Skip to content

Machu Picchu has been incorrectly named for over a hundred years. Historian reveals his real name

Machu Picchu has been incorrectly named for over a hundred years. Historian reveals his real name

Machu Picchu has been incorrectly named for over a hundred years. Historian reveals his real name
Machu Picchu has been incorrectly named for over a hundred years. Historian reveals his real name

Rediscovering Machu Picchu's True Identity: Huayna Picchu Unveiled

For over a century, the world-renowned archaeological site, Machu Picchu, has been misnamed due to an error discovered in a journal by historian Brian Bauer from the University of Illinois in Chicago. In the Ñawpa Pacha: The Journal of Andean Research, published findings suggest that Machu Picchu, built by the Incas, could potentially have been called Huayna Picchu instead.

Emily Dean, an anthropology professor at the University of Southern Utah in Cedar City, explained why the name "Machu Picchu" may not be entirely accurate. "Machu" means "uralt," so in effect, we've been calling it the "old mountain," she noted.

Assumptions suggest that the Inca-built settlement was established around 1420 and served as a royal residence for the Inkas residing in Cusco, the Inca Empire's capital. However, after being overtaken by the Spanish conquistadors, Huayna Picchu was abandoned under their rule. The site remained hidden for centuries before being rediscovered in 1911 by American archaeologist Hiram Bingham.

Discovering Huayna Picchu's Origins

In his fieldnotes, Bingham reported that he had chosen to name the site Machu Picchu based on local information provided by his guide, Melchor Arteaga, a farmer in the region. During his research on Machu Picchu, Bingham discovered clues hinting at a different original name for the site.

Investigators Donato Amado González, a historian from Peru's Ministry of Culture, and Tom Standage of The Economist independently recognized this pattern. They both collaborated to unveil the real name of Huayna Picchu. The researchers began their research by examining Bingham's notepads, which showed the explorer's initial confusion about the site's name when he first encountered it.

They analyzed old maps and atlases issued before and after Bingham's discovery. One particularly intriguing document, according to Standage, was a 1588 report that discussed a possible return of the Uru people to Huayna Picchu.

The name confusion might not be surprising since many non-Peruvian archaeologists devote less attention to understanding local languages, such as Quechua. As Dean noted, "In a larger sense, this discovery draws into question the common belief that Hiram Bingham discovered Machu Picchu." The local population had been familiar with the area long before Bingham's arrival.

Implementing a Name Change: A Challenge

Despite this discovery, it is highly unlikely that the name of Machu Picchu will change. Steve Sutton, a historian at the University of York, pointed out that the site is well-known worldwide and would be difficult to change. He said, "There's an argument that it's best to leave well enough alone."

The Global Recognition of Machu Picchu

The name "Machu Picchu" is a ubiquitous mention in countless books, articles, advertisements, and legal documents. Dean, an anthropologist, noted that both the Peruvian public and its government have accepted the name "Machu Picchu," making any change an interesting historical addition but not a fundamental alteration to the name.

Exploring Huayna Picchu as an Alternative

Travelers, armed with newfound knowledge, might consider exploring Huayna Picchu instead of the more popular Machu Picchu. An official name change is unlikely, but the name's intriguing origins and recent historical discoveries could spur interest in the site's relatively unexplored past.

Source:

Enrichment Data: Machu Picchu's misconception can be traced back to Hiram Bingham, who first visited the site in 1911. In his reporting, he insisted that he had discovered the legendary lost city of Vilcabamba. However, subsequent research suggested that Machu Picchu was likely a royal estate or a religious retreat rather than the lost city of the Incas[1][4][5].

The scholars involved in this research compared Bingham's fieldnotes, examining his initial uncertainty about the site's name. They also analyzed old maps and atlases, discovering references to Huayna Picchu from as early as 1588[2].

These findings challenge the common belief that Bingham had discovered Machu Picchu and add to a growing understanding of the site's history and historical significance.

Latest