Welcome back to The Deep Dive, the show where
we take a complex pile of information, a stack
of sources, articles, research notes, and, well,
we distill it all into pure, fascinating knowledge.
And today we are really getting into one of the
big ones. We are. We're not just visiting a destination.
We're trying to unearth an enigma that has, you
know, captivated the world for over a century.
We are peeling back the moss and the mystery
of the legendary Inca citadel. We're talking
about Machu Picchu. Yeah. And it is so much more
than just a picture on a postcard. It's this
iconic symbol of ingenuity, isolation and a mystery
that just keeps going. It was even designated
one of the new seven wonders of the world back
in 2007. Right. But more than that, it's a masterpiece
of urban planning and engineering that was, and
this is the key part, it was literally built
upon the most challenging volatile terrain you
can imagine. Okay, let's unpack this. For you,
the listener, we've gathered a fantastic staff
of sources today. We're trying to move beyond
the standard tourist brochure. We're looking
at 16th century ethno -historical documents,
Hiram Bingham's own kind of contradictory field
notes. We've also got modern archaeological reports,
detailed geological studies, and this is critical.
cutting -edge radiocarbon dating that is forcing
historians to redraw their timelines. Exactly.
Our mission today is pretty clear. We want to
move past that romanticized idea of the lost
city of the Incas and really understand the facts,
the why and the how behind this site's creation
and, you know, its surprisingly brief life. We
are diving into its contested chronology, the
brilliant structural engineering that really
defies both gravity and geology. And the intense,
continuous modern challenge of preserving this
vast historic sanctuary. And just to situate
ourselves, because the location is everything
here, we are focusing on a 15th century Inca
yacta. Right, and the Quechua term, yacta, it
isn't just a city. It refers to a specialized
settlement, maybe even a sacred center. It's
situated in the eastern cordillera of southern
Peru, sitting at a truly breathtaking 2 ,430
meters. That's roughly 7 ,970 feet above a deep
canyon carved by the Urubamba River. I mean,
that altitude alone represents a triumph of logistics,
let alone the complex city they built there.
Sure. Exactly. The location wasn't just impressive.
It was immediately part of the political statement
of imperial power. So we need to dissect not
just the stones and the architecture, but the
people who lived there, the rituals they performed,
and the whole political context that allowed
such a marvel to exist for a brief but spectacular
moment in the Inca Empire. So let's start where
any good historical analysis begins, the beginning.
Traditionally, when we talk about Machu Picchu's
origin, we tie it directly to this massive expansionist
phase of the Inca Empire under one key figure.
the ninth Sapa Inca, Pachacuti Inca Yupanqui.
That's the consensus, yeah. It's derived from
the documentary evidence, you know, the early
Spanish historical reconstructions. These models
place the start of construction around 1450,
which is roughly a decade after Pachacuti's takeover
and the rapid expansion of the empire. Right.
The theory long held that he ordered this seasonal
royal retreat, or maybe an estate, after his
successful conquest of the middle and lower Urubamba
region. The idea was that it was meant to be
a prestigious destination for his court. And
the work was thought to have maybe continued
under his son. Potentially, yes, under his successor,
Tupac Inca Yupanqui. That seemed like a neat
and tidy narrative, an imperial villa built by
the emperor who conquered the territory. But
here's where it gets really, really interesting,
because that traditional consensus tends to get
refined, if not entirely overthrown, by modern
technology. Precisely. The documentary model
gave us a fixed starting point, but it was based
on oral traditions that were recorded after the
conquest. So not exactly firsthand accounts?
Not at all. But a landmark 2021 study led by
researchers, including Richard Berger at Yale,
provided a significant source -based refinement
using hard science. They analyzed 26 highly sensitive
AMS, that's accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon
measurements, from human remains recovered during
the early 20th century excavations. And the specific
date nugget they pulled out shifted the timeline
back, right? A lot. So if the traditional timeline
places Pachacuti's big expansion around 1450,
how significant is a 1420 start date? Does that
fundamentally change who we think founded the
site? It's a huge shift, and it directly challenges
that historical narrative. This modern dating
suggests that Machu Picchu was occupied earlier
than historians previously assumed. It places
the initial period of use roughly between circa
1420 and 1530. So that pushes the initial occupation
back at least two decades. At least, potentially
even three, before the traditional models place
Pachacuti's rise to power and the conquest of
the Urubamba region. So what does this new timeline
actually mean for the empire? Does it suggest
a pre -Pachacuti builder or does it force us
to redate the conquest itself? Well, it forces
a reassessment of Inca expansion dynamics. That
1420 date is a major challenge. It suggests two
possibilities. Either the construction and use
of the site began before Pachacuti became the
dominant unifying force. So maybe it started
as a smaller regional site that he later expanded?
That's one idea. Or, and this is maybe more likely,
the military conquest of the Uruvamba Valley
that fueled Pachacuti's rise just happened much
earlier in his career than we previously modeled.
So either way, the Inca were there earlier than
the Spanish recorded histories let on. Exactly.
It refines our understanding of Inca imperial
timing, showing their reach was established earlier.
And yet for such a monumental, logistically insane
project, it had a surprisingly brief existence,
only about 80 years of active imperial use. It
was a spectacular but very short -lived endeavor.
The abandonment context is tragic and swift.
It happened sometime between 1532 and 1565. Right
in the middle of the Spanish conquest. It was.
And while the collapse of formal Inca rule certainly
played a role, the sources suggest that the rapid
spread of diseases introduced by Europeans, specifically
smallpox, may have decimated the support population
before the Spanish military ever even arrived
in the immediate area. So the site just couldn't
sustain itself. It couldn't. The political structure
crumbled. Its necessary labor force vanished.
And because the site was so high up and logistically
challenging, it just never became a target for
the Spanish in the way Cusco or other major cities
did. That explains why it became a lost city.
Not because the Spanish destroyed it, but because
the people who ran it died or dispersed, leaving
it to the jungle. Precisely. It was lost to history,
but, and this is an important point, it was never
lost to the local Quechua families who maintained
small settlements there. Which brings us to a
major point of confusion for tourists and scholars
alike. The name. We all call it Machu Picchu,
but what does that name actually signify? And
was that the original name the Inca used? Let's
unpack that. The etymology is pretty straightforward
in the Quechua language. Machu means old, or
old person. While Huayna often spelled H -U -A
-Y -N -A means young. And Picchu? Picchu translates
to peak, summit, or maybe pyramid. So the common
name, Maichu Picchu, translates literally to
old mountain or old peak, referring to the specific
mountain saddle on which the settlement sits.
And the smaller pointy peak next to it is Huayna
Picchu. The young peak. Exactly. But there's
a major naming controversy swirling around here
based on recent historical findings that suggest
we might be calling the site by the wrong name
entirely. Absolutely. The same 2021 research
that refined the chronology also provided some
really strong esno -historical evidence. Researchers
reviewed late 16th century documents and found
consistent references from indigenous individuals
who mentioned returning to Huayna Picchu. Referring
to the main settlement, not just the little peak.
Exactly. They were referring to the main settlement.
It seems the site may have been named for that
smaller, more visually distinctive peak, or perhaps
it was just called Picchu, the peak. So if local
Quechua speakers knew it as Huayna Picchu or
simply Picchu, how did the entire world end up
calling it Machu Picchu? That association and
the resulting international cementing of the
name Machu Picchu stems almost entirely from
Hiram Bingham's 1911 publications and his subsequent
narrative. Even though he acknowledged the local
names for both peaks, his field notes, his early
maps, and especially his later bestselling book,
they all popularized the name Machu Picchu globally.
It seems like a classic case of the narrative
of the scientific discoverer overriding local
knowledge. It is. Bingham was looking for a completely
different place, the long lost capital of Vitkos.
By focusing his documentation and all the publicity
on the Machu Picchu location, he basically solidified
that name for the whole world. It's a reminder
that geography and language, even in a lost city,
are often shaped by who gets to tell the story.
The brief 80 -year existence of the city is made
even more miraculous by the complexity of the
how. I mean, it's a feat of civil engineering
that just beggars belief. We're talking about
building this complex, monumental city on a narrow
saddle between two peaks floating 450 meters
that's nearly 1 ,500 feet above the river canyon.
This location is not only remote, it's geologically
terrifying. It is a geological marvel made possible
only by incredible human ingenuity. Shifting
focus now to the construction, we have to talk
about the classical Inca dry masonry. It's the
hallmark of the site and really the key to its
survival against the elements. We often hear
that the stones fit together so tightly you can't
slide a piece of paper between them and there's
no mortar. For a non -engineer like me, that
sounds like a liability. Why is that lack of
mortar the key to stability in an earthquake
zone? Well, it's this ingenious inversion of
stability. That precision, the shaping and fitting
of massive granite blocks quarried directly on
site, is called ashlar masonry. Because the blocks
interlock so perfectly, they distribute weight
and force evenly, making them stable under normal
conditions. Okay. But crucially, the lack of
mortar allows the stones a minuscule degree of
movement. a kind of flexibility during seismic
activity. Instead of cracking or shattering,
the walls can essentially dance slightly during
a tremor, transferring the force effectively
and then settling right back into place. And
the structural resilience was not accidental
because the geological context here is just fascinating.
Not accidental at all. And what's so fascinating
is the finding that Machu Picchu was built intentionally
over two major earthquake fault lines. Wait,
wait. They built it on a fault line, not around
one. That seems like the definition of an unstable
foundation for a large city. It seems completely
counterintuitive. But that's the brilliant inversion.
Geologists suggest this location was intentional
because the fault lines caused the bedrock to
be highly fractured. Ah, so the rock was already
broken up for them. Exactly. This meant that
the massive amounts of granite required for the
construction were already broken up into manageable
pieces, easily available for quarrying and shaping.
They didn't have to carve perfect blocks out
of solid, stable rock. The earth had done the
initial work for them. One researcher even called
it an empire of fractured rocks, highlighting
how the Inca exploited geological weakness for
material gain. So they turned a geological weakness
into a logistical strength. They chose the location
because the fractured rock made the material
easier to access, and then they engineered the
masonry to withstand the inevitable earthquakes
that the fracturing suggested. That's an incredible
level of adaptive genius. It's astounding. What
specific design features did they use to stabilize
these structures? They engineered in flexibility
through shape. For instance, if you look at the
architecture, the doors and windows are trapezoidal.
Meaning they narrow from the bottom to the top.
Right. And that shape, narrowing upward, is inherently
much more resistant to the lateral and shear
forces generated during an earthquake than a
standard perpendicular rectangle. It's brilliant.
It turns the architecture itself into a safety
valve. What other details did they include to
keep the whole city from shaking apart? They
also used rounded corners, which prevent stress
points from concentrating force. And in the most
critical structures, they used L -shaped blocks
to tie outside corners together, essentially
interlocking the entire structure like a giant
stone puzzle. Wow. On top of that, you'll notice
that walls are often offset slightly row to row,
rather than being perfectly vertical. This subtle
feature allows for minute movement, minimizing
the chance of catastrophic collapse during a
large tremor. It's passive seismic engineering,
hundreds of years ahead of its time. That addresses
the lateral forces of earthquakes, but what about
the vertical forces of water? The area gets massive
amounts of rainfall, over 1 ,800 millimeters
or 71 inches per year. That much water on such
steep slopes should have caused the city to slide
right off the mountain long ago. How did they
handle the deluge? The hydraulic engineering
is, you could argue, even more critical than
the seismic stability for the sheer longevity
of the site. They prevented catastrophic erosion
and mudslides through the extensive use of terraces,
which are known as endines. Right. And these
are not just agricultural plots or, you know,
aesthetic steps. They are crucial works of geotechnical
stabilization. So they served a dual purpose.
Farming and slope stabilization. Exactly. The
hundreds of terraces across the steep slopes
prevent erosion and secure the foundation of
the entire settlement. Detailed excavations,
particularly those led by Kenneth Wright, revealed
the sheer sophistication of their construction.
It goes far beyond just simple piles of dirt.
Each terrace utilized a meticulous layered drainage
system designed to channel waterway instantly.
Okay, let's break down those layers. What was
the recipe for a perfect Inca terrace? Okay,
so you start at the bottom with a layer of large
scones. This provides bulk and rapid drainage.
Then you have a layer of loose gravel, and then
a mix of sand and gravel, which acts as a filter.
And on top of that? On top of that, you have
the rich topsoil at the surface. This layer permeability
is the key. It ensures water drains rapidly down
and away, rather than saturating the soil and
creating the conditions for devastating mudslides
and slope failure. It was essentially a self
-draining mountain filter. So even a monsoon
wouldn't turn the site into a mudslide. Pretty
much. And that's the definition of sustainable
engineering. What's incredible is that they engineered
the stability and then they went a step further
for the farming aspect. How so? The system was
so efficient that routine irrigation was generally
unnecessary because of the high volume of natural
rain. But here's the logistics nugget. Research
suggests the rich topsoil found on the terraces
was likely imported from the Urubamba Valley
floor. Wait, wait. So they moved a mountain of
rock to stabilize the slopes, and then they imported
tons of dirt just to grow crops. That really
confirms this was a project of, like, unlimited
imperial budget and political will. Absolutely.
It wasn't a casual settlement. It was a meticulously
planned imperial retreat designed to be perfect
from the geology up. And the same layering techniques,
slightly modified, were used underneath the main
city center to protect the structures from flooding
and instability. The entire urban area was laced
with canals and water reserves, all for water
management and erosion control. Despite being
so geographically isolated, it wasn't disconnected.
You mentioned earlier the evidence of long -distance
trade. How do we know they weren't just living
off their terraces? We know because of artifacts
that originate far, far away. For example, obsidian
nodules found at the site have been chemically
traced back to distant sources, either Titicaca
or Chivay. This confirms active trade, connecting
this remote retreat to the extensive pre -Hispanic
exchange networks. And of course, the principal
approach to the settlement was always via the
Inca trail system, the Copacan. Yes, and for
anyone who might not be familiar, the Copacan
was this extensive, multi -thousand mile highway
network built by the Inca. stretching across
the entire empire, from Ecuador down to Chile
and Argentina. Machu Picchu was deliberately
connected to this central artery, especially
through the monumental Intipunku, the sun gate.
So it was isolated by altitude but intentionally
linked by infrastructure. Precisely. Contemporary
accounts even noted local maintenance of these
paths, which further complicates that old narrative
of Machu Picchu being entirely hidden before
the Spanish conquest. If we connect this engineering
marvel to the people who inhabited it, the story
becomes even more interesting. You mentioned
skeletal studies have kind of shattered the notion
that this was just a simple, homogenous royal
retreat for Pachacuti and his family. Completely.
It was a cosmopolitan hub. So who exactly was
living and working here? during those 80 years
of occupation. The estimated permanent population
was relatively small, around 750 people. Most
served as permanent support staff, known in Inca
society as Yanaconas. And these were retainer
communities. Exactly. They were often taken from
conquered or allied regions specifically to serve
the imperial elite. They were essentially skilled,
non -local labor. And the genetic and forensic
analysis actually confirms this diversity. Absolutely.
Genome -wide analyses show they possessed incredibly
diverse ancestries, including individuals with
strong Andean, coastal Ecuadorian, and even Amazonian
lineages. These people lived, reproduced, and
were buried together, which suggests a diverse,
integrated support staff for the ruler. brought
in from all corners of the burgeoning empire.
It really makes Machu Picchu a microcosm of the
Inca Empire. That's a great way to put it. It
was a consolidation of diverse populations serving
the elite. What specific scientific evidence
pointed to them being immigrants rather than
lifelong locals from that valley? Well, there
are two main lines of evidence. First, chemical
and isotopic analyses of their bones revealed
differing levels of trace elements, suggesting
long -term diets characteristic of specific,
spaced -apart regions, not just the local high
-altitude microclimate. Okay, so their bones
told a story of where they came from. Right.
And second, Researchers found osteological markers,
including bone damage caused by water parasites
that are indigenous to lowland or coastal areas
of Peru. This confirms they had spent significant
portions of their lives elsewhere before moving
to Machu Picchu. And their diets shifted once
they arrived at the imperial estate, adapting
to the court's preference. Yes. Their previous
diets included varying levels of maize, potatoes,
grains, legumes, and fish, depending on where
they came from. But the analysis of their short
-term diet just prior to death, after they had
moved to Machu Picchu, showed a significant shift
toward a heavily corn -centric diet. This confirms
they adapted their food intake to what was likely
supplied and favored by the Inca elite at the
retreat. Let's talk about their work. Being support
staff for royalty sounds easier than hauling
stones in the Mide system. But what did the archaeology
actually tell us about their physical health
and daily labor? The archaeology strongly supports
the royal support staff theory. Most of the skeletal
remains found at the site show lower levels of
degenerative conditions like arthritis and significantly
fewer severe bone fractures compared to individuals
found in other parts of the Inca Empire. That's
a huge contrast. It is. When researchers look
at Inca individuals who performed heavy physical
labor, like the forced middle workers or those
who served in the military, their skeletons show
massive wear and tear. consistent with years
of taxing physical stress. But not at Machu Picchu.
Not really. The residents of Machu Picchu generally
lived less physically demanding lives, suggesting
their role was focused on specialized tasks,
administration, and support services, rather
than heavy construction or large -scale farming.
Beyond people, the sources mention animals, including
those imported for specific purposes. This again
highlights the incredible logistics involved.
Indeed. Many animal bones recovered. belonged
to lanas and alpacas. Now, these camelids naturally
live at much higher altitudes, closer to 4 ,000
meters in the Puna region. They were deliberately
brought down to the 2 ,400 -meter elevation of
Machu Picchu. And they were essential resources.
Essential. Imported for meat, transport, and
their high -quality pilts. And what about the
ubiquitous guinea pigs? They seem to have served
a ritual function. Guinea pigs were found in
special tomb caves, which suggests their use
in funerary rituals, a common practice across
the Inca Empire. Interestingly, six dogs were
also recovered. And their careful placement near
human remains suggests they were cherished companion
animals of the dead, which really adds some texture
to the daily lives of these retainers. Going
back to agriculture for a moment, we established
that they imported the topsoil, but they also
had 750 mouths to feed. How much farming did
they actually manage on those magnificent terraces?
The total cultivated terrace farming area only
accounted for about 4 .9 hectares, or just 12
acres. That's not a lot. Not at all. While they
grew staple crops like corn and potatoes, soil
and yield studies confirmed this amount was fundamentally
insufficient to support a population of 750 people
year -round. This is a critical piece of evidence.
It confirms the suggestion that Machu Picchu
could not possibly be a self -sustaining Its
food supply had to be constantly imported. Reliably
and constantly from surrounding valleys and farther
afield, reinforcing its profile as a specialized
seasonal royal retreat entirely dependent on
the empire's highly efficient logistical network.
Finally, what about rituals? Was this a place
of massive human sacrifice like we sometimes
hear about with other major Inca sites? Well,
while human sacrifice, specifically the Capacocha
ritual, which often involved children, was practiced
at major huacas or sacred places high up in the
Andes, there is little direct archaeological
evidence for it at Machu Picchu. Why do you think
that is? It may be because of its function as
a retreat rather than a primary administrative
center. Instead, the evidence points strongly
toward frequent and extensive animal offerings.
What kind of animal offerings? primarily camelids,
llamas, and alpacas. Their remains have been
documented near the Temple of the Condor and
adjacent caves, often associated with funerary
or general ceremonial purposes. The focus here
seems to have been more on solar rituals, ancestor
veneration, and agricultural requests, rather
than those severe imperial Capacocha sacrifices.
The architecture itself seems to reinforce that
specialized ceremonial and religious function
of the site. The urban layout is highly ordered,
right? It's deliberately split into two halves.
It is. You have the upper town, Hanan, which
was dedicated to the religious and ceremonial
activities, and then the lower town, Hurin, which
contained residences, doorhouses, and workshops.
These are all arranged around the main square
and structured into those trapezoidal compounds
called conchas. Let's focus on the upper town
and its most significant structure, the Torion,
or Temple of the Sun. This semicircular structure
is built right among these massive, naturally
occurring granite blocks. The Torion is magnificent.
It's a direct spiritual echo of the Coricancha,
the main Temple of the Sun in Cusco, because
of its parabolic enclosure wall. It's built with
the site's finest ashlar masonry, which we discussed
earlier, signifying its immense spiritual importance.
The base of the structure uses the natural bedrock,
which is carved with steps and platforms, creating
a cave -like space sometimes interpreted as the
Royal Mausoleum. And the upper chamber clearly
had an astronomical function, but maybe not in
the way we might imagine a modern observatory.
Exactly. The upper chamber features a Z -shaped
altar rock and a distinct system of three openings,
eastern, southeastern, and northern. Archaea
astronomical studies have shown that while the
taurion was not a highly precise astronomical
instrument for, say, predictive calculations,
it certainly incorporated solar orientations
for essential ritual purposes. So it was less
about science and more about making a spiritual
connection visible. That's a good way to put
it. It allows characteristic sunlight patterns
to fall across the altar rock at key times of
the year and provides limited framed views of
important star groups, like the Pleiades. And
the spiritual connection to the surrounding landscape,
the sacred mountains or Apis, is vital. A specific
trapezoidal opening in the Torion, sometimes
called the serpent's door, leads onto a small
platform that overlooks a series of pools and
provides a clear framed view of Huayna Picchu.
It integrates the celestial with the terrestrial.
Tying the structure to the peaks that were revered
as ancestral deities, yes. Speaking of celestial
connection, let's move to one of the most famous
sites, the Intuatana Stone. The place where the
sun is tied. This is one of the features that
always captures the imagination, but what was
its actual function? The Intuatana is a uniquely
carved ritual stone situated on its own terrace
hill within the Hanan sector, a prominence that
places it symbolically closer to the heavens.
While its exact function is still debated, it
definitely plays a significant role in solar
alignment. I recall a very specific and surprising
detail about its alignment and shadows. Yes.
This is a brilliant piece of engineering observation
based on the site's latitude, which is 13 degrees
south of the equator. Because of this location,
at midday on two specific dates, November 11
and January 30, the sun is situated almost exactly
above the pillar. Causing it to cast no shadow.
Exactly. It cast no shadow. And that alignment
would have been incredibly important for ceremonial
observations marking specific calendrical points.
It allowed them to fix the time of the sun's
passage through the zenith. It did. But it's
crucial to note that scholars generally reject
the popular idea that it was a simple solar calendar
nomad for basic daily timekeeping. Its primary
purpose was far deeper likely for horizontal
solar observations and holding profound symbolic
significance, visually aligning with sacred peaks
like Veronica, Salcante, and Huayna Picchu. So
if the Torreon focuses on the Pleiades and general
solar ritual and the Inti Potana focuses on shadowless
days, where do we find the most precise solar
observatory? That brings us to Inti Maché, or
the Sun Cave, a specialized structure located
on the eastern side of Machu Picchu. Architecturally,
this structure contains some of the finest masonry
found in the entire Inca Empire. The precision
of the stonework here is exceptional, even by
Inca standards. What makes its windows so specialized?
That unique, tunnel -like window is engineered
so that sunlight enters the cave interior only
for a few days around the December solstice.
Which is when the sun reaches its lowest arc
in the southern hemisphere. Right. This precise
alignment suggests it functioned explicitly as
a solar observatory linked to the Capac Rami,
or the Royal Feast of the Sun. This sounds like
a festival of major social and political importance.
It was crucial. The Capac Rami was a critical
festival where noble boys were initiated into
manhood through an ear -piercing ritual. Historical
sources suggest the ritual involved the initiates
watching the sunrise from inside the cave, marking
their transition as the sun aligned perfectly
with the structure. Wow, that underscores the
ceremonial gravity of this particular structure.
And the political elite who inhabited Machu Picchu
seasonally. Before we leave the sacred plaza,
let's quickly touch on the Temple of the Three
Windows. It sounds deceptively simple. but it's
architecturally complex. It stands prominently
on the Sacred Plaza and features this magnificent
trapezoidal wall made of large, finely worked
white granite blocks. It's defined by three oversized
trapezoidal openings flanked by two smaller niches.
Evidence suggests it was originally roofed by
a three -wall timber truss system designed to
let occupants observe both sunrise and sunset.
And this building actually holds a piece of modern,
if controversial, history that connects directly
to the rediscovery narrative. It does. It's notable
because this is precisely where the Peruvian
explorer Agustin Lizarga left his charcoal inscription
in 1902, years before Bingham arrived. That graffiti,
La Zarga in 1902, was clearly visible when Bingham
first photographed the site. It's a physical
testament to the local knowledge and prior visitation
that Bingham later minimized in his popular accounts.
The history of Machu Picchu's introduction to
the global stage is often simplified into Hiram
Bingham discovered the lost city in 1911. But
as we've established, the sources tell a much
messier, more complex story, especially when
it comes to who deserves credit. Right. And it
forces us to ask. What defines discovery? Bingham,
who was a Yale lecturer but not a trained archaeologist,
arrived in 1911 searching for a completely different
place, the lost Neo -Inca capital of Vitkos.
Which was later correctly identified elsewhere.
Correct. He was led to Machu Picchu not by academic
deduction, but by local indigenous knowledge.
He was searching along the Urubamba River, armed
with some general historical references. What
specific guidance did he receive? Well, at a
place called Mandopampa, he asked Melkor Arteaga,
a local farmer, who said he knew of excellent
ruins atop Huayna Picchu. The next day, July
24, 1911, Arteaga led Bingham up. They found
a small hut occupied by a Quechua couple, Rucharte
and Alvarez, who were actively farming the cleared
Inca terraces. So it wasn't exactly abandoned.
Not at all. And it was Ricard's 11 -year -old
son, Pablito, who actually led Bingham along
the ridge to the main ruins. So he was guided
to a site that was actively being farmed by local
families who were well aware of its existence.
That's already a huge blow to the whole lost
city narrative. And that's compounded by the
previous visitation we just discussed. Agustin
Lazarega had visited in 1902 and left his inscription.
In Bingham's own pocket field journal, he initially
noted, Augustin Lizarga is discoverer of Machu
Picchu. He wrote that down himself. He did. The
initial documentation clearly acknowledged the
local and previous Peruvian exploration. But
the narrative changed over time, didn't it? Bingham's
later writings downplayed Lazarega and the local
farmers. Significantly. While Bingham initially
acknowledged Lazarega in his early writings,
like Inca Land in 1922, he gradually minimized
his role, focusing instead on the scientific
importance of his own documentation. By his final,
famous version, Lost City of the Incas in 1952,
he had adopted the position that he was the scientific
discoverer. Claiming it was so overgrown he couldn't
even see it at first. Exactly. He essentially
argued that his expedition, sponsored by Yale
and National Geographic, was the one that brought
the ruins to international scientific attention,
making him the rightful discoverer. in a global
sense. The controversy didn't stop with the name
and the credit. It escalated dramatically when
Bingham started his full -scale excavations between
1912 and 1915. He removed thousands of items,
knives, jewelry, human bones, shipping them to
Yale under the guise of an 18 -month study period.
That sounds suspiciously convenient for Yale.
It was a complex legal gray area, but you have
to remember the context. Bingham was operating
under the 1852 Civil Code of Peru. And that law
stated that the discoverer of antiquities not
on private land was entitled to a share of the
fines. So he was technically adhering to that.
Technically. Yeah. He signed agreements to take
the artifacts for an 18 -month study period.
So he wasn't technically smuggling, but he was
exploiting a system that favored the Western
discoverer and using the lack of infrastructure
in Peru as justification to keep the items indefinitely.
Exactly. That 18 -month study period stretched
for nearly a century. Yale kept the artifacts,
citing Carew's lack of infrastructure, and the
removal included thousands of items, ceramic
vessels, silver statues, jewelry, human bones,
and a set of 15th century ceremonial knives made
from bismuth bronze, which are historically significant
as the earliest known artifacts with this specific
alloy. This provoked an intense local and cultural
fight in Peru, accusing Bingham of cultural malpractice
despite his adherence to the letter of the old
law. How long did it take for those protests
to really gain international traction? It took
decades. Local coalitions formed almost immediately,
but the dispute gained major international esteem
in the early 2000s. The Peruvian government launched
legal battles, demanding the return of all materials.
The pressure became intense, evolving from a
simple legal claim into a major international
cultural heritage fight. And the matter was resolved
officially only about a decade ago. Correct.
After years of intense legal and cultural pressure,
Yale finally acknowledged Peru's clear title
to all the objects in 2007. The agreement stipulated
Yale would share rights only in the research
collection, part of which would remain there
for continuing study. And the final batch was
returned when? The final batch of thousands of
artifacts was delivered in November 2012. They
are now permanently exhibited at the Machu Picchu
Museum Casa Concha in Cusco, securing them within
their cultural homeland. Fast forward to today,
the challenge isn't rediscovery or ownership,
it's preservation against overwhelming popularity.
What's the scale of modern tourism pressure and
how is it impacting the site? The pressure is
immense. Machu Picchu is Peru's most visited
international destination. We're talking well
over 1 .5 million visitors annually as of 2024.
This scale exposes the site to severe economic
and commercial pressures, forcing incredibly
difficult decisions about visitor management.
I know UNESCO has voiced concerns about overcrowding,
specifically citing potential erosion and damage
to the stonework from just the sheer volume of
foot traffic. What have authorities done to manage
that flow? Streaker entrance regulations began
in 2011. originally limiting daily visitors to
2 ,500. But the economic reality often outweighs
conservation concerns. Due to substantial lobbying,
that limit was significantly increased in 2024
to 4 ,500 daily, with up to 4 ,600 permitted
during peak seasons. And that's despite UNESCO's
concerns. Yes, despite previous concerns from
UNESCO that considered including the site on
its list of World Heritage in Danger. It's a
continuous balancing act between preservation
and economic necessity. And the sources mentioned
significant conflicts over infrastructure projects
near the site, often related to accommodating
that huge influx of people. Yes. There have been
numerous controversies. In the late 1990s and
again more recently, controversial plans for
cable cars, bridges, and luxury hotels have faced
widespread protests. Critics argued the government
failed to conduct proper environmental impact
surveys, threatening the fragile ecosystem. And
that opposition was strong enough to create a
no -fly zone. It was. A no -fly zone currently
exists above the area to protect the site from...
For travelers, accessing the site is complex.
What are the main physical routes? There are
three primary ways. First, the majority take
the scenic train from Cusco or Olante Tambo to
Aguas Calientes, the town below the ruins, and
then take a regulated bus up the mountain. Then
there's the Inca Trail. Right. The highly regulated
multi -day Inca Trail system that spans about
42 .5 kilometers and requires limited permits
and advanced booking because of the high environmental
impact of the trekking route. And the third,
more unconventional route. That's the hydroelectric
route. It involves traveling by road closer to
the hydroelectric station and then walking or
taking a short train to Aguas Calientes. It's
more affordable but carries higher risks during
the rainy season. And notably, the Peruvian government
is pursuing infrastructure improvements. There's
a paved highway under construction planned for
completion in 2025. Which will make access easier,
but probably increase traffic. That's the fear
among conservationists, yes. Finally, we should
note the site's designation as a sanctuary because
it involves more than just the stones. The whole
ecosystem is protected. Absolutely. In 1981,
Peru declared a vast area of 325 square kilometers
around Machu Picchu a historic sanctuary. This
protects not just the architecture, but also
the vast biodiversity of the Peruvian Yungas
and central Andean wet Puna ecoregions. The sanctuary
is home to over 550 tree species, as well as
fauna like the Andean condor, the puma, and the
spectacled bear. It's a conservation area of
global importance. So what does this deep dive
truly reveal about Machu Picchu? The deepest
insight is that it was far from an isolated,
lost city stumbled upon by a foreigner. It was
a strategically chosen, geologically informed,
short -lived royal estate. It dates slightly
earlier than we previously thought and was populated
by a highly diverse cosmopolitan retainer class
brought in from across the Inca Empire. And its
original identity, possibly Huayna Picchu, was
unfortunately overwritten by the narrative of
its modern rediscovery. But its true genius lies
in its construction. It's a remarkable story
of human mastery over nature. We learned that
the Inca intentionally located their city on
major fault lines, not out of foolishness, but
to gain easier access to materials, turning a
geological weakness into a massive logistical
strength. And then they stabilized the whole
structure using unparalleled dry masonry techniques,
trapezoidal shapes to resist sheer forces, and
those elaborate multi -layered hydraulic systems
that prevented the mountain from washing away.
The lessons in adaptive, sustainable engineering
and water management are profound, particularly
given the challenges we face today in volatile
environments. Which leaves us with this provocative
thought for you to mull over. Given that the
Inca intentionally located their city on fault
lines for building stability and material accessibility,
exploiting what we would call a risk, what assumptions
might we still be making about lost ancient cities?
And what essential lessons about sustainable
adaptive engineering might remain buried beneath
the moss and topsoil? Think about the genius
required to solve problems that way, you know,
using the land instead of fighting it. Thank
you for joining us on this deep dive. We'll see
you next time.