Letter to the Editor

Dear Editor,

It is unfortunate that Mr. Ciampaglia chose to title his review of the Machu… Dear Editor,

It is unfortunate that Mr. Ciampaglia chose to title his review of the Machu Picchu show at Carnegie Museum of Natural History, “Carnegie Exhibit is Underwhelming,” for much of his review is quite positive. I wish to provide an explanation as to why the largest area of the exhibit, which he did not find appealing, is presented in this manner. The exhibit is based upon Hiram Bingham’s 1912 excavations at Machu Picchu. The artifacts that he recovered all reflect the daily life of the servant class supporting Emperor Pachucuti, who built his royal estate at this spectacular location. No artifacts were found that can be associated with Inca nobility, for these elite items of gold and silver would have returned with the Inca ruler to his imperial capital in Cuzco. No royal burials have ever been found at Machu Picchu, for their tombs were also in Cuzco.

Except for a few gold and silver earrings and necklaces from the burials excavated by Bingham, almost no precious metals have ever been found at the site. It would be difficult to mount a major Inca show with quantities of large gold and silver artifacts, since most were melted down by the Spanish invaders. The everyday artifacts from the site may appear to be “underwhelming,” since the artifacts appear “drab” when compared to the gold and silver loan pieces, but these artifacts are used to portray everyday life at this Inca royal estate, the main focus of this exhibit. The reviewer indicates that many of artifacts from Machu Picchu are still in storage at the Yale Peabody Museum “… waiting to be rediscovered.” The entire collection of artifacts, faunal and human remains was examined to determine what should be placed on exhibit. The best objects from Machu Picchu are on display. A reanalysis of the collection, as exhibited in the second to last gallery, has led to new interpretations about Inca daily life at this World Heritage site. I again stress that the exhibit focuses only upon Machu Picchu and its discovery by Hiram Bingham in 1911 and his 1912 excavations. It does not attempt to be an all-encompassing exhibit on the Inca Empire and its culture. Thus there is no need to “… spruce this collection up” with objects from other museum collections, since this exhibit is strictly about Machu Picchu and what the objects from this site tell us about its residents. The 50 or so loan objects and the reconstructed palace room are used to give the visitor a glimpse of what the royalty at Machu Picchu may have used and worn. These loan artifacts contrast dramatically with the artifacts of the 300 or so servants that were resident at Pachucuti’s royal estate.

I hope Pitt students, staff and faculty will take the opportunity of visiting the exhibit, for contrary to the reviewer’s comment, that “After all, how many other Machu Picchu exhibits is this one competing with that the public has heard of?” the answer is none! Machu Picchu is free (museum admission and the $2 surcharge) to all Pitt students upon showing a Pitt ID card, and I urge students to see the exhibit, for it is the next best thing to going to Machu Picchu.

James B. Richardson III

Professor of Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh

Curator of Anthropology, Carnegie Museum of Natural History