;^;^o Philip Ainsworth Means, 



The artifacts of the period under consideration are chiefly in 

 the form of pottery, albeit textiles are also present to a consid- 

 erable extent. In general, designs on Nasca textiles may be said 

 to take the form of rather simple, but by no means crude, geo- 

 metric patterns, perhaps with a slight and conventionalized zoo- 

 morphic element, such as those in Uhle, 1913b, Figures 3, 7, and 

 9. On both pottery and textiles of this region and period the 

 colors were much less numerous and splendid than they were in 

 either the Proto-Nasca period or the Tiahuanaco II period. If, 

 then, Nasca art can be said to preserve an echo of the color tra- 

 ditions of its predecessors, and also of their geometric tendencies, 

 (for some of its chief motifs are derived directly from some of 

 their minor ornamental details), so, in no less degree, can the 

 black modelled ware of the Chimu period be said to preserve the 

 realistic tendencies, as well as some of the decorative motifs, of 

 Proto-Chimu art. 



6. THE COLLA-CHULPA CULTURE. 



The name chosen to distinguish this period is made up of the 

 two names applied by various writers to the people who lived 

 in it.^^ 



As the general culture-level was so low, it is but natural that 

 the pottery of this period should be poor. The best collection of 

 it is that made by Bandelier which is now to be seen in the Ameri- 



"Joyce, 1912, p. 75, Markham, 1912, p. 186, Beuchat, 1912, p. 576, and 

 others use the term Collas. Bandelier, 1910, pp. 184 ff., calls them Chullpa. 

 (The double 11 is without justification.) The term Aymard, often applied 

 ta these people by writers, and even by such first-rank authorities as 

 Bandelier (1910, pp. 63 et passim), Hrdlicka (1911, p. i) and others, is 

 entirely misleading. The people who lived in the Titicaca basin between 

 the time of Tiahuanaco II and the Inca conquests were the Collas. It 

 was they who produced the culture here to be discussed and who built 

 the chulpas or burial-towers. The name Aymara was first given to these 

 people by the Jesuits of Juliaca some time before 1590, and it was estab- 

 lished in usage by Bertonio (1603) and Torres Rubio (1616). All this 

 has been emphasized by Markham (1912, p. 192) and Joyce (1912, p. 75) 

 but it cannot be dwelt upon too often. The mistake of the Jesuits is 

 accounted for by the fact that the Aymaras, whose original home was 

 between Cuzco and the continental divide, were conquered by the Inca 

 Pachacutec and were moved, by him, to Lake Titicaca as mitimaes. 

 ( Sarmiento, 1907, p. 108; Garcilasso, II, p. 50.) 



