980. Inca Architecture. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 4. Dean, Carolyn. 2010. A Culture of Stone: Inka Perspectives on Rock. Durham: Duke University Press. 5. Nair, Stella. 2015. At Home with the Sapa Inka; Architecture, Space and Legacy at Chinchero. Austin: University of Texas Press. Biography Trained as an architect and architectural historian, Stella Nair has conducted fieldwork in Bolivia, Mexico, Peru, and the United States, with ongoing projects in the South Central Andes. Subjects and regions she has explored include Tiwanaku lithic technology, the design of Inka royal estates, and 18th century Andean woven roofs. She has published two books: At Home with the Sapa Inca: Architecture, Space, and Legacy at Chinchero (University of Texas, 2015), and (with Jean-Pierre Protzen) The Stones of Tiahuanaco: A Study of Architecture and Construction 22  23 S. Nair (Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 2013). Nair is Associate Professor at University of California, Los Angeles (Art History, Archaeology and American Indian Studies). 23