Advertisement

Temporal Plurality and Temporal Transgressions: Time and Things in an Early Colonial Period Mortuary Assemblage from Northern Highland Ecuador

  • Tamara L. BrayEmail author
Article
  • 33 Downloads

Abstract

The power of archaeology as an arm of postcolonial studies lies with its focus on the material dimensions of colonialism and its ability to interrogate the role of things in negotiating the terrain of cultural dissonance. This paper contributes to the postcolonial critique by taking up the matter of temporality and historicity from an indigeno-centric perspective, offering an analysis of the notion of temporal plurality via a focus on the “time of materials.” The context of the study is a specific mortuary assemblage from a shaft tomb in the northern Andean highlands of Ecuador dating to the early Colonial period. This example is used to illustrate the way objects, as elements of heterogeneous assemblages, can create distinct temporalities that work to contravene or resist assimilation to the regime of historicity. The assemblage analyzed here conveys an ontology of temporal plurality that encompassed both radical continuity and radical change. As one example among many, it serves to challenge taken-for-granted assumptions about the universality of historical time, the “natural” segregation of past, present, and future, and the significance of European artifacts in indigenous contexts.

Keywords

Temporality Historicity Ecuador Colonialism 

Notes

References

  1. Athens, J. S. (1995). Relaciones interregionales prehistóricas en el norte de los Andes: evidencia del sitio de La Chimba en el Ecuador septentrional. In Gnecco, C. (ed.), Perspectivas Regionales en la Arqueología del Suroccidente de Colombia y Norte del Ecuador. Editorial Universidad del Cauca, Popayán, pp. 3–29.Google Scholar
  2. Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things. Duke University Press, Durham, NC.Google Scholar
  3. Bergson, H. (2001 [1889]). Time and Free Will: An Essay on the Immediate Data of Consciousness, Pogson, F. L. (trans.), Dover, Mineola, NY.Google Scholar
  4. Bhabha, H. (1994). The Location of Culture. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  5. Borja, A. (1897 [1582]). Relación en suma de la doctrina é beneficio de Pimanpiro y de las cosas notables que en ella hay, de la cual es beneficiado el P. Antonio Borja. In Jimenez de la Espada, M. (ed.), Relaciones Geográficas de Indias, Tomo 3. Tipografía de los Hijos de M. G. Hernández, Madrid, pp. 128–136.Google Scholar
  6. Bravo, E. (2005). La Cerámica Cosanga del Valle de Cumbaya, Provincia de Pichincha (Z3B3-022): Una Aproximación a la Definición de su Rol en los Contextos Funerarios del Sitio La Comarca. Tésis de Licenciatura, Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral, Guayaquil, Ecuador.Google Scholar
  7. Bray, T. L. (1991). Inca Imperialism on the Northern Frontier. Doctoral dissertation, State University of New York, Binghamton.Google Scholar
  8. Bray, T. L. (1994). Vínculos andinos-amazónicos en la prehistoria ecuatoriana: la conexión Pimampiro. Sarance 20: 135–146.Google Scholar
  9. Bray, T.L. (1995a). Pimampiro y puertos de comercio: investigaciones arqueológicas recientes en la Sierra Norte del Ecuador. In Gnecco, C. (ed.), Perspectivas Regional en la Arqueología del Suroccidente de Colombia y Norte del Ecuador. Editorial Universidad del Cauca, Popayan, Colombia, pp. 30–47.Google Scholar
  10. Bray, T. L. (1995b). The Panzaleo puzzle: non-local pottery in northern highland Ecuador. Journal of Field Archaeology 22(2): 137–148.Google Scholar
  11. Bray, T.L. (2000). Informe Anual del Proyecto Arqueológico “Vínculos Andinos-Amazónicos en la Prehistoria Ecuatoriana: El Distrito Pimampiro, Fase III, Excavaciones al Sitio de Shanshipampa”. Manuscript on file at National Institute of Cultural Patrimony, Quito, Ecuador.Google Scholar
  12. Bray, T. L. (2005). Archaeological investigations in northern highland Ecuador: the Pimampiro district as a multi-ethnic locale. Journal of Field Archaeology 30(2): 119–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bray T. L. (2008). Chiefdoms of the Ecuadorian highlands. In Handbook of South American Archaeology, Silverman, H. and Isbell, W. (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York, pp. 527-543.Google Scholar
  14. Bray, T. L. (2017). Archaeology, temporal complexity, and the politics of time. In Swenson, E. and Roddick, A. (eds.), Constructions of Time and History in the Pre-Columbian Andes. University Press of Colorado, Boulder, pp. 263–278.Google Scholar
  15. Bray, T. L. and Echeverría, J. (2014). The late imperial site of Inca-Caranqui: at the end of empire. Ñawpa Pacha 35(2): 176–199.Google Scholar
  16. Caillavet, C. (1983). Toponimía histórica, arqueología, y formas prehispánicas de agricultura en la región de Otavalo, Ecuador. Bulletin de l'IFEA 12(3–4): 1–21.Google Scholar
  17. Chakrabarty, D. (2000). Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  18. Childe, V. G. (1956). A Short Introduction to Archaeology. Collier, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Chouin, G. and DeCorse, C. (2010). Prelude to the Atlantic trade: new perspectives on southern Ghana's pre-Atlantic history (800-1500). Journal of African History 51(2): 123–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cipolla, C. and Hayes, K. (eds.) (2015). Rethinking Colonialism: Comparative Archaeological Approaches. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
  21. Coronel, R. (1991). El Valle Sangriento: De los Indígenas de la Coca y el Algodón a la Hacienda Cañera Jesuita, 1580–1700. Abya-Yala Press, Quito.Google Scholar
  22. Croucher, S. and Weiss, L. (2011). The archaeology of capitalism in colonial contexts, an introduction: provincializing historical archaeology. In Croucher, S. and Weiss, L. (eds.), The Archaeology of Capitalism in Colonial Contexts. Springer, New York, pp. 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cuellar, A. (2006). The Organization of Agricultural Production in the Emergence of Chiefdoms in the Quijos Region, Eastern Andes of Ecuador. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  24. Deagan, K. (1987). Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of Florida and the Caribbean, 1500–1800, Vol. 1. Ceramics, Glassware, and Beads. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  25. DeLanda, M. (2006). A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity. Continuum, London.Google Scholar
  26. Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. (1987). A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.Google Scholar
  27. Echeverría, J. and Uribe, M. V. (1981). Papel del valle del Chota-Mira en la economía interandina de los Andes septentrionales del Ecuador. Sarance 9: 25–45.Google Scholar
  28. Espinosa Soriano, W. (1988). Los Cayambes y Carangues: Siglos XV-XVI, El Testimonio de la Etnohistoria. Instituto Otavaleño de Antropología, Otavalo.Google Scholar
  29. Fabian, J. (1983). Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes its Object. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  30. Ferris, N., Harrison, R., and Wilcox, M., (eds.) (2015). Rethinking Colonial Pasts Through Archaeology. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  31. Francisco, A. (1969). An Archaeological Sequence from Carchi, Ecuador. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  32. Gondard, P. and López, F. (1983). Inventario Arqueológico Preliminar de los Andes Septentrionales del Ecuador. Mag-Pronareg-Orstrom and the Central Bank of Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador.Google Scholar
  33. González-Ruibal, A. (2016). Archaeology and the time of modernity. Historical Archaeology 50(3): 144–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Grijalva, C. (1937). La expedición de Max Uhle a Cuasmal o sea la protohistoria de Imbabura y Carchi. Editorial Chimborazo, Quito.Google Scholar
  35. Guerlac, S. (2006). Thinking in Time: An Introduction to Henri Bergson. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
  36. Hartog, F. (2003). Regimes d’historicité: Présentisme et expériences du temps. Seuil, Paris.Google Scholar
  37. Hayes, K. and Cipolla, C. (2015). Introduction: reimagining colonial pasts, influencing colonial futures. In Cipolla, C. and Hayes, K. (eds.), Rethinking Colonialism: Comparative Archaeological Approaches. University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar
  38. Helgesson, S. (2014). Radicalizing temporal difference: anthropology, postcolonial theory andliterary time. History and Theory 53(4): 545–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Herder, J.G. (1955 [1799]) Metakritik zur Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Berlin.Google Scholar
  40. Hodder, I. (2012). Entangled: An Archaeology of the Relationships Between Humans and Things. Wiley-Blackwell, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jijón y Caamaño, J. (1920). Neuva Contributión al Conocimiento de los Aborígenes de la Provincia de Imbabura de la República del Ecuador. Tipografia Salesianas, Quito.Google Scholar
  42. Jijón y Caamaño, J. (1927). Puruha: Contributión al Conocimiento de los Aborígenes de la Provincia del  Chimborazo de la República del Ecuador. Tipografia Salesianas, Quito. Google Scholar
  43. Jordheim, H. (2014). Introduction: multiple times and the work of synchronization. History and Theory 53(4): 498–518.Google Scholar
  44. Koselleck, R. (2002). The Practice of Conceptual History: Timing History, Spacing Concepts. Presner, T. (trans.). Stanford University Press, Stanford, LA.Google Scholar
  45. Koselleck, R. (2004). Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time. Tribe, K. (trans.). Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  46. Landázuri, C. (1990). Pueblos indígenas de los valles interandinos: el caso de Pimampiro (siglo XVI). Quitumbe 7: 11–35.Google Scholar
  47. Larraín Barros, Horacio (1980). Demografía y Asentamientos Indígenas en la Sierra Norte del Ecuador en el Siglo XVI. Instituto Otavaleño de Antropología, Otavalo, Ecuador.Google Scholar
  48. Latour, B. (1993). We Have Never Been Modern. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  49. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  50. Liebmann, M. and Rizvi, U. (eds.) (2008). Archaeology and the Postcolonial Critique. Altamira Press, Lanham, MD.Google Scholar
  51. Lucas, G. (2004). Modern disturbances: on the ambiguities of archaeology. Modernism/Modernity 11(1): 109–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lucas, G. (2005). The Archaeology of Time. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  53. Lucas, G. (2012). Understanding the Archaeological Record. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  54. Lucas, G. (2015). Archaeology and contemporaneity. Archaeological Dialogues 22(1): 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lydon, J. and Rizvi, U. (eds.) (2016). Handbook of Postcolonial Archaeology. Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
  56. Mbembe, A. (2002). African modes of self-writing. Public Culture 14(1): 239–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Meyers, A. (1981). Análisis de la cerámica de Cochasquí. In Oberem, U. (ed.), Cochasquí: Estudios Arqueológicos. Instituto Otavaleño de Antropología, Otavalo, pp. 219–284.Google Scholar
  58. Newson, L. (1995). Life and Death in Early Colonial Ecuador. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.Google Scholar
  59. Oberem, U. (1981). Cochasquí: Estudios Arqueológicos, 3 vols. Instituto Otavaleño de Antropología, Otavalo.Google Scholar
  60. Olsen, N. (2012). History in the Plural: An Introduction to the Work of Reinhart Koselleck. Berghahn, New York.Google Scholar
  61. Plazas, C. and Echeverría, J. (1995). Piezas de oro Piartal-Tuza halladas en el Departamento de Nariño al sur de Colombia. In Echeverría, J. and Uribe, M. V. (eds.), El Area Septentrional Andina Norte: Arqueología y Etnohistoria. Ediciones del Banco Central, Quito, pp. 345–366.Google Scholar
  62. Porras, P. (1975). Fase Cosanga: Estudios científicos sobre el Oriente Ecuatoriana. Centro de Publicaciones de la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador, Quito.Google Scholar
  63. Ramón, G. (2003). Relaciones interétnicas en la Sierra Norte: la diversa evolución de Cayambe y Otavalo en el tránsito a la República. Procesos, Revista Ecuatoriana de Historia 19: 23–48.Google Scholar
  64. Richard, F. (2015). Materializing colonial pasts: African archaeological perspectives. In Richard, F. (ed.), Materializing Colonial Encounters: Archaeologies of African Experience. Springer, New York, pp. 1–40.Google Scholar
  65. Rodríguez, E. (1991). Informe preliminar de la primera y segunda etapas de trabajo de campo del Proyecto Panzaleo. Manuscript on file, Museo del Banco Central del Ecuador, Quito.Google Scholar
  66. Schmidt, P. and Mrozowski, S. (eds.) (2013). The Death of Prehistory: Reforming the Past, Looking to the Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  67. Silliman, S. (2009). Change and continuity, practice and memory: Native American persistence in colonial New England. American Antiquity 74(2): 211–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Smith, A. T. (2015). The Political Machine: Assembling Sovereignty in the Bronze Age Caucasus. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  69. Smith, M. and Good, M. E. (1982). Early Sixteenth Century Glass Beads in the Spanish Colonial Trade. Cottonlandia Museum, Greenwood, MS.Google Scholar
  70. Smith, M., Graham, E., and Pendergast, D. (1994). European beads from Spanish-colonial Lamanai and Tipu, Belize. Beads 6: 21–47.Google Scholar
  71. Trouillot, M (1995). Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History. Beacon, Boston.Google Scholar
  72. Uribe, M. V. (1977–78). Asentamientos Prehispánicos en el Altiplano de Ipiales, Colombia. Revista Colombiana de Antropología 21: 57–195.Google Scholar
  73. Uribe, M. V. (1995). Pastos y etnias relacionadas: arqueología y etnohistoria. In Echeverría, J., Uribe, M. V. (eds.), El Area Septentrional Andina Norte: Arqueología y Etnohistoria. Ediciones del Banco Central, Quito, pp. 367–438.Google Scholar
  74. Verneau, R. and Rivet, P. (1912). Ethnographie ancienne de l’Équateur. Service géographique de l’Armée. Mesure d’un arc de meridian equatorial den Amerique du Sud, T.6. Gauthier-Villars, Paris.Google Scholar
  75. Webmoor, T. (2007). What about "one more turn after the social" in archaeological reasoning? Taking things seriously. World Archaeology 39(4): 563–578.Google Scholar
  76. Wernke, S. (2013). Negotiating Community and Landscape in the Peruvian Andes: A Transconquest View. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.Google Scholar
  77. Willey, G., and Phillips, P. (1958). Method and Theory in American Archaeology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  78. Wilson, D. (1862). Prehistoric Man; Researches Into the Origin of Civilization in the Old and the New World, Volume 1. Cambridge, MacMillan, London.Google Scholar
  79. Wolf, E. (1982). Europe and the People Without History. University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyWayne State UniversityDetroitUSA

Personalised recommendations