Colonial Latin American Review

ISSN: 1060-9164 (Print) 1466-1802 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ccla20

Mapping colonial Quechua through trial

th
interpretations in 17 -century Cajamarca

Luis Andrade Ciudad & Martha G. Bell

To cite this article: Luis Andrade Ciudad & Martha G. Bell (2016) Mapping colonial Quechua
th
through trial interpretations in 17 -century Cajamarca, Colonial Latin American Review, 25:4,
445-464, DOI: 10.1080/10609164.2016.1281006

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10609164.2016.1281006

Published online: 17 Mar 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ccla20

Download by: [University of Newcastle, Australia] Date: 18 March 2017, At: 10:49
COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW, 2016
VOL. 25, NO. 4, 445464
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10609164.2016.1281006

Mapping colonial Quechua through trial interpretations

in 17th-century Cajamarca
Luis Andrade Ciudada and Martha G. Bellb
a
Humanities Department, Linguistics and Literature Section, Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Per;
b
Humanities Department, Geography Section, Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Per

The historical distribution of Quechua in Cajamarca, Peru, has long represented a gap in
the historical and linguistic knowledge of this region. This gap centers on the key question
of whether the current distribution of Quechua approximately reflects its historical distri-
bution, or whether in fact this language was spoken across a much wider area in the colo-
nial (and possibly pre-Hispanic) past. Quechua, an indigenous Andean language thought
to have originated in what is now central Peru, was spread widely throughout the Andes in
at least two different periodsthe Inca (13th15th centuries) and the early Spanish colonial
(16th17th centuries), as a sort of lingua franca.1 Currently, it is considered one of the
most widely spoken indigenous languages in the world. In Perus Cajamarca region,
specifically, little is known thus far about the spread and distribution of this language
in either historical or pre-Hispanic times. Quechua is spoken nowadays in some scattered
localities of Cajamarca, traditionally described as enclaves, the most important of which
are the district of Chetilla (to the west of the city of Cajamarca) and the locality of Porcn
Bajo, in the district of Cajamarca (to the north of the city of Cajamarca) (Figure 1). Some
scholars also report Quechua-speaking localities (Chala, Llaucn, and Yanacancha)2 in
Hualgayoc province (Quesada 1976a, 2728), as well as in non-specified localities of
Cutervo and Jan provinces (Torero 2002, 81). However, it is unclear whether these
limited enclaves represent the extent to which the language was spoken in other
periods. In this article we argue that without a systematic historical approach to this
problem no advances can be made to bridge this gap, and we present one such method
to address the issue.
We propose that one systematic way to solve this problem is through interdisciplinary
research in Andean linguistics and cartographic visualization. In the following, we aim to
show that a careful analysis of colonial documentary data can yield a cartographic rep-
resentation of the distribution of Quechua in 17th-century Cajamarca. The material we
examine is a series of documents held in the Regional Archive of Cajamarca (ARC)
that contain interpretations (language translations carried out orally at the time of the tes-
timonies) between Spanish and Quechua and, on a few occasions, other indigenous
languages. Using the testimonies of interpretations from Quechua and other languages,
we compiled a dataset of what languages were spoken where, which we then mapped
using the dot density cartographic method for representing conceptual point data. Our
results indicate that this is a useful analytic method that can be applied to other colonial
settings currently lacking information on language distribution in multilingual contexts.

2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group on behalf of CLAR
446 L. ANDRADE CIUDAD AND M. G. BELL

Figure 1. Current distribution of the Quechua language in Cajamarca, Peru. Sources: Quesada (1976a),
Torero (2002), Cerrn-Palomino (1987).

The focus of this article is colonial Cajamarca Quechuamore specifically, Cajamarca

Quechua during the 17th century, which has not been the object of systematic research so
far. This historical scope does not mean neglecting modern data on current Cajamarca
Quechua, which, as will be seen in the next section, is paramount for assessing our
research question. It does not mean either overriding the complex language history of
this territory, which seems to have also nestled other indigenous languages, distinct
from Quechua and Aymara, both in pre-Hispanic times and during the colonial and
even post-colonial periods. Among the non-Quechuan languagescurrently extinct
that have been hypothesized for Cajamarca are Culle (Silva Santisteban 1986; Espinoza
Soriano 1974; Adelaar 1990; Torero 1989; Andrade 2010, 2016), Cat (Torero 1989), and
Den (Torero 1989; Andrade and Ramn 2014; Andrade 2010). In this work, however,
we will not be able to concentrate on the non-Quechua indigenous languages, due to
the scarcity of information on them in our corpus. However, as will be seen, some specific
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 447

documents point to the presence of Mochica and, possibly, Den, along with Quechua as
the default judiciary code for indigenous populations in 17th-century Cajamarca. There-
fore, we start with consideration of the current distribution of Quechua and work to
compare this with our 17th-century reconstruction to address the broader debate of the
spread of Quechua over time across the Cajamarca province.

Current distribution of Cajamarca Quechua and assumptions about its

previous geographical scope
Grammatical descriptions and lexical collections of modern Cajamarca Quechua
(Quesada 1976a, 1976b; Ortiz Chamn et al. 1979) have been based mainly on the
Quechua from Chetilla and, secondarily, on that from Porcn, both places located
within Cajamarca province. There are no dialectological studies of Quechua from Hual-
gayoc province, and there are only limited reports on the presence of the language in
this province, formerly named Bambamarca due to the denomination of its main city
(Quesada 1976a; Cerrn-Palomino 1987, 58). The modern Quechua of Cutervo and
Jan provinces seems to be more tightly linked, from a dialectological point of view,
with the Quechua of Lambayeque (or ferreafano) than with the Quechua traditionally
known as cajamarquino (Torero 2002, 81), so these varieties must be considered separ-
ately. These sources about current Cajamarca Quechua focus on lexicon and grammatical
features, but no textual samples are provided, so it is difficult to perform thorough assess-
ments of the dialectological analysis that yield the conclusions summarized above.
Possibly due to the lack of empirical evidence on Hualgayoc Quechua, Adelaar states
that the presence of the language in most of the territory of the Cajamarca department
was never fully established and was restricted to the current territory of the province of
Cajamarca, where it was spoken in multiple localities, not only in Chetilla and Porcn:
There is evidence that Cajamarca Quechua until recently covered a wider area of use includ-
ing localities to the south and east of Cajamarca as well (Pariamarca, Baos del Inca). Some of
its speakers may still be found in these locations. By contrast, in most of the provinces of the
department of Cajamarca the presence of Quechua has never been established. The exotic
toponymy of the Cajamarca region bears witness to the former existence of non-Quechuan
languages that may have lingered on until the nineteenth century. There is no documentation
of these languages, except for place and family names. (Adelaar, 2012, 204)

In contrast with Adelaars view, discussing the 16th century, Torero (1993, 464) identifies
localities from the southwestern part of the Jan basin (Querocoto, Chimache, Chontal,
Guaratoca, Sallique, Tabaconas, and Pucar), between the current territory of the pro-
vinces of San Ignacio and Chota, as Quechua-speaking, based on the examination of
the Relacin de la tierra de Jan (Jimnez de la Espada 1965). He suggested the possibility
that this Quechua, although described as lengua del inga (language of the Inca) or
lengua general by the colonial source, could have been a Quechua native of those
peoples since pre-colonial times, and that its presence in these territories was not the
result of Spanish conquest (Torero 1993, 464). However, the author does not clearly
state the basis for this suggestion that Quechua spread to this area in advance of the
Spanish, with the Inca or even before.
In line with Adelaar (2012), Torero (1993, 1989) also warns of the existence of two sub-
strate languages, Cat and Den, distinct from Quechua in this area. This statement is mainly
448 L. ANDRADE CIUDAD AND M. G. BELL

based on toponymy, and no documentary mentions of these hypothetical languages have

been identified so far. A recent analysis of the lexicon of traditional weaving provides
additional evidence for at least one language distinct from Quechua, Aymara, and Culle
in the Cajamarca territory (Andrade and Ramn 2014). A multilingual scenario, with
Quechua and Spanish as linguae francae, and one or more local languages used in house-
hold domains has not been seriously considered in the debate over the historical distri-
bution of languages in Cajamarca. Only the territories of what are currently Cajabamba
and San Marcos provinces, in the southeast of the department, have been consensually
assigned to Culle, the extinct language of the colonial province of Huamachuco
(Adelaar 1990; Torero 1989; Andrade 2016).
Additional historical testimonies support arguments for a wider range of Quechua in
Cajamarca in the 17th century than can be observed in current times. A recent important
finding in the ARC was a letter written in this language by an indigenous woman of the
elite, doa Fabiana Lachos, to her son, about some family properties (Argouse 2014). This
letter was dated in 1661 and signed in Contumaz. This fact bears witness to the use of the
indigenous language in the 17th century in urban and elite contexts, but more importantly
for our argument, it confirms the use of Quechua in a domestic interaction in Contumaz,
to the west and outside the territory of the current Cajamarca province. In the same vein,
Adelaar and Trigoso (1998) found, also in the ARC, a letter written in Quechua in 1675
between two indigenous leaders from Cajamarca: Joan Baptista Astoquipan, from the city
of Cajamarca, and Augustin Ymllon, from the village of Santa Cruz, to the northwest and
outside of the current Cajamarca province. The writing of this letter was requested by
Ymllon of the scribe of the town council (cabildo) of Santa Cruz, and it confirms that
Quechua was used at the end of the 17th century for epistolary purposes.
As a final example, in a trial from the first half of the 18th century, Juan Santos Reyes, a
San Pablo resident who worked as a healer, was charged by the Tribunal de la Inquisicin
with practicing witchcraft (Glass-Coffin and Castaeda Murga 2005), and many of the
non-Spanish testimonies, especially those made by female witnesses, were given in the
general language, i.e. Quechua.3 The witnesses descriptions of the rituals performed
by Santos Reyes also suggest the use of Quechua by this 18th-century healer. One instance
of this is his alleged invocation to the Sun as Inti Apuyaya tucuita camac (Sun, Sacred
Father, who created everything). In addition, during this trial the cactus named gigantn
in Spanish (Cereus trigonodendron according to Soukup 1970) was called by its Quechua
denomination agua collai (hawaqullay or hawanqullay in Cuzco Quechua).4 San Pablo
is situated to the west, and outside of the territory of the current Cajamarca province.
Rivet (1949, 2) believed that the 17th-century distribution of Quechua in the region was
wider than the current territory of the Cajamarca province. In his view, the language had,
by this period, acquired the status of a lingua franca. Probably also basing his arguments
on the Relacin de la tierra de Jan, Rivet identified areas of the Tabaconas valley as
Quechua-speaking, especially places in the current territory of San Ignacio and the high-
lands of Chota province. Middendorf, in the 19th century, stated that the Indians of the
outskirts [of Cajamarca] speak the ancient language of the country, and many of them
plainly ignore Spanish (Middendorf 1973 [1895], 3:12930). Elspuru mentioned, in
the 1930s, that a high percentage of the indigenous population of the main city of the
department [of Cajamarca] use Quechua and in this way they keep their indigenous tra-
dition (Elspuru Berninzon 1939, 160). An illustration of the link between Quechua
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 449

language and culture can be found in the names of some rituals practiced in Cajamarca in
Elspurus time: the landaruto or first haircut (landa bunch of hair, rutu- to shear) and
the yupacundo (< yupaku- to grieve), a monotonous and melancholic song that remem-
bers the main virtues of the deceased (Elspuru Berninzon 1939, 158).5
A brief examination of the linguistic origin of the names of supernatural entities in a
collection of popular Cajamarca beliefs (Biblioteca Campesina 1988) shows a relative
prevalence of Quechua terms. These names are well disseminated throughout the rural
zones of the whole region. They include words such as: apo or apu, supernatural chief
of an animal species; Guacrayo, condemned and sinful person (from wakra horn and
yuq with); Illa, mother of an animal species, especially the domesticated ones; Illapa,
the complex of lightning and thunder; Pachaconda, a harmful vapor emanated from the
earth (from pacha earth, and quntay fume); and Supaipawawa, a baby that turns out
to be the son of the devil (from Supay devil, and wawa son).6 Andrade and Ramn
(2014) have stated that the lexicon of traditional pottery in southern Cajamarca as a
whole (provinces of San Miguel, San Pablo, Cajabamba, Cajamarca, and Contumaz)
also demonstrates a prevalence of Quechua terms, in sharp contrast with weaving termi-
nology, which shows a more clear presence of a hypothetical pre-Quechua language,
associated with Den in Toreros hypothesis (1989).
Therefore, for different periods of the past, documentary and lexical evidence suggests a
wider distribution of Quechua in the department of Cajamarca than just the province of
Cajamarca, as Adelaar states (2012). On the other hand, there is also onomastic data that
point to the presence of indigenous languages different from Quechua, as both Adelaar
(2012) and Torero (1993, 1989) stress. However, the coexistence of Quechua and local
languages cannot be discarded: Quechua could well have been spread over a wider area
than that of the province of Cajamarca, perhaps as a lingua franca, as Rivet suggests
(1949).
Thus far systematic efforts to clarify this problem for specific historical periods are
lacking. Here, we suggest that one way of assessing this topic, for the 17th century, is to
analyze the plentiful documentary material that contains data on interpretations of
Indian testimonies in judiciary settings. This information can be extracted from the
trial documents held in the ARC, using as a unit of analysis the interpretation act, i.e.
an occasion on which an individual was interpreted from an indigenous language to
Spanish during a trial.7 Knowledge about indigenous and mestizo interpreters and their
key social roles and networks in the Viceroyalty of Peru has increased in recent years
(Fossa 2006; Ramos 2011; Puente Luna 2014), but, as far as we know, scholarly work
has not taken advantage of their actions as language mediators for tracing cultural traits
of specific colonial territories and populations, as we have here with the reconstruction
of a historical language distribution. In the remainder of this article, we explain how we
compiled our database of interpretation acts, the method used to map these results, and
the implications of our findings for the broader debate.

The series Protector de Naturales of the ARC as a source

The ARC holds a series of documents ideal for the objectives of this study, which contains
documents related to judiciary lawsuits, of ordinary and criminal character, in which the
procurador or protector de naturales was involved. The protector de naturales was a
450 L. ANDRADE CIUDAD AND M. G. BELL

sort of advocate of Indians within the colonial justice system, and was one of the outcomes
of the intellectual work of Bartolom de Las Casas in defense of indigenous populations:
Since the first half of the 16th century, the protectores de naturales were instituted in the
various colonial areas. Their main assignment was the legal representation of the indigenous
population in the various trials and litigations that took place; they acted as justices of the
peace (jueces de paz), and from their base in the judiciary branch, they looked out for the
fate of the native population. (Bonnett 1992, 9; our translation)

Given that the involvement of the protector de naturales in these processes implied the
participation of indigenous actors, as accused parties or as complainants, we expected
this series of documents to include an important number of interpretations between indi-
genous languages, whatever they may have been, and Spanish.8
The series has 45 legajos (bundles) dating from 1604 to 1820. These are divided into
four subseries: Corregimiento-Causas Criminales (Criminal Cases) 4 legajos; Corregi-
miento-Causas Ordinarias (Ordinary Cases) 30 legajos; Intendencia-Causas Criminales,
6 legajos; and Intendencia-Causas Ordinarias, 5 legajos. Within this whole series, 23 of the
legajos date to the 17th century (in the Corregimiento collection); these are divided
between ordinary cases (22) and criminal cases (1). Due to schedule and budgetary restric-
tions, it was not possible to review each of these 23 legajos, so we decided to make a sample
of six legajos of ordinary cases and to include the only legajo of criminal cases within the
17th-century collection. Their main features are as shown in Table 1.
This sample of six legajos represents approximately 30% of the 17th-century bundles.
They were selected taking into account the need to achieve an overall coverage of the
century, collecting documentary material as evenly as possible through each decade. In
order to further enrich our sample, and take advantage of additional available information
on languages and interpretations in the region, we added to this corpus a large file (expe-
diente), identified by historian Nicanor Domnguez Faura, from the general collection of
Ordinary Cases. This file included 12 interpretation acts, some of them in yunga or
Mochica, for the locality of Niepos. In total, from our entire sample, we compiled 319
interpretation acts, which were the raw material for preparing our database.
The next step was to identify the individuals represented by these 319 interpretation
acts. This meant determining the name of the person testifying in an indigenous language
(and being interpreted) and disentangling the cases of repetition, when the same individ-
ual had testified multiple times. Also, we had to differentiate the individuals who were
involved in collective interpretations (these collective interpretations were scarce in the
sample, and, in general, the groups were formed by four persons at the most). Thus, we
obtained 348 cases of individuals being interpreted.

Table 1. General features of the legajos that made up our sample.

Legajo Period Number of files Interpretation acts
Corregimiento Criminal Cases Legajo 1 16051698 75 122
Corregimiento Ordinary Cases Legajo 1 16041617 35 45
Corregimiento Ordinary Cases Legajo 5 16391642 32 32
Corregimiento Ordinary Cases Legajo 10 16571659 34 50
Corregimiento Ordinary Cases Legajo 15 16691670 36 43
Corregimiento Ordinary Cases Legajo 20 16871689 21 7
Corregimiento Ordinary Cases Legajo 22 16941699 39 8
Total 272 307
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 451

Taking into account our research question, we only collected those judiciary statements
that showed explicit interpreter participation, discarding those in which indigenous people
spoke in Spanish, or those that did not clarify if interpretation was used. A different
research questioni.e. how did the indigenous population shift from using Quechua to
Spanish during the 17th centurywould have entailed selecting different information,
taking into account the entire collection of statements, focusing on the number of state-
ments with interpreters in relation to the total, and assessing variation over time. This
problem diverges from our main object; however, it could be a goal for future research.
Another topic worth considering is that until the mid-17th century, Huamachuco and
its related localities, such as Otuzco and Santiago de Chuco, were included within the Co-
rregimiento of Cajamarca. This is why the ARC contains many documents related to this
vast region currently located within the territory of the Libertad department. As our study
sought to observe the current territory of the Cajamarca department, all the interpret-
ations corresponding to Huamachuco and its related zonesthe nucleus of the extinct
Culle languagewere excluded from the corpus, with the exception of Cajabamba (cur-
rently part of the Cajamarca department). However, as will be shown, some documents
from the Huamachuco area helped to solve analytical problems posed by this series.

Analyzing interpretation acts

It was not always straightforward to transfer information on interpretation acts from the
trial documents. In the following we explain our methodology, focusing on problematic
cases. Seventeenth-century judicial trials followed a fairly uniform pattern regarding
interpretation: in general terms, this pattern entailed the nomination of the interpreter,
his oath to perform the role to the best of his ability, the interpretation of the general
data about the testifier (name, birthplace, age, his/her relationship with the other litigants),
his/her main statement, and a final recall of his/her words in order to verify that every-
thing that was said was recognized by the testifier as true. However, we can observe, as
can be expected, variation in the data registered from period to period and among different
individuals or scribes. Judiciary secretaries were sometimes more (or less) meticulous in
delivering information, some proceedings were swifter than others, and many times the
individuals interpreted did not supply the full information required by the colonial
justice system, most frequently regarding age information.
For our study, once the date of the statement was confirmed, two pieces of information
were required about each testimony: (1) the language being interpreted (e.g. Quechua) and
(2) the birthplace and/or the location of residence of the declarant. Depending on the pres-
ence or lack of these two data, different complications arose which we explain in the fol-
lowing paragraphs. We begin with an ideal case and then continue to describe several
variations. When possible, we include the exact texts (interpretations or excerpts), in
other cases we provide our summary of them (document summary).

Case 1: language and birthplace mentioned

Interpretation (case 347). En el pueblo de epos en cinco das del mes de septiembre de mil
y seiscientos y onze aos ante mi el dicho el dicho juez el dicho melchor de escouar presento
por testigo a un yndio que dixo llamarsse Diego Xac natural deste dicho pueblo del qual por
452 L. ANDRADE CIUDAD AND M. G. BELL

lengua e ynterpretaion de don Chrisptoual Chuquinboques yndio ladino en la lengua espa-

ola y saue la lengua de yunga se tomo e resciuio juramento en forma de derecho y el lo hizo y
prometio de desir verdad y siendo preguntado del pedimento dixo .9

In this case, the document gives the declarants birthplace (natural deste dicho pueblo,
originally from this mentioned town), here referring to epos (Niepos), as well as the
date of the statement (cinco das del mes de septiembre de mil y seiscientos y onze
aos ve days of the month of September in the year one thousand and six hundred
and eleven), and also explicitly mentions the language in which the declarant testies
(lengua de yunga, i.e. Mochica). This represents an ideal case; others were not as straight-
forward. For example, some documents do not state the birthplace but rather the pachaca
or aillu to which the declarant belonged, as happened in Case 2.

Case 2: language mentioned, along with specification of the aillu-pachaca

Document summary (case 61). The Indian named Domingo (his surname is not men-
tioned), a boy of 910 years, is interpreted on 11 February 1644, in a proceeding held in
the villa de Caxamarca, by Antonio de Campos Benavides and Pedro Baptista Vigo. It is
said that the interpretation was made in the lengua general del inga, but no birthplace is
mentioned for Domingo. It is only stated that his parents were from the aillu of Chimchim.

Rostworowski de Diez Canseco (1992) and Remy (1992) both stated that pachacas (or
aillus) in 16th-century Cajamarca were scattered across the different towns of the Co-
rregimiento. In a rationale that they label discontinuous territoriality, towns of the
region were inhabited by members of different huarangas, pachacas or aillus. Huarangas
were units of social organization formed by pachacas or aillus; the former were the largest
units, and the latter were subsidiary units. This is shown in the visitas of 15711572 and
1578 (Rostworowski 1992; Remy 1992), where many towns were home to residents from
multiple huarangas. In addition, the visitas show that members of the same pachaca may
have lived in different towns. For example, an individual described in a document as a
member of the pachaca of Ascape or Ascay may had been a resident of the town of San
Esteban de Chetilla (now in Cajamarca province), of the town of San Pablo Chalaques
(now in San Pablo province), or of the town of San Gabriel de Cascas (now in the Con-
tumaz province). Hence, there is not a uniform relation between pachaca or aillu,
which were ethno-political concepts, and locality of residence, which is a geographical
or territorial concept. If we follow this hypothesis, the mention of aillu or pachaca in
an interpretation act does not necessarily indicate a specic place of birth and/or resi-
dence. Therefore, our initial decision was to represent the cases when only aillu or
pachaca is included as Location unspecied on the map, and their exact location was
not determined.
Julien (1993, 25758), however, has stated that the towns that included individuals
from multiple huarangas were typically located, as in the case of Tacabamba, along the
borders of the different huarangas territories, or along the borders of the Cajamarca
corregimiento. Moreover, he claims that this phenomenon must have been more prevalent
in the late pre-Hispanic period, and that it probably does not reflect the common situation
in the Late Intermediate period. For our purposes, Julien takes an important step forward,
since he was able to identify the approximate geographical location of the Cajamarca hua-
rangas, based on links between the names of the pachacas and modern toponymy, in cases
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 453

Table 2. Specific cases in which pachaca was the only identifier, which were located based on Julien
(1993).
Huaranga or parcialidad to
which the pachaca belonged Pachaca Modern locality
Colquemarca Culquimarca Culquimarca
Caxamarca Caxamarca Cajamarca
Chinchn, Chinchn or Chimchim Chinchin (most likely)
Otuzco Otuzco
Chondal Payac or Payaca San Miguel de Pallaques
Bambamarca Bambamarca, Pampamarca or Pambamarca Bambamarca
Guancamarca Huangamarca
uruchuco, Suruchuco Sorochuco
Tacabamba Tacabamba
Quidn Quidn

where the same denominations are still used. Considering this evidence, he prepared a
map of the territories of the huarangas of Cajamarca for the Inka period. While this
map does not show the boundaries between huarangas, and does not give the specific
locations of most of the pachacas or aillus of Cajamarca, nevertheless, Juliens map does
enable the identification of geographic location for several of the cases in our corpus
that include only information on pachacas or aillus (specific cases detailed in Table 2).
In this way, we were able to locate cases like the one summarized above in case 2, which
referred to the pachaca of Chimchim, and also to map cases such as the following, which
referred to the pachaca of Sorochuco:
Document summary (case 326). The Indian Agustin Chuqui Guaman is interpreted on 16
May 1695, at the site of Suruchuco [current Sorochuco, Celendn] by don Pedro Chauarre.
The document specifies that the interpretation was made by Chauarre in the lengua general
del ynga as an expert [perito] on it, but the birthplace of Chuqui Guaman is not mentioned.
Only a statement that he pertains to the pachaca of Sorochuco is given.

Case 3: mention of the birthplace without mention of the language

In the third case, a mention of the birthplace is given, but there is no mention of the
language from which the interpretation was made. Since the overwhelming majority of
interpretations were from the lengua general, perhaps we could infer that most of
these unidentified interpretations were also made in Quechua, but there is nothing in
the texts themselves that states this with certainty. Therefore, we represent these cases
as Language unspecified.
However, there is one exception: in some cases, the interpreter is identified, and based
on our corpus we know that he only worked as translator of a single language. Therefore,
in all of the cases where such an interpreter is identified, we may assume the same
language was being interpreted. This is the case for Joan Baptista or Juan Bautista de
Valds, who only interpreted the lengua general.
Document summary (case 122). The indian Antn Llacxaguanca, of more than 50 years of
age, originally from the Cajamarca village and from the Guayacondo ayllo was interpreted
on 12 June 1616 by Juan Bautista de Valds in a proceeding held in Cajamarca city. The
language of interpretation was not mentioned, but taking into account the other interpret-
ation acts by Valds in our corpus, it is inferred that he only interpreted the general
language. Hence, we conclude that Llacxaguanca was interpreted in the general language.
454 L. ANDRADE CIUDAD AND M. G. BELL

Along the same lines, if a series of interpretations of Quechua is observed, and one single
interpretation from the series, near in date to the others, does not specify the language, we
also have a strong basis from which to suppose that the language used was Quechua. We
represent these cases as lengua general del inga (supposedly).

Case 4: ambiguous mention of the language

In many acts of interpretation it is stressed that the translation was made in the general
and mother language (en la lengua general y materna). At first, we assumed the coordi-
nation of both adjectives; that is to say, that the general language (i.e. Quechua) was being
described as the mother language of the Indians. However, another reading emerged when
we reviewed the following visita from 1687 of several localities of the region where Culle
was the native language (Adelaar 1990; Adelaar with Muysken 2004, 4023; Torero 1989;
Andrade 2016), in order to collect information on damages against the mitayos and yana-
conas from the estates of that region:
Excerpts from a proclamations document. En el pueblo de San Nicolas de Caxabamba []
para la averiguazion los dichos mitayos y dems indios de su seruicio para que se exsaminen
con los dems testigos que supiesen del caso en la lengua del Ynga y materna por el ynterprete
que para ello se nombrare []. En el pueblo de la Limpia Concepcin de Otusco [] para la
aueriguazion de ello asimismo traeran a los dichos mitaios y demas yndios de su seruiio para
que sean examinados con los dems testigos que supieren del casso en la lengua del Ynga y la
Materna por el ynterprete que para ello se nombrare al thenor de este autto []. En el pueblo
de Santiago de Chuco [] por voz de Pedro Villegas yndio pregonero hisieron publicar el
dicho auto en concursso de muchas personas en altas y enteligibles boses assi en la lengua
espaola como en la del ynga y materna; de forma que pudo llegar a noticia de todos y
para que conste; se puso por diligenia y lo firmaron.

This passage states that in Otuzco, the mitayos were meant to be examined en la lengua
del Ynga y la materna (in the language of the Inca and the native one). This is significant
because the article la before materna discards an interpretation where the adjective
materna is subordinate to the noun phrase lengua del Inga, as could be erroneously
understood in the references to Cajabamba and Santiago de Chuco. This piece of infor-
mation goes hand in hand with another document dated 1612 from the Conchucos
area, where an ecclesiastical inspector (visitador) explained the purpose of the visita in
the town of Cabana to the Indians in the general language and in their mother language
(en su lengua general y en su lengua materna), and afterwards, in the town of Huandoval,
the same explanation was given in the general and mother language (en la lengua general
y materna).10 This area of the northern zone of the modern Ancash department was also
part of the Culle-speaking region (Adelaar 1990; Adelaar with Muysken 2004, 4023;
Torero 1989; Andrade 2016). These data help us to disambiguate the references to
lengua general y materna in our corpus. We have read, therefore, this expression as a
coordinated phrase describing two languages, one of them implicit, which we understand
as a language other than Quechua, native to Cajamarca, as stated by previous researchers
(Torero 1989; Adelaar 2012). Therefore, we represent lengua general y lengua materna as
a different category.11
Our corpus contains no explicit mentions of a language native to Cajamarca, besides
the references to the coastal yunga for Niepos. Nevertheless, one interpretation act
from the town of Trinidad (modern Contumaz) includes an allusion to this hypothetical
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 455

language. In this case, a 23-year-old woman was not able to speak Spanish or Quechua,
and thus required special interpretation that was sought among the local population.
Given that Contumaz was the nucleus of the Den language (Torero 1989), we suggest
that this case refers to an interpretation from this native language of Cajamarca.12
En el pueblo de la Santsima Trinidad en diez y siete das del mes de agosto de mil y seisien-
tos y setenta y nueve aos yo el dicho Juez Comisario el dicho Juan Sanches de Abendao
presento por testigo a Maria Lachos india dijo no saber la lengua [testado: gua] espaola
ni la general de quien reeui juramento por dios nuestro seor y una seal de cruz en
deuida forma de derecho auiendolo hecho bien y cumplidamente y o cargo de el prometio
de decir berdad en lo que supiere y le fuere preguntado.

However, we caution that while it is likely that this woman was a resident of Trinidad, her
origin was not explicitly stated in the document, and thus we were not able to pinpoint a
location for this case, which is the only exclusive allusion to a language native to Caja-
marca. Rather, we register it in the group Location unspecified. Apart from this clarifica-
tion, several additional cautionary remarks are also necessary, and are described below.

Cautionary remark 1: language of the interpretation vs. mother language

Our first remarka very basic but central oneis that the indigenous language in which
the interpretation is carried out is not necessarily the mother language of the region
involved. In an ecclesiastical trial (captulo) against a priest of the mining site of Atun Con-
chucos,13 in the current territory of northern Ancash, which, as we said, is part of the zone
consensually attributed to Culle, all of the statements made by Indian witnesses, both
locals and outsiders (forasteros), were interpreted in Quechua, although it is most
likely that Culle was the mother tongue of the local indigenous population. In this
vein, our data do not discard the possibility that there was a native language of Cajamarca
distinct from Quechua. Quechua may have been used for judiciary purposes (Puente Luna
2014, 9) just as it was for ecclesiastical ones (Durston 2007, 2008), in a sort of diglossia
within indigenous languages. Based on our dataset, we can only state that the indigenous
language most used in the judiciary setting was the general one. In our material we have
few references to non-Quechua languages. There is one indirect allusion to a hypothetical
language of Cajamarca distinct from Quechua and yunga, which comes from the locality
of Trinidad in Contumaz (see above), a few mentions of yunga from Niepos, and lastly
several interpretations carried out in both the general language and the mother tongue
(see case 4 before).

Cautionary remark 2: hyper-general mention of the birthplace

As seen in the map, most of the individuals interpreted reported that they were originally
from the city or village of Cajamarca. However, we should take this information with
caution. For example, an individual named Antn Lulo (case 149) was interpreted on
two separate occasions. In the first one he self-reported being natural del pueblo de
Nepos del ayllo de Chonta (originally from the town of Niepos, from the ayllu of
Chonta). In the second proceeding, which was a group interpretation, Lulo was translated
along with other Indians. Perhaps for practical reasons or the convenience of the judicial
456 L. ANDRADE CIUDAD AND M. G. BELL

secretary, the city of Cajamarca was mentioned as his birthplace. Due to the dates of the
interpretations and additional data about the age of the declarant, we infer that this is the
same individual. There is the possibility, then, that other records stating that declarants
were originally from the city of Cajamarca could be obscuring, or over-generalizing, a
range of distinct birthplaces.

Cautionary remark 3: birthplace versus locality of work or residence

For this study, and especially for cartographic representation, we determined that the
birthplace of the declarant was the most important geographical information. However,
this decision might hide the fact that some individuals had migrated from other zones
of Cajamarcaor from outside of the Corregimientoand had only learned the
general language upon arrival in their new home. This was probably the case for the
Indian Lorenzo de Alvarado (case 76), a worker on the hacienda of Yuracmarca located
on the outskirts of Dulce Nombre de Jess (today Jess), but originally from Trujillo.
As is apparent from his statement, he had been living in Jess for several years, and
had children there. It is probable that he learned Quechua in his workplace, since Trujillo
was most likely a completely Spanish-speaking zone in 1675, and, in any case, the native
language spoken in this coastal city in the early colonial period was Quingnam, distinct
from Quechua and Mochica (Quilter et al. 2010; Salas Garca 2010). However, on our
map, due to the methodological decision of representing birthplace, we were forced to
locate this case in Trujillo.

Cautionary remark 4: the size of the sample

At the beginning of our exercise, we believed that working with a documentary corpus
from different periods of the 17th century would allow us to observe changes in the pres-
ence of Quechua over time. However, 348 cases proved insufficient for creating informa-
tive maps of sub-periods within the whole century analyzed. Therefore, we present only a
general cartographic representation of the century. Given our results, we suggest that an
expanded dataset, which takes into account the entire 17th-century collection of Protector
de Naturales held in the ARC, would likely widen the nuclear zones already identified by
our map, without making significant changes or adding unexpected new zones.

Cartographic visualization of the data

A cartographic visualization of this dataset was achieved using the dot density map
method for representing conceptual point data (Figure 2). This method, described in
detail in Slocum, McMaster, Kessler and Howard (2008, 3023, 31825, 337), is helpful
for representing numerical data associated with point locations, especially when the
phenomenon being represented is not uniform across the enumeration unit. Put much
more simply, the dot density method allows for the representation of spatially specific
raw data, in this case population, by using one dot to represent one person, and locating
that dot as precisely as possible.14 Our map is a multivariate dot map: it uses different
colored dots to indicate speakers of different languages or potentially different languages15
(Table 3). This method is a relatively conservative one: it presents raw data counts and
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 457

Figure 2. Cartographic visualization of the interpretation acts derived from analysis of the collections of
the ARC, using the dot density map. One dot is used to represent the birthplace of each individual.

allows readers to form their own interpretations of population density and distribution. In
the case developed here, it is the most accurate method for representing the locations
where speakers of particular languages could be found during the period of study, and
demonstrates how multiple languages were spoken in the same locations.16 It is akin to
the network approach advocated by Smith (2005) for representing ancient states, in
that it precisely represents point-specific historical data without generalizing relationships
across space and time into inaccurate territorial representations.
Several aspects of cartographic design presented challenges for representing the data
collected in this study and warrant brief discussion. Among these, the most straightfor-
ward are that of dot size and color. Here, dot size was originally defined using the
methods described in Slocum et al. (2008, 321), and later refined based on our own dis-
cretion to best represent the distribution and clustering of language speakers. Dot color
was selected to represent distinct classes of data (e.g. Quechua v. Yunga), using color
families to indicate language relationships (e.g. hues and tones of green to represent
Quechua speakers and two classes of probable Quechua speakers).
Dot placement was slightly more complicated. First, it was necessary to identify the
modern location of all of the places mentioned in the dataset. In many cases this was
straightforward, for instance Villa de Caxamarca is the current city of Cajamarca, but
in other cases this required additional investigation, for example the historic locality of
Cigues, which we have identified as the modern town called Siguis, an annex of Querocoto,
458 L. ANDRADE CIUDAD AND M. G. BELL

Table 3. Number of cases from each location for each language (data used in map elaboration).
Location Language Number of cases
Asuncin Lengua general del inga 3
Lengua general del inga (probable) 4
Language unspecified 3
Bambamarca Lengua general del inga (probable) 3
Lengua general del inga y la materna 4
Language unspecified 1
Cabana Language unspecified 1
Cajabamba Language unspecified 2
Cajamarca Lengua general del inga 34
Lengua general del inga (probable) 24
Lengua general del inga y la materna 13
Language unspecified 45
Celendn Lengua general del inga 6
Language unspecified 1
Chachapoyas Lengua general del inga 3
Chetilla Lengua general del inga 1
Chinchin Lengua general del inga 1
Language unspecified 1
Chota Lengua general del inga 20
Lengua general del inga (probable) 6
Language unspecified 5
Contumaz Language unspecified 1
Culquimarca Language unspecified 1
Cutervo Lengua general del inga 2
Guzmango Lengua general del inga o yunga (mochica) 1
Huamachuco Lengua general del inga 1
Huambos Lengua general del inga 3
Lengua general del inga (probable) 1
Huangamarca Language unspecified 1
Jan de Bracamoros Lengua general del inga 1
Jess Lengua general del inga 13
Lengua general del inga (probable) 1
Language unspecified 8
Montn Lengua general del inga 2
Niepos Lengua general del inga 8
Lengua general del inga o yunga (mochica) 4
Yunga (mochica) 3
Otuzco Lengua general del inga 1
Lengua general del inga (probable) 1
Pion Lengua general del inga 4
Querocoto Lengua general del inga 5
Quidn Language unspecified 1
San Lorenzo de Llama Lengua general del inga 2
San Luis de Lucma Lengua general del inga 1
San Miguel de Pallaques Lengua general del inga 2
Lengua general del inga (probable) 3
Language unspecified 1
San Pablo Lengua general del inga y la materna 1
Santa Cruz Lengua general del inga 1
Santiago de Cachn Lengua general del inga 4
Scota Lengua general del inga 7
Sorochuco Lengua general del inga 2
Language unspecified 1
Tacabamba Lengua general del inga 4
Lengua general del inga (probable) 3
Language unspecified 1
Trinidad Lengua general del inga 1
Language unspecified 3
Trujillo Lengua general del inga 1
Location unspecified Lengua general del inga 21
Lengua general del inga (probable) 20

(Continued )
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 459

Table 3. Continued.
Location Language Number of cases
Lengua general del inga y la materna 4
Den (Probable, not Quechua nor Spanish) 1
Language unspecified 20

in Chota province (mapped as Querocoto). Another difficult case was the historically
named Pueblo de Peon, which we have identified as the modern district of Pion, also
in Chota province. Then, each individual dot was placed as near as possible to the location
listed in the documentary evidence for each person in the dataset. Again, in some cases this
was simple, as in Cajabamba, where only two individuals were identified. In others this
was more complicated, for example Cajamarca, where over 100 individuals were found.
Thus, a large cluster of dots was formed around the city of Cajamarca, definitely surpass-
ing the boundaries of the city where the individuals in question actually were born. Lastly,
we decided to cluster dots representing speakers of the various languages next to one
another within each city or town. This was based not on geographic data collected from
the documents, but rather to facilitate comparison of quantities of language speakers, to
allow readers to more easily understand the relative number of members of each group.
Finally, in some cases the documentary evidence only identified the province of origin,
not a specific town. In these cases, points were placed nearest to the largest population
center in the province.

Discussion and conclusions

The cartographic visualization of the data about language interpretations included in a
representative sample of the series Protector de Naturales of the ARC supports the pro-
posal that Quechua or the general language was spoken across the Cajamarca corregi-
miento, in a broader zone than the current territory of the Cajamarca province, during
the 17th century. This included localities corresponding to the current provinces of
Chota (to the north of the Cajamarca province), Celendn (to the east), and San Miguel
(to the west). Although we interpret the results of our study with caution, our findings
are in agreement with other sources, since they show the presence of Quechua in San
Pablo, Contumaz, Santa Cruz, and Tabaconas, which are places mentioned as
Quechua-speaking in other documents like the Relacin de la Tierra de Jan (16th
century), as interpreted by Torero (1993), the letters written in Contumaz in 1661
(Argouse 2014) and Santa Cruz in 1675 (Adelaar and Trigoso 1998), and the witchcraft
document from the first half of the 18th century analyzed by Glass-Coffin and Castaeda
Murga (2005). These findings also coincide with the present situation, since the current
Quechua-speaking localities of Chetilla and Porcn are covered in our map.
Our work, however, does not solve the problem of explaining the function of the
general language in Cajamarca during the 17th century: whether it was a lingua
franca (Rivet 1949), as the recurrent explicit formulation of the documents suggests
(lengua general), or whether it was a vernacular language, as Torero (1993) proposed
for the region between San Ignacio and Chota provinces. Regardless, from a historical
point of view, our cartographic representation invites a rethinking of the idea that the
current Cajamarca Quechua localities are enclaves. The metaphor of enclaves implies
460 L. ANDRADE CIUDAD AND M. G. BELL

that in the past they were scattered Quechua-speaking points surrounded by Spanish-
speaking territory, or by non-Quechua local languages that may have lingered until the
nineteenth century, as previous scholarly works suggest (e.g. Adelaar 2012).
The scarcity in our sample of interpretations in native languages other than Quechua,
such as Yunga and the hypothetical Den language, favors the view of Quechua as the
default-indigenous language of the courtrooms. This finding supports the statement of
Puente Luna (2014, 9) that [t]he colonial lengua general was clearly the language of Chris-
tianity (Durston 2008, 55), but it might also be the language of the law. However, the rare
but explicit references to Yunga (Mochica) and the various allusions to a mother
language distinct from Quechua suggest a coexistence between the general language
and other languages in a sort of multiple diglossia (Fasold 1996; Parodi 2011, 92)
between Spanish, Quechua, and the local languages for some zones of the Cajamarca
region. The reference from 1679 to the young woman in Trinidad (Contumaz) who
did not know Quechua or Spanish is worth reiterating.
The relatively small number of cases in our dataset (348 interpreted individuals) made
the disaggregation of the cases into shorter periods (e.g. four 25-year periods within the
full century) uninformative from a cartographic perspective. In future approaches to
this problem, incorporating a higher percentage (preferably 100 percent) of the document
collection could result in more illuminating maps representing change over time during
such shorter periods. However, we believe our sample, even with its restrictions, does
succeed in representing the core zones of Quechua in 17th-century Cajamarca.
The methodology followed here could be useful for exploring other colonial contexts
that lack a clear representation of indigenous language distribution in historical periods.
We can suggest two specific cases from the Andes in which the same technique could
be fruitfully applied. First, Huancabamba, in the Piura highlands, is a locality where a
variety of Mochica was spoken (following colonial grammarian Fernando de la Carrera,
1939 [1644]), but where a vernacular language from the Jivaroan stock was the native
tongue (according to ethnohistorian Anne-Marie Hocquenghem, n.d.). A preliminary
examination of the Piura Regional Archive shows some interpretations in the general
language (i.e. Quechua), and demonstrates the potential for further study. Second, the
south and south-central region of the modern Lima department, especially the territory
corresponding to Yauyos, Huarochir, and Canta, is an area where future analysis could
map the colonial distribution of Quechua alongside Spanish as well as some varieties of
the Aymaran family, such as the surviving Jacaru (Hardman 2000; Cerrn-Palomino
2000). In the latter case, there is substantial potential source material, for example the
abundant documentation of this zone held in the Archbishopric Archive of Lima,
especially in the series Hechiceras e Idolatras (witchcraft and idolatry). In conclusion,
our work with 17th-century Cajamarca trial documents demonstrates a fruitful exchange
between the fields of Andean linguistics and cartographic visualization, an area of inter-
disciplinary research whose value we have indicated throughout this article.

Notes
1. Adelaar (2012) states that a Wari expansion to the north preceded the Quechua diffusion con-
ducted by the Inca state. For a discussion on previous, more regionally restricted expansions of
the Quechuan tree, see Cerrn-Palomino (1987, 33036) and Torero (2002, 86, 89, 9194).
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 461

2. Yanacancha is currently part of the Cajamarca province.

3. An anonymous reviewer pointed out the fact that the expression general language was used
in different moments of the colonial period to refer to other indigenous languages distinct
from Quechua. However, at least during the 17th and 18th centuries, in the northern
Andes, the expression only referred to Quechua, according to the previous documentary
material we have been able to access, so we can confidently make this equivalence for the pur-
poses of this study.
4. Thanks to Juan Castaeda Murga for providing access to the transcription of the trial
documents.
5. Taylor (2006) gives an etymology of yupaku for the Chachapoyas-Lamas Quechua, where
the verb has the same meaning to grieve, departing from the verb yupa to count: to
recite, while crying, the relation of the main qualities of the deceased. Quesada (1976b)
does not give this entry for Cajamarca Quechua.
6. There are other names of supernatural beings in the collection that do not allow a Quechua
etymology, but that point to another indigenous origin, such as la mano suga, a huge and
hairy hand (where sugo, suga means dark gray); Minshulay, a sort of witch; Cuda, a type
of female imp; Iname, the name of the rainbow, which is supposed to be harmful, especially
for women and children; and Ollcaihuas, a sort of giant animal that precedes a big flood (Bi-
blioteca Campesina 1988).
7. We depart from the most common definition of interpreting as oral translation, adopting a
more technical view of it as a real-time performance where a first and final rendition in
another language is produced on the basis of a one-time presentation of an utterance in a
source language (Kade 1968, cited by Pchhacker 2010). In contrast to translation, inter-
preting is ephemeral and based on memory. On the other hand, interpreting is usually set
in a live context, and interpreters (should) have access to a range of situational cues regarding
the communicative event and its participants (Pchhacker 2010). This definition should
make clear why we had no access to translated texts in Quechua or other indigenous
languages. In the communicative events pictured by our documents, the utterances in
Quechua or in non-Quechua indigenous languages were rendered orally, first and finally,
in Spanish, by the interpreter, and subsequently written and summarized also in Spanish
by the judicial secretary.
8. In spite of its obvious advantages for studying indigenous populations in colonial Cajamarca,
this series has only been used so far for a social history analysis of conflict and power between
the different population strata in the 18th century (Lavall 1999).
9. Expansion of textual abbreviations is indicated in italics.
10. Archive of the Archbishopric of Lima, Visitas, I, III, f. 5.
11. However, consider the case lengua materna general del ynga, which is found five times in
our corpus. These cases have been interpreted as references to Quechua.
12. More evidence for the existence of a native language of Cajamarca was found in the lexicon of
traditional weaving (Andrade and Ramn 2014).
13. Archive of the Archbishopric of Lima, Captulos, 14, 1. For further analysis of this trial see
Andrade (forthcoming).
14. In other cases where this method is used, one dot may be used to represent a certain number
of people, for instance, one dot equal to one thousand individuals. However here, since the
totals are relatively low, we have applied the direct equivalence of one dot equal to one
person.
15. A much more complex example of this same method, as applied to racial diversity, can be
found in 2010 Racial Dot Map 2013. Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, Rector
and Visitors of the University of Virginia (Dustin A. Cable, creator), available at: http://
www.coopercenter.org/demographics/racial-dot-map-access-and-use-policy.
16. One potential disadvantage of this cartographic method is that it is hard to extract actual
numeric data from the map, since counting individual dots is difficult and time-consuming.
Therefore, we have included data tables and counts to facilitate data interpretation by readers
(Table 3).
462 L. ANDRADE CIUDAD AND M. G. BELL

Notes on contributors
Luis Andrade Ciudad is lecturer in Linguistics at the Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Per. His
research interests include Andean linguistics, language contact, and social and ethnographic
approaches to language history. He recently published The Spanish of the Northern Peruvian
Andes: a sociohistorical and dialectological account (2016).
Martha G. Bell is lecturer in Geography at the Pontificia Universidad Catlica del Per. Her
research interests include the history of land and natural resource use and the history of agricultural
practices and hydraulic technologies in Peru. Her recent publications look at spatial histories of the
colonial Andes, including Spanish-Andean models of land use and Spanish traditions of water
management.

Acknowledgements
We thank Evelio Gaitn Pajares, Luz Elena Snchez Pellisier, Elsa Muoz Portal, and Bertha Angulo
Mori, from the Archivo Regional de Cajamarca, for their kind support and assistance during the
documentary revision. Nicanor Domnguez Faura generously facilitated review of documentary
material he had identified in the same archive. Juan Castaeda Murga did the same with an expe-
diente found in the AGI. Two anonymous reviewers helped improve the content and form of the
text. A previous version of this work was presented to the linguists at the Pontificia Universidad
Catlica del Per, in a Lunes Lingstico session. The colleagues gathered there provided fruitful
suggestions for improvement.

References
Adelaar, Willem F. H. 1990. En pos de la lengua culle. In Temas de lingstica amerindia, edited by
Rodolfo Cerrn-Palomino and Gustavo Sols Fonseca, 83105. Lima: Consejo Nacional de
Ciencia and Tecnologa-GTZ.
2012. Cajamarca Quechua and the expansion of the Huari state. In Archaeology and language
in the Andes. A cross-disciplinary exploration of prehistory, edited by Paul Heggarty and David
Beresford-Jones, 197217. New York: The British AcademyOxford University Press.
Adelaar, Willem F. H., and Jorge Trigoso. 1998. Un documento colonial quechua de Cajamarca. In
50 aos de estudios americanistas en la Universidad de Bonn. Nuevas contribuciones a la
arqueologa, etnohistoria, etnolingstica y etnografa de las Amricas, edited by Sabine
Dedenbach-Salazar Senz, Carmen Arellano Hoffmann, Eva Knig, and Heiko Prmers, 641
51. Markt Schwaben: A. Saurwein.
Adelaar, Willem F. H., with the collaboration of Pieter Muysken. 2004. The languages of the Andes.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Andrade Ciudad, Luis. 2010. Contactos y fronteras de idiomas en la Cajamarca prehispnica. In
Lenguas y sociedades del antiguo Per: hacia un enfoque interdisciplinario. Boletn de
Arqueologa de la PUCP 14, edited by Peter Kaulicke, Rodolfo Cerrn-Palomino, Paul
Heggarty and David Beresford-Jones, 16580. http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/
boletindearqueologia/article/view/1213/1187.
. 2016. The Spanish of the northern Peruvian Andes: A sociohistorical and dialectological
account. New York: Peter Lang.
. Forthcoming. Lenguas, doctrina y escuela en un asiento minero norandino del siglo XVII. In
Proceedings of the 8th Congress on Missionary Linguistics. Lima: PUCP.
Andrade Ciudad, Luis, and Gabriel Ramn Joffr. 2014. Toolkits and cultural lexicon: An ethno-
graphic comparison of pottery and weaving in the northern Peruvian Andes. Indiana 31:
291320. http://www.iai.spk-berlin.de/en/publications/indiana/previous-issues/indiana-31.html.
Argouse, Aude. 2014. Y yo, con qu voy a vivir? Carta de doa Fabiana Lachos, 1661. Historia y
Justicia 3: 33650.
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 463

Biblioteca Campesina. 1988. Los seres del ms ac. Muestras sobrenaturales en la tradicin oral caja-
marquina. Cajamarca: Proyecto Enciclopedia Campesina-Aspaderuc.
Bonnett V., Diana. 1992. Los protectores de naturales en la Audiencia de Quito. Siglos XVII y XVIII.
Quito: Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales-Abya Yala.
Carrera, Fernando de la. 1939. Arte de la lengua yunga [1644]. Edited by Radams A. Altieri.
Tucumn: Instituto de Antropologa, Universidad Nacional de Tucumn.
Cerrn-Palomino, Rodolfo. 1987. Lingstica quechua. Cuzco: Centro de Estudios Rurales
Bartolom de Las Casas.
. 2000. Lingstica aimara. Cuzco: Centro de Estudios Regionales Andinos Bartolom de Las
Casas.
Durston, Alan. 2007. Pastoral Quechua. The history of Christian translation in colonial Peru, 1550
1650. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame.
. 2008. Native-language literacy in colonial Peru: The question of mundane Quechua writing
revisited. Hispanic American Historical Review 88 (1): 4170.
Elspuru Berninzon, Eulogio. 1939. La provincia de Cajamarca. In Ensayos geogrficos, edited by
Javier Pulgar Vidal, 2:14661. Lima: Universidad Catlica del Per.
Espinoza Soriano, Waldemar. 1974. Los seoros tnicos del valle de Condebamba y provincia de
Cajabamba. Historia de las huarancas de Llucho y Mitmas, siglos XVXX. Anales Cientficos de la
Universidad del Centro del Per 3: 8371.
Fasold, Ralph. 1996. La sociolingstica de la sociedad: introduccin a la sociolingstica. Madrid:
Visor.
Fossa, Lydia. 2006. Narrativas problemticas: los inkas bajo la pluma espaola. Lima: Fondo
Editorial de la PUCP, Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
Glass-Coffin, Bonnie, and Juan Castaeda Murga. 2005. La Inquisicin y el extrao proceso contra
Juan Santos Reyes (17281750): descifrando el porqu de los hechos. In Pasiones y desencuentros
en la cultura andina, edited by Hiroyasu Tomoeda and Luis Millones, 7197. Lima: Fondo
Editorial del Congreso del Per.
Hardman, Martha J. 2000. Jaqaru. Munich: Lincom Europa.
Hocquenghem, Anne-Marie. n.d. Los guayacundos de Caxas y la sierra piurana, siglos XV y XVI.
Piura-Lima: Centro de Investigacin y Promocin del Campesinado-Instituto Francs de
Estudios Andinos.
Jimnez de la Espada, Marcos, ed. 1965. Relacin de la tierra de Jan. In Relaciones geogrficas de
Indias-Per. Vol. 3. Biblioteca de Autores Espaoles. Madrid: Atlas.
Julien, Daniel G. 1993. Late pre-Inkaic ethnic groups in Highland Peru: An archaeological-ethno-
historical model of the political geography of the Cajamarca region. Latin American Antiquity 4
(3): 24673.
Lavall, Bernard. 1999. Amor y opresin en los Andes coloniales. Lima: Instituto Francs de Estudios
Andinos-Universidad Ricardo Palma-Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
Middendorf, Ernest W. 1973. Per. Observaciones y estudios del pas y sus habitantes durante una
permanencia de 25 aos. Vol. 3. [1895]. Lima: Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos.
Ortiz Chamn, Blanca, Cruz Landa Quito, Vicente Ortiz Alaya, and David Coombs. 1979.
Cuentokuna llaqtancheqmanta. Cuentos folklricos en el quechua de Cajamarca. Yarinacocha,
Peru: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
Parodi, Claudia. 2011. Multiglosia virreinal novohispana: el nhuatl. Cuadernos de la ALFAL 2: 89
101.
Pchhacker, Franz. 2010. Interpreting. In Handbook of Translation Studies, 1:15357. John
Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/hts.1.int1.
Puente Luna, Jos Carlos de la. 2014. The many tongues of the king: Indigenous language
interpreters and the making of the Spanish Empire. Colonial Latin American Review 23 (2):
14370.
Quesada, Flix. 1976a. Gramtica quechua: Cajamarca-Caaris. Lima: Ministerio de Educacin-
Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
. 1976b. Diccionario quechua: Cajamarca-Caaris. Lima: Ministerio de Educacin-Instituto
de Estudios Peruanos.
464 L. ANDRADE CIUDAD AND M. G. BELL

Quilter, Jeffrey, Marc Zender, Karen Spalding, Rgulo Franco Jordn, Csar Glvez Mora, and Juan
Castaeda Murga. 2010. Traces of a lost language and number system discovered on the north
coast of Peru. American Anthropologist 112 (3): 35769.
Ramos, Gabriela. 2011. Language and society in early colonial Peru. In History and language in the
Andes, edited by Paul Heggarty and Adrian J. Pearce, 1938. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Remy, Pilar. 1992. La visita a Cajamarca de 1571-72/1578. In Las visitas a Cajamarca, 1571-72/1578:
documentos, edited by Mara Rostworowski de Diez Canseco and Pilar Remy, 1:37108. Lima:
Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
Rivet, Paul. 1949. Les langues de lancien diocse de Trujillo. Journal de la Societ des Americanistes
38: 152.
Rostworowski de Diez Canseco, Mara. 1992. Etnias forasteras en la visita toledana a Cajamarca. In
Las visitas a Cajamarca, 157172/1578: documentos, edited by Mara Rostworowski de Diez
Canseco and Pilar Remy, 1:936. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
Salas Garca, Jos Antonio. 2010. La lengua pescadora. Boletn de la Academia Peruana de la Lengua
50: 83128.
Silva Santisteban, Fernando. 1986. La lengua culle de Cajamarca y Huamachuco. In Historia de
Cajamarca II. Etnohistoria y lingstica, edited by Fernando Silva-Santisteban, Waldemar
Espinoza Soriano and Rogger Ravines, 36569. Cajamarca: Instituto Nacional de Cultura.
Slocum, Terry A., Robert B. McMaster, Fritz C. Kessler, and Hugh H. Howard. 2008. Thematic car-
tography and geovisualization. 3rd edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Smith, Monica L. 2005. Networks, territories, and the cartography of ancient states. Annals of the
Association of American Geographers 95 (4): 83249. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8306.2005.00489.x
Soukup, Jaroslav. 1970. Vocabulario de los nombres vulgares de la flora peruana. Lima: Colegio
Salesiano.
Taylor, Grald. 2006. Diccionario quechua Chachapoyas-Lamas. Lima: Instituto Francs de
Estudios Andinos-Instituto de Estudios Peruanos-Comentarios.
Torero, Alfredo. 1989. reas toponmicas e idiomas en la sierra norte peruana. Un trabajo de
recuperacin lingstica. Revista Andina 7 (1): 21757.
. 1993. Lenguas del nororiente peruano: la hoya de Jan en el siglo XVI. Revista Andina 11 (2):
44772.
. 2002. Idiomas de los Andes. Lingstica e historia. Lima: Instituto Francs de Estudios
Andinos-Horizonte.