Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
DANTE ANGELO
Department of Cultural and Social Anthropology, Stanford University, USA
ABSTRACT
Recent social violence in Bolivia is examined in the context of that
country’s dominant historical narratives. The practice of archaeology in
Bolivia is intimately tied to the development of nationalism and a
history of colonialism. While the history of Bolivian archaeology has
seen multiple interpretations of the past, the dominant voices have
consistently emphasized understandings of the past that legitimize and
bolster Bolivian nationalism and contemporary social politics. In
particular, the Altiplano site of Tiwanaku has been formulated as a locus
of Bolivian national patrimony, while other regions have been margin-
alized as ‘peripheries’ or ‘frontiers’. This understanding of history is not
simply a matter of debate for archaeologists, but has very real con-
sequences in present-day geopolitics and the lives of individuals.
KEY WORDS
historical narratives ● nationalism ● politics of archaeology ● South
American archaeology ● Tiwanaku
383
04 057585 Kojan (to_d) 19/9/05 10:09 am Page 384
■ INTRODUCTION
This article explores the recent violence and social upheaval in Bolivia
in relation to the historical narratives that are employed by archaeologists
and that, in many ways, define Bolivia as a nation. In particular, we examine
the archaeological site of Tiwanaku, which has become the symbolic and
literal focal point of the dominant narrative of Bolivian history. We will look
at the role Tiwanaku has played in the overlapping narratives of colonial-
ism, nationalism and archaeological research. We will also present a reading
of alternative historical evidence that can help us better understand the
ongoing violence in Bolivian society, and which points to the importance of
recognizing and creating space for multiple understandings of the past to
emerge.
1936) conducted work at the site and became the early authors of the
archaeological narrative of Bolivia.
As with archaeological narratives around the world, the early studies of
Tiwanaku were closely linked with the history of European colonialism.
The cultural evolutionist theories that framed early archaeological narra-
tives were in large part created as explanations and legitimizations of the
control of people and resources in the European colonies (Lyons and
Papadopoulos, 2002; Mamani, 1996; Pratt, 1992). Monumental sites like
Tiwanaku came to be seen as physical evidence of the progress of history,
as increasingly complex and hierarchical civilizations replaced their more
primitive antecedents – the implication being that European colonial
powers were the inheritors of this lineage of progress and domination that
derives from the natural flow of history (Posnanksy, 1957). This view
became further cemented with the publication of Julian Steward’s (1948)
Handbook of South American Indians (Bennett, 1946), a magnum opus of
neo-evolutionary anthropology that squarely places Tiwanaku as a key
milestone in the development and advancement of Andean civilization.
In many ways, however, Steward’s overarching work merely formalized
04 057585 Kojan (to_d) 19/9/05 10:09 am Page 387
a narrative that had been under development since the early days of
Spanish colonialism. As a kind of microcosm of the colonial world, the early
missionaries, mercenaries and administrators mapped a political geography
onto the South American landscape in which the central Andes and Pacific
Coast were seen as a region of rapid cultural advancement associated with
monumentality and social stratification, at the expense of other regions that
were seen as culturally primitive, historically stagnated, and closely tied to
the natural world (Kojan, 2002; Pagden, 1982). In spite of other interpre-
tive frameworks, as the culture historical approach used by Ibarra Grasso
(1953), Stig Ryden (1947) and others, such narratives of domination persist
right up into the present scholarship, only strengthened by the consolida-
tion of positivist and evolutionary frameworks. Current archaeological
debates about the cultural history of the Amazonian lowlands, for example,
continue to focus on the ability (or inability) of people to form ‘complex’
societies in the tropical forest (Heckenberger et al., 2001; Meggers 1971,
2001). Stanish (2001: 41) succinctly captures the conventional wisdom about
the central Andes in his description of this as a ‘culturally precocious
region’, making a clear reference to an evolutionary model of culture.
The contemporary upshot of these longstanding historical narratives is
that Andean archaeology has become synonymous with the study of the
development and dynamics of the state. In Bolivia, this focus on the state
has become almost exclusively targeted at the site of Tiwanaku, especially
in the wake of nationalist ideology following the social revolution of 1952.
Most of the major archaeological research projects conducted in Bolivia are
contextualized in relation to Tiwanaku – they are investigating the site itself,
looking at the development of the ‘Tiwanaku state’ in the Titicaca Basin,
or the impact of Tiwanaku across other parts of the Andes. Until quite
recently, very few archaeological projects were conducted in Bolivia that
were not explicitly directed at understanding some aspect of the Tiwanaku
state.
Aymara historian Carlos Mamani (1996) insightfully argues that the
mestizo elites of Bolivia realized quite early on in their nation-building
efforts that Tiwanaku provided a local symbol to reinforce the notion of a
national patrimony. Tiwanaku, with its proximity to the capital city of La
Paz, its monumental scale, its antiquity, and its remarkable assemblage of
large statuary and decorative artifacts make the site seem eerily pre-
ordained to serve the role of a national symbol. Although today the most
prominent parts of Tiwanaku are recent (and not very faithful) construc-
tions designed by archaeologists, the site now provides an ideal embodi-
ment of Bolivia’s narrative of indigenous heritage.
We recognize that this focus on the Tiwanaku state has, without question,
produced some important archaeological research. From this work, we
know a great deal about, for example, the socioeconomic formation and
04 057585 Kojan (to_d) 19/9/05 10:09 am Page 388
■ ALTERNATIVE NARRATIVES
One of the implications of the narrow focus on the site of Tiwanaku is that
other parts of the country are somehow devoid of the same rich archaeo-
logical heritage. From a casual, or even a careful examination of Bolivian
archaeology, one might reasonably be left with the understanding that its
04 057585 Kojan (to_d) 19/9/05 10:10 am Page 390
We argue that this case study illustrates one of the principle sources of
power that dominant narratives, such as that of Tiwanaku, wield in the
world. The real power of the Bolivian national narrative derives from its
selective manipulation and exclusion of other histories, particularly those
that point to contemporary issues of social and political discordance, such
as the history of the eastern Andes or southern Bolivia. The histories of
these areas have not simply been forgotten, or displaced in favor of the
more compelling Tiwanaku-centered history. They have, for 400 years, been
actively manufactured as narratives of emptiness (Kojan, 2002).
One of the most fascinating aspects of the national historical narrative
of Bolivia is that in many ways it defies reason – it does not take much
consideration to realize that the white/mestizo elite’s claim to authority is
not reasonably validated by an appeal to prehistory. In fact, we might say
that one of the only features of Bolivian history that everyone can agree
on is that the Spanish colonialists did not arrive in South America until
1524. The idea that Tiwanaku represents the cultural heritage of all
Bolivians may in some ways be a pleasant idea of national unity, but it is
empirically problematic to say the least. Yet, in the absence of publicly legit-
imate alternative histories, this Tiwanaku narrative flourishes.
This process of primordialism can be found at work in many other ways
and in other parts of the world (Kohl, 1998; Kohl and Fawcett, 1995). An
even more far-flung appeal to a national primordial past are the references
to the standard core of Western primordial history of Egypt, Greece and
Rome on the part of other New World nations. We would argue that the
Greek revival architecture of Washington DC national monuments (Reps,
1991), the pseudo-Egyptian motifs on US currency and the proliferation of
Roman symbols in modern Brazil (Funari, 2003) are all part of the same
pattern. Seen in this context, the romanticized fixation on Tiwanaku seems
almost reasonable, that is, were it not for the impact this narrative has on
the lives of people today.
In his critique of Bolivian archaeology and its paradoxical exclusion of
indigenous identity, Mamani writes of the advocates of the nationalist
history:
All the nationalist denunciations of outside domination, all their stress on
internal development, have only led to the development of a sort of Monroe
Doctrine: they take possession of what is not theirs in order to lay the
foundations of their ‘nation’ in a past which does not belong to them and
whose legitimate descendants they continue to oppress. (Mamani, 1996: 634)
Although Mamani’s binary ‘Us vs. Them’, ‘Indigenous vs. Mestizo’ formu-
lation is problematic in its own homogeneity, the focus of his critique is right
on target. The nationalist historical narrative of Bolivia, with its roots in the
04 057585 Kojan (to_d) 19/9/05 10:10 am Page 394
increases for farmers to use water, which in some cases came from their
own wells (Finnegan, 2002). The Bolivian military, in defense of these
corporate interests, clashed with and killed many of the protesters. Bechtel
was eventually forced to relinquish its position in Bolivia and later
attempted to sue the country for breach of contract.
In October 2003, protesters again clashed with the Bolivian military and
made headlines in the USA and around the world in the so-called ‘War of
the Gas’. In both cases, the context of much of the media coverage, and the
wider discourse surrounding these events was as an indigenous rebellion
against the forces of modernization. This movement was generally charac-
terized by national as well as international media as a clear indicator of the
indigenous vs. white division of the country.6 This dual essentialism opened
the door for other dualistic narratives to come into play. In the discourses
of both Bolivian nationalism and globalization, the recent social and politi-
cal conflicts are portrayed as a clash between the forces of modernity and
progress on one hand, and those of an irrational traditionalism on the other.
In this sense, the conceptualization of Bolivia’s indigenous population as
representing a stagnated and more primitive social order both sustains and
echoes wider discourses of colonialism and globalization, in which poor
countries like Bolivia are viewed as detrimentally resisting the movement
of progress.
As with many other post-colonial nations, the social inequality and
poverty in Bolivia has commonly been carefully disguised and reworked
into a failure on the part of the indigenous communities to recognize and
comply with the progress of modernity (Abercrombie, 1998; Thomas, 1991).
These conceptualizations then become part of the legitimization for the
continued exploitation of Bolivian people and land, although such ideas are
usually translated and euphemized into more progressive notions of stew-
ardship and the utilization of natural resources. At present, despite almost
2 years of ongoing protest and a recently approved law on agrarian reform
that recognizes the communal rights of indigenous peoples to control their
land and its resources, claims by workers’ groups and indigenous com-
munities are still disregarded. The Guarani people, for example, have been
trying to gain a measure of determination over the oil drilling that is taking
place against their wishes, on their land. Despite the legal recognition of
this land by law (INRA, 2000) as part of the Ancestral Communities Lands
(Territorios Comunitarios de Origen or TCOs), the oil companies that
signed contracts with the national government continue to drill with devas-
tating social and environmental consequences. These and other protests
receive very little attention in the international, or even Bolivian media, but
the coverage that is presented often nostalgically presents these conflicts as
part of an emergent and redemptive expression of cultural resistance.7
Such highly reified readings of the recent violence in Bolivia derive from
a similar misrepresentation of the uprisings. In these cases, the conflicts
04 057585 Kojan (to_d) 19/9/05 10:10 am Page 396
have been portrayed as ones between the forces of progress and modernity
on one side and an antiquated traditionalism on the other. And both of
these readings result in the same outcome for the people of Bolivia by
providing the basic elements for the dominant discourse to reconstitute its
power. The dominant narrative of Bolivian nationalism, as well as the
underlying ideology of oppression and exploitation, relies on homogeneous
and essentialized understandings of the indigenous ‘Other’. Whether the
oppressed group is seen as playing the role of the ignorant primitive or the
heroic aborigine matters very little in this regard. In Bolivia, as with many
other parts of the world (El-Haj, 1998; Schmidt and Patterson, 1995),
archaeology has been complicit in the creation and reaffirmation of this
formulation of the indigenous as a subaltern category (Mamani, 1996).
The distillation of a diverse, complex, contradictory and fragmentary
material record into a strikingly homogeneous and linear narrative of
monumentality and progress, as embodied by the site of Tiwanaku, has
played a key role in marginalizing contesting voices in contemporary
Bolivia. Given an extensive and growing body of scholarship on the politi-
cal motivations for, and applications of, archaeological research (Hodder,
1991; Politis, 2003; Shanks and Tilley, 1992[1987]; Trigger, 1984, 1989; Wylie,
1995), it should come as no surprise that archaeology in Bolivia is closely
linked to its wider social and political context.
The question then becomes how to understand the seeming uniformity
in the conceptualization of Bolivian history, and how to create space for
alternative voices to emerge into this conversation. Here the concept of
multivocality and its implications for archaeology assert themselves quite
strongly. Archaeologists find themselves in a delicate position in relation to
the proposition of multivocality. If we hold firm to our role as the official
interpreters of the past, empowered by the authority of science and
economic privilege to write our narratives of history, then we will continue
to reinforce the power dynamics derived from the movements of colonial-
ism and nationalism. However, if we as archaeologists position ourselves as
a kind of clearinghouse for multiple understandings of the past, we risk
either abdicating our responsibility about our own understandings about
the past – and thus implicitly denying or evading accountability – or worse,
we risk transforming the proposition of multivocality into yet another
stratum of authority whereby the archaeological narratives can be seen as
emerging victorious from among the dozens of alternative interpretations.
Either way, we have not removed the issues of authority, power, or privi-
lege from the equation.
This is precisely the point we wish to emphasize here. We can never
remove ourselves from the social, political or economic context in which
our work is conducted, nor would it be at all desirable to do so. Quite to
the contrary, we would argue that part of the lesson of multivocality is that
we must strive to identify, expose, critique and generally immerse ourselves
04 057585 Kojan (to_d) 19/9/05 10:10 am Page 397
and our work in the contemporary social context in which we find ourselves.
An understanding of archaeology, and the historical narratives that it
produces, as inexorably embedded in a contemporary context of social and
political actors, has fairly dramatic implications for the concepts of multi-
vocality. Rather than being a largely sterile debate about the objectivity or
subjectivity of archaeological interpretations, the potential emergence of
alternative narratives of the past is of very real importance in the lives of
people today. As Joyce, in her discussion of Bahktin, makes clear:
. . . the requirement to evaluate words (and actions) is a moral imperative
which cannot be evaded. In his [Bahktin’s] view, communication matters, it
has serious consequences, it shapes ongoing social reality. These aspects of
his arguments resonate with recent claims that archaeological discourse must
be taken seriously because of its social consequences. (Joyce, 2002: 31)
Or, we might ask, from a slightly different perspective, if our work did not
have social consequences then why should we practice archaeology to begin
with?
If we agree with the proposition that there are multiple legitimate narra-
tives of the past, then our efforts are best spent in trying to make space for
these narratives to emerge. Because historical narratives are so closely
linked to ideas about identity, nationalism, race, citizenship and other highly
charged and powerfully influential arenas of human existence, simply
acknowledging the plurality of understandings of the past, while surely an
important undertaking, is not enough. We might say that asking for another
party’s understanding of the past is necessary, but not sufficient. This is
particularly important where there are descendant communities that
identify a connection to the archaeological materials under study. Unless
these efforts are matched with an actual interest in living communities, such
an approach becomes merely a professional nicety at best. To ask the
Aymara, for example, for their story of Tiwanaku as an exercise in multi-
vocality, while ignoring the wider social, political and economic environ-
ment in which archaeological research takes place, is ultimately an empty
and cynical gesture.
Multivocality should not be seen as a theoretical perspective to be
adopted or discarded according to one’s theoretical proclivities, but is closer
to a truism of historiography. There are always multiple perspectives of the
past because there are always multiple observers and interpreters of its
evidence, each of them similarly embedded in his or her own social environ-
ment. Of course, how such different voices are heard or accepted in the
wider world is a very different matter. Although the concept of multi-
vocality, as a theoretical tool of the humanities and social sciences, has most
recently been articulated within the context of the academy, anthropolo-
gists and academics in general have in many ways been dragged kicking and
screaming to an acknowledgment of pluralism and multivocality.
04 057585 Kojan (to_d) 19/9/05 10:10 am Page 398
narratives of the past can also be used to argue for more reactionary claims
(Arnold, 1990). In this regard, multivocality in archaeology cannot be
simply understood as a diversity of voices, but rather needs to be under-
taken as part of a larger project of interrogating and discussing the contem-
porary uses of the past and, primarily, acknowledging accountability with a
past that is inextricably tied to a present. It is impossible to take responsi-
bility for every unforeseen implication that our work may have – even the
best-intentioned research can be used and applied in ways that we may not
support. This is precisely the point. There is apparently no limit to the ways
that the past can be used, manipulated, ignored and elucidated in the
contemporary world. But through the historical narratives that we write,
we can try to make space for multiple understandings of the past (even
those that question our own academic authority) to be heard and more
flexible and equitable concepts of citizenship to emerge.
Such a proposition raises some challenging ethical questions for archae-
ologists and the work that they do. For example, is it ethically viable for
archaeologists to continue to explore and reinforce narratives that are often
specifically utilized to substantiate structures of dominance and social
oppression? In the case of Bolivia, we have argued that the dominant state
narrative of Tiwanaku and the exclusion of other historical narratives have
been used as tools of disenfranchisement and arguments for the continued
exploitation of Bolivian resources and communities. The widely-employed
archaeological tropes of ‘state development’ or the ‘rise of complex
societies’ are inherent value judgments tightly linked to discourses of
colonialism and, more recently, globalization. The continued recreation and
reinforcement of the Tiwanaku narrative is also a reinforcement of official
Bolivian state ideology. Although we do not believe this represents the
intentions of many research archaeologists, the narratives that are produced
by this work nevertheless have concrete impacts on the lives of people.
Nadia Abu El-Haj (1998), in her analysis of the practice of archaeology
in Jerusalem, makes a keen observation that in addition to studying material
culture, archaeology also produces its own material culture. The structures
and features that archaeologists uncover, and the historical narratives that
archaeologists help create, are used in very tangible ways in the real world.
El-Haj argues that the architecture and monuments of Jerusalem tell a story
of the primordial roots of the dominant state identity, while the physical
manifestations of alternative stories of the city are left as silent ruins. These
stone and concrete markers have effects on the lives of people today. They
provide persistent cues to the citizens and visitors of Jerusalem about who
belongs there and who does not. Simply the act of walking through the
streets of the city, admiring the architecture, or stopping to read about a
recent archaeological discovery serve as a reminder and reaffirmation of
present-day social hierarchies and dominance.
The persistent emphasis on the rise of the Tiwanaku state and the erasure
04 057585 Kojan (to_d) 19/9/05 10:10 am Page 400
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Junko Habu, Clare Fawcett and John Matsunaga
for inviting us to participate in their 2004 SAA panel. They would also like Ian
Hodder and Orin Starn for their feedback on early drafts of this article.
Notes
1 In this way, the media coverage echoed the stories of the Zapatista revolution in
Mexico in the mid-1990s and the violent revolutionary movements of the
Sendero Luminoso and other groups in Peru in the 1980s (Patterson, 1995).
2 It is interesting to draw a comparison between the role played by Tiwanaku in
Bolivia, and that played by the monumental Incan sites, such as Saqsaywaman
and Macchu Picchu in neighboring Peru. In many ways, what the Incan sites are
to Peru, Tiwanaku is to Bolivia. However, unlike the Peruvian case, in which
heritage and identity heavily relies on the temporal proximity to Incan history,
from which primordial links are drawn and incorporated into notions of
national pride, the case of Tiwanaku renders a different situation. The national
narrative of Tiwanaku emphasizes the antiquity of the site as opposed to a sense
of uninterrupted continuity. As a monumental site, Tiwanaku provided the
cornerstone to nationalistic claims that, because of its remoteness in time, are
rooted in a much stronger way to a primordial past (Mamani, 1996).
3 Even by the materialist and evolutionary standards often used to argue for the
supreme importance of state societies like Tiwanaku, the eastern Andes, with its
evidence of dense occupation, heavily constructed agricultural terracing,
monumental structures, and extensive networks of roads and irrigation canals,
should be viewed as an important part of Bolivia’s past.
4 Coca is an integral part of the daily and ritual lives of every adult in the Andes,
and no wedding, funeral or birth would be complete without the distribution
and consumption of copious amounts of coca. The most desirable coca grows
only on the steep, semi-tropical slopes of the eastern foothills of the Andes, and
the Spanish, like the Inca before them, did not waste any time in seizing control
of this valuable resource. The most desirable species of coca, Erythroxylum coca
coca, can be grown only along the eastern escarpment of the Andes between
1700 and 500 meters above sea level (Plowman, 1984). Coca is also the main
ingredient in cocaine, but requires significant refining for its production. The
raw coca leaf, usually mixed with an alkali material to release the alkaloids, is a
mild stimulant that serves to suppress hunger and counteract the physiological
effects of high altitude.
5 The Spanish hacienda owners also imported African slaves to work in the coca
plantations. Today many of the main coca-producing villages of the Bolivian
eastern Andes are populated by black Indians – the descendants of these slaves.
6 The reductionist image of two polarized repúblicas, that is the república de
indios and the república de blancos (the Indian’s and white’s republics), was
used as a means of making diversity a tool of power and domination. After the
declaration of independence, the colonial administrative power over land and
the inhabitants of the newly created country was relinquished to the new
white/mestizo elites who were, by then, in charge of creating a new legal and
04 057585 Kojan (to_d) 19/9/05 10:10 am Page 402
References
Abercrombie, T. (1998) Pathways of Memory and Power. Ethnography and History
among an Andean People. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Albarracín-Jordán, J. (1996a) ‘Tiwanaku Settlement System: The Integration of
Nested Hierarchies in the Lower Tiwanaku Valley’, Latin American Antiquity 7:
183–210.
Albarracín-Jordán, J. (1996b) Tiwanaku. Arqueología Regional y Dinámica Segmen-
taria. La Paz: Plural Editores.
Almaraz, S. (1967) El Poder y la Caida: El Estaño en la Historia de Bolivia. La Paz:
Editorial Los Amigos del Libro.
Almaraz, S. (1969) Requiem Para una República. La Paz: Universidad Mayor de San
Andres.
Angelo, D. (1999) ‘Tráfico de Bienes, Minería y Aprovechamiento de Recursos en
la Región de los Valles del Sur Boliviano’, licenciatura thesis, Antropología-
Arqueología Dept., Universidad Mayor de San Andrés, La Paz.
Angelo, D. and J. Capriles (2000) ‘La Importancia de las Plantas Psicotrópicas para
la Economía de Intercambio y Relaciones de Interacción en el Altiplano sur
Andino’, Complutum 11: 275–84.
Arnold, B. (1990) ‘The Past as Propaganda: Totalitarian Archaeology in Nazi
Germany’, Antiquity 64(244): 464–78.
Assadourian, C.S. (1995) ‘Exchange in the Ethnic Territories between 1530 and
1567: the Visitas of Huanuco and Chucuito’, in B. Larson and O. Harris (eds)
Ethnicity, Markets, and Migration in the Andes, pp. 101–34. Durham: Duke
University Press.
Bandelier, A.F.A. (1911) ‘The Ruins at Tiahuanaco’, American Antiquarian Society
21: 218–65.
Bandy, M. (2001) ‘Population and History in the Ancient Titicaca Basin’, PhD disser-
tation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley.
Barrios, R. (1993) ‘La Elusiva Paz de la Democracia Boliviana’, in S. Rivera and R.
Barrios (eds) Violencias Encubiertas en Bolivia, pp. 143–208. La Paz: Cipca-
Aruwiyiri.
Bennett, W.C. (1934) ‘Excavations at Tiwanaku’, Anthropological Papers of the
American Museum of Natural History, New York 34(3): 359–494.
04 057585 Kojan (to_d) 19/9/05 10:10 am Page 403
Finnegan, W. (2002) ‘Leasing the Rain: The World is Running out of Fresh Water,
and the Fight to Control it has Begun (Letter from Bolivia)’, The New Yorker
78(7): 43–52.
Funari, P.P.A. (2003) ‘Brazilians and Romans: Colonialism, Identities and the Role
of Material Culture’, paper presented at the Fifth World Archaeological
Congress, Washington DC.
Gathercole, P.W. and D. Lowenthal, eds (1990) The Politics of the Past. One World
Archaeology, Vol. 12. London: Unwin Hyman.
Gnecco, C. 1999. ‘Archaeology and Historical Multivocality. A Reflection from the
Colombian Multicultural Context’, in G. Politis and B. Alberti (eds) Archaeol-
ogy in Latin America, pp. 258–70. London: Routledge.
Hastorf, C., ed. (1999) ‘Early Settlement at Chiripa, Bolivia: Research of the Taraco
Archaeological Project’, Contributions of the University of California. Archaeo-
logical Research Facility. Berkeley: University of California.
Hastorf, C., M. Bandy, W. Whitehead and L. Steadman (2001) ‘El Período Forma-
tivo en Chiripa, Bolivia’, Textos Antropológicos 13(1–2): 17–91.
Heckenberger, M.J., J.B. Peterson and E. Góes Neves (2001) ‘Of Lost Civilization
and Primitive Tribes, Amazonia: A Reply to Meggers’, Latin American Antiquity
12(3): 328–33.
Hobsbawm, E.J. and T.O. Ranger (1983) The Invention of Tradition. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Hodder, I. (1989). ‘Postmodernism, Poststructuralism and Postprocessual Archae-
ology’, in I. Hodder (ed.) The Meaning of Things, pp. 64–78. London: Harper-
Collins.
Hodder, I. (1991) Reading the Past: Current Approaches to Interpretation in Archae-
ology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ibarra Grasso, D.E. (1953) ‘New Archaeological Cultures from the Departments of
Chuquisaca, Potosi, and Tarija’, American Antiquity 19: 126–9.
Ibarra Grasso, D.E. (1960) Prehistoria del Departamento de Potosi. Potosi: Instituto
de Investigaciones Historicas – Universidad Autónoma Tomas Frias.
Instituto de Reforma Agraria, INRA (2000) Ley No 1715 y su Reglamento, 2nd edn.
La Paz: INRA.
Janusek, J.W. (1994) ‘State and Local power in a Pre-Hispanic Andean Polity:
Changing Patterns of Urban Residence in Tiwanaku and Lukurmata, Bolivia’,
PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Chicago, IL.
Janusek, J.W. (2002a) ‘Interregional Interaction and Social Complexity in the
Bolivian Eastern Valleys’. Paper presented at the 42nd Annual Meeting of the
Institute of Andean Studies, Berkeley, CA.
Janusek, J.W. (2002b) ‘Out of Many, One: Style and Social Boundaries in Tiwanaku’,
Latin American Antiquity 13(1): 35–61.
Janusek, J.W. (2004) ‘Tiwanaku and its Precursors: Recent Research and Emerging
Perspectives’, Journal of Archaeological Research 12(2): 121–83.
Joyce, R. (2002) The Languages of Archaeology: Dialogue, Narrative, and Writing.
Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Julien, C. (1978) ‘Inca Administration in the Titicaca Basin as Reflected at the
Provincial Capital of Hatunqolla’, PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropol-
ogy, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
04 057585 Kojan (to_d) 19/9/05 10:10 am Page 405
Klein, H.S. (1993) Haciendas and Ayllus: Rural Society in the Bolivian Andes in the
Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Klein, K.L. (1997) Frontiers of Historical Imagination: Narrating the European
Conquest of Native America, 1890–1990. Berkeley, CA: University of California
Press.
Kohl, P.L. (1998) ‘Nationalism and Archaeology – On the Constructions of Nations
and the Reconstructions of the Remote Past’, Annual Review of Anthropology
27: 223–46.
Kohl, P.L. and C.P. Fawcett (1995) ‘Archaeology in the Service of the State: Theor-
etical Considerations’, in P.L. Kohl and C.P. Fawcett (eds) Nationalism, Politics,
and the Practice of Archaeology, pp. 3–18. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Kojan, D. (2002) ‘Cultural Identity and Historical Narratives of the Bolivian Eastern
Andes: An Archaeological Study’, PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropol-
ogy, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
Kolata, A., ed. (1989) Arqueología de Lukurmata. La Paz: CIMA.
Kolata, A. (1993) The Tiwanaku: Portrait of an Andean Civilization. Cambridge,
MA: Blackwell.
Kolata, A., ed. (1996) Tiwanaku and its Hinterland: Archaeology and Paleoecology
of an Andean Civilization. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Kolata, A., M. Binford, M. Brenner, J. Janusek and C. Ortloff (2000) ‘Environmental
Threshold and the Empirical Reality of State Collapse: A Response to Erickson
(1999)’, Antiquity 74(284): 424–26.
Larson, B. (1988) Cochabamba 1550–1900: Colonialism and Agrarian Transform-
ation in Bolivia. Durham: Duke University Press.
Lathrap, D.W. (1973) ‘Gifts of the Cayman: Some Thoughts on the Subsistence Basis
of Chavin’, in D. Lathrap and J. Douglas (eds) Variations on Anthropology,
pp. 91–105. Urbana, IL: Archaeological Surveys.
Lecoq, P. (2001) ‘El Período Formativo en Potosí y el Sur de Bolivia: Un Estado de
la Cuestión’, Textos Antropológicos 13(1–2): 231–63.
Lyons, C.L. and J.K. Papadopoulos (2002) ‘The Archaeology of Colonialism’, in C.L.
Lyons and J.K. Papadopoulos (eds) The Archaeology of Colonialism, pp. 1–23.
Los Angeles, CA: Getty Research Institute.
Mamani, C. (1996) ‘History and Prehistory in Bolivia. What About the Indians?’, in
R.W. Preucel and I. Hodder (eds) Contemporary Archaeology in Theory,
pp. 632–45. Oxford: Blackwell.
Meggers, B. (1971) Amazonia: Man and Culture in a Counterfeit Paradise. Chicago:
Aldine Publishing Company.
Meggers, B. (2001) ‘The Continuing Quest for El Dorado: Round Two’, Latin
American Antiquity 12(3): 304–25.
Murra, J. (1975). ‘El Control Vertical de un Máximo de Pisos Ecológicos en la
Economía de las Sociedades Andinas’, in J. Murra (ed.) Formaciones Políticas y
Económicas del Mundo Andino. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
Nielsen, A. (2001) ‘Ocupaciones Formativas en el Altiplano de Lípez-Potosí,
Bolivia’, Textos Antropológicos 13(1–2): 265–85.
Nielsen, A. (2002) ‘Asentamientos, Conflicto y Cambio Social en el Altiplano de
Lípez (Potosí)’, Revista Española de Antropología Americana 32: 179–205.
Oberem, U. (1974) ‘Trade and Trade Goods in the Ecuadorian Montana’, in P.J. Lyon
04 057585 Kojan (to_d) 19/9/05 10:10 am Page 406
Schmidt, P.R. and T.C. Patterson (1995) ‘Introduction’, in P.R. Schmidt and T.C.
Patterson (eds) Making Alternative Histories: The Practice of Archaeology and
History in Non-Western Settings, pp. 1–24. Santa Fe, NM: School of American
Research Press.
Shanks, M. and I. Hodder (1995) ‘Processual, Post-processual and Interpretive
Archaeologies’, in I. Hodder, M. Shanks, A. Alexandri, V. Buchli, J. Carman, J.
Last and G. Lucas (eds) Interpreting Archaeology: Finding Meaning in the Past,
pp. 3–29. London: Routledge.
Shanks, M. and C. Tilley (1992/1987) Re-constructing Archaeology. Theory and
Practice. London: Routledge.
Spivak, G.C. (1988) ‘Can the Subaltern Speak?’, in L. Grossberg and C. Nelson (eds)
Marxist Interpretations of Literature and Culture. Limits, Boundaries and Fron-
tiers, pp. 271–313. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Squier, E.G. (1867) ‘Among the Andes of Peru and Bolivia’, Harper’s New Monthly
Magazine 36.
Stanish, C. (2001) ‘The Origin of State Societies in South America’, Annual Review
of Anthropology 30: 41–64.
Starn, O. (1991) ‘Missing the Revolution: Anthropologists and the War in Peru’,
Cultural Anthropology 6(1): 63–91.
Steward, J., ed. (1948) Handbook of South American Indians. Washington DC:
Bureau of American Ethnology, US Department of State.
Tarragó, M. (1977) ‘Relaciones Prehispánicas Entre San Pedro de Atacama (Norte
de Chile) y Regiones Aledañas: La Quebrada de Humahuaca’, Estudios
Atacameños (5): 50–63.
Thomas, N. (1991) Entangled Objects. Exchange, Material Culture and Colonialism
in the Pacific, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Trigger, B. (1984) ‘Alternative Archaeologies: Nationalist, Colonialist, Imperialist’,
Man 19: 355–70.
Trigger, B. (1989) A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Trigger, B. (1995) ‘Romanticism, Nationalism, and Archaeology’, in P.L. Kohl and
C.P. Fawcett (eds) Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology,
pp. 263–79. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Trouillot, M.-R. (1995) Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History.
Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Urton, G. (1999) Inca Myths. London: British Museum Press.
Van Buren, M. (1996) ‘Rethinking the Vertical Archipelago: Ethnicity, Exchange,
and History in the South Central Andes’, American Anthropologist 98(2): 338–51.
Visweswaran, K. (1997) ‘Histories of Feminist Ethnography’, Annual Review of
Anthropology 26: 591–621.
Vranich,A. (1999) ‘Interpreting the Meaning of Ritual Spaces: The Temple Complex
of Pumapunku, Tiwanaku, Bolivia’. PhD dissertation, Anthropology Depart-
ment, University of Pennsylvania, PA.
Watkins, J. (2000) Indigenous Archaeology. American Indian Values and Scientific
Practice. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.
Watkins, J. (2003) ‘Beyond the Margin: American Indians, First Nations and Archae-
ology in North America’, American Antiquity 68(2): 273–85.
04 057585 Kojan (to_d) 19/9/05 10:10 am Page 408
Werlich, D. (1968) ‘The Conquest and Settlement of the Peruvian Montana’, PhD
dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Minnesota, MN.
Wylie, A. (1995) ‘Alternative Histories: Epistemic Disunity and Political Integrity’,
in P.R. Schmidt and T.C. Patterson (eds) Making Alternative Histories: The
Practice of Archaeology and History in Non-Western Settings, pp. 255–72. Santa
Fe, NM: School of American Research Press.