CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 80Archaeological Research and ProtectionHistorical and Cultural Archaeology StudiesAmazonian Archaeology and Ethnohistory

Mapping the Political Landscape: Toward a GIS Analysis of Environmental and Social Difference

Kosiba, Steve, Bauer, Andrew M.·2013·Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory
DOI 10.1007/s10816-011-9126-z
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper employs geographic information systems (GIS) to analyze the relationship between environmental context and social inequality. Using recent archaeological data from the political center of the Inka Empire (Cuzco, Peru), it investigates how material and spatial boundaries embed social differences within the environment at both local and regional scales. In doing so, the paper moves beyond conventional archaeological GIS approaches that treat the environment as a unitary phenomenon. It develops a methodological and theoretical framework for the examination of a political landscape—the distinct spaces and materials that differentially shape people’s social experience and perception of their environment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10816-011-9126-z

Cites

155 of 155 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. Arkush, E. (2005). Colla fortified sites: warfare and regional power in the Late Prehispanic Titicaca Basin, Peru. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California Los Angeles.
  2. Betanzos, J. (1968 [1551]). Suma y narración de los inkas, Crónicas peruanas de interés indígena (pp. 1–55). Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Españoles.
  3. Casana, J. (2003). From Alalakh to Antioch: settlement, land use and environmental change in the Amuq Valley of Southern Turkey. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago
  4. Cuba Peña, L. A. (2003). Informe de Investigación Arqueológico Wat’a—Warokondo. Cuzco: Instituto Nacional de Cultura (INC).
  5. Cuba Peña, L. A. (2004). Informe de Investigación Arqueológico Wat’a—Warokondo. Cuzco: Instituto Nacional de Cultura (INC).
  6. Cummins, T. (1998). Let me see! Reading is for them: Colonial Andean images and objects “como es costumbre tener los caciques Señores. In E. Boone & T. Cummins (Eds.), Native traditions in the Postconquest World (pp. 91–148). Washington: Dumbarton Oaks.
  7. D’Altroy, T. N. (2001b). Politics, resources, and blood in the Inka Empire. In S. E. Alcock, T. N. D’Altroy, K. D. Morrison, & C. M. Sinopoli (Eds.), Empires (pp. 201–226). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  8. D’Altroy, T. N. (2002). The Inkas. Malden: Blackwell.
  9. Dwyer, E. B. (1971). The early Inka occupation of the valley of Cuzco, Peru. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley.
  10. Flores Ochoa, J. (1968). Los pastores de Paratía. México: Inst. Indigenista Interam.
  11. Garcilaso de la Vega, I. (1965 [1605]). Los Comentarios Reales de los Inkas. In C. Sáez de Santa María (Ed.), Obras Completas (Biblioteca de Autores Españoles, v. 132–135). Madrid: Ediciones Atlas.
  12. Gasparini, G., & Margolies, L. (1980). Inka architecture (P. J. Lyon, Trans.). Bloomington: University of Indiana Press.
  13. Harris, T. (2000). Moving GIS: Exploring movement within prehistoric cultural landscapes using GIS. In G. Lock (Ed.), Beyond the map: Archaeology and spatial technologies (pp. 116–123). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
  14. Johansen, P. G. (2011). Practicing social difference, producing social space: The political architectonics of Iron Age settlement places. In P. Johansen & A. Bauer (Eds.), The archaeology of politics: The materiality of political practice and action in the past (pp. 186–220). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  15. Kendall, A. E. (1976). Aspects of Inka architecture. Ph.D dissertation, University of London, London
  16. Kendall, A. E. (1985). Aspects of Inka architecture: Description, function, and chronology, parts 1 and 2. BAR International Series 242. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
  17. Kendall, A. E. (1996). An archaeological perspective for Late Intermediate Period Inka development. Journal of the Steward Anthropological Society, 24(1–2), 121–156.
  18. Kolata, A. L. (1996). Principles of authority in the native Andean state. In G. Urton (Ed.), Structure, knowledge, and representation in the Andes: Journal of the Steward Anthropological Society 24: 61–84.
  19. Kosiba, S. (2010). Becoming Inka: The Transformation of political place and practice during Inka State formation (Cuzco, Perú). Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Chicago, Chicago.
  20. Kosiba, S. (2011). The politics of locality: Pre-Inka social landscapes of the Cuzco Region. In P. Johansen & A. Bauer (Eds.), The archaeology of politics: The materiality of political practice and action in the past (pp. 114–150). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  21. Kvamme, K. L. (1992). Terrain form analysis of archaeological location through geogrpahic information systems. In G. Lock & J. Moffet (Eds.), Computer applications and quantitative methods in archaeology (pp. 127–136). Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, S577.
  22. Lindsay, I. (2011). Holding down the fort: Landscape production and the sociopolitical dynamics of Late Bronze Age fortress regimes in the Southern Caucuses. In P. Johansen & A. Bauer (Eds.), The archaeology of politics: The materiality of political practice and action in the past (pp. 151–185). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  23. Llobera, M. (2000). Understanding movement: A pilot model towards the sociology of movement. In G. Lock (Ed.), Beyond the map: Archaeology and spatial technologies (pp. 65–84). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
  24. Llobera, M. (2003). Extending GIS based analysis: the concept of visualscape. International Journal of Geographic Information Science, 1(17), 1–25.
  25. Lock, G. (Ed.). (2000). Beyond the map: Archaeology and spatial technologies. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
  26. Lock, G., & Harris, T. (2006). Enhancing predictive archaeological modeling: Integrating location, landscape and culture. In M. W. Mehrer & K. L. Wescott (Eds.), GIS archaeological site location modeling (pp. 41–62). Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis.
  27. Madry, S. L. H., & Crumley, C. L. (1990). An application of remote sensing and GIS in a regional archaeological settlement pattern analysis. In K. M. Allen, S. W. Green, & E. B. W. Zubrow (Eds.), Interpreting space: GIS and archaeology (pp. 364–380). London: Taylor & Francis.
  28. Madry, S. L. H., & Rakos, L. (1996). Line-of-sight and cost-surface techniques for regional research in the Arroux River Valley. In H. D. G. Maschner (Ed.), New methods, old problems: geographic information systems in modern archaeological research (pp. 104–126, occasional paper no. 123). Carbondale: Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University.
  29. Mehrer, M. W., & Wescott, K. L. (Eds.). (2006). GIS archaeological site location modeling. Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis.
  30. Mitchell, T. (1988). Colonising Egypt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  31. Morris, C., & Santillana, J. I. (2007). The Inka transformation of the Chincha capital. In R. L. Burger, C. Morris, & R. Matos Mendieta (Eds.), Variations in the expression of Inka Power (pp. 135–164). Washington: Dumbarton Oaks.
  32. Morris, C., & Thompson, D. (1985). Huánuco Pampa: An Inka City and its Hinterland. London: Thames and Hudson.
  33. Murra, J. V. (1973). Rite and crop in the Inka State. In D. Gross (Ed.), Peoples and cultures of native South America (pp. 377–394). New York: Natural History Press.
  34. Murtha, T. (2009). Land and labor, classic Maya terraced agriculture: An investigation of the settlement ecology and intensive agricultural landscape of Caracol, Belize. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.
  35. Niles, S. A. (1999). The shape of Inka history: Narrative and architecture in an Andean Empire. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.
  36. Niles, S. A., & Batson, R. N. (2007). Sculpting the Yucay Valley: Power and style in Late Inka architecture. In R. L. Burger, C. Morris, & R. Matos Mendieta (Eds.), Variations in the expression of Inka power (pp. 185–221). Washington: Dumbarton Oaks.
  37. Patterson, T. C. (1992). The Inka Empire: The formation and disintegration of a pre-capitalist state. Oxford: Berg Publishers.
  38. Polo de Ondegardo, J. d. (1916[1571]). Informaciones acerca de la religion y gobierno de los inkas (1a.parte), Coleccion de Libros y Documentos Referentes a la Historia del Peru, serie 1, tomo 3 (pp. 3–208). Lima: Imprenta y Libreria Sanmarti y Ca.
  39. Protzen, J.-P. (1991). Inka architecture and construction at Ollantaytambo. New York: Oxford University Press.
  40. Rizvi, U. Z. (2011). Subjectivities and spatiality in Indus urban forms: Mohenjo Daro, the body and the domestication of waste. In P. Johansen & A. Bauer (Eds.), The archaeology of politics: The materiality of political practice and action in the past (pp. 221–244). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  41. Ruggles, C., & Medyckyj-Scott, D. J. (1996). Site location, landscape visibility, and symbolic astronomy: a Scottish case study. In H. D. G. Maschner (Ed.), New methods, old problems: Geographic information systems in modern archaeological research (pp. 127–146, occasional paper no. 123). Carbondale: Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University.
  42. Saile, T. (1997). Landscape archaeology in Central Germany: Site catchment analysis using GIS. In I. Johnson & M. North (Eds.), Archeological applications of GIS: Proceeding of Colloquium II, UISPP XIIth Congress, Forli, Italy, September 1996. Sydney: Sydney University Archaeological Methods Series 5.
  43. Santillán, H. (1968 [1563]). Relacion del origen, descendencia, politica y gobierno de los Inkas. Biblioteca de Autores Espanoles, Book 209 (pp. 97–149). Madrid: Ediciones Atlas.
  44. Tschan, A. P., Raczkowski, W., & Latalowa, M. (2000). Perception and viewsheds: Are they mutually inclusive? In G. Lock (Ed.), Beyond the map: Archaeology and spatial technologies (pp. 28–48). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
  45. Urton, G. (1999). Inka myths. Austin: University of Texas Press.
  46. Wheatley, D. (1996). The use of GIS to understand regional variation in earlier Neolithic Wessex. In H. D. G. Maschner (Ed.), New Methods, old problems: Geographic information systems in modern archaeological research (pp. 75–103, occasional paper no. 123). Carbondale: Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University.
  47. Wheatley, D., & Gillings, M. (2000). Vision, perception and GIS: Developing enriched approaches to the study of archaeological visibility. In G. Lock (Ed.), Computing the past: Computer applications and quantification methods in archaeology (pp. 1–27). Amsterdam: IOS Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kosiba, S., & Bauer, A. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Alabama (US)
  • DePauw University (US)
Corresponding author
Kosiba, Steve
Venue
Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2012-01-12
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
61-101
ISSN
  • 1072-5369 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7764
DOI
10.1007/s10816-011-9126-z
OpenAlex
W2127200016
Semantic Scholar
8c398fda53d2ff65cca1a8110db0c8176024c91b
Cited by
80
References
155
Citations by year
2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 3
FWCI
11.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Space and Planetary Science › Archaeological Research and Protection
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Historical and Cultural Archaeology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Amazonian Archaeology and Ethnohistory
Keywords
political landscape, environmental context, social inequality, Inca Empire, Cusco, archaeological GIS, spatial boundaries, material culture, environmental perception, landscape archaeology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review