TH2UD

[Harte]

Yes, I love how all of you keep using modern day techniques to describe the building methods. Yet, the big fat elephant in the room -- no one can explain how it was done.

You said this before, and I gave you a link.
Nobody's fault but your own now.

We don't hav the type of sophistication to this day. Please, once again, explain how they knew their techniques were anti-seismic in construction. Our structure today last maybe 100 years with constant maintenance. Theirs have lasted 10's of thousands with zero maintenance. Such primitive beings, with such advanced knowledge..........

Explain how you know that this is particularly anti-seismic. I mean, only the exposed surfaces have these fine joints. Behind that is fill.
Explain how you know that the Inca did this for earthquake resistance.

This is a retaining wall, not a lowest-bid skyscraper.
How long do you suppose a stone retaining wall built today would last? This one is only a little over 500 years old. Are there older walls in existence still standing?

Harte

[Harte]

This is rich. The Inca themselves, proclaimed they did not build the foundations.....

I do believe this is the end of the conversation.

If you think that, you got it from some fringe shyster, not from the Inca, and you've never even read what the Inca actually said to the Spanish about Sacsayhuaman AND Cusco.
Several of the Spanish Chronicles are available free online. You have chosen not to read them.

Harte

[Byrd]

Yes, I love how all of you keep using modern day techniques to describe the building methods. Yet, the big fat elephant in the room -- no one can explain how it was done. We don't hav the type of sophistication to this day. Please, once again, explain how they knew their techniques were anti-seismic in construction. Our structure today last maybe 100 years with constant maintenance. Theirs have lasted 10's of thousands with zero maintenance. Such primitive beings, with such advanced knowledge..........

Ancient Egypt is my milieu; not the ancient Americas.

However, if I recall correctly, the structures you are actually relatively recent (no more than 800 years old) and came about during a time when they had access to bronze and iron tools.  And they started working with stone in the very distant prehistoric.  So the remarkable features you're talking about didn't just suddenly show up (as it seems that you think) and they weren't present all throughout the history of this civilization; they were developed over hundreds and thousands of years and were inherited from older civilizations.

The Maya were the successors of the Olmec (roughly 1200 to 400 BCE) and rose from the Archaic Period (begins around 8000 BCE and ends around 2000 BCE).  So, by the time that the stonework you mention appears, they'd been building in stone and creating marvelous statues (and jade ornaments) for 3,000 years.

 If you look carefully at the stonework on these sites (in order by age) you will see that the "earthquake resistant" feature didn't appear in the early examples.  It only appears later.  Same with the types of close-fitting joins.  In addition, they used different types of stone very differently (some people think of "stone" as a single substance, when it can actually range from "easily carved" (like soapstone) to "easy to mine an shape (like limestone) to tough substances like jade and granite and basalt (different techniques for different stones.)  There are as many different textures and hardnesses and durabilities as there are...well... rocks.

People have written many books and papers about this (sadly, a lot of them are scholarly and tiring to read) -- but you might enjoy the brief overview at this site  (short reference: https://www.mayaincaaztec.com/mia-simila...ne-masonry)

For something longer that compares Mesoamerican stonework during two different times, here's this: https://drmsh.com/PaleoBabble/Who%20Taug...asonry.pdf

[Heiden]

If you think that, you got it from some fringe shyster, not from the Inca, and you've never even read what the Inca actually said to the Spanish about Sacsayhuaman AND Cusco.
Several of the Spanish Chronicles are available free online. You have chosen not to read them.

Harte

.


You have no clue what was actually said. You read it in a book and believed it.I love how the educated people think they are always right about something they learned from a book. Education and Intelligence are 2 separate things with no relation to each other. You educated amigos sure are annoying and I've seen so many threads ruined by your educated bullshit

[Heiden]

Some people think for themselves, others just think what a book tells them. As a matter of fact I read this great history book called The Wizard of Oz. Totally true. Everything

[Harte]

You have no clue what was actually said. You read it in a book and believed it.I love how the educated people think they are always right about something they learned from a book. Education and Intelligence are 2 separate things with no relation to each other. You educated amigos sure are annoying and I've seen so many threads ruined by your educated bullshit

To the extent that we know ANY "history" of the Inca, we know it through the Spanish Chroniclers.
The Inca didn't leave some "history" - they wrote with knots in ropes.

You made a statement about what the Inca said concerning Sacsayhuaman. I know for a fact that your statement is in error. I know this because I've read some of what the Spanish recorded.

As you can see, it's an easy step from there to surmise that you haven't actually read any of the history of the Inca and, given I've heard your erroneous statement from fringe con men before, I deduced your source of the claim to be one of those.

I'd point out that posting the opposite of the truth is, in itself, annoying, and you have no idea the number of such posts I've been through - though not here, at ATS and elsewhere.

You are annoying with your chronic astonishment.

Harte

[Harte]

Some people think for themselves, others just think what a book tells them. As a matter of fact I read this great history book called The Wizard of Oz. Totally true. Everything

Are you saying that the Spanish credited the Inca with the building of Sacsayhuaman when the Inca didn't build it? For what?
Right, they credited the brown people in the 1500's. The original DEI.

Harte

[Heiden]

Are you saying that the Spanish credited the Inca with the building of Sacsayhuaman when the Inca didn't build it? For what?
Right, they credited the brown people in the 1500's. The original DEI.

Harte

How did you come up with this when. I said absolutely nothing even close to what you are saying. You just make shit up alot?

[Harte]

How did you come up with this when. I said absolutely nothing even close to what you are saying. You just make shit up alot?

You claim to know what the Inca said, don't you?
You obviously didn't read that in any book, given your disdain for books.

I'll state again - to the extent that we know ANYTHING about what the Inca said, we know it from what the Spanish reported. The reports you haven't read.
So, you imply that the Spanish Chronicles have been manipulated - or fabricated - to give the Inca credit for building Sacsayhuaman. In the 1500's. By European racists.

Do you understand now?

Harte

[Hanslune]

Excuse me, but isn't "Harte" part of the titular acronym of this thread? :D

Harte

No not on Monday's