Origins and Evolution of the Ushnu
.
In the last two posts I presented a hypothetical reconstruction of the Cuzco ushnu, which probably was constructed around the very early 1400’s, and discussed and provided examples of provincial ushnu that probably date from the 1430’s onwards.
This posting will discuss the origins of the Cuzco ushnu, and how and why provincial ushnu evolved and changed from the Cuzco design.
The origins of the Cuzco ushnu
As we have seen the best reconstruction I can offer of the Cuzco ushnu is of a small platform with a 6 foot high pointed stone pillar emerging from it. At the foot of the platform was a 3 foot high rounded stone basin, shaped a bit like a teat. These three separate components (platform, upright, basin) all have different origins.
My feeling is that the origin of the Cuzco ushnus platform or bench was from a religious context. These are common religious structures. Morris [2005?] states that 'rectangular platforms, usually against one or two walls of a building, are one of the most common features that distinguish religious buildings from secular ones'. Not surprisingly such benches or platforms were also reported in the Coricancha temple in Cuzco. Betanzos, in his commentary on the Cuzco ushnu clearly states that its purpose was to be the public version of the private shrine to the Sun in the Coricancha [Betanzos 1557 (1996)]. This may have involved replicating such benches.
The origin of the upright would seem to be purely calendrical, as a way of observing the seasons by aligning the point with two others on the Incan horizon and waiting for the sun to rise between them and presumably directly above the ushnu stone.
The basin would seem to be another common religious structure, directly associated with the religious purpose of the platform/bench, where offerings could be poured [Morris, 2005?].
The combination of these three individual features gave rise to the original Cuzco ushnus shape.
The Cuzco ushnu was not described by any of the chroniclers as large. There are several possiblities I think that might explain why this was so:
1. Incan benches found in other religious contexts are often not large. Based on my theory above, the ushnus bench was such a structure and so was not conspicuously large either.
2. The Cuzco ushnu is recorded as being constructed decades before the Incan kingdom expanded into an empire (if we accept Cieza de Leons attribution of the Cuzco ushnu to the seventh Incan king Yahuar-Huacac). At the time it was built the resources the Cuzco nobility had access to would have been much smaller, therefore the structure was probably modest in size.
3. The nobility of Cuzco may have politically limited the size of the ushnu to prevent the Inca emperor being physically elevated far above them when he sat on the ushnu as a throne during ceremonies in the Haukaypata plaza. Rivalaries between various royal factions were reported by the Spanish during and after the conquest.
The evolution of the provincial ushnu
Several decades after the Cuzco ushnu was built (assuming its origin with the seventh Incan king) the Inca expanded from a small highland kingdom into an empire with new settlements being created at some distance from Cuzco. In such new settlements provincial ushnu were built.
The defining feature of the provincial ushnu is of a platform built on a large scale (large enough for a person to sit comfortably on the top). Some ushnu are made up of several stacked platforms of decreasing size, but all consist of at least one such platform (for example the Shimal ushnu illustrated in the last posting is a single platform). I believe these platforms derive directly from the Cuzco ushnu (which derives from a religious bench), but are simply enlarged in scale.
I believe they were enlarged because whilst the functions of the ushnu remained largely the same from the Cuzco to provincial models (as site for sacrifices to the Sun, as a throne for the Inca, as a reviewing platform, and perhaps site for solar/calendrical observations etc), the context did alter. By the time the Incas came to build provincial ushnu they were now in control of an increasing vast empire. The had developed an imperial destiny and an imperial blueprint, part of which was conveyed in their masonary. Such a context had not existed when the original Cuzco ushnu was built, at which time Cuzco was a small settlement ruling a small kingdom, amongst many other such small kingdoms.
Part of the Incan imperial policy as they expanded their empire was doubtless to impress and subdue their subject peoples. Ceremonial centres were constructed throughout the empire to stage and host imperially organized festivals including reciprocity ceremonies where the Inca (or his representatives) exchanged gifts with local nobility, and religious ceremonies involving the imperial religious cult of the Sun and the Emperor (the son of the Sun). A main feature of many of these ceremonial sites was the plaza, where people could gather, and dominating many of these plazas, and therefore the events held in them was the provincial ushnu, a symbol of the Inca and his power. It therefore makes sense to expect the ushnu to have been enlarged to take on this magnified role in the provinces, dominating the provincial peoples who gathered beneath it.
As these events would often have included offering sacrifices provincial ushnu (like the original Cuzco ushnu) appear to have contained or been adjacent to basins of one type or another.
The one feature that I think was generally disregarded when provincial ushnu were built was the upright. The function of this on the Cuzco ushnu was for calendrical purposes. It would appear that this method of observation was not usually carried over to the provincial models, certainly none of the early chroniclers record this function for provincial ushnu, and as far as I am aware only one example of an upright has been found in context with an ushnu, that at Tajra Chullo [Meddens 1997]. At this site is not known what the upright functioned as. Meddens describes it as 'zoomorphic in shape, resembling a guinea pig' and suggests 'this stone served as a gnomon'. Though later he describes it as 'a large pillar...that could have served in both horizon and zenith observations' [Meddens 1997]. So it is possible that even the upright of the Cuzco ushnu could have been repeated in the provincial models.
However this one example seems to be an isolated case. Perhaps other uprights were destroyed by the Spanish. Or alternatively the function of solar observations may have been separated to another structure. Garcilaso de la Vega [1609 (1966)] describes columns erected in the squares of Sun temples as being used to determine the time of year, and a range of structures which may have functioned as observatories have been found at several Incan sites [Hyslop 1990]. Alternatively perhaps as Pino suggests such observations may have been made from some provincial ushnu [Pino 2005], but without the use of an upright.
Conclusions
In summary then, the evidence suggests to me that the Cuzco ushnus shape developed from a fairly standard platform or bench shape often found in Incan religious contexts. This was associated (as was often the case) with a basin for ritual offerings. In addition to this a stone upright was placed on the bench to be used for calendrical purposes.
Decades after the construction of the Cuzco ushnu, the Incas had developed an increasingly large empire, with subject peoples and administrative centres to administer them. New ushnu were built in such centres. These ushnu maintained the original bench and basin features, but greatly magnified and sometimes repeated the bench component, making the ushnu more imposing and impressive as was appropriate to the new imperial Incan message to provincial subjects. The upright component appears to have been retained on some but not all provincial ushnu. Where it is absent it may have been destroyed, or perhaps its associated calendrical function may have been transferred to another structure, or performed from the ushnu in a way that did not require the upright feature.
This posting will discuss the origins of the Cuzco ushnu, and how and why provincial ushnu evolved and changed from the Cuzco design.
The origins of the Cuzco ushnu
As we have seen the best reconstruction I can offer of the Cuzco ushnu is of a small platform with a 6 foot high pointed stone pillar emerging from it. At the foot of the platform was a 3 foot high rounded stone basin, shaped a bit like a teat. These three separate components (platform, upright, basin) all have different origins.
My feeling is that the origin of the Cuzco ushnus platform or bench was from a religious context. These are common religious structures. Morris [2005?] states that 'rectangular platforms, usually against one or two walls of a building, are one of the most common features that distinguish religious buildings from secular ones'. Not surprisingly such benches or platforms were also reported in the Coricancha temple in Cuzco. Betanzos, in his commentary on the Cuzco ushnu clearly states that its purpose was to be the public version of the private shrine to the Sun in the Coricancha [Betanzos 1557 (1996)]. This may have involved replicating such benches.
The origin of the upright would seem to be purely calendrical, as a way of observing the seasons by aligning the point with two others on the Incan horizon and waiting for the sun to rise between them and presumably directly above the ushnu stone.
The basin would seem to be another common religious structure, directly associated with the religious purpose of the platform/bench, where offerings could be poured [Morris, 2005?].
The combination of these three individual features gave rise to the original Cuzco ushnus shape.
The Cuzco ushnu was not described by any of the chroniclers as large. There are several possiblities I think that might explain why this was so:
1. Incan benches found in other religious contexts are often not large. Based on my theory above, the ushnus bench was such a structure and so was not conspicuously large either.
2. The Cuzco ushnu is recorded as being constructed decades before the Incan kingdom expanded into an empire (if we accept Cieza de Leons attribution of the Cuzco ushnu to the seventh Incan king Yahuar-Huacac). At the time it was built the resources the Cuzco nobility had access to would have been much smaller, therefore the structure was probably modest in size.
3. The nobility of Cuzco may have politically limited the size of the ushnu to prevent the Inca emperor being physically elevated far above them when he sat on the ushnu as a throne during ceremonies in the Haukaypata plaza. Rivalaries between various royal factions were reported by the Spanish during and after the conquest.
The evolution of the provincial ushnu
Several decades after the Cuzco ushnu was built (assuming its origin with the seventh Incan king) the Inca expanded from a small highland kingdom into an empire with new settlements being created at some distance from Cuzco. In such new settlements provincial ushnu were built.
The defining feature of the provincial ushnu is of a platform built on a large scale (large enough for a person to sit comfortably on the top). Some ushnu are made up of several stacked platforms of decreasing size, but all consist of at least one such platform (for example the Shimal ushnu illustrated in the last posting is a single platform). I believe these platforms derive directly from the Cuzco ushnu (which derives from a religious bench), but are simply enlarged in scale.
I believe they were enlarged because whilst the functions of the ushnu remained largely the same from the Cuzco to provincial models (as site for sacrifices to the Sun, as a throne for the Inca, as a reviewing platform, and perhaps site for solar/calendrical observations etc), the context did alter. By the time the Incas came to build provincial ushnu they were now in control of an increasing vast empire. The had developed an imperial destiny and an imperial blueprint, part of which was conveyed in their masonary. Such a context had not existed when the original Cuzco ushnu was built, at which time Cuzco was a small settlement ruling a small kingdom, amongst many other such small kingdoms.
Part of the Incan imperial policy as they expanded their empire was doubtless to impress and subdue their subject peoples. Ceremonial centres were constructed throughout the empire to stage and host imperially organized festivals including reciprocity ceremonies where the Inca (or his representatives) exchanged gifts with local nobility, and religious ceremonies involving the imperial religious cult of the Sun and the Emperor (the son of the Sun). A main feature of many of these ceremonial sites was the plaza, where people could gather, and dominating many of these plazas, and therefore the events held in them was the provincial ushnu, a symbol of the Inca and his power. It therefore makes sense to expect the ushnu to have been enlarged to take on this magnified role in the provinces, dominating the provincial peoples who gathered beneath it.
As these events would often have included offering sacrifices provincial ushnu (like the original Cuzco ushnu) appear to have contained or been adjacent to basins of one type or another.
The one feature that I think was generally disregarded when provincial ushnu were built was the upright. The function of this on the Cuzco ushnu was for calendrical purposes. It would appear that this method of observation was not usually carried over to the provincial models, certainly none of the early chroniclers record this function for provincial ushnu, and as far as I am aware only one example of an upright has been found in context with an ushnu, that at Tajra Chullo [Meddens 1997]. At this site is not known what the upright functioned as. Meddens describes it as 'zoomorphic in shape, resembling a guinea pig' and suggests 'this stone served as a gnomon'. Though later he describes it as 'a large pillar...that could have served in both horizon and zenith observations' [Meddens 1997]. So it is possible that even the upright of the Cuzco ushnu could have been repeated in the provincial models.
However this one example seems to be an isolated case. Perhaps other uprights were destroyed by the Spanish. Or alternatively the function of solar observations may have been separated to another structure. Garcilaso de la Vega [1609 (1966)] describes columns erected in the squares of Sun temples as being used to determine the time of year, and a range of structures which may have functioned as observatories have been found at several Incan sites [Hyslop 1990]. Alternatively perhaps as Pino suggests such observations may have been made from some provincial ushnu [Pino 2005], but without the use of an upright.
Conclusions
In summary then, the evidence suggests to me that the Cuzco ushnus shape developed from a fairly standard platform or bench shape often found in Incan religious contexts. This was associated (as was often the case) with a basin for ritual offerings. In addition to this a stone upright was placed on the bench to be used for calendrical purposes.
Decades after the construction of the Cuzco ushnu, the Incas had developed an increasingly large empire, with subject peoples and administrative centres to administer them. New ushnu were built in such centres. These ushnu maintained the original bench and basin features, but greatly magnified and sometimes repeated the bench component, making the ushnu more imposing and impressive as was appropriate to the new imperial Incan message to provincial subjects. The upright component appears to have been retained on some but not all provincial ushnu. Where it is absent it may have been destroyed, or perhaps its associated calendrical function may have been transferred to another structure, or performed from the ushnu in a way that did not require the upright feature.
.
Link to the next post in this series - http://ushnu.blogspot.com/search/label/sources
References
Betanzos, Juan de. Narrative of the Incas. Translated by Hamilton and Buchanan. 1996, University of Texas Press
Garcilaso de la Vega, Inca. Royal Commentaries of the Incas and General History of Peru. Translated by HV Livermore. 1966, University of Texas
Hyslop, John. Inka settlement planning. 1990, University of Texas Press
Morris, Craig. The Architecture of Tahuantinsuyo in the volume The Incas, Art and Symbol, 2005(?). Banco de Credito del Peru
Pino Jose Luis M. El ushnu y la organizacion espacial astronomica en la sierra central del Chinchaysuyu, 2005. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos
No comments:
Post a Comment