UKC

I'm watching a programme on the telly about building the ALMA Observatory at the Chajnantor Plateau. 5000m high, and the construction workers are on oxygen.

But googling the plateau, it seems that one of the mountains on the plateau is Licancabur, a 5920m volcanic cone.

Inca ruins were found on the summit, indicating that the Incas not only got there, but built there. That seems amazing, but the standard route up Licancabur is described as a "hike", so perhaps it's not too onerous a climb.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dd/Licancabur_volcano_summi...

It got me wondering. What's the highest peak where it's known or at least believed that the peak was climbed by prehistoric humans?

Replying to my own post, preserved bodies of Inca sacrifices were found on the summit of Llullaillaco, a 6730m mountain on the border of Argentina and Chile.

That seems one heck of a height for a prehistoric climbing party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Llullaillaco

In reply to Annoying Twit:

I don't know the exact elevation but Inca burial remains have been found 'near the summit' of Aconcagua, 6959M.

This article mentions the effort required to arrange human sacrifices on extremely high mountains. It mentions the archaeological discoveries of a series of Inca camps on the way up to summits. That makes the Inca climbing sound quite modern.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/ice-mummies-inca.html

In reply to Annoying Twit:

are the inca's pre-history?

In reply to es:

Before I posted I did look into the definition of pre-history, and the opinions I read on the definition was that it was before written records were kept. And that the definition of "pre-history" depended on the society involved. It would therefore depend on whether the Khopu, or record by knots, is considered to be a writing system or not. Certainly large parts of the world had entered the historical era at the time the Incas were climbing mountains in the Andes.

When I've seen mentions of landmark events such as George Mallory being the first person to set foot on Mount Everest, I've always wondered if there were earlier, unrecorded, expeditions that at least reached Everest and other mountains. The Inca's achievements would suggest that this is possible, but the presumed lack of archeological evidence would suggest not.

In reply to es:

pre-internet is pre-history.
some people had apparently walked to the top of everest by then.

In reply to Annoying Twit:

I have no evidence - but I always assumed that when people said first person - what they actually ment was first rich white person.

In reply to ice.solo:

Didn't they hike?

In reply to Annoying Twit: I suspect prehistoric man was an expert in getting high. Mushrooms, cacti etc. were probably more favoured than mountains though.

In reply to Steve John B:

no. hikings when you carry your own stuff.

In reply to Annoying Twit:

Getting high on the glaciated peaks of the Himalaya would be tough with lowlander clothing and (non)gear. The high Andes are ideally suited to high non-technical walks/hikes/climbs/plods. Some peaks in Tibet are too, but didn't have the nearby concentrations of population that the Andes would have had (concentrated being a relative term here).

If you compare older and newer reference books you might note that the human height records used to note Whymper etc on Chimborazo as a record. Of course this is now seen as incorrect, given the ruins found higher on L'co and other high Andean summits, and just a white man's historical ignorance - somewhat understandable decades ago, not now. So maybe someone climbed Aconcagua centuries ago, quite possible. Which means the first rich white man records don't come in until the ascent of Trisul in 1907.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_altitude_record_(mountaineering)

In reply to Annoying Twit:

Yeah, yeah, but what did they ever do on gr... Oh, and of course some say Pterodactyls made it all too easy =)

My only real contribution is fossilised running footprints of a hunting party have been found where one human bloke was running at .02 or so off Usain Bolt in his WR. This was determined by looking at the gate and stride length, etc. The point was made that the chances of modern humans discovering a uniquely fast runner in fossillised tracks is not high, he was probably just another quick runner.

Physiology of living high will have been a factor.

Interesting wonderment twit.

In reply to Annoying Twit:

Don't forget that the Altiplano is already at 4000m so the Incas and Aymaras who lived there are starting from high up. Their bodies have adapted, they are short and stocky and have larger lungs and heart than we do. I once got involved in a game of football with some in Bolivia, and even though we had been at altitude for two months they had the advantage on us, they weren't even puffing

Chewing coca leaves helps a bit too!

In reply to Annoying Twit:

There are stories of an African king who offered his daughter to any warrior who would bring back some of the white stuff from the top of Kili. Numerous ones tried but everyone failed and everyone of them brought back water even after elaborate attempts to wrap the white stuff in bananah leaves. He is said to have been so angry that he had them executed.

In reply to Annoying Twit:
For an idea of prehistoric mountain technology, look at Oetzi.
They found his body at about 3210m in the Tisenjoch in Tyrol.
http://www.iceman.it/en/node/226
I love his kit. Deerskin shoes with hay insulation held in place by woven grass netting. Framed backpack. I like the choice of loincloth and leggings rather than trousers - would make taking a dump in winter a lot easier.
They reckon he died in the Alps over 5000 years ago. Now that is prehistoric!

In reply to almost sane:


Apparently his kit was designed by Mammut.