Ö÷²¥´óÐã

Ancient and Archaeology  permalink

Inca wells

• Message 1. 

  Posted by Priscilla (U14315550) on Saturday, 29th October 2011

  Once a flippant reply comes to mind, and dealt with, does any one know what shape Inca water wells were. Hearing yet again remarks about their lack of arches etc, I was reminded on the Indus valley wells which were all circular whilst the town layouts/buildings were all straight lines and no arches /domes that we know of.
  
  Circular wells make sense for heaving up a skin/bucket of water, and I assume strength so though the shape was known understood in this and other ancient cultures and used curved building was not thought necessary in other structures. It was not that the notion had not been 'discovered' but that they had no purpose for it.
  
  So were Inca wells circular?
  
  Regards, P.
  

  Link to this forum: Inca wells

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Saturday, 29th October 2011

  P, I haven't been able to track down anything about Inca wells, they seem to have relied on constructing channels to bring spring water down from the mountains where rivers were not sufficient or suitable.

  Link to this forum: Inca wells

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Monday, 31st October 2011

  Inca irrigation is difficult to generalise about since it features varying solutions to the equally varying challenges presented by local terrain.
  
  The giant Chan Chan complex, for example, unlike most of what we associate with "typical" Inca architecture, was built on a coastal plain far from any mountains or higher water sources from which water could be safely or economically channelled. The site consists of ten large walled areas, each almost a town in itself and each with its own independent water supply. These wells were constructed by tunnelling at an angle through the bedrock, the gradient being shallow enough to walk on without difficulty. Where space proved a contsraint to this method the approaching walkway was zig-zagged. Incidentally, the internal roofing of these wells was constructed using a corbel arch technique, hardly impressive in arch technology until one realises that these roofs were made of baked mud slabs.
  
  This shallow well technique was possible due to a high water table, typical then in Peru for those plains with a slight elevation above sea level. Where the elevation was higher it was more typical and eminently more feasible to settle near springs and then channel the water to the nearby dependent agricultural district. For that reason deep wells were a rarity (one exists in Tambomochay and it is indeed round).
  
  It is important to remember also that "Inca" reflects only the last local power-base to control the area before the coming of the Europeans. Prior to this, overall power appears to have changed hands several times, even in the traditional Inca heartland around Cuzco. There is really no such thing then as "genuine" Inca architecture since much of what bears that name now was innovated and employed by other diverse cultures prior to their takeover. Chan Chan, for example, was built by the Chimu, the "royal bath" of Tambomochay appears to predate Inca Cuzco by two centuries.
  
  As an aside: Much is made of the Incas shunning "the wheel". However they and their neighbours were no strangers to rollers, pulleys, wheeled fulcrums and other applications of "rolling technology". What they really didn't invent (and had no use for) was "the cart". I imagine an equally pragmatic approach was taken by the locals with regard to the requirement to build an arch. It is possibly not that the concept was beyond them, simply that it was of no practical use to them whatsoever given the alternative solutions they so successfully employed.

  Link to this forum: Inca wells

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by Priscilla (U14315550) on Monday, 31st October 2011

  Thank you for that, Nordmann. Interesting also anout the use of wheels as simple machines.
  
  I do get disturbed by generalisation and assumptions about ancient cultures in the narrated dialogue of the partially informed. Likewise, over developed theory based on a tiny 'find' is no better.
  
  Over laid cultures, yes that is another interesting aspect. In the Indus valley, taking wells as an example, though bullt on the same base and brick size, the quality of the culture's skills deteriorates considerably several times.
  
  They now stand like high chimneys because Sir Mortimer Wheeler had to dig deep to expose the remarkable original sophisticated habitation. I ought add that he then had to rebuild much of it to make sense of the house, street grid, and drainage system.
  
  Thank you other posters also for attaching no blue pun posts to my daft title.
  
  Regards, P.

  Link to this forum: Inca wells

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 4.

  Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Monday, 31st October 2011

  I agree completely about assumptions which tend to denegrate past cultures based solely on the basis of selected technologies deemed to be inferior.
  
  Chan Chan is a superb case in point. At the time of its construction it is estimated to have had around 50,000 inhabitants - an 11th century city therefore of comparable size to London. Unlike London it had ample fresh water for all its citizens, an effective sewage system, and seemingly no problem with feeding its inhabitants since it appears to have produced agricultural surpluses for the two centuries it existed prior to being taken over by the Aztecs (which is why they probably did so). When one thinks of London during the same two centuries one is forced to ask oneself which of the two communities was living the better life - those in technologically advanced England or those in the mud buildings of Chan Chan?

  Link to this forum: Inca wells

  Report message5

Back to top