In 1974 & 1975 (then an undergraduate student), I  visited the Nazca Plateau for a first hand observation and discovery of the Nazca geoglyphs.  During this travel, he developed a working hypothesis regarding the creation of the Nazca lines.  This was further reinforced after meeting with Maria Reiche, and exploring the hypothesis with her.

It appeared clear, that the giant Nazcan geoglyphs (lines and symbols) bore the unmistakable traits of different architects.  Additionally, it appeared that some symbols had been laid down before the lines that crossed them.  That in effect, and earlier culture or society had created one set of lines or symbols, and that a later culture had marked over them.

This was a somewhat radical belief in that time, as prevailing theory was that a single culture had created the lines and symbols.

The challenge, was deriving this hypothesis from the visible evidence, of which there was very little - just the lines and symbols themselves.  During the course of several years, a comparative analysis was performed in the attempt to identify individual or groups of lines and symbols from others.

This represents just an introduction to this theory for the general public.  The original version was never published.  However, a revision based upon new evidence is to be published soon.

Dr. Tim McGuinness 2006

As a result of my observation and analysis, it appeared that several cultures (possibly five, but no less than three) produced the geoglyphs.

The first culture employed extraordinary precision in the creation of their lines and symbols.  These are represented by the perfectly straight long lines, and precise geometrics, including the large spiral.  These artifacts are of a order of magnitude different in their quality and precision.

The second culture employed far less skill or precision in laying down their symbols and objects.  Most of the animal shapes and lines fall into this grouping.  While they are very stylistic, and appear quite detailed, and analysis of geometry shows far more random alignments within each object - what might be called precise "freehand design" - good but not engineering quality.  It appears that there are actually three sub-sets within this group - The Paracas Group 1 (very crude figures), the Paracas Group 2 (much more precise figures), and three Nazcan groups.

There is a third grouping, however it is not clear if they are the work of a separate culture, or just poor workmanship, or perhaps repairs made after the fact.  These are the poor quality designs, including several large trapezoids, that sprinkle the pampa.  They have visibly rough edges, with jagged lines.

Of course multiple cultures, and multiple generations within each culture, have lived near the lines - for at least two millennia - and logically, some maintenance must have occurred on the lines for the cultures using them for their purpose.  However, it is more probable that a culture capable of the significant perfection of many of the lines, would have maintained them in the same perfection. 

Therefore, it is theorized that a minimum of three distinct cultures (with sub groups) created the lines and symbols.  Which came first is the subject of significant debate, since dating of the lines themselves is not really possible.  Only objects, such as wooden sticks left in locations along the lines and symbols makes dating possible, but these objects might not be from the original creation of the lines in question.

The system of classification used here, simply provides a guide to both differentiate between two main architect classes (based upon apparent precision), and to identify possible anomalous geoglyphs that appear within the respective contexts.

An example of the miles-long straight long lines

  Here you see an example of the ultra-precise straight line runways and trapezoids viewed from ground level

  Here is another runway - clearly not straight - was this a different culture or period that produced these geoglyphs?

In the above photo notice the precise long line running from bottom to top to the right of the arrow shaped symbol.  This represents a good example of a Class One Geoglyph - ultra-precise.  There is another angled line connecting with the runway that is also a Class One Geoglyph.

In the same photo we observe the symbol itself - the arrow head - and while the lines that form the symbol are stylistically consistent with the objects around it, it is not very precise in the placement of the lines and curves - the distance between lines, nor the angles of the curves that form the ends.  This Class Two Geoglyph demonstrates a different degree of engineering skills than the Class One Geoglyphs.

In this photo we see a geoglyph of Chile's Atacama desert.  While the design of this geoglyph is consistent with the techniques used in the region, stylistically it is an anomaly, and may in fact be of modern origin.  This is a good example of a Class Three Geoglyph - not a fraud (necessarily), but suspect.

Class Four Objects

In this photo of a Class Four Geoglyph we see a design clearly out of place with the majority of the Nazca figures - however, it is consistent with the Paracas style common in the surrounding areas in other media.

Class Five Objects

This line of small mounds near San Pedro de Atacama is a non-contextual anomaly.  That is, this Class Five Geoglyph appears authentic, but does not fit with the local style or context, and represents an anomaly.

Class Five Objects

This Class Five Geoglyph of the Caral Half Face is another example of an anomalous geoglyph.  It appears to be authentic, but does not match any known style in the region: neither ceramic nor petroglyph.  It may well turn out to be a Class Three, but it certainly does not conform to the local context (as understood).