Andrew Collins on Gobekli Tepe sister site

[E.P. Grondine]

Over 70 yrs old but nearly as nutty as some of the alt crap .
" The adena were stated to be of medium height "with the males standing 5'6" and the females 5'2"
P 265 has a diagram of the stature of " Mr &Mrs Adena " 165 & 158.8cm respectively
The Hopewell were considered taller , by an inch .
Later edition Griffin foreword of Webb and Snow's " Adena People "

I'm sorry that you can not handle height data any better than you can handle geological data.

[E.P. Grondine]

What the hell does the lullingstone mural have to do with either Gobekli Tepe nor even PPN B?
Usual Pelagian heretics.

[Simon21]

What the hell does the lullingstone mural have to do with either Gobekli Tepe nor even PPN B?
Usual Pelagian heretics.

It is real archaeology. What do "comet impact events" or supposed black giants have to do with anything?

[Simon21]

Re: Andrew Collins on Gobekli Tepe sister site
Postby E.P. Grondine » Tue Apr 03, 2018 4:16 am

Simon -
Yes, amateur archaeologists would be the best description, and they live in Charleston, West Virginia,
and they were raised around Adena sites.
That said, they put a hell of a lot of work into their book, and it was very carefully edited by Jeff Wilson,
who did a whole lot of the first LIDAR work on Ohio archaeological sites, and who also is THE expert on Serpent Mound, bar no one.
Jeff has recovered Putnam's excavation notes and plates,
and some time later this year you will be hearing a whole lot more about Putnam's archaeological carby them. But they are nbot porfessional archaeologistseer from him.


Your praise is no doubt welcomed by them. But they are not professional archaeologists, there is a difference a significant difference.

Jason and Sarah also work with local archaeologists in the Charleston area.out.

Which I am sure is lovely though I do have relatives who found it frightening and moved.

I've never talked with Jason and Sarah about their other interests,

I am presuming it would be a very long conversation.

but if you are trying to recover Adena excavation records, you become an "investigative historian",
and if you publish on them, you will end up working with depth psychology while dealing with the nuts.
(Pretentious "academic" nuts leave me cursing, but I am going to watch my language.)

Really? Recovering records is meat and drink to historians - Douglas J. Newton is a historian not an investigative historian despite his interesting discoveries. Pretentious academic "nuts" may exist. But at least they are academic ie have bothered to have the education and training. And I am sure you would prefer to have a "pretentious academic nut" doctor opening your chest cavity then a self-opionated amateur who combines and interest with medicine with just about every other field.

I can state that if you're working with Adena culture, or at an Adena site,
their book is one of the best resources I've seen,
and compares very favorably with works done by professional archaeologists with many years of experience.
Given that Jason and Sarah's book is the only source for Adena excavation records that have been lost for years,
I think it is highly likely that it will be referenced by archaeologists publishing on Adena sites and Adena culture for years to come.

If you rely on the work of amateurs it is not surprising you come to such odd conclusions.

Based on my earlier experiences, about 10 to 15 years from now you will understand.
This kind of response simply comes with the territory.

And why do you think that may be? People who beleive in the Loch Ness monster also encounter scepticism. Is this not worth serious reflection? 10 to 15 years is time enough to get a decent degree/s from a decent University - perhaps you can consider this? We all know the "history will absolve me" cliche, it is another sign.

Simon21 wrote:
This comes across as quite racist and one wonders why the moderators do not intervene, so sensible discussions on factual archaeology can prevail Is it suddenly OK to insult native Americans and try to pervert their heritage and beliefs.

Obviously you are also completely ignorant of the Native American traditions about giants,
as well as not knowing the standard works on Adena.

However I do not presume to make generalised offensive comments about their beliefs. I do not know the figure but I assume there were thousands of Native American groups and bands, some given to cultivation others more nomadic, many speaking their own languages. To presume they all had the same belief is somewhat like the views of the conquistadores (the name given to the Spanish invaders and slaughterers) who used the "they all worship devils" excuse to commit various genocides. Again this is an old trope, one encounters it in Indiana Jones movies for example - which also contain racist tropes whitey knows all.


I regularly meet and socialize with Native Americans, and I take passing on what has been passed on very seriously.
I am pleased when archaeological evidence confirms traditions..

Why on earth should you be. What arrogance. The traditions of any people need no confirmation (even if cod) from archaeology and certainly not from a gullible white outsider convinced he is going to shake the world through the power of his own intellect (given 10 or 15 years). The clear implication of this sort of thing (which is done to native peoples all over the globe) is that Native Americans are so stupid they cannot come with a belief system derived from their imaginations - like every other group of human beings can do.

I would also use caution. The various Koorie peoples have been known to spin porkies to intrusive english-speaking whities asking rude questions about their sacred native sites and to have roared with laughter when they found themselves quoted.

[Simon21]

Mod Hat On

We're fairly tolerant as long as the bitching and moaning doesn't reach obscene levels.

In Charles Mann's 1491 he noted that early European chroniclers marveled at the tall physiques of native Americans compared to the Europeans who ate a mainly grain-based diet. Like most fish stories, the fish only gets bigger with each retelling.

Mod Hat Off

Yes the suburb of Manly in Sydney is got from Governor Phillip describing the physique of the inhabitants, though this did not stop him and the settlers from erradicating them. It is an interesting observation but one needs to know the context. Sailors in Europe were not chosen on account of their size (isn't is said that Columbus must have been in agony from having to stoop everytime he entered his cabin)- royal guards on the other hand.

But as to moderation Carl Sagan put it best did he not when he said "keep an open mind but not so open as your brain falls out". Surely some discussions are beyond the pale - black giants, Comet impact events, ridiculous jargon, amateur ranting. New sites have been found in LA, new roman settlements have been found in the UK by real archaeologists etc surely this is archaeology.

[Tiompan]

" The adena were stated to be of medium height "with the males standing 5'6" and the females 5'2"
P 265 has a diagram of the stature of " Mr &Mrs Adena " 165 & 158.8cm respectively
The Hopewell were considered taller , by an inch .
Later edition Griffin foreword of Webb and Snow's " Adena People "
“
That is an example of data from a book you consider as a standard introduction , data is something that you can't handle and continually evade .
In the rare cases when you do provide any data it is shown to be in error .

[Tiompan]

" But in terms of the late Roman Empire. .... But the BM presenter seemed fairly firm ."
The BM presenter should have have mentioned that he was confining the symbol to the Roman period , or maybe he was unaware of earlier uses of the symbol .

[Simon21]

" But in terms of the late Roman Empire. .... But the BM presenter seemed fairly firm ."
The BM presenter should have have mentioned that he was confining the symbol to the Roman period , or maybe he was unaware of earlier uses of the symbol .

He did obviously a simple sign can be made anywhere. However since the title of his talkk was Christianity in Roman Britain - the archaeological evidence his context was fairly obvious. And the point remains. Personally I am not aware of the "Christian" cross being used as a celebrated symbol in any other site of this period. But it does seem weird that Britain (which does not seem to hve a had a high reputation in the Empire) was the first place to use it in this open manner.

The presenter is writing a book on the subject. He also contends that St Germanus did indeed visit in about 429 and probably brought armed forces with him (Roman?) - hence the alleluiia victory. Be fascinated to see the evidence for this which must of course be largely archaeological.

[Tiompan]

Any cross that predates christ obviously couldn't be described as a christian cross , but it wasn't described as christian cross .
The description was " the first example we have of the Cross being used as a major symbol" .
Maybe the definite article lends more weight in a christian context but that ignores the cultural importance that may have been attributed to the symbol prior to christian appropriation .

[Simon21]

Any cross that predates christ obviously couldn't be described as a christian cross , but it wasn't described as christian cross .
The description was " the first example we have of the Cross being used as a major symbol" .
Maybe the definite article lends more weight in a christian context but that ignores the cultural importance that may have been attributed to the symbol prior to christian appropriation .

I think it is fairly clear I am talking about Roman Britain and Lullingstone Villa. The figures are garbed in crosses and are in the orantes form of praying. It was not a discussion on the symbol of the cross generally.

Sorry but I cannot make this any clearer.

[Tiompan]

Yes it was clear that you were talking about the Roman Villa at Lullingstone .
That is why " the first example we have of the Cross being used as a major symbol" is wrong because it provides a date for the cross .

[Simon21]

Yes it was clear that you were talking about the Roman Villa at Lullingstone .
That is why " the first example we have of the Cross being used as a major symbol" is wrong because it provides a date for the cross .

Sorry can't pretend to understand this. Lullingstone Villa has been dated as is well known (though this may be disputed). So the point being made still stands.

And if my reference was clear why the confusion? The Lullingstone frieze is well kown.

[Tiompan]

Yes the frieze and the villa are well known as is the approximate date of the build of the villa .
That is why we can say " " the first example we have of the Cross being used as a major symbol" is wrong .
Any cross from christian period can't possibly be " the first example we have of the Cross being used as a major symbol " , even if it is a Chi Rho , which is not a symbol of the cross .

[Simon21]

Yes the frieze and the villa are well known as is the approximate date of the build of the villa .
That is why we can say " " the first example we have of the Cross being used as a major symbol" is wrong .
Any cross from christian period can't possibly be " the first example we have of the Cross being used as a major symbol " , even if it is a Chi Rho , which is not a symbol of the cross .

Sorry I think you are confused. The first example - that is the exact point being made. The cross was not seen by early christians as a major symbol at all. You find this in the catacombs etc. The word example means exactly that. "This is the first example we have of "cherubim used in a frieze", this is the first example we have of Carausius strking his own coins". How are those statements wrong ?

Any cross from christian period can't possibly be " the first example we have of the Cross being used as a major symbol " , even if it is a Chi Rho , which is not a symbol of the cross

Well er yes it can if you cannot produce any other examples, which is what I was wondering. We are of course referring to the clothing worn by the figures which makes the significance all the greater.

If you know of any other major examples from this time please let me know. I haven't found any.

You do know the Villa was completed over a long period of time and the house chapel (if that is what it was) was only completed in the late fourth century.

[Tiompan]

No I am not confused . You are .
You said " the first example we have of the Cross being used as a major symbol" .
My reply was "Crosses have been used in rock art long before the Lullingstone mural , from many different periods and cultures ."
That obviously means a long time before Lullingstone was built or the Roman period .
It doesn't matter that the villa or the murals were built over a period , I am talking in terms of millenia not decades or centuries .
It's very simple "Crosses have been used in rock art long before the Lullingstone mural ,from many different periods and cultures ."
Do you dispute that ?
You do know that a Chi Rho is not a cross ?