Why did all indigenous South American cultures build there cities in the mountains?

Just over two weeks ago I stood in wonder gazing at one of the newly crowned 'new 7 wonders of the world' Machu Picchu. As I gazed at this incredible site there were a number of thou8ghts going through my head: firstly, this is amazing, secondly there are far too many people here and finally, I am knackerred.

Whilst the Inca Trail was truly one of the highlights of my trip so far, it was also very tiring and I soon after decided that I would take some time off to rest before I excerted myself in such a way again.

However that does not seem to have happened. This is largely because of the tight schedule I have imposed upon myself due to the extensivity of my trip and partly due to my nature, which craves activity most of the time and seldom wants for rest.

So it has come to pass that since the Inca Trail I have either been moving to my next destination, looking around colonial cities or hiking and climbing waterfalls in the Amazon. So it may be little suprise then that around a week ago I decided to embark on yet another epic trek to a ruined South American city, this time to the lost city of the Tayrona's near Santa Marta in Columbia.

The trek itself took six days, and unfortunately my assumption that the trek would be flat and easy as I had left the Andes was false. The six days was generally spent either going up or down various mountains and although I no longer had to combat the problem of altitude, there was the small matter of the 37 degree temperature to contend with.

However although the negativity of this introduction would imply that I had not enjoyed the trek to Ciudad Perdida (literally translated as 'Lost City') as the city is called, that could not be further from the truth. The trek was not only amazing, but in many ways far more enjoyable than the Inca trail, even if the city itself is not itself as truly awe-inspiring as Machu Picchu. To be honest comparing the ruin to Machu Picchu is slightly unfair, firstly it is far older and secondly it is unfair to judge against one of the aforementioned 'new seven wonders of the world', however it is a useful comparison.

The city itself is spectacular, but in a very different way to Macchu Pichu. Firstly, the remain s of the city are not that of temples and houses, but instead stone terraces. This is because the houses theselves were constructed from wood and built on the terraces. These terraces alone are impressive constructions considering they date back to 1000 CE and pre date Machu Pichu by over 500 years. The other major difference between the two sites is the setting. Whilst both sites were previously covered by the jungle until their discovery, where Machu Picchu has been completely cleared, Ciudad Perdida is still in encroached upon by the jungle giving the visitor more of a feeling that he is actually discovering something and seeing the city in much the same way that it was found. The final and perhaps the most important difference between the two sites is the number of people at Ciudad Perdida. When I was at the site, there were six tourists, including me, at the site. Machu Picchu in contrast with its' 3000 tourists a day its' restaurant and its' souvenir shops is the complete opposite. There site does have a miltary regikent at the site also, but they generally stay out of the way in their camp.

There are a number of reasons for the relatively small number of people at the site itself. Firstly the only way to the site is by the 6 day trek which I did (3 days there and 3 days back) and unlike Machu Picchu there is no train or bus to get there. Secondly Columbia itself is a far less popular destination than Peru beacuae although I have found Columbia to be very safe, it still has a reputation for kidnappings and robbery. This is fairly unfair considering the last kidnapping of a tourist happened 5 years ago (admittedly on a trek to Ciudad Perdida) and also because you are far more likely to be robbed in Venezuela, Brazil, Ecuador and even Peru. The trek itself is also now completely safe due to the large military presence in the area. This is in part to protect the tourists due to the history of guerilla insurgency in the area, but predominately the military in the area are there to remove the numerous coca plantations that were used to be in the national park.

I am very happy that I got to see the site with so few people around. This is something which will inevitably change as Columbia becomes safer and more of a destination for international tourists. Apparently the Columbian government is also already working out ways to make access to the site easier. So if you are interested in planning a visit to Ciudad Perdida, do so as soon as possible.

I am now back in Santa Marta having a day on the beach before I head back to Cartagena for a couple of days before I hopefully get a boat across the Carribean to Panama vis the San Blas Islands.

Its a hard life.

Speak to you all soon

Phil