Is This How The Inca Walls Were FINISHED/JOINED So Perfectly?

Inca masonry is highly regarded as some of the most advanced stone work on the planet, especially as it was done by an ancient culture who we’re generally taught only had access to primitive tools and building methods, it’s no wonder why even the top researchers and scientists around the world are still scratching their heads about how these stones were cut and fit together so perfectly and uniquely. The stone work is truly mesmerising to look at, every block being individually shaped and cut to fit the ones surrounding it, where not a pin, a piece of paper, or a razor blade could be squeezed in the joints, it’s like an elegantly perfect megalithic jigsaw puzzle. The material used for the blocks ranges from limestone in mainly foundation constructions, to granite and andesite which would usually be used for the more prominent constructions or widely visible walls. Some of the most notable places featuring this architecture include Machu Picchu, Sacsayhuaman and Ollantaytambo in Peru.

There's also evidence that this architecture could have been constructed around 1,200-800bc as there is radiocarbon dating showing occupation from around that time found in Machu Picchu, so I will cover if the Inca's even built these walls in one of my next video's.

Thanks for watching, please subscribe

#PolygonalWalls #IncaWalls #PeruvianWalls

[ArchaeoLogic]

I have been looking into the geopolymer theories too so will make a video when I have enough information as I've stumbled on some new techniques lately that I was unaware of too, and yes we've known for a long time that ancient cultures used concrete etc so it's not beyond the realms of possibility.

However, most people commenting about geopolymer use this as an answer to how they handled large stones, but when considering this there's still things I question, for example:
- If the Inca walls were made using geopolymer, why do we find large stones clearly pounded into shape still in quarries with drag marks left there unfinished?
- If they used geopolymer for large stones in Egypt why is the unfinished obelisk left there half cut from the bedrock after most likely cracking so they abandoned it?
- If the Serapeum boxes were made from geopolymer why is there a box left in one of the hallways, they wouldn't have built it in that spot so it was clearly being transported.
- If the huge 800 ton blocks at the Temple of Jupiter in Baalbek were geopolymer, why is there a quarry still with a few blocks a similar size clearly cut from bedrock (eg. stone of the pregnant woman) nearly a kilometer away from the temple?

We know ancient cultures used concrete and probably other geopolymer materials for certain things, but I'm not sold on that being the answer to the handling of large stones, most evidence still points to hard labour and a large workforce, but I'm always happy to charge my stance with new evidence :)

[Alpheccca]

Until someone actually constructs a similar wall or building, it will remain a mystery.

[col]

Could work on settling the stone one on top of the other but, last I checked, gravity doesn't act horizontally - and yet the joints are still perfect on that direction too.

[SirCharles]

Test it. Sounds easy enough. Make a slurry of the sulphuric acid mud and paste it around some roughly cut stones forming a small wall. Should be easy to get a grant for the test and a paper published afterwards.

[lesboyce]

How does this explain the vertical joints that have no weight pressure ?

[Gkm]

4:03: ahhhh. Finally, a YouTube presenter who knows, and utilizes, the difference between theory and hypothesis! THANK YOU. As for this particular hypothesis, while it might help explain the joints between the blocks we are still left with an ancient civilization cutting, and then moving among mountains, and then cutting again to perfectly fit, GRANITE blocks as large as 25x17x3 feet and weighing upwards of 130 tons. Hypothetically using only manual labor and/or animal labor.

[elainemunro]

So let’s see someone use it in a sample? Hypotheses are only good if they can be tested. Otherwise, MEANINGLESS.

[fredbassett]

the Inca themselves say they didn't do this stonework. they found it and preserved it.

[drebelbisengineering]

I agree with your hypothesis. A similar condition occurs with detrimental effects in concrete. Aggregate in concrete with a high silica content, e.g. flint, chert, quartz is adversely affected by alkali ions transported by water that infiltrates the concrete through microcracks. The water either contains Na or K which combine with OH to form alkali or the water combines with the CaO in the concrete to release OH. Upon contact with reactive aggregate, the hydroxide reacts with the aggregate in a process know as Alkali Silica Reaction (ASR) or "concrete cancer" forming calcium-silicate-hydrate gel. The gel has minimal strength and expands as it absorbs water. In concrete the pressure due to expansion, cracks the concrete and the gel eventually oozes out of the fissures in the concrete. Acidic solutions may induce a similar process, and I know that hydrochloric acid is used to remove or etch concrete.

[conservativemike]

The Inca were squatters who moved-in long after the original builders moved on.

[SRBrown]

One hypothesis I've seen is using "string saws" to make cuts where the string is looped through a acid solution like the one mentioned, then over the stone, sort of like a bandsaw, but with string and acid rather than steel teeth. I saw it a long time ago and can't find it now, but interesting nonetheless

[johnwarner]

I've been to Egypt and seen the pyramids, and to Cusco and Machu Picchu. The structures and materials are different, yet many of the same techniques were employed. In all cases, it's only the visible front surfaces that are sculpted and fitted with precision. All other surfaces are rough and unfinished. In Cusco and the pyramids in Egypt you can see how rough things were on the back sides. Totally unfinished. To make the finishing stones sit in proper orientation with the others behind and to the sides of them, they used a form of concrete made from the rock chips and some form of binding agent. When it came to matching edges on the visible front surfaces, various techniques, or combination of techniques, were used. In Egypt, a local showed us how easy it was to shape granite. They just rub a large granite rock with a smaller hand-held granite rock. The nodules of granite rub away at a very high rate. Don't know how they did limestone, but rubbing was also likely the way it was done. They'd get things to match up as close as possible, set them in place with their concrete, then make a crack filler mixture using granite or limestone dust and some binding agent. This would be pushed into the cracks and formed, then left to harden. Probably more interesting than the actual fitting of the stones themselves, was how they moved these multi-ton rocks around as they were being worked. That's the REAL mystery. They'd have to lift them in and out as the fitting process was taking place. They had to do this over and over until everything was sitting just right. Not an easy feat.

[pushrod]

While this is an interesting idea, I'm still pondering why and how they manipulated such large stones.

[AethericEchoes]

One big advantage to this theory over those such as softening the stones somehow, is that this one can be tested experimentally using known technology.

Sorry. The Inca's had nothing to do with the megalithic ruin sites other than the Inca's were squatters. The only thing the Inca's built were crude structures from broken rocks that were the debris from the cataclysm that ended the ice age.

[samyoungblood]

I’m starting to wonder if they didn’t use a recipe for a more solid forming concrete. A mix that would create granite and other hard stones. Has anyone ever noticed the concrete bag method being used? Just stacking dry bags of quickcrete? They spray the bags with water and leave them. Eventually forming perfect walls of concrete. If the ancients used a similar method using giant burlap bags of a special blend of sands and lime to form larger more solid finished walls. Just a thought. Thinking of trying it out with various size bags and recipes for Concrete or geopolymer mixes.

[baraskparas]

An Egyptian technique offered on TV proposed a chalk staining of the bottom stone, resting the top stone on it and then grinding away the protuberances on the top stone that were stained by chalk. Obviously a technique involving gripping the top stone and moving it was needed. That was done by gripping large handles on the stone with long timbers and using several men and leverage to do the moving work.

[tommyh.]

If the combination of weight and acid worked at all, then the horizontal joints would be most effected. The vertical joints, not so much or not at all. Back to the drawing board.

[bigred]

I read a synopsis of this paper also, and having done chemistry find it compelling and plausible as an explanation for the contact surfaces of the stones used in those buildings, and walls etc.

[robertqueberg]

It is great that people still have the courage and confidence to offer up their ideas about how many different and previously unexplained issues have come to be everyday processes. Fear of ridicule by small minds, only causes the unsolvable to remain unsolved.
Having worked as a toolmaker, charged with solutions to problems, or meeting productivity goals needed to achieve a higher percentage of the market share, I learned to think about previous experiences, and to discuss ideas with people known to be able to listen, and offer support or rebuttal of my ideas. From there it was GO time.
As I understand the concept put forth here, each individual joint should show some residue of the original stones, that were eroded or dissolved by the addition of the solution on each joint face. I would be tempted to reject the chemical solution theory if there is no evidence of any loose, dry leveling material having been used. My first question would be, about the accuracy that was available to the people cutting, measuring, and assembling any two blocks. If the faces were chipped away with crude iron chisels and hammers, such as were used to create large buildings in Europe and Asian civilizations at similar times, I would “doubt” that the magic water theory, would be a viable one. Now that the opinions are on the table, it is time to take off the suits and put on the work clothes, while testing things in real world situations.