Machu Picchu's population

You are now here: Rediscover Machu Picchu / Machu Picchu's population

Who lived in the city and how did the population disappear?       

What we know for certain and what we can theorize about who live in Machu Picchu   

Because Machu Picchu was never discovered by the Spanish conquistadores, there are no documents about who exactly inhabited the citadel. We can only create theories based on what we know from Spanish chronicles about other similar cities.

When professor Hiram Bingham discovered the ruins in 1911, the city was covered with plants, most of the structures filled with earth, there were no inhabitants. However, there were groups of locals who often wondered to the area, some even lived up there.   

The original population of Machu Picchu has disappeared, leaving no descendants behind. Most likely, the city was abandoned several hundreds of years ago, long before the Spanish arrived to Peru. Maybe even before America was discovered.

Scientists approximate the population of Machu Picchu to around 750. There are 140 stone buildings, most of them houses and many built for religious purposes. The most plausible theory is that the city was inhabited primarily by priests, rich Incas, important people.

Archaeologists have excavated over 200 skeletons: 135 men and 109 women.

However, the number of remains is much lower that that of the approximated number of inhabitants (750), suggesting that the city was left for some (unknown reason).

Because Machu Picchu is over 500 years-old and if it weren't left by the Incas, then several generations would have come one after another. In that case, several thousands of skeletons should be buried.

It is also a possibility that the citadel was under populated, less people living there than it could hold.

Where did Machu Picchu's population disappear?

What could have happened to the Inca population of the "Old Peak"?

There could be 3 possible theories: the possibility of a conflict due to which the population could have died or they could have died due to a deadly epidemic, then there's the possibility that they simply left the city for some reason.     

The possibility of massacre by the Spanish army is excluded, there were no signs of occupation, nor of any destruction inflicted by military force. Machu Picchu has remained well conserved. Other people, different from Incas living in the area, such as jungle tribes from the eastern part of the region could not have had the strength to destroy such a strategically well-placed and possibly well defended citadel like Machu Picchu.

Machu Picchu was chosen a location that itself contributes to the defense, regardless of how many people were in it or how well armed they were. Any attacking force might have had a major disadvantage when trying to take it.

There's another possibility for the conflict theory... Other Incas could have killed the inhabitants of Machu Picchu. Wars between Inca tribes was quite common. Often, whole communities were annihilated. For example, when Huayna Capac (or Wayna Capac) defeated the Caranques, he ordered the execution of all remaining members of that community. Some believe that the population of Machu Picchu could have fallen victim to such an atrocity.

The Incas had very severe rules, sometimes guilty persons were killed along with their families and even house animals.

But there's no sign of violence on human remains found. So, the possibility of massacre can be excluded.

The city could also have been emptied by people from the outside, like in an act of mass hostage-taking or looting.

Most of the time we hear about the city being abandoned, but some theorists say that the hidden citadel was probably ravaged by disease and the population rapidly died out.

The disease theory points out to the fact that epidemics were quite common in Latin America and often whole cities died out. Like in 1940, when the population of an area close to Machu Picchu was decimated by malaria. A skeleton of a rich woman was found by Hiram Bingham on the site of the citadel and it bared signs of syphilis. It being a contagious disease, could mean that a whole community could contract the deadly disease and die. Such diseases could have slowly killed the inhabitants. Plague or malaria could have wiped the population out fast, just in a few months, perhaps weeks.

Quarantining is also a possibility. If, for example, plague had broken out, then the sick must have been isolated and the healthy could have left the city. 

But, the relatives must have had time to bury their dead and if it's true, then there should be signs of the illness. But there isn't.

Like plague eliminated millions of people in Europe of the middle ages, something might have happened here too and Machu Picchu's population fell victim to it.

We do not know for sure, but a slight possibility exists that the locals died because of illness. Nobody managed to prove the theory, because no signs of the same deadly illness have been found on large numbers of skeletons.

Finally, let's see what we can say about the theory that says that the population simply abandoned the city.

Most archaeologists believe that the inhabitants of the "city in the clouds" have left before the Spaniards have arrived. Machu Picchu was constructed somewhere in the mid or late 1400s and the Spaniards have arrived at the end of the 1520s. The fact that the inhabitants have abandoned the city before the arrival of the conquistadores, has added more to its "invisibility". Due to the fact that there was no Inca movement in the area, it hasn't crossed the Spaniards' minds that something might be "up there". The valley is long, steep mountains and deep jungle conceal the construction well.

The fact that less than 250 skeletons were found on spot is surprising. A city that could have accommodated around 750 to maximum 1000 people, should have left behind several thousand skeletons, if it would have been used for centuries. But scientists state that the place was completely deserted several decades after it was erected.

Perhaps it was never in complete use. Maybe, the Incas have built it and then considered to leave it behind for some reason. The fact that many buildings are unfinished and that there's a large quarry in the middle of the city (not very aesthetic from the architectural point of view), might mean that there either wasn't worth finishing it or something bad had interrupted the working people.

Basically it comes down to 2 things: either the "wonder of construction" didn't pay off (wasn't worth continuing the effort) or, some horrible unexpected event had stopped the Incas and forced them to flee.

And unexpected even could also have religious meaning, perhaps they left because they received "signs from the gods" that they simply "shouldn't live there anymore", Machu Picchu could have become sort of a "forbidden city", being under curse, for example. The religious argument is also possible.

The construction of the city must have been extremely difficult, considering the conditions 500 - 600 years ago. It's possible, that the city could not have sustained itself well enough. If only about quarter of a thousand people lived there, perhaps there wasn't a working force strong enough to ensure the city enough food. If they didn't have enough to eat for some reason, they might have migrated somewhere else.

Perhaps the city has an isolated sanctuary after all and the people simply didn't come out. Thos who were living there simply didn't grow in numbers and the decrease of population slowly lead to the disappearance of the locals. First, their number might have decreased so much that they were too few to sustain the city and then, they might have abandoned it to seek better life outside.

All these theories are just possibilities, because the Incas did not write and no legends survived about the city, we will never know for sure how the people who lived in Machu Picchu disappeared.