Cusco & Machu Picchu
We travel extensively, and I am often asked about my favourite trip. If it’s not about fishing (Alaska) I always reply Cusco, Peru. The response is always the same. “Did you get to Machu Picchu?”. The question irritates me even though the answer is yes. You ask why? I have been to both Cusco & Machu Picchu on three occasions, and if I ever return, it will be only to Cusco. The reason is Sacsayhuaman, in my opinion, a most amazing and unexplained site and far more so than Machu Picchu.
The base (original) construction at both sites is the same. No mortar is used, and it is not possible to insert paper where the stones join. Both sites contain add-ons to the original that involve significantly smaller stones and less precise joining, which I speculate was the work of the Incas. Machu Picchu has a 3rd layer that represents very sloppy attempts at modern-day restoration.
What makes the difference:
Altitude
Machu Picchu, 7,972 ft, Cusco, 11,152 ft Sacsayhuaman, 12,142 ft Just up a very steep hill from Cusco
Location of the Quarry Sites:
The stone quarry at Machu Picchu is known as the “Quarry of Machu Picchu.” It is located near the archaeological site of Machu Picchu in Peru. The quarry is between Machu Picchu and Huayna Picchu, just adjacent to the archeological site. Many of the stones weigh in excess of 5 tons, and some are in the 20-to-30-ton range.
The massive limestone blocks at Sacsayhuamán were primarily quarried from local sites near Cusco. The closest and most prominent quarries used for these colossal stones—many weighing over 100 tons and several nearly 200 tons—include Muyna Waqoto, Rumiqolqa (located about 20 to 32 kilometers away).
Difficulty in transporting:
At Machu Picchu, stones are quarried adjacent, so easy
At Sacsayhuamán, the much heavier stones were transported a long distance and in some cases across a river to Cusco and then another 1,000 ft up a very steep hill to the site.
So why is it that Machu Picchu gets so much more attention? It starts with the fallacy that the Incas where amazing and I’m not sure that is true. The Incas reigned for less than 200 years. The Mayans for about 3,000. I speculate that the Incas adopted many of their sites and at least a portion of their trails from an earlier civilization. There is no “direct” evidence that they constructed the original stones at either site, and there are reports from the early Spanish that confirm that.
The 2nd was that programs like Ancient Aliens & The Unexplained give it more viability and credibility by siting it’s elevation but completely ignoring that Sacsayhuaman is over 4,000 higher.
There is no comparison. If you make it to Cusco, you now know where to go. It’s easier and much less expensive to visit.
