Archaeologica.org

I recommend Hancock's "Fingerprints of the Gods" as long as you take it with a grain of salt, or even a handful of salt. It's entertaining and thought provoking. It's got a lot of just plain bullshit in it, but it will make you think. It inspired me to get into archaeology and ancient history in a big way if only to see how much of his information was for real. He does supply some good info and some interesting theories. Some of it is just too far out to believe.

Some of it is just too far out to believe.

That probably means its true.

Ancient man has created pictures of their own hand on rock walls for 50,000 years. Some years ago a couple of scuba divers explored an underwater cave off of the south coast of France. They eventually emerged in a cave which was above sea level. On the wall was the form of a human hand.

It was later determined that the only way it could have gotten there was by ancient man venturing into the cave from the entrance that was below sea level. It was also noted that the coastline at that time would have been three miles from the entrance.

So when Hancock speaks of people living where water now exists is not a theory but a fact. But I think he uses the term "civilizations". That term means a change from hunter gatherer to an agricultural or at least domesticated animals. That may be hard to prove.

When I first read FOTG I was quite taken with his discussion of Hapgood's map...although not with the theory of earth crust displacement. Anyway, Hancock had a print of a US Air Force map with a similar 'projection' as the Piri Reis map....the USAF map was centered over Cairo.

He also made reference to the use of ground penetrating radar in 1947 which confirmed the accuracy of the Piri Reis map.

Curious, I e-mailed Hancock about his theory and asked why it was necessary to use the earth-crust displacement theory since, it seemed, his lost civilization was capable of flight in order to get the map projection which the USAF obtained. Why could they not have used the same method as the 1947 team since if you have the means to fly, you could easily develop ground penetrating radar?

His research assistant wrote back and we had an exchange about the possibilities of ancient flight. Again, Von Daniken points out many examples in mythology of men flying or of flying dragons, etc. Could they all be bullshit or could they be imperfectly remembered descriptions of an ancient science?

His research assistant wrote back and we had an exchange about the possibilities of ancient flight. Again, Von Daniken points out many examples in mythology of men flying or of flying dragons, etc. Could they all be bullshit or could they be imperfectly remembered descriptions of an ancient science?

Quite a bit in your post. I'm still not gonna comment on Hancock until I've given him a good read. I've got plenty to talk about regarding the Piri Reis map and the crustal displacement theory - but for the moment let me comment on Von Daniken.

I read Von Daniken (how many years ago was that?) and came away with mixed feelings. I really liked the way he presented many earth mysteries, and failed science. But then there were his conclusions. It seemed to me, then and now, that he fell victim to a basic human trait. That is to see what you want to see. EX: see Bosnian thread, both sides of the issue.

Von Daniken showed a picture of a Mayan (or Aztec glyph) that he said was a man in a spaceship blasting off. Well, I was young and impressionable and I looked at it for a long time. I didn't remotely come to the same conclusion. There were quite a few examples like that. As I said the book had merit. It didn't convince me of ancient astronauts. Those mysteries are still there but I think we have to find a different solution.

Von Daniken was in the early 70's and he wrote several books. THey tended to get more and more fantastic as he pressed his theory into every conceivable anomaly.

The basic theory was that earth was helped along by alien visitors. He never answered the two basic questions that formed in my mind:

1- Why would they bother?

2- Why would they stop?

Still, his petroglyphs showing similar figures from disparate places with apparent helmets and hoses were interesting, to say the least.

But everything he attributes to ancient astronauts could be equally explained by Hancock's Legacy Civilization....and without resorting to outer space.

Von Daniken did, I seem to recall, have an interest in what technology would seem like to primitive people. Our science would be their magic and he was of the opinion that religion arose from that basic misunderstanding.

I think it was V.D. who came up with an interesting intellectual exercise. You can try it if you like.....I've done it and it is a bitch. I can't recall exactly what his parameters were but it doesn't matter, you'll get the idea.

Imagine yourself living in a forgotten valley in New Guinea. You live a basic stone age hunter/gatherer lifestyle. Your language consists of about 600 words....mainly environmental; tree, rock, bush, fire, water, rain, thunder, lighting, bird, snake, words for different animals and fish, words for some of the people in the tribe, etc. You carry a flint-tipped spear. You have an animist religion which thinks that spirits inhabit trees and animals.

One day you are out hunting a few miles from your 'village' when you hear a dreadful noise. Curious, you head towards the sound and peeking out from behind a rock you see a large jet helicopter just powering down its rotors after landing. You are terrified but can't look away or run away.
As you watch, ten people get out all dressed in orange (or any color you like) flight suits with white helmets. You note this symbol on the side of the helicopter.






The crew spreads out conducting various scientific tasks. One shouts and points at something on the ground and another comes running with an automatic rifle which he proceeds to fire 3 times. Then he goes over and picks up the body of a snake, shakes it at the person who yelled, and tosses it away.

The crew spends several hours at the landing site until the commander says something and they all pack up their gear and get back on the chopper. Then with a noise you have never heard before the chopper lifts off and the jet engines fly it away.

You stay where you are for a few moments and then wander out into the field. You find 3 spent shell casings and the body of the snake, with wounds of such a nature that you cannot equate them to your spear. Aside from the casings, you find some plastic wrappings and other trash left behind and duly pick these up to bring back to your tribe.

Now, here is the assignment. Describe what you have just seen to the tribal elders using only the basic language skills that you possess and the handful of artifacts that you picked up.

"Ugh, ummagumma shamalama ding dong bang bang bang snake whoosh whoosh whoosh zoom!" (holds out the shell casings) "wowowowowowowowowo eeeewwwwwwww!", they said. (the whole village bows to the shell casings.) "far out man!', he thinks to himself.

Beagle wrote:Von Daniken showed a picture of a Mayan (or Aztec glyph) that he said was a man in a spaceship blasting off. Well, I was young and impressionable and I looked at it for a long time. I didn't remotely come to the same conclusion. There were quite a few examples like that.

I was thumbing through 'In Search of Ancient Gods' (1st Edition HC no less) this very morning. For reference, the Mayan glyph is the lid of Pacal's sarcophagus at Palenque. My impression is/was about the same as yours. "Um, ok Erich."

Somewhere I have that picture. I agree that Von Daniken's explanation is far out.

Trouble is, so is archaeology's.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_tumba_pacal_2.htm

Erich von Daniken popularized the nation in the late 1960s that this sarcophagus lid showed the portrait of an ancient astronaut taking off or landing in his spaceship, a stylized rocket. Von Daniken is worth quoting,

"Although the tombstone forms a frame in the middle of which a being is sitting and leaning forwards (like an astronaut in his command module.) This strange being wears a helmet from which twin tubes run backwards. In front of his nose is an oxygen apparatus. The figure is manipulating some kind of controls with both hands. The fingers of the upper hand are arranged as if the being was making a delicate adjustment to a knob in front of him. We can see four fingers of the lower hand which has its back to us. The little finger is crooked. Doesn't it look as if the being was working a control such as the hand-throttle of a motorbike? The heel of the left foot rests on a pedal with several steps."

(pages 197-l98)

Then, of course, there is the standard when-all-else-fails-jump-on-religion theory put forward by mainstream archaeologists.

However, for reasons that make a lot of sense, Childress explains in his well researched book, Von Daniken's explanation is highly unlikely. He then goes on to say:

"A more credible, and in fact, as interesting an explanation for the sarcophagus lid of Lord Pacal is that the engraved relief represents a division of the universe in three layers; the Upper World, the Middle World, and the Underworld."

( page 199)

Howard LaFay in the December Issue of National Geographic's, "The Maya, Children of Time" gave another interpretation:

"Frozen in a perpetual fall, Pacal, the great ruler of Palenque, drops at the instant of death into the jaws of an underworld monster, just as the sun sinks each day in the west. This interpretation holds that, again, like the sun, he will ascend into the heavens, thus fulfilling a cosmic cycle."

And, then, these authors comment on Maya legend and offer their own alternative.

What do Maya legends say about the relief?. It is a vessel returning Lord Pacal (Pacal Votan to the underworld). I believe the Maya, the descendents of Lord Pacal, told us in their legends exactly what the scene represents.
Once again our research proves that the real answer backs up our theory. I submit that Lord Pacal is shown sitting in a tunnel car used to travel the 800 miles of subterranean passages (the 'dwelling of the thirteen snakes') to the land of the underworld and his home, Valum Chivim.

So, the question remains.....where did the Maya learn about "tunnel cars?"

Frank Harrist wrote:"Ugh, ummagumma shamalama ding dong bang bang bang snake whoosh whoosh whoosh zoom!" (holds out the shell casings) "wowowowowowowowowo eeeewwwwwwww!", they said. (the whole village bows to the shell casings.) "far out man!', he thinks to himself.

Not easy, though. I think the analogy was later extended to where someone watching such an event would, of course, consider such people 'gods' and noting that they had different functions each would be the god of something specific, while the guy giving orders would assume the Zeus role of "king of the gods."

I had fun with that exercise this morning. In my opinion the culture with a language that primitive would probably be late H. Erectus.

But even a later culture with advanced language skills would still have trouble with someting that was outside their experience and for which they had no frame of reference. Take the "chariots of fire" for instance.

I'm getting my copy of FOTG tonight.

Yeah, presupposing they knew what a 'chariot' was.

Otherwise, the only thing they knew that could fly was a bird so combine the bird with the fiery trail and Voila....dragons....even if they didn't have the word for it yet.

Many examples. In the Americas - Thunderbird, Phoenix, etc.
Thinking about dragons.... what you suggest could well be. I also thought that comets might have a role to play.

We live in a culture that mostly can't see a clear night sky, much less take the time to get out of city lights and view it.

But The ancients didn't miss anything moving up there. Meteor showers especially have played a role. Some are pretty spectacular. The Leonids come annually. And others.

It's interesting that the Great Serpent Mound in Ohio is near an ancient impact crater.

All right - I've got a copy of FOTG. Large book and extremely well referenced. I'll comment chapter by chapter. So keep your copy handy.