SH Archive Inca Terraces are Mine Remnants?

[Archive]

I recently spent a long time backpacking around Peru exploring the various enigmas. Terraces are one of the most profound yet unstudied topics of the area. The mainstream view is correct in the claim that some terraces were and are used for agriculture, but there are reasons to doubt that was their original purpose.

The mainstream view (Wiki):

"Terraced farming was developed by the Wari culture and other peoples of the south-central Andes before 1000 AD, centuries before they were used by the Inca, who adopted them. The terraces were built to make the most efficient use of shallow soil and to enable irrigation of crops by allowing runoff to occur through the outlet."

Many modern day researchers (Brien Foerster) claim these terraces, because of their (mostly) non polygonal retaining walls, were created by the Inca far after the "megalithic" construction era. The two different terrace styles can be seen at Ollanta, Polygonal at the bottom and upper left terraces, and the rough "ukun" pacha in between.

​

The scale and seamless integration of the terraces into the megalithic sites lead me to believe that it was the builders material/labor choice, rather than a less capable civilization. Viewing these constructions as the same project opens up some interesting possibilities.

Strip Mines:

A few weeks after I came back from Peru I was driving through the mountains of Colorado and passed a strip mine on the side of a mountain. After spending so much time hiking around terraces in Peru I was shocked to see such a similar structure at home. The further I looked into it the more convinced I am that these "Inca" terraces were primarily constructed as a byproduct of mining excavation.

Here is a photo of a strip mine:

Inca Terrace:

As you can see in the strip mine photo, the different levels of the mine have started to collapse. The logical next step would be to reinforce the levels by adding a supporting layer of stones. Some layers would need varying degrees of strength, which I believe explains the two different types of masonry found at Ollanta and other sites. This reaffirms that such a project as a whole, would have been undertaken as one project.

The scale of Inca terraces:

The amount of terraces throughout Peru is astounding and that is only what has been publicly uncovered. The terraces are not just a few levels, they often extend to the very top of mountains. The logistics of farming up an entire mountain when there is plenty of flat arable valley land is absurd. This is further amplified by the abundance of non reinforced upper mountain terraces. These can be seen on google maps satellite view, I highly recommend spending sometime looking north of Cusco and throughout the Sacred Valley on sat view.

Satellite view of a mountain top in Peru:

​

Satellite of a mountain top in Colorado:

​

This second photo is of a burn area in Colorado. The mountain has been mined in parallel strands. I believe the resemblance speaks for itself.

Conclusion:

Terraces have definitely been built and or used for agricultural purposes, but due to the immense scale, illogical origin story, and resemblance to modern day mining techniques, I believe that is enough to at the very least doubt the mainstream story.

Note: This OP was recovered from the Sh.org archive.

Note: Archived Sh.org replies to this OP are included in this thread.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Hipophoralcu
Date: 2020-06-28 09:13:17
Reaction Score: 0

I am always curious where all the stuff has gone that was mined everywhere around the planet in ancient times.
While there is arable land in the valleys, do you think you could better defend your harvest in the valley or on a terraced mountain?
Looks awful widespread and at the same time seemingly only the upper surface was mined. I find it unlikely that at this scale there was an uniform mineable stuff everywhere so near the surface. Ore deposits are not supposed to work like that, though i am not a geologist.

 

[usselo]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: usselo
Date: 2020-06-28 12:07:04
Reaction Score: 1

The mainstream view is correct in the claim that some terraces were and are used for agriculture, but there are reasons to doubt that was their original purpose.

Conclusion:

Terraces have definitely been built and or used for agricultural purposes, but due to the immense scale, illogical origin story, and resemblance to modern day mining techniques, I believe that is enough to at the very least doubt the mainstream story.

Great observations. You see the same thing in Portugal. Valleys lined with terraces top to bottom and for miles (OK, kilometres) along their length. Uranium was mined in one such area, and tungsten still is. I think I've seen evidence of similar in Spain. Italy might be worth a look too.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: dojod
Date: 2020-06-28 20:44:40
Reaction Score: 1

Looks awful widespread and at the same time seemingly only the upper surface was mined. I find it unlikely that at this scale there was an uniform mineable stuff everywhere so near the surface. Ore deposits are not supposed to work like that, though i am not a geologist.

About 90% of ore mined in the United states is from surface mining. It depends on the ore and location of course, but the scale and uniformity is what makes surface mining "easy" and profitable. Specifically, this would be contour strip mining. The Wikipedia description is interesting:

""Contour mining" involves removing the overburden above the mineral seam near the outcrop in hilly terrain, where the mineral outcrop usually follows the contour of the land. Contour stripping is often followed by auger mining into the hillside, to remove more of the mineral. This method commonly leaves behind terraces in mountainsides."


Surface mining is often combined with Sub-surface. As that is underground, we would have no idea because they are often back filled with the tailings and collapse eventually. Even in modern times we do not know where recent sub surface tunnels are. In South Dakota they built an entire neighborhood over a relatively recent gypsum mine and just had to evacuate.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Hipophoralcu
Date: 2020-06-29 05:51:28
Reaction Score: 0

About 90% of ore mined in the United states is from surface mining. It depends on the ore and location of course, but the scale and uniformity is what makes surface mining "easy" and profitable. Specifically, this would be contour strip mining. The Wikipedia description is interesting:

""Contour mining" involves removing the overburden above the mineral seam near the outcrop in hilly terrain, where the mineral outcrop usually follows the contour of the land. Contour stripping is often followed by auger mining into the hillside, to remove more of the mineral. This method commonly leaves behind terraces in mountainsides."


Surface mining is often combined with Sub-surface. As that is underground, we would have no idea because they are often back filled with the tailings and collapse eventually. Even in modern times we do not know where recent sub surface tunnels are. In South Dakota they built an entire neighborhood over a relatively recent gypsum mine and just had to evacuate.

Surface mining is widespread, yes. Maybe if i try to use other words. Looking up biggest strip mines, i ended up with badged 288 and Black Rock Thunder coal mine in Wyoming. Comparing this to the area of terraces, the coal mine is tiny in my opinion.