Page 1 of 2
Mexico Pyrimid Origins
Posted: Wed May 10, 2006 7:52 am
by gunny
What influence did other cultures have on central America and Mexico's amazing culture. A new city found at 1500BC in northern Mexico is pushing way back their origins. Hyerdahl's "Tiki" came from the west on a ship with white sails. One reason Cortez did not get his butt shot off was they thought Tiki had returned. Rumors of a crypt with mummy with red hair surfaced some years ago. Then no more data. DNA today on that would be interesting. Not seem possible that level of progress of Indians could have produced architecture of that magnitude without western help. Lots of fun things for us to go explore. Damn
Posted: Wed May 10, 2006 9:27 am
by Minimalist
Caral, in Peru, is dated to 3000 BC so the idea that there were advanced South and Central American Indian civilizations is well attested in the record but those legends came from somewhere.
Graham Hancock also speaks of a stele which shows bearded white men and another which shows those same men as war casualties, presumably after a battle with the local Indian tribes. These are associated with the Olmec culture of which the African stone heads has already been discussed.
Posted: Wed May 10, 2006 10:02 am
by gunny
Probably from Bosnia
Posted: Wed May 10, 2006 10:08 am
by Minimalist
That would be my guess.
Wonder what RK thinks?
caral
Posted: Wed May 10, 2006 11:45 am
by stan
http://archaeologica.boardbot.com/viewtopic.php?t=102
Gunny, here's the link to our previous discussions of Caral.
It's pretty interesting!
Posted: Wed May 10, 2006 12:00 pm
by Minimalist
This site offers a lot of speculation and some looney tunes stuff but I can attest that the comments from Hancock about La Venta are accurate representations of what he had to say in Fingerprints of the Gods. Hancock also had some photos of the stelae in question but so far I can't seem to find those on the web. I wonder if I could make a decent copy and scan on my equipment.
Oh, well....for your amusement:
http://hope-of-israel.org/olmec.htm
Hancock continues:
At Monte Alban, however, there seemed to be carved in stone a record of the DOWNFALL of these masterful men. It did not look as if this could have been the work of the same people who made the La Venta sculptures. The standard of craftsmanship was FAR TOO LOW for that. But what was certain -- whoever they were, and however inferior their work -- was that these artists had attempted to portray the same NEGROID subjects and the same goatee-bearded CAUCASIANS as I had seen at La Venta. There the sculptures had reflected strength, power and vitality. Here, at Monte Alban THE REMARKABLE STRANGERS WERE CORPSES. All were naked, most were castrated, some were curled up in foetal positions as though to avoid showers of blows, others lay sprawled slackly. -- Fingerprints of the Gods, p. 146.
Posted: Wed May 10, 2006 12:19 pm
by gunny
Saw the negroid face on the grounds of the Houston museum. No doubt it was from Africa. Any data on the "Red Headed Stranger" mummy found eariler? Looks like we will have to go beyond the Carolinas to Mexico. The tequilas is better down there. Packed my entrenching tool and MREs and M16.
Posted: Wed May 10, 2006 12:27 pm
by Minimalist
Uh-huh.
For those who may not know what we are talking about.
Posted: Wed May 10, 2006 12:38 pm
by Minimalist
gunny wrote:Saw the negroid face on the grounds of the Houston museum. No doubt it was from Africa. Any data on the "Red Headed Stranger" mummy found eariler? Looks like we will have to go beyond the Carolinas to Mexico. The tequilas is better down there. Packed my entrenching tool and MREs and M16.
Hey, gunny, take a look at this.
http://www.burlingtonnews.net/redhairedmummiesperu.html
Took a while to find because apparently Willie Nelson did a song about a Red-Headed Stranger and there is a Western book about a Red-Headed Mummy! That queered up the search result a bit.
Posted: Thu May 11, 2006 6:35 am
by gunny
Will buy Hancock book.
Posted: Thu May 11, 2006 8:41 am
by Frank Harrist
gunny wrote:Will buy Hancock book.
It's a good book, if taken with a grain of salt. I like the way it makes you think when you read it. A lot of it's malarkey, but it's a really good read. It re-awakened my interest in ancient civilisations and archaeology. Just don't believe it all. He brings up a lot of really good questions.
Posted: Thu May 11, 2006 7:19 pm
by stan
This red-hair business is the bomb!
Posted: Thu May 11, 2006 10:26 pm
by Beagle
You know, I don't think the history of the Americas has been scratched yet. I have seen Hancock on TV and I have read some of his opinions on the web, but I haven't read his book.
I agree with his premise that an older civilization existed and that its' remains are mostly underwater. Of course I don't mean a high tech civilization like ours. Beyond that, it's my understanding that his thinking is in the ozone layer.
I'm still waiting for anyone who can come up with an explanation of how earlier man could move such megalithic stones like we see at Baalbek in Lebanon and all over the world. I've seen all the TV junk, where they move a relatively small rock on logs. The rocks at Baalbek would have crushed wood beneath them.
Anyway, if one of you reads Hancock and highly recommends it, I'll read it.
Posted: Thu May 11, 2006 11:06 pm
by Minimalist
Start with Fingerprints of the Gods....
and don't forget Underworld.
Posted: Thu May 11, 2006 11:16 pm
by Minimalist
Of course I don't mean a high tech civilization like ours. Beyond that, it's my understanding that his thinking is in the ozone layer.
2,000 years ago the Romans built a civilization on slave labor and later developed water powered factories and for most of the next two millenia were looked back upon with awe and wonder by their successors. Our technological society did not begin until the Industrial Revolution. Our concept of history begins around 3,000 BC which means that we can account for about 5,000 years.
That means that there is virtually 5 times the amount of 'pre-history' as there is of 'history' and who can say what may have happened in such a vast span of time. Anthropologists and archaeologists ask us to believe that mankind developed in a linear way from thuggish cavemen to thuggish invaders of other people's countries.