Job Discussion Forums

[Aramas]

Which cities in South America have been continuously inhabited for thousands of years? Surprisingly enough, google spits out mostly US cities (lol) when I try searching on the subject.

So far I only know of Quito and Cuzco. There must be a lot more. Does anyone have any links to websites with good histories of ancient cities in the region?

[lozwich]

I know its not technically South America, but Mexico City has been around in one way or another for quite a while. Look up Tenochtitlan.

[Justin Trullinger]

One of the (not especially scarce) problems with the colonial period is the way it tended to erase previous histories.

As you've apparently found, Quito (once Quitus, or some approximation) was pre-Incan, and has been inhabited more or less continuously for god knows how long. But just this week, we've been celebrating the "foundation" of Quito. By the Spanish. In 1525. Hmmm. It's a bit aggravating, but the truth is, many South American cities were built on previously inhabited areas. But you don't see very many signs of it. In Quito, you can read about what came before, and there's one good museum dedicated to the subject, but there's nothing left of it to SEE. Cuzco is the only major city I've seen with anything Incan or pre-Incan remaining. (Some really nice architecture!)

If you want to see signs of precolonial life, and not just read about them, I might recommend smaller towns. Otavalo, for example, is hardly a principle city, but offers a lot more in terms of survival of ancient cultures, traditions, and artifacts.

Regards,
Justin

[jessicah632]

Hmmm...I bet there's a lot more Central American ones than South, thanks to the fairly dense concentrations Toltecs/Olmecs/Azetcs/Mayans up there.

First one that popped into mind in S. America (aside from Cuzco) is Nazca. On go2peru.com it says:
"The town of Nazca was founded in 1591 by the Spaniards, on the valley of Nazca, close to towns inhabited by old civilizations that had been dominated by the Inca. The ancestral name was Nanasca."

So even though the Spaniards "founded it" it was built where other people had lived -- but it doesn't necessarily follow that Nazca was CONTINUOUSLY inhabited.

And of course Copabana, Bolivia and Puno, Peru: they've got to have been settled by the Aymara-speakers...and Tihuanaco (sp?) people?

Also there is Trujillo's Chan Chan, which is pretty old (pre-Inca anyway), but that doesn't really count because Trujillo ISN'T Chan Chan, it's just right next to it, so...

There's Ollaytaytambo, but like Nazca that's not very big, more of a town than a city, and anyway it sort of goes hand-in-hand with Cuzco.

Geez...there's got to be something in Colombia? What about Brazil & Argentina?

The Spaniards and Portuguese really did a number on the continent, eh?

--Jessicah

[MELEE]

[Cdaniels]

[MO39]

In the late 1970s, I lived and worked in the small (now much larger) city of Texcoco, located about midway between Mexico City and the pyramids at Teotihuac�n. I was somewhere aware of its colonial history (there's a cathedral and a small church built by the early 15th-century Franciscan missionary Fray Pedro de Gante), but I knew nothing about its pre-Columbian glory days, when it rivaled Tenochtitlan (now Mexico City) in wealth and prestige. It was only when I found myself at New York University in the early 1990s, working on an MA in Latin American Studies, that I "discovered " the history and true identity of the place I'd lived in for over two years. So Texcoco has been continually inhabited for at least 700 years, at least as long as Mexico City.

[Guy Courchesne]

For more on Mexico's history, check out Gary Jennings "the Aztec" and sequels. It's fiction, but the settings are historically accurate I believe.

[Aramas]

Mexico City has an interesting history, but it's not of specific interest to me as I won't be going there. You know the deal - "Poor Mexico. So close to the USA and so far from god."

I can understand the Spaniards razing Tenochtitlan. The Aztecs were sacrificing people daily, since they believed that if they didn't feed it a human heart every day, the sun wouldn't rise. There's an interesting article on the BBC website at present. Apparently Mexico City has sunk nine metres in the past 100 years.

I'm less clear on why they demolished Quito and Cusco. Why knock down buildings only to rebuild them using inferior construction techniques?

[MELEE]

[cultureman]

[Guy Courchesne]

"Poor Mexico. So far from God, so close to the USA"

I always took that as an insult to the US?