1 10 5 https://apconf-much.org/proceedings/files/original/e3d699d5cbe820496ec9481e3c438cfa.mp4 655df45474f44632ef07cdaa97bdd6eb Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Session 14: Pre-Hispanic Navigation Subject The topic of the resource Video interview with Session 14 Chair Carlos Ausejo and links to the papers presented in the session. Description An account of the resource Navigation was not unknown in the Americas, at the Spaniards arrival different kind of vessel were in use both in the Pacific and the Atlantic shores, as well as in lakes or rivers. Canoe, reed rafts, balsa log raft and others skin based watercraft have been described mainly on historical records and gave us an idea of this technologies. Although it is clear that long and short distance maritime trade routes were in use and watercraft were also involve in war activities and other maritime activities, archaeological evidence related with actual boats has been elusive to find. Still some of these traditions have survived time and in use with some changes and others were incorporated to European navigation traditions. During the last decades an increasing interest among researchers in addition to new and different approaches from a broad spectrum of perspectives, including archaeology, history, ethnohistory and ethnography, has brought new and better understanding about these technologies. In spite of this, venues of dialogue to present and discuss about these traditions has been practically inexistent. The aim of this session is to show research advances on this topic mainly in the Pacific shores and inland waters through different perspectives up to the Spanish arrival. It will focus primarily in the Andean and Mesoamerican region, however other regions would be accepted. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Carlos Ausejo Moving Image A series of visual representations that, when shown in succession, impart an impression of motion. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Video interview with Session 14 Chair Carlos Ausejo. Description An account of the resource Navigation was not unknown in the Americas, at the Spaniards arrival different kind of vessel were in use both in the Pacific and the Atlantic shores, as well as in lakes or rivers. Canoe, reed rafts, balsa log raft and others skin based watercraft have been described mainly on historical records and gave us an idea of this technologies. Although it is clear that long and short distance maritime trade routes were in use and watercraft were also involve in war activities and other maritime activities, archaeological evidence related with actual boats has been elusive to find. Still some of these traditions have survived time and in use with some changes and others were incorporated to European navigation traditions. During the last decades an increasing interest among researchers in addition to new and different approaches from a broad spectrum of perspectives, including archaeology, history, ethnohistory and ethnography, has brought new and better understanding about these technologies. In spite of this, venues of dialogue to present and discuss about these traditions has been practically inexistent The aim of this session is to show research advances on this topic mainly in the Pacific shores and inland waters through different perspectives up to the Spanish arrival. It will focus primarily in the Andean and Mesoamerican region, however other regions would be accepted. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Carlos Ausejo Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 6/12/2014 Asia-Pac Session 14 2014 https://apconf-much.org/proceedings/files/original/985784694be97847b3193fe9e35472b2.pdf a03b5891136c4deb2d2215b0af13b756 PDF Text Text Pre-Hispanic Navigation in the Andean Region Carlos Ausejo Centro Peruano de Arqueología Marítima y Subacuática (CPAMS) Lima18 Perú Email: causejo@cpams.org.pe Abstract Offshore and inland waters in the Andean region were crossed by boats of various types made of different materials. These were related mainly to fishing activities, but also were involvedin long-distance trade of luxury goods, rituals, passengers and even war.Construction technologies and development of these vessels varied depending on available resources and the capacity of societies to solve navigational problems. In that sense a variety of types and forms of vessels have been identified, and although not all boats are "complex" as the Europeans, it is clear that they evolve and had changes over time that perfected them.Despite this plentiful of technologies, the archaeological record of actual watercraft is almost nonexistent. As a result the approach to these technologies is through other evidence as the iconography fund on pottery, textiles and wall friezes, as well as sculptural referencesnot to mentionreferences recorded by Spanish chroniclers and ultimatelypost- Conquest survivals.The aim of this paper is to recount these technologies through indirect evidence and elaborate some hypotheses about the use and success of the same in the pre -Hispanic Andean world and its survival after the conquest. Keywords: Prehispanic, Navigation, raft, boat, andean Introduction The Peruvian coastal environment consists of two related ecological zones, the Pacific Ocean with its adjacent shoreline and the river valleys that wind through the coastal desert creating linear oases. The coast of Peru, due to its complex natural environment generates a constantly renewed of marine food supply. The source of this large supply is the Peruvian Coast Current, also known as Humboldt Current, which is the easternmost segment of the counter clockwise circulation of the Pacific Ocean (Bawden, 1996). The archaeological evidence for the Middle Archaic (6000-3000 BC1) in the Andean area allows us to think that sedentary groups develop in the Andean valleys and the slopes each with their own neolithisation process. These societies 1 �depended on mixed economies however the coastal ones placed greater emphasis on the extraction of marine products (Shady, 2003b). The particular richness of the Peruvian coast allows the subsistence of larger groups of people and early complex coastal societies in pre-ceramic times as suggested by Moseley. Evidences of these can be found in Caral, Supe, and other sites, from the same period such as Huaynuna, Las Haldas, Ancon and La Paloma (Bearez and Miranda, 2003).Ever since the large marine resources could support the development of early complex societies, an increasing amount and more efficient marine exploitation was critical causing the development of new technologies to go further into the sea and complement the shoreline exploitation. Shellfish, Sea Mammals, Fish, and later the guano from off shore islands and long distance trade of sumptuary items, require a constant evolution and specialization on, fishing hooks, fishing nets and ultimately marine vessels (Rostworowski, 1989). Evidences for navigation The invention of floating devices in pre-Hispanic times is not a matter of discussion even though the lack of direct archaeological evidence of such devices. All evidences related with ancient navigation are based on historic and etnohistorical references, experimental archaeology and indirectarchaeological evidences such as iconography, models and artifacts. All of these sources face their own validation problems and subsequent debate. From all these sources it is clear that along the Andean region rafts of different complexity were the principal navigation tool, with the exception of the reed boat for Moche2times in the northern coast and Titicaca Lake3 (Ausejo, 2011). Archaeological evidence Actual rafts or boats have been elusive for archeologists, however the best evidence for them can be seenin a collection of wooden raft models found in southern Peru and northern Chile dated to the Late Intermediated Period (1000 – 1350 AD), belonging to the Chiribaya culture. The models are found on individual burials as burial offerings among others (Ortiz,2003). 2 �Other evidences are depictions of seafarers on mud friezes and sculpture or painted pottery. Depictions of seafarers on friezes are very rare, however Huaca Las Balsas, part of the Tucume complex in La Leche valley, dated prior to the arrival of the Chimu rule over the area shows a frieze (2.20m x 1.60 m) with two reed boats or rafts, each with two figures holding oars or paddles(Heyerdahl, 1995).Another wall frieze shows a similar depiction with four figures, two over a balsa log raft and two divers collecting spondyllus shell (Vicente Cortez, personal communication). The balsa raft appears to have sails. Likewise Mochefineline paintings on pottery show navigation depictions with complex reed boats (Ausejo, 2011). Besides the Moche other societies also represented navigation related representations such as the Sican, Chimu and Chancay (Cordy-Collins, 1990). The final archaeological evidence, which implies navigation, is the presence of archaeological remains in the off shore islands during the extraction of guano4 on the second half of the XIX century. The most interesting finds are wooden figures representing nude seated prisoners associated with Moche pottery (Kubler 1948). For San Lorenzo Island in the central coast, extensive cemeteries with complex burials have been reported, as well as hunting and fishing stations (Hudtwalcker and Pinilla, 2006). Historical Records The body of these records is composed by the chroniclers’ accounts, administrative and judicial documents and travellers’ accounts from the XVIII and XIX century. Despite the variety of information available from them, these records must be used with care and analysed critically; the chronicles, -texts written by Spanish observers- where written at a time when the indigenous people were seen as idolaters or sub-humans, therefore the preconceptions preclude any reasonable understanding of the Andean culture (Bawden, 1996). The earliest report come from Fray Bartolome de las Casas, around 1512, provided by the son of a Kuna5 chief telling about people from a rich kingdom, other than the Spaniards navigating with ships or vessels a little smaller using sails and paddles (Heyerdahl, 1995). The second and more famous report is from 1527, by Bartolome Ruiz, Pizarro’s pilot, aboutthe encounter with a little vessel tacking northward against 3 �the Northern current. The vessel was already passing the Ecuador when the Spaniards following the current southward into unknown waters intercepted it (Heyerdahl, 1995). Evidently the balsas were still in use and even of importance at the arrival of the Spaniards and during the rule of the Incas (Heyerdahl, 1995). Therefore some chroniclers and administrative documents refer to times before and during the Inca’s rule. An account classified as historical, but without references, is the naval battle fought by Atahualpa, who allied with the Curaca of Tumbes to declare war against the Puná Island. Having been defeated and wounded, Atahualpa withdrew to Quito and Tumbes was conquered and burned by the Curaca of Puná. That is why Pizarro changed the name of Tumbes to Puerto Quemado (Burned Harbour) (Rostworowski, 1999).Another account is related with a brief conversation between Pizarro and Atahualpa he asked the Inca ruler why the Curaca of Chincha was carried on a stretcher, and he responded that it was a very good friend and great man of the coast, and he had available a hundred thousand rafts at sea (Hocquenguem, 1999; Rostworowski, 1989) The most interesting and controversial document is a manuscript file, called “Aviso”, from the Royal Palace of Madrid; the document mention that before the Inca expansion, the Chincha lordship had thirty thousand farmers divided in twelve thousand farmers, ten thousand fishermen and six thousand "traders in the Indian way", each with reasonable wealth (Rostworowski, 1999). They used two routes, a land to highland, from Chincha to Cusco and Collao and another maritime, on rafts to Mantas and Puerto Viejo in Ecuador (Rostworowski, 1989).The controversy is because Rostworowski interpret the “traders in the Indian way” as merchants engage in maritime long distance trade and therefore the use of boats capable of long distance travel, such as described byBartolome Ruiz of the raft and the specificity of the contentssimilar to those referred in the “Aviso”(Rostworowski, 1989). Etnohistorical Evidence The Incas, as well as other previous societies, didn’t have a writing system, so they rely in oral tradition to keep records of their history. The Spaniards later recorded these Story’s or legends during the earlier years of the conquest or later. Therefore just like the historical records, and because they refer to events several years before the arrival 4 �of the Spaniards, legends recorded by the chroniclers must be use with discretion and critically. The northern coast of Peru before the Inca rule in the area have two foundations myths about the Chimu, very similar with each other but with different port of arrival, Naylamp arrives to Lambayeque and Tacaynamo to Trujillo (Rostworowski 1999). On either case the myth refers to a group capable of navigation systems and probably long distance traffic. Miguel Cabello de Balboa describes Naylamp arrival to the Lambayeque valley (Ravines, 1980):"The natives of Lambayeque say, that in ancient times who cannot number them, came from the northern part of this Piru with large fleet of rafts with a father of campaigns, a man of great value and quality called Naylamp and brought many concubines, but the principal wife was called Ceterni, brought within his company many people who as captain and leader were following him, but what was the most valuable among them were officers who were forty ... " (Cabello Balboa, [1576] 1951: 327-330). Another myth, in this case referred to the God Viracocha, is of particular interest. The God after finishing the creation of the world leaves to Ecuador, apparently Manta or Puerto Viejo, and embarks with his servants into a sea voyage without return (Hocquenguem, 1999). In the case of the Inca’s we found only two specific stories specifically related with Tupac Yupanqui, an Inca ruler several years before the arrival of the Spaniards.The first story is related with the use of balsa log rafts in the tributaries of the Amazons River transporting large number of soldiers and people with success. The second, and the famous, is his journey into the Pacific Ocean to the legendary islands of Auachumbi and Nina Chumbi. Apparently by the experimental use of balsas it seems that the islands referring in the Tupac Yupanqui story are Easter Island (for Ninachumbi) and Kava (for Avachumbi) according with the information of distance and direction provided by Sarmiento (Heyerdahl 1995). What’s more interesting is the references in Polynesian manuscripts noted by Sir Peter Buck, about a visitor in Mangareva called Tupa, and also tells that Tupa before going back to his country told them it was a vast land full of people and ruled by powerful kings (Heyerdahl, 1995). 5 �Type of Vessels In this section we’d like to discuss and define the type of navigation vessels use at the time and before the arrival of the Spaniards. The main problem we face typifying and defining marine, as well as lake or river, vessels is that some writers, weather is a reed or balsa log boat, use the term “Balsa” “Boat” or “Raft” indifferently to any kind of marine or water vessel they encountered and reported (Cordy-Collins personal communication). So to keep clear the terms we will use the definition of raft as a nonwatertight made of individual floating elements (McGrail, 1985). Although all pre – Hispanic vessels can be describe into this definition, we’ll make one exemption with a specific reed craft, called Tule Boat (Cordy Collins, 1972), or Reed Boat (Donnan and McClelland, 1979), found only in iconography depictions. The differences between a raft and a boat are base in comparisons with similar complex reed crafts use nowadays in the Titicaca Lake. After reviewing the available resources of information we can identify at least five types of vessels define by their building materials. Gourd Rafts The simplest vessel is made of gourds tied to each other, although it isn’t mentioned it should have some kind of simple deck; apparently it was used to cross rivers in flood seasons or particular coastal rivers with a constant and high flow the whole year (Rostworowski, 1981). Such is the case of the Santa River, south of Chao, the longest and mightiest of coastal rivers. Since the sixteenth century, is mentioned as “the greatest river, the toughest of these valleys and plains, it is cross using ugly rafts of gourds called mates ... " (JudioPortugués, 1958: 27 in Ravines, 1980) Skin Raft Another simply vessel is made with sea lions skins inflated as floating devices, they are reported between Ica, in Peru, and San Antonio, Chile (Paez 1986). This practice has been lost in the whole area, however in 1958 Hans Niemeyer reported one last man who remembered the construction technique of these vessels. The construction was simple, made of two inflated sea lion skins tied together with leather straps. A set of beams connected the skins, and over them wooden planks formed a simple deck (Rostworowski, 1981). A single person seated or kneeing with a double bladed paddle 6 �manned it. These raft were use for fishing, carrying goods and passengers, as well as Niter Paez, 1986). Balsa Log Raft The balsa logs vessels are the most common type of deep - sea vessel found by the Spaniards (Fig. 1 - 4). These traditions cover an area that includes Ecuador, Peru and northern Chile (Valdivia 1974). They are made of thick long logs of balsa wood (Genus Ochroma) tie together with ropes. Figure 1:Wall frieze of balsa log raft at Huaca Las Figure 2: Wall frieze of balsa log raft with sail and Balsas, northern coast of Perú. (Photo by: Vicente divers at Huaca Las Balsas, northern coast of Perú. Cortez) (Photo by: Vicente Cortez) Figure 3: Modern balsa log raft at mancora, Figure 4: Modern balsa log raft at mancora, northern coast of Perú. (Photo by: Ericka Cicchini) northern coast of Perú. (Photo by: Carlos Ausejo) The logs are always in odd numbers, being the middle log the longest, and over them other logs as crosspieces to tight the construction. Over the logs a framework of canes was laid and provisions and cargo were kept in an elevated cabin to protect it from the 7 �sea washouts (Heyerdahl, 1995).The balsa logs vessels size seem to be variable, but most accounts reveal that could carry a considerable cargo in men and horses and also carried stone anchors resembling millstones on the deck (Heyerdahl, 1995). Two different kinds of sails were use with the balsa log vessel: First, the lateen or triangular sail, as reported by Fernandez de Oviedo; and second, the square sail on a double mast, both types survived until modern times. The square sail on a bipod mast is also found in reed vessels on the Titicaca Lake (Heyerdahl, 1995). One last technology to note on the balsa logs vessels, and perhaps the more interesting is described first by the Dutch admiral Spilbergen about the use of broad boards inserted vertically in the cracks of the logs. The “Guaras” was system use called by the Figure 5:Totora Raft known as “Caballito de Totota” o “Totora indigenous people for deep Reed Horse”. (Photo by: Vicente Cortez) sea navigation. But it was in 1736 when two Spanish naval officers, G. Juan and A de Ulloa, describe in a better way the guara system and their advantages (Heyerdahl, 1995): “Hitherto we have only mentioned the construction and the uses they are applied; but the greatest singularity if this floating vehicle is that it sails, tacks, and works as well in contrary wind as ships with keel, and makes very little leeway. This 8 �advantages derives from another method of steering than by a rudder; namely, by some boards, three or four yards in length, and half a yard in breadth, called guaras, which are placed vertically, both at the head and stern between the main beams, and by thrusting some of them deep in the water, and raising others, they bear away, lift up, tack, lay to, and perform all the other motions of a regular ship.” Reed Raft The raft is a single or double manned vessel made of a reed fiber called Totora (ScirpusCalifornicus), it grew in abundance in marshes and lakes, natural or artificial, along the coast (Rostworowski, 1981) and It is also known in modern days as “Caballito de Totora” or Reed Horse (Fig. 5). They seem to had different characteristics according to the area, for example Huanchaco, north coast, have only the bow pointed upward and turn up; in Lurin, central coast, three bundles were made with the central bundle being slightly longer than the others. In the case of Moche and Chimu ceramics representation they seem to have both pointed ends upwards (Rostworowski, 1981). Strong continuities of this tradition exist, as shown by the survival of the “Caballito de Totora” in the north coast, and have been convincingly shown through ethnographic research into modern and recent societies of the north coast region (Bawden, 1996). Reed Boat This type of boat can only be seen at the Titicaca Lake nowadays (Fig. 6). This particular reed craft, although by definition might be considered as a raft, will be considered a boat in this paper. It consists of massive bundles of Totora forming a high floating hull (although it’s not empty and not watertight), over the “hull” the surface is dry and protected contrary to the washed surfaces of rafts. Depending on the size it could carry several people as mentioned by Cobo which described that major balsas were made over gathering reeds bundles on which they could sail up to twelve people and when they were joined two it was able to carrying cattle and beasts (Rostworowski, 1981). Larger boats can be made by sewing two of these and have a second deck made of lighter cane as well as sails. This is the type of craft being represented in Moche pottery as double deck reed boats capable of transporting cargo and in some cases passengers (Cordy-Collins, 1999; Ausejo 2011). This boat building tradition didn’t 9 �survive in the coast like it did in the Titicaca Lake probably replaced by the balsa log vessel tradition (Ortiz, 2006) However, it is unclear yet the origin of this construction technique in the Titicaca lake. Nevertheless complex reed crafts have proven to be worthless for long distance sea travels during the voyage made by Gene Savoy in 1969 from the Salaverry port in Peru to (Rostworowski, 1981). Figure 6:Totora read boat in Lake Titicaca, southern highlands, between Perú and Bolivia. (Photo by: Vicente Cortez) Conclusion As we can see societies in the Andean region successfully developed different types of watercraft using available resources for construction and adapted for different activities. Although archaeological evidence has been hard to find or identify most of these traditions are still alive as proof of their efficiency and success. This paper is a summary of most watercraft known for the Andean region and as such it’s an invitation for further research in the topic. We still have the great question of where can we find these vessels in the archaeological record, and then for every type of vessel we still have unanswered questions like when and where the sail appeared. Or why the reed boats disappeared in the northern coast, etc. The topic is broad and we haven’t even looked at the watercraft traditions in the Amazon basin. Acknowledgements 10 �I’d like to thank the organizing committee of the 2014 APCONF, especially to Hans Van Tilburg and Veronica Walker, and the session presenters, for making possible this session. Endnotes 1. Georgian Calendar designation that starts at year one, from the birth of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, with every year since added by one. 2. Between 400 B.C. and 600 A.C. (Rowe, 1945) 3. The Titicaca Lake is located in the border of Peru and Bolivia in the Altiplanic region. 4. Guano is the excrement of seabirds and seals found in the offshore islands of the Peruvian coast. It is an effective fertilizer due to its high levels of phosphorus and nitrogen (Shimada, 1994) 5. The Kuna lived in northern Colombia and the Darien region of Panama at the arrival of the Spaniards (Bartolomé and Barabas,2004). References Ausejo, C., 2011.Pre-Hispanic Navigation: Iconographic Evidence in Moche Fine Line PaintingIn. In M. Staniforth, Proceedings on the Asia-Pacific regional conference on Underwater Cultural Heritage. 8-12 Nov 2011, Manila: 969-979. Bartolomé, A and A. Barabas. 2004. Recursos culturales y autonomía étnica. La democracia participativa de los Kuna de Panamá. En Amérique Latine Histoire et Mémoire 10. Bearez, P., Miranda, L., 2003. Análisis arqueo ictiológico del sector residencial del sitio arqueológico de Caral – Supe, Costa Central del Perú. In R. Shady, and C. Leyva (Eds.),La Ciudad Sagrada de Caral – Supe: Los orígenes y la formación del Estado Prístino en el Antiguo Perú. Lima: Instituto Nacional de Cultura – Proyecto Especial ArqueológicoCaral – Supe: 123-132. Bourguet, S., 1994. El mar y la muerte en la iconografía Moche. In: Uceda, S., Mujica, E. (eds). Moche: propuestas y perspectivas: Actas del Primer Coloquio sobre la cultura Moche, Trujillo, 12 al 16 de abril 1993. Lima: Universidad Nacional de La Libertad – Trujillo. Bawden, G., 1996. The Moche. Cambridge: Mass, Oxford: Blackwell. Cabello de Balboa, Miguel. 1951 [1576] MisceláneaAntártica: unahistoria del Perúantiguo:Seminario de Historia del Perú – Incas Instituto de Etnología. 11 �Cordy – Collins, A. 1990.FongaSigde, Shell Purveyor to the Chimu Kings. In: Moseley, ME, Cordy - Collins, A. (eds)., Rostworowski de Diez Canseco, M, Moseley, ME. (organizers). The Northern dynasties: kingship and statecraft in Chimor: a symposium at Dumbarton Oaks, 12th and 13th October 1985. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Cordy – Collins, A., 1999.La sacerdotisa y la Ostra: Queda resuelto el enigma del Spondylus?. In: Cordy-Collins, A. et. al. 1999. Spondylus: ofrenda sagrada y símbolo de paz. Lima: Fundación Telefónica, Museo Arqueológico Rafael Larco Herrera. Donnan, CB., Castillo, L., 1994. Excavaciones de tumbas de sacerdotisas Moche en San José de Moro, Jequetepeque. In: Uceda, S., Mujica, E. (eds). Moche: propuestas y perspectivas. Lima: Universidad Nacional de La Libertad – Trujillo. Donnan, CB., McClelland, D., 1979. The burial theme in Moche iconography. Washington: Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University. Casas, B. de las.1956 [1512].Historia de lasIndias/ Fray Bartolome de las Casas.Ediciónpreparadapor la Fundación “InstitutoBartolomé de las Casas” de los Dominicios de Andalucía. Heyerdahl, T., 1995.Chapter 1.In: Heyerdahl, T., Sandweiss, D., Narváez, A. (eds). Pyramids of Túcume: The quest for Peru's forgotten city. London: Thames and Hudson. Hocquenghem, AM., 1999. En torno al Mullu, Manjar Predilecto de los Poderosos Inmortales. In: Cordy-Collins, A., Rostworowski, A., Hocquenghem, A., Pillsbury, J.1999. Spondylus : ofrenda sagrada y símbolo de paz. Lima: Fundación Telefónica, Museo Arqueológico Rafael Larco Herrera. Hudtwalcker, J., Pinilla, J., 2006. La historia cultural de la Isla San Lorenzo.Gaceta Cultural del Perú 22, 20-21. Kubler, G., 1948. Towards Absolute Time: Guano Archaeology. American Antiquity XIII/4, 29-50. McClelland, D. 1990.A maritime passage from Moche to Chimu. In: Moseley, ME, Cordy - Collins, A. (eds)., Rostworowski de Diez Canseco, M, Moseley, ME. (organizers). The Northern dynasties: kingship and statecraft in Chimor: a symposium at Dumbarton 12 �Oaks, 12th and 13th October 1985. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. McGrail, S., 1985. Towards a classification of water transport: World Archaeology,Vol 16. Issue 3: 298-303 Ortiz, J., 2003. Navegación en la Zona Sur Andina:Derroteros de la Mar del Sur.N˚11: 123-135. Ortiz, J., 2006. Tecnología de exportación. Gaceta Cultural del Perú 22, 12-13. Paez, R., 1986. Balsas de cuero de lobo en la segunda mitad del Siglo XIX: Antecedentes cuantitativos para el norte de Chile.RevistaChungara N˚ 16-17:412-418. Ravines, R., 1980. Chanchán: metrópoli Chimú. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos: Instituto de Investigación Tecnológica Industrial y de Normas Técnicas. Rostworowski de Diez Canseco, M., 1981. Recursos naturales renovables y pesca, siglos XVI y XVII. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos. Rostworowski de Diez Canseco, M., 1989. Costa peruana prehispánica. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos. Rostworowski, M., 1999. Intercambio Prehispánico del Spondylus. In: Cordy-Collins, A., Rostworowski, A., Hocquenghem, A., Pillsbury, J. 1999. Spondylus: ofrenda sagrada y símbolo de paz. Lima: Fundación Telefónica, Museo Arqueológico Rafael Larco Herrera. Rowe. J.,1946. Absolute Chronology in the Andean Area.American Antiquity. Vol 10: 265-284 Shady, R., et al. 2003a. Los orígenes de la civilización en el Perú: el áreaNorcentral y el Valle de Supe durante el Arcaico Tardio. In: Shady, R., Leyva, C. (eds). La Ciudad Sagrada de Caral – Supe: Los orígenes y la formación del Estado Prístino en el Antiguo Perú. Lima: Instituto Nacional de Cultura – Proyecto Especial ArqueológicoCaral – Supe: 93-100 Shady, R., 2003b. El sustento económico del surgimiento de la civilización en el Perú. In: Shady, R. and Leyva, C. (eds). La Ciudad Sagrada de Caral – Supe: Los orígenes y la formación del Estado Prístino en el Antiguo Perú. Lima: Instituto Nacional de Cultura – Proyecto Especial ArqueológicoCaral – Supe:101-106 13 �Shimada, I.,1994. Pampa Grande and the MochicaCulture.Austin: University of Texas Press Valdivia, L., 1974. Pesca de arrastre con balsas en playa de Arica. RevistaChungara N˚ 4:55-60. Biography Carlos Ausejo is an archaeologist specialized in underwater archaeology, since 2006 he has taken part on several underwater Archaeology Projects in Peru. In 2009 he finished his degree in Maritime Archaeology at University College London, and in 2010, with other colleagues he founded the “Centro Peruano de ArqueologíaMarítima y Subacuática” (CPAMS). He is currently working as general manager at Hatunqucha, a CRM company that specializes in underwater and public archaeology, and also as Director at the (CPAMS), and part time professor in archaeology at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. 14 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Session 14: Pre-Hispanic Navigation Subject The topic of the resource Video interview with Session 14 Chair Carlos Ausejo and links to the papers presented in the session. Description An account of the resource Navigation was not unknown in the Americas, at the Spaniards arrival different kind of vessel were in use both in the Pacific and the Atlantic shores, as well as in lakes or rivers. Canoe, reed rafts, balsa log raft and others skin based watercraft have been described mainly on historical records and gave us an idea of this technologies. Although it is clear that long and short distance maritime trade routes were in use and watercraft were also involve in war activities and other maritime activities, archaeological evidence related with actual boats has been elusive to find. Still some of these traditions have survived time and in use with some changes and others were incorporated to European navigation traditions. During the last decades an increasing interest among researchers in addition to new and different approaches from a broad spectrum of perspectives, including archaeology, history, ethnohistory and ethnography, has brought new and better understanding about these technologies. In spite of this, venues of dialogue to present and discuss about these traditions has been practically inexistent. The aim of this session is to show research advances on this topic mainly in the Pacific shores and inland waters through different perspectives up to the Spanish arrival. It will focus primarily in the Andean and Mesoamerican region, however other regions would be accepted. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Carlos Ausejo Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Pre-Hispanic Navigation in the Andean Region Description An account of the resource Offshore and inland waters in the Andean region were crossed by boats of various types made of different materials. These were related mainly to fishing activities, but also were involvedin long-distance trade of luxury goods, rituals, passengers and even war.Construction technologies and development of these vessels varied depending on available resources and the capacity of societies to solve navigational problems. In that sense a variety of types and forms of vessels have been identified, and although not all boats are "complex" as the Europeans, it is clear that they evolve and had changes over time that perfected them.Despite this plentiful of technologies, the archaeological record of actual watercraft is almost nonexistent. As a result the approach to these technologies is through other evidence as the iconography fund on pottery, textiles and wall friezes, as well as sculptural referencesnot to mentionreferences recorded by Spanish chroniclers and ultimatelypost- Conquest survivals.The aim of this paper is to recount these technologies through indirect evidence and elaborate some hypotheses about the use and success of the same in the pre -Hispanic Andean world and its survival after the conquest. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Carlos Ausejo, in Van Tilburg, H., Tripati, S., Walker Vadillo, V., Fahy, B., and Kimura, J. (eds.) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 5/16/2014 Asia-Pac Session 14 2014 https://apconf-much.org/proceedings/files/original/f0fc64ddc4060318fd30b06bc6a58ef2.pdf 1ba4650c58fcd675a897fd9b12be9613 PDF Text Text Native navigation traditions in Mexico Central Plateau: a study between archaeology and ethnology Alexandra Biar University of Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne Paris, 75005 France E-mail: alexbiar@hotmail.com Abstract In the Americas, long before the Conquest, existed various native navigation techniques (coastal, lacustrine and fluvial), aboard numerous and diversified wooden boats. Among these, stands one that was made by carving a tree trunk: the dugout canoe. As an evidence of human ingenuity, it acquired its importance by being the bridge between land and water, representing the bond between the human and the aquatic world. Similarly, this means of transportation played a primordial part in the native civilizations as it was involved in daily activities at different levels: transportation (people, goods, raw material), natural resource exploitation (hunting, gathering and fishing), rituals and war. These activities implied the organization of the lacustrine areas, thanks to adapted facilities such as channels, piers, bridges and warehouses. In Mexico’s Central Plateau, in the endoreic basins of Mexico and Pátzcuaro, flourished two of the most powerful contemporaneous and rival empires in all Mesoamerica: the Mexica and the Tarascan (Fig.1). Based on their respective lacustrine surroundings and specific methods, they accomplished the edification of their capitals, Tenochtitlan and Tzintzuntzan, through the use of navigation. Nowadays, some remains of these antique and powerful civilizations naval technology still exists, allowing us, thanks to a multidisciplinary method, to approach a broad vision of their history and transformation. Key words: cross-cultural, navigation, Americas, Mexico, dugout, naval, technology Introduction Contrasting with other civilizations of the ancient world such as those of the Mediterranean or South-East Asia, Mesoamerican cultures are not particularly renowned for their maritime history or naval architecture. We owe the first in-depth studies of Mesoamerican navigation in the 1980s to the British archaeologist Norman Hammond, who focused largely on the transportation of goods 1 �and traffic along the entire coastline of the Gulf of Mexico and the Yucatán Peninsula. Historical sources show us that, along this maritime navigation studied by Hammond, another very important form of navigation existed, on rivers and lakes. Unfortunately, few researchers bore attention to these freshwater examples, even though, according to the cultural ecology theory, numerous writers, such as Sanders and Price (1968), Fig.1-Endoreic Basin of the Mexico’s Central have confirmed that they favored the Plateau (lakes of Mexico and Patzcuaroand) development of highly complex and the Post-classic Empires (Mexica social Tarscan) and structures. It is indeed in the center of the closed-water basins of Mexico’s central plateau that we see the flourishing of successive great civilizations such as Teotihuacan, the Mexica s and the Tarascans, and a key correlation between their development and lake navigation has been systemically asserted. Nevertheless, scientific investigation about the dugout canoe as an indispensable tool in a navigation system, specifically in the Basin of Mexico, is only due to Margaret Leshikar as late as 1982. She wrote her PHD Thesis about a dugout canoe discovered in 1959 during a preventive excavation in the heart of Mexico City, using this artifact as an important source to collect new data about the Mexica Empire’s organization. Unfortunately, concerning the Tarascan Empire, there exist no scientific investigation about the navigation system or the dugout canoes, even if nowadays, some of the Lake Pátzcuaro fishermen still use this traditional craft to work. The only evidence we have comes from the CREFAL, an international organism founded in1951 by the UNESCO to approach and educate isolated community about sanitary, social and educative problems. This is why all the available investigations bear on the fishermen’s skills and way of life, rather than on navigation techniques. Due to the perishable raw materiel used to build the canoes and most lacustrine installations, wood, archaeological remains are scarce. The only examples of prehispanic boats from the Basin of Mexico found to date are a wooden one-man canoe 2 �on display in the Mexica Hall of the National Anthropology Museum (Fig.2a) and a miniature model found in Offering 41 of the Templo Mayor (Fig.2b), though we know other similar examples have been found in other parts of Mesoamerica, in Belize for instance. The single-person canoe of the Anthropology Museum was discovered in the 1960s along the actual Calzada de Tlalpan. Judging from its dimensions and carrying capacity, we can estimate it was able to carry about a ton of weight – by our reckoning, after studying similar examples, a vessel able to transport large monoliths, such as several Mexica monuments. Tying together several canoes could of course allow for larger and heavier charges. But this implies sufficient breadth, both of the canoe and of the canals along which it travelled. This is why ethnology and history are the best way to compensate the shortcomings of archaeological research, because native navigation in Xochimilco canals and in Lake Pátzcuaro (Michoacán) is always practiced. Fig.2a-Dugout canoeof Tlalpan causeway in the Mexica Hall of the National Anthropology Museum, Meico City - A.BIAR Fig.2b-Miniatures models founds in Offering 41 of the Templo Mayor, Templo Mayor Museum General environment adaptation Establishment Around 1325, two of the main Mesoamerican empires founded their capital in direct connexion with a lacustrine environment. Tenochtitlan, capital of the Mexica Empire, was built on a small island within Lake Texcoco. Tzintzuntzan, capital of the Tarascan Empire, was established on the northeast shore of Lake Patzcuaro. In order to assert themselves as the centers of the two powerful empires later confronted by the Conquistadors, both cities’ inhabitants had to learn to dominate their environment – to exploit it to economic, political and religious ends. Not only did they took maximum 3 �advantage, like their contemporaries and others before them, of one-man canoes carved from a single log of wood, but they developed complex technological systems in order to control their lakeside world, the supply of goods and the growth of towns and cities. But each one, due to their distinct location, used the lake with different goals. Mexica space engineering The Mexica s soon shaped their environment to suit their needs and to consolidate their power. The major hydraulic works that they and their neighbors on the lakes of the Valley of Mexico engineered fulfilled different objectives. The first and best documented of these was clearly to reclaim land from the lakes using the ingenious system of ‘Chinampas ’ and canals, artificial physical extensions of preexisting islands. As is well known, the invention of Chinampas is probably due to the inhabitants of Lakes Xochimilco and Chalco, in the south of the Mexico Basin, and was intended originally as a means of developing intensive agriculture. It is worth remembering here something clearly illustrated in the Plano en Papel de Maguey, which is that the Chinampas of Tenochtitlan served not only as plots of cultivated land, but also as a residential zone, implying control over the soil dampness. The second objective of Mexica engineering was to control the disastrous fluctuations in lake water levels, by constructing canals, dykes and even aqueducts - public works that also helped reduce the (previously high) water saline levels. The benefits these environmental changes brought complemented each other, but needed daily maintenance, with the use of lake crafts and a large, well organized labor force. The canals of the island of Tenochtitlan, which earned the city the nickname of Venice of the New World, crisscrossed the entire metropolis, creating a grid-like landscape structure and allowing fast communication both within and outside the city. Thanks to the historian Edward Calnek (1972) and the architect Jorge González Aragón, we know that two kinds of canals existed: regular ones that followed labyrinthine [maze-like] routes and which measured up to two meters width, and main canals, facing East-West and measuring 3-5 meters in width. When we consider that the largest Aztec monoliths – such as the goddess Tlaltecuhtli weighing 12 tons and measuring 4.19 x 3.62 m – 4 �were transported on the lake and to the city’s heart, it stands to reason that some of the principal canals must have been at least 6 meters wide. The main canals, epitomized by the famous Acequia Real (Royal Channel) that ran along the length of today’s Corregidora Avenue in Mexico City Historic Centre, were ideal for carrying large boats - used as much for transporting tribute items to Moctezuma’s palace as for bearing religious monuments and processional celebrants. By contrast, the regular canals carried a still larger volume of smaller boats with their daily loads of passengers and goods. Of course, we shouldn’t forget that a significant part of urban traffic took place on land, suggesting the existence of fixed and moveable bridges – a fact confirmed in the accounts of the Spanish defeat during the Sad Night. The broad and lengthy causeways connecting the island of Tenochtitlan with the mainland served several purposes: first, as a means of communication by land; secondly, they acted as dykes to hold the water at bay, and complemented the great stone levee-bridge constructed under the leadership of Nezahualcóyotl, the wise king of Texcoco. The three main causeways were those from Tepeyac (to the north), Tlacopan (to the west) and Iztapalapan (to the south). It’s worth noting that this last one was built by the Xochimilcas, clear proof of the political power of the Mexica s and of their influence over neighboring peoples. A fourth, smaller, causeway was that of Chapultepec. This uniquely supported the aqueduct constructed in the decade following 1420 and re-built on the orders of Nezahualcóyotl two decades later, supplying fresh water to the island city of Tenochtitlan, surrounded by salty water. In the construction and maintenance of these great public works, it’s obvious that single-man canoes played a key role, helping to ferry materials and every-day goods. It’s impossible to imagine life in Tenochtitlan and the coastal communities of the Basin of Mexico without navigation. While navigation is hardly mentioned in the historical accounts of great hydraulic works, its crucial role is evident from the descriptions of daily life and commerce, first and foremost in the southern lakes of Chalco and Xochimilco. As a matter of fact, the pictographic and historical documents describe the movement of products along lacustrine routes that remained in use even into the first half of the 20th century, as in the case of the Canal de la Viga. These routes were 5 �privileged with installations such as harbors and jetties to control the flow of people and goods. Cortés (1983) wrote: ‘At each entrance to the city, where the canoes unload [...] there are houses where live officials in charge of supervising and taxing every product […]’ This organization level demanded the construction and fitting-out of facilities and buildings tailor-made for the moving, storing and monitoring of goods and people by government authorities. These installations included (Fig.3):  Harbors: natural or artificial havens suitable for the (un) loading of cargo and (dis) embarkation of passengers by boat, and for carrying out maintenance.  Quays: places suitable for loading goods and people. Port installations are in effect groupings of architectural several structures complementary that roles: combine custom points for the receipt and control of goods; warehouses and storage facilities; stalls Fig.3-Location of nautical installations in the lake of and posts for buying and selling; jetties for Mexico that contributed to the control and the transfer of goods from dry land to lake regulation of canoe traffic in the Post-classic transportation, etc. The construction of period. these facilities requires both manpower and materials (wood, stone, lime, etc.). Unfortunately, to date, few archaeological remains exist of such facilities, making it harder to draw firm conclusions regarding their construction and purpose. Given their importance to the Mexica economy and government, more archaeological work is badly needed in the search for port installations, several of which should be located at the periphery of Tenochtitlan and the surrounding lake shores. A quay is generally an impermanent construction requiring considerable space, with a jetty whose size would be relative to the breadth of the canal serving it and to the volume of goods passing through. The archaeologist Francisco González Rul (1998) 6 �identified two types of quay: stone and wood. Remains of these have been found under the present Palacio Nacional of Mexico. We also have a few descriptions of them in historical records from the 16th and 17th centuries, and litho-/photographs from the 19th and 20th centuries. On the site of the famous prehispanic and colonial quay (pic 10) at the corner of Alhóndiga Street and Corregidora Avenue stands today a stone bridge, evocative of Mexico City’s bygone lakeside past. Dockyards: military or private establishments dedicated to boat building, repair, maintenance and equipment. These facilities had to be located near large bodies of water and must have resembled hangars, capable of housing several small canoes as well as larger, more important vessels. Fray Bernardino de Sahagún (1978) refers to these last items in his description of the ceremonies and sacrifices at the disposal site of Pantitlán, in the center of Lake Texcoco: ‘When all were sacrificed, we took all the offerings... and we carried them to the place where the lake is called Pantitlán, which is found not far from the dockyards.’ And later (Book 2, Florentine Codex) he indicates: ‘and when [the fire priest] had cast away [papers in an incense ladle], then they turned the boat about [...] And when they had come to reach Tetamacolco, where there had been embarking at the place of embarkation, thereupon there was bathing; then there was [returning] on the part of each [boat].’ What’s interesting in these passages is the specific reference to places for the keeping and return of craft, and in particular those for ritual or military use, suggesting the existence of different types of lakeside storage facilities around the Basin of Mexico – for trade, for military purposes and for religious ceremonies. It would also imply different types of boats, for specific uses. We know, for example, that some vessels were of large dimensions, used in festivals to carry the priests with their offerings, or the emperor and his court. According to historical sources, these boats were kitted out with benches and awnings to offer protection from the sun and the rain. We may then contemplate the existence of larger canoes, or even of rafts. Finally, we should also recall the probable existence of large vessels for military use, as mentioned in the accounts of the Noche Triste (Sad Night) and of the victorious sally of 7 �the Mexica against the Spanish at the beginning of the siege of the city. The simple fact that the Conquistadors had to build brigantines proves the critical role these were to play in achieving eventual control of the lakes. Tarascan space organization The Tarascans used the lacustrine world as an economic space, to provide them part of their basic alimentation, and as a center of distribution, but not to protect and centralize their power. Their capital, Tzintzuntzan, according to its location on the lakeshore, didn’t face the same environmental problems as the Mexica ’s, even if navigation was also used for religious and sometimes political matters. The most important historical data is the Relation of Michoacán and the Lienzo de Jucutacato, studied by Hans Roskamp (1998). Their economic and politic organization turned around three axes: the lake, the shore and the surrounding mountains. Each one provided the capital with basics needs: food, clothes, building materials. The islands of Janitzio, Jaracuaro, Yunuen y La Pacanda have their Fig.4-Spatial organization and principal proper fishing areas, which permit them to communication ways in the lake of Patzcuaro control all the pisicultural resources. Thanks to in the Post-Classic period. this monopole, they were able of supply the more important shore side markets: Tzintzuntzan, Pátzcuaro, Asajo and Erongaricuaro, which allowed distributing local and regional goods. Pollard (1993) considers that the site of Ihuatzio played an important part in storage activities (Fig.4). The only way to transport all merchandise and passengers to these places was by using dugout canoes. Boarding canoes was made from both lake and island natural beaches, today transformed as harbors. From the post conquest period to nowadays, canoes were used during religious ceremonies to transport saints from a village to another one. The canoe transporting the saint’s effigy was decorated with flowers and conducted by the chief of the community, followed by other embarkations with musicians, incense, and singers. This ethnological 8 �evidence allows us to imagine the native ceremonies, including matrimonial ceremony where the pretender had to navigate to the island to receive blessings from his family in law before marrying his wife. This sacred bond between religion and navigation is the same, even if more important in the Tarascan life and ritual than among the Mexica s. But as exemplified in the Mexica ritual calendar, numerous ceremonies involved lacustrine rituals or navigation. Finally, we just have a testimony of a naval battle between the lords of the lakeshore city against the island lords: “Las embarcaciones se dividen en tres grandes flotas mandadas cada una por uno de los principes […] Hirépan dirige sus proas rumbo a Jaracuaro. Hiquingari lleva la dirección de Janitzio. Tangaxhuan hace deslizar sus ágiles piraguas […] en las playas de Pacanda. […] El aire cubrió de flechas, el silencio del lago fue interrumpido por una estruendosa gritería, y cuando las embarcaciones llegaron al abordaje, se oía el duro choque de las macanas […] y bien pronto, el agua cristalina se tiño con la sangre de los heridos y de los moribundos” (Ruiz, 1891, Chapter XVIII) This event, as the “Noche Triste” (Sad Night) in Mexico, reveals the naval military power of these empires. Both of them used their aquatic environment as an economical, political, religious and military way to build, assert and maintain their power. The arrival of the Spaniards in the 1520’s ruined for good the equilibrium created by these two empires. Vessel typology The 16th century sources tell us much about the vessels used by the Mexica s and their neighbors, from the construction materials they used, through their shape and trim, to details such as their form of propulsion, carrying capacity and uses. A careful analysis of the data suggests that, as in the case of the boats spotted by Columbus on the open Caribbean Sea, those of the Basin of Mexico were mainly one-man canoes. 9 �Based on detailed study of the different depictions of canoes represented in the codices – some of which show a wide variety of shapes and styles even on a single page - we are today in a position to draw up a typology of canoes in use in the basins of Mexico and Patzcuaro in the 15th and 16th centuries, including a list of sources consulted for this study, amounting to 63 identified boats (Fig.5). Fig.5-Table of the 16th century sources used to establish the vessels typology Our own research shows that all vessels sported a flat bottom, perfectly adapted to lake use, allowing their crews to maneuver them easily and speedily. To this canoe typology (Fig.6), we need to add another for the vital propulsion tools. In the codices, two different types of paddle are shown: one in the form of a long, broad spade, the other a heart-shaped spade. We should of course add the pole, mentioned in the texts, though not shown graphically. Conclusion This paper is a summary of my PhD research to promote the importance of archaeological and ethnological studies of native navigation in Mesoamerican lakes. The relation between these civilizations and the use of wood as an indispensable material to adapt their customs to a lacustrine environment proves that their engineering capacity and organization were far more complex and elaborate than we imagine. Both material and techniques are underestimated by the scientific world because of the few 10 �archaeological remains. This is why a multidisciplinary approach is necessary. These native navigation traditions are about to disappear because the world is changing too fast for these communities, to be able to adapt every aspect of their culture and traditions. I hope to be able to organize, with the help of the Mexica n archaeologist, Mariana Favila, to create a symposium around the theme of Native’s navigation tradition in the Americas to. It will be interesting to join specialists of navigation in one place to highlight this underestimate aspect of our investigations. Fig.6-Typology of Mexico’s Central Plateau canoes: a first attempt to identify and classify canoe styles shown in the historical sources. Pictures map and table: A.BIAR Bibliography BIAR, A., 2011, La navigation Mexica dans la lagune de Mexico : navigation et prise du pouvoir, master thesis, Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, Paris CALNEK, E., 1972, Settlement patterns and chinampa agriculture at Tenochtitlan. American Antiquity, vol. 37, nùm. 1 CORTES, H., 1983, Cartas de Relación, Porrúa, Sepan Cuantos, México 11 �FAVILA VAZQUEZ, M., 2011, La navegación en la Cuenca de México durante el Postclásico tardío: la presencia de la canoa en el entramado social Mexica , license thesis, ENAH, México GONZALEZ RUL, F., 1998, Urbanismo y arquitectura en Tlatelolco, colección científica, seria antropología social, INAH, México D.F. HAMMOND, N.,1981, Classic Maya Canoes. The International Journal of Nautical Archeology and underwater exploration, nùm. 10 (3), pp.173-185 LESHIKAR, M., 1982, The Mexica canoe: an archeologicaland historical study of its design, uses, and significance, PhD thesis, University of Texas, Austin POLLARD, H., 1993, Tariacuri’s legacy, the prehispanic Tarascan State, University of Oklahoma Press, Ed Norman and London ROSKAMP, H., 1998, La historiográfica indígena de Michoacán: el lienzo de Jucutacato y los títulos de Carapan, Research School CNWS publication, Vol.72, School of Asian, African and American Studies, Leiden University, Holland RUIZ, E., 1891, Michoacán: Paisajes, tradiciones y leyendas, Oficina Tip. De la Secretaria de Fomento, Mexico, D.F. SANDERS, W. T. and Barbara J. PRICE,1968, Mesoamerica: the evolution of a civilisation, Random House, New York SAHAGUN, B. de, 1978, Florentine Codex, Dibble et Anderson, The school of American research and the University of Utah, Etats-Unis Biography Alexandra Biar started her studies in archaeology in 2005 at the University of Bordeaux3 to obtain, three years later, a Bachelor in Art History & Archaeology. She started a Master in the University oh Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne in 2008, her thesis was supervised by Eric Taladoire, Leonardo Lopez Lujan y Eric Rieth, and titled Navigation in the Basin of Mexico in the Post-classic period. She graduated in 2011 with honours. After beginning her investigations on this theme, she decided to extend her research on the Basin of Pátzcuaro for her PhD, which is supervised by Brigitte Faugère. 12 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Session 14: Pre-Hispanic Navigation Subject The topic of the resource Video interview with Session 14 Chair Carlos Ausejo and links to the papers presented in the session. Description An account of the resource Navigation was not unknown in the Americas, at the Spaniards arrival different kind of vessel were in use both in the Pacific and the Atlantic shores, as well as in lakes or rivers. Canoe, reed rafts, balsa log raft and others skin based watercraft have been described mainly on historical records and gave us an idea of this technologies. Although it is clear that long and short distance maritime trade routes were in use and watercraft were also involve in war activities and other maritime activities, archaeological evidence related with actual boats has been elusive to find. Still some of these traditions have survived time and in use with some changes and others were incorporated to European navigation traditions. During the last decades an increasing interest among researchers in addition to new and different approaches from a broad spectrum of perspectives, including archaeology, history, ethnohistory and ethnography, has brought new and better understanding about these technologies. In spite of this, venues of dialogue to present and discuss about these traditions has been practically inexistent. The aim of this session is to show research advances on this topic mainly in the Pacific shores and inland waters through different perspectives up to the Spanish arrival. It will focus primarily in the Andean and Mesoamerican region, however other regions would be accepted. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Carlos Ausejo Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Native navigation traditions in Mexico Central Plateau: a study between archaeology and ethnology Description An account of the resource In the Americas, long before the Conquest, existed various native navigation techniques (coastal, lacustrine and fluvial), aboard numerous and diversified wooden boats. Among these, stands one that was made by carving a tree trunk: the dugout canoe. As an evidence of human ingenuity, it acquired its importance by being the bridge between land and water, representing the bond between the human and the aquatic world. Similarly, this means of transportation played a primordial part in the native civilizations as it was involved in daily activities at different levels: transportation (people, goods, raw material), natural resource exploitation (hunting, gathering and fishing), rituals and war. These activities implied the organization of the lacustrine areas, thanks to adapted facilities such as channels, piers, bridges and warehouses. In Mexico’s Central Plateau, in the endoreic basins of Mexico and Pátzcuaro, flourished two of the most powerful contemporaneous and rival empires in all Mesoamerica: the Mexica and the Tarascan (Fig.1). Based on their respective lacustrine surroundings and specific methods, they accomplished the edification of their capitals, Tenochtitlan and Tzintzuntzan, through the use of navigation. Nowadays, some remains of these antique and powerful civilizations naval technology still exists, allowing us, thanks to a multidisciplinary method, to approach a broad vision of their history and transformation. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Alexandra Biar, in Van Tilburg, H., Tripati, S., Walker Vadillo, V., Fahy, B., and Kimura, J. (eds.) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 5/16/2014 Asia-Pac Session 14 2014 https://apconf-much.org/proceedings/files/original/3ceb07a24f543cc8b5b46ce8dd13002b.pdf 2d99555f3dc1582d9d23aceaa929545d PDF Text Text Hollowing out the canoe: a reflection of the society Luz Elena G. Cervantes Escuela Nacional de Antropología e Historia (ENAH) Distrito Federal, Mexico, 04360 Mexico E-mail: luz_elena_c@hotmail.com Abstract The dugout canoe is an important element in a lot of maritime societies all over the world. It’s not only a small boat made by hollowing a tree with particular characteristics, but it is the reflection of the society in which the canoe was made. A canoe represents the interaction of ideology, tradition, economics and purpose, as well as environment and material resources. Mexico is no exception; the canoe was the best aquatic transport in pre-Hispanic communities, both for coastal and inland waters. So, the canoe can bring us a lot of archaeological information about pre-Hispanic cultures, its traditions and its environment. It is impossible to access the social explanation of the canoe if we are not able to describe it formally. So, a registration strategy will give us the possibility to store data for a social explanation of the boat. In addition, using this strategy, it is possible to accumulate general and specific data from which it can be proposed a typology of dugout vessels. This research is a step forward of a typology proposal for dugout canoes in Mexico, which aims to grow as more canoes are found, both in archaeological contexts and inside public and private institutions, museums and private collections. Key words: Americas, dugout, ethnography, methodology, Mexico, nautical 1 �Introduction The presence of water bodies as part of the ancestors life, made them to develop ways to take advantage of these resources. They needed a transport that allowed them to travel through the water. In most of the maritime communities, the canoe was the aquatic transport by excellence, for both, coastal and inland waters. This is the case in many of the pre-Hispanic communities in Mexico. Usage of the dugout canoe, the one made by hollowing out a single wooden trunk, has great importance in pre-Hispanic societies, as it is reflected on written and pictorial sources of information, as well as the preservation of several specimens found in actual communities. Therefore, the canoe could provide us with much archaeological information about pre-Hispanic cultures, as well as of their traditions and environments. How can the canoe be the reflection of the society in which it was built? The dugout canoe is an important element for maritime societies all over the world. It’s not only a small boat made by hollowing a tree with particular characteristics, but it is the reflection of the society in which the canoe was made. For this, Adams (2001) mentioned that the manufacturing process observed in each canoe, reflects the complex social activity around this. The boats can be seen as a manifestation of the maritime needs and aspirations of society, this is achieved by considering the characteristics that represents the interaction of ideology, tradition, economics, purpose, environment and material resources, which are reflected in the shape, structure, appearance and use of each vessel.  In terms of ideology and tradition, Adams notes that on the boat you can see a set of ideas about what ships mean for society, the importance they have and how they should be designed and constructed. That's why they have their own characteristics in terms of the design parameters and the ways in which they carry out various aspects of construction. In this work, despite failing to fully understand the tradition of a canoe, due to the scarce archaeological information about dugout canoes in Mexico, it can be observed similarities and differences in the physical properties of these vessels, which helps us to infer periods and 2 �geographic regions in which the canoes were built. It is like this how we can identify "types" of boats and with these, building traditions.  The economy, understood in terms of manpower and wealth can be reflected in the construction of vessels, both in size and materials used, and specific characteristics of the boat. These features have a close relationship with the material resources and with the purpose.  The purpose, understood as the function of the boat, is also observable in the physical characteristics of the vessel. The canoe has multiple functions in the indigenous life: transportation (of people, goods, materials, and ideas), resource exploitation (hunting and fishing), ceremonies, rituals and military confrontations.  Regarding the environment for which the boat is manufactured, it is reflected in the dimensional characteristics of the vessel, as if a boat is built for lakes or protected coasts, you will not need the same properties of stability and robustness that you need for a boat built for open water. Similarly, the canoe has architectural features which are defined by the place for navigation.  Finally, material resources, both natural and manufactured. This means that the available resources in part determine the size of the vessels, and also provide properties relating to the buoyancy and shipload capacity. That is how the material resources maintain their close relationship with the purpose of the boat. Similarly, manufactured material resources (such as tools) define some specific manufacturing features of the canoe; it is another feature that can provide us with information about timing and place of construction. It is impossible to access the social explanation of the canoe if we are not able to describe it formally. So, a registration strategy will give us the possibility to store data for social explanation of the boat. In addition, registration under this strategy, it is possible the accumulation of general and specific data, from which it can be proposed a typology of dugout vessels. How to approach the canoe? There are some specific problems in Mexica n archaeology which has resulted in an underdeveloped study of the canoes. A common problem has been to consider the canoe as a perishable material, and other important issue has been the inability to 3 �recognize the different objects frequently found in archaeological contexts. Because of this, it is very difficult to study the dugout canoe from an archaeological approach. While the lack of specific studies can be explained from the apparent absence of materials in archaeological contexts, there are different strategies with which to have a closer knowledge about the manufacture of canoes of indigenous tradition and with this, try to give a social explanation around the canoe. In addition to the ethnography and the study of written sources, you can use the direct study of dugout canoes located in museums, institutions and private collections, from which to obtain information about their manufacturing. Also, with this strategy, a classification can be developed based on the specific construction elements of each canoe, generating increasingly complex types. This is why apart of this strategy, a recording methodology which allows us to formally describe the canoe and recognize both their manufacturing characteristics, including structural elements, and the way it was manufactured, is proposed. This methodology is divided into four stages: A) The first is to fill a description and identification form of each canoe. These forms were made in the context of the methodology proposal described here. The information recorded in the files is as follows:  Identification canoe information.  Type of vessel.  Traditional Name.  Information on who performs the registration  Registered date.  Identification of photographs and drawings.  Location (institution or individual custody, responsible and place of origin)  General measures (Length, Width and Depth)  Building materials.  General method of construction.  Number of stems. 4 � Nailing.  Diameter of the wick stick (sail propulsion)  Evidence of manufacture.  Evidence of construction elements.  Evidence of propulsion.  Decoration.  Repairs. Fig. 1 Axes for the Topographic survey, based on the  State of preservation. Anderson’s lines. Author: Luz Cervantes  General Sketch. B) The second step is to make a record as detailed as topographical surveys. That is, sampling point is done from calculated measurements from three axes (X, Y and Z), which, together, make a three-dimensional model of the canoe. The distribution of these axes is based on survey lines of Anderson (1988): Water lines, which are horizontally distributed along the canoe, parallel to the water or flotation line; Buttock lines, which are distributed vertically along the canoe, parallel to the major axis, and Sections which intersect the canoe perpendicular to the major axis or length. (Fig. 1) This data is stored in registration forms to have a good control and management. C) The third step is to perform a specific photographic record, with which the previous information will be complemented. For the photographic record the following strategy is proposed. It is important to place a scale, the orientation of the canoe relative to the bow or the stern and an identification chalkboard. Obviously, if the boat is into an excavation context, in addition to the guidance on the bow and stern, it must be indicate the orientation from north. The scale is needed to show the size of the canoe. The orientation fits to better locate the features described in relation to the archived images. And the board is the best resource for material identification; here it is included information of where the canoe is located, the date on which it was registered, the person who registered, and identification number of the piece. 5 �The strategy for the photographic record consists in how to take the photos. This has been done in two phases. The first consists in photographs of general views, which is to archive the shape and size of the boat. The second includes specific detail views to note building elements, decorations, manufacturing marks and repairs, if they exist. For the first phase of the photographic record, the following photographs are proposed (Fig. 2): Fig.2 General views for photographic record. Author: Luz Cervantes  A photograph taken in front of the bow and stern, respectively, from which the entire rim line is observed, it is taken at the height of a standing person. If the canoe is larger, and the rim cannot be observed, shall be taken from above, with the help of a ladder or bank.  A totally front photograph, where observe only the bow or stern and bands perspective. This will be taken at the height of a person kneeling or squatting. If the canoe is larger, shall be taken with the person standing. 6 � A side view photograph of port and starboard, where canoe maximum length can be observed. This photo is usually taken kneeling or squatting, to appreciate the canoe in full.  A photograph taken in an isometric perspective, usually from the bow, loaded into one of the bands. The purpose of this view is to perceive the construction details of bow and stern height relative to the length and width of the canoe. The second phase consists of photographs of details (Fig. 3), it is important to portray all possible elements of construction, use and repairs. These photographs must be taken with a scale and in a macro mode, so can be appreciated the most possible characteristics. D) The fourth step methodology is to registration survey of the make a on a technical drawing. The purpose is to provide sufficient information to facilitate analysis, help design possible future and develop reconstruction and maintenance of the vessel. Fig. 3 Photographs of details. Author: Luz Cervantes The drawing must contain a representation in plan, profile and the body of the boat. The drawing should be clearly indicated by its size dimensions, the scale must be indicated, it should contain a record field (identification, date and name of the artist) and the three projections are needed to provide more information about the canoe (Fig. 4). For drawings of boats is proposed the scale 1:10, because at this it can be possible to appreciate the details of the vessel, and a very large format and unwieldy paper is not required. 7 �With these drawings, in addition to fact charts and specific pictures, it is possible to make a comparison between canoes belonging to the recorded simple and propose different types of boats. Fig. 4 Example of drawing. Author: Luz Cervantes A preview of the type proposed for the dugout boats in Mexico, which aims to grow as found more evidence is found, both in archaeological excavations, and public and private institutions, museums and private collections is presented in Fig. 5. This typology is completely open to be improved or modified, as pre-Hispanic navigation studies within archaeology, will increase. What is happening with the canoes in Mexico? After this analysis of dugout canoes of indigenous tradition, it is necessary to talk about this "apparent" absence of canoes as archaeological material in Mexico. For this, two dilemmas arise: the first of them leads us to ask if there really is an absence of any archaeological material belonging to canoes in Mexico. If this were the case, why is there a record of canoes with the same characteristics in other parts of the world? And why are there archaeological features of the same material of the canoes (wood) in many regions of the country? The second, focusing in the term archaeological material, are there no canoes as archaeological material in Mexico? If this were the case, all the canoes no longer used that have been abandoned in the mangroves, in shipyards, in museums, in public institutions and in many more places should be taken into account. Michael Schiffer considers that every element at the end of its life, assuming that is not reused, becomes waste so it changes from its systemic context (use) to an 8 �archaeological context (non-use). So, I believe that these “unused” canoes have not been studied from an archaeological perspective because they have not being "found" in archaeological underground contexts, and they have been discarded and not included as archaeological material. Conclusions As mentioned at the beginning of this work, archaeology in Mexico has been focused on investigations of other aspects, such as the monumental sites, and has been ignored small aspects, but these are of great importance to past societies. One of these aspects that archaeology has left aside is the water transport in and out of the country's land. The canoe in Mexico is considered as the "transport by excellence" because the water in its various forms, was distributed throughout the country and in the case of rivers, connects together large regions. Thus, here is reflected the importance of vessels in prehispanic Mexico, therefore the registration of these at an archaeological Fig. 5 Typology. Author: Luz Cervantes level, requires the necessary specialization to understand this importance. That´s how, this work it aims to raise awareness among Hispanic culture researchers in Mexico to the relevance of studying indigenous tradition on canoe construction and use. At the same time, it tries to demonstrate that there are methodological tools which help 9 �us to get closer to objects and materials that unfortunately in Mexico have been understudied due to their scarce presence in archaeological excavations. References Adams, J, 2001. Ships and Boats as Archaeological Source Material. World Archaeology, Vol. 32 (3): 292-310. Anderson, R., 1988.Guidelines for recording of historical ships,National Park Service, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Washington, D.C. Béat, A., 1995.Pirogues monoxylesd'Europecentrale 
construction, typologie, évolution, us e cantonal d arch ologie (Archéologieneuchateloise), Francia. Biar, A., 2011. La navigation Mexica Dans la lagune de Mexico : navigation et prise du pouvoir.Thèse de Master, Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, Paris, Francia. Greenhill, B., 1976.Archaeology of the boat. A new introductory study, Adam and Charles Black, London. Lira, N., s/a. Canoas monóxilas en el centro-sur de Chile. Navegando sobre los árboles. Memoria para optar al título profesional de arqueólogo, Departamento de Antropología, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de Chile. Schiffer, M., 1990.ContextoArqueológico y ContextoSistémico, Boletín de Antropología Americana, Num. 22: 81-93. Torres, L., 1964. Tratamiento empleado para la conservación de una canoa prehispánica, Boletín de Antropología, INAH, Num18: 10-13, México. Wendt, C., 2007. Los olmecas, los primeros petroleros. Arqueología Mexica naNum 87: 56-59 , México. Biography Luz Elena G. Cervantes is an archaeologist who graduated from the Escuela Nacional de Antropología e Historia in Mexico and she`s member of the Nautical Archaeology Society. She has taken some courses in maritime archaeology and she has dedicated her studies to pre-Hispanic navigation, specifically of water transport. She is making a dugout canoes compilation, in order to form a complete typology of canoes in Mexico. 10 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Session 14: Pre-Hispanic Navigation Subject The topic of the resource Video interview with Session 14 Chair Carlos Ausejo and links to the papers presented in the session. Description An account of the resource Navigation was not unknown in the Americas, at the Spaniards arrival different kind of vessel were in use both in the Pacific and the Atlantic shores, as well as in lakes or rivers. Canoe, reed rafts, balsa log raft and others skin based watercraft have been described mainly on historical records and gave us an idea of this technologies. Although it is clear that long and short distance maritime trade routes were in use and watercraft were also involve in war activities and other maritime activities, archaeological evidence related with actual boats has been elusive to find. Still some of these traditions have survived time and in use with some changes and others were incorporated to European navigation traditions. During the last decades an increasing interest among researchers in addition to new and different approaches from a broad spectrum of perspectives, including archaeology, history, ethnohistory and ethnography, has brought new and better understanding about these technologies. In spite of this, venues of dialogue to present and discuss about these traditions has been practically inexistent. The aim of this session is to show research advances on this topic mainly in the Pacific shores and inland waters through different perspectives up to the Spanish arrival. It will focus primarily in the Andean and Mesoamerican region, however other regions would be accepted. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Carlos Ausejo Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Hollowing out the canoe: a reflection of the society Description An account of the resource The dugout canoe is an important element in a lot of maritime societies all over the world. It’s not only a small boat made by hollowing a tree with particular characteristics, but it is the reflection of the society in which the canoe was made. A canoe represents the interaction of ideology, tradition, economics and purpose, as well as environment and material resources. Mexico is no exception; the canoe was the best aquatic transport in pre-Hispanic communities, both for coastal and inland waters. So, the canoe can bring us a lot of archaeological information about pre-Hispanic cultures, its traditions and its environment. It is impossible to access the social explanation of the canoe if we are not able to describe it formally. So, a registration strategy will give us the possibility to store data for a social explanation of the boat. In addition, using this strategy, it is possible to accumulate general and specific data from which it can be proposed a typology of dugout vessels. This research is a step forward of a typology proposal for dugout canoes in Mexico, which aims to grow as more canoes are found, both in archaeological contexts and inside public and private institutions, museums and private collections. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Luz Elena G. Cervantes, in Van Tilburg, H., Tripati, S., Walker Vadillo, V., Fahy, B., and Kimura, J. (eds.) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 5/20/2014 Asia-Pac Session 14 2014 https://apconf-much.org/proceedings/files/original/fa21249eaf64046c482b341435d91ebc.pdf 38dea40a1754e30e9bc862574755cae2 PDF Text Text Lacustrine battles carried out by the Mexica people: Use of war canoes in Tenochtitlan Mariana FavilavVázquez UNAM México D.F. 04340 México Email: mariana.favila@gmail.com Abstract There have been multiple studies in relation to the political, military and ritualistic confrontations between ancient societies, which have been carried out to address the problem of war in pre-Hispanic times. In particular, we are interested here in approaching the problem of the existence of an armed navy which participated in the confrontations that took place in the lake that surrounded the Mexica capital, before and during the process of conquest, in order to propose some guidelines which may help us to understand the complexity that hardly looms, in relation to these lake battles. By turning our attention to the spatio-temporal context that interests us, the Mexica in the Late Post Classic period on the island of Tenochtitlan-Tlatelolco, we have found evidence regarding the fact that the canoes, in this sense, seem to have worked as a specialized mechanism within this context, providing huge advantages to its users for defense and offense during the fighting tactics involving both land and water confrontations. Keywords: Mexica, canoe, navigation, war, lake, Mexico, Spain, nautical, archaeology Introduction It is possible to identify in the case of Mesoamerica, some examples of scenes where we can recognize boats driven by what could be described as armed commandos; such is the case of sheets 75 and 80 of the Nutall Codex, where Lord 8 Deer, with his half older brother, Lord 12 Movement, join the Lord 4 Jaguar in his expedition to conquer the Gulf Coast, by navigating in what appears to be war canoes (Jansen, 1997).There are many interesting scenes represented in Maya vases photographed by Justin Kerre where we can observe diverse deities fighting against marine monsters in their canoes (Grofe, 2007). Another example is the mural paintings found in several Chichén Itzá buildings; in the interior walls at the Warriors Temple were discovered two murals which were reconstructed by Earl Morris in 1930: Attack on a town and captive holding and Coastal town (Staines, 2004). Many of the Mexica examples will be described in the 1 �next lines. As we can see, the use of canoes in different kind of water battles in Mesoamerica is unquestionable, nevertheless, in the case of the Mexica, there has been a constant discussion regarding the existence or inexistence of what could be described as an armed navy (Bravo, 2005; Hassig, 1992). Starting from this point and with the evidence presented in the next lines, we propose that there was no such thing as a specific Mexica navy, but one armed body capable of using both land and water with the purpose of fighting. And yet so, those canoes used in war activities, were also part of the complex military system in which they functioned as attack and defense mechanisms, and not only functioned as a mean of transportation. Such seems to have been the relevance of the boats in the pre-Hispanic context that in the 04v sheet of the Mendocino Codex there is a scene where some Mexica warriors were murdered by Chalco people, who also took the trouble to destroy their canoes. From the matter exposed above, we make the next questions to the available information: which was the logistic in the Mexica fleet? How were their boats? Is it possible to characterize a naval Mexica tradition that confronted the Spanish maritime tradition? We will try to develop some answers to this and also formulate some others that we can’t answer yet. What has been said about the Mexica lake battles? Let us now consider the space and time context, which interest us: the Mexica society during the Late Post classic period in the Tenochtitlan-Tlatelolco Island. We have already mentioned that any attack to the population within the lake probably demanded a considerable military effort, war material and specialized resources both by them and by their enemies (Goñi, 2008). The written sources made by the witnesses soldiers of the battles, or by some of the chroniclers such as Fray Diego Durán or Fray Bernardino de Sahagún, give us a vast amount of information about the functioning of what has been described as the Mexica fleet. Fray Juan de Torquemada, for example, tells us about this the following: […] the Mexica ns, not only did they exercised in making boats, to run along the lagoon, leading far ahead in the fisheries and hunts within it, contracting with all the people, filling with supply their city, but also they garnished their boats and canoes, exercising themselves in the things of war, by water, understanding that from now on it would be necessary to be right and provided in the military art, 2 �since they always needed to free their city, by the force of weapons (Torquemada, 1975-1983: 151). The chronicles written by Bernal Díaz del Castillo and Hernán Cortés, have been studied before by historian Isabel Bravo Bueno, who took their stories as primary sources so she could describe the war activities in which canoes were the protagonists (Bravo, 2005). In relation to this subject, author Ross Hassig has established that tactical use of the boats could have resolved logistics problems, by minimizing transport costs and time, this for the towns in the lakeshore and also for the people living in the island, which were also rapidly reachable (Hassig, 1990). In our case, in order to approach the subject, we will expose other examples of lacustrine battles which are described in colonial sources; this will allow advancing some initial guidelines in our conclusions. Battles carried out by Mexica before and with the arrival of the Spaniards: recognizing some tactics in the lacustrine warfare The first fight against Culhuacan Regarding the confrontation that Mexica had with the Culhuacan people before Tenochtitlan was established, when the leader of the second ones, Achitometl, recognized his daughter flayed in a ritual organized by the Mexica , Fernando de Alvarado Tezozómoc described in his Mexica n Chronicle, a specific moment when these found themselves cornered in the lake (Tezozómoc, 1980). In order to save themselves it was necessary that they ran away navigating in some cane rafts built in that precise moment. This passage has been drawn in the Aubin Codex; where there are four characters sailing in the above mentioned rafts. What is interesting about these is that in the Mexica yotl Chronicle, Tezozomoc tells another version of the same facts, where the Mexica s crossed the lake by sailing in their own shields: Culhuacans then pursued the Mexica ns, by throwing them to water, and when they were thrown here they conquered a place called Acatzintitlan, when Culhuacans got angry, then perhaps they hid in the water. Then when they were pursued by the Culhuacans, they crossed in here sitting on their shields (Tezozómoc, 1998: 58). 3 �There is a painting in the 11 sheet of the Azcatitlan Codex where this scene is represented, and where we can observe the Mexica sailing their chimallis1.Both versions present different perspectives about the matter of our concern due to the fact that the ability to construct rafts in the first version lets us know that this people already carried with them some kind of knowledge about the use they could give to canoes and how to appropriate the lake. On the other hand, Pablo Escalante Gonzalbo has developed the possibility that the second version involving the shields may be related with some European stories that may have arrive to the hands of both the authors of the written and the painted versions. We must remember that indigenous identity in the XVI century was not isolated from the European Renaissance humanist culture. In the version where the escape is carried out with the use of the defensive weapons (the chimallis or shields), seems to be related to a crucial episode in the history of Rome in which the people had to defend themselves from the Etruscans. Escalante refers to author Andrea Alciato and his oeuvre Emblemata, a popular text from the time of Renaissance humanism that was studied in rhetoric classes at universities in the colonial Mexico (Escalante, 2008).Here we will emphasize the following: based on the story told by Tezozómocin respect to the fighting between Mexica and Culhuacan before the foundation of Tenochtitlan, and those images in the codices referred to above, we may at least say that in the memory of the mestizo author and those tlacuilos (painters) who created the pictorial documents it is possible to infer the need to transmit an episode in the early colonial discourse, where before the establishment of the Mexica capital a basic handling of some form of water transport is recognized at a time of military confrontation. The Tenochcas fight against Cuitlahuac It is important to also mention the military campaign which Mexica ruler, Itzcóatl, made against the people of Cuitlahuac, an island between Xochimilco and Chalco. Fray Diego Durán actually describes how by the times of Itzcoatl, the Mexica already had many enemies since they were so tenacious thanks to their control of the lake (Durán, 1967).The reason why the Mexica confronted Cuitlahuac is that Xochitl Olinqui, Cuitlahuac’s tlahtoani (governor), felt offended after the Mexica invited Cuitlahuac’s women to dance in honor to Huitzilopochtli. And so a war started, and Mexica soldiers 4 �had to fight in the lake and won the battle. There were other successful conquers by Itzcóatl in Tenayuca, Tepanohuayan, Toltilan, Cuauhtitlan and Xaltocan, and Isabel Bravo Bueno has attributed this success to the use of the canoes which benefited the logistics and tactics of the war (Bravo, 2005). The clues to identify who were those that fought in the canoes One of the arguments that makes it harder to recognize the organization of an armed group exclusively created to fight in the lakes, is the fact that there are some historical passages that describes how the abilities of the average people were used during lacustrine battles. It seems that in some cases, the warriors who fought in land were transported in the canoes by skilled rowers during the fight, and also that the same fishermen and bird hunters took part when it was necessary, maybe to make up for the lack of a group specifically trained to combat in the lake. During Axayacatl’s rule in Tenochtitlan, a bloody battle occurred between Tenochcas and Tlatelolcas, when these last ones found one of their dikes completely destroyed, preventing the transit of canoes. Tlatelolco’s ruler, Moquihuixtli, tried to convince the Huejotzingas and Tlaxcaltecas that all together should fight the Tenochcas, though the first ones denied participating in such wile, the ruler decided to continue with the affront. Before the fight, the king Moquihuixtli summoned more than a thousand young fisherman and bird hunters from Tlatelolco, in order to create an effective army against the Tenochcas. Previous to the battle, the governor tested them by faking a great bird hunt in the lake. This seems to surprisingly reveal some kind of training in the operation of the canoes and the practice of attacks (Durán, 1967:254-255). This story was written by Fray Diego Durán, and in it we could glimpse the possibility that in effect, young fishermen were trained or at least selected by how they managed their weapons and canoes. By following this reasoning we dare to question: Perhaps this story alludes to the eternal condition of the Mexica as hunters and lake fishermen? We must remember they were such even before arriving to the Mexico Lake, according to their own history. We need to consider that relation between men and lacustrine environment had already been developed before Mexica people arrived to the Basin of Mexico. It seems to be, that trough all their history, the need to be constantly identified with a society that could dominate the water bodies (since that group that started its 5 �journey from the mythical city of Aztlan was formed by skilled fishermen) would justify their settlement choice in the Tenochtitlan Island. Their way of life was clearly impregnated by a lacustrine identity, and so they created for themselves a history according to that essentially aquatic universe (Espinosa, 1996). The last battle in the lake: Mexica people against Spaniards and their indigenes allies The main information about the lacustrine battles that took place around the Island of Tenochtitlan is available directly in the Spanish Chronicles. Nevertheless we must remember that not all of them were eye witnesses of the events, and those who were had a tendency to exaggerate some of their data in order to fulfill a specific purpose. One thing is sure, and this is that the Spanish soldiers rapidly realized they were in major trouble since the most effective mean of movement in the lake were the canoes (Goñi, 2008). Among the first mentions regarding this way of transport, we found one where Hernán Cortés lets us know that they were used to immediately escape from Tenochtitlan the minute the Spaniards arrived. […] certain Spaniards got into some high rooftop, where they could subjugate the entire city, and saw how all natural disarmed her and ones, with their properties, they entered the lake with their canoes, they call acales and others went up to the mountains (Cortés, 2002: 137). From this passage we also obtained the information related to the canoe name in Nahuatl, according to the Vocabulary of Fray Alonso de Molina they were named acalli (Molina, 2008). About those canoes utilized in the battles, there seems to have existed at least two types. One of them with no difference between the flat fore and aft as it is possible to observe in the 45 sheet of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. The other type is a reinforced canoe, with wood boards integrated in such a way they worked as shields to protect the soldiers from fire and attacks as Bernal Díaz del Castillo and Isabel Bravo Bueno lets us know (Bravo, 2005): […] and since the musketeers and the crossbowmen shoot those who went in canoes, they had them well armed with wood boards, and behind these boards, they were kept well (Díaz del Castillo, 2007: 299-300). 6 �And so, they were two ways of protection used by the warriors: their own shields integrated into the canoes as it is observed in the sheet 45 previously named, or well, the wood boards as observed in the 154 sheet of Florentine Codex. Regarding the attack tactics, the same kind of tricks developed in land were used in the lakes. Sometimes sunken traps were used to plunge enemy boats and other times by faking runaways and then returning to attack (Bravo, 2005). There is also an interesting description by Sahagún where an attack tactic consists in the coordinated action of two pairs of warriors, each one with an eagle warrior and a jaguar warrior. Together in a canoe they travel fast against the enemy; then the other couple does the same, not without first hiding the insignias which are described to be carved in the boats. This may lead us to think that the warrior’s boats had an easily recognizable distinctive: When the Mexica n warriors saw what they were doing and plotting, then they started to think what they would have to do. And after they thought it, right away there comes a boat; very slightly they went rowing and put it on the wayside. There was not any badge to be seen, since they were well covered. Right away comes another canoe. Also with careful and excuses they were rowing. And then again two boats come: and thus they were four (Sahagún, 1975: 785). The only pictorial example related to the passage above mentioned is in the 41 sheet of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, where it can be observed a scene where Hernán Cortés arrives to Texcoco. On the upper left sector of the image there is a canoe with the bow carved in the shape of the head of what could be an eagle. It is important to reinforce the idea that the battles that took place around the Island implied that land and lacustrine attacks became a unity. From the combination of both armed bodies it has been deduced that army included with no doubt, naval war. Even author Ross Hassig uses the term in Nahuatl, chimalacalli in order to refer to this armed body, even though the Molina’s Vocabulary does not register it. Actually, this word appears constantly in the twelfth book of Sahagun’s oeuvre, referring to the ships that had an integrated defense dispositive, those war canoes previously described. In that case it would make sense that Hassig used this word to describe a “naval militia” inside the Mexica army, although this one may not have really existed. 7 �In order to conclude We must indicate that we agree with historian Isabel Bravo Bueno about the fact that for now it is possible to say that those who lived in the lake surroundings, this means, fishermen, bird hunters, rowers and those who had the abilities to navigate the canoes, were also capable to form part of this “Mexica n navy” that troubled so much the Spaniards in their attempt to conquer Tenochtitlan and Tlatelolco (Bravo, 2005; Favila; 2011). And so, we have tried to delineate some of the ways and tactics that took place during the lacustrine battles. Regarding the existence or not, of a military body specifically created to attack by water, with the historical sources analysis and the pictographic evidences, it is not possible to reach a conclusive answer yet. But we do believe that some clearance is reached if we take into account that the naval militia that Ross Hassig referred to, may actually indicate the existence of those war canoes, or maybe, the author was using the term chimalacalli2in its plural condition (sometimes a word in Nahuatl does not need a grammatical mark for plural) and for this reason he assumed the existence of the armed navy. We must not forget also, that according to written sources, those who navigated the war canoes were actually rowers dedicated to this (Sahagún, 1975), and not properly the warriors. Finally, we believe there is still much to say about the canoes with badges, since there is still much to rescue from the many references to lacustrine battles in the old texts. In general, it seems to be that canoes may have played a role as one of the symbols of the Mexica control around the lake region, since they carried the capacity to dominate and rule the lacustrine basin, giving shape to a particular way of life which allowed the success of a society that managed to appropriate the lake. Acknowledgement I would like to thank Carlos Ausejo and Alexandra Biar for the invitation to be part of the Pre-Hispanic Navigation session, and also to the APCONF 2014 planning committee for accepting my proposal to be part of the program. Endnotes 1 Accordingly with the Vocabulario… of Fray Alonso de Molina, chimalli refers to some kind of shield (Molina, 2008). 8 �2 Perhaps this word is also related to those versions mentioned above where the Mexica s fought the Culhuacans, and because of that they had to navigate in their shields. References Bravo, I., 2005. La guerra naval entre los aztecas. Estudios de Cultura Náhuatl, Vol. 36: 199-223. Cortés, H.,2002. Cartas de Relación. Editorial Porrúa, México. Díaz del Castillo, B.,2007.Historia verdadera de la conquista de la Nueva España. Editorial Porrúa, México. Durán, D., 1967. Historia de las Indias de Nueva España e Islas de la Tierra Firme. Editorial Porrúa, México. Escalante, P., 2008. Humanismo y arte cristiano-indígena. La cultura emblemática entre colegiales, artistas y otros miembros de las elites nahuas del siglo XVI. In Pablo Escalante Gonzalbo (Coord.), El arte cristiano-indígena del siglo XVI novohispano y sus modelos europeos,Centro de Investigación y Docencia en Humanidades del Estado de Morelos, Cuernavaca, Morelos: 9-27 Espinosa, G.,1996. El embrujo del lago. El sistema lacustre de la Cuenca de México en la cosmovisión Mexica . Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológicas,México. Favila, M., 2011. La navegación en la cuenca de México durante el Postclásico Tardío. La canoa en el entramado social Mexica . Escuela Nacional de Antropología e Historia,México. Goñi, G., 2008.Las conquistas de México y Yucatán. Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, México. Grofe, M. J., 2007. The recipe for rebirth: cacao as fish in the mythology and symbolism of the ancient Maya.Independent works from the Foundation Research Department, Inc. Hassig, R., 1992. War and society in ancient Mesoamerica. University of California Press, Los Angeles. 1990. Comercio, tributo y transportes: La economía política del Valle de México en el siglo XVI. Editorial Alianza, México. 9 �Jansen, M., 1997.La Princesa 6 Mono y el Héroe 8 Venado: una epopeya mixteca. Historia del Arte de Oaxaca, Gobierno del Estado de Oaxaca, México: 211- 237. Molina, A.,2008. Vocabulario en lengua castellana y Mexica na y Mexica na y castellana. Editorial Porrúa,México. Sahagún, B.,1975. Historia general de las cosas de la Nueva España.Editorial Porrúa,México. Staines, L., 2004. Pintura mural maya. Revista Digital Universitaria, Vol. 5 (7): 1-14. URL: http://www.revista.unam.mx/vol.5/num7/art40/ago_art40.pdf Tezozómoc, F., 1998. Crónica Mexica yotl. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, México. Tezozómoc, F., 1980. Crónica Mexica na. Editorial Porrúa, México. Torquemada, J.,1975-1983. Monarquía Indiana. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, México. Biography Mariana Favila Vázquez is an archaeologist who graduated from the National School of Anthropology and History (ENAH), and is currently studying her master’s degree in Mesoamerican Studies at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), with specialization in Mesoamerican Archaeology. She has developed some studies regarding the Pre-Hispanic navigation in Mesoamerica and coordinated some seminaries concerning this subject in order to expand the interest between degree students. 10 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Session 14: Pre-Hispanic Navigation Subject The topic of the resource Video interview with Session 14 Chair Carlos Ausejo and links to the papers presented in the session. Description An account of the resource Navigation was not unknown in the Americas, at the Spaniards arrival different kind of vessel were in use both in the Pacific and the Atlantic shores, as well as in lakes or rivers. Canoe, reed rafts, balsa log raft and others skin based watercraft have been described mainly on historical records and gave us an idea of this technologies. Although it is clear that long and short distance maritime trade routes were in use and watercraft were also involve in war activities and other maritime activities, archaeological evidence related with actual boats has been elusive to find. Still some of these traditions have survived time and in use with some changes and others were incorporated to European navigation traditions. During the last decades an increasing interest among researchers in addition to new and different approaches from a broad spectrum of perspectives, including archaeology, history, ethnohistory and ethnography, has brought new and better understanding about these technologies. In spite of this, venues of dialogue to present and discuss about these traditions has been practically inexistent. The aim of this session is to show research advances on this topic mainly in the Pacific shores and inland waters through different perspectives up to the Spanish arrival. It will focus primarily in the Andean and Mesoamerican region, however other regions would be accepted. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Carlos Ausejo Document A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Lacustrine battles carried out by the Mexica people: Use of war canoes in Tenochtitlan Description An account of the resource There have been multiple studies in relation to the political, military and ritualistic confrontations between ancient societies, which have been carried out to address the problem of war in pre-Hispanic times. In particular, we are interested here in approaching the problem of the existence of an armed navy which participated in the confrontations that took place in the lake that surrounded the Mexica capital, before and during the process of conquest, in order to propose some guidelines which may help us to understand the complexity that hardly looms, in relation to these lake battles. By turning our attention to the spatio-temporal context that interests us, the Mexica in the Late Post Classic period on the island of Tenochtitlan-Tlatelolco, we have found evidence regarding the fact that the canoes, in this sense, seem to have worked as a specialized mechanism within this context, providing huge advantages to its users for defense and offense during the fighting tactics involving both land and water confrontations. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Mariana FavilavVázquez, in Van Tilburg, H., Tripati, S., Walker Vadillo, V., Fahy, B., and Kimura, J. (eds.) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 5/20/2014 Asia-Pac Session 14 2014