Norms

With great variations in ideological meaning across the empire, it is no surprise that Inca power to alter local habitus was also uneven. That is not to say that the Incas did not meddle in the affairs of provincial families, kin networks, and communities.

Inca interventions in local gender, marriage, and family practices focused on creating tributary households for the service of the empire. In provinces where dec­imal rule was mobilized, administrative units reconfigured kin networks and ethnic identities. For example, in the Huanuco region, households from the Chupaychu and Quero groups were united under a single kuraka.^[1808] Inca labor tribute assignments would have created scheduling challenges for local communities, which relied on the reciprocal coordination of labor across networks of households. Imperial resettlement practices permanently displaced households from provin­cial groups, while labor rotations redirected labor from local communities for dif­ferent activities throughout the year. From the perspective of the state, tributary households were expected to be self-sustaining, and communities worked special lands to support widows and orphans, but it is clear that in many instances Inca policies disrupted daily subsistence and social practices to the point that state inter­vention was necessary. Betanzos states that the Inca ruler and his wife both used the title waqchakuyaq, “friend of the poor [i.e. those without kin],” which suggests the social disequilibrium wrought by provincial policies.^[1809]