Peru as a Whole

THE PERUVIAN CO-TRADITION WENDELL C. BENNETT

I. THE CONCEPT OF AN AREA CO-TRADITION THE culture area concept as developed by

Wissler1 has had only limited applicability to archaeology, since it depends too much on specific
elements or traits, is too heavily weighted by subsistence, is not sharply enough defined, is too
inclusive, and is too static in time. Although Wissler divided the New World into a number of
archaeological culture areas, these have not been very meaningful, since they lump gross elements
with total disregard for time, which results more in confusion than in significant classification.

In Kroeber's reappraisal of North America many modifications have been made in the culture area
concept, which have reawakened the interests of archaeologists. Kroeber2 works on the assumption
that ".. . space and time factors are sufficiently interrelated in culture history to make the culture area a
valuable mechanism . . . . " With this in mind he arranges the numerous small areas of North America
into six major groups, each of which he3 believes ".. . to represent a substantial unit of historical
development, or of a prevailing characteristic current of culture." He goes even further to introduce the
qualification of "in tensity" for a culture area:4 "What we call intensity of culture therefore means both
special content and special system. A more intensive as compared with a less intensive culture norm
ally contains not only more material—more elements or traits—but also more material peculiar to
itself, as well as more precisely and articulately established interrelations between the materials." This
quality of intensity implies time depth, as Kroeber demonstrates in discussing particular groups.

The addition of time depth to a culture area forms a meaningful unit for archaeological historical
interpretation. For one thing, this allows more precise regional delimitation, since only the territory is
considered within which the component cultures formed a culture area at every time period, and not
the territory of maximum expansion during a particular time period. A name for such a cultural-time-
space unit is badly needed. It is possible to employ such phrases as culture area column, culture area
continuum, and culture area with time depth, but Dr. Ralph Linton has proposed "area co-tradition"
which seems more satisfactory. Unlike the culture area classification, the cultures included in an area
co-tradition are treated as wholes. Thus each has its own his tory, its own persistent traditions. The
coined word, co-tradition, refers, then, to the linkage, the interrelationships of these cultural traditions
in time and space.

To repeat, an area co-tradition is the over-all unit of cultural history of an area within which the
component cultures have been interrelated over a period of time. The term is not applied merely to
the cultural history of a region. For example, Highland Colombia's history does not form a co-tradition,
since there is as yet no evidence of the mutual relationships of the archaeological cultures included.
Neither is a co-tradition the history of a single culture. A reconstruction of Navaho history, which traced
the migration from some northern area like the Mackenzie to the present home in the Southwest
would be excluded from this concept. In brief, the co-tradition implies a cultural continuum in an area.
The successive occupations of a Patagonian rock-shelter would not, in themselves, be sufficient.

An area co-tradition should have certain over all characteristics which distinguish it as a whole. Regional
subdivisions are to be expected, since these, in a sense, reflect the component cultures, but links
between regions and evidence of their being subjected to the same general influences should be found.
The unit should have definable limits in both space and time. Changes within the time period covered
are inevitable, but the major ones should be more or less uniform, although not necessarily identical.
The questions of origin and of basic formulation of the area co-tradition are of great interest, but not
intrinsically part of the concept. Likewise, the causes and directions of change within the unit are
subjects for later investigation.

As a classificatory device, the area co-tradition is a useful preliminary to the study of culture history.
Although in part an abstraction, the area co-tradition actually purports to represent a substantial unit of
cultural history. Various area co-traditions, once established, can be compared. Do they have single
centers, multiple centers, shifting centers? How important is size, complexity, rate of change? What
types of unity are found in each, such as political, stylistic, subsistence, environmental? Are there regular
sequences of internal development? Archaeologists have been blocked in studies of acculturation and
culture change because of the uncertainty of cultural continuity, but with this concept regional cultural
changes can be examined and their causes sought. Peru is selected for an illustration of an area co-
tradition.

I I. THE PERUVIAN CO-TRADITION

Many archaeologists have spoken of Andean or Central Andean civilization, but few have bothered to
define its territorial limits. Tello6 states that the Andean civilization covers all the mountains and the
Pacific coast from the Colombian border, 2° 5' North, to the Rio Bio Bio, 38° South. Uhle, while not so
specific, writes as though he were dealing with an equally extensive area. Means6 says that he is
covering the republics of Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia, together with adjacent portions of Colombia,
Argentina, and Chile. The present writer7 has defined the Central Andes as the highlands and coast of
Peru and the highlands of Bolivia, including the eastern cordillera. None of these writers consistently
deals with the total area he defines. In this description of the Peruvian co-tradition, an attempt is made
to define the unit more sharply—an attempt anticipated by Kroeber:8 "I should observe first that I
regard all native Peruvian civilization as a unit—a larger historical whole, a major areal culture with
time depth."

This is essentially the present view, namely that the Peruvian co-tradition includes the coast and
highlands of Peru and the Titicaca basin of Bolivia, or, more specifically, the Peruvian coast from
Lambayeque to Mollendo and the highlands from Cajamarca to Tiahuanaco; and that it covers a time
span from the formulation of the Chavin horizon to the Spanish Conquest, or, in terms of guess-dates,
from about 200 B.C. to 1532 A.D. Before these space and time limits can be properly explained, the
over-all characteristics of the Peruvian co-tradition must first be presented.

The Peruvian co-tradition has the following major characteristics. Subsistence is based on intensive
agriculture and herding. The common plants are maize, potatoes, quinoa, manioc, beans, peanuts, oca,
pepper, squash, cotton, and many fruits. The domesticated animals are the llama, alpaca, and guinea
pig. The narcotic coca is chewed with lime, while tobacco is of minor importance. Cultivation is with
digging stick and clod crusher, and utilizes irrigation, terracing, fertilizer, and crop rotation. The
clothing pattern is based on the breach clout or skirt and belt, the slit-neck shirt, shawl, head band or
other headgear, and the woven bag with strap. The crafts of pottery, metallurgy, basketry, shell,
feather, and woodwork are all prominent, but weaving is particularly out standing. Common design
motifs are the feline, fish, condor, ray, trophy head, masked figure with cape, and many geometric
elements. Craft specialization is common. Buildings are made with permanent materials, such as stone
and adobe. Massive construction is typical, both for religious purposes and public works. Temples and
dwellings are commonly decorated with carving, painting, and arabesques. The population is
concentrated in villages or larger aggregates. There are political units above the local groups and
marked individual and class distinctions. Abundant leisure time over and above economic minimums is
ever present. The standard work pattern is in groups, either on the basis of cooperation, religious
inspiration, or forced corvee. The prominence of ancestor worship, elaborate grave goods, and mummy
bundles can be designated by the term "necro

8 Kroeber, 1944, p. 111.

BENNETT] A REAPPRAISAL OF PERUVIAN ARCHAEOLOGY 3

tropic-' (grave-oriented). The pilgrimage religious pattern is typical, and such pilgrimages are not limited
to local areas or to a single time period as witnessed by Chavin de Huantar, Tiahuanaco, Pachacamac,
and Copacabana. Many negative characteristics could be added to the above list, such as no urn burial,
no bow and arrow, and weak water transportation.

These characteristics are found in each sub division and each main time period of the Peruvian co-
tradition, which is also united in other ways. Specific traditions link the cultures of some subdivisions
throughout several time periods. Various types of horizon styles cut across some or all of the sub-
regions in one time period. Furthermore, many of the component cultures are intricately related in
space and time. For example, Chiripa has relationship with Pucara, Early Tiahuanaco, and Chana pata;
Pucara in turn is linked with Classic Tiahuanaco, Wari, the Epigonal, and the Black White-Red horizon;
these, finally, merge into lea and Chimu. Another such branching relationship is Chavin, Cavernas,
Necropolis, and Nazca on one side; Chavin, Salinar, Mochica, and Chimu on the other. Finally, as will be
shown later, the culture changes throughout the Peruvian area are roughly uniform in time and
direction.

The geographical environment of the Peruvian area has many consistencies in spite of some major
contrasts in altitude, rainfall, and temperature. However, both on the coast and in the highlands there
are large areas suitable for cultivation. These have rich soils and ample water supply, and are not
covered by resistant deep rooted grasses or forest. All of these areas are isolated enough for
independence, but close enough for cultural contact. All present mate rials suitable for architecture and
craft manufacture.

At this point the geographical limits of the Peruvian co-tradition can be examined in greater detail.
Although it is true that some of the cultural characteristics are found elsewhere, that similar geographic
conditions exist in adjacent regions, and that some of the horizon styles extend beyond the boundaries,
a detailed examination shows that the Peruvian co-tradition, as delimited previously, is reasonably
isolated, both geographically and culturally.

The Peruvian here defined, is roughly 1700 kilometers long, from north to southeast, and from 100 to
400 kilometers wide. Within this area, the major valleys and basins are never

separated by more than 200 kilometers, and even then small settlement pockets exist in between. (The
Cuzco basin is an exception and is the most isolated of all. This is interesting since on the basis of
present evidence, the Cuzco basin is known to be prominent only in the late periods.) In the north,
however, the Cajamarca basin is separated from Loja in southern Ecuador by some 400 kilometers of
rough, forest covered mountains which lack sizeable basins and which are virtually without population
today. Furthermore, a climatic change occurs north of Cajamarca which produces a double rainy season
and supports a wet paramo cover

age, less suitable for llamas and alpacas than the Peruvian puna. Turning next to the northern coast,
Lambayeque is separated from Piura by the Sechura desert, some 225 kilo

meters wide. Piura, in turn, is separated from the subtropical coast of Manabi and Guayas by an
extensive, barren, unpopulated stretch of sand.

Ecuadorian archaeology is too little known to permit sound generalization. The best work has been
done in Manabi and Esmeraldas on the coast, and in the highland basins from Cuenca north, rather
than in the parts closest to Peru. At present, the sub-regions of Ecuador appear quite independent
culturally, although the Tuncahuan style may ultimately prove to be a genuine horizon. There are some
indications that coast and highland connections will be established. For example, earth mounds are
characteristic of highland Imbabura and coastal Esmeraldas, and Collier and Murra" encoun tered many
highland sherds in Azuay which they considered to be of coastal origin. Future work may allow
grouping the coast and high lands of Ecuador and southern Colombia as an areal co-tradition, but this
would probably be an independent one, not merely an adjunct of the Peruvian. In highland Ecuador,
for example there are no pre-Inca buildings with permanent materials, no large scale sites, no
identifiable ceremonial centers, and few llamas and alpacas. There is no evidence of widespread
cultural ties of the kind that unite Peru. Furthermore, there are few specific stylistic tie-ups with Peru in
the pre-Inca periods. The gold work of Sigsig and Chordeleg looks somewhat Tiahuanacoid, but there is
no ceramic confirmation of the spread of the Tiahuanaco horizon. In brief, the Peruvian unit seems well
delineated both culturally and geographically in the north. Piura may some day be grouped with Peru,
but Ecuador seems unlikely.

The tropical forests of the Upper Amazon mark the eastern boundary of the Peruvian unit. The
penetration of Andean culture into the tropics, and the influence of tropical cultures on the Andean are
interesting problems but have little to do with the limits of the Peruvian co-tradition, which certainly
does not exist in the jungle.

The southern margin of the Peruvian unit is in part determined by the intense desert conditions. The
Atacama desert along the coast is the most intense in the world with only one major oasis, Calama on
the Rio Loa, and this lies some 700 kilometers south of Arequipa. Even so, the Calama cultures, none of
major importance, show some relationship to the Peruvian, but further south in Chile the Diaguita
cultures are affiliated with the Northwest Argentine co-tradition.

A desert strip cuts eastward across the Andes south of 17°. The western Cordillera of Bolivia is dry,
without basins, and, today, virtually without population. South of Lake Titicaca, the Desaguadero River
disappears in Lake Poopo, where the water evaporates into ex tensive salt flats. Actually, apart from the
Titicaca basin, the most inhabitable regions of Bolivia are in the eastern Cordillera. The closest to Peru
is the Cochabamba basin, and this is separated from Titicaca by over 300 kilo meters of rugged
mountainous country. In spite of this, good Tiahuanaco ceramics are found in the Cochabamba region
although permanent buildings, ceremonial centers, and stone carving are not. In general, the Peruvian
influences in the eastern cordillera are no greater than those from the Amazon, Chaco, and Pampas. It
thus seems sound on geographical and cultural grounds to fix the southern boundary of the Peruvian
co-tradition on the Mollendo-Are quipa-Tiahuanaco line.

Once the spatial limits and the over-all characteristics of the Peruvian co-tradition have been defined,
the subdivisions can be considered. These are of two kinds, regional and temporal. The regional
subdivisions involve both coastal valleys and highland basins which present some interesting contrasts,
but at this time only the spatial relationships are discussed.

It has long been customary to trisect both the coast and the highlands into a North, a Central, and a
South division. This has led to some con

fusion, particularly since a glance at the map shows clearly that the south highlands (Puno Tiahuanaco)
bear no close spatial correspond ence to the south coast (Nazca-Caflete). Since coast-highland
relationships are of considerable importance, more precise regional terms must be employed.

Each coastal valley forms an isolated unit and should, theoretically, have its own local cultural history.
However, archaeological refinements in Peru are not sufficient to show this. Consequently, the valleys
are arranged into nine groups on the basis of proximity and cultural overlap. These are listed from north
to south with each named after a single central valley:

There are numerous highland valleys, pockets, and basins, but only six are of major importance. These
are again listed from north to south: Each highland basin is separated from its neighbor by a
substantial distance, around 300 kilometers, but, with the exception of Cuzco, none is too distant from
one or more of the coast groups. On geographical grounds, communication from basin to basin would
be more difficult than from highland to coast, and, in the case of the Tiahuanaco horizon, the spread
from one basin to another seems to have been by way of the coastal valleys. There are many other
indications of rather close relationship of the highland basins with the adjacent coastal valleys. On the
basis, then, of actual spatial relationships and known cultural tie-ups, five transverse divisions can be
listed, although these admittedly overlap, and do not cover every basin and group to complete
satisfaction: 1. Far North division: Ca/amarca-Lambayeque-Moche (Fig. 2: I, A, 1, 2). Confirmed
culturally by the Chavfn horizon, the spread of the Cajamarca style, and the cursive tripod style.

I. LAMBA- fl$r \ f K*

YEQU0 I^KS N NM-,-

2. MOCHE

3. CHIM60TC

4. HO«RM£r £ -/.pCAULI

OLI VI K

JoKnttii.gi.iCi.;

FIG. 2. Limits and Divisions of the Peruvian Co-Tradition.

Rimac (Fig. 2: II, B, 2, 3,4, 5). Confirmed culturally by the Chavfn horizon, the White-on-Red horizon, the
Negative horizon, the Tiahuanaco horizon, the Black-White-Red horizon, and the Recuay three color
negative distribution.
3. Central division: Afa»tara-Rimac-Canete-Ica (Fig. 2: III, D, 5, 6, 7). Confirmed culturally by the Nazca B-
Y horizon, the Tiahuanaco horizon, and probably by other connections.

These divisions are weakest for the Huánuco and Cuzco basins and the Lomas coast group, the cultural
history of none of which is known. A South division (Fig. 2: IV) is left open for future confirmation. The
Callejon and the Mantaro basins seem to have been the most important highland centers during most
of Peruvian cultural history, and consequently merit far more attention than they have received thus
far.

The Peruvian co-tradition can also be divided temporally although the lines are not too sharp. It is
interesting, however, that the cultures of the total region change in the same directions at
approximately the same times. For Viru Valley, at least, this is not due to population replacement, since
Mr. Ford has assembled convincing evidence for a basic population continuum there. Temporal divi

sions have been recognized since the days of Uhle's pioneer work. Means10 dealt with Andean
civilization in terms of century by century growth of culture. Larco11 proposed seven major divisions
for the coast of Peru. At the 1946 Chiclin conference, Strong and Larco outlined seven divisions for the
north coast. In a manuscript submitted to the Ameri can Museum of Natural History, I have de scribed
the Peruvian co-tradition in terms of six major time divisions:

1. Cultists (Chavin de Huantar, Cupisnique, Nepefia and Casma Coast Chavin sites, Early Ancon and
Supe, Chongoyape), in which the pattern is formulated.

2. Experimenters (Cavernas, Chancay White-on-Red, Salinar, Huaraz White-on-Red, Chanapata, Chiripa),

in which technological experiments in agriculture, ceramics, metallurgy, building, and the like are in
evidence.

3. Mastercraftsmen (Nazca A and B, Interlocking, Early Lima, Mochica A and B, Gallinazo, Recuay, Katak,
Pucara, Early Tiahuanaco, and initial Classic Tiahuanaco), in which technological controls are complete,
and numerous local patterns of orientation are formulated.

4. Expansionists (Tiahuanaco, Wari, Epigonal, Middle Ancon I-II, Pacheco, Early lea, Wilkawain-
Tiahuanaco, Cajamarca, and also the somewhat later Black-White-Red horizon sites), in which attention
is completely turned to social and political organization, and conquest and expansion is manifested
everywhere.

5. City Builders (lea, Chancay Black-on-White, Late Huamachuco, Early Inca, Decadent Tiahuanaco,
Chimu), in which local political controls are reformulated, and popu lations are concentrated in large
units.

6. Imperialists (Inca and local manifestations), in which political empire is finally achieved over the total
area.

Without entering into the details of the content of each temporal division, let me point out a few
general observations about the Peruvian co-tradition.

1. The Peruvian evidence shows a long slow period of initial cultural growth, but the formulation of the
pattern which characterizes the area co-tradition takes place with comparative rapidity, and this
pattern persists until in terrupted by the Spanish Conquest. This seems an impor tant point to stress, in
view of the fact that some writers have obviously confused the time required for formulation of a
pattern with the length of its duration.

2. The Peruvian co-tradition shows technological ad vancement up to the point (Mastercraftsmen)

where tech niques are adequate for a satisfactory control of subsistence and maintenance of the
economy. There is then a shift to social and political manipulation of man-hour work units and virtually
no new advances are made in technology. In the case of Peru the social and political pattern which
emerged is characterized by sharp class distinctions and corvee labor.

3. The Peruvian co-tradition has different focal centers in different time periods, from the North
division, to the Central and South, and finally to the Cuzco basin. It like wise illustrates the constant
contrast between the coastal valleys which are dependent on a single source of irrigation water, and
the amorphous highland basins. We can almost go so far as to say that the coast fostered states, the
high lands confederacies.

4. Numerous trends can be observed, for example: from small villages to cities; from individual artists to
mass craft production; in art style, from Chavfn stylization to realism, to Tiahuanaco
conventionalization, to geometric.

In brief, it seems that the concept of area co-traditions, as illustrated by Peru, is a useful one which
might profitably be applied to other parts of New World and Old World archaeology. It does not follow
that any region, if sufficiently studied, will represent an area co-tradition. Also, as in the case of the
culture area, differences in intensity are to be expected. On the basis of present evidence, several other
area co-traditions in the New World could probably be established.

III. OTHER AREA CO-TRADITIONS

A Southwest co-tradition would cover the region of Arizona, western New Mexico, south east Colorado,
and southern Utah, and encom pass three major cultural and regional com ponents, the Anasazi,
Hohokam, and Mogollon-Mimbres. The author is not competent to describe this unit in detail, but some
of the general characteristics might be: maize agriculture supplemented by collecting and hunting;
village pattern; metate-mano complex; sub terranean cists and storage pits; pit houses; rough
architecture with stone, mud, and beams; emphasis on basketry, weaving, and pottery with
monumental stone carving and metallurgy lacking; ritual emphasis; rain and fertility cults; absence of
marked class or individual dis tinctions. The unit might have a time span from about 300 to 1600 A.D.,
and some six major epochs, designated, in the case of Hohokam:12 Pioneer, Colonial, Sedentary,
Classic, Late, and Historic.

A Middle American co-tradition would include the area from western Honduras and Salvador to
Zacatecas in Mexico. The major regional and cultural components would appear to be Central Mexico
(Toltec, Aztec), Oaxaca (Zapotec), Vera Cruz (Olmec, Totonac), and Guatemala-Salvador-Yucatan
(Highland and Lowland Maya). Vaillant13 characterizes the total unit by: intensive agriculture, both
tropical and semi-desert; maize, beans, cacao, tobacco, cotton, squash, peppers; ceramics, weaving,
and limited metallurgy; lack of do mesticated animals; emphasis on sculpturing; polytheism based on
nature worship; divinities in drawings and sculpture; platforms and temples; writing; astronomy; and
recorded calendar. Vaillant estimates the over-all time span as 0-1500 A.D., and recognizes four
divisions: Middle Cultures, Full Independent Civilizations, Late Independent Civilizations, Mixteca-
Puebla.

A Northwest Argentine co-tradition should include the mountainous regions of Salta, Catamarca,
Tucuman, La Rioja, northern San Juan, and western Santiago del Estero. Northern, southern, and
eastern sub-regions could be distinguished. Some of the general characteristics would be urn burial,
particularly for infants; villages of rough stone or clay; absence of ceremonial centers; emphasis on
ceramics, metallurgy, figurines, and clay pipes; use of tobacco for smoking and snuff; agriculture,
probably without irrigation; serpent, jaguar, owl, and toad design motifs; and prob ably warlike
tendencies. The time span would still be uncertain, but in all sub-regions parallel development could be
noted, and the cultures arranged into early, middle, late and Inca periods. It is possible that parts of
central Chile would be included, but it is significant that Jujuy in northern northwest Argentina would
not be.

These three area co-traditions plus the Peruvian appear to be of roughly comparable size, time
duration, and intensity. Among other possibilities of area co-traditions of less duration and intensity are
Alaska, the Northwest Coast, Southeast United States, Ecuador coast and highland, West Indies-
Venezuela, and Patagonia. Regions like the Amazon and the Eastern Woodlands would be hard to
define because of their great expanse and somewhat vague cultural characteristics.

1 Wissler, 1917.

2 Kroeber, 1939, p. 2.

3 Kroeber, 1939, p. 20.

4 Kroeber, 1939, p. 222.

5 Tello, 1942.

6 Means, 1931.

7 Bennett, 1946a.

9 Collier and Murra, 19431. Lambayeque group: Lambayeque, Sana, Pacasmayo (Fig. 2:1).

2. Moche group: Chicama, Moche, Viru, Chao (Fig. 2:2). 3. Chimbote group: Santa, Chimbote, Nepefia,
Casma (Fig. 2: 3).

4. Huarmey valley (Fig. 2:4).

5. Rimac group: Paramonga, Supe, Huaura, Chancay, Ancon, Rimac, Lurfn (Fig. 2:5).

6. Caflete group: Mala, Canete, Chincha (Fig. 2: 6). 7. Ica group: Pisco, lea, Nazca (Fig. 2: 7).

8. Lomas group (Fig. 2:8).

9. Arequipa group: Camana, Majes, Mollendo, Arequipa (Fig. 2:9).

1. Cajamarca basin (Fig. 2, A).

2. Callejon de Huaylas basin (Fig. 2, B).

3. Hudnuco basin (Fig. 2, c).

4. Mantaro basin (Fig. 2, D).

5. Cuzco basin (Fig. 2, E).

6. Titicaca basin (Fig. 2, r). 2. North division: Co//c/d«-Moche-Chimbote-Huarmey PIURA

4. South division: Cuzco-Lomas (Fig. 2: IV, E, 8). So far not confirmed culturally.

5. Far South division: Titicaca-Arequipa (Fig. 2: V, r, 9). Confirmed culturally by the Tiahuanaco horizon,
the spread of the Decadent Tiahuanaco and the Atacamefio cul tures.

0 Means, 1931.

11 Larco, 1938-39,

12 Martin, Quimby, and Collier, 1947.

13 Vaillant, 1941

Yale University

New Haven, Connecticut

PERÚ EN SU CONJUNTO

LA COTRADICIÓN PERUANA WENDELL C. BENNETT

I.EL CONCEPTO DE COTRADICIÓN DE ÁREA EL concepto de área de cultura desarrollado por Wissler1
solo ha tenido una aplicabilidad limitada a la arqueología, ya que depende demasiado de elementos o
rasgos específicos, está demasiado ponderado por la subsistencia, no está lo suficientemente definido,
es demasiado inclusivo y es demasiado estático en el tiempo. Aunque Wissler dividió el Nuevo Mundo
en varias áreas de cultura arqueológica, estas no han sido muy significativas, ya que agrupan elementos
burdos con total desprecio por el tiempo, lo que resulta más en confusión que en una clasificación
significativa.

En la reevaluación de América del Norte por parte de Kroeber, se han realizado muchas modificaciones
en el concepto de área de cultivo, que han vuelto a despertar el interés de los arqueólogos. Kroeber2
parte del supuesto de que "... los factores de espacio y tiempo están suficientemente interrelacionados
en la historia de la cultura como para hacer del área de la cultura un mecanismo valioso ..." Con esto en
mente, clasifica las numerosas áreas pequeñas de América del Norte en seis grupos principales, cada
uno de los cuales él3 cree que "... representa una unidad sustancial de desarrollo histórico, o de una
corriente característica predominante de la cultura". Va aún más lejos al introducir la calificación de
"intensidad" para un área de cultura: 4 "¿Cómo llamamos en

Por tanto, la tensión de la cultura significa tanto un contenido especial como un sistema especial. Una
cultura más intensiva en comparación con una menos intensiva normalmente contiene no sólo más
material —más elementos o rasgos— sino también más material peculiar de sí mismo, así como
interrelaciones establecidas de manera más precisa y articulada entre los materiales. "Esta cualidad de
intensidad importa profundidad en el tiempo, como demuestra Kroeber al discutir grupos particulares.

La adición de profundidad de tiempo a un área de cultura