Stone Masonry and Machu Picchu
I recently received and email challenging me to produce a coherent explanation of the architecture and stonework of Machu Picchu and other megalithic sites. The questioner wanted to know how anyone else other than aliens could have produced these sites. My initial response was simply to tell him the basics-that these civilizations had left us truly discernible clues as to how the work was done. That was kind of lazy of me (hey, I was on the road). Now that I’m back, I’ve decided the topic would make a good re-entry into PaleoBabble for me and readers.
Sorry, it isn’t aliens. I’m also sorry that I don’t have anything sexier than studies by geologists, anthropologists, and engineers to offer. Data is boring, I know. Oh, well. At any rate, it’s worth noting that many people like my emailer have basically not read anything in the scientific literature about these sites. Instead, they come armed with books by Zecharia Sitchin, or Erich von Daniken, or the latest HBO special propping up the ancient alien hypothesis. There viewers and readers are told how impossible it is to get stones lined up adjacently to each other so closely that a playing card can’t go between them. Or that the stones came from quarries hundreds of miles away. Both of these ideas are inaccurate and, frankly, disparaging to the Inca.
Here are a few articles on the Inca that deal with Machu Picchu and other sites. I trust they will be interesting and informative.
Jean Pierre Protzen, “Who Taught the Inca Stonemasons Their Skills? A Comparison of Tiahuanaco and Inca Cut-Stone Masonry,” The Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 56, No. 2 (Jun., 1997), pp. 146-167.
Jean Pierre Protzen, “Inca Quarrying and Stone Cutting,” The Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 44, No. 2 (May, 1985), pp. 161-182
Susan A. Niles, “Niched Walls in Inca Design,” The Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 46, No. 3 (Sep., 1987), pp. 277-285
One note of warning on these articles. They are not light reading. This is real scholarship, not the fluff produced by Sitchin, von Daniken, etc.
so you tell me how they lifted stones 1000 tons or more. you ppl are stupid
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
March 19th, 2012 at 3:57 PM
if one man can move a 20,000 pound block and stand it upright himself (Wally Wallington – see theforgottentechnology.com) then those techniques for applied physics are scalable. Many men could do it using the same approaches. But you wouldn’t know that, apparently. I doubt if you’ve ever looked.
[Reply]
So how did the LA Coliseum turn out EXACTLY oval in the early 20th century without spacecraft helping us from above?
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
April 8th, 2012 at 7:47 PM
LOL
[Reply]
Explain the Egyptians obsession with math and astronomy. How the pyramids are aligned with stars and constellations.
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
April 8th, 2012 at 7:50 PM
There’s nothing to explain (why would we be surprised at their fascination with this?) There are several posts on the blog on this (see under the “Pyramids” subject; archaeoastronomy is cool stuff; and it’s all naked eye work). Examples (read in this order):
http://michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/2010/05/new-scholarly-paper-on-archaeoastronomy-and-pyramid-alignment/
http://michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/2010/07/more-on-pyramid-alignment/
http://michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/2011/09/a-new-old-journal-article-on-the-great-pyramids-celestial-alignment/
[Reply]
The power of Jesus gives man the power of many men.
Faith in Him allows the dead to rise and the stones of many tons to be lifted!
Through the power of prayer alone I have gained wealth and power.
Jesus did all these things for me!
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
April 28th, 2012 at 10:55 PM
I’m not sure what this has to be with ancient engineering – ?
[Reply]
“But to obtain the smooth finishes, the
perfectly planar faces, and exact right interior and exterior
angles on the finely dressed stones, they resorted to techniques
unknown to the Incas and to us at this time”. – This is from the Jean Pierre Protzen, “Who Taught the Inca Stonemasons Their Skills? A Comparison of Tiahuanaco and Inca Cut-Stone Masonry”. An excerpt from your own resource.
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
May 5th, 2012 at 11:35 AM
That the finishing is not understood does not mean (a) that the quarrying and cutting is not understood (it is), or (b) that aliens were involved. Your post illustrates the non sequitur thinking that plagues the ancient astronaut idea. The technology is human, though not *completely* or “perfectly* understood.
[Reply]
I can imagine someone around 1600 bce: “It is obvious that evil spirits helped Rome construct great buildings such as the Coliseum and Pantheon using pagan mortar. Our God-fearing master Stonemasons cannot begin to replicate, nor would they wish to replicate, such Satanic construction.”….
[Reply]
The finish is as equally important an aspect of the entire process as the quarrying and stone cutting is, when considering the age the Incas lived in (1500 B.C.). It speaks volumes of the knowledge they possessed. Knowledge that was nonequivalent to that period in time. Understanding the finish undoubtedly means comprehending it all. Allow me to educate you.
The quarry for the red sandstone was 10 Kilometers away from the city. The green Andesite stones that were used to create the most elaborate carvings and monoliths originate from the Copacabana peninsula, located across Lake Titicaca (90 Kilometers away). A remarkable distance considering that the largest of these stones weighs 131 metric tons.
Once successfully quarried, it is thought that the Incas laboriously “dragged” these stones or ferried them on mere reed boats to the construction site. The river cobbles which “could” have been used as “hammerstones”, Jean Pierre Protzen describes in his stonecutting “theory”, are hardly a match against the sheer magnitude of the Andesite stone. Hence his failed experimentation to replicate such a precise and geometrical procedure.
Simply put, modern machinery would have a very difficult time carrying the smallest stone. Let us not delve into the topic of how they went about tempering and placing these gargantuan monuments in position. Or even the actual purpose of their construction. Such conjecture is unnecessary, although i am more than willing to elaborate once you respond to my “non sequitur” reply.
What truly plagues the ancient astronaut theory is your inability to generate an original explanation concerning the subject. I must say, i am inclined to completely disagree with you my presumptuous friend.
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
May 6th, 2012 at 12:55 PM
Yes, they had some wonderful technique that we don’t know today. So how are aliens necessary? Please, tell us how alien involvement MUST be the case. Otherwise, to connect this to ancient astronauts is indeed a non sequitur — a conclusion that does not follow. (“We don’t know the ancient method for doing X, so X must have been done by aliens, or aliens taught humans to do X” — never mind the fact that, in our own day and age we have not been able to provide one piece of scientific evidence that aliens even exist).
[Reply]
Michael, i understand your viewpoint. But again, you are asking for an explanation without coming to your own. You want X to be something X is not. Evidence and truth comes in all shapes and forms. You must realize that. In this day and age, logic implies that if the universe is as infinite as it is presumed to be, then so are the possibilities. Perhaps the ancients did build every single monument, but not without guidance. You simply cannot ignore the primitive age they lived in. Is it mere coincidence that ALL civilizations speak of these entities and have provided an abundant source of scientific evidence that state and depict it? Their design structure somehow resembles one another even though they had no knowledge of the next or were on opposite sides of Planet Earth. Do not forget, this vast space we inhabit has more to it than meets the eye. It has physical and spiritual aspects therefore pragmatism only goes so far. Let us take this trip together. This is the last you will hear of me. Farewell Michael, my brother, my friend.
[Reply]
MSH Reply:
May 7th, 2012 at 9:23 PM
I’m just asking for a coherent argument that *requires* an alien explanation. It isn’t an unreasonable request.
[Reply]