January 2010 (UTC) 

 ::I've read what you are saying here and what I see repeated over and over is you refer specifically to Tiwanaku and not Puma Punku. I am aware Tiwanaku was found largely undisturbed and when I say that some "natural disaster" decimated Puma Punku I do not mean Tiwanaku as well and am specifically referring to only the ruins of Puma Punku itself. But is Puma Punku specifically cited in any of these accounts as being found intact? I don't think so. I'm not trying to hassle you, I am actually very interested. All of the drawings I have seen of Puma Punku from any period are reconstructions of the artist based on the blocks found at the site and not a representation of a first hand observer who saw them intact.  

 ::Both sites as we now know through ground penetrating radar, satellite photos and the like (not to mention local and ancient lore) were at least during some phases all part of one large community, so today it is understood if talking about "Tiwanaku" it may possibly refer to the entire community including Puma Punku, like when we say "New York City" this includes the Bronx, Manhattan, and surrounding burroughs though literally they are considered different places, but except from myth this would have been unknown to early explorers and accounts of the 1800's which suggests they were likely considered 2 different places entirely. Though technically, from a modern archeological point of view this may not be the case, but still today, for all intents and purposes, to the layman and traveler alike they are still considered two different places. Puma Punku is almost a mile away from Tiwanaku and up until recently what lies between has been relatively unknown. I have read excerpts of the Spanish from the 1600's who describe Tiwanaku in detail as being relatively intact, but they make no mention of Puma Punku. Maybe some do, which I would love to find, but from what I have read I don't see it. Also, even today, most people that go to Tiwanaku don't even know there are other ruins in the area. Tours don't even go to Puma Punku which is crazy to me. I was at the site for at least an hour or more and the whole time I was there saw only 3-4 other people at any given time and for about 20 minutes there were none, whereas Tiwanaku had a steady flow of at least a few hundred at a time. When I stood atop the Akapana Pyramid, even though only a mile a way, Puma Punku was barely discernible as anything other than a hill, like any other hill, let alone ruins and this with the site having been developed for tourism and much of the tall grass around the site being cut or removed. 

 ::In this context, I must wonder if these early accounts specifically refer to the state in which Puma Pumku was found. I am skeptical that they do and would be greatly interested if they did. If not, as I suspect, then I believe one needs to be extra cautious not to superimpose early accounts of Tiwanaku onto Puma Punku passing off what is known about one as fact about the other.  22:53, 17