Forum

Author of the Month

The Disappearance Of The Children Of Viracocha, Part 3: Cuzco: The City Which The Inca Found, Not Founded (cont.)
By Brien Foerster

By far the greatest quantity and quality of Hanan Pacha structures are found in the area above Cuzco, in the proximity of Sachsayhuaman, and in the nearby Sacred Valley. So numerous are these “forbidden” artefacts, some, such as Qenqo, Chinkana and Amaru Machay, which are bigger than a house, that Jesus Gamarra suggests that there are possibly 5000 of them in the general area.

If, as theorized, Hanan Pacha works are as old or even older than Tiwanaku or Puma Punku, then could Cuzco and the Sacred Valley of Peru be much more ancient than most archaeologists suggest? It would seem so.

As has been discussed earlier, general consensus by academia would have us believe that Cuzco was first inhabited by the Inca in 1200 AD, and that they “civilized” the inhabitants found there. Then who made the andesite Hanan Pacha works, which are clearly, based on weathering patterns alone, several thousand years old?

Indeed, all works universally attributed to the Inca become very suspect when the Hanan Pacha works, and others, are looked at and taken into account.

The Coricancha, or “Courtyard Of Gold” which has been well established as having been the center of the Inca world since their arrival, has not been satisfactorily explained as to the date of construction, or even how it was achieved.

The great outer wall that faces the Avenida del Sol, and has a major protruding curve in its design, on top of which stands the Church of Santo Domingo, of Spanish colonial origin, is composed of curved basalt blocks, approximately 2 feet on each side. The basalt of which it is constructed was quarried from a site 60 km away.

Are we led to believe that a culture that has just arrived in a new place goes to the trouble of accessing stone from this great distance to build its first major structure? It is far more plausible that the Coricancha was already there, and that the Inca adopted it, and expanded on it over time, as can equally be said for Sachsayhuaman, the grand “fortress” that stands on a hill just north of Cuzco.

The latter is probably the most famous of “Inca” achievements due to its grand scale. It is a zigzag wall consisting of three levels, with the largest stones being employed on the first or ground level. Each block is unique in shape and size, with some being at least 18 feet tall, 4 feet in depth, and perhaps approaching 100 tons, or more, in weight.

The stone on this level is a highly crystallized limestone, having a creamy colour. Aside from the grand size of each stone, is the fact that many show shallow depressions, some rectangular in nature, as if the stones were moulded and shaped like dough or soft concrete. Moreover, if the surface of these stones had been finished, in terms of shaping, with hard stone such as obsidian, why are there no tool marks? Were they sanded down as some would propose?

Palace enclosures, such as that where the Sapa Inca Pachacutec was born, just across the street from the Coricancha, show marks on the outer surface of the stones of white dots, which are tool marks left by the builders. So if Sachsayhuaman is contemporary with this building, give or take 100 years, where are the tool marks?

The suggestion that quartz sand and water were used as a way to polish the stone surfaces of Sachsayhuaman, and thus reduce or erase the presence of tool marks is preposterous. If this had been the case, then why had the shallow depressions described above have been left? Aesthetically, that would be the equivalent of a furniture maker polishing a table top, and leaving hammer marks in the surface behind.

PreviousPage 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Page 7Page 8Next

Site design by Amazing Internet Ltd, maintenance by Synchronicity. G+. Site privacy policy. Contact us.

Dedicated Servers and Cloud Servers by Gigenet. Invert Colour Scheme / Default