THE CUSCO CEQUE SYSTEM AS SHOWN IN THE EXSUL IMMERITUS BLAS

VALERA POPULO SUO

Brian S. Bauer

In this article I discuss a recently discovered drawing of the Cusco ceque system. A previous study of the drawing suggests
that it is an inaccurate reproduction of the system. In contrast, I propose that the drawing is accurate and organizes
information on the system in ways not considered by scholars before. While the accuracy of the drawing is confirmed,
the question of authorship remains open.

En este artículo se discute sobre un dibujo del sistema de ceques del Cusco. Un estudio previo acerca del mismo sugiere
que es una reproducción inexacta del sistema. Por el contrario, aquí se propone que el dibujo es preciso y que organiza la
información acerca del sistema de ceques de un modo nunca antes considerado por los investigadores del tema. Aunque
la precisión del dibujo queda confirmada, la cuestión acerca de su autoría permanece aún sin responder.

I n the 1990s, a series of documents came to light in

a private archive in Italy which contain what
appears to be the only known pre-modern period
drawing of the Cusco ceque system.1 The drawing
is found within a small folio entitled Exsul immeritus
Blas Valera populo suo (henceforth abbreviated as
EiBVps), allegedly written by the defrocked Jesuit
Blas Valera. The drawing is labeled cequecuna (i.e.
“ceques”2) and seems to be based on information
from Polo de Ondegardo’s now lost 1559 description
of the Cusco ceque system, which was later copied by
Bernabé Cobo in 1653 (Bauer 1998). A previous
study of the EiBVps drawing suggests that it is an
inaccurate reproduction of the Cusco ceque system
(Zuidema 2007). In this article, I provide a brief
description of the Cusco ceque system and compare
that information with the newly found drawing. I
propose that the drawing is remarkably accurate. In
presenting this analysis I recognize that both the
authorship and the age of the EiBVps are currently
at the center of a prolonged debate (Adorno 1998,
2015; Hyland 2003, 2008; Laurencich Minelli
2005; Laurencich Minelli and Numhauser 2004,
2007; Pellicani 2001). Nevertheless, I believe that a
“decoding” of the drawing may offer new insights
into how the indigenous people of Cusco conceived

Brian S. Bauer, Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois (bsb@uic.edu)

Ñawpa Pacha, Journal of Andean Archaeology, Volume 36, Number 1, pp. 23–34. Copyright # 2016 Institute of Andean Studies. All rights reserved.

23
 Ñawpa Pacha: Journal of Andean Archaeology Volume 36, Number 1
of the system, providing additional information on
this controversial set of documents.
The Cusco Ceque System
In order to appreciate both the simplicity of the
EiBVps drawing, as well as its elegance, I will begin
with a brief review of the basic organizing principles
of the Cusco ceque system.3 The city of Cusco and
the surrounding region were conceptually divided
by the Inca into two parts: Hanan (upper) Cusco
and Hurin (lower) Cusco. Each of these parts was
further divided into two divisions (suyus).
Chinchaysuyu and Antisuyu formed Hanan Cusco
while Collasuyu and Cuntisuyu formed Hurin
Cusco. These four quarters converged on the
Temple of the Sun (i.e., the Coricancha) in the
center of Cusco. While various Spanish chronicles
provide information concerning the suyu divisions
of the Cusco region, Cobo’s Historia del Nuevo
Mundo (1653) goes further, describing a related,
but vastly more complex, Inca partitioning system
(Cobo 1956: 169–186, 1980: 14–61, 1990: 51–84
[1653: Bk 13, Ch. 13–16]). In addition to the four
quarters of the valley, Cobo states that the Cusco
region was further partitioned by 42 abstract lines,
or ceques, that radiated from the center of the city.
The course of these lines was determined by the
locations of 328 huacas (shrines) that were scattered
across the countryside. Cobo writes:
From the Temple of the Sun as from the
center there went out certain lines which
the Indians call ceques: they formed four
parts corresponding to the four royal roads
which went out from Cusco. On each one
of those ceques were arranged in order the
guacas and shrines which there were in
Cusco and its district, like stations of holy
places, the veneration of which was
common to all. [Cobo 1980: 15 (1653: Bk
13, Ch. 13)]
In the course of his account, Cobo describes the
ceques contained in each of the four suyus, as well
24
as the individual shrines that formed the organiz-
ational lines. His account indicates that the first
three divisions, Chinchaysuyu, Antisuyu, and
Collasuyu, contained nine ceques each. The organiz-
ation of ceques in Cuntisuyu, the fourth suyu, was
more complex. Cobo lists 14 ceques in this suyu,
but he states that one ceque, the eighth, was divided
in two. Field research in Cusco has found that this
ceque actually formed two separate lines radiating
out from Cusco (Bauer 1998: 127–129).
Accordingly, the total number of ceques in
Cuntisuyu was 15 (Figure 1).
Cobo specifically notes that attendants and servants
of the various Cusco-based kin groups ( panacas and
ayllus) were responsible for making offerings to the
shrines on specific ceques (Cobo 1980: 14 [1653:
Bk 13, Ch. 13]). Accordingly, the spatial divisions
of the Cusco Valley, as defined by the courses of
ceques, were directly linked to the social organization
of the capital by the ritual responsibilities held by
certain kin groups (Rowe 1985; Zuidema 1964).
The Ceque Clusters: Collana, Payan, and
Cayao
The ceques in each of the four suyus were enumer-
ated in groups of three, here called “ceque clusters”
(Figure 2). The lines within each ceque cluster
were characterized as being either “collana,”
“payan,” or “cayao.” Various colonial period docu-
ments indicate that these are prestige ranking terms
which begin with collana and end with cayao
(Bauer 1998: 35–38; Rowe 1985, 1986; Zuidema
1964). The nine ceques of Chinchaysuyu,
Antisuyu, and Collasuyu were each arranged within
three clusters of three. The organization of the 15
ceques of Cuntisuyu is again slightly more
complex, being organized with five clusters of three
ceques. Four of the five clusters in Cuntisuyu
contain a group of three ceques called collana,
payan, and cayao. The fifth cluster of Cuntisuyu is
said by Cobo to contain one ceque which was
divided into collana and cayao parts, and one
ceque which he calls anaguarqui.4
 Bauer: The Cusco ceque system

Figure 1. The Cusco ceque system.

Chinchaysuyu, Antisuyu, and Collasuyu
contained nine ceques each; Cuntisuyu
contained 15 lines.

ceques, held a total of 80 shrines. The number of

The Huacas of the Cusco Ceque System shrines in each suyu also can be summed up following
the internal divisions provided by Cobo of collana,
The course of the ceques as they were projected across
payan, and cayao. For example, the three ceques of
the countryside was determined by the locations of
Antisuyu that were classified as collana (An. 1, An.
some 328 huacas. The shrines represented a host of
4, and An. 7) hold a total shrine count of 25. The
sacred objects and places in the countryside that were
three payan ceques of Antisuyu (An. 2, An. 5, and
believed to have some connection to the supernatural
An 8) have a total shrine count of 31. While the
world. Most, if not all, of the huacas in the Cusco
three ceques classified as cayao (An. 3, An. 6, and
ceque system represented contact points with important
An. 9) have a total shrine count of 22 (see Table 2).
chthonic powers. Contact with a huaca required signs of
The suyu as a whole contains 78 huacas
respect: a prayer, an offering, or, more typically, both.
(25 + 31 + 22 = 78). This condensed tallying of the
The number of shrines on each ceque varied. For
shrines of the system will be important to remember
example, the first ceque of Cuntisuyu (Cu. 1) held
as we examine the newly found EiBVps drawing.
15 shrines, while the ninth ceque of Cuntisuyu
(Cu. 9) held only three (Table 1).5 Although
Chinchaysuyu, Antisuyu, and Collasuyu held the Drawing of the Cusco Ceque System Found
same number of ceques, they contained different in the Exsul Immeritus Blas Valera Populo Suo
numbers of shrines. According to Cobo,
Chinchaysuyu had 85 shrines, Antisuyu had 78, The newly discovered drawing of the Cusco ceque
and Collasuyu had 85. Cuntisuyu, with its 15 system is contained within a small folio of papers

25
 Ñawpa Pacha: Journal of Andean Archaeology Volume 36, Number 1

Figure 2. The ceques classified as “collana,” “payan,” or “cayao.” Note that, while Chinchaysuyu, Antisuyu, and Collasuyu had three
clusters of three ceques each, Cuntisuyu had five clusters. Most of the ceques within the system were classified as either collana, payan, or
cayao. Exceptions to this are found in Cuntisuyu. The numbers on both sides of the figure list the final shrine on each of the ceques.

entitled Exsul immeritus Blas Valera populo suo,
which is itself part of two large lots of documents
found within the family archive of Clara
Miccinelli. Although these documents were first
reported in a disjointed fashion, they have now
been published in full (Laurencich Minelli 2005,
2009) and in no less than three languages: the orig-
inal Latin with Italian and Spanish translations.
Before the discovery of the Miccinelli documents,6
the known works of Blas Valera had received little
scholarly attention (Hyland 2008). He was best
known for being an important information source
for Garcilaso de la Vega, who received a badly
burned manuscript written by Valera after the
latter’s death in 1597, as well as the possible
author of the “Relación de las costumbres antiguas
de los naturales del Pirú” (Hyland 2003;
Laurencich Minelli 2014). The Miccinelli docu-
ments have been the source of much controversy
since they make a number of extraordinary claims,
including that Valera continued to live and work
long after his reported death in Spain in 1597 and
that Felipe Guaman Poma de Ayala was not the orig-
inal author of Nueva Coronica y Buen Gobierno. The
Miccinelli documents also claim that there was a
secret writing system developed by the Incas based
on quipus.7 It is important to note that none of
these claims are supported in other texts. While
the question of who wrote the Miccinelli documents
remains open, there is a growing consensus that they
are the product of a religious cult, inspired by the
teachings of Blas Valera, dating to the seventeenth
century (Hyland 2003). Critical for this study, the
EiBVps appears to contain the only known pre-

26
 Bauer: The Cusco ceque system

Table 1 The Cusco ceque system as numerated by Cobo. Table 1 Continued

Suyu Ranking Number of huacas Suyu Ranking Number of huacas

Chinchaysuyu Cu. 5 Cayao 5
Ch. 1 Cayao 5 Cu. 6 Payan 5
Ch. 2 Payan 8 Cu. 7 Collana 5
Ch. 3 Collana 10 Cu. 8a Cayao 7
Ch. 4 Cayao 8 Cu. 8b Collana 8
Ch. 5 Payan 10 Cu. 9 Cayao 3
Ch. 6 Collana 11 Cu. 10 Payan 4
Ch. 7 Cayao 8 Cu. 11 Collana 4
Ch. 8 Payan 13 Cu. 12 Cayao 3
Ch. 9 Collana 12 Cu. 13 Payan* 4
Total 9 ceques 85 huacas Cu. 14 Collana 4
Antisuyu Total 15 ceques 80 huacas
An. 1 Collana 11 Grand total 42 ceques 328 huacas
An. 2 Payan 10 * This ceque appears to have been mislabeled by Cobo as cayao,
An. 3 Cayao 10 it was most likely called payan.
An. 4 Collana 7
An. 5 Payan 10 modern drawing of the Cusco ceque system. The
An. 6 Cayao 7 creator of the document provides an extremely
An. 7 Collana 7 brief introduction to the drawing, writing in a com-
An. 8 Payan 11
bination of Latin, Spanish, and Quechua. Like
much of the information contained within the
An. 9 Cayao 5
Miccinelli documents, the notes on the Cusco
Total 9 ceques 78 huacas
ceque system are disjointed, rambling, and difficult
Collasuyu
to follow. The writer seems obsessed with the
Co. 1 Cayao 9
work of Garcilaso de la Vega, the notion of secret
Co. 2 Payan 8 forms of writing and esoteric knowledge. The infor-
Co. 3 Collana 9 mation reads as follows:
Co. 4 Cayao 10
Co. 5 Payan 10 Now I draw, although in breve, those invis-
Co. 6 Collana 10 ible paths grouped in threes, which connect
Co. 7 Cayao 8 the families, towns, and cities of the
Co. 8 Payan 8
ancient empire; ordered and spaced from its
center Coricancha. Like Ariadne’s thread
Co. 9 Collana 13
[that] enabled Daedalus to leave [the maze],
Total 9 ceques 85 huacas
each ceque [departs] from the sacred huaca
Cuntisuyu
[i.e., the Coricancha], destroyed by represen-
Cu. 1 Anahuarqui 15
tatives of the Church. Why [then] does
Cu. 2 Cayao 4 Garcilaso write “The Spaniards had won
Cu. 3 Payan 4 that empire without the aid of wine or
Cu. 4 Collana 5 similar spirits.”8 Before you excuse, accuse.
Continued Behold the ceques. But first I ask, why

27
 Ñawpa Pacha: Journal of Andean Archaeology Volume 36, Number 1

Table 2 Huaca counts according to ceques when grouped into With this limited introduction, the meaning of which
collana, payan, and cayao. is unclear, it is difficult to know what exactly the
Number of author of the EiBVps understood concerning the
Ranking terms Ceques huacas internal arrangement of the ceques and their huacas.
Chinchaysuyu The introduction to the drawing can be described
Collana Ch. 3, Ch. 6, Ch. 9 33 as muddled at best, and it provides no real insights
Payan Ch. 2, Ch. 5, Ch. 8 31 into the drawing. To me this suggests that the
Cayao Ch. 1, Ch. 4, Ch. 7 21
author of the EiBVps was not the original draftsman
of the drawing and it was copied from another
85
source. In contrast to the text of the document, as
Antisuyu
will be shown below, the drawing itself reflects an inti-
Collana An. 1, An. 4, An. 7 25
mate familiarity with the Cusco ceque system.11 The
Payan An. 2, An. 5, An. 8 31
original artist’s knowledge of the system may have
Cayao An. 3, An. 6, An. 9 22 been gained through access to the writings of Polo
78 de Ondegardo or Cobo, or alternatively, an indigen-
Collasuyu ous oral source in Cusco (Figures 3 and 4). I
Collana Co. 3, Co. 6, Co. 9 32 suggest that the confused written introduction to
Payan Co. 2, Co. 5, Co. 8 26 the system needs to be separated intellectually from
Cayao Co. 1, Co. 4, Co. 7 27 the elegant drawing of the ceques as they may date
85 to different time periods and may reflect different
Cuntisuyu levels of understanding of the ceque system presented
Collana Cu. 4, Cu. 7, Cu. 11, 18 by two separate authors. In other words, the drawing
Cu. 14 may be an early colonial representation of the Cusco
Payan Cu. 3, Cu. 6, Cu. 10, 17 ceque system, while the text appears to be a later cre-
Cu. 13 ation by an individual who did not understand the
Cayao Cu. 2, Cu. 5, Cu. 9, Cu. 15 system but found the drawing to be an intriguing
12 diagram to be included within an otherwise confused
Cayao/ Cu. 8 15 discourse. The fact that the text reflects no real
Collana
insights into the system, while the drawing is a
Anahuarqui Cu. 1 15 precise summation of it, only raises the complexity
80 of understanding of the EiBVps as a cultural artifact.12
Grand total 328

does Garcilaso write “is it lawful to discuss
and reveal secret acts that occur in wars
without falling into hate, since with this
fear historians leave many things unsaid.”9
Even without investigating, it is clear that
the organization resembles a quipu. They
should be ashamed of the dull forgetfulness
and insipid ignorance of completely forget-
ting a cardinal principle of the empire.
These groups of lines are like the harp
strings of those pagans won by the pious
hand of Jesus …10
The Cusco Ceque System Drawing
The drawing itself shows a series of 14 lines radiating
out from a yellow square, representing the city of
Cusco, or perhaps even the central patio of the
Coricancha. It is a remarkable drawing since it encap-
sulates much of what we know about the huacas and
ceques of Cusco from Cobo’s account. Although not
specifically labeled, the suyus are displayed in the
follow fashion: Chinchaysuyu (north), Antisuyu
(east), Collasuyu (south), and Cuntisuyu (west). The
ceques of Chinchaysuyu are represented by three

28
 Bauer: The Cusco ceque system
Figure 3. The Cusco ceque system as shown in Exsul immeritus
Blas Valera populo suo (Clara Miccinelli’s collection, Exsul
Immeritus, Naples).
lines, those of Antisuyu by three lines, those of
Collasuyu by three lines, and those of Cuntisuyu by
five lines. The three lines of Chinchaysuyu,
Antisuyu, and Collasuyu are colored red, black, and
green. The five lines of Cuntisuyu are more
complex: the first three are colored red, black, and
green; the fourth line is divided in half and colored
red/green; and the fifth line of Cuntisuyu is colored
blue. If we compare the colored lines of this drawing
with information from Cobo’s document, we can
deduce that red represents “collana,” black “payan,”
and green “cayao.” The red/green line represents the
unique eighth ceque of Cuntisuyu, said to be com-
posed of both a collana and a cayao ceque.
Furthermore, the blue line of Cuntisuyu represents
the unique ceque which Cobo calls anaguarqui.
Following this logic the ceques of Hanan Cusco
(Chinchaysuyu and Antisuyu) are presented in a
clockwise order, while those of Hurin Cusco
29
(Cuntisuyu and Collasuyu) are presented in an anti-
clockwise order; a feature of the system which was
noted long ago by both Zuidema (1964) and Rowe
(1985). The end of each line in the drawing is
marked by a circle with a dot inside (ʘ), a symbol
used by the author to represent a sum, similar to the
sigma (Σ) used by modern mathematicians. Like the
strings of a quipu, each of the lines also contains a
number of marks that represent knots. Decimal
knots are symbolized by solid black dots while
numbers less than 10 are represented by ovals. For
example, the black ( payan) ceque of Antisuyu contains
three dots (signifying 30) and a single oval (signifying
one), representing the number 31. Combining what
we know about the Cusco ceque system from Cobo,
with the information presented in this drawing, we
can see that the numbers presented on the lines rep-
resent the combined total number of huacas within
a suyu according to the collana, payan, and cayao
classification. For example, Cobo discusses a total of
nine ceques in Antisuyu, three of which are collana,
three are payan, and three are cayao. The sums of
the huacas within each of these classifications are pre-
sented within the drawing. In other words, the three
collana ceques of Antisuyu together held 25 huacas
(11 on An. 1, seven on An. 4, and seven on An. 7).
Thus the first line of Antisuyu in the drawing,
which is shown in red, contains two dots (signifying
20) and five ovals (signifying five). The three payan
ceques of Antisuyu held a total of 31 huacas (10 on
An. 2, 10 on An. 5, and 11 on An. 8). So the
second line of Antisuyu in the drawing, which is
shown in black, contains three dots and one circle.
Similarly, the three cayao ceques of Antisuyu held a
total of 22 huacas (10 on An. 3, seven on An. 6,
and five on An. 9). In this way, the third line of
Antisuyu, which is green, contains two dots and two
circles. Similar huaca counts are presented in the
other three suyus (see Table 3).
The Summation Table
To the lower right of the ceque drawing is a 4 × 5 grid.
The first four columns of this grid are labeled:
Chichaysuyu, Collasuyu, Antisuyu, and Cuntisuyu.
 Ñawpa Pacha: Journal of Andean Archaeology Volume 36, Number 1
The final column is labeled with a circle with a dot in
its center, signifying “sum.” The designated columns
contain the following numbers, represented in dotes:
Chinchaysuyu 85, Collasuyu 85, Antisuyu 78, and
Cuntisuyu 80. The total column contains the
number 328.13 These counts are an accurate totaling
of the huacas in each suyu as recorded by Cobo.
Discussion
In an earlier article entitled “The Inca Calendar, the
ceque system, and their representation in Excul
Immeritus,” which describes the EiBVps ceque
system drawing and Cobo’s chronicle, Zuidema
(2007: 98) concludes that there are “significant discre-
pancies between the two sources in the organization of
especially the numbers of huacas in suyu IV [i.e.,
Cuntisuyu] but also in the other three suyus.”
Zuidema is, however, mistaken as he sums the huacas
on the collana, payan, and cayao lines in a different
30
Figure 4. Diagram of the Cusco ceque
system as shown in the Exsul immeritus
Blas Valera populo suo.
way than was intended by the creator of the
drawing.14 My review of the drawing leads to a very
different conclusion. I find that the drawing is an accu-
rate reproduction of the system and, more importantly,
it presents a way of counting the huacas in each suyu
which has not been considered in earlier studies.
So, who drew this precise rendering of the Cusco
ceque system? Since neither the huaca counts nor the
internal divisions of the system are specifically noted
in the EiBVps, the drawing appears to have been
included only to support the author’s obsessive dis-
cussions of quipus. Could Blas Valera have been
the original artist? We know that Blas Valera spent
several years in Cusco where his interests and knowl-
edge of the Incas certainly grew (Hyland 2003:
52–58). Yet, apart from the drawing discussed
above, the known writings of Valera do not suggest
that he held an intimate understanding of how the
Cusco ceque system was organized. Consequently,
Valera seems an unlikely candidate.15 Alternatively,
we know that Polo de Ondegardo wrote an
 Bauer: The Cusco ceque system

Table 3 Sums of the huacas found on the ceques grouped by

ranking terms (collana, payan, and cayao) according to Cobo
and in the EiBVps.

Cobo EiBVps
Chinchaysuyu
Collana (red) 33 33
Payan (black) 31 31
Cayao (green) 21 21
85 85
Antisuyu
Collana (red) 25 25
Payan (black) 31 31
Cayao (green) 22 22
78 78
Collasuyu
Collana (red) 32 32
Payan (black) 26 26
Cayao (green) 27 27
85 85
Cuntisuyu
Collana (red) 18 18
Payan (black) 17 17
Cayao (green) 15 15 Figure 5. Guaman Poma de Ayala’s (ca. 1615: 360 [361])
drawing of a quipucamayoc. The caption reads “Contador maior i
Cayao/Collana Cu. 8 15 15
tezoredro, Tavantin svio, Qvipoc Cvraca” [Head accountant and
Anahuarqui Cu. 1 15 15 treasurer, Tawantinsuyo, quipo curaca]. The form and
80 80 composition of the gird are similar to those seen in the EiBVps
drawing of the Cusco ceque system.

account of the ceques and huacas of Cusco in 1559

(see Bauer 1998: 16–19). This document was used
during the Third Provincial Council of Lima and
it was later copied by Cobo. Furthermore, in his
various discussions of the shrines of the empire,
Polo de Ondegardo also mentions he made a
“map” or “chart” of the Cusco ceque system and
he encouraged others to make similar maps as they
attempted to root out idolatrous practices in the
Andes. While clearly speculative, because the infor-
mation in the EiBVps is an accurate summation of
the data recorded by Polo de Ondegardo (and later
copied by Cobo), the original drawing may have
been created for Polo de Ondegardo when he was
researching the system and later copied into the
EiBVps. There is, however, another possible source.
The Miccinelli documents contain several drawings
that appear to be by Felipe Guaman Poma de
Ayala. Could he be the original artist of the
drawing? There is some evidence that supports this
possibility. Mostly importantly, Guaman Poma de
Ayala is known to make grids similar to that
shown in the EiBVps. One such grid is shown in
his famous drawing of a quipucamayoc [quipu
master] (Figure 5). There is a 5 × 4 grid within
which numbers are recorded in dots in the lower
left side of this drawing. Although rotated by 90
degrees, the grid and numbering system shown in
Guaman Poma de Ayala’s drawing of the quipuca-
mayoc are similar to those used in the EiBVps. On
the other hand, it is clear that the author of the

31
 Ñawpa Pacha: Journal of Andean Archaeology Volume 36, Number 1
EiBVps was familiar with this particular drawing by
Guaman Poma de Ayala since it is referenced in
the EiBVps text (Laurencich Minelli 2005: XLII).
So such a grid system could also have been included
within the ceque system drawing by an artist who
was familiar with Guaman Poma de Ayala’s work.
Unfortunately, despite extensive discussions, the
complex relationship between Blas Valera, Guaman
Poma de Ayala, and other colonial writers has yet
to be clearly defined (see Adorno 1998, 2015;
Pellicani 2001). In other words, while the issue of
the accuracy of the Cusco ceque system drawing is
now closed, the question of authorship remains
open.
Notes
1. I thank Laura Laurencich Minelli who first showed
me the EiBVps drawing of the Cusco ceque system
and aided in its reproduction in this article. I
would also like to thank the owner of the document,
Clara Miccinelli, who kindly gave me permission for
its publication.
2. Cuna is used in Quechua to make plurals, so ceque-
cuna is simply ceques.
3. Part of this overview of the Cusco ceque system is
taken from the book The Sacred Landscape of the
Inca: The Cuzco Ceque System (Bauer 1998).
4. It is not known why Cuntisuyu contained a different
arrangement of ceques than the other quarters of the
empire.
5. Because of its complex nature, a clear classification
system needs to be used in discussions of the
Cusco ceque system. The ceques and huacas are
best identified according to the order in which
Cobo presents them in his description of the
system (Rowe 1980). For example, Cu. 9:3 signifies
the third shrine on the ninth ceque of Cuntisuyu,
while Cu. 1:15 designates the fifteenth shrine on
the first ceque of Cuntisuyu.
6. This collection of papers has also been referred to as
“The Naples documents.”
7. See Hyland (2003, 2008) for an overview of the
documents and the many controversies that sur-
round them.
8. Laurencich Minelli (2005: 300) noted that this
quote from Garcilaso de la Vega (1963 [1609]:
367) comes from Bk 9, Ch. 16 of his Comentarios
Reales de los Incas.
32
9. Laurencich Minelli (2005: 300) noted that this
quote from Garcilaso de la Vega (1963 [1609]:
329) comes from Bk 8, Ch. 24 of his Comentarios
Reales de los Incas.
10. “… semitas occultas delineo igitur breviter quidem
quae terni nectunt, sive continent sive familias
pagosque populos urbesque componunt antiqui
imperii composite ac moderate facti cuius intimus
Corricnacha est. Ita Ariadnae filum ad egressum
daedali ducebat ut unaquaeque earum cequecu-
narum ad sacras huacas a Legatis Ecclesiae deletas
ducit. Curnam Garcilasse autem scripsisti: ‘que
habiendo Ganado los Españoles aquel Imperio tan
sin del vino, ni de otros regalos semejantes.’ Dum
excusare credis, accusas. Ecce cequecuna igitur sed
quaero antes—curnam Garcilasse scripsisti: ‘si es
licito ahondar y declarar tanto los hechos secretos
que pasan en las guerras, sin caer en odio, que
muchas cosas dexan de decir los historiadores por
este miedo?’ Etiam sine investigatione de dictae
architecturae consensione quipui, levissimus assen-
tietur. Se pudeat illum indoctum oblivionem
iecisse in primum principium Imperii, sed insulsus
rudium. Haec fasciae linearum funibus citharae
similes quae illos gentiles conciliabat quos Iesus
piis manibus accepisset …” (text taken from
Laurencich Minelli 2005: 300–302).
11. A reviewer of this article, who is concerned with the
originality of the document, has suggested that the
familiarity of the Cusco ceque system which is
shown in the drawing could have been derived
from the works of Tom Zuidema. I do not believe
that this is the case. The organizing principles of
the drawing are substantially different from those
suggested by Zuidema in his numerous writings on
the system. In fact, Zuidema (2007), in his own
review of this drawing, was unable to decode it
based on his understanding of the system and con-
cluded that the drawing is an inaccurate represen-
tation of the system. The discovery that the
drawing is an accurate representation of the system
as recorded in Cobo (and presumably by Polo),
but is very different from those presented in
current academic studies, has important impli-
cations. Rather than suggesting that the drawing
was derived from the works of Zuidema, the exist-
ence of the drawing could be used to question the
validity of many of Zuidema’s interpretations con-
cerning the system. This is not without precedent.
Extensive fieldwork in the Cusco region (Bauer
1998) has now called into question the physical
form of the ceque system as presented by Zuidema
 Bauer: The Cusco ceque system
as well as many of his elaborate suggestions that the
system is linked to a calendar system (Zuidema 1964,
1977).
12. See Adorno (1998, 2015) for a detailed discussion of
the many questions that have been raised about the
dating and legitimacy of the Exsul immeritus Blas
Valera populo suo text.
13. The three red dots representing three hundreds have
faded in the original drawing and are difficult to see.
14. Using his model of the internal organization of the
system, Zuidema sums the number of huacas con-
tained within each ceques cluster. For example, the
first three ceques of Antisuyu (An. 1, An. 2, and
An. 3) contain a total of 31 huacas. Not surpris-
ingly, this is not the same number that is reached
when the huacas on all the collana ceques of
Antisuyu (An. 1, An. 4, and An. 7) are summed
(i.e., 25).
15. Zuidema (2007: 100) seems to favor Valera as the
artist, writing: “If Blas Valera was that author, he
probably could and would have had access to the
account and to the ‘carta’ or drawing of the ceque
system, that Polo de Ondegardo had made of it in
1559 and that had been consulted in the Concilio
Limense. Possibly, Valera later did not remember
accurately any more the minor numbers of the
ceque system, having lost access to that account
and drawing.”
References Cited
Adorno, Rolena
1998 Criterios de aprobación: el manuscrito Miccinelli
de Nápoles y las crónicas de la conquista del Perú.
Anthropologica 16(16): 369–394.
2015 Contenidos y contradicciones: la obra de Felipe
Guaman Poma y las aseveraciones acerca de Blas
Valera. In Repertorio de Ensayistas y Filosofos,
http://ensayo.rom.uga.edu/filosofos/peru/
guaman/adorno.htm.
Aveni, Anthony F.
1981 Horizon astronomy in Incaic Cuzco. In
Archaeoastronomy in the Americas, edited by
R.A. Williamson, pp. 305–318. Ballena Press,
Los Altos, CA.
Bauer, Brian S.
1998 The sacred landscape of the Inca: the Cuzco ceque
system. University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.
Bauer, Brian S., and David S.P. Dearborn
1995 Astronomy and empire in the ancient Andes.
University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.
33
Cobo, Bernabé
1956 [1653] Historia del Nuevo Mundo. In Obras del
P. Bernabé Cobo de la Compañía de Jesús, edited
by P. Francisco Mateos. Biblioteca de Autores
Españoles (continuación), Vols. 91 and 92.
Ediciones Atlas, Madrid.
1980 [1653] Relación de las guacas del Cuzco. In An
account of the shrines of ancient Cuzco.
Translated and edited by John H. Rowe.
Ñawpa Pacha 17(1979): 2–80.
1990 [1653] Inca religion and customs. Translated and
edited by Roland Hamilton. University of Texas
Press, Austin, TX.
Hyland, Sabine
2003 The Jesui and the Incas: the extraordinary life of
Padre Blas Valera, J.S. University of Michigan
Press, Ann Arbor, MI.
2008 Valera, Blas (1544–1597). In Guide to documen-
tary sources for Andean studies, edited by Joanne
Pillsbury. University of Oklahoma Press,
Norman, OK.
Laurencich Minelli, Laura
2005 Exsul immeritus Blas Valera populo suo e historia et
rudimenta linguae piruanorum: indios, gesuiti e
spagnoli in due documenti segreti sul Perù del
XVII secolo. CLUEB, Bologna.
2009 Exsul immeritus Blas Valera populo suo e historia et
rudimenta linguae piruanorum. Nativos, jesuitas y
españoles en dos documentos sectetos del siglo XVII.
Yoplact, Chachapoyas.
2014 De las costumbres antiguas de los naturales del
Peru: un enfoque nuevo. Revisita ANUAC 3(2):
1–14.
Laurencich Minelli, Laura, and Paulina Numhauser
2004 El silencio protagonista: el primer siglo Jesuita en el
virreinato del Perú: 1567–1667. Ediciones Abya-
Yala, Quito.
2007 Sublevando el virreinato: documentos contestatarios
a la historiographia tradicional del Perú colonial.
Ediciones Abya-Yala, Quito.
Pellicani, Antonio (editor)
2001 Guaman Poma y Blas Valera: tradición Andina e
historia colonial. Instituto Italo-Latinoamericano,
Roma.
Rowe, John H.
1985 La constitución Inca del Cuzco. Histórica 9(1):
35–73.
1986 Probanza de los Incas nietos de conquistadores.
Histórica 9(2): 193–245.
Zuidema, R. Tom
1964 The ceque system of Cuzco: the social organization of the
capital of the Inca. Translated by Eva M. Hooykaas.
 Ñawpa Pacha: Journal of Andean Archaeology Volume 36, Number 1

International Archives of Ethnography, supplement
to Vol. 50. E. J. Brill, Leiden.
1977 The Inca calendar. In Native American astronomy,
edited by Anthony F. Aveni, pp. 219–259.
University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.
1990 Inca civilization in Cuzco. Translated by Jean-Jacques
Decoster. University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.
2007 The Inca calendar, the ceque system, and their
representation in Excul immeritus. In Per Bocca
d’altri. Indios, gesuiti e spagnoli in due documenti
segreti sul Perů del XVII secolo, edited by Laura
Laurencich Minelli, D. Domenici, and S.
Venturoli, pp. 75–104. Alma Digital Library,
Bologna.

34