Biophysical, Spatial, Functional, and Constructive Analysis of the Pre-Hispanic Terraces of the Ancient City of Pisaq, Cusco, Peru, 2024

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Primary Concern: The data in this article seem interesting and likely are important. The major issue is that they are not used to produce or reinforce a coherent argument. In many ways, the data are disconnected from each other, from any discussion of the cultural importance of Inka terrace engineering, and from the perspective of cultural heritage management/conservation. For example, more discussion of the relationship between the creation of microclimates on terraces and agricultural production--and how this related to Inka sociopolitical organization--would tie together several lines of data that exist in isolation in the current manuscript. More background information about Inka terracing, including its function within and importance to the empire, would provide more context for understanding the present study. Much of the information on UNESCO World Heritage sites in the introduction could be removed to focus on Inka architecture, which is much more relevant to the subject matter. On the whole, the manuscript lacks a coherent, narrative argument that the presented data should support.

Major Concerns: The manuscript seems to be built around the description of figures that illustrate data. While figures are powerful tools for visualizing data, they should be used to highlight specific concepts or aspects of cultural heritage discussed in the paper, and should not be the focus of the paper. Providing more detailed discussion of concepts, and using figures to illustrate aspects of that concept (or its material manifestations in the archaeological record), would provide structure to this article that is currently lacking.

The discussion section brings in some comparative material but does not synthesize data from the previous sections to produce an argument.

Minor Concern: Some aspects of the figures and their captions do not match (e.g., a caption identifies a photograph of terraces as an urban center). These should be reviewed and revised.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English is generally sound. It can be repetitive at times, especially when concepts are listed in a sentence, and the list then repeated verbatim elsewhere in the paper. Some basic revision for clarity and overly long sentences would also improve the readability of the paper, although these are aspects of writing style more than language.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

See attachment.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

See attachment.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The Pisaq terrace system is a legacy of sustainable Inca architecture, aligned with current Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) such as climate action and life on land. These terraces have not only enabled agriculture on sloping terrain, but also play a role in environmental conservation and geological stability. The authors’ manuscript analyses these pre-Hispanic terrace systems of the ancient city of Pisaq, in Cusco, Peru. It is certainly of great interest, especially for its purpose of analysing the biophysical, spatial, functional and constructive components of the pre-Hispanic terrace systems at Pisaq. In addition, the manuscript also assesses the impact of tourism, geological instability and cultural loss on the ecological and economic value of the terraces.

The research analysis uses digital tools such as QGIS, Google Earth Pro and Sun Path 3D to assess the climatology, flora and fauna, as well as the spatial and functional characteristics of the area. Programs such as AutoCAD, SketchUp and Photoshop were also used to graphically represent the results. The use of these tools gives the manuscript great additional value, very interesting from a technical perspective and from an architectural point of view.

Despite all of the above, some issues have been identified that could be improved. Addressing these aspects would enhance the analysis and provide a more robust and comprehensive perspective on the preservation and value of Pisaq’s terraces:

1st) Lack of depth in impact analysis. The manuscript mentions factors like tourism, geological instability, and cultural loss, but it does not delve deeply enough into how these specific factors quantitatively affect the pre-Hispanic terraces of Pisaq. A more detailed analysis of these impacts would strengthen the conclusions.

2nd) Limited discussion on long-term sustainability. While the manuscript talks about the importance of preserving the terraces and reforestation, it does not offer a clear or long-term strategy for ensuring the sustainability of these initiatives. More information on long-term conservation measures or policies would be beneficial. Sustainability is a key tool in the current management of architectural heritage, and it also seems to be understood as such in the manuscript.

3rd) Technical methodology, but lacking explanation. Although advanced tools like QGIS and SketchUp are used, the explanation of how these methods specifically contribute to the study’s results is not very clear. This can make the methodology difficult to understand for readers unfamiliar with these tools (Not all researchers in the architectural and heritage field are fluent in handling these tools, although we are familiar with them).

4th) Absence of comparison with other archaeological sites: the analysis focuses exclusively on Pisaq.

5th) Limited assessment of current threats. Although the text mentions threats like tourism and geological instability, it does not provide a detailed evaluation of how these threats are currently being managed or concrete solutions to mitigate them.

6th) Minimal inclusion of community participation. The manuscript could benefit from a greater focus on the role of local communities in the conservation of the terraces. Community involvement is key in conservation and sustainability projects, and the lack of emphasis on this aspect weakens the social analysis of the study.

7th) Generalized conclusions. While the manuscript concludes that the terraces are important for ecological preservation and agriculture, the final recommendations are somewhat general. More specific and actionable recommendations, especially related to management and conservation policies, would be beneficial.

All in all, the work is very interesting and the research is very thorough. The authors have done a good job.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The level of English in the "heritage-3224899-peer-review-v1.pdf" document is appropriate for an academic context but could benefit from some improvements for greater clarity and fluency. Here’s a more detailed analysis:

1st) Clarity. In certain parts, such as the description of tools used or the impact of certain factors on the terraces, clarity can be challenging. The text would be more effective if it explained some complex concepts in a simpler and more detailed way.

2nd) Grammar and structure. The grammar is generally correct, but some sentences tend to be long and complex, making them harder to follow. Breaking up long sentences and improving transitions between ideas would enhance the text’s flow.

3rd) Technical terminology. The use of technical terms is appropriate and specialized for an academic audience. However, some concepts may be too condensed or not fully explained, specially for non-expert readers (although it is understood that it is an academic - scientific text). Adding clarifications or examples could simplify the understanding.

4th) Vocabulary. The vocabulary is precise and well-suited to the subject matter, but in some sections, it could be more varied to avoid repetition and add richness to the text. Using synonyms or related terms would make it more dynamic.

5th) Coherence and flow. While the text of the manuscript is coherent, it can be dense at times due to complex sentence structures, which affects the overall flow. Improving sentence structure by making it more direct would facilitate easier reading.

In summary, the English level is good and meets academic standards, but it could be improved in terms of fluency, clarity, and sentence structure to make it more accessible and easier to follow for a broader audience, without losing its scientific rigor.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This revised manuscript addressed my original concerns and is a much more cohesive submission. I applaud the authors on their efforts to synthesize their data into a series of coherent arguments and provide importance cultural context for understanding the terraces of Pisaq.

Minor edits:

1) There is a disconnect between an addition (in red text) on page 7, in the paragraph discussing Figure 3, and the original text. It appears that this addition is supposed to replace a section of original text?