A Matter of Perspective

Usage of Indigenous Sources Inside the UNESCO Nomination for Qhapaq Ñan Daniel Kauder

“Qhapaq Ñan – Main Andean Road”, was inscribed into the UNESCO world heritage in Doha on the 15 June 2014. The South American countries of Argentina, Bolivia, Columbia, Chile, Ecuador, and Peru worked over 13 years on the nomination.1 The inscription was one of the first transnational heritage sights built by humans.2 Scientists believe that the widely ramified road system spans between 23.000 to 50.000 km in its entirety.3 273 road sections were inscribed with a total of 6000 km.4 It is therefore no wonder, that the official nomination paper contains over 2765 pages.

Our interest lies with the historical section of the nomination paper containing “only” 289 pages. It is expected that the historical part of any UNESCO world heritage nomination paper will feature contemporary witnesses (if there were any), and perspectives of historical scientists. Both might provide a detailed picture and narrative why the Qhapaq Ñan should be inscribed as a UNESCO world heritage site. In our current age of decolonization, it is important to understand through which eyes do we look in the past? Which author tells us of the wonders of the Qhapaq Ñan? Whose perspective is shown and most importantly,

1 Korstanje & Azcárate 2007, 118. 2 Pointecker 2015. 3 Pointecker 2015, 13; see Korstanje & Azcárate 2007, 118; see UNESCO 2017. 4 UNESCO 2014, 685. whose achievement should be inscribed? The European bounty of the Conquistadores, or the built achievement of the Inca and their ancestors that live mostly in rural areas of the South American countries?

Qhapaq Ñan was a large and significant construction of the Inca empire. One can assume, that the history section will feature at some point the indigenous chronicler Felipe Guaman Poma de Ayala’s work El primer nueva corónica y buen gobierno. 5 On over 1400 pages, Poma tells the rise and fall of the Inca empire, in an Augustine of Hippo fashion – he even starts with Adam and Eve, and includes a mythical Andean episode. But he mainly creates a narrative that criticizes the misuse and mistreatment of the Spanish rule.6 The truly exceptional part of Poma’s work, lies within the over 400 handmade drawings and calligraphies included in the work. The Poma scholar Rolena Adorno claims that: “Guaman Poma’s Nueva corónica is one of the most spectacular autograph manuscripts surviving from the Spanish colonial era […]”. 7

A quick scan of the nomination paper shows various usages of Poma’s drawings, this leaves us with the possibility that the Qhapaq Ñan could have been one of the first indigenous South American heritage sites inscribed through an indigenous perspective.

5 Adorno 2011, 84. 6 Ibid. 7 Adorno 2011, 86.

In the following I’m going to critically analyze the usage of Poma’s chronicle inside the nomination paper. The largest referencing of Poma can be found between the pages 686 – 825 in the section named “History and Development”, and due to the relatively short nature of this paper, I will only work with highlighted extracts from this section.8

State of Research

Sadly, we must acknowledge the fact that the state of historical research on the Qhapaq Ñan is at best precarious; the most important and most recent book can be found in the scientific field of ecotourism studies. Marco Pointeckers “Inkastraßen im Wandel der Zeit” is a thorough analysis on the history the Qhapaq Ñan and indigenous communities that live near it. It entails interdisciplinary research from the fields of politics, history, source studies, economics, and geography.9 It is noteworthy however to add, that Pointeckers research aims at gathering knowledge and insight on how to establish an ecological and sustainable tourism in the Andes. Since he works largely with original historical sources and offers a polysemic perspective on the multitudes and multimodality of the Inca Road system it is still the best work available for historical research to date. Other available international and independent historical research is still evidently missing.

Although the nomination paper itself is considered a larger research work on the Qhapaq Ñan, one must keep in mind, that the work might be influenced by the assignment and intention of its authors – the governments involved in the nomination. Research was mostly conducted by the ministries of the participating countries.10 Hence, a political influence should not be ruled out completely.

The main problem of historical research on the Qhapaq Ñan is the scarcity of preColumbian written sources. The Incas did not use documents like modern countries do. Communication was conducted largely orally

8 UNESCO 2014, 685. 9 Pointecker 2015. 10 UNESCO 2014, 2730 and via the Khipu a knotting system coded with decimal numbers. Most researchers think it was used to distribute wares throughout the Inca empire.11 Although indigenous people constantly argue, that the Khipu could also have been used to convey stories and histories.12 It took archaeological research until 2017, when Sabine Hyland published her first research on Khipus with newly discovered differently colored knots.13 According to her, there seems to be enough resolution and depth to encode an historical narration inside the Khipus.14 However, one must be cautious with this find, as this new form of Khipu is still not completely decoded.15 This problem is one of main reasons why researchers still have to rely on indigenous and colonial authors.

Of all indigenous authors, Guaman Pomas Nueva corónica remains one of the most well researched works. Although written in the year 1615 in Peru, it was printed in the 20th century for the first time. It was discovered by chance in 1908, in the Royal Danish Archive in Copenhagen, by the German librarian Robert Pietschmann.16 Research done by the archive found out that the Danish king purchased it in 1660.17 We still don’t know what had happened to the manuscript in the 45 years prior to the purchase by the king. Translations and interpretations were published in English by Christopher Dilke (1978) and Rolena Adorno (1986, 2000, 2008, 2011)18, but the majority of publications are written in Spanish.

Source Interpretation

The famous drawings of Poma can be found throughout the nomination paper, a majority of these are found in the “History and Development” chapter.19 30 drawings of Poma

11 Pointecker 2015, 115. 12 Ibid. 13 Hyland 2017; Guaman Poma de Ayala 1978, 19. 14 Hyland 2017. 15 Ibid. 16 Dilke 1978, 12. 17 Ibid. 18 Dilke 1978; Adorno 2000; Adorno 2008; Adorno 2011. 19 UNESCO 2014, 685828.

were used in the retelling of the rise and fall of the Inca Empire and the history of the construction of the Qhapaq Ñan. Most of them are small in size, and on the side of the text or interwoven with the text.20 Others were placed besides larger photographs of the physical remains of the Qhapaq Ñan.21 Some pages rarely show larger pictures of Pomas drawings without text, or any kind accompaniment.22 All 30 drawings are used in the grand story of the Inca Empire, there is no usage of drawings in the chapter which deals with the constructional history of the Qhapaq Ñan.

All drawings have one detail in common: there is no text that corresponds to the drawings, no explanations are given, no caption lines, and no references of the drawings can be found. To put it simply: there’s no linkage between historical perspective and actual history text.23 It seems as though the drawings of Poma were only used to illustrate the text. The overall impression of this passage is muddled and chaotic, since the text does not belong to Poma but was written from the authors of the nomination paper. It is important to add however that this chaotic impression is only visible for readers with knowledge of Pomas works. This is very important to keep in mind, as this highlights how problematic the situation already is. The construct is a historical narration with uncommented critical drawings of Poma. Poma is only named in the text as an historical person in a list of authors that delivered important works on the Inca and subsequently on the Qhapaq Ñan, and where single elements of the organization of the Inca Empire are elucidated and explained.24 Most of these indications are very short, often only one or two sentences long. More importantly, these short indications mostly explain the nature of the Inca administrative system.25 Critical passages from Poma’s chronicle are left out completely, especially his famous critic on

20 UNESCO 2014, 728; see UNESCO 2014, 722. 21 UNESCO 2014, 730. 22 UNESCO 2014, 687; see UNESCO 2014, 722. 23 UNESCO 2014, 687722. 24 UNESCO 2014, 917; see UNESCO 2014, 756. 25 UNESCO 2014, 787. the Christian missionization of South America and the behavior of Christian priests.26 In addition, the nomination paper misses a list of figures of Poma’s drawings.27

For a better comprehensibility of this issue, four extracted pages from the nomination are included in this paper. They work as tool, to grasp this unique usage of Pomas drawings better visually. Their intended meaning as a drawing is not explained, they only serve the purpose of a visual mode of how they are used inside the nomination paper. They can be found on the following two pages. However, it is noteworthy to add; all photos are in low resolution, even though they are extracted from the official nomination paper from the UNESCO server.28 There is no explanation given by the UNESCO, or the involved countries, why they use low resolution photography in an official UNESCO nomination.29

Interpretation of Usage

To interpret these findings, it is important to look at the framework in which they are presented. UNESCO nominations take place on the highest level of national governments. The responsible authors of the nomination paper work for the national ministries of the participating countries.30 A large portion of the political and cultural elite of the South American continent is represented by the nomination paper. It is therefore reasonable to assume, that the aspired standard towards the nomination paper was high. This document is ultimately the basis of the entire nomination, every important argument must be included and presented in an orderly fashion to appeal to the UNESCO jurors. Failures, mistakes, and any kind of scientific inaccuracy is not expected of UNESCO nomination papers.

To leave drawings of the most important Inca chronist, without any kind of comment, explanation or subtext can only be denoted

26 Mills et al. 2002, 174178; see Adorno 2011, 8687. 27 UNESCO 2014, 12765. 28 UNESCO 2014. 29 Ibid. 30 UNESCO 2014, 2330.

Figure from page 694, UNESCO 2014.

Figure from page 719, UNESCO 2014. as inaccurate. Measured by the importance of the document, it is hard to deal with the amateurish and unscientific usage of Guaman Poma’s drawings. The problem of this usage lies within Poma’s work itself. The Nueva corónica had a main assignment given by its author: to criticize the Spanish colonial rulership.31 Poma’s critique was addressed to missionaries, priests, administrators, and the indigenous population in Lima that chummed themselves up to the Spanish colonial lords. And although Poma wrote an entire universal history of the Inca empire and its demise, the manuscript had only one addressee: It was only meant to be read by the eyes of the Spanish king. He even included a passage in which he introduces himself as a personal advisor to the king, that enlightens the king on the wrongdoings in his colonies.32 Poma was famous in Peru for his hubris, and was later convicted and exiled from his country. He then wrote the entire Nueva corónica in exile.33 However, even though Poma seems to be a problematic person, he is still one of the most important critical voices of the colonial period of South America, since he historically revealed widespread unfavorable behavior towards local citizens. Poma’s work is therefore quite difficult and almost impossible to use uncritically and superficially, as his work is too deeply traversed by his contempt towards the Spanish colonial rulers.34

This leaves us with the question: why is this important side of the Nueva corónica not included in the UNESCO nomination paper of Qhapaq Ñan? Or simply put: why was the chronicler with the strongest colonial critique degraded to a thirdgrade correspondent and illustrator, that only visualizes the text of the authors? Thus far, the narrative of the nomination seems to create an uncritical and almost objective view of Poma’s intentions with his work. A lot of potential to criticize the colonial achievements was underutilized, including the creation of a nuanced image and narrative

31 Adorno 2011, 86. 32 Adorno 2011, 84 33 Adorno 2011, 83. 34 Adorno 2011, 86.

Figure from page 730, UNESCO 2014.

Figure from page 722, UNESCO 2014. of the South American history. More importantly, the situation of Inca settlements and indigenous people and perspectives are pushed to the backgrounds. Problems and atrocities of the colonial conquest are never mentioned, as if they had no effect on the Qhapaq Ñan and were merely a subordinate event with a negative history that does not belong inside a UNESCO nomination.

Due to the high funding, and years of work that are channeled into UNESCO nominations, it is assumed that most nomination papers must create a strong narrative that is aimed at positively influencing the judge’s decision. Therefore it is important to understand what kind of narrative is implemented in the History and Development section of the nomination. Under this assumption it is explicable why Poma’s drawings and writings can be found in an uncritical and uncommented manner. A radical position that Guaman Poma represents could cast doubt on the colonial achievement of the European invaders.35 His perspective on colonial atrocities by Spanish clerics and colonial rulers could reflect discredit on arguments and descriptions of colonial authors.

But one could counter that thought by arguing, that a scientifically nuanced Poma works better as a historical source, than an unfiltered one. His hate could have tarnished his perception too much. Rolena Adorno argues that his work is basically a reckoning on his experiences under colonial rule, and he uses scorn and satire to deliver his anger to posterity.36 “[…] there is no justice in Peru.” 37

The historian Olaf Kaltmeier recently showed that UNESCO World Heritage nomination papers for Peruvian World Heritage seem to generally leave out critical remarks on the Conquista or even forget to mention the Conquista at all.38

35 Adorno 2011, 84. 36 Adorno 2011, 86. 37 Ibid; Adorno reflects on Poma’s quote: “[…] there is no God and no King, they are in Rome and Castile.”, how the chronicler viewed the situation at the beginning of the 17th century in Peru. 38 Kaltmeier 2014, 7677.

An intentional deception is not detectable at this point, despite the massive amateurish usage of Poma’s works. However, the misuse is severe, the entire History and Development section must be labeled “unscientific” if we would apply scientific standards from historical studies. It is remarkable how much deficiencies and inconsistencies can be found, if we consider that this paper was conceived by six different cultural ministries from six different South American countries.

Usage of Colonial Sources

The section of the constructional history of the Qhapaq Ñan is exclusively reserved for European authors. They seem to fulfill the role of praising the beauty of the newly discovered and conquered world gushingly,39 and a lack of a correct timeline can be detected. First, we learn about Alexander von Humboldt’s view on the Qhapaq Ñan, secondly the conquistador Francisco Pizarro is given space to tell us from Inca Road and lastly his secretary shares insight on the wonders of the Inca empire, both died more than 200 years before Alexander von Humboldt was born in 1759.40 In contrast to Poma, it is Pizarro and his secretary who can share their views on the Qhapaq Ñan.41 An entire paragraph from Pizzaro’s memoires is quoted unfiltered, in which Pizarro praises the wonders of the IncaRoad system exuberantly.42

The fact that Pizarro was the biggest profiteer of the wellconstructed street system is not included. Without the Inca built achievement, the Conquista would have probably taken significantly longer and cost more resources. Pizarro immediately recognized the advantages of the Qhapaq Ñan. His excitement is historically understandable. His architectural enthusiasm can be therefore mainly attributed to the advantages for his brutal conquest, rather than his admiration of indigenous builder ingenuity by the Inca and the earlier

39 UNESCO 2014, 754765. 40 UNESCO 2014, 757; see UNESCO 2014, 765. 41 UNESCO 2014, 754. 42 Ibid. Waru, who constructed the foundations of the Qhapaq Ñan around 500 AD.

The problematic finds seem to continue, and the now clearly visible narrative cannot be overlooked or ignored anymore. The history section of the nomination paper does not offer one single critical element on the exploitation of indigenous people. Indigenous views or perspectives are only included until conquistador Francisco Pizarro sets foot on South American soil. From this moment on, readers will only see, hear, and feel through the eyes and perspectives of the conquerors. The Spanish perspective seizes overall control.43 The shift of power is literally readable. It is however again unscientific under modern standards of historical studies, to only include European sources from this point on. The narrative seems to favor the colonial achievement of the Spanish conquest. The indigenous infrastructural achievement of the Inca and the Waru is strangely praised by their Usurper Pizarro, who destroyed their entire culture. By the one whose main intent was the total enslavement of all indigenous people, the seizing of their natural resources, mainly gold, and to increase his personal power. Is this the only person who can tell us of the wonders of the Qhapaq Ñan? Does this imply that only a European can understand the significance of the Qhapaq Ñan and the need for inscription into the UNESCO world heritage?

History meets Reality

The usage of historical sources and the imagery that is constructed reproduces only the perspective of the colonial rulers, the explorers, and scientists. For better academic insight and understanding of the nomination, we need to look on the real outcomes of the project and its consequences for modern day South Americans, although we will mainly shed light on Peruvian reality of the nomination, due to the strictly limited size of this paper.

The nomination has a real aim, it was incepted for the inscription of the Qhapaq

43 UNESCO 2014, 754765.

Ñan, securing and preserving the physical remains of the cultural streets, and the development of underdeveloped hinterlands with the assistance of world heritage tourism.44

The Peruvian cultural ministry founded the so called “Qhapaq ÑanProject” to help with the development and cataloging of the Inca roads,45 and the project ran until 2010. It also had the side functionality to design ways in which the local indigenous could be integrated into the nomination, with the deeper aim to strengthen the cultural identification with the material heritage.46 However, Guadelope Martinez, the Spanish born leader of the project stated in an interview: Quabrala de Huamaco in Argentina was the first historical street in South America that was nominated for UNESCO world heritage. I’ve seen photos before and after the nomination and the consequences of land speculation. A similarity can be found around the former pilgrimage route from Jauja to Pachacamac. We are in urgent need of taking action, because rich land speculators in Lima, are buying land at an increasing speed […]47

Martinez statement shows how drastic the consequences of UNESCO nominations can be for rural communities. It is evident, that there are different interests involved in a UNESCO world heritage nomination. The international recognition through the UNESCO raises the Qhapaq Ñan to legitimate world heritage. With this award, countries can apply for additional funding for larger developments to secure the heritage sites and improve the lives of citizens surrounding these sites at the same time. It is noteworthy to highlight the financial aspect of the nomination, UNESCO world heritage

44 Pointecker 2015, 138; see Korstanje & Azcárate 2007, 116. 45 Pointecker 2015, 138139. 46 Ibid. 47 Pointecker 2015, 140; Pointecker interviewed Martinez in 2007, one year after she became the head of Qhapaq Ñan-Project, her quote is of integral evidence to this analysis, she clearly states that UNESCO nominations in South America are connected to massive land speculation from wealthy individual from the big cities. The quotation was translated from German to English by the author of this paper. inscriptions have significantly increased the income of countries through the boom of international tourism and the prospects of further development.48 Lucrative, but mostly hidden from the common sight, is also the land speculation, if we take Martinez statement into account and match it with the numbers of the entire nomination; 6000 km of road and over 273 archeological sites. Even a smaller amount of speculation would still result in gigantic gains in total. Since most of the street crosses the underdeveloped hinterlands of the Andean countries, it is reasonable to assume that land prices were quite low before the nomination officially began. The initiative of the entire nomination can be traced back to Lima’s political upper class.49 Conflict archaeologists Korstanje and Azcáran also presented in detail, that the first goal of the nomination was to make indigenous and rural communities the main profiteers of the nomination and possible inscription.50 Which was still not achieved until May 2017, when the original German version of this paper was written. Until 2007, only very few people profited from the nomination.51 Unfortunately, Korstanje and Azcáran do not name the government who decided to nominate the Qhapaq Ñan. Peru had two different governments in 2001.Former president Alejandro Toledo Manrique, who was in office from 28 July 2001 until 2006 is now an international wanted criminal.52 According to journalist Tjerk Brühwiler, Manrique accepted over 20 million dollars in bribery.53 His predecessor Valentin Paniagua Corazao was only an interim president who took over the administration after President Fujimori had to resign after a massive scandal about voter fraud in 2000.54 Corazao is not considered corrupt, yet lost the election to Manrique, a political involvement is rated as highly likely.55

48 Pointecker 2015, 207; see Luger 2008, 36. 49 Korstanje & Azcárate 2007, 122. 50 Ibid. 51 Ibid. 52 Brühwiler 2017. 53 Ibid. 54 Ibid. 55 Korstanje & Azcárate 2007, 118.

Conclusion

The history section of the UNESCO World Heritage Nomination paper for Qhapaq Ñan is not written with modern scientific standards. Contrary to expectations of finding detailed and nuanced encounters and discussions on Guaman Pomas Nueva corónica, and therefore gaining insight into indigenous perspectives into the past, authors mainly highlighted the “Point of view” of Europeans. Only Europeans are directly quoted, only Europeans are allowed to talk about the wonders of the Qhapaq Ñan. Why did they not include Poma’s descriptions of the Inca Road system? The coverage is onesided and European, subsequently the narrative is to no wonder, also European. It is not the built achievement of Indigenous people that is celebrated but the colonial conquest and hence the capture and securement of the Road system for Spain, and more specifically Europe. This eurocentrism is only exaggerated by the completely uncritical usage of Conquistador Pizzaro’s journals and the defusing of Guaman Poma’s critical drawings and writings.56

Furthermore, surprising parallels, between text and reality can be found in the realization of the nomination. Indigenous people were not substantially involved or included in the history section of the nomination paper and the Qhapaq Ñanproject of the Peruvaion Ministry of Culture.57 The chances to develop the hinterlands and rural areas of South America were not used. Instead, archaeologists found massive and widespread land speculation. Only very few and rich people from the big capital cities profited so far from the project.58

I truly believe that the provided evidence does not confirm any unfavorable intention behind the UNESCO nomination. Yet, there are a lot of conspicuous “coincidences” that cannot be overlooked or ignored. A larger project in the future could try to bring more insight into the upbringing of the project, the nomination, and their respective problems.

56 Adorno 2011, 85. 57 Korstanje & Azcárate 2007, 123; This assumption is based on my research during May 2017. 58 Korstanje & Azcárate 2007, 116. Literature and sources

Adorno, R. 2000. Guaman Poma: writing and resistance in colonial Peru, University of Texas Press, Austin. Adorno, R. 2008. The Polemics of Possession in Spanish American Narrative, Yale University Press. Adorno, R. 2011. Colonial Latin American Literature – A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Brühwiler, T. 2017. Anklage gegen Alejandro Toledo - Perus Ex-Präsident sitzt in den USA fest, https://www.nzz.ch/international/anklage-gegenalejandro-toledo-perus-ex-praesident-sitzt-in-denusa-fest-ld.145138 (accessed 25 May 2017). Guaman Poma de Ayala, F. 1978. Letter to a King – A Peruvian Chief’s Account of Live Under the Incas and Under Spanish Rule, translated by Christopher Dilke, E.P. Dutton, New York. Hyland, S. 2017. ‘Writing with Twisted Cords: The Instricptive Capacity of Andean Khipus’, Current Anthropology, Vol. 58, Nr. 3, www.journals. uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/691682 Kaltmeier, O. 2014. 'Die Retro-Kolonialisierung der Stadt: Kulturerbepolitiken und Vertreibung im historischen Stadtzentrum von Lima’, Urbane (T)Räume: Städte zwischen Kultur, Kommerz und Konflikt, Studien zu Lateinamerika, Vol. 28, eds. H-J Burchardt, O. Kaltmeier & R. Öhlschlägger, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, Baden-Baden, 72-89. Korstanje, M. A. & J. G. Azcárate 2007. The Qhapaq Ñan Project – A Critical View, Archaeologies, Vol. 3, 116-131. Luger, K. & K. Wöhler, eds. 2008. Welterbe und Tourismus – Schützen und Nützen aus einer Perspektive der Nachhaltigkeit, Studien-Verlag, Innsbruck. Mills, K., W. B. Taylor & S. Lauderdale Graham, 2002. Colonial Latin America; A Documentary History, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Lanham MD. Pointecker, M. 2015. Qhapaq Ñan – Inkastraßen im Wandel der Zeit, Lateinamerikanistik, Vol. 15, Lit Verlag, Wien. Ströter-Bender, J. ed. 2010. World Heritage Education – Positionen und Diskurse zur Vermittlung des UNESCO-Welterbes; KONTEXT Kunst - Vermittlung - Bildung, Vol. 4; Tectum Verlag; Marburg. UNESCO 2017. Qhapaq Ñan, Andean Road System http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1459 (accessed 25 May 2017). UNESCO 2014. Executive summary - World Heritage Nomination Qhapaq Ñan, Andean Road System; Nomination 1459. http://whc.unesco.org/ uploads/nominations/1459.pdf