¹ On the use of notarial documents by historians of colonial Latin America, see particularly Kellogg, Susan and Restall, Matthew, eds., Dead Giveaways: Indigenous Testaments of Colonial Mesoamerica and the Andes (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1998).Google Scholar

² Fairbanks, Charles, “Backyard Archaeology as a Research Strategy,” The Conference on Historic Sites Archaeology Papers Vol. 11 (1975): pp. 133–139,Google Scholar outlines the methodology. Kathleen Deagan in her work at St. Augustine provided the first serious archaeological treatment of ethnic relations in the Spanish colonies, identifying material culture associated with those of Spanish, African and Native American ancestry. See Deagan, Kathleen (ed.), Spanish St. Augustine: The Archaeology of a Colonial Creole Community (New York: Academic Press, 1983).Google Scholar

³ Collingwood's, R.G. approach to evidence, particularly as outlined in The Idea of History (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1946),Google Scholar was taken up by a new generation of archaeologists such as Hodder, Ian in Reading the Past: Current Approaches to Interpretation in Archaeology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986).Google Scholar Wylie, Alison, “Invented Lands/Discovered Pasts: The Westward Expansion of Myth and History,” Historical Archaeology, Volume 27, Number 4 (1993): pp. 1–19,CrossRefGoogle Scholar and her “Archaeological Cables and Tacking: The Implications of Practice for Bernstein's ‘Options Beyond Objectivism and Relativism’,” Philosophy of the Social Sciences vol. 19 (1989): pp. 1–18, provide her interpretation of archaeological “cables” of evidence and their relationship to historical archaeology and material culture. The complexities of comparing archaeological to archival evidence of material culture in the Andes is discussed by Rappaport, Joanne in “Cultura material a lo largo de la frontera septentrional Inca: Los Pastos y sus testamentos,” Revista de antropología y arqueología [Bogotá] Volume 6 Number 2 (1990) p. 12.Google Scholar

⁴ On race as a social construct see Fields, B.J. “Slavery and Ideology in the United States of America,” New Left Review Vol. 181 (1990): pp. 95–118,Google Scholar and Goldberg, D.T., Racist Culture: Philosophy and the Politics of Meaning (Oxford: Blackwell, 1993).Google Scholar On the idea of ethnogenesis see Sidney Mintz, W. and Price, Richard, The Birth of African-American Culture: An Anthropological Perspective (Boston: Beacon Press, 1992),Google Scholar and Sider, G., “Identity as History: Ethnohistory, Ethnogenesis and Ethnocide in the Southeastern United States,” Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, Vol. 1 (1994): pp. 109–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar On creolization see Ferguson, Leland, Uncommon Ground: Archaeology and Early African America, 1650–1800 (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1992).Google Scholar

⁵ In historical practice see Thompson, E.P., “The Poverty of Theory,” in The Poverty of Theory and Other Essays, ed. by Thompson, E.P. (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1978): pp. 1–210,Google Scholar in anthropology the work of Comaroff, Jean and Comaroff, John, Of Revelation and Revolution, Volume 1 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar or Ortner, Sherry, “Reading America: Preliminary Notes on Class and Culture,” in Recapturing Anthropology, ed. by Fox, R.G. (Santa Fe: School of American Research Press, 1991): pp. 163–189.Google Scholar The recent acceptance of historical agency as a concept useful to historical archaeologists is outlined by Wilkie, Laurie A. and Bartoy, Kevin M. in “A Critical Archaeology Revisited,” Current Anthropology, Vol. 41 Number 5 (2000): pp. 747–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶ Wilkie and Bartoy, “A Critical Archaeology Revisited,” summarizes this recent turn toward practice theory, which is also emphasized in Kent Lightfoot, Schifi, Ann M. and Wake, Thomas A. (eds.), The Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Fort Ross, California (Berkeley: University of California Archaeological Research Facility, 1997)Google Scholar and in Jamieson, Ross W., Domestic Architecture and Power: The Historical Archaeology of Colonial Ecuador (New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press, 2000).Google Scholar

⁷ Bell, James, “On Capturing Agency in Theories About Prehistory,” in Representations in Archaeology, ed. by Gardin, J. and Peebles, C. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1992): pp. 30–55,Google Scholar Johnson, Matthew, “The Conception of Agency in Archaeological Interpretation,” Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, Vol. 8 (1989): pp. 189–211,CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Saitta, Dean, “Agency, Class and Archaeological Interpretation,” Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, Vol. 13 (1994): pp. 201–227,CrossRefGoogle Scholar are all treatments of the relationship between human agency and material culture from an archaeological viewpoint.

⁸ Wilkie, and Bartoy, , “A Critical Archaeology Revisited,” p. 749.Google Scholar Ian Hodder, “Reading the Past” was an important work in redefining how archaeologists look at material culture.

⁹ Boyer, Richard, “Negotiating Calidad: The Everyday Struggle for Status in Mexico,” Historical Archaeology Vol. 31, Number 1 (1997): pp. 66–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Chance, John K., Race and Class in Colonial Oaxaca (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1978),Google Scholar Mòrner, Magnus, Race Mixture in the History of Latin America (Boston: Little, Brown, 1967),Google Scholar and Chance, John K. and Taylor, William B., “Estate and Class: A Reply,” Comparative Studies in Society and History Vol. 21 Number 3 (1979): pp. 434–442,CrossRefGoogle Scholar all show the evolution of historians’ treatment of the caste system, and the ways that its categories could be manipulated.

¹⁰ Boyer, , “Negotiating Calidad ,” pp. 65–66 Google Scholar particularly points toward the examples of Brading, David A. and Wu, Celia, “Population Growth and Crisis: León, 1720–1816,” Journal of Latin American Studies Vol. 5 (1973): p. 9,CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Carmagnani, Marcelo, “Demografía y Sociedad: La Estructura Social de los Centros Mineros del Norte de México, 1600–1720,” Historia Mexicana Vol. 21 (1972): pp. 426,Google Scholar 445.

¹¹ The complex roles of the many caste groups in 17th century urban Latin America are admirably covered by Cope, R. Douglas, The Limits of Racial Domination: Plebeian Society in Colonial Mexico City, 1660–1720. (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1994).Google Scholar

¹² Adorno, Rolena, “Images of indios ladinos in early colonial Peru,” In Transatlantic Encounters: Europeans and Andeans in the Sixteenth Century, ed. by Andrien, Kenneth J. and Adorno, Rolena (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991): pp. 232–270.Google Scholar

¹³ In colonial Quito becoming a godparent, a skilled artisan, or a reseller of stolen goods were just some of the ways that enslaved Africans participated in the urban power structure. See Minchom, Martin, The People of Quito, 1690–1810: Change and Unrest in the Underclass (Boulder: Westview Press, 1994)Google Scholar and Lane, Kris, “Captivity and Redemption: Aspects of Slave Life in Early Colonial Quito and Popayan,” The Americas 57:2 (2000): pp. 205–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁴ Bowser, Frederick P., The African Slave in Colonial Peru: 1524–1650 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1974)Google Scholar and Blanchard, Peter, Slavery and Abolition in Early Republican Peru (Wilmington, DE: Scholarly Resources, 1992)Google Scholar provide excellent overviews of slavery and slave resistance in the colonial Andes. For the archaeology of African colonial communities, runaway or otherwise, in Latin America see Orser, Charles E., “The Archaeology of the African Diaspora,” Annual Review of Anthropology Vol. 27 (1998): pp. 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁵ Certain archaeological finds in domestic contexts, such as the colonoware pottery in Ferguson, Uncommon Ground, can be characterized as “typical” of African ethnicity, but as Mullins, Paul R., ‘“A Bold and Gorgeous Front’: The Contradictions of African America and Consumer Culture” In Historical Archaeologies of Capitalism, ed. by Leone, Mark P. and Jr.Potter, Parker B. (New York: Plenum Press, 1999)Google Scholar cautions, the demonstration of the unique nature of African New World material culture can come through the study of consumption patterns, rather than through a simple search for material culture of “African” origin.

¹⁶ ANH/C C116.404a, f.3r ( 1664). All references to primary documents are from the notarial section of the Archivo Nacional de Historia, Cuenca, Ecuador, referred to hereafter as ANH/C. Lovejoy, Paul E., Transformations in Slavery: A History of Slavery in Africa, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2nd ed., 2000),Google Scholar and Thornton, John, Africa and Africans in the Making of the Atlantic World, 1400–1680, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992)Google Scholar both discuss the complexity of the analysis of such “tribal” identities of enslaved Africans in the New World, given the complexities of the assimilation of , subject peoples into other ethnic groups in Africa, and the stereotypes of Europeans and colonial elites in the use of such terms. Thornton, “Africa and Africans,” p. xvi, identifies Bran as a cultural group in the region of what is now Dakar in Senegal.

¹⁷ Epperson, Terrence W., “The Contested Commons: Archaeologies of Race, Repression, and Resistance in New York City,” In Historical Archaeologies of Capitalism: p. 88 Google Scholar gives a British colonial example of such changes in “national” designations by enslaved Africans.

¹⁸ Lienzo is a plain-weave cotton fabric, according to the glossary of Costume and identity in Highland Ecuador, ed. by Rowe, Ann Pollard (Washington D.C.: The Textile Museum, 1998): p. 284.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Viteri, Tamara Estupiñán, Diccionario básico del comercio colonial quiteño (Quito: Ediciones del Banco Central del Ecuador, 1997), p. 151 Google Scholar suggests that colonial enaguas for women were always made of white lienzo fabric.

²⁰ A lliglla is a Quechua word for a woman's square or rectangular shawl, usually without fringe, worn with the ends brought together and pinned with a tupu at the chest, according to Meisch, Lynn A. and Rowe, Ann P., “Indigenous Ecuadorian Costume,” in Costume and Identity ed. by Rowe, , p. 45.Google Scholar

²¹ Bayeta in modern Ecuador is a coarse plain-weave wool, made on a treadle-loom, according to the glossary of Rowe, (ed.), Costume and Identity, p. 283.Google Scholar

²² Sevillaneta was a type of textile, and is also mentioned in a 1596 Quito will by Salomon, Frank, “Indian Women of Early Colonial Quito as seen through their testaments.” The Americas 44 (1988), p. 335,CrossRefGoogle Scholar and as part of a 1722 shipment of cloth into Cartago, Costa Rica by Solórzano Fonseca, Juan Carlos, “El comercio de Costa Rica durante el declive del comercio Español y el desarrollo del contrabando Ingles: Periodo 1690–1750,” Anuario de Estudios Centroamericanos 20:2 (1994): p. 36.Google Scholar

²³ A paño in modern Cuenca usage is a woman's shawl, according to Meisch, Lynn A., “Azuay Province,” In Costume and Identity, ed. by Rowe, , pp. 257–258.Google Scholar It is different from a lliglla mainly in the way it is worn, wrapped around, rather than draped over, the shoulders, in “European” style.

²⁴ For the ongoing role of coral as prehispanic and colonial jewelry item, usually set in silver, see Rappaport, “Cultura Material,” p. 13 Google Scholar and Caillavet, Chantal. “Caciques de Otavalo en el siglo XVI: Don Alonso Maldonado y su esposa.” Miscelánea Antropològica Ecuatoriana 2 (1982): p. 44.Google Scholar

²⁵ In gemology a girasol opal is a type of fire opal with an effect of light that floats or moves as the stone is turned. See Jackson, Julia A., Glossary of Geology (Alexandria, VA: American Geological Institute, 1997), p. 269.Google Scholar

²⁶ ANH/C L526f840r-84lv (1690).

²⁷ The first official census of the city, in 1778, showed that the 484 people of African descent (both enslaved and free) made up about 3% of the total urban population of 14,763. The slightly higher (7%) numbers in the San Bias neighborhood to the east of the city core suggests that this was where the majority of free people of African descent lived in the late 18th century. See Simard, Jacques Poloni, “Formación, desarrollo y configuración socio-étnica de una ciudad colonial: Cuenca, siglos XVI–XVIII.” Anuario de Estudios Americanos 54:2 (1997): p. 440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁸ On the use of the topo by an elite woman in seventeenth-century Cuenca see Jamieson, Ross W., “Doña Luisa and Her Two Houses: Widowhood as Power in the Colonial Andes,” In Lines That Divide: Historical Archaeologies of Race, Gender and Class, ed. by Delle, James A., Mrozowski, Stephen A., and Paynter, Robert (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press), p. 158.Google Scholar Salomon, “Indian Women,” pp. 334–337 Google Scholar discusses Native Andean elite women's clothing in the 16th century.

²⁹ In late 17th century Cuenca we know that, at least in the case of the income of priests, rental of part of their houses was common. See Pérez, Jesús Paniagua and Viforcos Marinas, María Isabel, “El poder económico del clero secular cuencano en la segunda mitad del siglo XVII.” Estudios de Historia Social y Econòmica de América 13 (1996) p. 62.Google Scholar In Quito many colonial households consisted of an upper floor where the property owners lived, and ground floor rooms for servants, rental to the urban poor, or to small businesses, according to Minchom, , “The People of Quito,” p. 29.Google Scholar

³⁰ Boyer, , “Negotiating Calidad,” p. 67 Google Scholar treats the “parallel culture” of Native peoples within the Spanish colonial system. Salomon, , “Indian Women,” pp. 325–341,Google Scholar discusses the great distance between the most powerful and most humble of Native women in early colonial Quito.

³¹ Forastero means “outsider” or “immigrant,” and thus it is clear that Bustamente was not from Cuenca, most likely because he was an itinerant trader. His background is entirely unknown. On the many implications of the term forastero see the contributions in Robinson, David J., ed., Migration in colonial Spanish America (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³² ANH/C C94.124flr-2v (1696).

³³ Estupiñán describes cristal as a thin wool cloth with a luster to it in “Diccionario básico,” p. 124.

³⁴ Rowe, Ann P., “Dyes,” In Costume and Identity, ed. by Rowe, , p. 20 Google Scholar describes añil in Ecuador as indigo dye from the Indigofera suffruticosa plant; a blue dye, processed into cakes and traded extensively to Ecuador from Central America until the 1970s.

³⁵ Camello/pelo de camello refers literally to camel/camelhair, and probably refers to a cloth (known also as camelote, or camlet in Énglish) that was a woven mix of camelhair and sheep's wool, according to Estupiñán, “Diccionario básico,” p. 87.Google Scholar Camello could also refer to a lot of different mixes of camelid/goat hair, as well as silk or other fibers.

³⁶ Ruán is a type of cotton “broadcloth” stamped with colored decoration, made in Rouen, France, according to Estupiñán, , “Diccionario básico,” p. 297 Google Scholar and Diccionario de Autoridades (Madrid: Real Academia Española, 1726–1739) p. 647. The Rouen broadcloth industry is examined in Belhoste, Jean-François, “La maison, la fabrique et la ville: l'industrie du drap fin en France (XV^e–XVIIl^e siècles),” Histoire, Economie et Société 13:3 (1994): pp. 457–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁷ The town of Cambrai in Flanders in the 17th century produced fine, plain-woven, white linens, as described by Philippe Guignet, “Adaptation, mutations et survivances proto-industrielles dans le textile du Cambrésis et du Valenciennois du XVIIIème au début du XXème siècle,” Revue du Nord Volume 61, pp. 27–59. Estopilla was finer than regular Cambrai cloth, a type of gauze, according to the Real Academia Española, “Diccionario de Autoridades,” p. 642.

³⁸ In the 17th century silk stockings were one of the major industries of Genoa, as described by Belfanti, Carlo in “Fashion and Innovation: The Origins of the Italian Hosiery Industry in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries,” Textile History 27:2 (1990): pp. 132–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁹ Frutilla is listed as a species of coquillo, or small palm nut/seed, which rosaries are made from, and with a Latin translation of Globuli indici, in the Diccionario de Autoridades (Madrid: Real Academia Española, 1726–1739) p. 804. Unfortunately this Latin name does not appear to correspond to any modern scientific botanical name.

⁴⁰ On the silk industry in Calabria in the seventeenth century see Calabria, Antonio, “The Seven-teenth-Century Crisis Revisited: The case of the Southern Italian Silk Industry: Reggio Calabria, 1547–1686,” Essays in Economic and Business History 19 (2001): pp. 1–15.Google Scholar

⁴¹ The pecho could be what is now called in Ecuador a pichu (Quechua pronunciation of Spanish pecho, or “chest”). This is a traditional woman's wrapped dress, resembling Inca women's costume, as described by Miller, Laura M. and Rowe, Ann P., “Majipamba, Troje and Cacha,” In Costume and Identity, ed. by Rowe, , p. 187–189 Google Scholar

⁴² Estupiñán, Diccionario básico p. 165 Google Scholar describes papel de estraza as a rough wool fabric used to wrap market goods.

⁴³ Solimán is corrosive sublimate, or mercuric chloride (HgCl₂).

⁴⁴ Pita and cabuya axe both terms used in Ecuador for fiber made from Agave americana or Furcraea andina plants. See Rowe, Ann P. and Meisch, Lynn A., “Fibers,” In Costume and Identity, ed. by Rowe, , pp. 16–17.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Bauer, Arnold J., Goods, Power, History: Latin America's Material Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), pp. 110–113,Google Scholar discusses the consumption of fine European cloth in the colonial Audiencia of Quito, Salomon, while, “Indian Women” pp. 334–336,Google Scholar shows that Native Andean women of wealth were heavy consumers of such cloth, at least in the early colonial period.

⁴⁶ For details on Panama majolica recovered in the Andes see Jamieson, Ross W., “Majolica in the Early Colonial Andes: The Role of Panamanian Wares,” Latin American Antiquity Vol. 12 (2001): pp. 45–58,CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Rovira, Beatriz E., “Presencia de Mayólicas Panameñas en el mundo colonial: Algunas consideraciones acerca de su distribución y cronología,” Latín American Antiquity Vol. 12 (2001) pp. 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁷ On archaeological excavations in houses near the plaza mayor of Cuenca see Jamieson, , “Domestic Architecture,” and Jamieson, Ross W: Informe al Instituto Nacional de Patrimonio Cultural del Ecuador de la Prospección Arqueológica Realizada en Tres Casas del Centro Histórico de Cuenca, Azuay. (Cuenca, Ecuador: unpub. manuscript, INPC, 2001).Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Boyer, , “Negotiating Calidad” p. 70.Google Scholar