Out of Place Artifact

Out-of-place artifact
Contents
1 Out-of-place artifact 1
1.1 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.1 Unusual artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.2 Questionable interpretations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1.3 Unlikely interpretations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1.4 Natural objects mistaken for artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1.5 Erroneously dated objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1.6 Modern-day creations, forgeries & hoaxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1.7 Entirely ctional . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2.1 Authors and works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2 Acmbaro gures 6
2.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2 Dating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.5 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3 Aiud object 8
3.1 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4 Ancient Discoveries 9
4.1 Episodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1.1 Series 1 (2003) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1.2 Series 2 (2005) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1.3 Series 3 (2007) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1.4 Series 4 (early 2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
i
ii CONTENTS
4.1.5 Series 5 (late 2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

4.1.6 Series 6 (2009) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.4 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5 Antikythera mechanism 10
5.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.1.1 Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.1.2 Origin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2 Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2.1 Major fragments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.2.2 Minor fragments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.3 Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.3.1 Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.3.2 Faces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.3.3 Doors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.3.4 Gearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.3.5 Accuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5.4 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5.6 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.6.1 Books . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.6.2 Journals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.6.3 Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.7 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6 Baghdad Battery 24
6.1 Physical description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.2 Theories concerning operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.2.1 Supporting experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6.3 Controversies over use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6.3.1 Battery hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6.3.2 Electroplating hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6.3.3 Bitumen as an insulator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6.3.4 Alternative hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6.4 In the media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6.5 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
6.6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
CONTENTS iii
7 Bat Creek inscription 28

7.1 Geographic and historical context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7.2 Archaeological excavations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
7.3 Analysis and debate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
7.4 Recent commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7.5 Current location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
7.6 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
7.7 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
7.8 Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
7.9 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
8 Brandenburg stone 34
8.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
8.2 Claims of Welsh origin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
8.3 Authenticity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
8.4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
9 Calaveras Skull 36
9.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
9.2 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
9.3 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
10 Chariots of the Gods (lm) 38

10.1 Other versions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
10.2 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
10.3 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
11 Coso artifact 39
11.1 Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
11.2 Criticism and analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
11.3 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
11.4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
11.5 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
12 Crystal skull 41
12.1 Collections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
12.2 Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
12.3 Other artifacts of controversial origin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
12.4 Individual skulls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
12.4.1 Mitchell-Hedges skull . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
iv CONTENTS
12.4.2 British Museum skull . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

12.4.3 Paris skull . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
12.4.4 Smithsonian Skull . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
12.5 Paranormal claims and spiritual associations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
12.6 In popular culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
12.7 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
12.8 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
12.9 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
13 Dendera light 50
13.1 Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
13.1.1 Mainstream view . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
13.1.2 Fringe view . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
13.2 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
13.3 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
13.4 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
14 Dorchester Pot 52
14.1 Geological context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
14.2 The pot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
14.3 Fringe theories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
14.4 Mainstream views . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
14.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
14.6 Other Dorchester Pot References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
15 Eiserner Mann 55
15.1 Sign content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
15.2 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
16 Eltanin Antenna 57
16.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
16.2 Identication as sponge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
16.3 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
16.3.1 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
17 Esperanza Stone 59
17.1 Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
17.2 Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
17.3 Legend . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
17.4 Meaning of the symbols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
CONTENTS v
17.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
18 Geofact 60
18.1 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
18.2 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
19 Oklahoma runestones 62
19.1 Heavener Runestone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
19.2 Poteau Stone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
19.3 Shawnee and Pawnee Stones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
19.4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
19.5 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
20 Helicopter hieroglyphs 64
20.1 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
20.2 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
21 Hidden character stone 65

21.1 Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
21.2 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
21.3 Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
21.3.1 Five-character version . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
21.3.2 Six-character version . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
21.3.3 Traditional and Simplied chinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
21.3.4 Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
21.4 Cultural reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
21.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
22 Ica stones 67
22.1 Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
22.2 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
22.3 Popularization by Cabrera . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
22.4 Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
22.5 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
22.6 Footnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
22.7 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
23 Iron pillar of Delhi 70

23.1 Physical description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
23.2 Inscriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
23.2.1 Inscription of king Chandra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
vi CONTENTS
23.2.2 Samvat 1109 inscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

23.3 Original location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
23.3.1 Relocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
23.4 Scientic analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
23.5 Evidence of cannonball strike . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
23.6 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
23.7 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
23.7.1 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
23.8 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
24 Kensington Runestone 79
24.1 Provenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
24.2 Text and translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
24.3 Linguistic analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
24.3.1 Lexical evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
24.3.2 Grammatical evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
24.3.3 Paleographic evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
24.4 Purported historical context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
24.5 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
24.6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
24.7 Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
24.8 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
25 Kingoodie artifact 86
25.1 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
26 Klerksdorp sphere 87
26.1 Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
26.2 Geological explanation of their origin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
26.3 Criticism of out of place claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
26.4 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
26.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
27 Lake Winnipesaukee mystery stone 90

27.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
27.2 Symbols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
27.3 Analysis and interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
27.4 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
27.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
27.6 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
CONTENTS vii
27.7 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
28 Llygadwy 92
28.1 Time Team excavation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
28.2 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
28.3 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
29 London Hammer 94
29.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
29.2 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
30 Los Lunas Decalogue Stone 96

30.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
30.2 Controversy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
30.3 Similar landmarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
30.4 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
30.5 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
30.6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
30.7 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
31 Misra Gar il-Kbir 99

31.1 Origin of the tracks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
31.2 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
31.3 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
32 Newark Holy Stones 101

32.1 Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
32.2 Skepticism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
32.3 Hoax theories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
32.3.1 David Wyrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
32.3.2 Rev. John W. McCartys and stonecutter Elijah Sutton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
32.4 Related discoveries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
32.5 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
32.6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
32.7 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
33 Olmec alternative origin speculations 105

33.1 Mainstream scientic consensus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
33.2 African origins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
33.2.1 Epigraphic evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
33.2.2 Genetic evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
viii CONTENTS
33.2.3 Osteological evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

33.3 Chinese origins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
33.4 Jaredite origins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
33.5 Nordic origins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
33.6 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
33.7 Footnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
33.8 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
34 Pangboche Hand 111

34.1 Story . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
34.2 DNA Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
34.3 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
34.4 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

35.2 Poteau Stone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
35.4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
35.5 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
36 Quimbaya artifacts 115

36.1 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
36.2 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
37 San Pedro Mountains Mummy 116

37.1 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
37.2 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
37.3 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
38 Saqqara Bird 117

38.1 Conventional ideas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
38.2 Controversial ideas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
38.2.1 Attempts to prove the claim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
38.2.2 Position of tailplane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
38.3 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
38.4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
39 The Starving of Saqqara 120

39.1 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
39.2 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
CONTENTS ix
40 Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca head 121

40.1 Find . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
40.2 Evidence for Roman manufacture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
40.3 Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
40.4 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
40.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
40.6 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
40.7 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
41 Tucson artifacts 123

41.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
41.1.1 Latin inscriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
41.2 Views on authenticity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
41.2.1 Supporters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
41.2.2 Skeptics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
41.2.3 Possible creator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
41.3 In popular culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
41.4 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
41.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
42 Wolfsegg Iron 126

42.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
42.2 Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
42.3 Out-of-place artifact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
42.4 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
43 AVM Runestone 128

43.1 Discovery and investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
43.2 Confession and explanation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
43.3 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
43.4 Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
44 Bourne stone 130

44.1 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
45 Grave Creek Stone 131

45.1 Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
45.2 Artifact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
45.3 Inscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
45.4 Recent research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
x CONTENTS
45.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
46 Narragansett Runestone 133

46.1 Provenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
46.2 Media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
46.3 2012 Disappearance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
46.4 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
46.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134

47.2 Poteau Stone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
47.4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
47.5 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
48 Spirit Pond runestones 137

48.1 Interpretation and authenticity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
48.2 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
48.3 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
48.4 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
48.5 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
49 Vrendrye Runestone 139

49.1 Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
49.2 The stones fate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
49.3 Speculated origins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
49.4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
50 Nazca Lines 140

50.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
50.2 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
50.3 Alternative explanations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
50.4 Environmental concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
50.5 Images . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
50.6 In ction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
50.7 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
50.8 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
50.9 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
50.10External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
CONTENTS xi
51 Piri Reis map 147

51.1 Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
51.2 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
51.3 Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
51.3.1 The Antarctic coast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
51.4 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
51.5 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
51.6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
51.7 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
52 Stone spheres of Costa Rica 152

52.1 Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
52.2 Geographic setting and location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
52.3 Site description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
52.4 Pre-Columbian history . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
52.5 Post-contact history . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
52.6 Historical background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
52.7 Early researchers in the region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
52.8 Current research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
52.9 Tourism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
52.10Myths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
52.11See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
52.12References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
52.13External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
52.14Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
52.14.1 Text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
52.14.2 Images . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
52.14.3 Content license . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
Chapter 1
OOPArts redirects here. For The Pillows album, see technology more advanced than that of modern times.[1]
OOPArts (album). For the SYUN album, see OOPARTS
(SYUN album).
An Out-of-place artifact (OOPArt) is an artifact of his-

1.1 Examples
torical, archaeological, or paleontological interest found in
an unusual context, that challenges conventional historical The following are examples of objects that have been argued
chronology by being too advanced for the level of civiliza- by various fringe authors (see list) to have been OOPArts:
tion that existed at the time, or showing "human presence"
before humans were known to exist.
The term is rarely used by historians or scientists. Its 1.1.1 Unusual artifacts
use is largely conned to cryptozoologists, proponents of
ancient astronaut theories, Young Earth creationists, and A minority of alleged OOPARTs are at least debatably un-
paranormal enthusiasts.[1] The term is used to describe a usual within the scientic mainstream, although not impos-
wide variety of objects, from anomalies studied by main- sible for their time period.
stream science and pseudoarchaeology far outside the main-
stream to objects that have been shown to be hoaxes or to
have mundane explanations. Antikythera mechanism: Its clockwork-like appear-
ance, dating to about 1,000 years before clocks were
Critics argue that most purported OOPArts which are not
invented, has been claimed by fringe sources to be
hoaxes are the result of mistaken interpretation, wishful
evidence of alien visitation,[3] and authors such as
thinking, or a mistaken belief that a particular culture
Zecharia Sitchin argue that this artifact is a product
couldn't have created an artifact or technology due to a
not of Man, but of the gods.[4] However, main-
lack of knowledge or materials. In some cases, the un-
stream scientists consider the Antikythera mechanism
certainty results from inaccurate descriptions. For exam-
to be a form of mechanical computer created around
ple: the Wolfsegg Iron was said to be a perfect cube, but in
150100 BCE based on the theories of astronomy and
fact it is not; the Klerksdorp spheres were said to be perfect
mathematics developed by the ancient Greeks. Its de-
spheres, but they are not; and the Iron pillar of Delhi was
sign and workmanship reect a previously unknown,
said to be rust proof, but it has some rust near its base.
but not implausible, degree of sophistication.[5][6]
Supporters regard OOPArts as evidence that mainstream
science is overlooking huge areas of knowledge, either Maine penny: Some authors argue the 11th-century
willfully or through ignorance.[1] Many writers or re- Norse coin found in a Native American shell midden in
searchers who question conventional views of human his- Maine, United States is evidence of direct contact be-
tory have used purported OOPArts in attempts to bol- tween Vikings and Native Americans in Maine. Main-
ster their arguments.[1] Creation Science relies on allegedly stream belief is that it was brought to Maine from
anomalous nds in the archaeological record to challenge Labrador or Newfoundland via an extensive north-
scientic chronologies and models of human evolution.[2] ern native trade network.[7] Over 20,000 objects were
Claimed OOPArts have been used to support religious de- found over a 15-year period at the Goddard Site in
scriptions of pre-history, ancient astronaut theories, and the Brooklin, Maine. The sole non-Native artifact was the
notion of vanished civilizations that possessed knowledge or coin.[8]
1
2 CHAPTER 1. OUT-OF-PLACE ARTIFACT
1.1.2 Questionable interpretations Abydos helicopter: A pareidolia based on palimpsest

carving in an ancient Egyptian temple.
Baghdad Battery: Vase and rods made in Parthian or
Sassanid Persia. May have been used as a galvanic Aiud object: An object said to be composed of 90
cell for electroplating, though no electroplated artifacts percent aluminum, claimed to be at least 400 years
from this era have been found.[9][10] old (long before aluminum smelting) and as much as
250,000 years old. [19]
Dorchester Pot: A metal pot claimed to have been
blasted out of solid rock in 1852.[11][12] Baalbek megaliths: Supposedly impossible to move
with Bronze Age technology.
Kingoodie artifact: An object resembling a corroded
nail, said to have been encased in solid rock[13][14] Dendera Lamps: Supposed to depict light bulbs, but
made in Ptolemaic Egypt.
Lake Winnipesaukee mystery stone: Originally
thought to be a record of a treaty between tribes, Iron Man (Eiserner Mann): An old iron pillar, said to
subsequent analysis has called its authenticity into be a unique oddity in Central Europe.
question.[15][16]
The Hidden character stone, a Chinese petroglyph.
Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca head: A terracotta oering
head seemingly of Roman appearance, found beneath Iron pillar of Delhi: Supposedly demonstrates more
three intact oors of a Pre-Columbian burial site in advanced metallurgy than was available in 1st millen-
Mexico, dated between 1476 and 1510. However, the nium India.
artifact has been determined to be older and ancient
Roman provenance has not been excluded.[17][18] The "London Hammer", also known as the London
Artifact, hammer made of iron and wood that was
found in London, Texas in 1936. Part of the hammer
1.1.3 Unlikely interpretations is embedded in a limy rock concretion.
Nazca Lines: Supposedly impossible to design without

the aid of an aerial view.
The Newark Holy Stones, used as extremely unlikely

evidence that Hebrews lived in the Americas, but more
probably a hoax.
Pacals sarcophagus lid: Described by Erich von

Dniken as a depiction of a spaceship.
Piri Reis map: Several ancient astronauts authors, and

others such as Gavin Menzies and Charles Hapgood,
suggested that this map, compiled by the Turkish
admiral Piri Reis, shows Antarctica long before it was
discovered.
Quimbaya airplanes: Golden objects found in

Colombia and made by Quimbaya civilization culture,
they are supposed to represent modern airplanes. In
the Gold Museum, Bogot, they are described as g-
ures of birds and insects.
Saqqara Bird: Supposed to depict a glider, but made

in Ancient Egypt.
Shakkidog: Small humanoid and animal gurines

made during the late Jmon period (14,000400 BCE)
The iron pillar of Delhi of prehistoric Japan, said to resemble extraterrestrial
astronauts.
1.2. SEE ALSO 3
Stone spheres of Costa Rica: Inaccurately described Crystal skulls: Supposedly demonstrate more ad-
as being perfectly spherical, and therefore demonstrat- vanced stone-cutting skill than was present in pre-
ing greater stone-working skill than was present in pre- Columbian Mesoamerica. Appear to have been made
Columbian times. in the 19th century.
Ica stones: Depict Inca dinosaur-hunters, surgery, and
1.1.4 Natural objects mistaken for artifacts other modern or fanciful topics. Collected by Javier
Cabrera Darquea, who believed them to be prehistoric.
Baigong Pipes: Their natural origins are Kensington Runestone: Purports to have been made
challenged.[20][21][22] by 15th century descendents of Leif Ericson's colony.
Generally believed to be a modern-day hoax.
Eltanin Antenna: Actually a sponge.[23][24]
The Michigan relics, supposedly ancient artifacts that
Klerksdorp spheres: Actually Precambrian are archaeological forgeries and were supposed to
concretions.[25][26] prove that people of an ancient Near Eastern culture
had lived in Michigan, USA.
1.1.5 Erroneously dated objects The Tucson artifacts, a hoax.

The Calaveras Skull, an admitted hoax.
Coso artifact: Thought to be prehistoric; actually a
1920s spark plug.[2] Los Lunas Decalogue Stone: Supposedly made by
Pre-Columbian Israelite visitors to the Americas.
Malachite Man: Thought to be from the early Generally believed to be a modern-day hoax.
Cretaceous; actually a post-Columbian burial.[27][28]
Wolfsegg Iron: Thought to be from the Tertiary epoch; 1.1.7 Entirely ctional
actually from an early mining operation. Inaccurately
described as a perfect cube. Dropa stones: Popularized by David Gamon (as David
Agamon) as part of his false document Sungods in Ex-
ile.
1.1.6 Modern-day creations, forgeries &
hoaxes
1.2 See also
Ancient technology
Anachronism
Occams razor advocates that among competing hy-
potheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions
should be selected.
Paluxy River became famous in 1930s when locals
found dinosaur and supposed human footprints in the
same rock layer.
1.2.1 Authors and works

Charles Fort, researcher of anomalous phenomena
An Ica stone depicting dinosaurs
Fortean Times
Peter Kolosimo
Acmbaro gures: Mid-20th century gurines of
dinosaurs, attributed by Waldemar Julsrud to an an- Erich von Dniken, the most famous ancient astro-
cient society. nauts theorist
4 CHAPTER 1. OUT-OF-PLACE ARTIFACT
Chariots of the Gods?, one of his notable [10] Flatow, I (2012) Archaeologists Revisit Iraq. interview with
works Elizabeth Stone, Talk of the Nation, National Public Radio.
Washington, DC.
Zecharia Sitchin
[11] Steiger, B. (1979) Worlds Before Our Own. New York,
Fingerprints of the Gods book by Graham Hancock New York, Berkley Publishing Group. 236 p. ISBN 978-
1-933665-19-1
Michael Cremo, author of several books including
Forbidden Archeology [12] Fitzpatrick-Matthews, K, and J Doeser (2007) Metallic vase
from Dorchester, Massachusetts. Bad Archaeology.
Charles Berlitz, famous linguist and writer of anoma-
lous phenomena [13] Sir David, B (1854) Queries and Statements concerning a
Nail found imbedded in a Block of Sandstone obtained from
The Mysterious Origins of Man originally aired on Kingoodie (Mylneld) Quarry, North Britain. Report of the
NBC in 1996 Fourteenth Meeting of the British Association for the Ad-
vancement of Science vol. 51, John Murray London.
Strata (novel)
[14] Fitzpatrick-Matthews, K, and J Doeser (2007) A nail in De-
Warehouse 13, a television science ction series vonian sandstone from Kingoodie, Scotland. Bad Archaeol-
ogy.
1.3 References [15] anonymous (nd) The Mystery Stone. Museum Exhibits, New
Hampshire Historical Society, Concord, New Hampshire.
[1] O'Hehir, Andrew (August 31, 2005). Archaeology from [16] Klatell, JM (July 23, 2006). New Englands 'Mystery Stone':
the dark side. Salon.com. Retrieved 19 April 2010. New Hampshire Displays Unexplained Artifact 134 Years
[2] Stromberg, P, and PV Heinrich (2004) The Coso Artifact Later. Associated Press. Retrieved March 8, 2014.
Mystery from the Depths of Time?, Reports of the National
[17] Hristov, RH, and S. Genoves (2001) Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca.
Center for Science Education. 24(2):26-30 (March/April
Dept. of Anthropology at the University of New Mexico,
2004) Retrieved March 8, 2014.
Albuquerque, New Mexico.
[3] The Antikythera Mechanism. Skeptoid.com. Retrieved
2011-08-24. [18] Schaaf, P and GA Wagner (1991) Comments on 'Mesoamer-
ican Evidence of Pre-Columbian Transoceanic Contacts,' by
[4] Zecharia Sitchin (25 January 2011). Journeys to the Mythical Hristov and Genovs. Ancient Mesoamerica. 10:207-213.
Past. Inner Traditions / Bear & Co. pp. 171. ISBN 978-
1-59143-951-6. Retrieved 19 June 2013. [19] Plummer (2016) Does this mysterious piece of aluminium
prove UFOs visited Earth 250,000 years ago?", The Daily
[5] "The Antikythera Mechanism Research Project", The An- Mail, London.
tikythera Mechanism Research Project. Retrieved 2007-07-
01 Quote: The Antikythera Mechanism is now understood [20] Anonymous (2002) Mysterious Pipes Left by 'ET' Reported
to be dedicated to astronomical phenomena and operates as from Qinghai. Peoples Daily Online, Beijing, China. Re-
a complex mechanical computer which tracks the cycles trieved March 8, 2014.
of the Solar System.
[21] Anonymous (2002) Chinese Scientists to Head for Suspected
[6] Paphitis, Nicholas (December 1, 2006). Experts: Frag-
ET Relics. Peoples Daily Online, Beijing, China. Retrieved
ments an Ancient Computer. The Washington Post.
March 8, 2014.
ATHENS, Greece. Imagine tossing a top-notch laptop into
the sea, leaving scientists from a foreign culture to scratch [22] Dunning, B (2009) The Baigong Pipes. Skeptoid: Critical
their heads over its corroded remains centuries later. A Analysis of Pop Phenomena. Retrieved March 8, 2014.
Roman shipmaster inadvertently did something just like it
2,000 years ago o southern Greece, experts said late Thurs- [23] Brookesmith, P (2004) The Eltanin Enigma. Fortean Times.
day. (May 2004). Retrieved March 8, 2014.
[7] Vinland Archeology. Smithsonian Institution National
[24] Heezen, BC, and CD Hollister (1971) The Face of the Deep.
Museum of Natural History. Retrieved 2011-08-24.
Oxford University Press, New York. 659 pp. ISBN 0-19-
[8] Bye, Columbus. Time. December 11, 1978. 501277-1
[9] Von Handorf, DE, and DE Crotty (2002) The Baghdad bat- [25] Cairncross, B (1988) Cosmic cannonballs a rational expla-
tery - myth or reality? Plating and Surface Finishing. vol. nation: The South African Lapidary Magazine. v. 30, no.
89, no. 5, pp. 8487. 1, pp. 4-6.
1.4. EXTERNAL LINKS 5
[26] Heinrich, PV (1997) Mystery spheres: National Center for

Science Education Reports. v. 17, no. 1, p. 34. (Jan-
uary/February 1997)
[27] Coulam, NJ, and AR Schroedl (1995) The Keystone azurite

mine in southeastern Utah. Utah Archaeology. 8(1):1-12.
[28] Kuban, GJ, (2005) Moab Man - Malachite Man. The

Paluxy Dinosaur/"Man Track Controversy. Retrieved
March 8, 2014.
1.4 External links

Critical perspective on Creationist and New Age
claims related to out-of-place artifacts at Bad Archae-
ology
Archaeology from the dark side at Salon.com

Out-of-place artifacts article at Cult and Fringe Ar-
chaeology
Chapter 2
Acmbaro gures
he brought back. Eventually, the farmer and his assistants

brought him over 32,000 gures which included representa-
tions of everything from the supposed dinosaurs to peoples
from all over the world including Egyptians, Sumerians, and
bearded Caucasians".[1]
The gures attracted little attention from scholars and sci-
entists, and when Julsrud began to assert that they were ac-
curate representations of dinosaurs created by an ancient
society, he only alienated himself further from serious sci-
entic investigation. Tabloids and popular media sources
covered the story, however, and the gures steadily became
somewhat famous.
Archaeologist Charles C. Di Peso was working for the
Amerind Foundation, an anthropological organization ded-
icated to preserving Native American culture. Di Peso ex-
The Acmbaro gures are about 33,000 small ceramic g- amined the gures and determined that they were not au-
urines allegedly found by Waldemar Julsrud in July 1944, in thentic, and had instead been produced by local modern-day
the Mexican city of Acmbaro, Guanajuato. The gurines farmers.[3][4]
are said by some to resemble dinosaurs and are sometimes
cited as anachronisms. Some young-Earth creationists have He concluded that the gurines were indeed
adduced the existence of gurines as credible evidence for fakes: their surfaces displayed no signs of age; no
the coexistence of dinosaurs and humans, in an attempt to dirt was packed into their crevices; and though
cast doubt on scientic dating methods and potentially of- some gurines were broken, no pieces were miss-
fer support for a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation ing and no broken surfaces were worn. Fur-
narrative.[1] thermore, the excavations stratigraphy clearly
However, there is no known reliable evidence for the valid- showed that the artifacts were placed in a recently
ity of the Acmbaro gures as actual ancient artifacts; and dug hole lled with a mixture of the surrounding
many have questioned the motives of those who argue for archaeological layers. DiPeso also learned that a
their validity.[2] local family had been making and selling these
gurines to Julsrud for a peso apiece since 1944,
presumably inspired by lms shown at Acm-
baros cinema, locally available comic books and
2.1 History newspapers, and accessible day trips to Mexico
Citys Museo Nacional.[5]
The Acmbaro gures were uncovered by a German im-
migrant and hardware merchant named Waldemar Julsrud. Others, however, argued that Di Peso could not have con-
According to Dennis Swift, a young-Earth creationist and ducted a thorough investigation in the four hours he spent
major proponent of the gures, Julsrud stumbled upon the at Julsruds home.[6] Charles Hapgood, pioneer of pole shift
gures while riding his horse and hired a local farmer to theory, became one of the gures most high prole and de-
dig up the remaining gures, paying him for each gure vout supporters.[7] Other supporters included Earle Stanley
6
Gardner, the prolic novelist and creator of the character [4] DiPeso, C.C. (1953). The Clay Monsters of Acambaro.
Perry Mason, who came to Julsruds defence, claiming that Archaeology. 6(2):111-114.
the 32,000 gures could not possibly have been produced
[5] Pezatti, Alex (2005). "Mystery at Acmbaro, Mexico. Ex-
by a single person or group of people and that the gures pedition Magazine. 47(3):7-8. University of Pennsylvania
were not a hoax. Museum.
The gures continue to draw attention in the present day.
[6] Childress, David Hatcher (1993). Lost Cities of North &
They have been cited in some pseudoscientic books such
Central America. Stelle, Illinois: Adventures Unlimited
as Atlantis Rising by David Lewis. Another young-Earth Press. p. 209. ISBN 0932813097.
creationist, Don Patten, has emerged as their staunchest
supporter. He has proposed some new lines of evidence, [7] Hapgood, Charles (2000). Mystery in Acambaro: Did
including the gures resemblance to the dinosaurs depicted Dinosaurs Survive Until Recently?. Adventures Unlimited
in Robert Bakkers book, Dinosaur Heresies.[8] Press. ISBN 0-932813-76-3.
[8] Blanton, John (October 1999). The Acambaro dinosaurs.

Newsletter of The North Texas Skeptics. 13 (10). Archived
2.2 Dating from the original on 27 December 2007. Retrieved 2007-
12-19.
Attempts have been made to date the gures using [9] Carriveau, G. W.; Han, M. C. (1976). Thermoluminescent
thermoluminescence (TL) dating. The earliest results, from Dating and the Monsters of Acambaro. American Antiq-
tests done when TL dating was in its infancy, suggested a uity. 41(4):497-500.
date around 2500 BC.[5] However, later tests contradicted
these ndings. In 1976, Gary W. Carriveau and Mark
C. Han attempted to date twenty Acmbaro gures using 2.5 External links
TL dating. They found that the gures had been red at
temperatures between 450 C and 650 C, which contra- Acmbaro gures and the Julsrud Museum at Munic-
dicted claims that these gures had been red at temper- ipality of Acmbaro ocial page.
atures too low for them to be accurately dated. However,
all of the samples failed the plateau test, which indicated ArchyFantasies Podcast - Episode 48: Acmbaro Fig-
that dates obtained for the Acmbaro gures using standard ures & Ica Stones
high-temperature TL dating techniques were unreliable and
lacked any chronological signicance. Based on the de-
gree of signal regeneration found in remeasured samples,
they estimated that the gures tested had been red approx-
imately 30 years prior to 1969.[9]
2.3 See also

Ica stones
2.4 References
[1] The Dinosaur Figurines Of Acambaro, Mexico. The In-
teractive Bible. 2003-07-27. Archived from the original on
14 December 2007. Retrieved 2007-12-19.
[2] Isaak, M. (2007). The Counter-Creationism Handbook. Uni-

versity of California Press, Berkeley, California. p. 362.
ISBN 978-0-520-24926-4
[3] DiPeso, C.C. (1953). The Clay Figurines of Acambaro,

Guanajuato, Mexico. American Antiquity. 18(4):388-389.
Chapter 3
Aiud object
The Aiud Object (or Aiud Artifact) is a claimed out- [3] Hilblairious (2014) Aluminum, Aliens (1): What THEY
of-place artifact said to have been found by construction left Behind in Aiud, Hilblairious.blogspot.ca.
workers in 1974 in the Mure River in central Romania,
[4] Ivan (2014) 15 Things You Should Know About the Aiud
near the town of Aiud, and said to be of ancient (possibly
Object Aluminum Wedge, Ancient-Code.com
pre-human) origin. Mainstream news sources [1] and para-
normal sites [2] have suggested the object may have been
left behind by extraterrestrial visitors to Earth.
The object is shaped like a wedge or possibly a fragment
of machinery, and is composed of 12 metals, including
about 89% aluminum.[3] The object was discovered with
conrmed mastodon fossils said to established its extreme
antiquity, with the earliest estimates placing its origin in a
period well before humans had established metalworking.
Dates asserted for the artifact have ranged from 250,000
years B.P. to 400 years B.P. Since even the later date would
establish an origin approximately 2000 years before humans
learned to process aluminum in 1825, the objects compo-
sition is said, along with its unusual form, to be evidence of
its extraterrestrial origin.[4]
At least one other commentator has commented on the ob-
jects physical and possible chemical similarity to a me-
chanical part from digging equipment, known as an exca-
vator bucket tooth (EBT). A row of these form the dig-
ging edge of a steam shovel or backhoe conguration.
While these teeth are usually made of carbon steel, buck-
ets with aluminum alloy teeth are used when excavating in
the presence of volatile compounds like coal, tar sands, or
petroleum.[3] As the object was found in a coal-producing
region, its possible modern provenance could place it in the
category of erroneously dated objects.
3.1 References
[1] Plummer (2016) Does this mysterious piece of aluminium
prove UFOs visited Earth 250,000 years ago?", The Daily
Mail, London.
[2] Cool Interesting Stu (2016) Aluminium Wedge of Aiud

Mystery, CoolInterestingStu.com.
8
Chapter 4
Ancient Discoveries
Ancient Discoveries was a television series that premiered 4.1.4 Series 4 (early 2008)
on December 21, 2003, on The History Channel. The pro-
gram focused on ancient technologies. The shows theme 4.1.5 Series 5 (late 2008)
was that many inventions which are thought to be modern
have ancient roots or in some cases may have been lost and 4.1.6 Series 6 (2009)
then reinvented. The program was a follow-up to a special
originally broadcast in 2005 which focused on technologies An episode about ancient surgery is available through
from the Ancient Roman era such as the Antikythera mech- Comcast OnDemand, even though it has not aired on His-
anism and inventors such as Heron of Alexandria. Episodes tory.
of the regular series expanded to cover other areas such as
Egypt, China and East Asia, and the Islamic world.
Ancient Discoveries was made for The History Channel by 4.2 References
Wild Dream Films based in Cardi in the UK. Much of
the lming was on location across the world. The series [1] TV.com Ancient Discoveries. TV.com. Retrieved 2009-
used contributions from archaeologists and other experts, 12-16.
footage of historical sites and artifacts, computer generated
reconstructions, and dramatized reconstructions along with [2] TVguide.com Ancient Discoveries. TVguide.com. Re-
trieved 2009-12-22.
experiments and tests on reconstructed artifacts.
[3] TVmsn.com Ancient Discoveries. TVmsn.com. Re-
trieved 2009-12-22.
4.1 Episodes
4.3 External links
4.1.1 Series 1 (2003)
Ocial Site (History Channel)
Michael Carroll was the initial narrator of the series for The
Ocial Site of Wild Dream Films
History Channel (US).
Ancient Discoveries at the Internet Movie Database
(Incomplete Episode Listings)
4.1.2 Series 2 (2005) Ancient Discoveries on Zap2It (Most Complete
Episode Listings)
Phil Crowley was narrator of this series of episodes and for
all subsequent episodes for The History Channel (US).
4.4 See also
4.1.3 Series 3 (2007) Ancient Inventions
The Re-Inventors
This was the rst series of episodes presented in wide screen
format on The History Channel (US).
9
Chapter 5
Antikythera mechanism
For the BT song The Antikythera Mechanism, see This The Antikythera mechanism (/ntkir/ ANT-i-ki-
Binary Universe. THEER- or /ntkr/ ANT-i-KITH--r) is an an-
cient analogue computer[1][2][3][4] and orrery used to pre-
dict astronomical positions and eclipses for calendrical and
astrological purposes,[5][6][7] as well as the Olympiads, the
cycles of the ancient Olympic Games.[8][9]
Found housed in a 340 millimetres (13 in) 180 millime-
tres (7.1 in) 90 millimetres (3.5 in) wooden box, the de-
vice is a complex clockwork mechanism composed of at
least 30 meshing bronze gears. Its remains were found as
one lump, later separated in three main fragments, which
are now divided into 82 separate fragments after conserva-
tion works. Four of these fragments contain gears, while in-
scriptions are found on many others.[10][11] The largest gear
(clearly visible in Fragment A at right) is approximately
140 millimetres (5.5 in) in diameter and originally had 223
The teeth.
Antikythera mechanism (Fragment A front) The artefact was recovered probably in July 1901[12]
from the Antikythera shipwreck o the Greek island of
Antikythera.[13] Believed to have been designed and con-
structed by Greek scientists, the instrument has been dated
either between 150 and 100 BC,[5] or, according to a more
recent view, in 205 BC.[14][15]
After the knowledge of this technology was lost at some
point in antiquity, technological artefacts approaching its
complexity and workmanship did not appear again until the
development of mechanical astronomical clocks in Europe
in the fourteenth century.[16]
All known fragments of the Antikythera mechanism are
kept at the National Archaeological Museum, in Athens,
along with a number of artistic reconstructions of how the
mechanism may have looked.[17]
The
Antikythera mechanism (Fragment A back) 5.1 History
See also: Antikythera wreck
10
5.2. DESCRIPTION 11
5.1.1 Discovery world.[6]

In 2006, continued research by the Antikythera Mecha-
The Antikythera mechanism was discovered in 45 metres nism Research Project suggested the concept for the mech-
(148 ft) of water in the Antikythera shipwreck o Point anism originated in the colonies of Corinth, since some
Glyphadia on the Greek island of Antikythera. The wreck of the astronomical calculations seem to indicate observa-
was found in April 1900 by a group of Greek sponge divers, tions that can be made only in the Corinth area of ancient
who retrieved numerous artefacts, including bronze and Greece. Syracuse was a colony of Corinth and the home
marble statues, pottery, unique glassware, jewellery, coins, of Archimedes, which might imply a connection with the
and the mechanism. All were transferred to the National school of Archimedes.[8] Another theory suggests that coins
Museum of Archaeology in Athens for storage and analy- found by Jacques Cousteau in the 1970s at the wreck site
sis. Merely a lump of corroded bronze and wood at the time, date to the time of the devices construction, and posits
the mechanism went unnoticed for two years while museum its origin may have been from the ancient Greek city of
sta worked on piecing together more obvious statues.[16] Pergamon,[25] home of the Library of Pergamum. With
On 17 May 1902, archaeologist Valerios Stais was exam- its many scrolls of art and science, it was second in impor-
ining the nds and noticed that one of the pieces of rock tance only to the Library of Alexandria during the Hellenis-
had a gear wheel embedded in it. Stais initially believed it tic period.[26]
was an astronomical clock, but most scholars considered the The ship carrying the device also contained vases in the
device to be prochronistic, too complex to have been con- Rhodian style, leading to a hypothesis the device was con-
structed during the same period as the other pieces that had structed at an academy founded by the Stoic philosopher
been discovered. Investigations into the object were soon Posidonius on that Greek island. A busy trading port in
dropped until British science historian and Yale University antiquity, Rhodes was also a centre of astronomy and me-
professor, Derek J. de Solla Price became interested in it chanical engineering, home to the astronomer Hipparchus,
in 1951.[18] In 1971, both Price and Greek nuclear physi- active from about 140 BC to 120 BC. That the mecha-
cist Charalampos Karakalos made X-ray and gamma-ray nism uses Hipparchuss theory for the motion of the moon
images of the 82 fragments. Price published an extensive suggests the possibility he may have designed, or at least
70-page paper on their ndings in 1974.[16] worked on it.[16]
It is not known how the mechanism came to be on the Cardi University professor Michael Edmunds, who led a
cargo ship, but it has been suggested that it was being taken 2006 study of the mechanism, described the device as just
from Rhodes to Rome, together with other looted treasure, extraordinary, the only thing of its kind, and said that its
to support a triumphal parade being staged by Julius Cae- astronomy was exactly right. He regarded the Antikythera
sar.[19] mechanism as more valuable than the Mona Lisa".[27][28]
In 2014, a study by Carman and Evans argued for a new
5.1.2 Origin dating of approximately 200 BC.[14][15] Moreover, accord-
ing to Carman and Evans, the Babylonian arithmetic style
Generally referred to as the rst known analogue com- of prediction ts much better with the devices predictive [14]
puter,[20] the quality and complexity of the mechanisms models than the traditional Greek trigonometric style.
manufacture suggests it has undiscovered predecessors Further dives are being undertaken in the hope of discover-
made during the Hellenistic period.[21] Its construction re- ing more of the mechanism.[15]
lied upon theories of astronomy and mathematics devel-
oped by Greek astronomers, and is estimated to have been
created around the late second century BC.[5]
In 1974, Derek de Solla Price concluded from gear settings 5.2 Description
and inscriptions on the mechanisms faces that it was made
about 87 BC and lost only a few years later.[13] Jacques The original mechanism apparently came out of the
Cousteau and associates visited the wreck in 1976[22] and Mediterranean as a single encrusted piece. Soon afterward
recovered coins dated to between 76 and 67 BC.[23] Though it fractured into three major pieces. Other small pieces have
its advanced state of corrosion has made it impossible to broken o in the interim from cleaning and handling,[29]
perform an accurate compositional analysis, it is believed and still others were found on the sea oor by the Cousteau
the device was made of a low-tin bronze alloy (of approx- expedition. Other fragments may still be in storage, undis-
imately 95% copper, 5% tin).[24] All its instructions are covered since their initial recovery; Fragment F came to
written in Koine Greek, and the consensus among schol- light in that way in 2005. Of the 82 known fragments, seven
ars is that the mechanism was made in the Greek-speaking are mechanically signicant and contain the majority of the
12 CHAPTER 5. ANTIKYTHERA MECHANISM
mechanism and inscriptions. There are also 16 smaller parts 5.3.1 Operation
that contain fractional and incomplete inscriptions.[5][8][30]
On the front face of the mechanism (see reproduction
here:[32] ) there is a xed ring dial representing the ecliptic,
the twelve zodiacal signs marked o with equal 30 de-
5.2.1 Major fragments
gree sectors. This matched with the Babylonian custom
of assigning one twelfth of the ecliptic to each zodiac sign
5.2.2 Minor fragments equally, even though the constellation boundaries were vari-
able. Outside of that dial is another ring which is rotatable,
Many of the smaller fragments that have been found con- marked o with the months and days of the Sothic Egyptian
tain nothing of apparent value, however, a few have some calendar, twelve months of 30 days plus ve intercalary
inscriptions on them. Fragment 19 contains signicant days. The months are marked with the Egyptian names for
back door inscriptions including one reading "...76 years.... the months transcribed into the Greek alphabet. The rst
which refers to the Callippic cycle. Other inscriptions seem task, then, is to rotate the Egyptian calendar ring to match
to describe the function of the back dials. In addition to the current zodiac points. The Egyptian calendar ignored
this important minor fragment, 15 further minor fragments leap days, so it advanced through a full zodiac sign in about
have remnants of inscriptions on them.[31]:7 120 years.[6]
The mechanism was operated by turning a small hand crank
(now lost) which was linked via a crown gear to the largest
gear, the four-spoked gear visible on the front of fragment
5.3 Mechanism A, the gear named b1. This moved the date pointer on the
front dial, which would be set to the correct Egyptian cal-
endar day. The year is not selectable, so it is necessary
to know the year currently set, or by looking up the cy-
cles indicated by the various calendar cycle indicators on
the back in the Babylonian ephemeris tables for the day of
the year currently set, since most of the calendar cycles are
not synchronous with the year. The crank moves the date
pointer about 78 days per full rotation, so hitting a particular
day on the dial would be easily possible if the mechanism
were in good working condition. The action of turning the
hand crank would also cause all interlocked gears within the
mechanism to rotate, resulting in the simultaneous calcula-
tion of the position of the Sun and Moon, the moon phase,
eclipse, and calendar cycles, and perhaps the locations of
planets.[33]
The operator also had to be aware of the position of the
spiral dial pointers on the two large dials on the back. The
pointer had a follower that tracked the spiral incisions in
the metal as the dials incorporated four and ve full rota-
tions of the pointers. When a pointer reached the terminal
month location at either end of the spiral, the pointers fol-
lower had to be manually moved to the other end of the
spiral before proceeding further.[5]:10
5.3.2 Faces
Schematic of the artefacts known mechanism
Front face
Information on the specic data gleaned from the ruins by The front dial has two concentric, circular scales that repre-
the latest inquiries are detailed in the supplement to Freeths sent the path of the ecliptic through the heavens. The outer
2006 Nature article.[5] ring is marked o with the days of the 365-day Egyptian
5.3. MECHANISM 13
(Payni)
(Epiphi)
(Mesore)
(Ep[agomene])
The Zodiac dial contains Greek inscriptions of the members

of the zodiac, which is believed to be adapted to the tropical
month version rather than the sidereal:[31]:8
Computer-generated front panel of the Freeth model
calendar, or the Sothic year, based on the Sothic cycle. On

the inner ring, there is a second dial marked with the Greek
signs of the Zodiac and it is divided into degrees. The outer
calendar dial may be moved against the inner dial to com-
pensate for the eect of the extra quarter day in the solar
year by turning the scale backward one day every four years.
A 365 1 4 -day year was used in the Callippic cycle circa 330
BC and in the Decree of Canopus during 238 BC, but that
is not reected in the dials.
The position of the sun on the ecliptic corresponds to the
current date in the year. The orbits of the moon and the
ve planets known to the Greeks are close enough to the
ecliptic to make it a convenient reference for dening their
positions as well.
The following Egyptian months are inscribed, in Greek let- Front panel of a 2007 recreation
ters on the outer ring:
(Thoth) IO (Krios [Ram], Aries)
(Phaophi) (Tauros [Bull], Taurus)
(Athyr, Hathor) I (Didymoi [Twins], Gemini)
(Choiak) I (Karkinos [Crab], Cancer)
(Tybi) E (Leon [Lion], Leo)
(Mecheir) E (Parthenos [Maiden], Virgo)
(Phamenoth) (Chelai [Scorpios Claw or Zygos], Libra)
(Pharmouthi) (Skorpios [Scorpion], Scorpio)
(Pachon) (Toxotes [Archer], Sagittarius)

IO (Aigokeros [Sea goat], Capricorn) in addition to the position.[34] The indicator was a small ball
embedded in the lunar pointer, half-white and half-black,
Y (Hydrokhoos [Water carrier], Aquar- which rotated to show the phase (new, rst quarter, half,
ius) third quarter, full, and back) graphically. The data to sup-
I (Ichthyes [Fish], Pisces) port this function is available given the sun and moon posi-
tions as angular rotations; essentially, it is the angle between
the two, translated into the rotation of the ball. It requires
Also on the zodiac dial are a number of single charac- a dierential gear, a gearing arrangement that sums or dif-
ters at specic points (see reconstruction here:[32] ). They ferences two angular inputs. Among its other rst-known
are keyed to a parapegma, a precursor of the modern day aspects, the Antikythera Mechanism is the earliest extant
almanac inscribed on the front face beyond the dials. They construction of a deliberate dierential gear scheme in his-
mark the locations of longitudes on the ecliptic for specic tory.
stars. Some of the parapegma reads (brackets indicate in-
ferred text):
{} Evening Rear face
{} The Hyades set in the evening
{} Taurus begins to rise
{N} Vega rises in the evening
{} The Pleiades rise in the morning
{} The Hyades rise in the morning
{} Gemini begins to rise
{} Altair rises in the evening
{} Arcturus sets in the morning
At least two pointers indicated positions of bodies upon the

ecliptic. A lunar pointer indicated the position of the moon,
and a mean sun pointer also was shown, perhaps doubling
as the current date pointer. The moon position was not a
simple mean moon indicator that would indicate movement
uniformly around a circular orbit; it allowed for the acceler-
ation and deceleration typical of what is known today as an
elliptical orbit, through the earliest extant use of epicyclic
gearing.
It also tracked the precession of the elliptical orbit around
the ecliptic in an 8.88 year cycle. The mean sun position
is, by denition, the current date. It is speculated that
since such pains were taken to get the position of the moon
correct,[31]:20, 24 then there also was likely to have been a
true sun pointer in addition to the mean sun pointer like-
wise, to track the elliptical anomaly of the sun (the orbit of
Earth around the sun), but there is no evidence of it among
the ruins of the mechanism found to date.[6] Similarly, nei-
ther is there the evidence of planetary orbit pointers for
the ve planets known to the Greeks among the ruins. See
Proposed planet indication gearing schemes below.
Finally, mechanical engineer Michael Wright has demon-
strated that there was a mechanism to supply the lunar phase Computer-generated back panel
5.3. MECHANISM 15
In July 2008, scientists reported new ndings in the jour- The Olympiad dial is the right secondary upper dial; it is
nal Nature showing that the mechanism not only tracked the only pointer on the instrument that travels in a counter-
the Metonic calendar and predicted solar eclipses, but also clockwise direction as time advances. The dial is divided
calculated the timing of the Ancient Olympic Games.[8] In- into four sectors, each of which is inscribed with a year indi-
scriptions on the instrument closely match the names of the cator and the name of two Panhellenic Games: the crown
months that are used on calendars from Epirus in northwest- games of Isthmia, Olympia, Nemea, and Pythia; and two
ern Greece and with the island of Corfu.[35][36] lesser games: Naa (held at Dodona) and another Olympiad
[38]
On the back of the mechanism, there are ve dials: the location that to date, has not been deciphered.[5][8]The in-
scriptions on each one of the four divisions are:
two large displays, the Metonic and the Saros, and three
[8]
smaller indicators, the Olympiad, the Callippic, and the The Saros dial is the main lower spiral dial on the rear of
Exeligmos.[5]:11 the mechanism.[5]:45, 10 The Saros cycle is 18 years and 11
1
The Metonic Dial is the main upper dial on the rear of the 3 days long (6585.333 days), which is very close to 223
mechanism. The Metonic cycle, dened in several phys- synodic months (6585.3211 days). It is dened as the cycle
ical units, is 235 synodic months, which is very close (to of repetition of the positions required to cause solar and lu-
within less than 13 one-millionths) to 19 tropical years. It nar eclipses, and therefore, it could be used to predict them
is therefore a convenient interval over which to convert be- not only the month, but the day and time of day. Note
tween lunar and solar calendars. The Metonic dial covers that the cycle is approximately 8 hours longer than an inte-
235 months in 5 rotations of the dial, following a spiral ger number of days. Translated into global spin, that means
track with a follower on the pointer that keeps track of the an eclipse occurs not only eight hours later, but one-third
layer of the spiral. The pointer points to the synodic month, of a rotation farther to the west. Glyphs in 51 of the 223
counted from new moon to new moon, and the cell contains synodic month cells of the dial specify the occurrence of
the Corinthian month names.[8][37] 38 lunar and 27 solar eclipses. Some of the abbreviations
in the glyphs read:
1. (Phoinikaios) = (Moon)
2. (Kraneios) = (Sun)
3. (Lanotropios) H\M = (of the day)
4. (Machaneus, mechanic, referring to \ = (hour)

Zeus the inventor) N\Y = (of the night)
5. (Dodekateus)
The glyphs show whether the designated eclipse is solar or
6. (Eukleios) lunar, and give the day of the month and hour; obviously,
solar eclipses may not be visible at any given point, and lu-
7. (Artemisios) nar eclipses are visible only if the moon is above the horizon
at the appointed hour.[31]:6 In addition, the inner lines at the
8. (Psydreus) cardinal points of the Saros dial indicate the start of a new
full moon cycle.
9. (Gameilios)
The Exeligmos Dial is the secondary lower dial on the rear
10. (Agrianios) of the mechanism. The Exeligmos cycle is a 54-year triple
Saros cycle that is 19,756 days long. Since the length of
11. (Panamos) the Saros cycle is to a third of a day (eight hours), so a full
Exeligmos cycle returns counting to integer days, hence the
12. (Apellaios)
inscriptions. The labels on its three divisions are:[5]:10
Thus, setting the correct solar time (in days) on the front Blank or o ? (representing the number zero, assumed,
panel indicates the current lunar month on the back panel, not yet observed)
with resolution to within a week or so.
H (number 8) means add 8 hours to the time men-
The Callippic dial is the left secondary upper dial, which
tioned in the display
follows a 76-year cycle. The Callippic cycle is four Metonic
cycles, and this dial indicates which of the four Metonic I (number 16) means add 16 hours to the time men-
cycles is the current one in the Callippic cycle. tioned in the display
Thus the dial pointer indicates how many hours must be thesis of the sun anomaly. Their system, they claim, is more
added to the glyph times of the Saros dial in order to calcu- authentic than Wrights model as it uses the known skill sets
late the exact eclipse times. of the Greeks of that period and does not add excessive
complexity or internal stresses to the machine.[6]
The gear teeth were in the form of equilateral triangles with
5.3.3 Doors an average circular pitch of 1.6 mm, an average wheel thick-
ness of 1.4 mm and an average air gap between gears of 1.2
The mechanism has a wooden casing with a front and a back mm. The teeth probably were created from a blank bronze
door, both containing inscriptions.[8][31] The back door ap- round using hand tools; this is evident because not all of
pears to be the Instruction Manual. On one of its frag- them are even.[6] Due to advances in imaging and X-ray
ments is written 76 years, 19 years representing the Cal- technology it is now possible to know the precise number
lippic and Metonic cycles. Also written is 223 for the of teeth and size of the gears within the located fragments.
Saros cycle. On another one of its fragments, it is written Thus the basic operation of the device is no longer a mystery
on the spiral subdivisions 235 referring to the Metonic and has been replicated accurately. The major unknown re-
dial. mains the question of the presence and nature of any planet
indicators.[31]:8
5.3.4 Gearing A table of the gears, their teeth, and the expected and com-
puted rotations of various of the important gears follows.
The gear functions come from Freeth et al. (2008)[8] and
The mechanism is remarkable for the level of miniaturisa-
those for the lower half of the table from Freeth and Jones
tion and the complexity of its parts, which is comparable
2012.[6] The computed values start with 1 year/revolution
to that of fourteenth-century astronomical clocks. It has at
for the b1 gear, and the remainder are computed directly
least 30 gears, although mechanism expert Michael Wright
from gear teeth ratios. The gears marked with an aster-
has suggested that the Greeks of this period were capable
isk (*) are missing, or have predecessors missing, from the
of implementing a system with many more gears.[33]
known mechanism; these gears have been calculated with
There is much debate that the mechanism may have had reasonable gear teeth counts.[8][31]
indicators for all ve of the planets known to the ancient
Table notes:
Greeks. No gearing for such a planetary display survives
and all gears are accounted forwith the exception of one
63-toothed gear (r1) otherwise unaccounted for in fragment [1] Change from traditional naming: X is the main year axis,
D.[6] turns once per year with gear B1. The B axis is the axis with
gears B3 and B6, while the E axis is the axis with gears E3
The purpose of the front face was to position astronomical and E4. Other axes on E (E1/E6 and E2/E5) are irrelevant
bodies with respect to the celestial sphere along the ecliptic, to this table.
in reference to the observers position on the Earth. That is
irrelevant to the question of whether that position was com- [2] Time is the interval represented by one complete revolu-
puted using a heliocentric or geocentric view of the solar tion of the gear.
system; either computational method should and does, re- [3] As viewed from the front of the Mechanism. The natural
sult in the same position (ignoring ellipticity), within the view is viewing the side of the Mechanism the dial/pointer
error factors of the mechanism. in question is actually displayed on.
Ptolemys epicyclic solar system (still 300 years in the future
[4] The Greeks, being in the northern hemisphere, assumed
from the apparent date of the mechanism), carried forward
proper daily motion of the stars was from east to west, ccw
with more epicycles, was more accurate predicting the po- when the ecliptic and zodiac is viewed to the south. As
sitions of planets than the view of Copernicus, until Kepler viewed on the front of the Mechanism.
introduced the possibility that orbits are ellipses.[39]
[5] On average, due to epicyclic gearing causing accelerations
Evans et al. suggest that to display the mean positions of the
and decelerations.
ve classical planets would require only 17 further gears that
could be positioned in front of the large driving gear and [6] Being on the reverse side of the box, the natural rotation
indicated using individual circular dials on the face.[40] is the opposite
Tony Freeth and Alexander Jones have modelled and [7] This was the only visual pointer naturally travelling in the
published details of a version using several gear trains counter-clockwise direction.
mechanically-similar to the lunar anomaly system allowing
for indication of the positions of the planets as well as syn- [8] Internal and not visible.
5.3. MECHANISM 17
[9] Prograde motion; retrograde is obviously the opposite direc- short pin on k1 inserted into a slot in k2. The two gears have
tion. dierent centres of rotation, so the pin must move back and
forth in the slot. That increases and decreases the radius at
There are several gear ratios for each planet that result in which k2 is driven, also necessarily varying its angular ve-
close matches to the correct values for synodic periods of locity (presuming the velocity of k1 is even) faster in some
the planets and the sun. The ones chosen above seem to parts of the rotation than others. Over an entire revolution
provide good accuracy with reasonable tooth counts, but the the average velocities are the same, but the fast-slow varia-
specic gears that may have been used are, and probably tion models the eects of the elliptical orbit of the moon, in
will remain, unknown.[6] consequence of Keplers second and third laws. The mod-
elled rotational period of the moon pointer (averaged over
a year) is 27.321 days, compared to the modern length of a
Known gear scheme lunar sidereal month of 27.321661 days. As mentioned, the
pin/slot driving of the k1/k2 gears varies the displacement
over a years time, and the mounting of those two gears on
the e3 gear supplies a precessional advancement to the el-
lipticity modelling with a period of 8.8826 years, compared
with the current value of precession period of the moon of
8.85 years.[5][8][42]
The system also models the phases of the moon. The moon
pointer holds a shaft along its length, on which is mounted
a small gear named r, which meshes to the sun pointer at
B0 (the connection between B0 and the rest of B is not vis-
ible in the original mechanism, so whether b0 is the current
date/mean sun pointer or a hypothetical true sun pointer is
not known). The gear rides around the dial with the moon,
but is also geared to the sun the eect is to perform
a dierential gear operation, so the gear turns at the syn-
A schematic representation of the gearing of the Antikythera Mech- odic month period, measuring in eect, the angle of the
anism, including the 2012 published interpretation of existing gear- dierence between the sun and moon pointers. The gear
ing, gearing added to complete known functions, and proposed drives a small ball that appears through an opening in the
gearing to accomplish additional functions, namely true sun pointer moon pointers face, painted longitudinally half white and
and pointers for the ve then-known planets, as proposed by half black, displaying the phases pictorially. It turns with a
Freeth and Jones, 2012.[6] Based also upon similar drawing in modelled rotational period of 29.53 days; the modern value
the Freeth 2006 Supplement[31] and Wright 2005, Epicycles Part for the synodic month is 29.530589 days.[5][8][42]
2.[41] Proposed (as opposed to known from the artefact) gearing
crosshatched. The Metonic train is driven by the drive train b1, b2, l1,
l2, m1, m2, and n1, which is connected to the pointer. The
The Sun gear is operated from the hand-operated crank modelled rotational period of the pointer is the length of the
(connected to gear a1, driving the large four-spoked mean 6939.5 days (over the whole ve-rotation spiral), while the
[5][8][42]
sun gear, b1) and in turn drives the rest of the gear sets. The modern value for the Metonic cycle is 6939.69 days.
sun gear is b1/b2 and b2 has 64 teeth. It directly drives the The Olympiad train is driven by b1, b2, l1, l2, m1, m2,
date/mean sun pointer (there may have been a second, true n1, n2, and o1, which mounts the pointer. It has a com-
sun pointer that displayed the suns elliptical anomaly; it is puted modelled rotational period of exactly 4 years, as ex-
discussed below in the Freeth reconstruction). In this dis- pected. Incidentally, it is the only pointer on the mecha-
cussion, reference is to modelled rotational period of vari- nism that rotates counter-clockwise; all of the others rotate
ous pointers and indicators; they all assume the input rota- clockwise.[5][8][42]
tion of the b1 gear of 360 degrees, corresponding with one
tropical year, and are computed solely on the basis of the The Callippic train is driven by b1, b2, l1, l2, m1, m2,
gear ratios of the gears named.[5][8][42] n1, n3, p1, p2, and q1, which mounts the pointer. It has a
computed modelled rotational period of 27758 days, while
The Moon train starts with gear b1 and proceeds through the modern value is 27758.8 days.[5][8][42]
c1, c2, d1, d2, e2, e5, k1, k2, e6, e1, and b3 to the moon
pointer on the front face. The gears k1 and k2 form an The Saros train is driven by b1, b2, l1, l2, m1, m3, e3,
epicyclic gear system; they are an identical pair of gears e4, f1, f2, and g1, which mounts the pointer. The modelled
that don't mesh, but rather, they operate face-to-face, with a rotational period of the Saros pointer is 1646.3 days (in four
rotations along the spiral pointer track); the modern value

is 1636.33 days.[5][8][42]
The Exeligmos train is driven by b1, b2, l1, l2, m1, m3,
e3, e4, f1, f2, g1, g2, h1, h2, and i1, which mounts the
pointer. The modelled rotational period of the Exelig-
mos pointer is 19,756 days; the modern value is 19755.96
days.[5][8][42]
Apparently, gears m3, n1-3, p1-2, and q1 did not survive SUN MARS
MERCURY JUPITER
in the wreckage. The functions of the pointers were de- VENUS SATURN Freeth et al. proposal
duced from the remains of the dials on the back face, and
reasonable, appropriate gearage to fulll the functions was Michael Wright was the rst person to design and build
proposed, and is generally accepted.[5][8][42] a model with not only the known mechanism, but also,
with his emulation of a potential planetarium system. He
suggested that along with the lunar anomaly, adjustments
would have been made for the deeper, more basic solar
anomaly (known as the rst anomaly). He included point-
ers for this true sun, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and
Saturn, in addition to the known mean sun (current time)
and lunar pointers.[6]
Proposed gear schemes Evans, Carman, and Thorndike published a solution with
signicant dierences from Wrights.[40] Their proposal
centred on what they observed as irregular spacing of the
Because of the large space between the mean sun gear and inscriptions on the front dial face, which to them seemed to
the front of the case and the size of and mechanical fea- indicate an o-centre sun indicator arrangement; this would
tures on the mean sun gear it is very likely that the mecha- simplify the mechanism by removing the need to simulate
nism contained further gearing that either has been lost in the solar anomaly. They also suggested that rather than ac-
or subsequent to the shipwreck or, was removed before be- curate planetary indication (rendered impossible by the o-
ing loaded onto the ship.[6] This lack of evidence and nature set inscriptions) there would be simple dials for each indi-
of the front part of the mechanism has led to numerous at- vidual planet showing information such as key events in the
tempts to emulate what the Greeks of the period would have cycle of planet, initial and nal appearances in the night sky,
done and, of course, because of the lack of evidence many and apparent direction changes. This system would lead to
solutions have been put forward. a much simplied gear system, with much reduced forces
and complexity, as compared to Wrights model.[40]
Their proposal used simple meshed gear trains and ac-
counted for the previously unexplained 63 toothed gear in
fragment D. They proposed two face plate layouts, one with
evenly spaced dials, and another with a gap in the top of the
face to account for criticism regarding their not using the
apparent xtures on the b1 gear. They proposed that rather
SUN
INFERIOR
SUPERIOR Wright proposal than bearings and pillars for gears and axles, they simply
held weather and seasonal icons to be displayed through a
window.[40]
In a paper published in 2012 Carman, Thorndike, and
Evans also proposed a system of epicyclic gearing with pin
MARS JUPITER and slot followers.[43]
Freeth and Jones published their proposal in 2012 after
VENUS SA
TURN
extensive research and work. They came up with a com-
pact and feasible solution to the question of planetary indi-
MERCUR
Y
cation. They also propose indicating the solar anomaly (that
is, the suns apparent position in the zodiac dial) on a sepa-
rate pointer from the date pointer, which indicates the mean
Evans et al. proposal
5.3. MECHANISM 19
position of the sun, as well as the date on the month dial. is attached to the sun spindle, inducing anomaly as the mean
If the two dials are synchronised correctly, their front panel sun wheel turns.[6]
display is essentially the same as Wrights. Unlike Wrights The inferior planet mechanism includes the sun (treated as
model however, this model has not been built physically, a planet in this context), Mercury, and Venus.[6] For each
and is only a 3-D computer model.[6] of the three systems there is an epicyclic gear whose axis is
mounted on b1, thus the basic frequency is the Earth year
Gearing Relationships of Lunar Pointer
the Antikythera Mechanism lun3

(crowned)
lun4 (as it is, in truth, for epicyclic motion in the sun and all
20 20
Freeth and Jones Proposal the planetsexcepting only the moon). Each meshes with
lun1 lun2
Gears connected
by solid horizontal 27 27 a gear grounded to the mechanism frame. Each has a pin
lines are meshed
Gears connected
jup1
76
jup2
83
mounted, potentially on an extension of one side of the gear
by solid vertical
lines rotate together
sat1 sat2
that enlarges the gear, but doesn't interfere with the teeth;
Gears connected
by dashed vertical
57 59
in some cases the needed distance between the gears centre
lines have a pin-
slot connection mar1
37
mar2
79
and the pin is farther than the radius of the gear itself. A bar
Gear Name
with a slot along its length extends from the pin toward the
Format: sat3 sat4 Saturn
# of Teeth 60 60 Pointer appropriate coaxial tube, at whose other end is the object
Gears are arranged vertically
jup3
86
jup4
86
Jupiter
Pointer
pointer, out in front of the front dials. The bars could have
based on their layer in the
mechanism been full gears, although there is no need for the waste of
mar3 mar4 Mars
Venus
Pointer
69 69 Pointer metal, since the only working part is the slot. Also, using
(slotted)
Mercury
the bars avoids interference between the three mechanisms,
Pointer
(slotted) each of which are set on one of the four spokes of b1. Thus
there is one new grounded gear (one was identied in the
Solar
Pointer
wreckage, and the second is shared by two of the planets),
(slotted)
one gear used to reverse the direction of the sun anomaly,
sun1 ven1 sun2 sun3
40 64 40 40 three epicyclic gears and three bars/coaxial tubes/pointers,
mer1 mer2 which would qualify as another gear each. Five gears and
104 33
three slotted bars in all.[6]
Frame
(Fixed) These rotate on b1
The superior planets systemsMars, Jupiter, and Saturn
Main Gear
(Yearly Pointer)
b1
223
a1
48
all follow the same general principle of the lunar anomaly
l1 b2 c1
Input
(crowned) mechanism.[6] Similar to the inferior systems, each has a
38 64 38
gear whose centre pivot is on an extension of b1, and which
m1
96
l2
53
c2
48
d1
24 meshes with a grounded gear. It presents a pin and a cen-
n1 m2 e1 b3
tre pivot for the epicyclic gear which has a slot for the pin,
53 15 32 32
and which meshes with a gear xed to a coaxial tube and
o1
60
n2
57
e2
32
d2
127 thence to the pointer. Each of the three mechanisms can
Olympiad
Cycle
m3 e3
t within a quadrant of the b1 extension, and they are thus
27 223
all on a single plane parallel with the front dial plate. Each
p1
60
n3
15
e4
188
f1
53
e5
50
k1
50
one uses a ground gear, a driving gear, a driven gear, and
q1 p2
Metonic
Cycle
g1 f2 k2 e6
a gear/coaxial tube/pointer, thus, twelve gears additional in
60
Callipic
12 54 30 50 50
all.
Cycle
h1 g2
60 20
Saros
In total, there are eight coaxial spindles of various nested
i1
60
h2
15
Cycle
sizes to transfer the rotations in the mechanism to the eight
Exeligmos
Cycle
Made by Scott Shambaugh
CC BY-SA 3.0 US 2014
Data from Freeth and Jones, "The Cosmos in the Antikythera Mechanism"
pointers. So in all, there are 30 original gears, seven gears
added to complete calendar functionality, 17 gears, and
Internal gearing relationships of the Antikythera Mechanism, based three slotted bars to support the six new pointers, for a grand
on the Freeth and Jones proposal total of 54 gears, three bars, and eight pointers in Freeth and
Jones design.[6]
The system to synthesise the solar anomaly is very similar On the visual representation Freeth supplies in the paper,
to that used in Wrights proposal. Three gears, one xed in the pointers on the front zodiac dial have small, round iden-
the centre of the b1 gear and attached to the sun spindle, tifying stones. Interestingly, he mentions a quote from an
the second xed on one of the spokes (in their proposal the ancient papyrus:
one on the bottom left) acting as an idle gear, and the nal
positioned next to that one, the nal gear is tted with an
oset pin and, over said pin, an arm with a slot that in turn, ...a voice comes to you speaking. Let the stars
be set upon the board in accordance with [their] 5.5 References

nature except for the Sun and Moon. And let
the Sun be golden, the Moon silver, Kronos [Sat- [1] Project overview. The Antikythera Mechanism Research
urn] of obsidian, Ares [Mars] of reddish onyx, Project. Retrieved 1 July 2007. The Antikythera Mecha-
Aphrodite [Venus] lapis lazuli veined with gold, nism is now understood to be dedicated to astronomical phe-
Hermes [Mercury] turquoise; let Zeus [Jupiter] nomena and operates as a complex mechanical 'computer'
be of (whitish?) stone, crystalline (?)...[44] which tracks the cycles of the Solar System.
[2] Seaman, Bill; Rssler, Otto E. (1 January 2011).

Neosentience: The Benevolence Engine. Intellect Books. p.
5.3.5 Accuracy 111. ISBN 978-1-84150-404-9. Retrieved 28 May 2013.
Mike G. Edmunds and colleagues used imaging and high-
Investigations by Freeth and Jones reveal that their sim- resolution X-ray tomography to study fragments of the An-
ulated mechanism is not particularly accurate, the Mars tikythera Mechanism, a bronze mechanical analog computer
pointer being up to 38 o at times. This is not due to in- thought to calculate astronomical positions
accuracies in gearing ratios in the mechanism, but rather
to inadequacies in the Greek theory. The accuracy could [3] Swedin, Eric G.; Ferro, David L. (24 October 2007).
not have been improved until rst Ptolemy put forth his Computers: The Life Story of a Technology. JHU Press. p.
Planetary Hypotheses in the second half of the second 1. ISBN 978-0-8018-8774-1. Retrieved 28 May 2013. It
was a mechanical computer for calculating lunar, solar, and
century AD and then the introduction of Keplers Second
stellar calendars.
Law.[6]
[4] Paphitis, Nicholas (30 November 2006). Experts: Frag-
In short, the Antikythera Mechanism was a ments an Ancient Computer. Washington Post. Imagine
tossing a top-notch laptop into the sea, leaving scientists
machine designed to predict celestial phenomena
from a foreign culture to scratch their heads over its cor-
according to the sophisticated astronomical the-
roded remains centuries later. A Roman shipmaster inadver-
ories current in its day, the sole witness to a lost tently did something just like it 2,000 years ago o southern
history of brilliant engineering, a conception of Greece, experts said late Thursday.
pure genius, one of the great wonders of the an-
cient worldbut it didnt really work very well![6] [5] Freeth, Tony; Bitsakis, Yanis; Moussas, Xenophon;
Seiradakis, John. H.; Tselikas, A.; Mangou, H.;
Zafeiropoulou, M.; Hadland, R.; et al. (30 November
In addition to theoretical accuracy, there is the matter of 2006). Decoding the ancient Greek astronomical calcu-
mechanical accuracy. Freeth and Jones note that the in- lator known as the Antikythera Mechanism (PDF). Na-
evitable looseness in the mechanism due to the hand- ture. 444 (7119): 58791. Bibcode:2006Natur.444..587F.
built gears, with their triangular teeth and the frictions be- doi:10.1038/nature05357. PMID 17136087. Retrieved 20
tween gears, and in bearing surfaces, probably would have May 2014.
swamped the ner solar and lunar correction mechanisms
built into it: [6] Freeth, Tony; Jones, Alexander (2012). The Cosmos in the
Antikythera Mechanism. Institute for the Study of the An-
cient World. Retrieved 19 May 2014.
Though the engineering was remarkable for
its era, recent research indicates that its design [7] Pinotsis, A. D. (30 August 2007). The Antikythera
conception exceeded the engineering precision mechanism: who was its creator and what was its use
of its manufacture by a wide marginwith con- and purpose?". Astronomical and Astrophysical Trans-
siderable accumulative inaccuracies in the gear actions. 26: 211226. Bibcode:2007A&AT...26..211P.
doi:10.1080/10556790601136925. Retrieved 9 January
trains, which would have cancelled out many of
2015.
the subtle anomalies built into its design.[6][45]
[8] Freeth, Tony; Jones, Alexander; Steele, John M.; Bit-
sakis, Yanis (31 July 2008). Calendars with Olympiad
display and eclipse prediction on the Antikythera
5.4 See also Mechanism (PDF). Nature. 454 (7204): 6147.
Bibcode:2008Natur.454..614F. doi:10.1038/nature07130.
Astrolabe PMID 18668103. Retrieved 20 May 2014.
Orrery [9] Kaplan, Sarah (June 14, 2016). The Worlds Oldest Com-
puter Is Still Revealing Its Secrets, The Washington Post.
Planetarium Retrieved June 16, 2016.
5.5. REFERENCES 21
[10] Decoding The Antikythera Mechanism - Investigation [24] What was it made of?". Antikythera Mechanism Research
of An Ancient Astronomical Calculator. Bibliotecap- Project. 4 July 2007. Retrieved 16 May 2012.
leyades.net. Retrieved 13 November 2012.
[25] Freeth, Tony (December 2009). Decoding an Ancient
[11] Vetenskapens vrld: Bronsklumpen som kan frutsga Computer (PDF). Scientic American: 78. Retrieved 26
framtiden. SVT. 17 October 2012. Archived 20 October November 2014.
2012 at the Wayback Machine.
[26] Article Pergamum, Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia,
[12] History | The Antikythera Mechanism Research Project. 6th Edition, 1.
www.antikythera-mechanism.gr. Retrieved 2016-05-02.
[27] Sample, Ian. Mysteries of computer from 65 BC are
[13] Price, Derek de Solla (1974). Gears from the Greeks. The solved. The Guardian. This device is extraordinary, the
Antikythera Mechanism: A Calendar Computer from ca. 80 only thing of its kind, said Professor Edmunds. The as-
B. C.. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, tronomy is exactly right ... in terms of historic and scarcity
New Series. 64 (7): 170. doi:10.2307/1006146. value, I have to regard this mechanism as being more valu-
able than the Mona Lisa. and One of the remaining mys-
[14] Carman, Christin C.; Evans, James (15 November 2014). teries is why the Greek technology invented for the machine
On the epoch of the Antikythera mechanism and its eclipse seemed to disappear.
predictor. Archive for History of Exact Sciences. 68 (6):
693774. doi:10.1007/s00407-014-0145-5. Retrieved 26 [28] Johnston, Ian (30 November 2006). Device that let Greeks
November 2014. decode solar system. The Scotsman. Retrieved 26 June
2007.
[15] Marko, John (24 November 2014). On the Trail of an An-
cient Mystery - Solving the Riddles of an Early Astronom- [29] Marchant, Jo (2006). Decoding the Heavens. Da Capo Press.
ical Calculator. New York Times. Retrieved 25 November p. 180. mechanical engineer and former curator of Londons
2014. Science Museum Michael Wright tells of a piece breaking
o in his inspection, which was glued back into place by the
[16] Marchant, Jo (30 November 2006). In search museum sta.
of lost time. Nature. 444 (7119): 534538.
Bibcode:2006Natur.444..534M. doi:10.1038/444534a. [30] Wright, Michael T. (2007). The Antikythera Mechanism
PMID 17136067. Retrieved 20 May 2014. reconsidered. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews. 32 (1):
2143. doi:10.1179/030801807X163670.
[17] The Antikythera Mechanism at the National Archaeologi-
cal Museum. Retrieved August 8, 2015. [31] Freeth, Tony (2006). Decoding the Antikythera
Mechanism: Supplementary Notes 2 (PDF). Nature.
[18] Haughton, Brian (26 December 2006). Hidden History: Lost
444 (7119): 58791. Bibcode:2006Natur.444..587F.
Civilizations, Secret Knowledge, and Ancient Mysteries. Ca-
doi:10.1038/nature05357. PMID 17136087. Retrieved 20
reer Press. pp. 4344. ISBN 978-1-56414-897-1. Re-
May 2014.
trieved 16 May 2011.
[32] The Cosmos on the front of the Antikythera Mechanism.
[19] Ancient 'computer' starts to yield secrets. Archived from
the original on 13 March 2007. Retrieved 23 March 2007. [33] Freeth, T. (2009). Decoding an Ancient Com-
puter. Scientic American. 301 (6): 7683.
[20] Angelakis, Dimitris G. (2 May 2005). Quantum Informa-
doi:10.1038/scienticamerican1209-76. PMID 20058643.
tion Processing: From Theory to Experiment. Proceedings
of the NATO Advanced Study Institute on Quantum Com- [34] Wright, Michael T. (March 2006). The Antikythera Mech-
putation and Quantum Information. Chania, Crete, Greece: anism and the early history of the moon phase display
IOS Press (published 2006). p. 5. ISBN 978-1-58603-611- (PDF). Antiquarian Horology. 29 (3): 319329. Retrieved
9. Retrieved 28 May 2013. The Antikythera mechanism, as 16 June 2014.
it is now known, was probably the worlds rst 'analog com-
puter' a sophisticated device for calculating the motions of [35] Wilford, J. N. (31 July 2008). Discovering how greeks
stars and planets. This remarkable assembly of more than computed in 100 B.C.. The New York Times.
30 gears with a dierential...
[36] Connor, S. (31 July 2008). Ancient Device Was Used To
[21] Allen, Martin (27 May 2007). Were there others? The Predict Olympic Games. The Independent. London. Re-
Antikythera Mechanism Research Project. Antikythera- trieved 27 March 2010.
mechanism.gr. Archived from the original on 21 July 2011.
Retrieved 24 August 2011. [37] Freeth, T (2009). Decoding an Ancient Com-
[22] Lazos, Christos (1994). The Antikythera Computer. AEO- doi:10.1038/scienticamerican1209-76. PMID 20058643.
LUS PUBLICATIONS GR.
[38] Olympic link to early 'computer'". BBC News. Retrieved
[23] Jacques-Yves Cousteau. 15 December 2008.
[39] Does it favour a Heliocentric, or Geocentric Universe?". Russo, Lucio (2004). The Forgotten Revolution: How
Antikythera Mechanism Research Project. 27 July 2007. Science Was Born in 300 BC and Why It Had To Be
Archived from the original on 21 July 2011. Retrieved 24 Reborn. Berlin: Springer. ISBN 3-540-20396-6.
August 2011.
Steele, J. M. (2000). Observations and Predictions
[40] Evans, James; Carman, Christin C.; Thorndyke, Alan of Eclipse Times by Early Astronomers. Dordrecht:
(February 2010). Solar anomaly and planetary displays in Kluwer Academic. ISBN 0-7923-6298-5.
the Antikythera Mechanism (PDF). Journal for the history
of astronomy. xli: 139. Retrieved 20 May 2014. Stephenson, F. R. (1997). Historical Eclipses and the
Earths Rotation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ.
[41] Wright, Michael T. (June 2005). The Antikythera Mech-
Press. ISBN 0-521-46194-4.
anism: a new gearing scheme. Bulletin of the Scientic In-
strument Society. 85: 27. Toomer, G. J. (1998). Ptolemys Almagest. Translated
by Toomer, G. J. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton
[42] Edmunds, Mike G.; Freeth, Tony (July 2011). Using Com-
putation to Decode the First Known Computer. IEEE Com- Univ. Press.
puter Magazine. 2011-7.
[43] Carman, Christin C.; Thorndyke, Alan; Evans, James 5.6.2 Journals
(2012). On the Pin-and-Slot Device of the Antikythera
Mechanism, with a New Application to the Superior Plan- Bromley, A. G. (1990). The Antikythera Mecha-
ets (PDF). Journal for the History of Astronomy. 43: nism. Horological Journal. 132: 412415.
93116. Bibcode:2012JHA....43...93C. Retrieved 21 May
2014. Bromley, A. G. (1990). The Antikythera Mecha-
nism: A Reconstruction. Horological Journal. 133
[44] An extract from a 2nd or 3rd century AD papyrus (1): 2831.
(P.Wash.Univ.inv. 181+221) about an Astrologers Board,
where the astrologer lays out particular stones to represent Bromley, A. G. (1990). Observations of the An-
the Sun, Moon and planets tikythera Mechanism. Antiquarian Horology. 18 (6):
641652.
[45] Georey, Edmunds, Michael (2011-08-01). An Initial As-
sessment of the Accuracy of the Gear Trains in the An- Charette, Franois (2006). High tech from
tikythera Mechanism. orca.cf.ac.uk. Retrieved 2016-05- Ancient Greece. Nature. 444 (7119):
10. 551552. Bibcode:2006Natur.444..551C.
doi:10.1038/444551a. PMID 17136077.
Edmunds, Mike & Morgan, Philip (2000). The An-

5.6 Further reading tikythera Mechanism: Still a Mystery of Greek As-
tronomy. Astronomy & Geophysics. 41 (6): 610.
5.6.1 Books Bibcode:2000A&G....41f..10E. doi:10.1046/j.1468-
4004.2000.41610.x. (The authors mention that an ex-
Lin, Jian-Liang; Yan, Hong-Sen (2016). Decoding tended account of their researches titled Computing
the Mechanisms of Antikythera Astronomical Device. Aphrodite is forthcoming in 2001, but it does not seem to
Berlin [u.a.]: Springer. ISBN 9783662484456. have appeared yet.)
Allen, M.; Ambrisco, W.; e.a. (2016). The Inscrip- Freeth, T. (2002). The Antikythera Mechanism: 1.
tions of the Antikythera Mechanism. Almagest 7.1. Challenging the Classic Research. Mediterranean
Turnhout: Brepols Publishers. ISSN 1792-2593. Archeology and Archeaometry. 2 (1): 2135.
James, Peter; Thorpe, Nick (1995). Ancient Inven- Freeth, T. (2002). The Antikyhera Mechanism: 2.
tions. New York: Ballantine. ISBN 0-345-40102-6. Is it Posidonius Orrery?". Mediterranean Archeology
and Archeaometry. 2 (2): 4558.
Marchant, Jo (6 November 2008). Decoding the Heav-
ens: Solving the Mystery of the Worlds First Computer. Freeth, T.; Bitsakis, Y.; Moussas, X.; Seiradakis,
William Heinemann Ltd. ISBN 0-434-01835-X. J. H.; et al. (2006). Decoding the ancient
Greek astronomical calculator known as the An-
Rosheim, Mark E. (1994). Robot Evolution: The De- tikythera Mechanism. Nature. 444 (7119):
velopment of Anthrobotics. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 587591. Bibcode:2006Natur.444..587F.
0-471-02622-0. doi:10.1038/nature05357. PMID 17136087.
Freeth, T. (2009). Decoding an Ancient Com- The Antikythera Mechanism Exhibitions coordinated
puter. Scientic American. 301 (6): 76 by the National Hellenic Research Foundation
83. doi:10.1038/scienticamerican1209-76. PMID
20058643. Video Feature Nature, 30 July 2008
Jo Marchant, Archimedes and the 2000-year-old com-

Jones, A. (1991). The adaptation of Babylonian
puter New Scientist, 12 December 2008
methods in Greek numerical astronomy. Isis. 82 (3):
440453. doi:10.1086/355836. Hublot painstakingly recreates a mysterious, 2,100-
year-old clockwork relic but why? Gizmag, 16
Price, D. de S. (1959). An Ancient Greek Com-
November 2011
doi:10.1038/scienticamerican0659-60. The Two Thousand-Year-Old Computer One hour
BBC television programme on the Antikythera Mech-
Spinellis, Diomidis (May 2008). The Antikythera anism, 10 May 2012.
Mechanism: A Computer Science Perspective. Com-
puter. 41 (5): 2227. doi:10.1109/MC.2008.166. 3D model simulator of Price and the Antikythera
Mechanism Research Projects representations
John A. Koulouris,(Esq.) (2008). The Heavens
of Poseidon: The History and Discovery of the Antikythera Mechanism on the Wolfram Demonstra-
AntiKythera Mechanism (In GREEK)" (PDF). IN tions Project.
NOMINE Portal. 1: 112.
YAAS - Een 3D interactive virtual reality simulator in
Steele, J. M. (2000). Eclipse prediction in VRML
Mesopotamia. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci. 54 (5): 421
Videos related to the Antikythera Mechanism, shown
454. doi:10.1007/s004070050007.
at the National Archaeological Museum and at exhi-
Weinberg, G. D.; Grace, V. R.; Edwards, G. R.; bitions around the world
Robinson, H. S.; et al. (1965). The Antikythera
Shipwreck Reconsidered. Trans Am Philos. Soc.
55 (New Series) (3): 348. doi:10.2307/1005929.
JSTOR 1005929.
Edmunds, M. G. (2014). The Antikythera

Mechanism and the Mechanical Universe.
Contemporary Physics. 55: 263285.
doi:10.1080/00107514.2014.927280.
5.6.3 Other
Hellenic Ministry of Culture and the National Archae-
ological Museum, The Antikythera Mechanism Re-
search Project
Rice, Rob S. (47 September 1997). The Antikythera

Mechanism: Physical and Intellectual Salvage from the
1st Century B.C. USNA Eleventh Naval History Sym-
posium. Thessaloniki. pp. 1925.
Panos, Kristina (2015). The Antikythera Mecha-

nism. Hackaday. Retrieved 24 November 2015.
5.7 External links

The Antikythera Mechanism Research Project
Chapter 6
Baghdad Battery
6.1 Physical description
The artifacts consist of terracotta pots approximately 130

mm (5 in) tall (with a one-and-a-half-inch mouth) contain-
ing a cylinder made of a rolled copper sheet, which houses a
single iron rod. At the top, the iron rod is isolated from the
copper by bitumen, which plugs or stoppers, and both rod
and cylinder t snugly inside the opening of the jar. The
copper cylinder is not watertight, so if the jar were lled
with a liquid, this would surround the iron rod as well. The
artifact had been exposed to the weather and had suered
corrosion.
Knig thought the objects might date to the Parthian pe-
riod, between 250 BC and AD 224, but according to St John
Simpson of the Near Eastern department of the British Mu-
Drawing of the three pieces.[1]
seum, their original excavation and context were not well-
recorded, and evidence for this date range is very weak.
Furthermore, the style of the pottery is Sassanid (224-
640).[2][10]
Most of the components of the objects are not particularly
amenable to advanced dating methods. The ceramic pots
could be analysed by thermoluminescence dating, but this
The Baghdad Battery or Parthian Battery is a set of three has not yet been done; in any case, it would only date the r-
artifacts which were found together: a ceramic pot, a tube ing of the pots, which is not necessarily that of the complete
of one metal, and a rod of another. Although the Seleucia artifact.
vessels do not have the outermost clay jar, they are other-
wise almost identical.[2][lower-alpha 1]
Wilhelm Knig was an assistant at the National Museum of
Iraq in the 1930s. In 1938 he authored a paper[3] oering
the hypothesis that they may have formed a galvanic cell,
6.2 Theories concerning operation
[2][4]
perhaps used for electroplating gold onto silver objects.
This interpretation is generally rejected today.[5][6] Some believe that wine, lemon juice, grape juice, or vinegar
While some researchers refer to the object as a battery, was used as an acidic electrolyte solution to generate an
the origin and purpose of the object remains unclear.[7] In electric current from the dierence between[2][10]the electrode
March 2012, Professor Elizabeth Stone, of Stony Brook potentials of the copper and iron electrodes.
University, an expert on Iraqi archaeology, returning from Knig had observed a number of very ne silver objects
the rst archaeological expedition in Iraq after 20 years, from ancient Iraq, plated with very thin layers of gold, and
stated that she does not know a single archaeologist who speculated that they were electroplated using batteries with
believed that these were batteries.[8][9] these as the cells.
24
6.4. IN THE MEDIA 25
6.2.1 Supporting experiments other reasons concludes that even if this was in fact a bat-
tery, it could not have been used for electroplating. How-
After the Second World War, a man named Willard Gray ever, Keyser still supported the battery theory, but believed
demonstrated current production by a reconstruction of the it was used for some kind of mild electrotherapy such as
inferred battery design when lled with grape juice.[4] W. pain relief, possibly through electroacupuncture.[10][13]
Jansen experimented with benzoquinone (some beetles pro-
duce quinones) and vinegar in a cell and got satisfactory
performance.[4] 6.3.3 Bitumen as an insulator
In 1978, Arne Eggebrecht reportedly reproduced the elec-
A bitumen seal, being thermoplastic, would be extremely
troplating of gold onto a small statue. There are no (di-
inconvenient for a galvanic cell, which would require fre-
rect) written or photographic records of this experiment.
[lower-alpha 2] quent topping up of the electrolyte (if they were intended
The only records are segments of a television
for extended use).[5][14][15]
show.
6.3.4 Alternative hypothesis

6.3 Controversies over use
The artifacts strongly resemble another type of object
with a known purpose storage vessels for sacred scrolls
6.3.1 Battery hypothesis
from nearby Seleucia on the Tigris.[16] Those vessels do
not have the outermost clay jar, but are otherwise al-
The artifacts do not form a useful voltaic for several reasons:
most identical. Since these vessels were exposed to the
elements,[2][lower-alpha 3] it is possible that any papyrus or
1. Gas is evolved at an iron/copper/electrolyte junction. parchment inside had completely rotted away, perhaps leav-
Bubbles form a partial insulation of the electrode. ing a trace of slightly acidic organic residue.[17]
Thus the more the battery is used, the less well it
works.
2. Although several volts can be produced by con- 6.4 In the media

necting batteries in series, the voltage generated by
iron/copper/electrolyte junctions is below 1 volt.[11] The idea that the terracotta jars in certain circumstances
could have been used to produce usable levels of elec-
tricity has been put to the test at least twice. On the
6.3.2 Electroplating hypothesis 1980 British Television series Arthur C. Clarkes Mysteri-
ous World, Egyptologist Arne Eggebrecht created a voltaic
Knig himself seems to have been mistaken on the nature cell using a jar lled with grape juice, to produce half a
of the objects he thought were electroplated. They were volt of electricity, demonstrating for the programme that
apparently re-gilded (with mercury). Paul Craddock of the jars used this way could electroplate a silver statuette in two
British Museum said The examples we see from this region hours, using a gold cyanide solution. Eggebrecht speculated
and era are conventional gold plating and mercury gilding. that museums could contain many items mislabelled as gold
Theres never been any irrefutable evidence to support the when they are merely electroplated.[18]
electroplating theory.[2] The Discovery Channel program MythBusters built repli-
David A. Scott, senior scientist at the Getty Conservation cas of the jars to see if it was indeed possible for them
Institute and head of its Museum Research Laboratory, to have been used for electroplating or electrostimulation.
wrote that There is a natural tendency for writers dealing On MythBusters' 29th episode (March 23, 2005), ten hand-
with chemical technology to envisage these unique ancient made terracotta jars were tted to act as batteries. Lemon
objects of two thousand years ago as electroplating acces- juice was chosen as the electrolyte to activate the electro-
sories (Foley 1977). but this is clearly untenable, for there chemical reaction between the copper and iron. Connected
is absolutely no evidence for electroplating in this region at in series, the batteries produced 4 volts of electricity. When
the time.[12] linked in series the cells had sucient power to electroplate
[19]
Paul T. Keyser of the University of Alberta noted that Egge- a small token.
brecht used a more ecient, modern electrolyte, and that Archaeologist Ken Feder commented on the show not-
using only vinegar, or other electrolytes available at the time ing that no archaeological evidence has been found ei-
assumed, the battery would be very feeble, and for that and ther for connections between the jars (which were neces-
26 CHAPTER 6. BAGHDAD BATTERY
sary to produce the required voltage) or for their use for [4] The Baghdad Battery, Museum of Unnatural Mystery web-
electroplating.[20] In fact, plating of the era in which the site.
batteries are claimed to have been used, have been found
[5] Baghdad batteries on the Bad Archaeology Network website.
to be re-gilded (with mercury).[2]
[6] Erich von Dnikens Chariots of the Gods: Science or
In 2016, a team of researchers from Vanderbilt University
Charlatanism?", Robert Sheaer. First published in the
developed a low-cost rechargeable junkyard battery using
NICAP UFO Investigator, October/November, 1974.
scrap steel and brass, by converting the surface of these met-
als into iron oxide and copper oxide nano structured archi- [7] Frood, A. Riddle of 'Baghdads batteries BBC News 27
tectures using an anodization process. The team drew inspi- February, 2003
ration from the simple design of the Baghdad battery.[21][22]
[8] Stone, Elizabeth (March 23, 2012). Archaeologists Revisit
Iraq. Science Friday (Interview). Interview with Flatow,
Ira. Retrieved April 6, 2012. My recollection of it is that
6.5 See also most people don't think it was a battery. ...It resembled other
clay vessels... used for rituals, in terms of having multiple
Dendera light mouths to it. I think its not a battery. I think the people
who argue its a battery are not scientists, basically. I don't
Coso artifact misinterpreted by some to be a know anybody who thinks its a real battery in the eld.
500,000-year-old spark plug
[9] Prof. Stones statement, listed as a 'red ag' among 5 red
History of the battery ags why it was not a battery (with sources, on Archaeology
Fantasies website)
List of topics characterized as pseudoscience
[10] Paul T. Keyser, The Purpose of the Parthian Galvanic Cells:
A First-Century A. D. Electric Battery Used for Analgesia,
Journal of Near Eastern Studies, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 81-
6.6 References 98, April 1993. Includes images of the artifact and similar
objects.
[1] Arran Froods BBC article: The artifact had been exposed
[11] Welfare, S. and Fairley, J. Arthur C. Clarkes Mysteries
to the weather and had suered corrosion, although mild
(Collins 1980), pp. 6264.
given the presence of an electrochemical couple.
[12] Scott, David A. (2002). Copper and Bronze in Art: Corro-
[2] In Arran Froods BBC article: There does not exist any
sion, Colorants, Conservation. Getty Publications. pp. 16
written documentation of the experiments which took place
18. ISBN 978-0-89236-638-5.
here in 1978, says Dr Bettina Schmitz, currently a re-
searcher based at the same Roemer and Pelizaeus Mu- [13] Oxford University, Elizabeth Frood editor (on eScholarship
seum. The experiments weren't even documented by pho- website): Eggebrechts account
tos, which really is a pity, she says. I have searched through
the archives of this museum and I talked to everyone in- [14] the Baghdad Battery on The Iron Skeptic website
volved in 1978 with no results.
[15] The Baghdad Battery and Ancient Electricity. Michigan
[3] Arran Froods BBC article: The artifact had been exposed State University students website, citing the now oine
to the weather and had suered corrosion, although mild SkepticWorld.com website and viewpoint. October 12,
given the presence of an electrochemical couple. 2010. Archived from the original on November 9, 2013.
Retrieved March 9, 2015.
[1] Paranormal Image Gallery Ancient Mysteries/Aztec carv- [16] Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews (26 December 2009). The bat-
ing of ancient astronaut. Unexplained Mysteries. Archived teries of Babylon: evidence for ancient electricity?". Bad
from the original on September 27, 2011. Retrieved Novem- Archaeology. Retrieved 17 December 2016.
ber 14, 2009.
[17] Lenny Flank (Feb 10, 2015). The Baghdad Battery: An
[2] Frood, Arran (February 27, 2003). Riddle of 'Baghdads Update. Daily Kos.
batteries". BBC News. Archived from the original on April
7, 2012. Retrieved April 6, 2012. [18] Welfare, S. and Fairley, J. Arthur C. Clarkes Mysterious
World (Collins 1980), pp. 6264.
[3] W. Knig, Ein galvanisches Element aus der Partherzeit?",
Forschungen und Fortschritte, vol. 14 (1938), pp. 8-9. [19] Ancient batteries episode on MythBusters.
[20] Ancient Alien Astronauts: Interview with Ken Feder.

W. Knig, Im Verlorenen Paradies-Neun Jahre Irak, Monster Talk Podcast. July 27, 2011. Retrieved June 2013.
pp. 166-68, Munich and Vienna: 1939. Check date values in: |access-date= (help)
6.6. REFERENCES 27
[21] Muralidharan, Nitin; Westover, Andrew S. From the

Junkyard to the Power Grid: Ambient Processing of
Scrap Metals into Nanostructured Electrodes for Ul-
trafast Rechargeable Batteries. ACS Energy Letters.
doi:10.1021/acsenergylett.6b00295.
[22] Making high-performance batteries from junkyard scraps.

Chapter 7
Bat Creek inscription
that the t as Paleo-Hebrew was substantially better than

Cherokee. He also reported a radiocarbon date on asso-
ciated wood fragments consistent with Gordons dating of
the script. In a 1991 reply, archaeologists Robert Mainfort
and Mary Kwas, relying on a communication from Semitist
Frank Moore Cross, concluded that the inscription is not
genuine paleo-Hebrew but rather a 19th-century forgery,
with John W. Emmert, the Smithsonian agent who per-
formed the excavation, the most likely responsible party.
The Bat Creek inscription. In a 1993 article in Biblical Archaeology Review, Semitist
P. Kyle McCarter, Jr. stated that although the inscription
The Bat Creek inscription (also called the Bat Creek is not an authentic paleo-Hebrew inscription, it clearly
stone or Bat Creek tablet) is an inscribed stone col- imitates one in certain features, and does contain an intel-
lected as part of a Native American burial mound ex- ligible sequence of ve letters -- too much for coincidence.
cavation in Loudon County, Tennessee, in 1889 by the McCarter concluded, It seems probable that we are dealing
Smithsonian Bureau of Ethnology's Mound Survey, di- here not with a coincidental similarity but with a fraud.[6]
rected by entomologist Cyrus Thomas. The inscriptions Mainfort and Kwas published a further article in American
were initially described as Cherokee, but in 2004, similar- Antiquity in 2004, reporting their discovery of an illustra-
ities to an inscription that was circulating in a Freemason tion in an 1870 Masonic reference book giving an artists
book were discovered. Hoax expert Kenneth Feder says the impression of how the Biblical phrase holy to Yahweh
peer reviewed work of Mary L. Kwas and Robert Mainfort would have appeared in Paleo-Hebrew, which bears strik-
has demolished any claims of the stones authenticity.[1] ing similarities to the Bat Creek inscription. The Gen-
Mainfort and Kwas themselves state The Bat Creek stone eral History correctly translates the inscription Holiness to
is a fraud.[2] the Lord, though Holy to Yahweh would be more pre-
Thomas inaccurately[1] identied the characters on the cise. They conclude that Emmert most likely copied the
stone as beyond question letters of the Cherokee alpha- inscription from the Masonic illustration, in order to please
bet, a writing system for the Cherokee language invented Thomas with an artifact that he would mistake for Chero-
by Sequoyah in the early 19th century.[3] The stone became kee.
the subject of contention in 1970 when Semitist Cyrus H.
Gordon proposed that the letters of inscription are Paleo-
Hebrew of the 1st or 2nd century AD rather than Cherokee,
and therefore evidence of pre-Columbian transatlantic con-
7.1 Geographic and historical con-
[4]
tact. According to Gordon, ve of the eight letters could text
be read as for Judea. Archaeologist Marshall McKusick
countered that Despite some diculties, Cherokee script The Little Tennessee River enters Tennessee from the
is a closer match to that on the tablet than the late-Canaanite Appalachian Mountains to the south and ows northward
proposed by Gordon,[5] but gave no details. for just over 50 miles (80 km) before emptying into the
In a 1988 article in Tennessee Anthropologist, economist Tennessee River near Lenoir City. The completion of
J. Huston McCulloch compared the letters of the inscrip- Tellico Dam at the mouth of the Little Tennessee in 1979
tion to both Paleo-Hebrew and Cherokee and concluded created a reservoir that spans the lower 33 miles (53 km)
28
7.2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATIONS 29
wide.[9] The inscription consists of at least eight characters,

seven of which are in a single row, and one located below the
main inscription, when held with the straighter edge down.
A portion of a ninth letter that has broken o remains at the
left edge in this orientation. Two vertical strokes in the up-
per left corner in this orientation were added by an unknown
party while the stone was stored in the National Museum
of Natural History, sometime between 1894 and 1970, and
were not part of the original inscription.[11]
7.2 Archaeological excavations

Bat Creek, now an inlet of Tellico Lake
In 1881, the annual appropriation by Congress for the

Smithsonian Institution's Bureau of Ethnology[12] speci-
of the river. Bat Creek empties into the southwest bank
cally designated that some of the funds be for archaeo-
of the Little Tennessee 12 miles (19 km) upstream from logical investigations relating to mound-builders and pre-
the mouth of the river. While much of the original conu- historic mounds.[13] Cyrus Thomas, an entomologist by
ence of Bat Creek and the Little Tennessee was submerged background, was appointed Director of the Mound Survey.
by the lake, the mound in which the Bat Creek Stone was According to archaeologist Kenneth L. Feder, With this
found was located above the reservoirs operating levels. funding, Thomas initiated the most extensive and intensive
In the 1880s, the Smithsonian Institution team led by John study yet conducted on the Moundbuilder question. The
W. Emmert conducted several excavations in the lower Lit- result was more than seven hundred pages submitted as an
tle Tennessee valley, uncovering artifacts and burials re- annual report of the Bureau in 1894 (Thomas 1894). ...
lated to the valleys 18th-century Overhill Cherokee inhab- He collected over 40,000 artifacts, which became part of
itants and prehistoric inhabitants. The Tellico Archaeo- the Smithsonian Institutions collection. ... Thomass work
logical Project, conducted by the University of Tennessee was a watershed, both in terms of answering the specic
Department of Anthropology in the late 1960s and 1970s question of who had built the mounds, and in terms of the
in anticipation of the reservoirs construction, investigated development of American archaeology.[14]
over two dozen sites and uncovered evidence of substan- In particular, Thomas addressed the question of whether
tial habitation in the valley during the Archaic (80001000 there were pre-Columbian alphabetically inscribed tablets
BC), Woodland (1000 BC 1000 AD), Mississippian (900- in the mounds, and emphatically concluded, in part on
1600 AD), and Cherokee (c. 1600-1838) periods.[7] The
the basis of the body of evidence his study had collected,
expedition of Hernando de Soto likely visited a village on that there were not.[15] Thomas also carefully assessed the
Bussell Island at the mouth of the river in 1540 and the ex-
claim that some of the mound artifacts exhibited a sophis-
pedition of Juan Pardo probably visited two villages further tication in metallurgy attained only by Old World cultures.
upstream (near modern Chilhowee Dam) in 1567.[8]
Not relying on rumors, Thomas actually examined many
The Bat Creek site, Smithsonian trinomial designation of the artifacts in question. His conclusion: all such ar-
40LD24, is a multiphase site with evidence of occupation tifacts were made of so-called native copper...[16] Feder
as early as the Archaic period.[9] According to Emmert, the concludes, With the publication of Thomass Report on the
site consisted of one large mound (Mound 1) on the east Mound Explorations of the Bureau of American Ethnology,
bank of the creek and two smaller mounds (Mound 2 and Moundbuilder archaeology had come of age. Its content
Mound 3) on the west bank. Mound 1which had a diam- was so detailed, its conclusions so reasonable that, though
eter of 108 feet (33 m) and a height of 8 feet (2.4 m)was not accepted by all, the myth of a vanished race had been
located on the rst terrace above the river, and is thus now dealt a fatal blow.[17]
submerged by the reservoir. Mound 2which had a diam- Thomas did not excavate the mounds himself, but delegated
eter of 44 feet (13 m) and height of 10 feet (3.0 m)and most of the eld work to assistants, including John Emmert,
Mound 3which had a diameter of 28 feet (8.5 m) and who excavated all three Bat Creek mounds in 1889. He
height of 5 feet (1.5 m)were both located higher up, on concluded that Mound 1 was little more than a shell deposit.
the second terrace. According to Emmerts notes, the Bat Emmert recorded eight burials in Mound 2one of which
Creek Stone was found in Mound 3.[10] included metal buckles and a metal button. His excavation
The stone consists of ferruginous siltstone, and measures of Mound 3 revealed nine skeletons, seven of which were
11.4 centimetres (4.5 in) long and 5.1 centimetres (2.0 in) laid out in a row with their heads facing north, and two more
30 CHAPTER 7. BAT CREEK INSCRIPTION
skeletons laid out nearby, one with its head facing north and
the other with its head facing south. He reported that the
Bat Creek Stone was found under the skull of the south-
facing skeleton. Along with the stone were two bracelets
identied by both Emmert and Thomas as copper, as well
as fragments of polished wood (possibly earspools).[18] A Coin of the First
1970 Smithsonian analysis found that the bracelets were in Jewish War, with Paleo-Hebrew letters similar to those
fact heavily leaded yellow brass.[19] In 1988, radiocarbon Gordon (1971) claimed are present on the Bat Creek
dating of the wood spools returned a date of 32769 AD inscription.
(i.e., the middle to late Woodland period).[20]
In 1967, the Tennessee Valley Authority announced plans In his 1894 nal report, Thomas published a photograph
to build Tellico Dam at the mouth of the Little Tennessee of the Bat Creek stone, with the straighter edge at the
River, and asked the University of Tennessee Department top,[23] along with Emmerts eld report on the nd, almost
of Anthropology to conduct salvage excavations in the Little verbatim.[24] Thomas himself added the opinion that the let-
Tennessee Valley. Litigation and environmental concerns ters on it were beyond question letters of the Cherokee
stalled the dams completion until 1979, allowing extensive alphabet said to have been invented by George Guess (or
excavations at multiple sites throughout the valley. Mound Sequoyah), ... about 1821.[25] He in fact had published a
1 of the Bat Creek Site was excavated in 1975. Investigators more legible lithograph of the stone, in the same orienta-
concluded that the mound was a platform mound typical tion, in his earlier book The Cherokees in Pre-Columbian
of the Mississippian period. Pre-Mississippian artifacts dat- Times, in which he used it as evidence for his short-lived
ing to the Archaic and Woodland periods were also found. theory that the Cherokee had built the mounds now classi-
The University of Tennessee excavators didn't investigate ed as Middle Woodland.[26]
Mound 2 or Mound 3, both of which no longer existed.[21]
Neither the University of Tennessees excavation of the Bat On the basis of vegetation covering the mound, Thomas
Creek Site nor any other excavations in the Little Tennessee concluded that the evidence seems positive that the mound
Valley uncovered any evidence that would indicate Pre- was at least a hundred years old, and that it was known that it
Columbian contact with Old World civilizations.[22] had not been disturbed in sixty years.[27] This would make
the mound too old to have contained a Cherokee inscription
in 1889. Thomas admitted that as Cherokee, the inscription
therefore constituted a puzzle dicult to solve.[27] He did
not provide either a transliteration or a translation of the in-
scription as Cherokee in either work.
The Bat Creek Stone received scant attention (even in
7.3 Analysis and debate Thomas later publications) until the 1960s when ethnolo-
gist Joseph Mahan, puzzled by Thomas conclusion that the
inscription was Cherokee, sent a photograph of the inscrip-
tion to Cyrus H. Gordon a professor of Mediterranean
Studies at Brandeis University and a well-known proponent
of Pre-Columbian transatlantic contact theories. Gordon
published a series of articles in the early 1970s arguing that
when the stone is turned so that the straighter edge is at the
The Cherokee syl- bottom, the letters are actually a version of Paleo-Hebrew
labary, initially identied by Cyrus Thomas (1890, 1894) text used in the 1st century BC through the 2nd century
as the source of the letters on the Bat Creek stone. AD. According to Gordon, the ve letters to the left of the
comma-shaped word divider read (right to left) LYHWD,
which he interpreted as for Judea, or, including the bro-
ken letter at the far left, LYHWD[M], for the Jews.[28]
Gordon provided only tentative Paleo-Hebrew readings of
the other three letters.[29] His ndings were published in
Newsweek and in newspapers across the nation, sparking
Lithograph of the a renewed interest in the inscription.[30]
Bat Creek inscription, as rst published by Thomas (1890)
(the original illustration has been inverted to the orientation In 1979, University of Iowa archaeologist Marshall McKu-
proposed by Gordon for Paleo-Hebrew.) sick argued that Despite some diculties, Cherokee script
7.4. RECENT COMMENTARY 31
is a closer match to that on the tablet than the late-Canaanite Paleo-Hebrew. In a reply in the same issue, P. Kyle Mc-
proposed by Gordon.[5] According to McKusick, the in- Carter, Jr., a professor of Near Eastern Studies at Johns
scription actually bore the closest similarities to an early Hopkins University and an expert on the Qumran Copper
version of Sequoyahs alphabet that was occasionally used Scroll, stated that although the inscription is not an authen-
before the standard, printed version of the script was devel- tic paelo-Hebrew inscription, it clearly imitates one in cer-
oped by Samuel Worcester in 1827.[31] However, McKu- tain features, and does contain an intelligible sequence of
sick gave no details and made no attempt to interpret the ve letters -- too much for coincidence. It seems proba-
inscription as Cherokee. ble that we are dealing here not with a coincidental similar-
ity but with a fraud. McCarter remarked that if Emmert
The debate was revived in 1988 by J. Huston McCulloch,
an economics professor at Ohio State University. In an ar- forged the inscription in an attempt to ingratiate himself
with Thomas by presenting him with a Cherokee inscrip-
ticle in the Tennessee Anthropologist, he compared the let-
ters in the inscription to both Paleo-Hebrew and Cherokee, tion, his choice of a paleo-Hebrew model was ironically
inept. [34]
including the pre-Worcester version favored by McKusick,
and concluded that despite admitted diculties, the t as
Paleo-Hebrew in Gordons orientation is substantially bet-
ter than as Cherokee, in either orientation. He reported the 7.4 Recent commentary
radiocarbon date of 32 AD 769 AD on the wooden ear-
spool fragments, and also that although brass similar to that
of the bracelets is a common modern alloy, it also was found
in the Roman empire, in particular during the period 45 BC
200 AD.[32]
Archaeologists Robert Mainfort and Mary Kwas (1991)
replied to McCullochs article with a number of objec-
tions: Relying on an unpublished assessment by Hebrew
paleography expert Frank Moore Cross of Harvard Univer- M
sity, they concluded the inscription is not legitimate Paleo- artists impression of Biblical phrase QDSh LYHWH in
Hebrew. Although they conceded that the composition of paleo-Hebrew script (Macoy 1868: 134), compared with
the brass bracelets is equivocal with respect to age, they the inscribed stone.
argued that the bracelets are in all likelihood relatively mod-
ern European trade items. They interpreted an 1898 state- In 2004 Mainfort and Kwas published a further article in
ment by Thomas, that one of the best recent works on an- American Antiquity, reporting their discovery of an illus-
cient America is awed to some extent by the depiction tration in an 1870 Masonic reference book that bears strik-
of mounds and ancient works which do not and never did ing similarities to the Bat Creek inscription.[35] The Ma-
exist and by the representation of articles which are mod- sonic illustration was an artists impression of how the Bibli-
ern productions, to be a veiled repudiation by Thomas of cal phrase Holy to Yahweh (QDSh LYHWH) would have
his own 1894 Mound Explorations report, and in particular appeared in Paleo-Hebrew. Mainfort and Kwas conclude,
of its Bat Creek inscription. They repeatedly characterized There can be little doubt that this was the source of the in-
Gordon and McCulloch as cult archaeologists, and Gor- scription and that the inscription was copied, albeit not par-
don in particular as a rogue professor. ticularly well, by the individual who forged the Bat Creek
Mainfort and Kwas concluded that the inscription is a stone.[36] They repeat their 1991 contention that Emmert
forgery, for which Emmert was responsible. They proposed produced it in order to please Thomas with a Cherokee-
that Emmerts motive for producing (or causing to have like artifact, but add that since it is unlikely that Emmert
made) the Bat Creek inscription was that he felt the best could write Cherokee, he must have copied this Masonic
way to insure permanent employment with the Mound Sur- illustration instead, and that the accidental resemblances to
vey was to nd an outstanding artifact, and how better to Cherokee were enough to fool Thomas.[37]
impress Cyrus Thomas than to 'nd' an object that would In 2014, the Smithsonian Department of Anthropology is-
prove Thomas hypothesis that the Cherokee built most of sued the following statement concerning the stone:
the mounds in eastern Tennessee?"[33] The Tennessee An-
thropologist discussion continued with McCulloch (1993a) While recognizing that a diversity of opinion con-
and Mainfort and Kwas (1993). tinues to circulate around the authenticity of the
In an invited article in Biblical Archaeological Review, Mc- Bat Creek Stone, the curators in the Depart-
Culloch (1993b) reviewed and extended the argument for ment of Anthropology at the National Museum
of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, be-
32 CHAPTER 7. BAT CREEK INSCRIPTION
lieve that the inscriptions on the artifact are forg- [8] Hudson (2005: 106-107)
eries and that the artifact is a fake. This opinion
[9] Mainfort and Kwas (1991: 3).
is widely shared by other professional archaeolo-
gists as represented in the article by Robert Main- [10] Except for the identication of the characters as Cherokee,
fort and Mary Kwas The Bat Creek Stone Re- Thomas (1894: 391-3) is based almost verbatim on Em-
visited: A Fraud Exposed, American Antiquity merts eld report.
2004. Along with other known fraudulent arti-
[11] McCulloch (1988: 96). These strokes were not present in
facts, we retain it in our collections as part of the
either the lithograph of Thomas (1890) or the photograph
cultural history of archaeological frauds, which
of Thomas (1894:394), but do appear in a 1970 Smithsonian
were known to be quite popular in the second half photograph published by Gordon (1971).
of the 19th century.[38]
[12] The name was later changed to the Bureau of American Eth-
nology
7.5 Current location [13] Smithsonian Institution Archives (1881).
[14] Feder (1999: 144).

The Bat Creek Stone remains the property of the Smithso-
nian Institution, and is catalogued in the collections of the [15] Feder(1999: 1458).
Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural
History. From August 2002 to November 2013, it was on [16] Feder (1999:150).
loan to the Frank H. McClung Museum at the University of [17] Feder (1999: 151).
Tennessee, Knoxville.[39] It has subsequently been loaned
to the Museum of the Cherokee Indian in Cherokee, N.C., [18] Thomas (1894: 3913).
which plans to put it on display in the near future.[40]
[19] McCulloch (1988: 104-7).
[20] McCulloch (1988: 10710), Beta Analytic-24483/ETH-

7.6 See also 3677.
[21] Schroedl (1975: 103)

Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact
[22] Chapman (1985: 97103).
Smithsonian Bureau of American Ethnology (Smith-
[23] Thomas(1894: 394)
sonian Bureau of Ethnology until 1897)
[24] Thomas(1894: 3913)
Theory of Phoenician discovery of the Americas
[25] Thomas (1894:393).
Yehud coinage
[26] Thomas (1890: 35-7).
[27] Thomas (1894: 714).

7.7 References
[28] Gordon (1971: 17587). Chicago lawyer and author
Henriette Mertz (1964) had already suggested the stone as
[1] Feder, Kenneth L. (2010-10-11). Encyclopedia of Dubious it appeared in Thomas report was upside down and that the
Archaeology: From Atlantis to the Walam Olum: From At- inscription was Semitic, but believed it to be Phoenician.
lantis to the Walam Olum. ABC-CLIO. pp. 39. ISBN
9780313379192. Retrieved 5 March 2013. [29] See discussion of these letters in McCulloch (1988).
[2] Mainfort, Jr., Robert C.; Kwas, Mary L. The Bat Creek [30] A Canaanite Columbus?" Newsweek 76 (17):65, 1970.
Fraud: A Final Statement. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
[31] McKusick (1994).
[3] Thomas (1894: 393).
[32] McCulloch (1988)
[4] Gordon (1971, Appendix).
[33] Mainfort and Kwas (1991: 12).
[5] McKusick (1979: 139).
[34] McCarter (1993: 55). See also several letters to the editor by
[6] McCarter (1993:55). Robert Stieglitz, McCarter, Mainfort and Kwas, McKusick,
McCulloch and others in the Nov./Dec. 1993 and Jan./Feb.
[7] Chapman (1985). 1994 issues of Biblical Archaeology Review.
[35] Mainfort and Kwas (2004), Macoy (1868: 134). The same McCarter, P. Kyle, Jr. Lets be Serious About the
illustration appears on p. 169 of the 1870 edition cited by Bat Creek Stone, Biblical Archaeology Review 19
Mainfort and Kwas, as well as the 1989 reprint edition, but (July/Aug. 1993): 54-55, 83.
not in the 1867 edition.
McCulloch, J. Huston. "The Bat Creek Inscription:
[36] Mainfort and Kwas (2004: 765). Cherokee or Hebrew?" Tennessee Anthropologist 13
[37] Mainfort and Kwas (2004: 766). (Fall 1988): 79-123. Reprinted in Faulkner (1992).
[38] E-mail dated Feb. 7, 2014 from Jake Homiak, Director, An- McCulloch, J. Huston (1993a). "The Bat Creek Stone:
thropology Collections & Archives Program, Smithsonian A Reply to Mainfort and Kwas, Tennessee Anthropol-
Museum Support Center, Suitland MD, to Barbara Dun- ogist 18 (Spring 1993): 1-26.
can, Education Director, Museum of the Cherokee Indian,
Cherokee NC. McCulloch, J. Huston (1993b). Did Judean Refugees
Escape to Tennessee?" Biblical Archaeology Review
[39] Per Timothy E. Baumann, Curator of Archaeology, Mc- 19 (July/Aug. 1993): 46-53, 82-83.
Clung Museum.
McKusick, Marshall. Canaanites in America: A New
[40] Per Barbara Duncan, Education Director, Museum of the
Cherokee Indian.
Scripture in Stone?" Biblical Archaeologist, Summer
1979, pp. 13740.
McKusick, Marshall. The Cherokee Solution to the
7.8 Sources Bat Creek Enigma, Biblical Archaeology Review, 20
(Jan./Feb. 1994): 83-84, 86.
Chapman, Jeerson. Tellico Archaeology: 12,000
Mertz, Henriette. The Wine Dark Sea: Homers Heroic
Years of Native American History Norris, Tenn.: Ten-
Epic of the North Atlantic. Chicago: Mertz, 1964.
nessee Valley Authority, 1985
ASIN B0006CHG68.
Faulker, Charles H. The Bat Creek Stone. Ten-
Schroedl, Gerald F. Archaeological Investigations at
nessee Anthropological Association, Miscellaneous
the Harrison Branch and Bat Creek Sites. University
Paper No. 15, 1992. Reprints pp. 3913 of Thomas
of Tennessee, Department of Anthropology, Report
(1894), McCulloch (1988), and Mainfort and Kwas
of Investigations No. 10, 1975.
(1991), with introduction by Faulkner.
Smithsonian Institution Archives. Funds for Ethnol-
Feder, Kenneth L. Frauds, Myths and Mysteries:
ogy and Mound Survey, dated March 3, 1881.
Science and Pseudoscience in Archaeology, 3rd ed.
Mountain View, CA: Mayeld Publishing Co., 1999. Thomas, Cyrus H. The Cherokees in Pre-Columbian
Times N.D.C. Hodges, New York, 1890.
Gordon, Cyrus H. Before Columbus: Links Between the
Old World and Ancient America. New York: Crown Thomas, Cyrus H. Report on the Mound Explorations
Publishers, 1971. of the Bureau of Ethnology, in Twelfth Annual Report
of the Bureau of American Ethnology to the Secretary
Hudson, Charles. The Juan Pardo Expeditions: Ex-
of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-91, 1894. Govern-
plorations of the Carolinas and Tennessee, 1566-1568.
ment Printing Oce, Washington, D.C. pp. 3913
Tuscaloosa, Ala.: University of Alabama Press, 2005.
reprinted in Faulkner (1992).
Mainfort, Robert C., Jr. and Mary L. Kwas. The
Robert Macoy, George Oliver. General History, Cy-
Bat Creek Stone: Judeans in Tennessee?" Tennessee
clopedia and Dictionary of Freemasonry (1870). Pp
Anthropologist 16 (Spring 1991): 1-19. Reprinted in
181
Faulkner (1992).
Mainfort, Robert C., Jr. and Mary L. Kwas. The Bat
Creek Fraud: A Final Statement, Tennessee Anthro- 7.9 External links
pologist 18 (Fall 1993): 87-93.
Macoy, Robert, General History, Cyclopedia and Dic- Catalogue No. A134902-0 in the Department of
tionary of Freemasonry, Masonic Publishing Co., New Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History,
York, 3rd ed., 1868, p. 134. (Same illustration ap- Smithsonian Institution.
pears on p. 169 of 1870 ed. and 1989 reprint ed., but Museum of the Cherokee Indian
not in 1867 ed.)
Chapter 8
Brandenburg stone
The Brandenburg stone is an inscribed stone slab found 8.2 Claims of Welsh origin
in Brandenburg, Kentucky, United States in 1912, on the
farm of Craig Crecelius. The stone contains a strip of linear
markings that resemble letters of a script. Crecelius exhib-
ited the stone several times, but was unable to nd anyone
who could identify the markings.
Jon Whiteld, who acquired the stone in 1965, claims that
they are Coelbren, a Welsh-language alphabet. Other writ-
ers have elaborated on these claims, arguing that this is
evidence of pre-Columbian contact between the legendary
Welsh prince Madoc and Native Americans. The consen-
sus of Welsh scholars is that Coelbren is a fake script in-
vented in the nineteenth century by Iolo Morganwg in his
book Barddas.
8.1 History
One of Morganwgs peithynen frames containing his bardic al-
In 1912, farmer Craig Crecelius found the stone artifact in phabet
eld near the Ohio River in Brandenburg, Kentucky. The
oolite stone measures 29 inches (74 cm) long by 15.5 inches
(39 cm) wide and varies in thickness from 1 to 3 inches (2.5 Whiteld sought evidence that the markings were Welsh in
to 7.6 cm).[1] For more than 50 years, Crecelius displayed origin. In 1998, the stone was examined by authors Baram
the stone at local fairs. At some point, the stone was shat- Blackett and Alan Wilson, who asserted that the inscrip-
tered into three pieces. tion was medieval Welsh. Blackett and Wilson have also
In 1965, Crecelius abandoned his pursuit of the artifacts claimed to have found the grave of King Arthur and the
origin and transferred ownership to Jon Whiteld. Eight Ark of the Covenant.[4] They translated the inscriptions into
years later, archaeologists examined the stone and con- English from Coelbren, the script described by Iolo Mor-
cluded that its markings were actually scratches result- ganwg, and which modern scholars believe to have been in-
ing from a natural process. The stone was stored at the vented by him.[2][5][6]
Brandenburg library until 1995 when it was moved to The stones inscription was translated to read: Toward
the Falls of the Ohio Interpretive Center in Clarksville, strength (to promote unity), divide the land we are spread
Indiana.[2] over, purely (or justly) between ospring in wisdom.[2][3]
In 1999, the artifact was moved to the Falls of the Ohio This was interpreted to mean that it was a boundary marker.
State Park Interpretive Center for a year, and then to the Jeerson Community College writer Lee Pennington has
Charlestown, Indiana public library. In January 2012 the endorsed claims of the artifacts ancient Welsh origin. The
artifact was returned to the Meade county library.[3] claims have been widely circulated.[1][2][3][7][8]
34
8.4. REFERENCES 35
8.3 Authenticity
More recently, the artifact has been a subject of several
books as well an episode of the H2 documentary America
Unearthed. Author Jason Colavito has argued against the
stones authenticity, asserting that it was forged in the 19th
or early 20th century when several books promoting Coel-
bren were widely circulated in America.[9]
8.4 References
[1] See, Larry Jr. (March 19, 2008). Archaeologists gather to
hear story of Brandenburg Stone. Meade County Messen-
ger. Retrieved March 24, 2013.
[2] Brandenburg Stone. Clark County (Indiana) Public Li-

brary. Retrieved March 24, 2013.
[3] Secretive Stone Gets New Home in Indiana. Bowling

Green, Kentucky. Daily News. July 23, 1999. Retrieved
March 24, 2013.
[4] Historians Battle over Arthurian Intrigue, Evening Chron-

icle, Newcastle, England, June 12, 2008, p.30.
[5] Coelbren y Beirdd - The Bardic Alphabet. National Mu-

seum of Wales.
[6] Cathryn, A Charnell-White (2007). Bardic Circles: Na-

tional, Regional and Personal Identity in the Bardic Vision of
Iolo Morganwg. University of Wales Press. p. 106. ISBN
978-0708320679.
[7] Holland, Jerey Scott (2008). Weird Kentucky: Your Travel

Guide to Kentuckys Local Legends and Best Kept Secrets.
Sterling. p. 23. ISBN 978-1402754388.
[8] Callahan, Jim (2000). Lest We Forget: The Melungeon

Colony of Newmans Ridge. Overmountain Press. p. 57.
ISBN 978-1570721670.
[9] Colavito, Jason (February 8, 2013). Following Up on the

Brandenburg Stone. Retrieved March 25, 2013.
Chapter 9
Calaveras Skull
After careful study, he ocially announced its discovery at

a meeting of the California Academy of Sciences on July
16, 1866, declaring it evidence of the existence of Pliocene
age man in North America, which would make it the oldest
known record of humans on the continent.[2]
Its authenticity was immediately challenged. In 1869 a San
Francisco newspaper reported that a miner had told a minis-
ter that the skull was planted as a practical joke.[3] Thomas
Wilson of Harvard ran a uorine analysis on it in 1879 (the
rst ever usage of such on human bone), with the results in-
dicating it was of recent origin.[4] It was so widely believed
to be a hoax that Bret Harte famously wrote a satirical poem
called To the Pliocene Skull in 1899.[5]
Whitney did not waver in his belief that it was genuine. His
successor at Harvard, F. W. Putnam, also believed it to be
real. By 1901 Putnam was determined to discover the truth
and he headed to California. While there, he heard a story
that in 1865 one of a number of Indian skulls had been dug
up from a nearby burial site and planted in the mine specif-
ically for miners to nd. Putnam still declined to declare
The Calaveras Skull, from William Henry Holmes preliminary de-
the skull a fake, instead conceding, It may be impossible
bunking of it.
ever to determine to the satisfaction of the archaeologist the
place where the skull was actually found.[2] Others, such as
The Calaveras Skull was a human skull found by miners adherents of Theosophy, also were unwavering in their be-
in Calaveras County, California, which was purported to lief in the authenticity of the skull.[3]
prove that humans, mastodons, and elephants had coexisted
in California. It was later revealed to be a hoax. Coinciden- To further complicate the issue, careful comparison of the
tally, calaveras is the Spanish word for skulls. skull with descriptions of it at the time of its discovery re-
vealed that the skull Whitney had in his possession was not
the one originally found.[2]
Anthropologist William Henry Holmes of the Smithsonian
9.1 History Institution investigated around the turn of the century. He
determined that the plant and animal fossils that had been
On February 25, 1866, miners claimed to have found a hu- discovered near the skull were indeed genuine, but the
man skull in a mine, beneath a layer of lava, 130 feet (40 m) skull was too modern, and concluded that to suppose that
below the surface of the earth, which made it into the hands man could have remained unchanged... for a million years,
of Josiah Whitney, then the State Geologist of California as roughly speaking... is to suppose a miracle.[3] Likewise, J.
well as a Professor of Geology at Harvard University. A M. Boutwell, investigating in 1911, was told by one of the
year before the skull came to his attention, Whitney pub- participants in the discovery that the whole thing was in-
lished the belief that humans, mastodons, and elephants deed a hoax.[6] The miners of the Sierra Nevada apparently
coexisted;[1] the skull served as proof of his convictions.
36
9.3. REFERENCES 37
did not greatly like Whitney (being an Easterner of very [10] Taylor, Ian T. From Mammal to Man. In the Minds of Men
reserved demeanor) and were delighted to have played (5th ed.). ISBN 0-9733368-0-3. Retrieved 2011-02-24.
such a joke on him.[2] Furthermore, John C. Scribner, a lo-
[11] Arguments we think creationists should NOT use. Cre-
cal shopkeeper, claimed to have planted it, and the story was ation Ministries International. Archived from the original
revealed by his sister after his death.[7] Radiocarbon dating on 2008-01-21.
in 1992 established the age of the skull at about 1,000 years,
placing it in the late Holocene age.[8]
Despite evidence to the contrary, the Calaveras Skull
continues to be cited by creationists as proof that
paleontologists ignore evidence that does not t their
theories,[9][10] although others have acknowledged that the
Calaveras Skull is a hoax.[11]
9.2 See also

Piltdown Man
9.3 References
[1] Whitney, J. D. (1865). Geology - Report of progress and
synopsis of the eld-work from 1860 to 1864. Philadelphia.
p. 252.
[2] The Calaveras Skull. Museum of Hoaxes. Archived from

the original on 2011-06-29. Retrieved 2009-07-06.
[3] The Notorious Calaveras Skull. Archaeology Magazine.

Archaeological Institute of America. 2009. Retrieved 2011-
02-23.
[4] Ian Haywood (1987). The Missing Link. Faking it: Art
and the Politics of Forgery. Harvester. p. 95. ISBN 978-
0-7108-1043-4. Retrieved 24 February 2011. (as cited in
Blinderman, Charles; Joyce, David. The Piltdown Plot.
Clark University. Retrieved 2011-02-23.)
[5] Conrad, Ernest C. (Spring 1982). Are There Hu-

man Fossils in the Wrong Place for Evolution?". Cre-
ation/Evolution Journal. 3 (2). Retrieved 2009-07-06.
[6] Heinrich, Paul (June 3, 1996). The Calaveras Skull Revis-

ited. Talk.Origins. Retrieved 2009-07-06.
[7] Weber, Christopher Gregory (Fall 1981). Paluxy Man

The Creationist Piltdown. Creation/Evolution Journal. 2
(4). Retrieved 2009-07-06.
[8] Taylor, R. E.; Payen, Louis A.; Slota, Peter J., Jr (April
1992). The Age of the Calaveras Skull: Dating the Pilt-
down Man of the New World.. American Antiquity. 57
(2): 269275. doi:10.2307/280732. JSTOR 280732.
[9] In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and

the Flood. Center for Scientic Creation. Retrieved 2009-
07-06.
Chapter 10
Chariots of the Gods (lm)
Chariots of the Gods (German: Erinnerungen an die Zu-

kunft) is a 1970 West German documentary lm directed
by Harald Reinl. It is based on Erich von Dniken's book
Chariots of the Gods?, a book that theorizes extraterrestri-
als impacted early human life. The lm was nominated for
an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature.[2][3]
10.1 Other versions

The lm was edited and dubbed into English in a 1973
American TV documentary, In Search of Ancient Astro-
nauts, narrated by Rod Serling.[4] This version was also
shown in many schools in the 1970s, distributed through
16 mm lm prints.[4]
The lm was released in the UK in 1971, in a version cut to
55 minutes and as a support to the lm The Railway Chil-
dren.
10.2 References
[1] Chariots of the Gods, Worldwide Box Oce Information.
Worldwide Box Oce. Retrieved 9 January 2012.
[2] The 43rd Academy Awards (1971) Nominees and Win-

ners. oscars.org. Retrieved 11 September 2011.
[3] NY Times: Chariots of the Gods. NY Times. Retrieved

11 November 2008.
[4] In Search of Ancient Astronauts at Internet Movie Database
10.3 External links

Chariots of the Gods at the Internet Movie Database
38
Chapter 11
Coso artifact
The Coso artifact is an object claimed by its discoverers to origin have included:
be a spark plug found encased in a lump of hard clay or rock
on February 13, 1961, by Wallace Lane, Virginia Maxey An ancient advanced civilization (such as Atlantis);
and Mike Mikesell while they were prospecting for geodes
near the town of Olancha, California, and long claimed as Prehistoric extraterrestrial visitors to Earth;
an example of an out-of-place artifact.[1]
If a spark plug is encased in a 500,000-year-old geode, Human time-travellers from the future leaving or los-
this nding would represent a substantial scientic and his- ing the artifact during a visit to the past.
torical anomaly, as spark plugs were invented in the 19th
century. Critics have argued, however, that the concretion, An investigation carried out by Pierre Stromberg and Paul
not geode, containing the Coso artifact can be explained by Heinrich, with the help of members of the Spark Plug Col-
known natural processes and credible evidence for it being lectors of America, suggested that the artifact is a 1920s
500,000 years old is completely lacking. Champion spark plug. Chad Windham, President of the
Spark Plug Collectors of America, identied the Coso arti-
fact as a 1920s-era Champion spark plug, which was widely
11.1 Discovery used in the Ford Model T and Model A engines. Other
spark plug collectors concurred with his assessment.[1]
Following its collection, Mikesell destroyed a diamond- Stromberg and Heinrichs report[1] indicates the spark plug
edged blade cutting through the rock containing the artifact became encased in a concretion composed of iron derived
and discovered the item.[1] In a letter written to Desert Mag- from the rusting spark plug. It is typical of iron and steel
azine of Outdoor Southwest a reader stated that a trained artifacts to rapidly form iron oxide concretions around them
geologist had dated the nodule as at least 500,000 years old as they rust in the ground.[4]
and contained a manmade object.[2] The identity of the al- The location of the Coso artifact is unknown as of 2008.
leged trained geologist and means of geologic dating were Of its discoverers, Lane has died, Maxey is alive but avoids
never claried, nor the ndings ever published in any known public comment, and the whereabouts of Mikesell are not
periodical.[1] Furthermore, at the time that Maxey reported known.
the Coso artifact as having been dated as being 500,000
years old, there was no known method, including the use of
guide fossils, by which either the artifact or concretion could
have been dated as being this old.[3] The nodule surround- 11.3 See also
ing the spark plug may have accreted in a matter of years or
decades, as demonstrated by examples of very similar iron London Hammer
or steel artifact-bearing nodules, which are discussed and
illustrated by Cronyn.[4]
11.4 References
11.2 Criticism and analysis [1] Stromberg, P., and P. V. Heinrich, 2004, The Coso Artifact
Mystery from the Depths of Time?, Reports of the National
The origin of the artifact has been the cause of much Center for Science Education, v. 24, no. 2, pp. 2630
speculation.[1] Pseudoscientic suggestions for the artifacts (March/April 2004).
39
40 CHAPTER 11. COSO ARTIFACT
[2] Maxey, V., 1961, The Coso Geode... in Letters...From Our

Readers. Desert Magazine of Outdoor Southwest. v. 25, no.
5, p. 4. (May 1961).
[3] Walker, M. (2005) Quaternary Dating methods Wiley, New

York, New York. 304 pp. ISBN 978-0470869277.
[4] Cronyn, J. M. (1990) The Elements of Archaeological Con-

servation Routledge, New York, New York. 326 pp. ISBN
978-0415012072.
11.5 External links

Andrew O'Hehir (August 31, 2005). Archaeology
from the dark side. Salon.
Chapter 12
Crystal skull
This article is about the crystal skulls. For other uses, see The results of these studies demonstrated that those exam-
Crystal skull (disambiguation). ined were manufactured in the mid-19th century or later,
The crystal skulls are human skull hardstone carvings almost certainly in Europe during a time when interest in
ancient culture was abundant.[1][2] Despite some claims pre-
sented in an assortment of popularizing literature, legends
of crystal skulls with mystical powers do not gure in gen-
uine Mesoamerican or other Native American mythologies
and spiritual accounts.[3]
The skulls are often claimed to exhibit paranormal phe-
nomena by some members of the New Age movement, and
have often been portrayed as such in ction. Crystal skulls
have been a popular subject appearing in numerous sci-
television series, novels, lms, and video games.
12.1 Collections
Trade in fake pre-Columbian artifacts developed during the
late 19th century to the extent that in 1886, Smithsonian ar-
chaeologist William Henry Holmes wrote an article called
The Trade in Spurious Mexican Antiquities for Science.[4]
Although museums had acquired skulls earlier, it was
Eugne Boban, an antiquities dealer who opened his shop
in Paris in 1870, who is most associated with 19th-century
museum collections of crystal skulls. Most of Bobans
collection, including three crystal skulls, was sold to the
ethnographer Alphonse Pinart, who donated the collection
to the Trocadro Museum, which later became the Muse
de l'Homme.
The crystal skull at the British Museum (ID Am1898C3.1 ), similar 12.2 Research
in dimensions to the more detailed Mitchell-Hedges skull.
Many crystal skulls are claimed to be pre-Columbian,
made of clear or milky white quartz (also called rock crys- usually attributed to the Aztec or Maya civilizations.
tal), claimed to be pre-Columbian Mesoamerican artifacts Mesoamerican art has numerous representations of skulls,
by their alleged nders; however, none of the specimens but none of the skulls in museum collections come from
made available for scientic study has been authenticated documented excavations.[5] Research carried out on sev-
as pre-Columbian in origin. eral crystal skulls at the British Museum in 1967, 1996 and
41
42 CHAPTER 12. CRYSTAL SKULL
tailed study by the British Museum and the Smithsonian in

May 2008.[11] Using electron microscopy and X-ray crys-
tallography, a team of British and American researchers
found that the British Museum skull was worked with a
harsh abrasive substance such as corundum or diamond,
and shaped using a rotary disc tool made from some suit-
able metal. The Smithsonian specimen had been worked
with a dierent abrasive, namely the silicon-carbon com-
pound carborundum (Silicon carbide) which is a syn-
thetic substance manufactured using modern industrial
techniques.[12] Since the synthesis of carborundum dates
only to the 1890s and its wider availability to the 20th cen-
tury, the researchers concluded "[t]he suggestion is that it
was made in the 1950s or later.[13]
12.3 Other artifacts of controversial

origin
None of the skulls in museums come from documented ex-
Aztec mask with mosaic inlays cavations. A parallel example is provided by obsidian mir-
rors, ritual objects widely depicted in Aztec art. Although
a few surviving obsidian mirrors come from archaeological
2004 shows that the indented lines marking the teeth (for
excavations,[14] none of the Aztec-style obsidian mirrors are
these skulls had no separate jawbone, unlike the Mitchell-
so documented. Yet most authorities on Aztec material cul-
Hedges skull) were carved using jewelers equipment (ro-
ture consider the Aztec-style obsidian mirrors as authentic
tary tools) developed in the 19th century, making a sup-
pre-Columbian objects.[15] Archaeologist Michael E. Smith
posed pre-Columbian origin problematic.[6]
reports a non peer-reviewed nd of a small crystal skull at
The type of crystal was determined by examination of an Aztec site in the Valley of Mexico.[16] Crystal skulls have
chlorite inclusions. It is only found in Madagascar and been described as A fascinating example of artifacts that
Brazil, and thus unobtainable or unknown within pre- have made their way into museums with no scientic evi-
Columbian Mesoamerica. The study concluded that the dence to prove their rumored pre-Columbian origins.[17]
skulls were crafted in the 19th century in Germany, quite
A similar case is the Olmec-style face mask in jade; hard-
likely at workshops in the town of Idar-Oberstein, which
stone carvings of a face in a mask form. Curators and schol-
was renowned for crafting objects made from imported
ars refer to these as Olmec-style, as to date no example
Brazilian quartz in the late 19th century.[7]
has been recovered in an archaeologically controlled Olmec
It has been established that the crystal skulls in the British context, although they appear Olmec in style. However they
Museum and Pariss Muse de l'Homme[8] were originally have been recovered from sites of other cultures, includ-
sold by the French antiquities dealer Eugne Boban, who ing one deliberately deposited in the ceremonial precinct of
was operating in Mexico City between 1860 and 1880.[9] Tenochtitlan (Mexico City), which would presumably have
The British Museum crystal skull transited through New been about 2,000 years old when the Aztecs buried it, sug-
Yorks Tianys, whilst the Muse de l'Hommes crystal gesting these were as valued and collected as Roman antiq-
skull was donated by Alphonse Pinart, an ethnographer who uities were in Europe.[18]
had bought it from Boban.
In 1992, the Smithsonian Institution investigated a crystal
skull provided by an anonymous source; the source claimed 12.4 Individual skulls
to have purchased it in Mexico City in 1960, and that it was
of Aztec origin. The investigation concluded that this skull 12.4.1 Mitchell-Hedges skull
also was made recently. According to the Smithsonian,
Boban acquired his crystal skulls from sources in Germany, Perhaps the most famous and enigmatic skull was allegedly
aligning with conclusions made by the British Museum.[10] discovered in 1924 by Anna Mitchell-Hedges, adopted
The Journal of Archaeological Science published a de- daughter of British adventurer and popular author F.A.
12.4. INDIVIDUAL SKULLS 43
Mitchell-Hedges. It is the subject of a video documentary with metal.[29] Anna Mitchell-Hedges refused subsequent
made in 1990, Crystal Skull of Lubaantun.[19] It was ex- requests to submit the skull for further scientic testing.[30]
amined and described by Smithsonian researchers as very The earliest published reference to the skull is the July 1936
nearly a replica of the British Museum skullalmost ex- issue of the British anthropological journal Man, where it
actly the same shape, but with more detailed modeling of is described as being in the possession of Mr. Sydney Bur-
the eyes and the teeth.[20] Mitchell-Hedges claimed that ney, a London art dealer who is said to have owned it since
she found the skull buried under a collapsed altar inside a 1933.[31] No mention was made of Mitchell-Hedges. There
temple in Lubaantun, in British Honduras, now Belize.[21] is documentary evidence that Mitchell-Hedges bought it
As far as can be ascertained, F.A. Mitchell-Hedges him-
from Burney in 1944.[30]
self made no mention of the alleged discovery in any of his
writings on Lubaantun. Others present at the time of the ex- F. A. Mitchell-Hedges mentioned the skull only briey
cavation recorded neither the skulls discovery nor Annas in the rst edition of his autobiography, Danger My Ally
presence at the dig.[22] According to new evidence pre- (1954), without specifying where or by whom it was
sented in a National Geographic documentary, the skull was found.[32] He merely claimed that it is at least 3,600 years
purchased at a Sothebys auction by F.A. Mitchell-Hedges old and according to legend it was used by the High Priest of
in London on Oct. 15, 1943. Shortly thereafter, he dis- the Maya when he was performing esoteric rites. It is said
cussed the purchase in a letter to his brother.[23] that when he willed death with the help of the skull, death
invariably followed.[33] All subsequent editions of Danger
The skull is made from a block of clear quartz about the size My Ally omitted mention of the skull entirely.[30]
of a small human cranium, measuring some 5 inches (13
cm) high, 7 inches (18 cm) long and 5 inches wide. The
lower jaw is detached. In the early 1970s it came under
the temporary care of freelance art restorer Frank Dorland,
who claimed upon inspecting it that it had been carved
with total disregard to the natural crystal axis, and without
the use of metal tools. Dorland reported being unable to
nd any tell-tale scratch marks, except for traces of me-
chanical grinding on the teeth, and he speculated that it
was rst chiseled into rough form, probably using diamonds,
and the ner shaping, grinding and polishing was achieved
through the use of sand over a period of 150 to 300 years.
He said it could be up to 12,000 years old. Although various
claims have been made over the years regarding the skulls
physical properties, such as an allegedly constant tempera-
ture of 70 F (21 C), Dorland reported that there was no
dierence in properties between it and other natural quartz
crystals.[24]
While in Dorlands care the skull came to the attention of
writer Richard Garvin, at the time working at an advertising
agency where he supervised Hewlett-Packard's advertising
account. Garvin made arrangements for the skull to be ex-
amined at Hewlett-Packards crystal laboratories in Santa
Clara, California, where it was subjected to several tests.
The labs determined only that it was not a composite as
Dorland had supposed, but that it was fashioned from a sin-
gle crystal of quartz.[25] The laboratory test also established
that the lower jaw had been fashioned from the same left-
handed growing crystal as the rest of the skull.[26] No inves-
tigation was made by Hewlett-Packard as to its method of
Eugne Boban, main French dealer in pre-Columbian artifacts dur-
manufacture or dating.[27]
ing the second half of the 19th century and probable source of many
As well as the traces of mechanical grinding on the famous skulls
teeth noted by Dorland,[28] Mayanist archaeologist Norman
Hammond reported that the holes (presumed to be intended In a 1970 letter Anna also stated that she was told by the
for support pegs) showed signs of being made by drilling few remaining Maya that the skull was used by the high
priest to will death.[34] For this reason, the artifact is some- New York City in 1887 by George F. Kunz.[40] It was sold
times referred to as The Skull of Doom. Anna Mitchell- at auction, and bought by Tiany and Co., who later sold
Hedges toured with the skull from 1967 exhibiting it on a it at cost to the British Museum in 1897.[41] This skull is
pay-per-view basis.[35] Somewhere between 1988 and 1990 very similar to the Mitchell-Hedges skull, although it is less
she toured with the skull. She continued to grant interviews detailed and does not have a movable lower jaw.[42]
about the artifact until her death. The British Museum catalogues the skulls provenance as
In her last eight years, Anna Mitchell-Hedges lived in probably European, 19th century AD[43] and describes it
Chesterton, Indiana, with Bill Homann, whom she married as not an authentic pre-Columbian artefact.[44] It has been
in 2002. She died on April 11, 2007. Since that time the established that this skull was made with modern tools, and
Mitchell-Hedges Skull has been owned by Homann. He that it is not authentic.[45]
continues to believe in its mystical properties.[36]
In November 2007, Homann took the skull to the oce of 12.4.3 Paris skull
anthropologist Jane MacLaren Walsh, in the Smithsonian's
National Museum of Natural History for examination.[37]
Walsh carried out a detailed examination of the skull us-
ing ultraviolet light, a high-powered light microscope, and
computerized tomography. Homann took the skull to the
museum again in 2008 so it could be lmed for a Smith-
sonian Networks documentary, Legend of the Crystal Skull
and on this occasion Walsh was able to take two sets of
silicone molds of surface tool marks for scanning electron
microscope (SEM) analysis. The SEM micrographs re-
vealed evidence that the crystal had been worked with a high
speed, hard metal rotary tool coated with a hard abrasive
such as diamond. Walshs extensive research on artifacts
from Mexico and Central America showed that pre-contact
artisans carved stone by abrading the surface with stone
or wooden tools and in later pre-Columbian times, copper
tools, in combination with a variety of abrasive sands or pul-
verized stone. These examinations led Walsh to the conclu-
sion that the skull was probably carved in the 1930s, and
was most likely based on the British Museum skull which
had been exhibited fairly continuously from 1898.[37]
Crystal skull at the Muse du quai Branly, Paris
In the National Geographic Channel documentary The
Truth Behind the Crystal Skulls, forensic artist Gloria
Nusse performed a forensic facial reconstruction over a The largest of the three skulls sold by Eugne Boban to
replica of the skull. According to Nusse, the resulting face Alphonse Pinart (sometimes called the Paris Skull), about
had female and European characteristics. As it was hypoth- 10 cm (4 in) high, has a hole drilled vertically through its
esized that the Crystal Skull was a replica of an actual hu- center.[46] It is part of a collection held at the Muse du
man skull, the conclusion was that it could not have been Quai Branly, and was subjected to scientic tests carried
created by ancient Americans.[38][39] out in 200708 by Frances national Centre de recherche et
de restauration des muses de France (Centre for Research
and Restoration of the Museums in France, or C2RMF).
12.4.2 British Museum skull After a series of analyses carried out over three months,
C2RMF engineers concluded that it was certainly not pre-
The crystal skull of the British Museum rst appeared in Columbian, it shows traces of polishing and abrasion by
1881, in the shop of the Paris antiquarian, Eugne Boban. modern tools.[47] Particle accelerator tests also revealed
Its origin was not stated in his catalogue of the time. He is occluded traces of water that were dated to the 19th cen-
said to have tried to sell it to Mexicos national museum as tury, and the Quai Branly released a statement that the
an Aztec artifact, but was unsuccessful. Boban later moved tests seem to indicate that it was made late in the 19th
his business to New York City, where the skull was sold to century.[48]
George H. Sisson. It was exhibited at the meeting of the In 2009 the C2RMF researchers published results of fur-
American Association for the Advancement of Science in ther investigations to establish when the Paris skull had been
12.6. IN POPULAR CULTURE 45
carved. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis indi- made) in The Mystery of the Crystal Skulls,[54] a 2008 pro-
cated the use of lapidary machine tools in its carving. The gram produced for the Sci Fi Channel in May and shown on
results of a new dating technique known as quartz hydra- Discovery Channel Canada in June. Interviewees included
tion dating (QHD) demonstrated that the Paris skull had Richard Hoagland, who attempted to link the skulls and the
been carved later than a reference quartz specimen artifact, Maya to life on Mars, and David Hatcher Childress, propo-
known to have been cut in 1740. The researchers conclude nent of lost Atlantean civilizations and anti-gravity claims.
that the SEM and QHD results combined with the skulls Crystal skulls are also referred to by author Drunvalo
known provenance indicate it was carved in the 18th or 19th Melchizedek in his book Serpent of Light.[55] He writes that
century.[49]
he came across indigenous Mayan descendants in posses-
sion of crystal skulls at ceremonies at temples in the Yu-
catn, which he writes contained souls of ancient Mayans
12.4.4 Smithsonian Skull who had entered the skulls to await the time when their an-
cient knowledge would once again be required.
The Smithsonian Skull, Catalogue No. A562841-0 in the
collections of the Department of Anthropology, National The alleged associations and origins of crystal skull mythol-
Museum of Natural History, was mailed to the Smithsonian ogy in Native American spiritual lore, as advanced by
Institution anonymously in 1992, and was claimed to be an neoshamanic writers such as Jamie Sams, are similarly
Aztec object by its donor and was purportedly from the col- discounted.[56] Instead, as Philip Jenkins notes, crystal skull
lection of Porrio Diaz. It is the largest of the skulls, weigh- mythology may be traced back to the baroque legends ini-
ing 31 pounds (14 kg) and is 15 inches (38 cm) high. It was tially spread by F.A. Mitchell-Hedges, and then afterwards
carved using carborundum, a modern abrasive. It has been taken up:
displayed as a modern fake at the National Museum of Nat-
ural History.[50] By the 1970s, the crystal skulls [had] entered
New Age mythology as potent relics of ancient
Atlantis, and they even acquired a canonical num-
ber: there were exactly thirteen skulls.
12.5 Paranormal claims and spiri- None of this would have anything to do with
tual associations North American Indian matters, if the skulls had
not attracted the attention of some of the most
Some believers in the paranormal claim that crystal skulls active New Age writers.[57]
can produce a variety of miracles. Anna Mitchell-Hedges
claimed that the skull she allegedly discovered could cause
visions, cure cancer, that she once used its magical proper- 12.6 In popular culture
ties to kill a man, and that in another instance, she saw in it
a premonition of the John F. Kennedy assassination.[51] Main article: Crystal skulls in popular culture
In the 1931 play The Satin Slipper by Paul Claudel, King
Philip II of Spain uses a deaths head made from a single
piece of rock crystal, lit by a ray of the setting sun, to Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
see the defeat of his Armada in its attack on England (day (2008), the 4th instalment in the Action/Adventure
4, scene 4, pp. 24344). [52] franchise, revolves around a ctional back-story about
crystal skulls, specically mentioning the Mitchell-
Claims of the healing and supernatural powers of crystal Hedges skull.
skulls have no support in the scientic community, which
has found no evidence of any unusual phenomena associated Stargate SG-1 (season 3), Episode 21 revolves around a
with the skulls nor any reason for further investigation, other crystal skull found on an alien planet, and an associated
than the conrmation of their provenance and method of skull that seems to borrow details from the Mitchell-
manufacture.[53] Hedges skull, other than the discoverer. In the show it
was reportedly found by Daniel Jacksons grandfather,
Another novel and historically unfounded speculation ties
Nick Ballard.
in the legend of the crystal skulls with the completion of
the current Maya calendar b'ak'tun-cycle on December 21, American Dragon: Jake Long, The rst half of the sec-
2012, claiming the re-uniting of the thirteen mystical skulls ond season revolves around nding the 13 Aztec crys-
will forestall a catastrophe allegedly predicted or implied by tal skulls, which hold the power to grant 1 irreversible
the ending of this calendar (see 2012 phenomenon). An air- wish to the person that holds the 13th skull, after the
ing of this claim appeared (among an assortment of others other 12 are placed in the Gargoyles of Pantheon.
12.7 Notes [20] Walsh (2008). See also the 1936 debate on its resemblance
to the British Museum skull, in Digby (1936) and Morant
[1] Crystal Skulls -- National Geographic. National Geo- (1936), passim.
graphic. Retrieved 1 October 2014.
[21] See Garvin (1973, caption to photo 25); also Nickell (2007,
[2] British Museum (n.d.-b), Jenkins (2004, p.217), Sax et al. p.67).
(2008), Smith (2005), Walsh (1997; 2008).
[22] Nickell (2007, pp.6869)
[3] Aldred (2000, passim.); Jenkins (2004, pp.218219). In this
[23] See The Truth Behind: The Crystal Skulls, which includes
latter work, Philip Jenkins, former Distinguished Professor
an interview with Dr. Jane Walsh, Smithsonian Institurion,
of History and Religious Studies and subsequent endowed
It was sold at auction, at Sothebys, to Frederick Mitchell-
Professor of Humanities at PSU, writes that crystal skulls
Hedges, so he didn't get it at Lubaantun, he didn't dig it up.
are among the more obvious of examples where the asso-
ciation with Native spirituality is a historically recent and [24] Dorland, in a May 1983 letter to Joe Nickell, cited in Nickell
articial synthesis. These are products of a generation of (2007, p.70).
creative spiritual entrepreneurs that do not "[represent] the
practice of any historical community. [25] See Garvin (1973, pp.7576), also Hewlett-Packard (1971,
p.9). The test involved immersing the skull in a liquid
[4] Holmes (1886) (benzyl alcohol) with the same diraction coecient and
viewing it under polarized light.
[5] Walsh (2008)
[6] Craddock (2009, p.415) [26] Garvin (1973, pp.7576); Hewlett-Packard (1971, p.9).
[7] British Museums (n.d.-b); Craddock (2009, p.415). [27] Hewlett-Packard (1971, p.10).
[8] The specimen at the Muse de l'Homme is half-sized. [28] Garvin (1973, p.84); also cited in Nickell (2007, p.70).
[9] See The mystery of the British Museums crystal skull is [29] Hammond, in a May 1983 letter to Nickell, cited in Nickell
solved. Its a fake, in The Independent (Connor 2005). See (2007, p.70). See also Hammonds recounting of his meet-
also the Museums issued public statement on its crystal skull ing with Anna Mitchell-Hedges and the skull in an article
(British Museum n.d.-c). written for The Times, in Hammond (2008).
[10] See the account given by Smithsonian anthropologist Jane [30] Nickell (2007, p.69)
Walsh of her joint investigations with British Museums ma-
[31] See Morant (1936, p.105), and comments in Digby (1936).
terials scientist Margaret Sax, which ascertained the crystal
See also discussion of the prior ownership in Nickell (2007,
skull specimens to be 19th century fakes, in Smith (2005).
p.69).
See also Walsh (1997).
[32] See Mitchell-Hedges (1954, pp.240243); also description
[11] Sax et al. (2008)
of same in the chapter Riddle of the Crystal Skulls, in
[12] Carborundum occurs naturally only in minute amounts in Nickell (2007, pp.6773).
the extremely rare mineral moissanite, rst identied in a
[33] Mitchell-Hedges quote, as reproduced in Nickell (2007,
meteorite in 1893. See summary of the discovery and his-
p.67).
tory of silicon carbide in Kelly (n.d.)
[34] Garvin (1973, p.93)
[13] See reportage of the study in Rincon (2008), and the study
itself in Sax et al. (2008). [35] Hammond (2008)
[14] Such as at Teotihuacan; see Taube (1992). [36] Stelzer, C.D. (2008-06-12). The kingdom of the crystal
[15] See for example Olivier (2003). skull. Illinois Times. Retrieved 2009-02-08.
[16] Smith, Michael E. (May 19, 2008). Aztec Crystal Skulls. [37] Walsh, Jane MacLaren (May 27, 2010). The Skull of
Publishing Archaeology Blog. Doom:Under the Microscope. Archaeology Magazine. Ar-
chaeological Institute of America. Retrieved February 17,
[17] Smithsonian puts its fake- crystal skull- on display. San 2013.
Francisco Chronicle (July 18). 2008. Retrieved 2008-09-
21. [38] The Truth Behind the Crystal Skulls (Documentary). Na-
tional Geographic Channel: The Truth Behind. 2013.
[18] Artworld University of East Anglia collections National Geographic Channel.
[19] Crystal Skull of Labaantun (1990)". The New York Times. [39] The Truth Behind The Crystal Skulls, page 1. Retrieved 8
Retrieved 2008-07-20. November 2013.
12.8. REFERENCES 47
[40] A Great Labor Problem. It Receives Attention from the 12.8 References
Scientists. They devote attention, too, to a beautiful adze and
a mysterious crystal skull (PDF). New York Times (August
Aldred, Lisa (Summer 2000).
13). 1887. Retrieved 2008-07-17.
Plastic Shamans and Astroturf
[41] British Museum (n.d.-a, n.d.-b)
Sun Dances: New Age Commer-
cialization of Native American
[42] Digby (1936) Spirituality. American Indian
Quarterly. Lincoln: University of
[43] British Museum (n.d.-a) Nebraska Press. 24 (3): 329352.
doi:10.1353/aiq.2000.0001. ISSN
[44] British Museum (n.d.-c). See also articles on the investiga- 0095-182X. JSTOR 1185908.
tions which established it to be a fake, in Connor (2005), OCLC 184746956.
Jury (2005), Smith (2005), and Walsh (1997, 2008). British Museum (n.d.a). Rock
crystal skull. Explore: Highlights.
[45] Rincon (2008), Sax et al. (2008) Trustees of the British Museum. Re-
trieved 2008-04-22. Check date val-
[46] Kunz (1890, pp.285286), see description in Ch. XIV:
ues in: |date= (help)
Mexico & Central America
British Museum (n.d.b). Study of
[47] Quote reported by Agence France-Presse, see Rosemberg two large crystal skulls in the collec-
(2008). tions of the British Museum and the
Smithsonian Institution. Explore:
[48] Quote reported by Agence France-Presse, see Rosemberg Articles. Trustees of the British Mu-
(2008). See also Walsh (2008). seum. Retrieved 2008-04-22. Check
date values in: |date= (help)
[49] Calligaro et al. (2009, abstract)
British Museum (n.d.c). The crys-
tal skull. News and press releases:
[50] Edwards, Owen (May 30, 2008). The Smithsonians Crys-
Statements. Trustees of the British
tal Skull. Smithsonian Museum. Retrieved 24 April 2012.
Museum. Retrieved 2008-04-14.
[51] Various authors. The Crystal Skulls Skeptic magazine. Check date values in: |date= (help)
Vol. 14, No. 2. 2008. Page 89. Calligaro, Thomas; Yvan Coquinot;
Ina Reiche; Jacques Castaing; Joseph
[52] Claudel, Paul. The Satin Slipper. Trans. John O'Connor Salomon; Gerard Ferrand; Yves
and Paul Claudel. London: Sheed & Ward, 1931. Origi- Le Fur (March 2009). Dating
nally published as Le Soulier de Satin (Paris: Nouvelle Revue study of two rock crystal carv-
Franaise). ings by surface microtopography and
by ion beam analyses of hydro-
[53] See Nickell (2007, pp.6773); Smith (2005); Walsh (1997;
gen. Applied Physics A: Materi-
2008).
als Science & Processing. Berlin:
Springer Verlag. 94 (4): 871
[54] John Schriber (Executive Producer). Kevin Human, Erin
McGarry, Andrew Rothstein and Andrea Skipper (Produc- 878. doi:10.1007/s00339-008-5018-
ers). Jayme Roy (Director of Photography). Lester Holt 9. ISSN 0947-8396. OCLC
(Presenter) (May 2008). The Mystery of the Crystal Skulls 311109270.
(television program). New York: Peacock Productions Connor, Steve (2005-01-07). The
(NBC), in association with the Sci Fi Channel. Retrieved mystery of the British Museums crys-
2008-06-06. tal skull is solved. Its a fake. The
Independent. London: Independent
[55] Serpent of Light - Beyond 2012, ISBN 1-57863-401-6 News & Media. Retrieved 2008-04-
13.
[56] See discussion of the various claims put forward by Sams,
Kenneth Meadows, Harley Swift Deer Reagan and others Craddock, Paul (2009). Scientic
concerning crystal skulls, extraterrestrials, and Native Amer- Investigation of Copies, Fakes and
ican lore, in Jenkins (2004, pp.215218). Forgeries. Oxford, UK and Burling-
ton, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.
[57] Quotation from Jenkins (2004, pp.217218). ISBN 978-0-7506-4205-7. OCLC
127107601. Press. ISBN 0-19-516115-7. OCLC

Digby, Adrian (July 1936). Com- 54074085.
ments on the Morphological Compar- Jury, Louise (2005-05-24). Art
ison of Two Crystal Skulls. Man. market scandal: British Museum ex-
London: Royal Anthropological In- pert highlights growing problem of
stitute of Great Britain and Ireland. fake antiquities. The Independent.
36: 107109. doi:10.2307/2789342. London: Independent News & Me-
ISSN 0025-1496. JSTOR 2789342. dia. Retrieved 2008-04-13.
OCLC 42646610. Kelly, Jim (n.d.). A brief his-
Garvin, Richard (1973). The Crystal tory of SiC. Industrial Materials
Skull: The Story of the Mystery, Myth Group, University College London.
and Magic of the Mitchell-Hedges Retrieved 2008-05-23.
Crystal Skull Discovered in a Lost Kunz, George Frederick (1890).
Mayan City During a Search for At- Gems and precious stones of North
lantis. New York: Doubleday. ISBN America: A popular description
0-385-09456-6. OCLC 553587. of their occurrence, value, history,
Hammond, Norman (2008-04-28). archology, and of the collections in
Secrets of the crystal skulls are lost which they exist, also a chapter on
in the mists of forgery. The Times. pearls, and on remarkable foreign
London: News International. Re- gems owned in the United States.
trieved 2008-08-24. Illustrated with eight colored plates
Hewlett-Packard (magazine editorial and numerous minor engravings.
sta) (February 1971). History or New York: The Scientic Publishing
hokum? Santa Claras crystals lab Company. OCLC 3257032.
helps tackle the case of the hard- McCoy, Max (1995). Indiana Jones
headed Honduran.. (PDF online fac- and the Philosophers Stone. New
simile at HParchive). Measure (sta York: Bantam Books. ISBN 978-0-
magazine). Palo Alto, CA: Hewlett- 553-56196-8. OCLC 32417516.
Packard: 810. Retrieved 2008-04- McCoy, Max (1996). Indiana Jones
11. and the Dinosaur Eggs. New York:
Hidalgo, Pablo (2008-04-07). The Bantam Books. ISBN 978-0-553-
Lost Chronicles of Young Indiana 56193-7. OCLC 34306261.
Jones. StarWars.com. Archived McCoy, Max (1997). Indiana Jones
from the original on 2008-04-11. Re- and the Hollow Earth. New York:
trieved 2008-05-03. Bantam Books. ISBN 978-0-553-
Holmes, William H. (1886-02-19). 56195-1. OCLC 36380785.
The trade in spurious Mexican McCoy, Max (1999). Indiana Jones
antiquities. Science, new series. and the Secret of the Sphinx. New
Cambridge, MA: The Science Com- York: Bantam Books. ISBN 978-0-
pany, and Moses King. ns7 (159S): 553-56197-5. OCLC 40775168.
170172. doi:10.1126/science.ns- Mitchell-Hedges, F.A. (1954). Dan-
7.159S.170. ISSN 0036-8075. ger My Ally. London: Elek Books.
OCLC 213776464. PMID OCLC 2117472.
17787662. Morant, G.M. (July 1936). A Mor-
Hruby, Zachary (May 2008). phological Comparison of Two Crys-
Critical Notes on Indiana Jones and tal Skulls. Man. London: Royal
the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull"". Anthropological Institute of Great
Mesoweb Reports & News. Mesoweb. Britain and Ireland. 36: 105107.
Retrieved 2008-06-01. doi:10.2307/2789341. ISSN 0025-
Jenkins, Philip (2004). Dream Catch- 1496. JSTOR 2789341. OCLC
ers: How Mainstream America Dis- 42646610.
covered Native Spirituality. Oxford Nickell, Joe (2007). Adventures in
and New York: Oxford University Paranormal Investigation. Lexing-
ton: University Press of Kentucky. (eds.). Exhibiting Dilemmas: Issues

ISBN 978-0-8131-2467-4. OCLC of Representation at the Smithsonian.
137305722. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Insti-
Olivier, Guilhem (2003). Mockeries tution Press. ISBN 1-56098-690-5.
and Metamorphoses of an Aztec God: OCLC 34598037.
Tezcatlipoca, Lord of the Smok- Walsh, Jane MacLaren (Spring
ing Mirror. Michel Besson (trans.) 2005). What is Real? A New Look
(Translation of: Moqueries et mta- at PreColumbian Mesoamerican Col-
morphoses d'un dieu aztque (Paris lections (PDF online publication).
: Institut d'ethnologie, Muse de AnthroNotes: Museum of Natural
l'homme, 1997) ed.). Boulder: History Publication for Educators.
University Press of Colorado. ISBN Washington, DC: Smithsonian In-
0-87081-745-0. OCLC 52334747. stitution and the National Museum
Rincon, Paul (2008-05-22). Crystal of Natural History Anthropology
skulls 'are modern fakes". Sci- Outreach Oce. 26 (1): 17, 1719.
ence/Nature. BBC News online. Re- ISSN 1548-6680. OCLC 8029636.
trieved 2008-05-22. Walsh, Jane MacLaren (MayJune
Rosemberg, Claire (2008-04-18). 2008). Legend of the Crystal
Skullduggery, Indiana Jones? Mu- Skulls. Archaeology. New York:
seum says crystal skull not Aztec. Archaeological Institute of America.
AFP. Retrieved 2008-04-22. 61 (3): 3641. ISSN 0003-8113.
OCLC 1481828. Retrieved 2008-04-
Sax, Margaret; Jane M. Walsh; Ian
16.
C. Freestone; Andrew H. Rankin;
Nigel D. Meeks (October 2008).
The origin of two purportedly
pre-Columbian Mexican crystal 12.9 External links
skulls. Journal of Archaeolog-
ical Science. London: Elsevier Real Science monograph on examinations of both the
Science. 35 (10): 27512760. BM & BH skulls
doi:10.1016/j.jas.2008.05.007.
ISSN 1095-9238. OCLC 36982975. skepdic.com: crystalskull
Smith, Donald (2005). With a high- Mitchell-Hedges Ocial website Biography of Anna
tech microscope, scientist exposes Mitchell-Hedges and account of the discovery of the
hoax of 'ancient' crystal skulls. In- skull.
side Smithsonian Research. Washing-
ton, DC: Smithsonian Institution Of- The Magic of Crystal Skulls - Legend of the 13 - 10:10
ce of Public Aairs. 9 (Summer). Event roundtable discussion about crystal skulls in
OCLC 52905641. Retrieved 2008- connection with the October 910, 2010 Crystal Skull
04-14. Events in New York City.
Taube, Karl A. (1992). The iconog- The Crystal Skull of Doom Critical look at the
raphy of mirrors at Teotihuacan. In Mitchell Hedges Skull and other crystal skulls.
Janet Catherine Berlo (ed.). Art, Ide-
ology, and the City of Teotihuacan: A Ancient Mexico, Hollywood and the French Connec-
Symposium at Dumbarton Oaks, 8th tion
and 9th October 1988. Washington
DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Li- The Crystal Skull: Mystical, or Modern?" A skepti-
brary and Collection. pp. 169 cal look at the mystical claims for the various crystal
204. ISBN 0-88402-205-6. OCLC skulls, and a fact-based look at their true histories.
25547129.
Walsh, Jane MacLaren (1997).
Crystal skulls and other problems:
or, don't look it in the eye"". In Amy
Henderson and Adrienne L. Kaeppler
Chapter 13
Dendera light
if the djed were a backbone. The arms hold up the snake

within the lotus ower. The snakes coming from the lotus
symbolize fertility, linked to the annual Nile ood.[2]
13.1.2 Fringe view

In contrast to the mainstream interpretation, there is a fringe
hypothesis according to which the reliefs depict Ancient
Egyptian electrical technology, based on comparison to
similar modern devices (such as Geissler tubes, Crookes
tubes, and arc lamps).[3][4] J. N. Lockyer's passing ref-
erence to a colleagues humorous suggestion that electric
lamps would explain the absence of lampblack deposits in
the tombs has sometimes been forwarded as an argument
The Dendera light, showing the single representation on the left supporting this particular interpretation (another argument
wall of the right wing in one of the crypts being made is the use of a system of reective mirrors).[5]
Proponents of this interpretation have also used a text re-
The Dendera light is a supposed ancient Egyptian electri- ferring to high poles covered with copper plates to argue
cal lighting technology depicted on three stone reliefs (one this[6] but Dr. Bolko Stern has written in detail explaining
single and a double representation) in the Hathor temple at why the copper covered tops of poles (which were lower
the Dendera Temple complex located in Egypt. The sculp- than the associated pylons) do not relate to electricity or
ture became notable among fringe historians because of the lightning, pointing out that no evidence of anything used to
resemblance of the motifs to some modern electrical light- manipulate electricity had been found in Egypt and that this
ing systems. was a magical and not a technical installation.[7]
Mainstream Egyptologists take the view that it is a typical
set of symbolic images from Egyptian mythology.
13.2 See also
Anachronism
13.1 Interpretation
Egyptian mythology
13.1.1 Mainstream view Pseudoarcheology
The view of Egyptologists is that the relief is a mythological OOPart

depiction of a djed pillar and a lotus ower, spawning
a snake within, representing aspects of Egyptian mythol-
ogy.[1][2] The Djed pillar is a symbol of stability which is 13.3 References
also interpreted as the backbone of the god Osiris. In the
carvings the four horizontal lines forming the capital of the [1] Wolfgang Waitkus, Die Texte in den unteren Krypten des
djed are supplemented by human arms stretching out, as Hathortempels von Dendera: ihre Aussagen zur Funktion und
50
Bedeutung dieser Rume, Mainz 1997 ISBN 3-8053-2322-

0 (tr., The texts in the lower crypts of the Hathor temples of
Dendera: their statements for the function and meaning of
these areas)
[2] "Dendera Temple Crypt". iafrica.com.
[3] Childress, D. H. (2000). Technology of the gods: the in-

credible sciences of the ancients. Kempton, Ill: Adventures
Unlimited Press. ISBN 0932813739
[4] Electricity in ancient times. WUFOC and NRKONTAKT.
[5] Lockyer, J. Norman (1998) [1894]. The Dawn of Astron-

omy. Kessinger Publishing. pp. 1801. ISBN 1564591123.
[6] Bruno Kolbe, Francis ed Legge, Joseph Skellon, tr., "An

Introduction to Electricity". Kegan Paul, Trench, Trbner,
1908. 429 pages. Page 391. (cf., "[...] high poles covered
with copper plates and with gilded tops were erected 'to break
the stones coming from on high'. J. Dmichen, Baugeschichte
des Dendera-Tempels, Strassburg, 1877)
[7] Stern, Bolko (1998) [1896]. gyptische Kulturgeschichte.

Reprint-Verlag-Leipzig. pp. 106108. ISBN 978-
3826219085.
13.4 External links

The Dendera Reliefs, Catchpenny Mysteries.
Frank Drnenburg, Electric lights in Egypt?. 2004.
(ed. An analysis of how the Egyptians didn't have elec-
tricity).
Chapter 14
Dorchester Pot
The Dorchester Pot was a metal vase-like object that was body of this object was said to resemble zinc alloyed with
recovered in two pieces after an explosion used to break up silver in color. It reportedly exhibited oral designs on its
rock at Meeting House Hill, in Dorchester, Massachusetts side and a wreath or vine design around its lower part, which
in 1852. According to text reprinted from the Boston Tran- were both inlaid with silver.[1] The primary source[1] of in-
script, a local paper, in the June 5, 1852 Scientic Amer- formation about this object, provides neither any picture of
ican,[1] the two pieces were found, loose among debris nor age estimate for the Dorchester Pot.
thrown out by the explosion. Apparently, it was inferred
from the locations of the two pieces of this pot among the
explosion debris that this pot had been blasted from solid
puddingstone (conglomerate), which is part of the Roxbury
14.3 Fringe theories
Conglomerate, from about 15 feet below the surface of
Meeting House Hill. The story has been used by creation- The Dorchester Pot is often discussed as an Out-of-place
ists and fringe theorists as evidence that conventional mod- artifact by various popular books and articles about un-
els of geology or the length of the human presence on earth solved mysteries, alternative science, and dierent types of
are wrong. Mainstream commentators identify it as a Vic- creationism. As part of a short description, an image pur-
torian era candlestick or pipe holder. porting to be of the Dorchester Pot appears on page 46 of
the 1985 Readers Digest Association book Mysteries of the
Unexplained.[7] They do not provide any estimate of the age
of the Dorchester Pot. The source that they credit for their
14.1 Geological context photograph of the Dorchester Pot is Brad Steiger's Worlds
Before Our Own.[8]
The Roxbury Conglomerate, from which this pot is al-
The photograph is also used in the Falun Gong website
leged to have come, has been dated as having accumu-
PureInsight, which provides without any explanation an
lated between 570 and 593 million years ago and during
age of 100,000 years for this artifact.[9] Michael Cremo, a
the Ediacaran Period.[2][3] It accumulated at the bottom
well-known Hindu creationist, claims that the Dorchester
of a deep rift basin, which was lled with marine water,
Pot is evidence for the presence of artistic metal work-
within submarine fan and slope environments.[3][4][5] Meta-
ers in North America over 600 million years ago.[10] Some
morphism has signicantly altered the Roxbury Conglom-
Young Earth creationists regard the Dorchester Pot as hav-
erate to sub-greenschist facies and created within it a well-
ing been manufactured by an ancient civilization that pre-
developed and closely spaced slaty cleavage that is oriented
dated the Noachian Flood.
approximately perpendicular to bedding. Tectonism has
also attened, stretched, indented, and fractured the pebbles
and associated matrix of the Roxbury Conglomerate to the
point that it often has the appearance of ow structure.[5][6] 14.4 Mainstream views
Mainstream archaeologists argue that the Dorchester Pot is
14.2 The pot neither Ediacaran in age nor even from an ancient, lost civ-
ilization. They identify it as being a recognizable historic
The bell-shaped vessel was described as being about 4.5 artifact.
inches (11.5 cm) high, 6.5 inches (16.5 cm) in diameter at Archaeologists Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews and James
the base and 2.5 inches (6.4 cm) in diameter at the top. The Doeser, whose website Bad Archaeology examines fringe
52
14.4. MAINSTREAM VIEWS 53
A photograph said to depict the Dorchester Pot.
Scientic American article[1] about Dorchester pot. Note the tongue-

in-cheek reference to "Tubal Cain", who was said to be the rst
blacksmith (Genesis 4:19-24)
archaeology, state that it is dicult to understand why

anyone might take this report seriously and also identies
the object as clearly a candlestick of obviously Victorian 19th-century pipe holder from India, Shivaji Maharaj Vastu San-
style... why would anyone in 1852 believe that it was more grahalaya
than a few years old?"[11]
Writing in 1964,[12] the Italian debunker Biagio Cata-
lano argues that the vase is actually almost identical, as
in both shape and decorations, to an Indian pipe-holder
stored at Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu Sangrahalaya of Mumbai.
54 CHAPTER 14. DORCHESTER POT
14.5 References 14.6 Other Dorchester Pot Refer-

ences
[1] Anonymous, 1852, A Relic of a By-Gone Age. Scientic
American. v. 7, no. 38, p. 298 (June 5, 1852)
Fort, Charles H. (1919) The Book of the Damned.
New York, New York, Boni and Liveright 228 p.
[2] Thompson, M.D., A.M. Grunow, and J. Ramezum, 2007,
Late Neoproterozoic paleogeography of the Southeastern New ISBN 1-58509-278-9 Mentioned on page 128 of
England Avalon Zone: Insights from U-Pb geochronology Chapter IX and The Book of the Damned by Charles
and paleomagnetism. Geological Society of America Bul- Fort
letin. 119(5/6):681-696.
St Rain, Tedd, 2003. Mystery Of America: Enigmatic
[3] Rehmer, J., 1981, Squantum tilloid Member of the Rox- Mysteries And Anomalous Artifacts Of North America
bury Conglomerate of Boston, Massachusetts. in M.J. Ham- - A Connection To The Ancient Past. Lost Arts Media.
brey and W.B. Harland, eds, pp. 756-759, Earths Pre- PDF (17.6 mb) ISBN 1-59016-999-9
Pleistocene Glacial Record. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, United Kingdom.
[4] Socci, A.D., 1990, Stratigraphic implications of facies within

the Boston Basin. in A.D. Socci, J.W. Skehan, and G.W.
Smith, eds, pp. 55-74, Geology of the Composite Avalon
Terrane of Southern New England. Special Paper no. 245.
Geological Society of America, Boulder, Colorado
[5] Carto, S.L., and N. Eyles (2011) Chapter 43 The Squantum

Member of the Boston Basin, Massachusetts, USA In: E. Ar-
naud, G.P. Halverson, and G. Shields-Zhou, eds. pp. 475-
480, The Geological Record of Neoproterozoic Glaciations.
Memoirs no. 36. Geological Society, London, England.
[6] Manseld, G. R., 1906, The Origin and Structure of the Rox-
bury Conglomerate. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative
Zoology at Harvard College. no. XLIX, p. 180
[7] Marshall, W., M. Dvais, V. Mollman, and G. Zappler (1985)

Mysteries of the Unexplained. Pleasantville, New York,
Readers Digest Association, Inc. 320 pp. ISBN 978-0-
89577-146-9
[8] Steiger, B. (1979) Worlds Before Our Own. New York,

New York, Berkley Publishing Group. 236 p. ISBN 978-
1-933665-19-1
[9] PureInsight, 2006. Zhengjian Book Series: Removing the

Veil from Prehistoric Civilizations -- Chapter 3: Prehistoric
Smelting Technologies and Mining Activities Translated from
( ):
[10] Cremo, M.A., and R.L. Thompson (1998) Forbidden Arche-

ology: The Hidden History of the Human Race. Badger, Cal-
ifornia, Bhaktivedanta Book Publishing. 914 p. ISBN 978-
0-89213-294-2
[11] Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews (19 August 2007). Metallic

vase from Dorchester, Massachusetts. Bad Archaeology.
Retrieved 16 December 2016.
[12] Catalano, B. (1964) Arte Indiana Arnoldo Mondadori Edi-

tore, K. Bharatha Iyer, Italy, g 81, 142 p.
Chapter 15
Eiserner Mann
Iron Man surroundings.
Der Eiserne Mann (The Iron Man) is an old iron pillar par-
tially buried in the ground in the German national forest of
Kottenforst-Ville Nature Park, about two kilometers north-
east of the village Dnstekoven. It is a roughly rectangular
metal bar with about 1.47 m above ground and approxi-
mately 2.7 m below ground. The pillar is currently located
at a meeting of trails which were built in the early 18th cen-
tury through the formerly pathless forest area, but it is be- Iron Man closeup.
lieved to have stood in another nearby location before that
time.
15.1 Sign content
The pillar is a unique oddity in Central Europe, and is al-
leged to be an out-of-place artifact. It was rst mentioned
The pillar is marked with a sign reading, in translation:
in a 17th-century document, where it was used as a vil-
lage boundary marker. There are some old aqueducts in
the vicinity along with an ancient stone walkway. The Iron Man is a piece of a poured pig
iron ingot. It is approximately 2.18 meters long
A metallurgical investigation in the 1970s showed that the and about 1 meter of its T-shaped end is in the
pillar is made of pig iron. It was poured into an earthen ground. This was apparently intended as an at-
[1]
trench, consistent with medieval methods of ironworking. tachment point for transport and processing and
After the long exposure to the weather, the iron man shows has until now, as an anchoring point, prevented
signs of weathering but there is remarkably little trace of any attempt at removing the ingot by force. Its
rust. It is located at 50.70757 N by 6.96105 E at an ele- porous surface and the uneven cross-section over
vation of approximately 159 m. its whole length are caused by the sandbed pour-
55
56 CHAPTER 15. EISERNER MANN
ing technique. The technique and the form point

to a date of manufacture in the late Middle Ages.
Origin and original purpose of the Iron Man
have not been explained satisfactorily. It has al-
ways been surrounded by numerous tales and leg-
ends as well as pertinent and also obscure spec-
ulation. It was rst mentioned in a document in
1625 as part of the border line between Alfter
and Heimerzheim along the Roman aqueduct.
According to a later source, it still fullled this
function in 1717. Its former position can not
be located accurately any more. It was not until
1727, under Prince Elector Clemens that the Iron
Man was placed in its present position. It served
as a marker of the main planning line while ex-
panding the system of paths for hunting between
Augustsburg Palace in Brhl and Herzogsfreude
Palace in Rttgen. Today it is a popular meeting
point among hikers.
Heimat- und Verschnerungsverein
Buschhoven e. V. Quelle: K. Grewe, Der
Eiserne Mann im Kottenforst, Cologne, 1978
15.2 References
[1] Grewe, Klaus. Der Eiserne Mann im Kottenforst. Rheinland-
verlag, Cologne, 1978.
Coordinates: 504227N 65739E / 50.70750N

6.96083E
Chapter 16
Eltanin Antenna
16.1 History
The 1,850 ton displacement Eltanin was originally launched
in 1957, and served with the US Navy as a cargo-carrying
icebreaker. In 1962 she was reclassied as an Oceano-
graphic Research Ship and became the worlds rst dedi-
cated Antarctic research vessel, a role which she lled until
1975.
On 29 August 1964, while engaged in taking sample cores
and photographing the seabed west of Cape Horn, the
Eltanin took the photograph reproduced in this article, at
position 59:07'S 105:03'W, in a depth of 3,904 metres.
The rst public mention of the unusual subject of the photo-
graph was a news item which appeared in the New Zealand
Herald on 5 December 1964, under the heading Puzzle
Picture From Sea Bed.
In 1968, author Brad Steiger wrote an article for Saga mag-
azine, in which he claimed that the Eltanin had in fact pho-
tographed an astonishing piece of machinery... very much
like the cross between a TV antenna and a telemetry an-
tenna.
USNS Eltanin photo (1964)

16.2 Identication as sponge
In 2003 Tom DeMary, a researcher in underwater acoustics,
contacted oceanographer A. F. Amos, who had been aboard
The Eltanin Antenna is an object photographed on the USNS Eltanin in the 1960s, and in turn Amos referred
the sea oor by the Antarctic oceanographic research ship DeMary to the 1971 book The Face of the Deep by Bruce
USNS Eltanin in 1964, while photographing the sea bottom C. Heezen and Charles D. Hollister. Hollister had already
west of Cape Horn. identied the mysterious object as Cladorhiza concrescens,
Due to its regular antenna-like structure and upright posi- a carnivorous sponge. Heezen and Hollisters book repro-
tion on the seaoor at a depth of 3,904 metres, some propo- duces the photograph taken by the USNS Eltanin and a re-
nents of fringe and UFO-related theories including Bruce drawn version of a drawing by Alexander Agassiz which
Cathie have suggested that it might be an extraterrestrial originally appeared in his 1888 Three Cruises of the Blake.
artifact.[1] Other authorities have suggested that the object Hollister and Heezen describe Cladorhiza concrescens as a
photographed by the Eltanin was an unusual carnivorous sponge which somewhat resembles a space-age microwave
sponge, Chondrocladia concrescens (formerly Cladorhiza antenna,[2] while Agassiz described the sponges as having
concrescens). a long stem ending in ramifying roots, sunk deeply into
57
58 CHAPTER 16. ELTANIN ANTENNA
16.3.1 Further reading

Gage, John G.; Tyler, Paul A. (1993). Deep-sea bi-
ology: a natural history of organisms at the deep-sea
oor. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press. ISBN 978-0-521-33665-9.
Hooper, J.N.A.; van Soest, R.W.M., eds. (2002). Sys-

tema Porifera: a guide to the classication of Sponges.
New York, New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum
Publishers. ISBN 0-306-47260-0.
1888 illustration of Cladorhiza concrescens by Agassiz
the mud. The stem has nodes with four to six club-like ap-
pendages. They evidently cover like bushes extensive tracts
of the bottom.[3]
16.3 References
[1] Brookesmith, Peter. Eltanin Enigma. Fortean Times (May
2004). Archived from the original on 2007-10-19.
[2] Heezen, Bruce C.; Hollister, Charles D. (1971). The Face

of the Deep. Oxford University Press. p. 35. ISBN 0-19-
501277-1.
[3] Agassiz, Alexander (1888). Three cruises of the United States

Coast and Geodetic Survey Steamer Blake. Houghton Mif-
in. p. 177.
Chapter 17
Esperanza Stone
The Esperanza Stone was a large (8-feet long) inscribed 17.3 Legend
stone found in the valley of the Yaqui, Mexico. It was dis-
covered and excavated in 1909 by Major F. R. Burnham There was a legend that the stone had fallen down out of
and Charles Frederick Holder. heaven in times past, and that the carving was by human
hands.[2]
17.4 Meaning of the symbols

Burnham believed that the symbols were Mayan. Others
class them as Petroglyphs.[3]
17.5 References
[1] Fort, Charles Hoy (1919). chapter 11. The Book of
the Damned. p. 145. citing Holder, Charles F. (Sep 10,
1910). The Esperanza Stone. Scientic American: 196.
ISSN 0036-8733. (complete article online; retrieved 03 Jan.
2017)
Esperanza Stone. Major F. R. Burnham (left), Holder (right),
Yaqui Delta, Sonora, Mexico, 1909. [2] Lippard, Jim. Review of The New Inquisition. Retrieved
25 January 2011. Many years ago a strange stone resembling
a meteorite fell into the valley of the Yaqui, Mexico, and the
sensational story went from one end to the other of the coun-
try that a stone bearing human inscriptions had descended to
17.1 Discovery earth. Hundreds visited the place, natives made a pilgrimage
to it from all over Sonora, and the stone, called the Esper-
anza, became famous in its way, and many of the inhabitants
The stone was discovered during an expedition in the Yaqui believe that it is a message from heaven, and demand that it
valley. be translated.
[3] Neas, Linda M. Rhinehart (Jan 13, 2011). About the Na-
tive American Indian Pictorial Language. Heather Marie
Kosur. Retrieved 25 January 2011.
17.2 Description
The stone was a brown, igneous rock, its longest axis about
eight feet, and on the eastern face, which had an angle of
about forty-ve degrees, was the deep-cut inscription.[1]
Symbols on the stone include a volute and a swastika, also
found on other stones in Mexico.
59
Chapter 18
Geofact
A geofact (a portmanteau of geology and artifact) is a There are measurements Schulz created to distinguish a ge-
natural stone formation that is dicult to distinguish from ofact such as blow angles from a sandstone or quartzite rock
a man-made artifact. Geofacts could be uvially reworked with a limit between 45 and 90 degrees, and if the abrasions
and be misinterpreted as an artifact, especially when com- were rounded these are considered geofacts.[3]
pared to paleolithic artifacts.[1] Artifacts are interpreted as geofacts so often that they have
Some of the proposed criteria for distinguishing geofacts entire articles lled with correcting excavations. Archeo-
from artifacts for paelelithic specimens resembling debitage logical geologist Paul V. Henrich (2002) corrects journalist
have been subjected to evaluation by experimental and ac- Graham Hancock in article, Artifacts or Geofacts? Alter-
tualistic studies. If the artifact has two or more of the fol- native Interpretations of Items from the Gulf of Cambay
lowing, then the artifact is more than likely to be a geofact. of his alleged artifacts found in the Gulf of Cambay, In-
Distinguishing geofacts from lithic debitage, through exper- dia is geofacts. Henrich illustrates in pictures that these
iments and comparisons:[2] designed artifacts were a combination of cement, layered
coarse and ne laminated sand stacked tightly together from
Possible examples include several purported prominent an- lamented lake silts with enough porosity appearing rigid to
cient artifacts, such as the Venus of Berekhat Ram and the look like a human design. Other corrections Henrich made
Venus of Tan-Tan. These are thought by many in the ar- were Hancocks Cambay pendants large at rock objects
chaeological community to be geofacts. A site which shows with a hole in between assumed as jewelry but are naturally
an abundance of what are likely geofacts is the Gulf of Cam- formed holes created by marine organisms. Henrich claims
bay. during excavations the team should have a geologist on site
Geofacts versus artifacts or as British scientists refer arte- because they are experts in rock formations to help distin-
facts are just one of the battles archaeologists go through guish between an artifact and geofact.[4]
while excavating a site. In the article, Artefact-Geofact Artifacts mixed with human remains can certainly contain
Analysis of The Lithic Material from The Susiluola Cave, mixtures of Geofacts. In the article, The alleged Early Pa-
by Hans-Peter Schulz (2007) whom explained Geofacts are leolithic artefacts are in reality geofacts: a revision of the
multi-shaped rocks that can be found while archaeologists site of Konczyce Weilkie 4 in the Moravian Gate, South
are trying to nd true artifacts during past glacial peri- Poland, Winiewski et. all. (2014), explain when geofacts
ods. Glacial periods such as the Eemian interglacial and the are mixed with artifacts in a uvial gravel pit it becomes
Middle Weichselian glaciation located in the northern parts very dicult to distinguish between the two. Another issue
of the world melted and began to move rocks from their Wisniewski questioned is if the site was livable during the
original areas while they scraped everything around them. Paleolithic period because artifacts are mobile and there-
The rock movement created sometimes weapon like spears fore would not be found in situ however, rocks that are na-
from smaller rocks and appear as artifacts but instead are tive to the area would usually be a geofact. A helpful hint to
just a product of glacial melting. Another element Schulz decide if an item is an artifact or geofact is if there are multi-
explained is the mixing of natural and salt water during ple rocks that have similar edges and shapes and this type of
the glaciations, which changed sediment locations within rock is in its natural environment then it is most likely a geo-
rocks such as the Susiluola cave located in Finland. Once fact. An argument the previous excavators claimed was that
the ice melted the sediment and ice created some articial some rocks were found over 140 meters from their original
markings on pebble sized rocks. Some elements that could environment meaning they could have been artifacts moved
morph rock shapes in caves include sandstone, siltstone and by humans. However this was quickly refuted because evi-
quartzite creating a kinetic process of shaping the rocks. dence in glacial moraines and uvial-glacial deposits caused
60
18.2. SEE ALSO 61
many rocks to move a similar distance from their original

environment.[5] Clearly distinguishing geofacts from arti-
facts is not a simple task however, if excavators stick with
the proper requirements and assumptions there will be far
less misinterpretations in the future.
18.1 References
[1] Demeter, F; Patole; Edoumba, E; Duringer, P; Bacon, AM;
Sytha, P; Bano, M; Laychour, V; Cheangleng, M; Sari, V
(2010). Reinterpretation of an archaeological pebble cul-
ture from the Middle Mekong River Valley, Cambodia.
Geoarchaeology. 25 (1).
[2] Comparative methods for distinguishing akes from ge-

ofacts: a case study from the Wenas Creek Mammoth
site. Journal of Archaeological Science. 52: 308320.
doi:10.1016/j.jas.2014.09.006.
[3] Schulz, P. H. (2007, December 20). Artefact-Geofact Anal-

ysis of The Lithic Material from The Susiluola Cave. www.
sarks.fi/fa, 64-75. Retrieved from http://www.sarks.fi/fa/
PDF/FA24_64.pdf
[4] Henrich, V. P. (2002, May 8). Artifacts or Geofacts? Al-

ternative Interpretations of Items from the Gulf of Cambay.
Intersurf.com, 1-16. Retrieved from http://www.intersurf.
com/~{}chalcedony/geofact.html
[5] Winiewski, A.; Badura, J.; Salamon, T.; Lewandowski, J.

(2014). The alleged early palaeolithic artefacts are in real-
ity geofacts: A revision of the site of koczyce wielkie 4 in
the moravian gate, south poland. Journal of Archaeological
Science. 52: 189203. doi:10.1016/j.jas.2014.07.022.
Oxford University Archaeological Society glossary
Heinrich, Paul V. (May 8, 2002). Artifacts or Ge-

ofacts? Alternative Interpretations of Items from the
Gulf of Cambay.. Retrieved 2007-06-09.
18.2 See also

Klerksdorp spheres
Chapter 19
Oklahoma runestones
A number of runestones have been found in Oklahoma. All a Norse presence, nothing similar has been found anywhere
of them are likely of modern origin, with some of them near Heavener or even in the American Midwest. He sug-
possibly dating to the 19th century "Viking revival" or beinggests that It is unlikely that the Norse would get signi-
produced by 19th-century Scandinavian settlers. cantly more fastidious about leaving any evidence behind
[2]
The oldest nd is the Heavener Runestone, rst docu- of their presence in Oklahoma.
mented in 1923. It is the most credible candidate as being Archaeologist Lyle Tompsen in a 2007 Masters Thesis for
of medieval date, but it is most likely a 19th-century arti- the University of Leicester (published in ESOP 29 2011:5-
fact made by a Scandinavian immigrant (possibly a Swede 43) examined the runestone and noted:
working at the local train depot). Two other Heavener
Runestones are most likely not runic at all but exhibit in- 1. There is no cultural evidence of Vikings in or near the
cisions of Native American origin. Three other runestones, region.
found in Poteau, Shawnee and Pawnee, are of modern date.
2. No Old Norse approach to translation ts this stone.
3. The stones most likely translation is 'Gnome Dal' (Val-

ley of the Gnomes).
4. Scandinavian presence in the nearby town of Heavener

is early and the likeliest source of the carving of the
stone.
the Heavener runestone 5. Other purported rune stones in the region are modern
creations, or misinterpreted Native American rock art.
19.1 Heavener Runestone Barring any new evidence, the stone is best considered a
modern creation.[3]
The Heavener Runestone is located in Heavener Runestone Henrik Williams, professor in Nordic languages at
Park in Le Flore County, Oklahoma, near Heavener, Okla- University of Uppsala, visited Oklahoma in 2015 as part
homa. of a tour sponsored by the American Association for Runic
[1] Studies in collaboration with Uppsala University and the
The runes on the stone are . Most of these American Friends of Uppsala University. In a speech to
characters belong to the Elder Futhark , but the nal L is the Poteau Chamber of Commerce he said that the Heav-
reversed compared with the last A, and the second char- ener stone Is probably in the top 20 Ive seen in the world,
acter is a short-twig A from the Younger Futhark. The just for the sheer size and impressive nature of it. He said
transcription is then gaomedal, but is generally thought that that it was probably 19th century with a 20% probability
the intention is that the second character should be an el- of it being 10th or 11th century. All words have endings,
der futhark N (also reversed). The inscription then reads back 1,000 and 500 years ago, and that is one thing we nd
gnomedal (either gnome valley, or a personal name G. disturbing, Williams said of the nonconforming ending on
Nomedal). the Heavener Runestone. None of the American inscrip-
Archaeologist Ken Feder notes that unlike the situation in tions ever found have any kind of layout or ornamentation.
eastern Canada where evidence has been found that proves Thats another thing that doesnt really t the pattern. He
62
19.4. REFERENCES 63
also noted that There are no Vikings or earlier inscriptions Professor Don G Wycko. an archaeologist at the Univer-
on Iceland or Greenland, so its a big jump from Sweden to sity of Oklahoma, examined the Shawnee stone and noted
Heavener.[4] that it is a soft red Permian sandstone, writing that the in-
In 1991, Carl Albert State College in nearby Poteau scription is... remarkably fresh and certainly not as worn
changed its mascot to a Viking in the stones honor. or weathered as the stones natural surface. The Survey
sta has viewed other exposures of this Permian sandstone
which have carved dates as late as 1957 that are more worn
and weathered...[7] Both the Shawnee and Pawnee rune-
19.2 Poteau Stone stones are products of the modern period. The inscription
reads either mldok or midok in standard Elder Futhark let-
The Poteau stone was found by schoolboys in 1967 near tering.
Poteau in Le Flore County, Oklahoma.
Tompsen also examined this stone, and writes that it is
carved into sandstone and is 15 inches long and shows 19.4 References
little weathering. They read and Thompsen
writes This stone consists of a mixture of letters and [1] The Heavener Runestone.
alphabets from dierent times. He transcribes these as [2] Kenneth L. Feder, Encyclopedia of Dubious Archaeology:
GLOIEA(?)(?). From Atlantis To The Walam Olum, page 137 (Greenwood,
Of the eight letters, ve are Elder Futhark, one Younger 2010). ISBN 978-0-313-37919-2
Futhark. The other two he calls spurious. He writes: " [3] Tompsen, Lyle. An Archaeologist Looks at the Okla-
By excluding the last two letters as spurious, ve are on the homa Runestones ESOP 29, 2011: 5-43 | Lyle Tompsen.
Heavener stone itself. The only one left is a straight line. To Academia.edu. Retrieved 2013-03-27.
the authors eyes, the Poteau Stone is a copy of the Heavener [4] Lovett, John (May 3, 2015). Swedish Runologist Studies
stone, with the addition of three spurious runic symbols as Heavener Runestone 'For Truth'". Times Record. Retrieved
script-ination.[3] 16 January 2016.
Swedish Professor Henrik Williams believes that the in- [5] Wallace, Josh (May 4, 2015). Oklahoma runestone is im-
scription is modern, with the stone and toolmarks not as pressive but not from Vikings, Swedish scholar says. New-
weathered as would be expected if it were from the Viking sOK. Retrieved 16 January 2016.
period.[5]
[6] Wilson, Steve (1989). Oklahoma Treasures and Treasure
Tales. University of Oklahoma Press. p. 33. ISBN 0-8061-
2174-2.
19.3 Shawnee and Pawnee Stones [7] Wycko, Don G, No Stones Unturned:Differing Views of
Oklahomas Runestones in Popular Archaeology, 2:16-31,
no 12, 1973, reprinted in Ancient Man: A Handbook of Puz-
zling Artifacts, compiled by William R. Corliss, The Source-
book Project, 1978, ISBN 0-915554-03-8
Lyle Tompsen, An Archaeologist Examines The Okla-

homa Rune Stones, Epigraphic Society Occasional Pa-
pers (ESOP) 29:2011.
Nielson, Richard, The Runestones of Oklahoma,
Epigraphic Society Occasional Publications (ESOP),
16:1987.
19.5 See also

the Shawnee runestone Kensington Runestone
The Shawnee stone was found in 1969 by three children in Vrendrye Runestone
Shawnee, Oklahoma, one mile from the North Canadian Spirit Pond runestones
River, which is a tributary of the Arkansas River.[6]
Chapter 20
Helicopter hieroglyphs
20.2 External links

Temples of Abydos 360-degree view
Newspaper article with images
Coordinates: 261105N 315508E / 26.1847N

31.9190E
The hieroglyphs in Temple of Seti I.
Helicopter hieroglyphs refer to an Egyptian hieroglyph

carving from the Temple of Seti I at Abydos.
The helicopter image is the result of carved stone being
re-used over time. The initial carving was made during the
reign of Seti I and translates to He who repulses the nine
[enemies of Egypt]". This carving was later lled in with
plaster and re-carved during the reign of Ramesses II with
the title He who protects Egypt and overthrows the foreign
countries. Over time, the plaster has eroded away, leaving
both inscriptions partially visible and creating a palimpsest-
like eect of overlapping hieroglyphs.[1][2]
In paleocontact hypothesis circles[3] the hieroglyphics have
been interpreted as an out-of-place artifact depicting a
helicopter as well as other examples of modern technology.
This claim is dismissed by Egyptologists who highlight this
pareidolia is partly based on widely distributed retouched
images that removed key details from the actual carvings.
20.1 References
[1] The Abydos temple helicopter"". Archived from the orig-
inal on 28 July 2005.
[2] Helicopter Hieroglyphs Explained. raincool.blogspot.nl.
[3] Darling, David. paleocontact hypothesis. The Encyclope-

dia of Science. Retrieved 20 January 2013.
64
Chapter 21
Hidden character stone
Coordinates: 254955N 1071923E / 25.831858N ing made by humans.[1] Other researchers included Li Feng-
107.323023E lin ( ) and Gu Jing-yi ( ).[7]
Hidden character stone ( / ) is a stone located Li Ting-dong further commented about the stones contri-
in a scenic spot area in Zhangbu village ( ), Pingtang bution to science, and that there is nothing like it. Liu Bao-
County, Qiannan Buyei and Miao Autonomous Prefec- jun further support additional research to be done and was
ture, Guizhou, Peoples Republic of China. The stone interested in the natural formation of the characters on the
displays patterns on its surface that have been interpreted stone.[8] Each character on the stone is about one square
as Simplied Chinese characters and Traditional Chinese shaku, which is about 1 square foot.[3]
characters, and have been read as "Communist Party of
China" ( ), or alternatively as Communist Party of
China perish ( ).[1]
21.3 Description
21.3.1 Five-character version

21.1 Area
The ve-character version suggests the characters on the
Hidden character stone is a main attraction along with stone said Communist Party of China ( ). This is
( ) that is part of the Qiannan Pingtang National Geo- the version publicly accepted in the PRC. Also when re-
logical park ( ).[2] The park has an area of about ferring to this version, the stone has been called ( ),
[2]
201.6 square kilometers. The stone is in a narrow gap be- literally save star stone. This name comes from people
tween two clis, wide enough to t just two people.[1] who are passionate in supporting and admire the communist
party.[4][9] The story of how the stone was discovered usu-
ally follows this version.[3] Zhang Dahua ( ) of Zhangbu
21.2 History village once publicly gave an explanation of how the name
save star stone was created.[7]
In June 2002, the Duyun international photography expo-
sition ( ) recommended an area in Zhangbu as 21.3.2 Six-character version
a photo spot.[3] The stone was discovered during cleanup
after the expo. The area has been isolated, untouched by The six-character version suggests the characters on
humans for a long time.[1] The person cleaning the area the stone said Communist Party of China perish
was sta member Wang Guo-fu ( ), who discovered the ( ).[1] There has been criticism that the sixth and
characters written on the stone.[4] last character perish ( ) has been purposely neglected to
From December 58, 2003 a Chinese scientic inspection turn a Perish communist stone ( ) into a save star
group was formed to investigate the stone with about 15 stone.[10] This is not a version accepted in the PRC, hence
scientists.[1] Some of the notables include Li Ting-dong when mainland media reports it, it has to hide the perish
( ) from Chinese academy of Sciences, Liu Bao-jun character.[5] Often when pictures are shown with the stone
( ) from Chinese academy of Sciences and Li Feng-lin having six characters, the description still refers to it by the
( ) from China University of Geosciences.[5] The stone ve-character version.[3] In Chinese text the character per-
was analyzed to be about 270 million years old from the ish ( ) is often used in association with the perish of a state
Permian period.[6] There are no traces of the characters be- like "Chu perish ( ), "Wei perish ( ).[11]
65
66 CHAPTER 21. HIDDEN CHARACTER STONE
21.3.3 Traditional and Simplied chinese [5] " - : ! ( )". Dong-

taiwang.com. Retrieved 2011-06-27.
The characters on the stone are a mix of Traditional Chinese
[6] 2.7 _ _ ". China.com.cn. 2008-02-
characters and Simplied Chinese characters. The rst and
13. Retrieved 2011-06-27.
third character ( , ) has no dierence. The second char-
acter country ( ) and fourth character produce ( ) is in [7] ATV Chinas mystery les ( ) episode on save star
the traditional form. The fth character, party ( ) is in stone
the simplied form.[12] The sixth character perish ( ) has
[8] http://www.ptjp.gov.cn/gzpt/wh/2010/56/10_5_6_10_28_
no dierence. Some have analyzed all the odd characters
12_65BE2_2.html
as simplied, while the even characters are traditional.[7]
[9] "" " - ". News.sohu.com. Re-
On the stone: trieved 2011-06-27.
Traditional Chinese: [10] : . "" " " " ( )". Renminbao.com. Re-
trieved 2011-06-27.
Simplied Chinese:
[11] / . [2002] (2002) Chinese civilization in a new light
#3 . Publishing Company. ISBN 962-07-
5311-9. Book end time line.
21.3.4 Analysis
[12] " " "( )_ _ ". News.sina.com.cn. 2005-
The origin of the characters remain a subject of dispute.[13] 03-10. Retrieved 2011-06-27.
There were some early speculations that the characters were
put there by the Peoples Liberation Army, but according to [13] Mao, Jianquan (2012). " ". . 6: 25.
[7]
the path of the Long March, they never went to Pingtang. [14] -
The characters also read left to right, which was not prac-
ticed at the time. The inclusion of a Simplied character be- [15] http://www.ptjp.gov.cn/gzpt/wh/2010/510/10_5_10_11_
fore the CPC did any simplications also ruled them out.[7] 37_2_76G39.html
There were also some skeptics who suspected the village
was creating a fraud to build their tourism industry at the
time.[7] Others think the Hidden character stone was made
in the Cultural Revolution.[14]
21.4 Cultural reference

The hidden character stone has appeared as a topic on a
number of shows such as CCTV's Approaching science
( ) and Hong Kong ATV show Chinas mystery les
( ).[15] Both refer to the ve-character version.
21.5 References
[1] Mysterious Two-Hundred Million-Year-Old Hidden
Stone Bears the Words: Chinese Communist Party
Collapses Page 28. S8int.com. Retrieved 2011-06-27.
[2] " - ". Life.chinatimes.com. 2011-06-

02. Retrieved 2011-06-27.
[3] " ( )( )- ". News.sohu.com. 2007-04-

02. Retrieved 2011-06-27.
[4] 2.7 " " ( )".

News.xinhuanet.com. 2003-12-08. Retrieved 2011-
06-27.
Chapter 22
Ica stones
directly incised, others by removing the background, leav-

ing the image in relief. The images vary from simple pic-
tures on one side of a pebble, up to designs of great com-
plexity. Some of the designs are in styles which can be rec-
ognized as belonging to the Paracas, Nazca, Tiwanaku, Ica
or Inca cultures.[1]
Some of the images are of owers, sh, or living animals of
various sorts.[1] Others appear to depict scenes[2][3] which
would be anachronistic in pre-Columbian art, such as di-
nosaurs, advanced medical works and maps.[4]
22.2 Background
An Ica stone allegedly depicting dinosaurs.
Archaeological remains show evidence of Peruvian cultures
The Ica stones are a collection of andesite stones found in going back for several thousand years. At some later stages,
Ica Province, Peru that bear a variety of diagrams. Some the whole of modern Peru was united into a single politi-
of them supposedly have depictions of dinosaurs, and what cal and cultural unit, culminating in the Inca Empire, fol-
is alleged to be advanced technology. These are recognised lowed by the Spanish conquest. At other stages, areas such
as modern curiosities or hoaxes. as the Ica Valley, a habitable region separated from others
by desert, developed a distinctive culture of its own.[5]
From the 1960s Javier Cabrera Darquea collected and pop-
ularized the stones, obtaining many of them from a farmer Excavations in Ica Province were carried out in the late
named Basilio Uschuya. Uschuya, after claiming them to nineteenth and early twentieth centuries by scholars such
be real ancient artifacts, admitted to creating the carvings as Max Uhle, Julio C. Tello, Alfred L. Kroeber, William
he had sold and said he produced a patina by baking the Duncan Strong and John Howland Rowe. None of them
stone in cow dung. reported the discovery of carved andesite stones. Never-
theless, carved stones which had been looted by huaqueros,
grave robbers, began to be oered for sale to tourists and
amateur collectors.[1]
22.1 Description
One of these collectors was Santiago Agurto Calvo, an ar-
chitect by profession, who was Rector of the National Uni-
The stones are composed of andesite. They vary in size versity of Engineering in Lima. He organised searches in
from 3x2.5x1.5 cm to 40 cm.[1] As a result of weather- ancient cemeteries, and in August 1966 found such a stone
ing, they have developed a thin patina. It consists of a in the Toma Luz sector, Callango district, in Ica Valley. The
weathering rind in which weathering has turned some of context corresponded to the Tiwanaku culture. He reported
the feldspar into clay, resulting in a softer material, rated 3 his discovery to the Regional Museum in Ica city, and
to 4 on the Mohs scale of mineral hardness, which can be was accompanied on further expeditions by its curator, the
scratched.[1] archaeologist Alejandro Pezzia Assereto.[1] In September
They are shallowly engraved with a variety of images, some 1966 in Uhle Hill cemetery, De la Banda sector, Ocucaje
67
68 CHAPTER 22. ICA STONES
District, they found, for the rst time, an engraved stone man, humans from another planet, and that Through the
with certain provenance in a tomb of the Paracas culture. transplantation of cognitive codes to highly intelligent pri-
This stone was a fairly at and irregular in shape, approx- mates, the men from outer space created new men on earth.
[8]
imately 7 x 6 x 2 cm in size. On it was carved a design The Ica stones achieved greater popular interest when
which might be abstract, or could be taken as a ower with Cabrera abandoned his medical career and opened a mu-
eight petals.[1] Agurto published the discovery in a Lima seum to feature several thousand of the stones in 1996.[2]
newspaper.[6] In 1973, during an interview with Erich von Dniken,
Pezzia continued to search. In the San Evaristo cemetery Uschuya stated he had faked the stones that he had sold.[3]
in Toma Luz, he found a carved stone of similar size to the In 1975 Uschuya and another farmer named Irma Gutierrez
previous one, with a realistic image of a sh. The context de Aparcana conrmed that they had forged the stones they
dated the tomb to the Middle Horizon (600-1000 A.D.). In gave to Cabrera by copying the images from comic books,
a grave not far away in the same cemetery, he found a stone text books and magazines.[2] Later, Uschuya recanted the
with the fairly realistic design of a llama, in a context typical forging story during an interview with a German journalist,
of the Ica culture. In 1968, Pezzia published his ndings, saying that he had claimed they were a hoax to avoid impris-
including drawings and descriptions.[1] onment for selling archaeological artifacts. In 1977, during
the BBC documentary Pathway to the Gods, Uschuya pro-
duced an Ica stone with a dentists drill and claimed to have
22.3 Popularization by Cabrera produced a fake patina by baking the stone in cow dung.[3]
That same year, another BBC documentary was released
with a skeptical analysis of Cabreras stones, and the new-
found attention to the phenomenon prompted Peruvian au-
thorities to arrest Uschuya, as Peruvian law prohibits the
sale of archaeological discoveries. Uschuya recanted his
claim that he had found them and instead admitted they
were hoaxes, saying Making these stones is easier than
farming the land. He engraved the stones using images in
books and magazines as examples and knives, chisels and
a dental drill.[9] He also said that he had not made all the
stones. He was not punished, and continued to sell similar
stones to tourists as trinkets.[3] The stones continued to be
made and carved by other artists as forgeries of the original
forgeries.[2]
22.4 Impact
A collection of Ica stones surrounding a portrait of Javier Cabrera
Meanwhile, in 1966, Peruvian physician Javier Cabrera Except in the rare cases that provenance is known, there is
Darquea was presented with a stone that had a carved pic- no reliable way of dating the stones.[3] Thus, a stone of un-
ture of a sh, which Cabrera believed to be of an extinct certain origin can never be used to establish a conclusion
species.[7] Cabreras father had begun a collection of simi- which would otherwise be considered unlikely. The stones
lar stones in the 1930s, and based on his interest in Peruvian have been used by some creationists to claim that humans
prehistory, Cabrera began collecting more. He initially pur- lived in proximity with dinosaurs, which contradicts evi-
chased more than 300 from two brothers, Carlos and Pablo dence that the extinction of dinosaurs predates mankind by
Soldi, who also collected pre-Incan artifacts, who claimed approximately 65 million years.[10] Believers in ancient as-
they had unsuccessfully attempted to interest archaeologists tronauts have also attempted to use the stones as evidence
in them. Cabrera later found another source of the stones, of a lost, advanced civilization brought to man from other
a farmer named Basilio Uschuya, who sold him thousands planets[3] and mytho-historians have claimed them as evi-
more. Cabreras collection burgeoned, reaching more than dence that ancient myths are accurate histories, neither of
11,000 stones in the 1970s.[3] Cabrera published a book, which is a position supported in the scientic nor academic
The Message of the Engraved Stones of Ica on the subject, communities.[2]
discussing his theories of the origins and meaning of the In his Encyclopedia of Dubious Archaeology: From Atlantis
stones. In this he argued that the stones show that man is at To The Walam Olum, archaeologist Ken Feder commented
least 405 million years old and for what he calls gliptolithic The Ica Stones are not the most sophisticated of the ar-
chaeological hoaxes discussed in this book, but they cer-

tainly rank up there as the most preposterous.[9]
22.5 See also

Acmbaro gures
Rock art
22.6 Footnotes
[1] Pezzia Assereto, A (1968) Ica y el Per Precolombino.
Tomo I. Arqueologa de la provincia de Ica. Empresa Edi-
tora Liberia, Ojeda, Venezuela. 295 pp.
[2] Carroll, Robert T. (2003). The Skeptics Dictionary: a col-
lection of strange beliefs, amusing deceptions, and dangerous
delusions. New York: Wiley. pp. 16971. ISBN 0-471-
27242-6., also online at skepdic
[3] Coppens, P (October 2001). Jurassic library - The Ica
Stones. Fortean Times.
[4] Carroll, Robert (2011-01-11). The Skeptics Dictionary:
A Collection of Strange Beliefs, Amusing Deceptions, and
Dangerous Delusions. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN
9781118045633. Retrieved 8 December 2013.
[5] Lanning, Edward P. (1967). Peru before the Incas. Prentice-
Hall.
[6] Santiago Agurto Calvo. Las Piedras Magicas de Ocucaje.
El Comercio. Lima, 11 December 1966
[7] Cabrera, Javier. The Message of the Stones. Ica, Peru. Re-
[8] Cabrera, Javier (2000). The message of the engraved stones
of Ica.
[9] Kenneth L. Feder, Encyclopedia of Dubious Archaeology:
From Atlantis To The Walam Olum, pages 143 (Greenwood,
2010). ISBN 978-0-313-37919-2
[10] When Did Dinosaurs Go Extinct? Cretaceous-Tertiary
Boundary Dating Rened. Science Daily. Retrieved April
17, 2012.
22.7 External links

Images of the Ica stones
Theory post-Cabrera - articles on the Ica Stones, the
Global Elite, the Pleiadians, etc.
Ica stones at the Pseudoarcheology Research Archive
Chapter 23
Iron pillar of Delhi
The pillar weighs over 6,000 kg (13,000 lb), and is thought

to have originally been erected in what is now Udayagiri
by one of the Gupta monarchs in approximately 402
CE, though the precise date and location are a matter of
dispute.[3]
23.1 Physical description
The iron pillar of Delhi
The Iron Pillar located in Delhi, India, is a 7 m (23 ft)

The Iron pillar stands within the courtyard of Quwwat-ul-Islam
column in the Qutb complex, notable for the rust-resistant
Mosque
composition of the metals used in its construction.
The pillar has attracted the attention of archaeologists The height of the pillar, from the top of its capital to the
and materials scientists because of its high resistance to bottom of its base, is 7.21 m (23 ft 8 in), 1.12 m (3 ft 8 in)
corrosion, and has been called a testimony to the high level of which is below ground. Its bell pattern capital is 1.07 m
of skill achieved by the ancient Indian iron smiths in the ex- (3 ft 6 in) in height, and its bulb-shaped base is 0.71 m (2
traction and processing of iron.[1][2] The corrosion resis- ft 4 in) high. The base rests on a grid of iron bars soldered
tance results from an even layer of crystalline iron hydrogen with lead into the upper layer of the dressed stone pavement.
phosphate hydrate forming on the high phosphorus content The pillars lower diameter is 420 mm (17 in), and its upper
iron, which serves to protect it from the eects of the local diameter 306 mm (12 in). It is estimated to weigh more than
Delhi climate.[1] six tonnes (13,228 lb).[4]
70
23.2. INSCRIPTIONS 71
A fence was erected around the pillar in 1997 in response to Orthography

damage caused by visitors. There is a popular tradition that
it was considered good luck if one could stand with ones The inscription covers an area of 2'9.5 10.5. The an-
back to the pillar and make ones hands meet behind it. The cient writing is preserved well because of the corrosion-
practice led to signicant wear and visible discolouration on resistant iron on which it is engraved. However, during the
the lower portion of the pillar. engraving process, iron appears to have closed up over some
of strokes, making some of the letters imperfect.[6]
It contains verses composed in Sanskrit language, in
shardulvikridita metre.[7] It is written in the eastern variety
23.2 Inscriptions of the Gupta script. The letters vary from 0.3125 to 0.5
in size, and resemble closely to the letters on the Allahabad
pillar inscription of Samudragupta. However, it had dis-
The pillar carries a number of inscriptions and grati of tinctive matras (diacritics), similar to the ones in the Bil-
dierent dates, some of which have not been studied sys- sad inscription of Kumaragupta I.[8] While the edges of the
tematically despite the pillars prominent location and easy characters on the Allahabad inscription are more curved,
access. the ones on the Delhi inscription have more straight edges.
This can be attributed to the fact that the Allahabad inscrip-
tion was inscribed on softer sandstone, while the Delhi in-
scription is engraved on the harder material (iron).[9]
23.2.1 Inscription of king Chandra The text has some unusual deviations from the standard
Sanskrit spelling, such as:[8]
pranu instead of prau: the use of dental nasal in-

stead of anusvara
mrty instead of mrtty: : omission of the second t
krty instead of krtty: omission of the second t
attru instead of atru (enemy): an extra t
History of study
In 1831, the East India Company ocer William Elliott

made a facsimile of the inscription. Based on this facsim-
ile, in 1834, James Prinsep published a lithograph in the
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and
Ireland (JASB). However, this lithograph did not represent
even a single letter of the inscription correctly. Some years
later, British engineer T. S. Burt made an ink impression of
the inscription. Based on this, in 1838, Prinsep published
an improved lithograph in the same journal, with his read-
ing of the script and translation of the text.[10]
Decades later, Bhagwan Lal Indraji made another copy of
the inscription on a cloth. Based on this copy, Bhau Daji
Lad published a revised text and translation in 1875, in
Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Soci-
ety (JBBRAS). This reading was the rst one to correctly
Detail showing the inscription of King Chandragupta II mention the kings name as Chandra. In 1888, John Faith-
full Fleet published a critical edition of the text in Corpus
[10]
The oldest inscription on the pillar is that of a king named Inscriptionum Indicarum.
Chandra (IAST: Candra), generally identied as the Gupta In 1945, Govardhan Rai Sharma dated the inscription to the
emperor Chandragupta II.[5] rst half of the 5th century CE, on paleographic grounds.[11]
72 CHAPTER 23. IRON PILLAR OF DELHI
He observed that its script was similar to the writing on II abdicated his throne, and settled down as a vanaprastha
other Gupta-era inscriptions, including the ones discov- (retiree) in Vishnupada.[8]
ered at Bilsad (415 CE), Baigram (449 CE), and Kahanum In a volume published in 2009, Michael Willis has sum-
(449 CE).[9] R. Balasubramaniam (2005) noted that the marised the debates and re-translated the relevant por-
characters of the Delhi inscription closely resembled the tions of the epigraph. He concludes: Candragupta may
dated inscriptions of Chandragupta II, found at Udayagiri have passed away but the legacy of his achievement is so
in Madhya Pradesh.[12] great that he seems to remain on earth by virtue of his
fame. Emphasis is placed on Candraguptas conquest of
Issuance enemies and the merit of his deeds, ideas which are also
found in coin legends: kitim avajitya sucaritair diva jay-
The inscription is undated, and contains an eulogy of a king ati vikramditya, i.e. Having conquered the earth with
named Chandra, whose dynasty it does not mention.[8] The good conduct, Vikramditya conquered heaven. The kings
identity of this king, and thus the date of the pillar, has been conquest of heaven combined with the description of him
the subject of much debate. The various viewpoints about resorting to the other world in bodily form (gm rita-
the identity of the issuer were assembled and analyzed in a syetar mrty), conrms our understanding of the wor-
volume edited by M. C. Joshi and published in 1989.[13] thy dead as autonomous theomorphic entities.[18]
The king is now generally identied with the Gupta King
Candragupta II.[14] This identication is based on several Text
points:
The script and the poetic style of the inscription, which

point to a date in the late fourth or early fth century
CE: the Gupta period.[13]
The inscription describes the king as a devotee of
the god Vishnu, and records the erection of a dhvaja
(standard, or pillar) of Vishnu, on a hill called Vish-
nupada (hill of the footprint of Vishnu).[15] Other
Gupta inscriptions also describe Chandragupta II as a
Bhagavata (devotee of Vishnu).[8] The names of the
places mentioned in the inscription are also charac-
teristic of the Gupta era. For example, Dakshina
Jalanidhi (the Indian Ocean) and Vanga (the Bengal
Bankelals 1903 tablets
region).[15]
The short name Chandra is inscribed on the archer- Following is the Roman script transliteration of the text:[19]
type gold coins of Chandragupta II, while his full name
and titles appear in a separate, circular legend on the Yasy odvarttayah-pratpamuras attrun same-
coin.[12] tygatan Vageshvhava varttinosbhilikhit
A royal seal of Chandraguptas wife Dhruvadevi khadgena krttir bhuje
contains the phrase Shri Vishnupada-svami Tirtv sapta mukhni yena samare sindhor
Narayana (Narayana, the lord of the illustrious jjit Vhlikyasydya pyadhivsyate jalanidhir
Vishnupada).[16] vviryynilair ddakshinah
Khinnasy eva visrijya gm narapater ggmrita-
As the inscription is an eulogy and states that the king has syaetrm mr(t)y karmma-jitvanim gatavatah
abandoned the earth, there has been some discussion as to krt(t)y sthitasyakshitau
whether it is posthumous, i.e. whether king Chandra was
dead when the record was created. Dasharatha Sharma ntasyeva mahvane hutabhujo yasya pratpo
(1938) argued that it was non-posthumous.[17] According mahnnadhay pyutsrijati pranista-ripor Yyat-
to B. Chhabra and G. S. Gai, the inscription states that nasya esahkshitim
the kings mind is xed upon Vishnu with devotion, and Prptena sva bhuj rjitan cha suchiran ch aikd-
therefore, indicates that the king was alive at the time. They hirjayam kshitau chandrhvena samagra chan-
theorize that it may have been recorded when Chandragupta dra sadrim vaktra-riyam bibhrat
23.3. ORIGINAL LOCATION 73
Tenyam pranidhya bhmipatin bhveva The residue of the kings eort a burning splen-
vishno (shnau) matim prnurvisnupade girau dour which utterly destroyed his enemies leaves
bhagavato Vishnuordhidhvajah sthpitah not the earth even now, just like (the residual heat
of) a burned-out conagration in a great forest.
J. F. Fleets 1888 translation is as follows:[20] He, as if wearied, has abandoned this world, and
resorted in actual form to the other world a
(Verse 1) He, on whose arm fame was inscribed place won by the merit of his deeds (and al-
by the sword, when, in battle in the Vanga coun- though) he has departed, he remains on earth
tries (Bengal), he kneaded (and turned) back with through (the memory of his) fame (krti).
(his) breast the enemies who, uniting together,
came against (him);-he, by whom, having crossed Willis concludes: Candragupta may have passed away but
in warfare the seven mouths of the (river) Sindhu, the legacy of his achievement is so great that he seems to
the Vahlikas were conquered;-he, by the breezes remain on earth by virtue of his fame. Emphasis is placed
of whose prowess the southern ocean is even still on Candraguptas conquest of enemies and the merit of his
perfumed;- deeds, ideas which are also found in coin legends: kitim
(Verse 2) He, the remnant of the great zeal of avajitya sucaritair diva jayati vikramditya, i.e. Having
whose energy, which utterly destroyed (his) ene- conquered the earth with good conduct, Vikramditya con-
mies, like (the remnant of the great glowing heat) quered heaven.[21] The kings conquest of heaven combined
of a burned-out re in a great forest, even now with the description of him resorting to the other world in
leaves not the earth; though he, the king, as if bodily form (gm ritasyetar mrty), conrms our un-
wearied, has quit this earth, and has gone to the derstanding of the worthy dead as autonomous theomorphic
other world, moving in (bodily) from to the land entities.[18]
(of paradise) won by (the merit of his) actions,
(but) remaining on (this) earth by (the memory
of his) fame;-
23.2.2 Samvat 1109 inscription
(Verse 3) By him, the king, attained sole supreme One short inscription on the pillar is associated with the
sovereignty in the world, acquired by his own arm Tomara king Anangpal, although it is hard to decipher.
and (enjoyed) for a very long time; (and) who, Alexander Cunningham (1862-63) read the inscription as
having the name of Chandra, carried a beauty of follows:[22]
countenance like (the beauty of) the full-moon,-
having in faith xed his mind upon (the god)
Samvat Dihali 1109 Ang Pl bahi
Vishnu, this lofty standard of the divine Vishnu
was set up on the hill (called) Vishnupada. Translation: In Samvat 1109 [1052 CE], Ang
[Anang] Pl peopled Dilli
Thanks to the tablets installed on the building in 1903 by
Pandit Banke Rai, the reading provided by him enjoys wide Based on this reading, Cunningham theorized that Anang-
currency. However, Bankelals reading and interpretation pal had moved the pillar to its current location while es-
have been challenged by more recent scholarship. The in- tablishing the city of Delhi. However, his reading has
scription has been revisited by Michael Willis in his book been contested by the later scholars. Buddha Rashmi Mani
Archaeology of Hindu Ritual, his special concern being the (1997) read it as follows:[22]
nature of the kings spiritual identity after death. His read-
ing and translation of verse 2 is as follows:[18] Samvat Kinll 1109 Angapala bdi
Translation: Anangpal tightened the nail [iron
[khi]nnasyeva visjya g narapater ggm rita- pillar] in Samvat 1109
syetar mrty karrmajitvani gatavata kr-
ty sthitasya kitau [*|]
ntasyeva mahvane hutabhujo yasya pratpo 23.3 Original location
mahn ndypy utsjati praitaripor yyatnasya
ea kitim [||*] While the pillar was certainly used as a trophy in build-
ing the Quwwat-ul-Islam mosque and the Qutb complex,
The Sanskrit portion given above can be translated as its original location, whether on the site itself or from else-
follows:[18] where, is debated.[23][24]
According to the inscription of king Chandra, the pillar was 23.4 Scientic analysis
erected at Vishnupadagiri (Vishnupada). J. F. Fleet (1898)
identied this place with Mathura, because of its proximity
to Delhi (the nd spot of the inscription) and the citys repu-
tation as a Vasihnavite pilgrimage centre. However, archae-
ological evidence indicates that during the Gupta period,
Mathura was a major centre of Budhism, although Vaish-
navism may have existed there. Moreover, Mathura lies in
plains, and only contains some small hillocks and mounds:
there is no true giri (hill) in Mathura.[25]
Based on paleographic similarity to the dated inscriptions
from Udayagiri, the Gupta-era iconography, analysis of
metallurgy and other evidence, Meera Dass and R. Bala-
subramaniam (2004) theorized that the iron pillar was orig-
inally erected at Udayagiri.[12][26] According to them, the
pillar, with a wheel or discus at the top, was originally lo-
cated at the Udayagiri Caves.[27] This conclusion was partly
based on the fact that the inscription mentions Vishnupada-
giri (IAST: Viupadagiri, meaning hill with footprint of
Viu). This conclusion was endorsed and elaborated by
Michael Willis in his Archaeology of Hindu Ritual, pub-
lished in 2009.[28] The key point in favour of placing the
iron pillar at Udayagiri is that this site was closely associated
with Chandragupta and the worship of Vishnu in the Gupta
period. In addition, there are well-established traditions of
mining and working iron in central India, documented par-
ticularly by the iron pillar at Dhar and local place names like
Lohapura and Lohang Pr (see Vidisha). The king of Delhi,
Iltutmish, is known to have attacked and sacked Vidisha in Details of the top of iron pillar, Qutub Minar, Delhi.
the thirteenth century and this would have given him an op-
The pillar was manufactured by the forge welding of pieces
portunity to remove the pillar as a trophy to Delhi, just as
of wrought iron. In a report published in the journal Current
the Tughluq rulers brought Asokan pillars to Delhi in the
Science, R. Balasubramaniam of the IIT Kanpur explains
1300s.
how the pillars resistance to corrosion is due to a passive
protective lm at the iron-rust interface. The presence of
second-phase particles (slag and unreduced iron oxides) in
23.3.1 Relocation the microstructure of the iron, that of high amounts of phos-
phorus in the metal, and the alternate wetting and drying
It is not certain when the pillar was moved to Delhi from existing under atmospheric conditions are the three main
its original location. Alexander Cunningham attributed the factors in the three-stage formation of that protective pas-
relocation to the Tomara king Anangpal, based on the short sive lm.[31]
pillar inscription ascribed to this king.[22] Pasanaha Chariu, Lepidocrocite and goethite are the rst amorphous iron oxy-
a 1132 CE Jain Apabhramsha text composed by Vibudh hydroxides that appear upon oxidation of iron. High corro-
Shridhar, states that the weight of his pillar caused the Lord sion rates are initially observed. Then, an essential chemical
of the Snakes to tremble. The identication of this pillar reaction intervenes: slag and unreduced iron oxides (sec-
with the iron pillar lends support to the theory that the pillar ond phase particles) in the iron microstructure alter the po-
was already in Delhi during Anangpals reign.[29] larisation characteristics and enrich the metalscale inter-
Another theory is that the relocation happened during the face with phosphorus, thus indirectly promoting passivation
Muslim rule in Delhi. Some scholars have assumed that it of the iron[32] (cessation of rusting activity). The second-
happened around 1200 CE, when Qutb al-Din Aibak com- phase particles act as a cathode, and the metal itself serves
menced the construction of the Qutb complex as a general as anode, for a mini-galvanic corrosion reaction during en-
of Muhammad of Ghor.[30] Finbarr Barry Flood (2009) vironment exposure. Part of the initial iron oxyhydroxides
theorizes that it was Qutb al-Dins successor Iltutmish (r. is also transformed into magnetite, which somewhat slows
1210-36 CE), who moved the pillar to Delhi.[22] down the process of corrosion. The ongoing reduction of
23.5. EVIDENCE OF CANNONBALL STRIKE 75
lepidocrocite and the diusion of oxygen and complemen- talline form (the latter being therefore an indicator of old
tary corrosion through the cracks and pores in the rust still age, as this precipitation is a rather slow happening). The
contribute to the corrosion mechanism from atmospheric crystalline phosphate eventually forms a continuous layer
conditions. next to the metal, which results in an excellent corrosion
resistance layer.[1] In 1,600 years, the lm has grown just
one-twentieth of a millimetre thick.[32]
In 1969, in his rst book, Chariots of the Gods?, Erich von
Dniken cited the absence of corrosion on the Delhi pil-
lar and the unknown nature of its creation as evidence of
extraterrestrial visitation.[35] When informed by an inter-
viewer, in 1974, that the column was not in fact rust-free,
and that its method of construction was well understood,
von Dniken responded that he no longer considered the
pillar or its creation to be a mystery.[36][37]
Balasubramaniam states that the pillar is a living testimony
to the skill of metallurgists of ancient India. An inter-
view with Balasubramaniam and his work can be seen in
the 2005 article by Veazy.[38] Further research published in
The Iron Pillar in Qutub Minar, c. 1905 2009 showed that corrosion has developed evenly over the
surface of the pillar.[39]
The next main agent to intervene in protection from oxida- It was claimed in the 1920s that iron manufactured in Mir-
tion is phosphorus, enhanced at the metalscale interface jati near Jamshedpur is similar to the iron of the Delhi
by the same chemical interaction previously described be- pillar.[40] Further work on Adivasi (tribal) iron by the Na-
tween the slags and the metal. The ancient Indian smiths tional Metallurgical Laboratory in the 1960s did not verify
did not add lime to their furnaces. The use of limestone this claim.[41]
as in modern blast furnaces yields pig iron that is later
converted into steel; in the process, most phosphorus is car-
ried away by the slag.[33] The absence of lime in the slag
and the use of specic quantities of wood with high phos- 23.5 Evidence of cannonball strike
phorus content (for example, Cassia auriculata) during the
smelting induces a higher phosphorus content (> 0.1%, av- A signicant indentation on the middle section of the pillar,
erage 0.25%) than in modern iron produced in blast fur- approximately 400 cm (156 in) from the current courtyard
naces (usually less than 0.05%). One analysis gives 0.10% ground level, has been shown to be the result of a cannon-
in the slags for 0.18% in the iron itself. This high phospho-ball red at close range.[42] The impact caused horizontal
rus content and particular repartition are essential catalysts
ssuring of the column in the area diametrically opposite
in the formation of a passive protective lm of misawite to the indentation site, but the column itself remained in-
(d-FeOOH), an amorphous iron oxyhydroxide that forms tact. While no contemporaneous records, inscriptions, or
a barrier by adhering next to the interface between metal documents describing the event are known to exist, histori-
and rust. Misawite, the initial corrosion-resistance agent, ans generally agree that Nadir Shah is likely to have ordered
was thus named because of the pioneering studies of Mis- the pillars destruction during his invasion of Delhi in 1739
awa and co-workers on the eects of phosphorus and cop- AD, as he would have considered a Hindu temple mon-
per and those of alternating atmospheric conditions in rust ument undesirable within an Islamic mosque complex.[43]
formation.[34] Alternatively, he may have sought to dislodge the decora-
The most critical corrosion-resistance agent is iron hydro- tive top portion of the pillar in search of hidden precious
[44]
gen phosphate hydrate (FePO4 -H3 PO4 4H2 O) under its stones or other items of value.
crystalline form and building up as a thin layer next to No additional damage attributable to cannon re has been
the interface between metal and rust. Rust initially con- found on the pillar, suggesting that no further shots were
tains iron oxide/oxyhydroxides in their amorphous forms. taken. Historians have speculated that ricocheting frag-
Due to the initial corrosion of metal, there is more phos- ments of the cannonball may have damaged the nearby
phorus at the metalscale interface than in the bulk of the Quwwat-ul-Islam mosque which is known to have suf-
metal. Alternate environmental wetting and drying cycles fered damage to its southwestern portion during the same
provide the moisture for phosphoric-acid formation. Over period and the assault on the pillar might have been aban-
time, the amorphous phosphate is precipitated into its crys- doned as a result.[45]
23.7 References
[1] On the Corrosion Resistance of the Delhi Iron Pillar, R. Bal-
asubramaniam, Corrosion Science, Volume 42 (2000) pp.
21032129. Corrosion Science is a publication special-
ized in corrosion science and engineering.
[2] Yoshio Waseda; Shigeru Suzuki (2006). Characterization of

corrosion products on steel surfaces. Springer. p. vii. ISBN
978-3-540-35177-1.
[3] R. Balasubramaniam 2005, p. 1.
[4] Joshi, M.C. (2007). The Mehrauli Iron Pillar. Delhi: An-
cient History. Berghahn Books. ISBN 978-81-87358-29-9.
[5] Agrawal, Ashvini (1989-01-01). Rise and fall of the imperial

Guptas. p. 177. ISBN 978-81-208-0592-7.
[6] B. Chhabra & G. S. Gai 2006, pp. 179-180.
[7] B. Chhabra & G. S. Gai 2006, p. 181.
[8] B. Chhabra & G. S. Gai 2006, p. 180.
[10] B. Chhabra & G. S. Gai 2006, p. 179.
[11] G. R. Sharma. Chandra of the Mehrauli Pillar Inscription.

Indian Historical Quarterly. XXI: 202212.
[13] M. C. Joshi, ed. King Candra and the Mehrauli Pillar

(Meerut, 1989).
[14] Delhi Iron Pillar: New Insights. R. Balasubramaniam, Aryan

Books International, Delhi, and Indian Institute of Advanced
Study, Shimla, 2002, Hardbound, ISBN 81-7305-223-9.

Upper half of pillar, demonstrating horizontal ssuring thought to [17] Dasharatha Sharma. The Non-Posthumous Character of
be caused by cannonball strike the Mehrauli Iron Pillar Inscription. Indian Culture. 5 (2):
206208.
23.6 See also [18] Michael D. Willis, The Archaeology of Hindu Ritual (Cam-
bridge, 2009): chapter 3.
History of metallurgy in the Indian subcontinent [19] R. Balasubramaniam 2005, p. 7.
[20] R. Balasubramaniam 2005, pp. 7-8.

Wootz steel
[21] James Allan, Catalogue of the Coins of the Gupta Dynasties,
Parkerizing pp. 345.
[22] Cynthia Talbot 2015, p. 79.

Serpent Column
[23] M.C. Joshi, S. K. Gupta and Shankar Goyal, eds., King
Qutb complex Chandra and the Mehrauli Pillar (Meerut, 1989).
23.7. REFERENCES 77
[24] Javid, Ali; Javeed, Tabassum (2007). World Heritage Mon- [42] Prasad KK, Ray HS. The Making of (and attempts at break-
uments and Related Edices in India Vol 1. Pg.107. Algora ing) the Iron Pillar of Delhi. Steel World, No. 1 (2001) pp.
Publishing. ISBN 978-0-87586-482-2. Retrieved 29 Octo- 51-56. Retrieved February 3, 2015.
ber 2012.
[43] Hearne GR. The Seven Cities of Delhi. Nabu Press (2010),
[25] R. Balasubramaniam 2005, pp. 13-14. p. 62. ISBN 114954399X. Retrieved February 3, 2015.
[26] Identity of Chandra and Vishnupadagiri of the Delhi Iron [44] Balasubramaniam R. Decorative Bell Capital of the Delhi
Pillar Inscription: Numismatic, Archaeological and Literary Iron Pillar. Journal of Operations Management, 50(3)
Evidence, R Balasubramaniam, Bulletin of Metals Museum, (1998), pp. 40-47. Retrieved February 3, 2015.
32 (2000) 4264.
[45] Balasubramaniam R, Prabhakar VN, Shankar M. On Tech-
[27] On the Astronomical Signicance of the Delhi Iron Pillar, R nical Analysis of Cannon Shot Crater on Delhi Iron Pillar.
Balasubramaniam and Meera I Dass, Current Science, vol- Indian Journal of History of Science, 44.1 (2009), pp. 29-
ume 86 (2004) pp. 11341142. 46. Retrieved February 3, 2015.
[28] Michael D. Willis, The Archaeology of Hindu Rit-
ual (Cambridge, 2009). Partly available online,
see http://www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledge/isbn/
23.7.1 Bibliography
item2427416/?site_locale=en_GB
B. Chhabra; G. S. Gai (2006). Mehrauli Iron Pil-
[29] Cynthia Talbot 2015, p. 80. lar Inscription of Chandra. In Upinder Singh. Delhi:
Ancient History. Berghahn Books. ISBN 978-81-
[30] Cynthia Talbot 2015, pp. 77-78.
87358-29-9.
[31] On the Corrosion Resistance of the Delhi Iron Pillar, R. Bal-
asubramaniam, Corrosion Science, Volume 42 (2000) pp. Cynthia Talbot (2015). The Last Hindu Emperor:
21032129. Prithviraj Cauhan and the Indian Past, 12002000.
Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781107118560.
[32] On the growth kinetics of the protective passive lm of the
Delhi Iron Pillar, R. Balasubramaniam, Department of Ma- R. Balasubramaniam (2005). Story of the Delhi Iron
terials and Metallurgical Engineering, Indian Institute of Pillar. Foundation Books. ISBN 978-81-7596-278-1.
Technology, Kanpur 208 016, India. Current Science, vol.
82, no. 11, 10 June 2002. King Chandra and the Mehrauli Pillar, M.C. Joshi,
S.K. Gupta and Shankar Goyal, Eds., Kusumanjali
[33] On the Origin of High Phosphorus Content in Ancient Indian Publications, Meerut, 1989.
Iron, Vikas Kumar and R. Balasubramaniam, International
Journal of Metals, Materials and Processes, vol. 14, pp. 1 The Rustless Wonder A Study of the Iron Pillar at
14. 2002 Delhi, T.R. Anantharaman, Vigyan Prasar New Delhi,
[34] The mechanism of atmospheric rusting and the eect of Cu 1996.
and P on the rust formation of low alloy steels, T. Misawa, Delhi Iron Pillar: New Insights. R. Balasubramaniam,
T. Kyuno, W. Suetaka, S. Shimodaira, Corrosion Science 11
Aryan Books International, Delhi, and Indian Institute
(1971) 3548.
of Advanced Study, Shimla, 2002, Hardbound, ISBN
[35] Dniken, Erich von: Chariots of the Gods?, p. 94. 81-7305-223-9.
[36] Playboy magazine, page 64, Volume 21 Number 8, 1974 The Delhi Iron Pillar: Its Art, Metallurgy and Inscrip-
[37] Story 1980, pp. 8889
tions, M.C. Joshi, S.K. Gupta and Shankar Goyal,
Eds., Kusumanjali Publications, Meerut, 1996.
[38] 1600 Years Young, Materials Performance, July, 2005.
The World Heritage Complex of the Qutub, R. Bala-
[39] Kamachi Mudali, U.; Baldev Raj (February 2009). In- subramaniam, Aryan Books International, New Delhi,
situ corrosion investigations on Delhi iron pillar. Trans- 2005, Hardbound, ISBN 81-7305-293-X.
actions of the Indian Institute of Metals. 62 (1): 2533.
doi:10.1007/s12666-009-0004-2. Delhi Iron Pillar (in two parts), R. Balasubrama-
niam, IIM Metal News Volume 7, No. 2, April 2004,
[40] Andrew McWilliam 1920, cited in Chakrabarti 1992
pp. 1117 and IIM Metal News Volume 7, No. 3, June
[41] Some Observations on Corrosion-Resistance of Ancient Delhi 2004, pp. 513.
Iron Pillar and Present-time Adivasi Iron Made by Primi-
tive Methods, A.K. Lahiri, T. Banerjee and B.R. Nijhawan. New Insights on the 1600-Year Old Corrosion Resistant
NML Tech. J., 5 (1963) 46-5. Cited in On the corrosion Delhi Iron Pillar, R. Balasubramaniam, Indian Journal
resistance of the Delhi iron pillar, R. Balasubramaniam. of History of Science 36 (2001) 149.
The Early use of Iron in India, Dilip K. Chakrabarti,

Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1992, ISBN
0195629922.
23.8 External links

Detailed list of Publications on Delhi Iron Pillar by
Balasubramaniam, IIT Kanpur
Corrosion resistance of Delhi iron pillar
Nondestructive evaluation of the Delhi iron pillar Cur-

rent Science, Indian Academy of Sciences, Vol. 88,
No. 12, 25 June 2005 (PDF)
The Delhi Iron Pillar
IIT team solves the pillar mystery, 21 Mar 2005,

Times of India (About Nondestructive evaluation of
the Delhi iron pillar)
(General article on Delhi Iron Pillar in One India
One People, May 2006, By Prof R Balasubrama-
nium, IIT Kanpur and S M Khened, Nehru Science
Centre, Mumbai)
Coordinates: 283128.76N 77116.25E /

28.5246556N 77.1850694E
Chapter 24
Kensington Runestone
The Kensington Runestone is a 202 pounds (92 kg) slab of

greywacke covered in runes on its face and side. A Swedish
immigrant, Olof Ohman, claimed to have discovered it
in 1898 in the largely rural township of Solem, Douglas
County, Minnesota, and named it after the nearest settle-
ment, Kensington.
The inscription purports to be a record left behind by Scan-
dinavian explorers in the 14th century (internally dated to
the year 1362). There has been a drawn-out debate on the
stones authenticity, but the scholarly consensus has classi-
ed it as a 19th-century hoax since it was rst examined in
1910, with some critics directly charging the purported dis-
coverer Ohman with fabricating the inscription,[2] although
there remains a local community convinced of the stones
authenticity.[3]
24.1 Provenance
Swedish immigrant[4] Olof Ohman asserted that he found

the stone late in 1898 while clearing land he had recently
acquired of trees and stumps before plowing.[5][6] The stone
was said to be near the crest of a small knoll rising above the
wetlands, lying face down and tangled in the root system of
a stunted poplar tree, estimated to be from less than 10 to
about 40 years old.[7] The artifact is about 30 16 6 inches
(76 41 15 cm) in size and weighs 202 pounds (92 kg).
Ohmans ten-year-old son, Edward Ohman, noticed some
markings,[8] and the farmer later said he thought they had
found an Indian almanac.
1911 bill of sale which transferred ownership of the stone from
During the period when Ohman discovered the stone,
Olof Ohman to the Minnesota Historical Society for $10.
the journey of Leif Ericson to Vinland (North America)
was being widely discussed and there was renewed in-
terest in the Vikings throughout Scandinavia, stirred by
the National Romanticism movement. Five years earlier from Sweden in 1905). Some Norwegians claimed the
Norway had participated in the Worlds Columbian Expo- stone was a Swedish hoax and there were similar Swedish
sition by sending the Viking, a replica of the Gokstad ship accusations because the stone references a joint expedition
to Chicago. There was also friction between Sweden and of Norwegians and Swedes at a time when they were ruled
Norway (which ultimately led to Norways independence by the same king, after the Union of Kalmar. It is thought to
79
80 CHAPTER 24. KENSINGTON RUNESTONE
be more than coincidental that the stone was found among The Kensington Runestone is on display at the Runestone
Scandinavian newcomers in Minnesota, still struggling for Museum in Alexandria, Minnesota.[17]
acceptance and quite proud of their Nordic heritage.[9]
A copy of the inscription made its way to the University
of Minnesota. Olaus J. Breda (18531916), professor of 24.2 Text and translation
Scandinavian Languages and Literature in the Scandinavian
Department, declared the stone to be a forgery and pub- The text consists of 9 lines on the face of the stone, and 3
lished a discrediting article which appeared in Symra during lines on the edge, read as follows:[18]
1910.[10] Breda also forwarded copies of the inscription to
Front:
fellow linguists and historians in Scandinavia, such as Oluf
Rygh, Sophus Bugge, Gustav Storm, Magnus Olsen and
8 : gter : ok : 22 : norrmen : po :
Adolf Noreen. They unanimously pronounced the Kens-
ington inscription a fraud and forgery of recent date.[11] ...o : opdagelsefrd : fro :
The stone was then sent to Northwestern University in vinland : of : vest : vi :

Evanston, Illinois. Scholars either dismissed it as a prank hade : lger : ved : 2 : skjr : en :
or felt unable to identify a sustainable historical context dags : rise : norr : fro : deno : sten :
and the stone was returned to Ohman. Hjalmar Holand,
vi : var : ok : ske : en : dagh : ptir :
a Norwegian-American historian and author, claims in his
autobiography, My First Eighty Years, that the stone was vi : kom : hem : fan : 10 : man : rde :
[12]
given to him by Ohman. However, the Minnesota His- af : blod : og : ded : AVM :
torical Society has a bill of sale showing Ohman sold them frlse : f : ill.
the stone for $10 in 1911. Holand renewed public inter-
est with an article[13] enthusiastically summarizing stud- Side:
ies that were made by geologist Newton Horace Winchell
(Minnesota Historical Society) and linguist George T. Flom hr : (10) : mans : ve : havet : at : se :
(Philological Society of the University of Illinois), who both
ptir : vore : skip : 14 : dagh : rise :
published opinions in 1910.[14]
from : deno : h : ahr : 1362 :
According to Winchell, the tree under which the stone was
allegedly found had been destroyed before 1910. Several
The sequences rr, ll and gh represent actual digraphs. The
nearby poplars that witnesses estimated as being about the
AVM is written in Latin capitals. The numbers given in
same size were cut down and, by counting their rings, it
Arabic numerals in the above transcription are given in
was determined they were around 3040 years old. One
the pentimal system. At least seven of the runes, includ-
member of the team who had excavated at the nd site in
ing those transcribed a, d, v, j, , above, are not in any
1899, county schools superintendent Cleve Van Dyke, later
[15] standard known from the medieval period (see below for
recalled the trees being only ten or twelve years old. The
details).[19] The language of the inscription is close to mod-
surrounding county had not been settled until 1858, and
ern Swedish, the transliterated text being quite easily com-
settlement was severely restricted for a time by the Dakota
prehensible to any speaker of a modern Scandinavian lan-
War of 1862 (although it was reported that the best land in
guage. The language being closer to the Swedish of the 19th
the township adjacent to Solem, Holmes City, was already
than of the 14th century is one of the main reasons for the
taken by 1867, by a mixture of Swedish, Norwegian and
[16] scholarly consensus dismissing it as a hoax.[20]
Yankee settlers. )
The text translates to:
Winchell estimated that the inscription was roughly 500
years old, by comparing its weathering with the weathering
Eight Geats and twenty-two Norwegians on an
on the backside, which he assumed was glacial and 8000
exploration journey from Vinland to the west.
years old. Winchell also mentions in the same report that
We had camp by two skerries one days journey
Prof. W. O. Hotchkiss, state geologist of Wisconsin, esti-
north from this stone. We were [out] to sh one
mated that the runes were at least 50 to 100 years. Mean-
day. After we came home [we] found ten men
while, Flom found a strong apparent divergence between
red of blood and dead. AVM (Ave Virgo Maria)
the runes used in the Kensington inscription and those in
save [us] from evil.
use during the 14th century. Similarly, the language of the
inscription was modern compared to the Nordic languages "[We] have ten men by the sea to look after our
of the 14th century.[14] ships, fourteen days travel from this island. [In
the] year 1362.
24.3. LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS 81
24.3 Linguistic analysis German aufdecken, ultimately loan-translated from French

dcouvrir in the 16th century. The Norwegian historian
Holand took the stone to Europe and, while newspapers in Gustav Storm often used the modern Norwegian lexeme in
Minnesota carried articles hotly debating its authenticity, late 19th-century articles on Viking exploration, creating a
the stone was quickly dismissed by Swedish linguists. plausible incentive for the manufacturer of the inscription
to use this word.
For the next 40 years, Holand struggled to sway public and
scholarly opinion about the Runestone, writing articles and
several books. He achieved brief success in 1949, when 24.3.2 Grammatical evidence
the stone was put on display at the Smithsonian Institution,
and scholars such as William Thalbitzer and S. N. Hagen Another characteristic pointed out by skeptics is the texts
published papers supporting its authenticity.[21] At nearly lack of cases. Early Old Swedish (14th century) still re-
the same time, Scandinavian linguists Sven Jansson, Erik tained the four cases of Old Norse, but Late Old Swedish
Moltke, Harry Anderson and K. M. Nielsen, along with a (15th century) reduced its case structure to two cases, so
popular book by Erik Wahlgren again questioned the Rune- that the absence of inection in a Swedish text of the 14th-
stones authenticity.[20] century would be an irregularity. Similarly, the inscription
Along with Wahlgren, historian Theodore C. Blegen atly text does not use the plural verb forms that were common
asserted[11] Ohman had carved the artifact as a prank, pos- in the 14th century and have only recently disappeared: for
sibly with help from others in the Kensington area. Further example, (plural forms in parenthesis) wi war (wrum),
resolution seemed to come with the 1976 published tran- hathe (hfuum), "[wi] ske (skaum), kom (ko-
script [22] of an interview of Frank Walter Gran conducted mum), fann (funnum) and wi hathe (hafdum).
by Dr. Paul Carson, Jr. on August 13, 1967 that had been Proponents of the stones authenticity pointed to sporadic
recorded to audio tape.[23][24] In it, Gran said his father John examples of these simpler forms in some 14th-century texts
confessed in 1927 that Ohman made the inscription. John and to the great changes of the morphological system of the
Grans story however was based on second-hand anecdotes Scandinavian languages that began during the latter part of
he had heard about Ohman, and although it was presented that century.[27]
as a dying declaration, Gran lived for several more years,
saying nothing more about the stone.
The possibility of the runestone being an authentic 14th- 24.3.3 Paleographic evidence
century artefact was again raised in 1982 by Robert Hall,
an emeritus Professor of Italian Language and Literature at The inscription contains "pentadic" numerals. Such numer-
Cornell University, who published a book (and a follow up als are known in Scandinavia, but nearly always from rela-
in 1994) questioning the methodology of its critics. Hall tively recent times, not from veried medieval runic monu-
asserted that the odd philological problems in the Rune- ments, on which numbers were usually spelled out as words.
stone could be the result of normal dialectal variances in S. N. Hagen stated The Kensington alphabet is a synthesis
Old Swedish of the period. He further contended that crit- of older unsimplied runes, later dotted runes, and a num-
ics had failed to consider the physical evidence, which he ber of Latin letters ... The runes for a, n, s and t are the old
found leaning heavily in favour of authenticity. Danish unsimplied forms which should have been out of
In The Vikings and America (1986), Wahlgren again stated use for a long time [by the 14th century]...I suggest that [a
that the text bore linguistic abnormalities and spellings that posited 14th century] creator must at some time or other in
he thought suggested the Runestone was a forgery.[25] his life have been familiar with an inscription (or inscrip-
tions) composed at a time when these unsimplied forms
were still in use and that he was not a professional runic
24.3.1 Lexical evidence scribe before he left his homeland.[28]
A possible origin for the irregular shape of the runes was
One of the main linguistic arguments for the rejection of the discovered in 2004, in the 1883 notes of a then-16-year-
text as genuine Old Swedish is the term opthagelse farth (up- old journeyman tailor with an interest in folk music, Ed-
dagelsefard) journey of discovery. This lexeme is unat- ward Larsson.[29] Larssons aunt had migrated with her hus-
tested in either Scandinavian, Low Franconian or Low Ger- band and son from Sweden to Crooked Lake, just outside
man before the 16th century.[26] The term exists in modern Alexandria, in 1870.[30] Larssons sheet lists two dier-
Scandinavian (Norwegian oppdagingsferd or oppdagelses- ent Futharks. The rst Futhark consists of 22 runes, the
ferd, Swedish upptcktsfrd) It is a loan from Low Ger- last two of which are bind-runes, representing the letter-
man *updagen, Dutch opdagen, which are in turn from High combinations EL and MW. His second Futhark consists of
24.4 Purported historical context
Sigillum ad causas for Magnus Eriksson, King of Norway and Swe-

den
There is some limited historical evidence for possible 14th-

century Scandinavian expeditions to North America. In a
letter by Gerardus Mercator to John Dee, dated 1577, Mer-
cator refers to a Jacob Cnoyen, who had learned that eight
men returned to Norway from an expedition to the Arctic
Edward Larssons notes (1885) islands in 1364. One of the men, a priest, provided the King
of Norway with a great deal of geographical information.[32]
Carl Christian Rafn in the early 19th century mentions a
priest named Ivar Bardarsson, who had previously been
based in Greenland and turns up in Norwegian records from
1364 onward.
Furthermore, in 1354, King Magnus Eriksson of Sweden
and Norway had issued a letter appointing a law ocer
named Paul Knutsson as leader of an expedition to the
colony of Greenland, to investigate reports that the pop-
Edward Larssons runic alphabets from 1885
ulation was turning away from Christian culture.[33]
Another of the documents reprinted by the 19th century
scholars was a scholarly attempt by Icelandic Bishop Gisli
27 runes, where the last 3 are specially adapted to repre- Oddsson, in 1637, to compile a history of the Arctic
sent the letters , , and of the modern Swedish alphabet. colonies. He dated the Greenlanders fall away from Chris-
The runes in this second set correspond closely to the non- tianity to 1342, and claimed that they had turned instead to
standard runes in the Kensington inscription.[29] America. Supporters of a 14th-century origin for the Kens-
The abbreviation for Ave Maria consists of the Latin letters ington runestone argue that Knutson may therefore have
AVM. Wahlgren (1958) noted that the carver had incised a travelled beyond Greenland to North America, in search of
notch on the upper right hand corner of the letter V.[20] The renegade Greenlanders, most of his expedition being killed
Massey Twins in their 2004 paper argued that this notch is in Minnesota and leaving just the eight voyagers to return
consistent with a scribal abbreviation for a nal -e used in to Norway.[34]
the 14th century.[31] However, there is no evidence that the Knutson expedition
24.6. REFERENCES 83
ever set sail (the government of Norway went through con- Heavener Runestone, a runestone found in Oklahoma
siderable turmoil in 1355) and the information from Cnoyen
as relayed by Mercator states specically that the eight men Narragansett Runestone, an assumed hoax in Rhode
who came to Norway in 1364 were not survivors of a recent Island
expedition, but descended from the colonists who had set- Spirit Pond runestones, are widely dismissed as a hoax
tled the distant lands several generations earlier.[32] Also, in Maine
those early 19th century books, which aroused a great deal
of interest among Scandinavian Americans, would have Maine penny, a Norse coin that was found in Maine
been available to a late 19th-century hoaxer.
Hjalmar Holand adduced the blond Indians among the
Mandan on the Upper Missouri River as possible descen- 24.6 References
dants of the Swedish and Norwegian explorers.[35] This was
dismissed as tangential to the Runestone issue by Alice [1] Richard Nielsen and Henrik Williams (May 2010).
Inscription Translation (PDF). Retrieved 2011-06-11.
Beck Kehoe (2004), in her book The Kensington Rune-
stone, Approaching a Research Question Holistically.[36] [2] Gustavson, Helmer. The non-enigmatic runes of the Kens-
ington stone. Viking Heritage Magazine. Gotland Univer-
sity. 2004 (3). "[...] every Scandinavian runologist and ex-
pert in Scandinavian historical linguistics has declared the
Kensington stone a hoax [...]"; Wallace, B (1971). Some
points of controversy. In Ashe G; et al. The Quest for Amer-
ica. New York: Praeger. pp. 154174. ISBN 0-269-02787-
4.; Wahlgren, Erik (1986). The Vikings and America (An-
cient Peoples and Places). Thames & Hudson. ISBN 0-500-
02109-0.; Michlovic MG (1990). Folk Archaeology in An-
thropological Perspective. Current Anthropology. 31 (11):
103107. doi:10.1086/203813.; Hughey M, Michlovic MG
(1989). Making history: The Vikings in the American
heartland. Politics, Culture and Society. 2 (3): 338360.
doi:10.1007/BF01384829.
The situation of Kensington
[3] forskning.no Kan du stole p Wikipedia?" (in Norwegian).
Retrieved 2008-12-19. Det nnes en liten klikk med
A possible route of such an expedition connecting the
amerikanere som sverger til at steinen er ekte. De er stort sett
Hudson Bay with Kensington would lead up either Nelson skandinaviskttede realister uten peiling p sprk, og de har
River or Hayes River,[37] through Lake Winnipeg, then up store skarer med tilhengere. Translation: There is a small
the Red River of the North.[38] ) The northern waterway clique of Americans who swear to the stones authenticity.
begins at Traverse Gap, on the other side of which is the They are mainly natural scientists of Scandinavian descent
source of the Minnesota River, owing to join the great with no knowledge of linguistics, and they have large num-
Mississippi River at Saint Paul/Minneapolis.[39] This route bers of adherents.
was examined by Flom (1910), who found that explorers
[4] http://kahsoc.org/ohman.htm farmer
and traders had come from Hudson Bay to Minnesota by
this route decades before the area was ocially settled.[40] [5] Extract from 1886 plat map of Solem township. Archived
from the original on October 26, 2009. Retrieved 2007-10-
31.
24.5 See also [6] Stephen Minicucci, Internal Improvements and the Union,
17901860, Studies in American Political Development
AVM Runestone, a hoax planted near the site of the (2004), 18: p.160-185, (2004), Cambridge University
Kensington runestone Press, doi:10.1017/S0898588X04000094. Federal appro-
priations for internal improvements amounted to $119.8 mil-
Elbow Lake Runestone, a hoax planted in Minnesota lion between 1790 and 1860. The bulk of this amount, $77.2
million, was distributed to the states through indirect meth-
Beardmore Relics, Viking Age relics, supposedly ods, such as land grants or distributions of land sale revenues,
found in Canada, associated with the Kensington rune- which would today be labeled o-budget.""
stone
[7] Done in Runes. Minneapolis Journal. appendix to The
Vrendrye Runestone, allegedly found west of the Kensington Rune Stone by T. Blegen, 1968. 22 February
Great Lakes in the 1730s 1899. Retrieved 2007-11-28.
[8] Hall Jr., Robert A.: The Kensington Rune-Stone Authentic [21] Olof Ohmans Runes. TIME. 8 October 1951. Retrieved
and Important, page 3. Jupiter Press, 1994. 2009-02-08.
[9] Michael G. Michlovic, Folk Archaeology in Anthropo- [22] Fridley, R (1976). The case of the Gran tapes. Minnesota
logical Perspective Current Anthropology 31.1 (February History. 45 (4): 152156.
1990:103107) p. 105.
[23] American heritage August 1977
[10] Olaus J. Breda. Rundt Kensington-stenen, (Symra. 1910, pp. [24] The Case of the Gran Tapes, Minnesota History pages
6580) 152156 (Winter 1976)
[11] Blegen, T (1960). The Kensington Rune Stone : New Light [25] Wahlgren, Erik (1986). The Vikings and America (Ancient
on an Old Riddle. Minnesota Historical Society Press. ISBN Peoples and Places). Thames & Hudson. ISBN 0-500-
0-87351-044-5. 02109-0.
[12] Holand, Hjalmar (1957). My First Eighty Years. New York: [26] Williams, Henrik (2012). The Kensington Runestone: Fact
Twayne Publishers, Inc. p. 188. and Fiction. The Swedish-American Historical Quarterly.
63 (1): 322.
[13] Holand, First authoritative investigation of oldest document
in America, Journal of American History 3 (1910:16584); [27] John D. Bengtson. The Kensington Rune Stone: A Study
Michlovic noted Holands contrast of the Scandinavians as Guide (PDF). jdbengt.net. Retrieved November 23, 2013.
undaunted, brave, daring, faithful and intrepid contrasted [28] Article The Kensington Runic Inscription by S.N. Hagen, in:
with the Indians as savages, wild heathens, pillagers, venge- Speculum: A Journal of Medieval Studies, Vol. XXV, No.3,
ful, like wild beasts: an interpretation that placed it squarely July 1950.
within the framework of Indian-white relations in Minnesota
at the time of its discovery. (Michlovic 1990:106). [29] Tryggve Skld (2003). Edward Larssons alfabet och Kens-
ingtonstenens (PDF). DAUM-katta (in Swedish). Ume:
[14] Winchell NH, Flom G (1910). The Kensington Rune Dialekt-, ortnamns- och folkminnesarkivet i Ume (Winter
Stone: Preliminary Report (PDF). Collections of the 2003): 711. ISSN 1401-548X. Retrieved 2009-02-06.
Minnesota Historical Society. 15. Retrieved 2007-11-28.
[30] Kensingtonsteinens gte. Schrdingers katt. Episode sub-
[15] Milo M. Quaife, The myth of the Kensington runestone: titles (click Teksting) (in Norwegian). 2012-12-20. NRK.
The Norse discovery of Minnesota 1362 in The New Eng-
[31] Keith and Kevin Massey, Authentic Medieval Elements
land Quarterly December 1934
in the Kensington Stone in Epigraphic Society Occasional
[16] Lobeck, Engebret P. (1867). Holmes City narrative Publications Vol. 24 2004, pp 176182
on Trysil (Norway) emigrants website (via Archive.org)". [32] Taylor, E.G.R. (1956). A Letter Dated 1577 from
Archived from the original on June 29, 2003. Retrieved Mercator to John Dee. Imago Mundi. 13: 5668.
2013-08-09. doi:10.1080/03085695608592127.
[17] Kensington Runestone Museum, Alexandria Minnesota. [33] Full text in Diplomatarium Norvegicum English translation
Retrieved 2008-12-19.
[34] Holand, Hjalmar (1959). An English scientist in America
[18] Sven B. F. Jansson, "'Runstenen' fran Kensington i Min- 130 years before Columbus. Transactions of the Wisconsin
nesota in Nordisk Tidskrift fr Vetenskap 25 (1949) 377 Academy. 48: 205219.
405. W. Krogmann, Der 'Runenstein' von Kensington,
[35] Hjalmar Holand, The Kensington Rune Stone: A Study
Minnesota', Jahrbuch fr Amerikastudien, 1958 3: 59111.
in Pre-Columbian American History. Ephraim WI, self-
Inge Skovgaard-Petersen, review of: Theodore C. Blegen:
published (1932).
The Kensington Rune Stone. New Light on an Old Rid-
dle. St. Paul, Minnesota Historical Society, 1968. Historisk [36] Alice Beck Kehoe, The Kensington Runestone: Approaching
Tidsskrift, Bind 12. rkke, 5 (1971). a Research Question Holistically, Long Grove IL, Waveland
Press (2004) ISBN 1-57766-371-3. Chapter 6.
[19] Aslak Liestl, The Bergen Runes and the Kensington In-
scription Minnesota History 40 (1966), p. 59 To Scan- [37] The Grass River at Great Canadian Rivers
dinavian scholars this will not be starrtling news, for they
[38] Harry B. Brehaut & P. Eng The Red River Cart and Trails
are agreed that the Kensington inscriptino is modern. [...]
in Transactions of the Manitoba Historical Society, series 3
The myth of the Kensington stone lives on, I am sorry to
no. 28 (19712)
say, partly because scholarship has failed in making its views
known in a form suitable to convince the public. [39] Pohl, Frederick J. Atlantic Crossings before Columbus
New York, W.W. Norton & Co. (1961) p212
[20] Wahlgren, Erik (1958). The Kensington Stone, A Mystery
Solved. University of Wisconsin Press. ISBN 1-125-20295- [40] Flom, George T. The Kensington Rune-Stone Springeld
5. IL, Illinois State Historical Soc. (1910) p37
24.7 Literature
Thalbitzer, William C. (1951). Two runic stones, from
Greenland and Minnesota. Washington: Smithsonian
Institution. OCLC 2585531.
Hall, Robert A., Jr. (1982). The Kensington Rune-

stone is Genuine: Linguistic, practical, methodologi-
cal considerations. Columbia, SC: Hornbeam Press.
ISBN 0-917496-21-3.
Kehoe, Alice Beck (2005). The Kensington Runestone:
Approaching a Research Question Holistically. Wave-
land Press. ISBN 1-57766-371-3.
Kensingtonstenens gta The riddle of the Kensing-

ton runestone (PDF). Historiska nyheter (in Swedish
and English). Stockholm: Statens historiska museum
(Specialnummer om Kensingtonstenen): 16 pages.
2003. ISSN 0280-4115. Retrieved 2008-12-19.
Anderson, Rasmus B (1920). Another View of the
Kensington Rune Stone. Wisconsin Magazine of His-
tory. 3: 19. Retrieved 2011-03-31.
Flom, George T (1910). The Kensington Rune-

Stone: A modern inscription from Douglas County,
Minnesota. Publications of the Illinois State Histori-
cal Library. Illinois State Historical Society. 15: 3
44. Retrieved 2011-03-31.
24.8 External links

Kensington Runestone Park in Solem Township, Dou-
glas County, Minnesota
Runestone Museum which houses the stone in Alexan-

dria, Minnesota
360 View of Rune Stone Zoom into and view the stone
just like you were at the museum.
Coordinates: 4548.788N 9540.305W / 45.813133N

95.671750W
Chapter 25
Kingoodie artifact
25.1 Notes
[1] Brewster, Sir David (1845). Queries and Statements con-
cerning a Nail found imbedded in a Block of Sandstone ob-
tained from Kingoodie (Mylneld) Quarry, North Britain.
Report of the Fourteenth Meeting of the British Association
for the Advancement of Science. London: John Murray: 51.
[2] Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews and James Doeser (2007-08-

19). Nail in sandstone from Kingoodie (UK)". Bad Ar-
chaeology. Retrieved 17 December 2016.
The Kingoodie Quarry, where the Kingoodie artifact was found.
The Kingoodie artifact (also known as Kingoodie ham-

mer) is an object with the characteristics of a corroded iron
nail found in a block of Devonian sandstone in 1844 in the
Kingoodie Quarry in Kingoodie, Scotland.
David Brewster reported to the British Association that the
nail was found when a rough block of stone was being pre-
pared for dressing. The nail was discovered when the over-
lying clay was cleared from the stone, with half an inch
(12.7 mm) of the nail projecting into the clay and the re-
mainder of the nail lying along the surface of the stone to
within an inch of the head which went down into the stone.
It is not known from what part of the quarry the stone came
from, and it was handled at least four or ve times be-
tween being found in the quarry and moved to where it was
dressed.[1]
There are, however, few references to this object, and the
mysteries surrounding its discovery were typical for the
nineteenth century. Most such mysteries were resolved by
the twentieth century.[2]
86
Chapter 26
Klerksdorp sphere
Klerksdorp spheres are small objects, often spherical hematite (Fe2 O3 ) or wollastonite (CaSiO3 ) mixed with mi-
to disc-shaped, that have been collected by miners and nor amounts of hematite and goethite (FeOOH). Observa-
rockhounds from 3-billion-year-old pyrophyllite deposits tions by Cairncross[7] and Nel and others[11] indicated that
mined by Wonderstone Ltd., near Ottosdal, South Africa. many of the Klerksdorp spheres found in unaltered pyro-
They have been cited by some alternative researchers and phyllite consist of pyrite (FeS2 ). The color of the speci-
reporters in books,[1][2] popular articles,[3][4] and many web mens studied by Heinrich[9][10] ranged from dark reddish
pages,[5][6] as inexplicable out-of-place artifacts that could brown, red, to dusky red. The color of those objects com-
only have been manufactured by intelligent beings. Geol- posed of pyrite is not known. All of the specimens of these
ogists who have studied these objects have concluded that objects, which were cut open by Heinrich,[9][10] exhibited
the objects are not manufactured, but are rather the result an extremely well dened radial structure terminating on
of natural processes.[7][8][9][10] either the center or centers of a Klerksdorp sphere. Some
of these objects exhibit well-dened and parallel latitudinal
grooves or ridges. Even specimens consisting of intergrown
26.1 Description attened spheres exhibit such grooves.[9][10]
26.2 Geological explanation of their

origin
Various professional geologists[7][8][9][10] agree that the
Klerksdorp spheres originated as concretions, which
formed in volcanic sediments, ash, or both, after they accu-
mulated 3.0 billion years ago. Heinrich[9][10] argues that the
wollastonite nodules formed by the metamorphism of car-
bonate concretions in the presence of silica-rich uids gen-
erated during the metamorphism of the volcanic deposits
containing them into pyrophyllite. It was also argued that
the hematite nodules represent pyrite concretions oxidized
by weathering of near surface pyrophyllite deposits. Be-
low the near-surface zone of weathering, which has devel-
oped in the pyrophyllite, pyrite concretions are unaected
A Klerksdorp sphere. It is 3 to 4 centimeters in maximum diameter by weathering and, thus, have not been altered to hematite.
and 2.5 centimeters in thickness. The radial internal structure of these objects is a pseudo-
The Klerksdorp spheres typically range in diameter from morph after the original crystalline structure of the original
[9][10]
0.5 to 10 cm. As illustrated by Heinrich,[9][10] they carbonate or pyrite concretion.
vary widely in shape from either approximate or at- Both Cairncross[7] and Heinrich[9][10] argue that the grooves
tened spheres to well-dened discs and often are inter- exhibited by these concretions are natural in origin. As pro-
grown. Petrographic and X-ray diraction analyses of spec- posed by Cairncross,[7] the grooves represent ne-grained
imens of these objects found that they consist either of laminations within which the concretions grew. The growth
87
88 CHAPTER 26. KLERKSDORP SPHERE
26.3 Criticism of out of place

claims
The various claims[1][2][4][6] that these objects are either

perfectly round or perfect spheres is now known to be
incorrect as directly observed by Heinrich.[8][9][10] These
specimens vary widely in shape, from noticeably attened
spheres to distinct disks. As illustrated by Heinrich,[9][10]
some of the Klerksdorp spheres are intergrown with each
other, like a mass of soap bubbles. The observations and
gure refute claims that these objects are either always
spherical or isolated in their occurrence. As noted by
Heinrich,[9][10] even grooved spheres are not perfect spheres
and some consist of intergrown spheres.
Similarly, the claims that these objects consist of metal, i.e.
"...a nickel-steel alloy which does not occur naturally... ac-
cording to Jochmans[4] are denitely false as discovered by
Cairncross[7] and Heinrich.[9][10] The fact that many of the
web pages that make this claim also incorrectly identify the
Side view of typical calcareous concretions, which exhibit equato-
pyrophyllite quarries, from which these objects came, as
rial grooves, found in Schoharie County, New York. The cube, for
scale, is one centimeter cubed.
the Wonderstone Silver Mine is evidence that these au-
thors have not veried the validity of, in this case, mis-
information taken from other sources since these quarries
are neither known as silver mines nor has silver ever been
mined in them in the decades in which they have been in
operation.[11][13]
Heinrich[14] notes that one of Michael Cremos sources re-
garding the allegedly anomalous spheres was the Weekly
World News, a satirical tabloid, which he described as an
of the concretions within the plane of the ner-grained lam- unreliable source of data for discussing the origins of
the South African spheres described as used by Forbidden
inations was inhibited because of the lesser permeability
and porosity of ner-grained sediments relative to the sur- Archeology. As noted by Cairncross,[7] it appears that the
source of the Weekly World News article is an earlier ar-
rounding sediments. Faint internal lamina, which corre-
sponds to exterior groove, can be seen in cut specimens. ticle by Barritt.[3] This article[3] appeared in a 1982 issue
of Scope magazine about these objects. Scope was a South
A similar process in coarser-grained sediments created the
latitudinal ridges and grooves exhibited by innumerable iron African tabloid-style magazine that, like the Weekly World
oxide concretions found within the Navajo Sandstone of News, cannot be regarded as being a credible source.
southern Utah called Moqui marbles. Latitudinal grooves Additionally, Roelf Marx, as quoted in Cairncross[7] and
are also found on carbonate concretions found in Schoharie Pope and Cairncross,[15] former curator of the Klerksdorp
County, New York. The latitudinal ridges and grooves of Museum, reports that he was misquoted regarding these ob-
the Moqui marbles are more pronounced and irregular than jects. Marx was quoted in popular articles as saying that the
seen in the Klerksdorp (Ottosdal) concretions because they objects rotated by themselves in vibration-free display cases
formed in sand that was more permeable than the ne- in the Klerksdorp Museum. Instead, Roelf Marx stated
grained volcanic material in which the Klerksdorp (Ottos- that they rotated because of the numerous earth tremors
dal) concretions grew.[9][10] generated by underground blasting in local gold mining.
Very similar concretions have been found within strata, Similarly, inquiries of scientists, who studied these objects,
as old as 2.7 to 2.8 billion years, comprising part of the have found that the claims that NASA found these objects
Hamersley Group of Australia. The Australian concretions to be either perfectly balanced, unnatural, or puzzling are
and the Klerksdorp spheres are among the oldest known ex- unsubstantiated.[10]
amples of concretions created by microbial activity during Published descriptions[2][5][6] of these spheres being harder
the diagenesis of sediments[12] than steel are meaningless in terms of Mohs scale of mineral
26.5. REFERENCES 89
hardness. Steel can vary from 4 to 8 on the Mohs scale, de- [14] Heinrich, P.V. 1996. The Mysterious Origins of Man: The
pending on the type of alloy, heat treatment, and whether it South African Grooved Sphere Controversy: Talk.Origins
is case-hardened or not. An examination of several Klerks- Archive.
dorp spheres found none to be harder than 5.0 on the Mohs [15] Pope C. and B. Cairncross 1988. Cosmic Cannonballs a
scale.[10] For comparison, common glass has a Mohs hard- geologic explanation: ARIP View. no. 1., pp. 5-6. (ARIP =
ness of 5.5. Association for the Rational Investigation of the Paranormal)
26.4 See also

Geofact
26.5 References
[1] Cremo, M., and R.L. Thompson, 1993, Forbidden Arche-
ology: The Hidden History of the Human Race: Torchlight
Publishing. ISBN 0-89213-294-9
[2] Cremo, M., and R.L. Thompson, 1999, The Hidden History
of the Human Race: Torchlight Publishing. ISBN 0-89213-
325-2
[3] Barritt, D., 1982, The Riddle of the cosmic cannon-balls:

Scope Magazine. (June 11, 1982)
[4] Jochmans, J. R., 1995, Top ten out-of-place artifacts: At-

lantis Rising. no. 5, pp. 34-35, 52, and 54. (Fall 1995)
[5] Barton, J., nd, The Grooved Spheres: Mysteries of the World
web site
[6] Psybertronist, nd, A balanced and concentric ringed mys-

tery spheroid as purportedly anomalous out-of-place arti-
facts
[7] Cairncross, B., 1988, "Cosmic cannonballs a rational expla-

nation: The South African Lapidary Magazine. v. 30, no.
1, pp. 4-6. (Full text via ResearchGate.)
[8] Heinrich, P.V., 1997, Mystery spheres: National Center for

Science Education Reports. v. 17, no.1, p. 34. (Jan-
uary/February 1997)
[9] Heinrich, P.V., 2007, South African concretions of contro-

versy: South African Lapidary Magazine. vol. 39, no. 1,
pp. 7-11.
[10] Heinrich, P.V., 2008, The Mysterious Spheres of Ottosdal,

South Africa. National Center for Science Education Re-
ports, v. 28, no. 1, pp. 28-33.
[11] Nel, LT., H. Jacobs, J.T. Allen and G.R. Bozzoli 1937. Won-
derstone. Geological Survey of South Africa Bulletin no. 8.
[12] Lindsay, J. F., 2007, Was There a Late Archean Biospheric

Explosion? Astrobiology. vol. 8, pp. 823-839.
[13] Lanham, A., 2004, archive.org: New horizons for Wonder-

stone, Mining Weekly, December 3, 2004.
Chapter 27
Lake Winnipesaukee mystery stone
27.2 Symbols
The stone is about 4 inches (100 mm) long and 2.5 inches
(64 mm) thick, dark and egg-shaped, bearing a variety of
carved symbols.[1] Carvings on one side of the stone show
an ear of corn and several other gures. The other side
is more abstract, featuring inverted arrows, a moon shape,
some dots and a spiral.[2]
A hole goes through the stone from top to bottom, seem-
ingly bored from both ends with dierent size bits (1 8 inch
(3.2 mm) at the top and 3 8 inch (9.5 mm) at the bottom).[2]
27.3 Analysis and interpretation

Lake Winnipesaukee mystery stone
at the New Hampshire Historical Society
A contemporary source suggested that the stone commem-
orates a treaty between two tribes.[3] Another writer later
suggested it is a thunderstone, and that thunderstones al-
The mystery stone from Lake Winnipesaukee is an alleged ways present the appearance of having been machined or
out-of-place artifact (OOPArt). The stones age, purpose, hand-worked: frequently they come from deep in the earth,
and origin are unknown.[1] embedded in lumps of clay, or even surrounded by solid
rock or coral.[4]
In 1994, a borescope analysis of the stones holes was per-
formed. State archaeologist Richard Boisvert later sug-
gested that the holes had the appearance of having been
27.1 History drilled by power tools from the 19th or 20th century:
In 1872, the stone was reportedly found in Meredith, New I've seen a number of holes bored in stone
Hampshire, United States, North America, while workers with technology that you would associate with
were digging a hole for a fence post. Seneca Ladd, a Mered- prehistoric North America. Theres a certain
ith businessman who hired the workers, was given credit for amount of unevenness ... and this hole was ex-
the discovery.[1] tremely regular throughout. What we did not
see was variations that would be consistent with
In 1892, upon Ladds death, the stone passed to one of his something that was several hundred years old.[5]
daughters.[1]
In 1927, the daughter donated the stone to the New Hamp- Scratches in the lower bore suggest it was placed on a metal
shire Historical Society.[1] shaft and removed several times.[5]
The stone is currently on exhibit at the Museum of New Analysis has concluded the stone is a type of quartzite, de-
Hampshire History.[1] rived from sandstone, or mylonite.
90
27.4 See also

Thunderstone
27.5 References
[1] The Mystery Stone. New Hampshire Historical Society.
Archived from the original on 2010-09-14. Retrieved 2010-
10-01.
[2] Citro, Joseph A. (2005). Joe Citros weird New England :

your travel guide to New Englands local legends and best kept
secrets. Sterling Publishing. p. 33. ISBN 1402733305.
[3] Author unknown (1872). The American Naturalist, Novem-

ber 1872.
[4] Author unknown (1931). Letter to the New Hampshire His-

torical Society, 1931.
[5] Klatell, James M. (July 23, 2006). New Englands 'Mystery

Stone': New Hampshire Displays Unexplained Artifact 134
Years Later. Associated Press. Retrieved 2010-10-01.
27.6 Bibliography
27.7 External links

Coordinates: 431225N 713208W / 43.20694N
71.53556W
Chapter 28
Llygadwy
Coordinates: 515303N 31402W / 51.884121N a sword made either in Britain or the Continent sometime
3.234015W Llygadwy is a locality near the village of during the 2nd or 1st centuries BCE. A. P. Fitzpatrick wrote
Bwlch in the county of Powys in southeast Wales. The that it was found to be securely stratied over a piece of
usual meaning of llygad in Welsh is 'eye' but it can signify barbed wire that was still attached to the fence post. The
a spring e.g. Llygad Llwchwr. The name therefore signies barbed wire itself had been manufactured during the late
the source of a stream known traditionally as 'Yw' though 1990s, certainly after around 1980.[4]
which is nowadays known as Ewyn Brook[1] and which
The purpose of the salting remains obscure, but it may have
ows through a wide, though short, vale known traditionally been inspired by the construction of outbuildings "in the
as Ystradyw. The modern spelling appears to be a corrup-
style of" ancient religious centres by a mid-19th century
tion of an earlier form Llygadyw.[2] The spring arises where owner of the site. Again, the programme shows how this
a band of non-marine limestone known as a calcrete out- builder made errors in his construction which show that the
crops within countryside otherwise dominated by sandstone building could not have been intended to be used for its ap-
rocks of the Old Red Sandstone. parent purpose. Whether this was a deliberate attempt to
deceive, or a sort of homage by a person of antiquarian in-
terests is obscure, and unlikely to be answered. However,
28.1 Time Team excavation the scale of the construction would have been dicult to
conceal, so an innocent explanation is most plausible. The
One (or more) people appear at some time to have salted property owner, although he had invited the Time Team to
the surroundings of a spring with archaeological relics for investigate his property, declined to be interviewed or ap-
reasons that can only be a matter of speculation. In 2001, pear on the show, sending his son-in-law in his place.
the popular UK archaeological television programme Time Many of the artefacts used for this were genuine, which
Team examined the site quite extensively. After some de- means that they were removed from their original context
bate and the discovery of a number of artefacts, the fake (at sites as far aeld as Switzerland), thus losing most of
nature of the site was soon demonstrated. Most notably: their archaeological information. Further, since the arte-
19th-century mortar was used to build an alleged Norman facts had not been recorded into the archaeological record
tower, supposedly Neolithic stones had been set in place in previously, their presence on this site attests to signicant
modern times, an aerial photo from 1972 showed the spring plundering of unknown sites to feed a market for illicit ar-
did not exist at all at that time, multiple genuine artefacts chaeological artefacts.
had been altered in modern times (a broken coin repaired
with modern glue, a statuette inscribed on top of existing
patina, numerous coins showing signs of modern cleaning
methods), and modern barbed wire was found underneath 28.2 References
a buried La Tene sword. [3]
[1] Ordnance Survey 1:25,000 scale Explorer map OL13 Brecon
The site contains a manufactured spring to which artefacts
Beacons National Park: eastern area
of a range of ages - Bronze Age to Georgian - have been
added to give it the semblance of being an important rit- [2] Cassini Historical map facsimile sheet 161 of Ordnance Sur-
ual centre. However one artefact in particular showed two vey Old Series mapping 1830-33
important points of data: that the person or person) doing
the salting did not understand stratigraphy, and that the [3] A Celtic Spring Llygadwy. Time Team. Channel 4. 21
salting took place after the mid-1980s. This artefact was January 2001. Retrieved 9 April 2011.
92
[4] Fitzpatrick, A. P. (2007). A Real Relic From a Sham Site:

An Iron Age Sword 'Found' At Llygadwy, Powys, Wales.
STUDIA CELTICA. XLI: 2030.
28.3 External links

Site map: Google Maps
Programme website: Channel 4 TV
Chapter 29
London Hammer
limestone may have formed a concretion around the object,

via a common process (like that of a petrifying well) which
often creates similar encrustations around fossils and other
nuclei.[7] J.R. Cole states: The stone is real, and it looks im-
pressive to someone unfamiliar with geological processes.
How could a modern artifact be stuck in Ordovician rock?
The answer is that the concretion itself is not Ordovician.
Minerals in solution can harden around an intrusive ob-
ject dropped in a crack or simply left on the ground if the
source rock (in this case, reportedly Ordovician) is chemi-
cally soluble.[8][9]
London Hammer in 1986
29.1 History
The London Hammer (also known as the London Arti-
fact) is a name given to a hammer made of iron and wood
Per subsequent accounts, the hammer was found by a local
that was found in London, Texas in 1936. Part of the ham-
couple, Max Hahn and his wife, while out walking along the
mer is embedded in a limy rock concretion, leading to it
course of the Red Creek near the town of London.[10] They
being regarded by some as an anomalous artifact, asking
spotted a curious piece of loose rock with a bit of wood
how an obviously man-made tool could come to be encased
apparently embedded in it and took it home with them. A
in a 400 million year old rock.[1][2]
decade later, their son Max broke open the rock to nd the
Creationist Carl Baugh referred to the hammer in the 1980s, concealed hammer head within. It began to attract wider
even using it as the basis of speculation of how the atmo- attention after Baugh obtained it in the 1980s.
spheric quality of a pre-ood earth could have encouraged
the growth of giants.[1][3] The hammer is now an exhibit in
Baughs Creation Evidence Museum, which sells replicas of
it to visitors.[4] 29.2 References
The metal hammerhead is approximately 6 inches (15 cen-
[1] If I had a Hammer. 5 (15). National Center for Science
timeters) long and has a diameter of 1 in (25 mm), leading Education. Winter 1985. pp. 4647. Retrieved 2007-
some to suggest that this hammer was not used for large 02-19. One of his principal pieces of evidence for human
projects, but rather for ne work or soft metal.[5] The metal contemporaneity with supposedly ancient geological strata is
of the hammerhead has been conrmed to consist of 96.6% an iron hammer with a wooden handle found near London,
iron, 2.6% chlorine, and 0.74% sulfur. The hammerhead Texas by others in the 1930s in an Ordovician stone con-
has not rusted since its discovery in the mid-1930s. The cretion in the scenario (but not in the Glen Rose region).
Hammer was bought by Carl Baugh in 1983, who claimed Humanists, Baugh said, claim it is an 18th century miners
the artifact was a "...monumental 'pre-Flood' discovery.[6] hammer. Noting the appearance of the handle, Baugh said a
similar-looking piece of wood from Michigan had just been
Other observers have noted that the hammer is stylistically radiocarbon dated 11,500 years old. (He gave no reference
consistent with typical American tools manufactured in the and did not blink at the date earlier than his view of creation.)
region in the late 1800s. One possible explanation for the Apparently this was meant to suggest that the hammer was
artifact is that the highly soluble minerals in the ancient earlier than the 19th (not 18th) century date other observers
94
29.2. REFERENCES 95
have suggested and to imply that the hammer itself had been [7] Kuban, Glen J. The London Hammer: An Alleged Out-of-
subjected to radiocarbon dating, although it had not been Place Artifact. The Paluxy Dinosaur. Retrieved 9 April
(Baugh, 1983b). 2015.
[2] Kuban, Glen J. (14 July 2006). The London Hammer: An [8] Cole, J. R. 1985. If I had a Hammer Creation/Evolution,
Alleged Out-of-Place Artifact. Glen Kubans Web Sites. Issue XV, pp.4647.
Retrieved 7 July 2015. An iron and wooden hammer, some-
times called the London Artifact or London Hammer, [9] Mihai, Andrei (March 19, 2009). The 10 most amazing
found by local hikers in a creek bed near London, Texas in unexplained artifacts. ZME Scienc. Retrieved Feb 22, 2015.
1936, has been promoted by Carl Baugh and other strict cre- [10] Texas Tracks and Artifacts: Do Texas Fossils Indicate Co-
ationists as an out-of place artifact. They maintain that the existence of Men and Dinosaurs? by Robert F. And Jerry
hammer, which was partially embedded in a small, limy rock D. Roth Helnstine (Jan 1, 1994)
concretion, originated in a Cretaceous rock formation (or an
Ordovician or Silurian one, depending on the account), thus
contradicting the standard geologic timetable. However, the
hammer was not documented in situ, and has not been reli-
ably associated with any specic host formation. Other rela-
tively recent implements have been found encased in by sim-
ilar nodules, and can form within centuries or even decades
under proper conditions (Stromberg, 2004). The hammer in
question was probably dropped or discarded by a local miner
or craftsman within the last few hundred years, after which
dissolved limy sediment hardened into a nodule around it.
Although a brief rebuttal to Baughs hammer claims was
made by Cole (1985), Baugh and a few other creationists
continue to promote it. This review provides further analy-
sis of the hammer and creationist claims about it.
[3] Giant Humans and Dinosaurs
[4] Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews (9 May 2007). The London

Artifact (Texas)". Bad Archaeology. Retrieved 17 Decem-
ber 2016.
[5] The London Artifact. www.creationevidence.org. Re-

trieved 25 February 2015.
[6] Hiddleston, Jim (20 July 2011). The London Hammer.

Historic Mysteries. Retrieved 25 February 2015. First of all,
there are conicting reports as to where the object was actu-
ally located in the surrounding rocks. And there is no photo-
graphic evidence of the object prior to being disturbed. One
report states that the hammer was embedded in a rock for-
mation dating from the Cretaceaus Period (65-135 million
years ago). But other accounts state that Mr. Hahn found
the hammer bearing nodule near these surrounding rocks.
Skeptics argue that minerals could have cemented the ham-
mer around the Cretaceous rock after it was dropped or left
behind. This could easily lead novice geologists to believe
that the hammer and the rock formation are from the same
time period. The only true method of determining the age of
the hammer is through Carbon 14 dating of the wooden han-
dle, but Baugh has yet to authorize this procedure. The han-
dle appears to be partially fossilized, so this certainly adds
to the argument that this a very ancient tool. But fossiliza-
tion can occur prematurely through various natural methods.
To skeptics, the hammer appears to be a tool that was aban-
doned or lost some 200 years ago, but to its [sic] support-
ers, this is a clear indication that man has been on this Earth
much longer than previously thought.
Chapter 30
Los Lunas Decalogue Stone
Coordinates: 344707N 1065947W / 34.785217N patination and was hardly visible. He was taken to the site
106.996512W by a guide who had seen it as a boy, back in the 1880s.[5]
However, Hibbens testimony is tainted by charges that in
at least two separate incidents, he fabricated some or all of
his archaeological data to support his pre-Clovis migration
theory.[6][7][8]
The reported 1880s date of discovery is important to those
who believe that the stone is pre-Columbian. However,
the Paleo-Hebrew script, which is closely related to the
Phoenician script, was well known by at least 1870, thus
not precluding the possibility of a modern hoax.[9]
Los Lunas Decalogue Stone in situ in 1997
The Los Lunas Decalogue Stone is a large boulder on the

side of Hidden Mountain, near Los Lunas, New Mexico,
about 35 miles (56 km) south of Albuquerque, that bears a
very regular inscription carved into a at panel.[1] The stone
is also known as the Los Lunas Mystery Stone or Com-
mandment Rock. The inscription is interpreted to be an
abridged version of the Decalogue or Ten Commandments
in a form of Paleo-Hebrew.[2] A letter group resembling
the tetragrammaton YHWH, or Yahweh, makes three ap-
Los Lunas Decalogue Stone after 2006 vandalization of rst line
pearances. The stone is controversial in that some claim the
inscription is Pre-Columbian, and therefore proof of early Because of the stones weight of over 80 tons, it was never
Semitic contact with the Americas.[3] moved to a museum or laboratory for study and safekeep-
ing. Many visitors have cleaned the stone inscriptions over
the years, likely destroying any possibility for scientic
30.1 History analysis of the inscriptions patina. Nevertheless, compar-
ing it to a modern inscription nearby, geologist George E.
The rst recorded mention of the stone is in 1933, when the Morehouse, a colleague of Barry Fell, estimated that the
late professor Frank Hibben (1910-2002), an archaeologist inscription could be between 500 and 2000 years old and
from the University of New Mexico, saw it.[4] According to explaining its freshness and lack of patina [10] as being due to
a 1996 interview, Hibben was convinced the inscription is frequent scrubbing to make it more visible.
ancient and thus authentic. He report[ed] that he rst saw In April 2006, the rst line of the unprotected inscription
the text in 1933. At the time it was covered with lichen and was obliterated by vandals.
96
30.3. SIMILAR LANDMARKS 97
Visitors to the site are required to purchase a $25 Recre- One argument against the stones antiquity is its ap-
ational Access Permit from the New Mexico State Land parent use of modern Hebrew (or otherwise atypical)
Oce. punctuation,[12] though amateur epigrapher Barry Fell ar-
gued that the punctuation is consistent with antiquity.[13]
Other researchers dismiss the inscription based on the nu-
30.2 Controversy merous stylistic and grammatical errors that appear in the
inscription.[12]
According to archaeologist Kenneth Feder, the stone is al-
most certainly a fake. He points out that the at face of the
stone shows a very sharp, crisp inscription... His main con-
cern however is the lack of any archaeological context. He
argues that to get to the location of the stone would have re-
quired whoever inscribed it to have stopped along the way,
encamped, eaten food, broken things, disposed of trash,
performed rituals, and so on. And those actions should have
left a trail of physical archaeological evidence across the
greater American Southwest, discovery of which would un-
deniably prove the existence of foreigners in New Mexico
in antiquity with a demonstrably ancient Hebrew material
culture... and states that There are no pre-Columbian an-
cient Hebrew settlements, no sites containing the everyday
detritus of a band of ancient Hebrews, nothing that even a
cursory knowledge of how the archaeological record forms
would demand there would be. From an archaeological
standpoint, thats plainly impossible.[14]
30.3 Similar landmarks

The Los Lunas Decalogue Stone is often grouped with the
Kensington Runestone, Dighton Rock, and the Newport
Tower as examples of American landmarks with disputed
provenances. Other disputed American Hebrew inscrip-
tions include the Smithsonian Institution's Bat Creek In-
scription and the Newark Ohio Decalogue Stone, Keystone,
and Johnson-Bradner Stone.
30.4 See also

Modern Samaritan mezuzah over doorway. Kiryat Luza, Mount
Gerizim. Bat Creek Inscription
Archaeolinguist Cyrus Gordon has proposed that the Los
Diusionism
Lunas Decalogue is a Samaritan mezuzah.[11] The familiar
Jewish mezuzah is a tiny scroll placed in a small container Newark Holy Stones
mounted by the entrance to a house. The ancient Samaritan
mezuzah, on the other hand, was commonly a large stone Pseudoarchaeology
slab placed by the gateway to a property or synagogue, and
bearing an abridged version of the Decalogue. On histori-
cal and epigraphic grounds, Gordon regards the Byzantine
period as the most likely for the inscription. The Samaritan 30.5 Notes
alphabet is a direct descendant of the Paleo-Hebrew alpha-
bet. [1] NM State Land Oce Mystery Stone webpage
98 CHAPTER 30. LOS LUNAS DECALOGUE STONE
[2] Deal (1999) provides a careful transcription and word-by- Fell, Barry, Ancient Punctuation and the Los Lu-
word translation. A similar online translation is provided by nas Text, Epigraphic Society, Occasional Publications,
Neuho and Fox (1999). 13:35, 1985.
[3] This claim is made, e.g., by Fell (1980, p. 167), Gordon Gordon, Cyrus, Diusion of Near East Culture in
(1995), Deal (1999) and Tabor (1997). Antiquity and in Byzantine Times, Orient 30-31
(1995), 69-81.
[4] Feder (2011, p. 160) states that the existence of the stone
was reported in print in 1933, but gives no reference. Neuho, Juergen, and Stan Fox, Translation of the
Los Lunas Inscription webspage dated 1999, ac-
[5] Tabor (1997). Tabor is a Professor in the Department of
Religious Studies, University of North Carolina - Charlotte. cessed Jan. 28, 2013.
[6] Preston (1995).

New Mexico State Land Oce, Mystery Stone, web-
page, accessed Jan. 26, 2013.
[7] Bliss (1940).
Preston, Douglas, The Mystery of Sandia Cave, New
[8] Dalton (2003). Yorker, 71 (16, June 12, 1995):66-83.
[9] Webster (1870, pp. 1766-67) provides a fairly complete, Tabor, James D, An Ancient Hebrew Inscription in
though antiquated, table of the Phoenician, Old Hebrew, and New Mexico: Fact or Fraud?" United Israel Bulletin,
Samaritan alphabets. 59 (Summer 1997): 1-3. Web version crawled by
Wayback Machine Dec. 2, 1998.
[10] Morehouse, George E.; The Los Lunas Inscriptions, a Geo-
logical Study, Epigraphic Society, Occasional Publications, Webster, Noah, American Dictionary of the English
13:44, 1985. Language, G&C Merriam, 1870.
[11] Gordon (1995).
[12] Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews (6 September 2011). The Los 30.7 External links
Lunas Inscription. Bad Archaeology. Retrieved 15 January
2014. Batya Ungar-Sargon, The Mystery Stone: Does a
rock in New Mexico show the Ten Commandments in
[13] Fell (1985).
ancient Hebrew? Harvard professor says yes, Tablet
[14] Feder (2011, pp. 159-62). (an online daily magazine of Jewish news and culture),
Feb. 27, 2013.
Fitzpatrick-Matthews, Keith, and Doeser, James,

30.6 References The Los Lunas Inscription Bad Archaeology (a web-
site examining dubious archaeological claims), 2013.
Bliss, Wesley L., A Chronological Problem Presented
by Sandia Cave, New Mexico. American Antiquity,
1940a 5(3):200-201.
Dalton, Rex, Dalton, R (27 November 2003).

University buildings named on shaky ground. Na-
ture. 426 (6965): 374. doi:10.1038/426374a. ISSN
0028-0836. PMID 14647348..
Deal, David Allen, Discovery of Ancient America, 3d

ed., Kherem La Yah Press, Irvine CA, 1999 (1st edi-
tion 1984).
Feder, Kenneth L. (2011). Encyclopedia of Dubious

Archaeology: From Atlantis to the Walam Olum. ABC-
CLIO/Greenwood. pp. 161162. ISBN 978-0-313-
37918-5..
Fell, Barry, Saga America, Times Books, 1980.

Chapter 31
Misra Gar il-Kbir
Also called cart ruts, they are up to 60 centimetres (24 in)

deep and have an average distance between them of 110
to 140 cm (43 to 55 in). Some cross while others form
junctions. This creates the illusion of a great railway station
switching yard.
Cart Ruts at Misrah Ghar il-Kbir
Misrah Ghar il-Kbir (informally known as Clapham

Junction) is a prehistoric site in Siiewi Malta near the
Dingli Clis. It is best known for its cart ruts - a complex
network of tracks gouged in the rock. The age and pur-
pose of the tracks are still a mystery of Maltese history. In A cart ruts junction at Ghar il-Kbir
general, most archeologists presume that the site developed
about 2000 BC after new settlers came over from Sicily to There are numerous theories about how these tracks were
start the Bronze Age in Malta. created. The most discussed are the following:
It is reported that the Clapham Junction nickname was Goods were transported here on sledges which gouged
given by an Englishman, who later reported that it re- the tracks into the rock.
minded him of the busy railway station Clapham Junction
in London. The tracks are real cart ruts for transporting goods.
It is an irrigation system.
31.1 Origin of the tracks There are also other attempts to explain the tracks:-
The tracks (known and signposted in Malta as Cart Ruts) The Maltese archeologist Anthony Bonanno thinks
can be found in a number of sites on Malta and on Gozo. that the ruts are devices of the Phoenicians, which
Busewdien in St Pauls Bay, Naxxar, San Gwann and would mean that the tracks were made more recently,
Bidnija are good examples of cart tracks found on the Is- in the 7th century BC.
land of Malta. Gozos best Cart Ruts are on the Ta en
plateau, Sannat. The Misra Gar il-Kbir site in Siiewi Recent research suggests that these may have been caused
near the Dingli Clis in the south of the island is probably by wooden-wheeled carts eroding soft limestone. An anal-
the most impressive they form here a real trac jam. ysis was made of the stresses that would have been caused
99
100 CHAPTER 31. MISRA GAR IL-KBIR
by a cart which would t the ruts. Professor Mottershead of

Portsmouth University said The underlying rock in Malta
is weak and when its wet it loses about 80 per cent of its
strength. The carts would have rst made tracks in the
soil but when that eroded, the cartwheels ran directly on
the bedrock, making it easier for other carts to follow the
same tracks. An Italian publishing house (Edizioni Saecula
www.edizionisaecula.it) with its book Halade mystai. In-
iziando al mare - Cart ruts una nuova interpretazione gives
new suggestions about this archaeological evidences. [1][2]
31.2 References
[1] Ancient mystery solved by geographers Archive.org
[2] Mottershead, Derek; Alastair Pearson & Martin Schaefer

The cart ruts of Malta: an applied geomorphology ap-
proach Antiquity Vol 82:318, 2008 pp 1065-1079 (pdf)
31.3 External links

Media related to Misra Gar il-Kbir at Wikimedia
Commons
http://www.gozo.gov.mt/pages.aspx?page=747
Coordinates: 355107N 142348E / 35.8519N

14.3967E
Chapter 32
Newark Holy Stones
The Newark Holy Stones refer to a set of artifacts allegedly

discovered by David Wyrick in 1860 within a cluster of
ancient Indian burial mounds near Newark, Ohio. The set
consists of the Keystone, a stone bowl, and the Decalogue
with its sandstone box. They can be viewed at the Johnson-
Humrickhouse Museum in Coshocton, Ohio.[1] The site
where the objects were found is known as The Newark
Earthworks, one of the biggest collections from an ancient
American Indian culture known as the Hopewell that ex-
isted from approximately 100 BC to AD 500.[2]
The events surrounding the discovery and authenticity of
the artifacts are controversial. A wide consensus believes
that the artifacts are either the subject of a hoax or origi-
nate from a time period that has no relation to the Hopewell.
Others believe that the artifacts inscription contains dialect
that is in fact of Judean descent and could have existed dur-
ing that time.
32.1 Discovery
The rst of these artifacts, popularly known as the Keystone
due to its shape, was excavated in June 1860. Unlike other
ancient artifacts found previously in this region, the Key-
stone was inscribed with Hebrew.[3] It contains one phrase
on each side:
Holy of Holies
King of the Earth
The Law of God
The Word of God
The second nd came later in November 1860 when Wyrick

and his excavation team came across a sandstone box which
contained a small, black limestone rock within[4] (the type
of rock was identied by geologists Dave Hawkins and Ken The Decalogue
Bork of Denison University[5] ). This rock was carved with
post-Exilic square Hebrew letters on all sides translated to
101
102 CHAPTER 32. NEWARK HOLY STONES
be a condensed version of the Ten Commandments.[6] The the Ohio Historical Society who has extensively studied
name Decalogue Stone, comes from the translation of the the Hopewell culture, suggests that the artifacts might have
Hebrew letters that outline the religious and moral codes de- been scientically forged to help advance the theory on
scribed in Exodus 20:2-17 and Deuteronomy 5:6-21, which monogenism.[9] In 1860, slavery was a subject of poignant
refer to the Decalogue or Ten Commandments. The in- interest and heated debate that was reaching a critical point
scription begins on the front at the top of an arch above the in American society. Anthropology and other forms of sci-
gure of a bearded man who is wearing a turban, robe, and ence were often used in defense or opposition.[10] Discus-
appears to be holding a tablet. It runs down the left side, sions promoting monogenism, for example, were often used
continues around all sides, and makes its way back to the to oppose slavery and segregation.[10]
front up the right side to where it began. This pattern indi- Further speculation is added by the prevalence of hoaxes
cates that the inscription was meant to be read repetitively.
and inconsistent testimony in similar areas of study regard-
Right above the gure of the man is a separate inscription ing the Cardi Giant, the Los Lunas Decalogue Stone and
which translates to "Moses".[6] Also found nearby during
the Beringer stones.
the same excavation was a small stone bowl about the size of
a tea cup, which is also on display with the other artifacts.[4]
32.3 Hoax theories
32.3.1 David Wyrick
Among some of the hoax theories is that Wyrick faked the

artifacts and planted them at the excavation sites. Prior
to his discovery, Wyrick supported the belief that the
Lost Tribes of Israel were the ancestors of ancient mound
builders in Ohio. Wyrick spent a great deal of time search-
ing a number of excavation sites at various mounds attempt-
ing to nd supporting evidence of this belief. Some ar-
The Keystone
gue that Wyrick could have become more desperate as time
went by providing the motivation to commit such an act.
In 1861, Wyrick published a pamphlet that described his
32.2 Skepticism account of the artifact discoveries. The publishing included
woodcuts of the inscriptions found on the stones. When
The Newark Holy Stones are viewed with considerable comparing Wyricks woodcuts of the Decalogue to the ac-
skepticism. The idea that there is a connection between the tual inscription found on the stone, Wyrick made at least
ancient Hopewell mound builders and Jewish settlers that 38 errors involving 256 Hebrew letters. Mistakes include
were in the Americas before Columbus is considered to be illegible and omitted letters. Wyricks depiction of Moses
a form of pseudoarchaeology. on the woodcuts had inconsistencies as well. Wyrick shows
Moses wearing a beret instead of a turban. He also shows
The rst stone to be found was written in modern Hebrew. Moses in a 19th-century dress instead of the owering robe
In July 1860 Abraham Geiger wrote in the New York Times shown on the stone.
that the bungling work of an unskilled stone mason and the
strangeness of some letters as well as the many mistakes and Some believe that the person or group responsible for the in-
transpositions was his fault. The letters are not antique. This scription had to have an extensive knowledge of the Hebrew
is not a relic of hoary antiquity.[7] language. Given that Wyrick made a large number of mis-
takes on the woodcuts seem to indicate that he may not have
Just over three months later, the second stone was found. been the stones author. Beverley H. Moseley, Jr., former
This was not only considerably more elaborate, it was writ- art director of the Ohio Historical Society, compared the
ten in archaic Hebrew. Ken Feder compares this with some- carving of Moses on the stone to Wyricks woodcut copy.
one today announcing that they had discovered a hitherto He concluded that both images couldn't have been made by
unknown play by Shakespeare which was then exposed as the same person.[11] After Wyricks death, Colonel Charles
a modern forgery, then shortly thereafter announcing the Whittlesey published a paper[12] in 1872 in which he recalls
discovery of a more plausible new play.[8] discovering a Hebrew bible among Wyricks personal items.
Another possibility is that the Newark Holy Stones were Whittlesey concludes at the time that the stones were a hoax,
forged to support a political viewpoint. Brad Lepper, of and assumed that the bible was Wyricks source of inspira-
32.5. SEE ALSO 103
tion for the inscription. However this theory was later dis- 32.5 See also
credited after it was determined that the letters used on the
Decalogue did not represent a style that would have been Los Lunas Decalogue Stone
consistent with the theory.[11][13]
The Hebrew version used in the inscriptions is another point
of contention. The version used was post-Exilic, but to be 32.6 References
from a Lost Tribe, it should have been in pre-Exilic form.
Some believe this is another example that shows the arti-
facts were either a hoax or did not date back to the time [1] Newark Holy Stones. Johnson-Humrickhouse Museum.
Retrieved 11 July 2016.
of the mound builders. Wyrick also made a claim in a let-
ter he wrote to Joseph Henry in 1863one year before his [2] Hopewell Culture. Ohio History Central. Retrieved 23
deaththat he might have been a victim of a hoax. August 2010.
[3] J. Huston McCulloch. View of the Keystone. Archaeolog-

ical Outliers: Adventures in Underground Archaeology. Ohio
32.3.2 Rev. John W. McCartys and stone- State University. Retrieved 23 August 2010.
cutter Elijah Sutton [4] The UnMuseum: The Decalogue Stones. The UnMu-
seum. Retrieved 23 August 2010.
Rev. John W. McCarty and Elijah Sutton were both resi-
dents of Newark when the Decalogue Stone (and the Key- [5] Marder, William (2005). Indians in the Americas: The Un-
stone) was found. Elijah Sutton was a stonecutter with no told Story. San Diego, CA: The Book Tree. p. 48. ISBN
other direct link to the event other than his part in carv- 1-58509-104-9.
ing Wyricks headstone when he died. However, it is as-
[6] J. Huston McCulloch. The Newark Holy Stones"". Ar-
serted that because the Decalogue Stone is made from sim-
chaeological Outliers: Adventures in Underground Archaeol-
ilar materials and is of the same width (thickness) as his ogy. Ohio State University. Retrieved 23 August 2010.
headstones, he must have cut the stone. As for Rev. John
W. McCarty, he played a more direct role in the artifacts [7] Lepper, Bradley T.; Kenneth L. Feder; Terry A. Barn-
discovery. hart; Deborah A. Bolnick (NovemberDecember 2011).
Civilizations Lost and Found: Fabricating History - Part
It was with the help of McCarty that the stone was trans-
Two: False Messages in Stone. Skeptical Inquirer. 35/6.
lated. Upon receiving the stone McCarty was able to trans- Retrieved 11 July 2012.
late it within hours. It is also likely that many Christian
clergy supported the idea of the Lost Tribes myth during [8] Kenneth L. Feder, Encyclopedia of Dubious Archaeol-
the 1800s, for it not only validated the Biblical tale of the ogy: From Atlantis To The Walam Olum, pages 192-
Lost Tribes but also implied their religious right to continue 193(Greenwood, 2010). ISBN 978-0-313-37919-2
colonize America and their Christianization of the Native
Americans. [9] Hollon, Amy (20 August 2010). Glenn Beck men-
tion boosts Newark Earthworks. NewarkAdvocate.com.
Archived from the original on August 23, 2010. Retrieved
30 August 2010.
32.4 Related discoveries [10] Anthropology, History of. Jacksonian America and Poly-
genism; Types of Mankind, 1854, The Bureau of Ethnology.
Retrieved 30 August 2010.
There were other stones found at the Newark site, like the
Keystone. Two other stones were also found at Newark [11] McCulloch, J. Huston (1989). The Newark Hebrew Stones:
shortly after Wyricks death (they have since been lost). Wyricks Letter to Joseph Henry. Midwest Epigraphic Jour-
However, they were quickly dismissed as fakes when the nal. 6: 510.
local dentist, John H. Nicol, claimed that he had carved and
[12] Whittlesey, Charles (1872). Archaeological Frauds: In-
introduced the stones to the site. Finally, a fth stone was
scriptions Attributed to the Mound Builders. Three Remark-
found at the same site as the Decalogue stone two years later able Forgeries.. Western Reserve Historical Society Histori-
by David M. Johnson, a banker, and Dr. Nathaniel Roe cal & Archaeological Tract #9.
Bradner, a physician. This fth stone, named the Johnson-
Bradner Stone, was also inscribed with post-Exilic Hebrew. [13] Ohio History: Ohio Historical Society. Columbus, OH: Fred
The Johnson-Bradner Stone has since been lost. J. Heer. 1908. pp. 217218.
104 CHAPTER 32. NEWARK HOLY STONES
32.7 Further reading

Alrutz, Robert W. (1980). The Newark Holy Stones:
The History of an Archaeological Tragedy. Denison
University.
Myers, Jan (27 March 2011). Curator lectures about

Newark Holy Stones. Coshocton Tribune. Gannett.
Archived from the original on 21 January 2013. Re-
trieved 11 July 2016.
Williams, Stephen (1 May 1991). Fantastic Archae-
ology: The Wild Side of North American Prehistory.
Univ. of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 16775. ISBN
0812213122.
Chapter 33
Olmec alternative origin speculations
critical and regard the promotion of such unfounded the-

ories as a form of ethnocentric racism at the expense
of indigenous Americans.[2] The consensus view main-
tained across publications in peer-reviewed academic jour-
nals that are concerned with Mesoamerican and other pre-
Columbian research is that the Olmec and their achieve-
ments arose from inuences and traditions that were wholly
indigenous to the region, or at least the New World,
and there is no reliable material evidence to suggest
otherwise.[3] They, and their neighbouring cultures with
whom they had contact, developed their own characters
which were founded entirely on a remarkably interlinked
and ancient cultural and agricultural heritage that was lo-
cally shared, but arose quite independently of any extra-
hemispheric inuences.[4]
33.2 African origins

San Lorenzo Tenochtitln Colossal Head 6, a 3-meter-high Olmec
sculpture with lips and nose said to resemble African facial features.
Some writers claim that the Olmecs were related to peoples
of Africa-based primarily on their interpretation of facial
features of Olmec statues. They additionally contend that
Olmec alternative origin speculations are explanations epigraphical, genetic, and osteological evidence supports
that have been suggested for the formation of Olmec civi- their claims. The idea was rst suggested by Jos Melgar,
lization which contradict generally accepted scholarly con- who discovered the rst colossal head at Hueyapan (now
sensus. These origin theories typically involve contact with Tres Zapotes) in 1862 and subsequently published two pa-
Old World societies. Although these speculations have be- pers that attributed this head to a Negro race.[5] The view
come somewhat well-known within popular culture, partic- was espoused in the early 20th century by Leo Wiener and
ularly the idea of an African connection to the Olmec, they others.[6] Some modern proponents such as Ivan van Ser-
are not considered credible by the majority of researchers tima and Clyde Ahmad Winters have identied the Olmecs
of Mesoamerica. with the Mand people of West Africa.[6]
33.1 Mainstream scientic consen- 33.2.1 Epigraphic evidence

sus Some researchers claim that the Mesoamerican writing sys-
tems are related to African scripts. In the early 19th cen-
The great majority of scholars who specialize in Mesoamer- tury, Constantine Samuel Ranesque proposed that the
ican history, archaeology and linguistics remain uncon- Mayan inscriptions were probably related to the Libyco-
vinced by alternative origin speculations.[1] Many are more Berber writing of Africa.[7] Leo Wiener[8] and others claim
105
106 CHAPTER 33. OLMEC ALTERNATIVE ORIGIN SPECULATIONS
that various Olmec and Epi-Olmec symbols are similar to gure of 0.101, for the presence of Dongolans at Tlatilco.
those found in the Vai script (a relatively modern script in Wiercinski summarizes his research by oering the follow-
Liberia which may have Cherokee inuence[9] ), in particu- ing ethnogenetical hypotheses":[16]
lar, the symbols on the Tuxtla Statuette, Teo Mask, Cascajal
Block, and the celts in Oering 4 at La Venta.
The indigenous rootstock of Tlatilco and Cerro de las
These assertions have found no support among Mesoamer-
Mesas consists of Ainoid, Arctic, and Pacic racial
ican researchers. While mainstream scholars have made
elements.
signicant progress translating the Maya script, researchers
have yet to translate Olmec glyphs.
A next migratory wave brought in additional Pacic
as well as Laponoid elements.
33.2.2 Genetic evidence
Some Chinese inuence of Shang Period could pen-
Genetic and immunological studies over the past two etrate Mesoamerica
decades have failed to yield evidence of precolumbian
African contributions to the indigenous populations of the A strange transatlantic, more or less sporadic migra-
Americas.[10][11][12] tion brought Armenoid, Equatorial, and Bushmenoid
elements.
33.2.3 Osteological evidence

Wiercinskis research methods and conclusions are not ac-
Andrzej Wiercinski claims that some of the Olmecs were of cepted by the vast majority of Mesoamerican scholars, in
African origin.[13] He supports this claim with cranial evi- part because of his reliance on the Polish Comparative-
dence from two Mesoamerican sites: Tlatilco and Cerro de Morphological methodology which limits the placement of
las Mesas. Tlatilco is a site in the Valley of Mexico. Al- skull types within a very narrow spectrum that is often
though outside the Olmec heartland, Olmec inuences ap- within Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongoloid. Native Amer-
pear in the architectural record. The crania were from the icans are thus made to t within these groups which of-
Pre-Classic period, contemporary with the Olmec. Cerro ten yields false and contradictory assumptions as a result
de las Mesa is within the Olmec heartland, although accord- of sample bias.
ing to Wiercinski, the series . . . is dated on the ClassicAn interdisciplinary analysis of Native American skulls has
period.[14] The Classic period is generally dened to startshown that there is no real evidence, apart from super-
around AD 250, or 600 years after the end of the Olmec cial misjudgments and erroneous conclusions, that Native
culture. Americans have any link to an African presence in Amer-
[17]
To determine the racial heritage of the skeletons, ica before the European encounter.
Wiercinski used classic diagnostic traits, determined
by craniometric and cranioscopic methods, as well as
the Polish Comparative-Morphological School skeletal
reference collection. These measurements were then
33.3 Chinese origins
compared against three crania sets from Poland, Mongolia
and Uganda to represent three racial categories which Some researchers have argued that the Olmec civilization
allowed Wiercinski to sort each skull into one or more came into existence with the help of Chinese refugees,
racial categories. particularly at the end of the Shang dynasty.[19] In 1975,
Betty Meggers of the Smithsonian Institution argued that
Based on his comparisons, Wiercinski found that 14% of the Olmec civilization originated due to Shang Chinese
the skeletons from Tlatilco and 4.5% of the skeletons from inuences around 1200 BC.[20] In a 1996 book, Mike
Cerro de las Mesas had elements of Black racial compo- Xu, with the aid of Chen Hanping, claimed that the very
sition. same La Venta celts discussed above actually bore Chinese
In the last section of his paper, Wiercinski compared the characters.[21][22] These claims are unsupported by main-
physiognomy of the skeletons to corresponding examples of stream Mesoamerican researchers.[23] The evidence relied
Olmec sculptures and bas-reliefs on the stelas. For exam- on by Mike Xu, including the coincidence of markings on
ple, Wiercinski states that the colossal Olmec heads repre- Olmec pottery with those on Chinese oracle bone writings,
sent the Dongolan type.[15] The empirical frequencies of the signicance of jade in both cultures and the shared
the Dongolan type at Tlatilco calculated by Wiercinski was knowledge of the position of true North, was discussed in
0.231, more than twice as high as Wiercinskis theoretical an article by Claire Liu in 1997 [24]
33.5. NORDIC ORIGINS 107
tral America, Chiapas and Yucatan.[27] LDS founder Joseph

Smith Jr. placed the arrival of the Jaredites in the lake
country of America (region of Lake Ontario), allowing for
the eventual migration of Book of Mormon peoples to Mex-
ico and Central America.[28]
Some LDS scholars identify the Olmec civilization with
the Jaredites, citing similarities and noting that the period
in which the Olmecs ourished and later declined corre-
sponds roughly with the Jaredite civilization timeline, al-
though most disagree with this idea.
33.5 Nordic origins
A jade Olmec mask. Gordon Ekholm, who was an eminent archae-

ologist and curator at the American Museum of Natural History,
suggested that the Olmec art style might have originated in Bronze
Age China.[18]
33.4 Jaredite origins
See also: Archaeology and the Book of Mormon
In the Book of Mormon, a text regarded as scripture by

churches and members of the Latter Day Saint movement,
the Jaredites are described as a people who left the Old
Detail of the carved portrait nicknamed Uncle Sam by researchers
World in ancient times and founded a civilization in the
Americas. Mainstream American History and Literature
According to Michael Coe, explorer and cultural diusion-
specialists place the literary setting for the Book of Mormon
ist Thor Heyerdahl claimed that at least some of the Olmec
among the Mound-builders of North America. The work
leadership had Nordic ancestry, a view at least partly in-
is therefore classied in the American Mound-builder
spired by the bearded gure, often referred to as Uncle
genre of the 19th century.[25] LDS scholars and authors
Sam,[29] carved into La Venta Stela 3, whose apparent
seek to demonstrate that events described in the Book of
aquiline nose has been cited as possible evidence for an-
Mormon have a literal foundation. A popular Book of
cient visitors to the Americas from the Old World:
Mormon geography model places the scene of the Jared-
ite arrival and subsequent development, in lands around
the Isthmus of Tehuantepec in Mesoamerica.[26] The tra- The presence of Uncle Sam inspired Thor
dition leading to this Central American model, however, Heyerdahl, the Norwegian explorer and author of
does not clearly originate with the Book of Mormon (rst Kon Tiki, among others to claim a Nordic ances-
published in 1830) but with enthusiastic interest in John try for at least some of the Olmec leadership...
Lloyd Stephens 1841 bestseller, Incidents of travel in Cen- [However], it is extremely misleading to use the
testimony of artistic representations to prove eth- [13] Rensberger, B. (September, 1988). Black kings of ancient
nic theories. The Olmec were American Indians, America, Science Digest, 74-77 and 122. See also Wiercin-
not Negroes (as Melgar had thought) or Nordic ski, A. (1972a) An anthropological study on the origin of
supermen.[30] 'Olmecs", Swiatowit, 33, p. 143-174.
[14] Wiercinski (1972b).
33.6 See also [15] Wiercinski (1972b), p.160
[16] Wiercinski, p. 158 or p. 171.

Settlement of the Americas
[17] http://www.icb.ufmg.br/lbem/pdf/
Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact theories gonzalez2008ajpa-americapeopling.pdf
Ancient Egyptian race controversy [18] Pool, p. 92, who cites Gordon Ekholm (1964) Transpacic
Contacts in Prehistoric Man in the New World JD Jennings
and E. Norbeck, eds., Chicago: University of Chicago, pp.
489510.
33.7 Footnotes
[19] This theory is mentioned in the history book The Rise of
[1] See Grove (1976) or Ortiz de Montellano (1997). the West: A History of the Human Community (1963) by
William H. McNeill
[2] Robbing Native American Cultures: Van Sertimas
Afrocentricity and the Olmecs an article from Current [20] Meggers.
Anthropology.
[21] Xu, Mike. TRANSPACIFIC CONTACTS?". Archived
[3] Taube, p. 17. There simply is no material evidence from the original on August 2, 2001. Retrieved 15 Decem-
of any Pre-Hispanic contact between the Old World and ber 2015.
Mesoamerica before the arrival of the Spanish in the six-
teenth century. [22] Xu, Mike (1996). The Origin. University of Central Okla-
homa Press. p. 52. ISBN 978-0964869424.
[4] Diehl (2004); Coe (1968).
[23] See for example Grove (1976).
[5] Stirling, p. 2, who cites Melgar (1869) and Melgar (1871).
[24] .
[6] Ortz de Montellano, Bernard & Gabriel Haslip Viera &
Warren Barbour 1997 [25] Roger G. Kennedy, HIDDEN CITIES THE DISCOVERY
AND LOSS OF ANCIENT NORTH AMERICAN CIVILIZA-
[7] C. S. Ranesque, First letter to Mr. Champollion on the TION, 1994, pp. 228-231; Robert Silverberg, and the
Graphic systems of Otolum or Palenque in Central Amer- mound-builders vanished from the earth,American Heritage
ica, in The Decipherment of Ancient Maya Writing, Hous- Magazine, June 1969, Volume 20, Issue 4
ton, S. et al., Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press
(2001), (pp. 45-47); and C. S. Ranesque, Second letter to [26] Southerton (2004, p.157)
Mr. Champollion--Elements of the Glyphs, ibid., pp. 48-
53. [27] Coon, W. Vincent, Choice Above All Other Lands Book of
Mormon Covenant Lands According to the Best Sources, Ch.
[8] Leo Wiener, Africa and the Discovery of America, Volume 4, Unsigned Articles and a Popular Book, pp. 64-104
3, Philadelphia, PA: Innes & Sons (1922) p. 271.
[28] Joseph Smith (editor), Traits of the Mosaic History Found
[9] Tuchscherer, Konrad (2002). Cherokee and West Africa: Ex- Among the Aztaeca Nations, Times and Seasons, June 15,
amining the Origins of the Vai Script. History in Africa, 29. 1842, Vol. 3, No. 16, pp 818-820; signed with Joseph
pp. 427486. JSTOR 3172173. Smiths ED. Joseph Smith comments on a chapter from
Josiah Priests American Antiquities and Discoveries in the
[10] http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/ West. Coon notes that Joseph Smith uses precisely the same
journal.pgen.1000500 description as Priest, Humboldt and others in describing the
Great Lakes region as the lake country. See, Lake, The
[11] Brown, David. Among Many Peoples, Little Genomic Va- Book of Mormon & Mound-Builder America
riety. The Washington Post. Retrieved May 20, 2010.
[29] see Coe (1968, p.59)
[12] https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/
lan/en/atlas.html [30] Coe. p. 55
33.8. REFERENCES 109
33.8 References Americas First Civilization. Ancient

peoples and places series. London:
Aguirre Beltrn, Gonzalo (1972). La Thames & Hudson. ISBN 0-500-
poblacin negra de Mxico: Estudio 02119-8. OCLC 56746987.
etnohistrico (in Spanish) (2nd edi- Green, L.D., (2000), "Mitochondrial
tion, with corrections and expansions DNA anities of the people of
ed.). Mxico D.F.: Fondo de Cultura North-Central Mexico", American
Econmica. OCLC 781507. Journal of Human Genetics, 66:989-
Alchina-France, J. (1985). Los ori- 998.
genes de America, Madrid: Editorial Grove, David C. (September 1976).
Alhambra. Olmec Origins and Transpacic
Bernal, Ignacio (1968). Views of Diusion: Reply to Meggers.
Olmec Culture. In Elizabeth P. American Anthropologist, New
Benson. Dumbarton Oaks Confer- Series (JSTOR reproduction).
ence on the Olmec, October 28th and Arlington, VA: American An-
29th, 1967 (PDF). Washington DC: thropological Association and
Dumbarton Oaks Research Library aliated societies. 78 (3): 634637.
and Collection. pp. 135142. OCLC doi:10.1525/aa.1976.78.3.02a00120.
52523439. JSTOR 674425. OCLC 1479294.
Coe, Michael D. (1968). Amer- Gutherie, J. (1996). The Olmec
icas First Civilization. Richard B. World: Ritual and Rulership. Prince-
Woodbury (consultant). New York: ton University: University of Prince-
American Heritage, in association ton Press.
with the Smithsonian Institution; dis- MacLachlan, C.M. & Rodriguez O,
tributed by Van Nostrand (Princeton, J.E., The Forging of the Cosmic Race:
NJ). OCLC 451758. A Reinterpretation of Colonial Mexico,
Coe, Michael D. (Summer 1973). University of California Press (1980)
Mormons and Archaeology: An Marquez, C. (1956). Estudios arque-
Outside View. Dialogue: A Jour- ologicas y ethnogracas. Mexico.
nal of Mormon Thought. Stanford, Meggers, Betty J. (March 1975).
CA: Dialogue Foundation. 8 (2): The Transpacic Origin of
4048. ISSN 0012-2157. OCLC Mesoamerican Civilization: A
197923057. Preliminary Review of the Evi-
Coe, Michael D. (1994). Mexico: dence and Its Theoretical Implica-
from the Olmecs to the Aztecs (4th editions. American Anthropologist,
tion, revised and enlarged ed.). Lon- New Series (JSTOR reproduc-
don and New York: Thames & Hud- tion). Arlington, VA: American
son. ISBN 0-500-27722-2. OCLC Anthropological Association and
29708907. aliated societies. 77 (1): 127.
Covarrubias, Miguel (1986) [1946]. doi:10.1525/aa.1975.77.1.02a00020.
Mexico South: The Isthmus of JSTOR 674066. OCLC 1479294.
Tehuantepec (Reprint, Originally Melgar, Jose (1869) Antigedades
published New York: Knopf 1946 mexicanas, notable escultura an-
ed.). London: KPI (Kegan Paul In- tigua, in Boletn de la Sociedad
ternational), distributed by Routledge Mexicana de Geografa y Estadstica,
& Kegan Paul, by arrangement poca 2, vol. 1, pp. 292-297,
with Alfred A. Knopf. ISBN Mexico.
0-7103-0184-7. OCLC 14069879. Melgar, Jose (1871) Estudio sobre la
Cuevas, Marco P. Hernadez (2004). antigedad y el origen de la Cabeza
African Mexicans and the discourse Colosal de tipo etipico que existe en
on Modern Mexico. University Press, Hueyapan del cantn de los Tuxtlas
Oxford. in Boletn de la Sociedad Mexicana de
Diehl, Richard (2004). The Olmecs: Geografa y Estadstica, poca 2, vol.
3, pp. 104-109; Mexico. production). Pre-Columbian Art at

Ortiz de Montellano, Bernard; Dumbarton Oaks, no. 2. Washing-
Gabriel Haslip-Viera; Warren Bar- ton, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research
bour (Spring 1997). They Were Library and Collection; Trustees of
NOT Here before Columbus: Afro- Harvard University. ISBN 0-88402-
centric Hyperdiusionism in the 275-7. OCLC 56096117.
1990s. Ethnohistory. Durham, Underhill, P.A., Jin, L., Zemans,
NC: Duke University Press, is- R., Oefner, J. and Cavalli-Sforza,
sued by the American Society L.L.(1996, January). "A pre-
for Ethnohistory. 44 (2): 199 Columbian Y chromosome-specic
234. doi:10.2307/483368. JSTOR transition and its implications for
483368. OCLC 42388116. human evolutionary history", Pro-
Pool, Christopher A. (2007). ceedings of the National Academy of
Olmec Archaeology and Early Sciences USA, 93, p. 196-200.
Mesoamerica. Cambridge World Van Sertima, Ivan (1976). They came
Archaeology. Cambridge and New before Columbus. New York.
York: Cambridge University Press. Wiercinski, A. (1971), Anidades
ISBN 978-0-521-78882-3. OCLC raciales de algunas poblaiones anti-
68965709. quas de Mexico, Anales de Instituto
Rensberger, B. ( September, 1988). Nacional de Antropologa e Historia,
Black kings of ancient America, 7a epoca, tomo II, pp. 123-143.
Science Digest, 74-77 and 122. Wiercinski,A. (1972). Inter- and
Salas, Antonio; Richards, Martin; Intrapopulational Racial Dierentia-
Lareu, Mara-Victoria; Scozzari, tion of Tlatilco, Cerro de Las Mesas,
Rosaria; Coppa, Alfredo; Torroni, Teothuacan, Monte Alban and Yu-
Antonio; Macaulay, Vincent; Car- catan Maya, XXXlX Congreso In-
racedo, ngel (2004) The African tern. de Americanistas, Lima 1970,
Diaspora: Mitochondrial DNA and Vol. 1, p. 231-252.
the Atlantic Slave Trade, American Wiercinski,A. (1972b). An an-
Journal of Human Genetics; March thropological study on the origin of
2004; 74(3): p. 454465. 'Olmecs", Swiatowit, 33:1972, pp.
Sorenson, John L. (1992). When 143-174.
Lehis Party Arrived in the Land, Did Wiercinski, A. & Jairazbhoy, R.A.
They Find Others There?. Provo, UT: (1975) Comment, The New Diu-
Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Reli- sionist, 5 (18),5
gious Scholarship. Retrieved April Wilford, John Noble; Mother Cul-
2007. Check date values in: |access- ture, or Only a Sister?, The New York
date= (help) Times, March 15, 2005.
Southerton, Simon G. (2004). Losing Wolverton, Susan Stanseld (2004).
a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, Having visions: The Book of Mormon
and the Mormon Church. Salt Lake Translated and Exposed in Plain En-
City, UT: Signature Books. ISBN 1- glish. New York: Algora. ISBN 0-
56085-181-3. OCLC 55534917. 87586-308-6. OCLC 54806382.
Stirling, Matthew W. (1968). Eliz- Xu, H. Mike (1996) Origin of the
abeth P. Benson, ed. Dumbarton Olmec Civilization, University of Cen-
Oaks Conference on the Olmec, Oc- tral Oklahoma Press.
tober 28th and 29th, 1967 (PDF on-
line reproduction). Washington DC:
Dumbarton Oaks Research Library
and Collection. pp. 18. OCLC
52523439.
Taube, Karl (2004). Olmec Art at
Dumbarton Oaks (PDF online re-
Chapter 34
Pangboche Hand
34.1 Story
Oil businessman and adventurer Tom Slick rst heard ac-

counts of the possible existence of a Yeti hand held as a
ritual artifact in the monastery at Pangboche during one of
his rst Abominable Snowman treks in 1957. The Slick
expeditions were the rst to bring photographs of the hand
back to the West.
During later Tom Slick-sponsored expeditions in and
around the Himalayas, his associates gathered more infor-
mation on the Pangboche hand, and an eort to further
examine it was planned. In 1959 Peter Byrne, a member
of Slicks expedition that year, reportedly stole pieces of
the artifact after the monks who owned it refused to allow
its removal for study.[1] Byrne claimed to have replaced the
stolen bone fragments with human bones, rewrapping the
hand to disguise his theft.[1]
Byrne smuggled the bones from Nepal into India, after
which actor James Stewart allegedly smuggled the hand
out of the country in his luggage.[1] Cryptozoologist Loren
Coleman rediscovered this story while writing Tom Slicks
biography in the 1980s. Coleman conrmed details of the
incidents with written materials in the Slick archives, inter-
views with Byrne, and correspondence with Stewart. Byrne
later conrmed the Pangboche hand story via a letter from
Stewart that Byrne published in a general book on Nepalese
wildlife.[2]
Photo of the Pangboche Hand, taken in 1958 by Peter Byrne
During the highly publicized 1960 World Book expedition,
which had many goals including gathering intelligence on
Chinese rocket launchings, Sir Edmund Hillary and Marlin
Perkins took a sidetrip in Nepal to investigate the hand.
Hillary was unaware of the possibility that he was looking at
a combination of the original material and the human bones
The Pangboche Hand is an artifact from a Buddhist placed there by Byrne. Hillary determined the artifact was
monastery in Pangboche, Nepal. Supporters contend that a hoax.
the hand is from a Yeti, a scientically unrecognized ani- According to monks at Pangboche monastery, many years
mal purported to live in the Himalayan mountains. A nger ago, a monk walked into a cave to meditate. There, he saw
bone from the hand was tested and the DNA shown to be a Yeti. Many years later, he came back, and the yeti was
human.[1] dead. He collected the hand and scalp and took it back to
111
112 CHAPTER 34. PANGBOCHE HAND
the monastery where it remained until it was discovered in [5] Yeti nger mystery solved by Edinburgh scientists. BBC
the modern age. News.
London University primatologist William Charles Osman
Hill conducted a physical examination of the pieces that
Byrne supplied. His rst ndings were that it was hominid, 34.4 External links
and later in 1960 he decided that the Pangboche fragments
were a closer match with a Neanderthal. DNA testing reveals yeti nger is a fraud
In 1991, in conjunction with Colemans research, it was
discovered that the Slick expedition consultant, an Amer-
ican anthropologist by the name of George Agogino, had
retained samples of the alleged Yeti hand. The NBC pro-
gram Unsolved Mysteries obtained samples and determined
they were similar to human tissue, but were not human, and
could only verify they were near human. After the broad-
cast of the program, the entire hand was stolen from the
Pangboche monastery, and reportedly disappeared into a
private collection via the illegal underground in the sale of
antiquities. George Agogino, before his death on Septem-
ber 11, 2000, transferred his important les on the Pang-
boche Yeti hand to Loren Coleman.[3]
In 2010 Weta Workshops produced a replica skull and hand
based on photos of the missing hand and skull. Mike Allsop
handed over the replica skull and hand to monks at Pang-
boche in May 2011.[4]
34.2 DNA Testing

On 27 December 2011 it was announced that a nger be-
longing to the hand contained human DNA, following tests
carried out in Edinburgh.[1] Dr. Rob Ogden commented
that We have got a very, very strong match to a number of
existing reference sequences on human DNA databases...
Human was what we were expecting and human is what we
got.[1][5]
34.3 References
[1] Hill, Matthew (27 December 2011). Tracing the origins of
a 'yetis nger'". BBC News Online. Retrieved 27 December
2011.
[2] see Colemans books Tom Slick and the Search for Yeti
(Boston/London: Faber and Faber, 1989) and Tom Slick:
True Life Encounters in Cryptozoology (Fresno, CA: Linden
Press, 2002).
[3] George Allen Agogino
[4] Jolly, Joanna (28 April 2011). "'Yeti hand' replica to be re-
turned to Nepal monastery. BBC News Online. Retrieved
27 December 2011.
Chapter 35
Oklahoma runestones
[2]

ley of the Gnomes).

stone.
modern creation.[3]
113
114 CHAPTER 35. OKLAHOMA RUNESTONES
period.[5]
2174-2.

16:1987.
35.5 See also

Chapter 36
Quimbaya artifacts
The Quimbaya artifacts are several dozen golden objects,

found in Colombia, made by the Quimbaya civilization cul-
ture, dated around 1000 CE, a few of which (the so-called
Quimbaya airplanes) are supposed by ancient astronauts
theorists to represent modern airplanes, and therefore to be
out-of-place artifacts. The whole of the gurines, measur-
ing 2 to 3 inches (5 to 7.5 cm) each, are described in main-
stream archaeology as depicting birds, lizards, amphibians
and insects common in that region and period, some of them
highly stylized, as in the Gold Museum, Bogot.
In 1994, Germans Peter Belting and Conrad Lubbers cre-
ated simplied radio-controlled scale models of these ob-
jects and showed that their models, which lack some con-
voluted features present in the real gurines, could y.[1]
36.1 See also

Saqqara Bird
36.2 References
[1] Thomas, Robert Steven (2011). Intelligent Intervention.
USA: Dog Ear Publishing. pp. 7477. ISBN 978-1-4575-
0778-6.
115
Chapter 37
San Pedro Mountains Mummy
Tribune.[2]
37.1 See also

Shoshone
Nimerigar
37.2 References
Photos and X-ray of the mummy
[1] Loendorf, Lawrence L.; Nancy Medaris Stone (2006).
In October 1932, while digging for gold in the San Pe- Mountain Spirit: The Sheep Eater Indians of Yellowstone.
dro mountains, Carbon County, Wyoming, two prospec- University of Utah Press. p. 189. ISBN 978-0874808681.
tors, Cecil Mayne and Frank Carr, blasted their way through
[2] Burke, Brendan (February 3, 2005). Man oers $10,000
some thick rock that a large vein of gold continued into.
for Pedro Mountain Mummy. Casper Star-Tribune.
When the dust settled, they saw they had opened up a small
trib.com. Retrieved 25 January 2011.
room, approximately 4 ft tall, 4 ft wide, and about 15 ft
deep. This is where they said that they rst saw the mummy
of a tiny person. Readers digest [chief contributing writer, Richard
Marshall]; Monte Davis; Valerie Moolman; Georg
This rst mummy was examined using X-rays which de- Zappler (1982). Mysteries of the unexplained (Repr.
termined that it was the body of an anencephalic infant with amendments ed.). Pleasantville, N.Y.: Readers
whose cranial deformity gave it the appearance of a minia- Digest Association. p. 40. ISBN 0895771462. Photo
ture adult. A second mummy examined by University of of mummy
Wyoming anthropologist George Gill and the Denver Chil-
drens Hospital in the 1990s was also shown to be an anen-
cephalic infant. DNA testing showed it to be Native Amer-
ican and radiocarbon dating dated it to about 1700.[1]
37.3 External links
According to a July 7, 1979, article in the Casper Star- Mummied Pygmy Found. The Waco News-
Tribune the rst mummy started debates over whether it Tribune. 15 Dec 1934. p. 7. Retrieved 17 December
was a hoax, a baby, or one of the legendary "little people". 2016 via Newspapers.com.
The mummy ended up in Meeteetse, Wyoming, at a local
drug store where it was shown as an attraction for several Peterson, Christine (October 31, 2010). Did a
years before it was bought by Ivan T. Goodman, a Casper, mummy prove the legend?". Casper Star-Tribune.
Wyoming businessman. The mummy was then passed on to
Leonard Wadler, a New York businessman and its present
location is unknown.[2] Seeking to prove evolution wrong,
an oer of a $10,000 reward was made for the person who
nds the missing mummy according to the Casper Star-
116
Chapter 38
Saqqara Bird
38.1 Conventional ideas
Some think the Saqqara Bird may be a ceremonial object

because the falcon, the bird after which the Saqqara Bird
is modeled, is the form most commonly used to represent
several of the most important gods of Egyptian mythology,
most notably the falcon deity Horus and the sun deity Ra
Horakhty. Others have posited it may have been a toy for
an elite child, or that it could have functioned as a weather
vane. Some have also speculated it may have been used as
a sort of boomerang, as such technology was common and
well known in ancient Egypt in the form of a throwing stick
used for hunting waterfowl.[2] But the most likely hypoth-
The Saqqara artifact. esis is that this bird was positioned on the masthead of sa-
cred boats used during the Opet Festival.[3] Reliefs showing
those boats are found in the Temple of Khonsu at Karnak
and date to the late New Kingdom.[4]
38.2 Controversial ideas
Some have suggested that the Saqqara Bird may repre-

sent evidence that knowledge of the principles of aviation
existed many centuries before such are generally be-
lieved to have rst been discovered. Egyptian physician,
archaeologist, parapsychologist and dowser Khalil Messiha
has speculated that the ancient Egyptians developed the
rst aircraft.[5] He wrote that it represents a diminutive of
an original monoplane still present in Saqqara.[5] He also
The Saqqara artifact. claimed that the Saqqara Bird could function as a glider
if it had a horizontal tailplane, which he suppose[d] was
[5]
The Saqqara Bird is a bird-shaped artifact made of lost, and noted that the Egyptians often placed miniatur- [6]
sycamore wood, discovered during the 1898 excavation of ized representations of their technology in their tombs.
the Pa-di-Imen tomb in Saqqara, Egypt. It has been dated to Messiha contended that the Saqqara Bird diers signi-
approximately 200 BCE, and is now housed in the Museum cantly from other statues and models of birds housed in the
of Egyptian Antiquities in Cairo. The Saqqara Bird has a Cairo museum. According to Messiha, the Saqqara Bird
wingspan of 180 mm (7.1 in) and weighs 39.12 g (1.380 has a vertical stabilizer which is unlike the generally hor-
oz).[1] Its function is not understood because of a lack of izontal shape of a real birds tail. Richard P. Hallion de-
period documentation. scribed this n as shaped as if the bird had twisted its tail
117
118 CHAPTER 38. SAQQARA BIRD
feathers. [7] It is also legless and has wings set at an angle 38.2.2 Position of tailplane
Messiha sees as similar to that of modern aircraft, which he
considered an attempt to create aerodynamic lift.[5] Messiha claims The lower part of the tail is broken [i.e.
at] which I think may be an evidence that the tail was at-
In spite of these claims, however, no ancient Egyptian air-
tached there. [13]
craft have ever been found, nor has any other evidence sug-
gesting their existence come to light. As a result, the theory
that the Saqqara Bird is a model of a ying machine is not
accepted by mainstream Egyptologists. Hallion notes that 38.3 See also
it is far too heavy and unstable itself to y.[7]
Pseudoarchaeology
Experimental archaeology
38.2.1 Attempts to prove the claim Egyptology

Ptolemaic Egypt
Messiha built a model of the Saqqara Bird to test for its Quimbaya aeroplane
aerodynamic eciency. His model was six times larger
than the dimensions of the original in an attempt to maintain
its proportional aerodynamic eciency,[8] and was given a
horizontal tailplane to act as a stabilizer, which Messiha be-
38.4 References
lieved is a missing part of the original model. Messiha in-
sisted that he was able to make his model y.[9] [1] Messiha, Dr. Hishmat (1973). "[Saqqara Bird]". Egypt
Travel Magazine. Cairo: Ministry of Tourism, Dept. of
In an attempt to discover whether claims of aerodynamic Publicity (153). ISSN 0013-2381. OCLC 1567664.
properties of the Saqqara Bird were correct, Martin Gre-
[2] Larry Orcutt (2001). Model Airplane?". Catchpenny Mys-
gorie, a builder and designer of free ight gliders, built
teries of Ancient Egypt. Retrieved 2010-04-18.
a replica of the Saqqara Bird made of balsa wood. Af-
ter testing this replica, Gregorie concluded: the Saqqara [3] Khonsu Temple relief with three sacred boats
Bird never ew. It is totally unstable without a tailplane ...
[4] The Temple of Khonsu, Volume 1: Scenes of King Herihor
Even after a tailplane was tted the glide performance was
in the Court, The Epigraphic Survey. Chicago: The Oriental
disappointing.[10] He added: the Saqqara Bird was prob- Institute, 1979. ISBN 0-918986-20-6. Reproduction of the
ably made as a childs toy or a weather vane.[10] reliefs are visible at page 107 and following pages ".
According to Messihas son, Dawoud Khalil Messiha, an
[5] Messiha, Khalil; et al. (1991). Aeronautics: African Ex-
architect who continued the work of his father, Gregories perimental Aeronautics: A 2000-Year Old Model Glider.
suggestion that the Saqqara Bird could be a weather vane In Ivan van Sertima. Blacks in Science: Ancient and Mod-
is impossible due to the lack of markings or holes on the ern. Journal of African Civilizations. vol. 5, no. 1-2. New
model that would serve as a means of hanging it. Dawoud Brunswick: Transaction Books. pp. 9299. ISBN 0-87855-
Khalil Messiha noted that the only hole that exists on the 941-8. Retrieved 2010-04-21.
bottom of the Saqqara Bird is a recent one and was made by
[6] Shaw, Ian; Paul T. Nicholson (1995). British Museum Dic-
museum ocials to x the model on a stick with reference
tionary of Ancient Egypt. London: British museum press.
to a model description in Cairo museum records.[11] ISBN 0-7141-0982-7.
Aerodynamics expert Simon Sanderson tested a replica
[7] Hallion, Richard P. (2003). Taking Flight: Inventing the
model in a wind tunnel without a tailplane and found that
Aerial Age, from Antiquity Through the First World War.
it produced four times the gliders own weight in lift. In New York: Oxford University Press. p. 11. ISBN 978-
Liverpool University, Sanderson then subjected it with the 0195160352.
data from wind tunnel and added a stabilizing tailplane to
a ight simulator meant to replicate the same trials as a [8] Kermode, A.C. (1989). Flying Without Formulae (Third
modern ghter jet. In virtual air streams and conditions ed.). London: Sir Isaak Pitman & Sons LTD. ISBN
in Egypt, the Saqqara Bird actually ew quite well. Over 0582026989.
2,000 years after the ancient Egyptians carved this mysteri- [9] Fiebag, Peter; Algund Eenboom; Peter Belting (2004). Die
ous bird, modern technology has proved beyond doubt that Flugzeuge der Pharaonen (in German). Munchen: Jochen
it could have own. [12] Kopp Verlag. pp. 2224, 54. ISBN 3-930219-80-8.
[10] Martin Gregorie (2002). Flying the Saqqara Bird. Catch-

penny Mysteries of Ancient Egypt. Retrieved 2010-04-21.
[11] Journal d' entre number 6347, Catalogue of Artifacts, Cairo

Egyptian Museum.
[12] Doug Aamoth (June 9, 2010). Cryptids: The Saqqara

Bird. Time. Retrieved 2013-06-12.
[13] Khalil Messiha; Guirguis Messiha; Gamal Mokhtar &

Michael Frenchman (1991). African Experimental Aero-
nautics: A 2,000-Year-Old Model Glider. Blacks in Sci-
ence: Ancient and Modern. Retrieved 2013-06-12.
Chapter 39
The Starving of Saqqara
The Starving of Saqqara is the name given to a statue of [4] Curran, Peggy (March 17, 2011). Experts can't crack Con-
suspected Pre-dynastic Egyptian origins. The statue, of two cordia sculpture riddle. The Gazette. Retrieved 18 March
nude beings (possible a male and female) with large skulls 2011.
and thin bodies, seated, also has writing on the back of one [5] Boswell, Randy (16 Mar 2011). Canadian university puts
of the gures[1] that has yet to be identied. Traces of dark ancient, mysterious sculpture on display. The Vancouver
pigment suggest that it was once painted. Sun. Sott.net. Retrieved 18 March 2011.
Vincent and Olga Diniacopoulos, who amassed a large col- [6] The mystery of 'The Starving of Saqqara'". Past Horizons.
lection of antiquities, brought the work to Canada in the March 16, 2011. Retrieved 25 March 2011.
1950s. The sculpture was exhibited in the 1950s at their
family-owned Galerie Ars Classica on Sherbrooke Street in
Montreal. The name Saqqara refers to the burial ground of
Memphis, Egypt. How the name came to be attached to the
39.2 External links
artifact is not known.[2]
MYSTERIOUS SCULPTURE. As It Happens.
The statue has been at Concordia University since 1999. CBC.ca. March 17, 2011. Retrieved 18 March 2011.
Experts from the University of Cambridge, the British Mu-
seum, the Brooklyn Museum, the Israel Museum and the
Royal Ontario Museum have all been consulted, without
success.[3]
The script has been determined to not be Aramaic,
Demotic, Egyptian, Hebrew, or Syriac.[4]
One expert, Clarence Epstein, suggests that it represents a
pair of conquered captives.[5]
The sculpture was displayed to the public from March 16
to 18, 2011. It was viewable at the atrium of Concordias
Engineering, Computer Science and Visual Arts Integrated
Complex.[6]
39.1 References
[1] Concordia University (March 14, 2007). The Starving of
Saqqara sculpture. ickr. Retrieved 4 October 2012.
[2] Concordia University. CSI Montreal: Concordia Sculpture

Investigation. Diniacopoulos Antiquities Collection. Re-
trieved 18 March 2011.
[3] Sculpture mystery baes Concordia researchers. CBC.ca.

Mar 17, 2011. Retrieved 18 March 2011.
120
Chapter 40
Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca head
The Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca head is a terracotta head, in Rome, Italy. According to Andreae "[the head]
probably originally part of a larger gurine, discovered in is without any doubt Roman, and the lab analy-
1933 among pre-Columbian or just post-Columbian grave sis has conrmed that it is ancient. The stylistic
goods in the Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca zone in the Toluca Val- examination tells us more precisely that it is a Ro-
ley, approximately 65 kilometers northwest of Mexico City. man work from around the II century A.D., and
the hairstyle and the shape of the beard present
Because the head appears to be similar in style to artifacts
of Roman origin, some believe that it is evidence of the typical traits of the Severian emperors period
[193-235 A.D.], exactly in the fashion of the
pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact between Rome and
the Americas, a view strongly promoted by archaeologist epoch. (Andreae cited in Domenici 2000: 29).
On the other hand, an examination of the eld
Romeo H. Hristov.[1] However, several other explanations
for its presence have also been put forward. notes of the archaeologist in charge of the exca-
vation as well as the site itself have not revealed,
in either case, signs of possible disturbances of the
context (Hristov and Genovs 1999).[4]
40.1 Find
A thermoluminescence test performed in 1995 by P.
The object was discovered by archaeologist Jos Garca Schaaf and G.A. Wagner in the FS Archometrie unit in
Payn during an excavation in 1933. It was a grave oer- Heidelberg, Germany, established its age range to some-
ing, found under three intact oors of a pyramidal structure. where between the 9th century BC and the middle of the
Along with the head were found a number of objects made 13th century AD, conrming its pre-colonial provenance.
of gold, copper, turquoise, rock crystal, jet, bone, shell and However, Schaaf and Wagner have objected to the way the
pottery.[2] The burial was dated to between 1476 and 1510 dates were described by Hristov and Genoves.[5][6]
AD. Payn did not publish information about the head itself
until 1960.[3] Bernard Andreae of the German Institute of Archaeology
in Rome, Italy, who examined photographs of the artifact,
stated that he believed that it was Roman and proposed the
2nd century AD as its date of origin, based on the hairstyle
40.2 Evidence for Roman manufac- and the beard.
ture
An assessment of the case was made in 2001 by Romeo H. 40.3 Hypotheses
Hristov of University of New Mexico and Santiago Genovs
T. of National Autonomous University of Mexico. Researchers who have analyzed the artifact have come up
with several possible explanations for the objects presence
This result clears up the doubts of Colonial at the site:
manufacture of the artifact, and makes the hy-
pothesis of Roman origin among other possibili- A hoax: according to an informal declaration by Paul
ties applicable. The identication of the head as Schmidt, an archaeologist at UNAM, the head was
Roman work from the IIIII century A.D. has been planted in the site by a participating archaeologist,
further conrmed by Bernard Andreae, a director Hugo Moedano, in an attempt to play a practical joke
emeritus of the German Institute of Archaeology on Jos Garca Payn, supervisor of the dig. Schmidt
121
122 CHAPTER 40. TECAXIC-CALIXTLAHUACA HEAD
moreover stated earlier that Garca Payn was not [3] Smith, Michael E. "The 'Roman Figurine' Supposedly Ex-
present during the entirety of the excavation.[3] Garca cavated at Calixtlahuaca", Accessed: 2012-02-13.
Payns son insists that his father stated that he was on
[4] Calixtlahuacas Head. unm.edu.
the site at the time of discovery. According to Hristov,
these allegations are hearsay, and because the individ- [5] Schaaf, Peter; Wagner, Gnther A (8 April 2000), letter,
uals directly involved have since died, a conrmation New Scientist (2233): 6465.
or refutation of the allegations has become impossible.
[6] Schaaf, Peter; Wagner, Gnther A (2001), Comments on
An import from an early European visitor who came Mesoamerican Evidence of Pre-Columbian Transoceanic
Contacts by Hristov and Genovs, Ancient Mesoamerica,
to Central Mexico. The date range for the burial in-
12: 7981, doi:10.1017/s0956536101121024.
cludes the early period of European exploration of the
Americas, though it predates the rst sustained con- [7] Heine-Geldern, Robert von. Ein Rmischer Fund aus dem
tact with Mexico under Hernn Corts. According to Vorkolumbischen Mexico. Anzeiger der sterreichischen
Hristov, it is possible but highly unlikely that the head Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische
was introduced during the Medieval or early Colonial Klasse. No. 98, 1961, pp. 117-119.; Romeo Histov, 'The
period.[2] Hristov notes that other historians have con- Little Roman Head of Calixtlahuaja Mexico: Some Re-
sidered the possibility of a Norse visit to the region ections, Neara Journal Vol. 28, #3 &4, 1994.
and that the gures unusual head-dress bears a possi- [8] James Meek, Clue to Romans head start on Columbus,
ble resemblance to Norse or Viking headgear. The Guardian, Thursday 10 February 2000.
It was traded or carried to Asia, and was imported to

America via a transpacic route from southeast Asia
by a Chinese or Indian ship. This thesis was proposed
40.6 Bibliography
by Robert Heine-Geldern in 1961, and has achieved
some support.[7] Hristov, Romeo H. (1994), The little Roman head
of Calixtlahuaca, Mexico: Some reections, NEARA
Hristov argues that a Roman, Phoenician, or Berber Journal, 28 (34): 6869
ship, or the drifting of such a shipwreck to the Ameri-
can shores is the best explanation. Hristov claims that Hristov, Romeo H.; Genovs T., Santiago (1999),
the possibility of such an event has been made more Mesoamerica evidence of pre-Columbian
likely by the discovery of evidences of travels from transoceanic contacts, Ancient Mesoamerica, 10
Romans, Phoenicians and Berbers in the 6th or 5th (2): 207213, doi:10.1017/S0956536199102013
century BC to Tenerife and Lanzarote in the Canaries, Hristov, Romeo H.; Genovs T., Santiago (2001),
and of a Roman settlement (from the 1st century BC Reply to Peter Schaaf and Gnter A. Wagners Com-
to the 4th century AD) on Lanzarote island.[2] David ments on 'Mesoamerican evidence of pre-Columbian
Grove, an archaeologist at the University of Illinois transoceanic contacts"", Ancient Mesoamerica, 12:
pointed out that being washed ashore from a Roman 8386, doi:10.1017/S0956536101121012
shipwreck does not imply any contact, let alone Ro-
man discovery of the New World.[8] Smith, Michael E. "The 'Roman Figurine' Supposedly
Excavated at Calixtlahuaca", Accessed: 2012-02-13.
(Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.
org/65PlUfqJr)
40.4 See also
40.7 External links
Calixtlahuacas Head by Romeo H. Hristov
40.5 References
The Calixtlahuaca Head by J. Huston McCulloch
[1] Romeo Hristov. unm.edu.
[2] Hristov, Romeo H.; Santiago Genovs T. THE ROMAN

HEAD FROM TECAXIC-CALIXTLAHUACA, MEX-
ICO: A REVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE (1)". Retrieved 3
June 2012.
Chapter 41
Tucson artifacts
The Tucson artifacts, sometimes called the Tucson Lead lime kiln where the objects were found at the margin of
Crosses, Tucson Crosses, Silverbell Road artifacts, prior trenches.[1] The objects were believed, by their discov-
or Silverbell artifacts, were thirty-one lead objects that erer and main supporters, to be of a Roman Judeo-Christian
Charles E. Manier and his family found in 1924 near Picture colony existing in what is now known as Arizona between
Rocks, Arizona which were initially sometimes thought to 790900 AD. No other nd has been formally established
be created by early Mediterranean civilizations that had as placing any Roman colony in the area, nor anywhere else
crossed the Atlantic in the rst century, but were later de- in North America.[3]
termined to be a hoax.[1][2] In November 1924, Manier brought his friend Thomas Bent
The nd comprised thirty-one lead objects consisting of to the site and Bent was quickly convinced of the authentic-
crosses, swords, and religious/ceremonial paraphernalia, ity of the discovery. Upon nding the land was not owned,
most of which contained Hebrew or Latin engraved inscrip- he immediately set up residence on the land in order to
tions, pictures of temples, leaders portraits, angels, and a homestead the property. Bent felt there was money to be
dinosaur (inscribed on the lead blade of a sword). One made in further excavating the site.[3]
contained the phrase Calalus, the unknown land which
was used by believers as the name of the settlement. The
objects also have Roman numerals ranging from 790 to 41.1.1 Latin inscriptions
900 inscribed on them which were sometimes interpreted
to represent the date of their creation because the numerals Provehimur pelago Calalus terra incognita. Populum late
were followed by the letters AD. The site contains no other regem Toltezus Silvanus. Traducti sunt Theodorus suas
artifacts, no pottery sherds, no broken glass, no human or copias subucie [sic] urbe Rhoda et plus septigentia capti. nul-
animal remains, and no sign of hearths or housing.[3][1] lus auro urbe eximentur.
We were driven by the sea Calalus unknown land. Sylvan
Toltezus people ruling far and wide. Theodore they were
led his troops [under?] Rhoda and more than seven hun-
41.1 History dred were captured. No one [to/by/in/with/from?] gold
[by/in/with/from?] the city they will be removed.
On September 13, 1924 Charles Manier and his father A literal translation of part of the Latin, illustrating the
stopped to examine some old lime kilns while driving north- grammatical and inectional failings of the inscription.[7]
west of Tucson on Silverbell Road. Manier saw an object
protruding about 2 inches (5.1 cm) from the soil. He dug The rst object removed from the caliche by Manier was
it out, revealing that the object was a 20 inches (51 cm)- a crudely cast metal cross that weighed 62 pounds (28 kg);
long lead cross which weighed 64 pounds (29 kg). Between after cleaning it was revealed to be two separate crosses riv-
1924 and 1930 additional objects were extracted from the eted together. After his nd, Manier took the cross to Pro-
caliche, a layer of soil in which the soil particles have been fessor Frank H. Fowler, Head of the Department of Classi-
cemented together by lime.[4][5] Caliche often takes a long cal Languages at the University of Arizona, at Tucson, who
period of time to form, but it can be made and placed determined the language on the artifacts was Latin. He
around an article in a short period of time, according to also translated one line as reading, "Calalus, the unknown
a report written by James Quinlan, a retired Tucson geol- land", from which the name of the supposed Latin colony
ogist who had worked for the U.S. Geological Survey.[1][6] was garnered.[1]
Quinlan also concluded that it would be easy to bury arti- The Latin inscriptions on the alleged artifacts supposedly
cles in the soft, silt material and associated caliche in the record the conicts of the leaders of Calalus against a bar-
123
124 CHAPTER 41. TUCSON ARTIFACTS
barian enemy known as the "Toltezus", which some have American Association for the Advancement of Science
interpreted as a supposed reference to the Mesoamerican and showing them at museums and universities on the east
Toltec civilization.[1] However, the Latin on the artifacts ap- coast. Astronomer Andrew E. Douglass, known for his
pears to either be badly inected original Latin, or inscrip- work in dendrochronology also considered the items to be
tions brazenly plagiarized from Classical authors such as authentic.[3]
Virgil, Cicero, Livy, Cornelius Nepos, and Horace, among In 1975, Wake Forest University professor Cyclone Covey
several others.[7] This has led many experts to condemn re-examined the controversy in his book titled Calalus: A
the artifacts as frauds.[1] What is perhaps most suspicious, Roman Jewish Colony in America from the Time of Charle-
however, is that most of the inscriptions are identical to
magne Through Alfred the Great. Covey was in direct con-
what appeared in widely available Latin grammar books, tact with Thomas Bent by 1970, and planned to carry out
like Harknesss Latin Grammar and Allen and Greenoughs
excavations at the site in 1972, but was not allowed, due
Latin Grammar, as well as dictionaries like The Standard to legal complications preventing Wake Forest University
Dictionary of Facts.[1]
from leading a dig at the site.[3] Coveys book proposes that
the objects are from a Jewish settlement, founded by peo-
ple who came from Rome and settled outside of present day
41.2 Views on authenticity Tucson around 800 AD.[5]
Manier took the rst item to the Arizona State Museum to

be studied by archaeologist Karl Ruppert. Ruppert was im-
pressed with the item, and went with Manier to the site the 41.2.2 Skeptics
next day where he found a 7 pounds (3.2 kg) caliche plaque
with some inscriptions including an 800 AD date. A to- Professor Frank Fowler originally translated the Latin in-
tal of thirty-one objects were found.[3] Other contemporary scriptions on the rst items and found that the inscriptions
scholars including George C. Valliant, a Harvard University were from well known classical authors such as Cicero,
archaeologist who visited the University of Arizona in 1928 Virgil and Horace. He researched local Latin texts avail-
and Dr. Bashford Dean, curator of arms and armor of the able in Tucson at the time and found the inscriptions on the
Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City thought the lead items to be identical to the texts available.
articles were fakes,[1] Neil Merton Judd, curator of the Na-
Dean Cummings student and excavator, Emil Haury,
tional Museum at the Smithsonian Institution happened to
closely examined scratches on the surface of the objects
be in Tucson at the time of the discovery of the objects
as they were removed from the ground and concluded that
and, after examining them, also thought they were fakes,
they were planted, based partly on a cavity in the ground
proposing that they may have been created by some men-
which was longer than a lead bar removed from it. After
tally incompetent individual with a air for old Latin and
Cummings became president of the university, his views
the wars of antiquity.[1][8]
changed in an unclear manner, possibly due to Haurys skep-
ticism, or the increasing sentiment that the items were noth-
ing more than a hoax and as university president had to
41.2.1 Supporters
take a dierent stand on the matter. George M. B. Hawley
staunchly opposed Bents views about the objects. Haw-
In the 1960s, Bent wrote a 350 page manuscript titled The
ley even accused Ostrander and Sarle as perpetrators of the
Tucson Artifacts about the objects which is unpublished,
[3] hoax.[3][4]
but kept by the Arizona State Museum. Both Manier and
Bent were supporters of the objects as a genuine archaeo-
logical nd.[3]
Lara Coleman Ostrander, a Tucson immigrant and high 41.2.3 Possible creator
school history teacher studied the historical background of
the research, and translated the alleged history of Calalus A local news article identied Timoto Odohui as the possi-
from the writings on the items. Geologist Clifton J. Sarle ble creator of the items. Odohui was a young Mexican boy
worked with Ostrander to present the Tucson Artifacts to who lived near the site and was a sculptor. The article men-
the press and the academic profession. tions his possible connection to the site and his ability to
Tucson University administrator and director of the Ari- craft lead objects. Bent wrote that a craftsman in the area
zona State Museum Dean Byron Cummings led archae- had recalled the boy, his love for sculpture of soft metals
ologists at the university to the location where the items and his collection of books on foreign languages, and told
were found. He brought ten of the objects to the the excavators this.[5][9]
41.3 In popular culture [9] Stevens, Kristina (1990) A Cold Trail, Zocalo Magazine,
Tucson.
Archaeologist and Lovecraft scholar Marc A. Beherec [10] Beherec, Marc A. 2008. H. P. Lovecraft and the Archae-
has written that H. P. Lovecraft alludes to Calalus in ology of 'Roman' Arizona. Lovecraft Annual 2: 192-202.
The Mound, ghost-written for Zealia Bishop. He ar-
gues that the items inuenced some of Lovecrafts other [11] The Desert Cross (video). America Unearthed. the His-
tory Channel. Retrieved December 16, 2016.
writings.[3][9][10]
The Tucson artifacts were featured on The History Chan- [12] Colavito, Jason (February 23, 2013). Review of America
nel show America Unearthed in the episode entitled The Unearthed S01E10 The Desert Cross"". Retrieved Decem-
[11] ber 16, 2016.
Desert Cross, on February 22, 2013. This episode was
criticised for its methodology, its ignorance (or deliber-
ate omission) of the complete text on the crosses, and its
conclusions.[12]
41.4 See also

Antillia
Ironwood Forest National Monument
41.5 References
[1] Burgess, Don. (Spring 2009) Romans in Tucson? The
Story of an Archaeological Hoax. Journal of the Southwest
51. 1. Retrieved February 23, 2013. via HighBeam Re-
search (subscription required)
[2] Feder, Kenneth L. (2010). Encyclopedia of Dubious Ar-

chaeology: From Atlantis to the Walam Olum. Santa Bar-
bara, California: Greenwood. pp. 257258. ISBN
9780313379192. Retrieved 2011-11-01.
[3] Williams, Stephen (1991) Fantastic Archaeology: A Walk

on the Wild Side of North American Prehistory, University
of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
[4] Thompson, Raymond H. (2004). Glimpses of the Young

Emil Haury. Journal of the Southwest. 46 (1).
[5] Erickson, Jim (September 1, 1996). Silverbell Road arti-

facts puzzle new generation. Arizona Daily Star. Retrieved
February 23, 2013.
[6] Burgess notes that Marshall Payn asked Quinlan to prepare

his report for his article: Payn, Marshall. (1996) The Tuc-
son Artifacts: Case Closed. New England Antiquities Re-
search Association Journal 30(3-4): 79-80.
[7] Thomas, Paul (Spring 2015). Plagiarism. The Tuc-

son Artifacts: A Philological Examination (honors thesis).
University of Kansas.
[8] Gilstrap, Peter. (3/21/1996) 'A Reputation in Ruins Phoenix

New Times. Retrieved February 23, 2013.
Chapter 42
Wolfsegg Iron
within the seam.
42.1 History
Early descriptions of the object appeared in contemporary

editions of the scientic journals Nature and L'Astronomie,
the object identied by scientists as being a fossil meteorite.
It was reported that the object was discovered when a work-
man at the Braun iron foundry in Schondorf, Austria, was
breaking up a block of lignite that had been mined at Wolf-
segg. In 1886, mining engineer Adolf Gurlt reported on the
object to the Natural History Society of Bonn, noting that
the object was coated with a thin layer of rust, was made of
iron, and had a specic gravity of 7.75.[2][3]
A plaster cast was made of the object shortly before the end
of the 19th century, as the original had suered from being
handled, and had had samples cut from it by researchers.
The Wolfsegg Iron

42.2 Analysis
The Wolfsegg Iron, also known as The Salzburg Cube, is The object was analysed in 19661967 by the Vienna
a small cuboid mass of iron that was found buried in Tertiary Naturhistorisches Museum using electron beam micro-
lignite in Wolfsegg am Hausruck, Austria, in 1885.[1] It analysis, which found no traces of nickel, chromium or
weighs 785 grams and measures 67 mm 67 mm 47 mm. cobalt in the iron, suggesting that it was not of meteoric ori-
Four of its sides are roughly at, while the two remaining gin, while the lack of sulfur indicated that it is not a pyrite.
sides (opposite each other) are convex. A fairly deep groove Because of its low magnesium content, Dr. Gero Kurat of
is incised all the way around the object, about mid-way up the museum and Dr. Rudolf Grill of the Federal Geologi-
its height.[2][3] cal Oce in Vienna thought that it might be cast iron, Grill
The Wolfsegg Iron became notable when it was claimed to suggesting that similar rough lumps had been used as ballast
be an out-of-place artifact: a worked iron cube found buried in early mining machinery.
in a 20-million-year-old coal seam. It was originally identi- The cast is currently kept in the Obersterreichischen Lan-
ed by scientists as being of meteoric origin,[2] a suggestion desmuseen in Linz, Austria, where the original object was
later ruled out by analysis. It seems most likely that it is a also exhibited from 1950 to 1958, while the original cuboid
piece of cast iron used as ballast in mining machinery, de- is held by the Heimathaus Museum of Vcklabruck, Aus-
posited during mining eorts before it was found apparently tria.
126
42.4. NOTES 127
42.3 Out-of-place artifact

The Wolfsegg Iron is claimed by some as an out-of-place ar-
tifact (OOPArt), and it is often stated as a fact in paranormal
literature that it disappeared without trace in 1910, from the
Salzburg Museum.[4][5] In fact, as mentioned above, it is at
the Heimathaus Museum in Vcklabruck, Austria, which is
where the above photo was taken. It has also erroneously
been described as a perfectly machined steel cube.[6]
42.4 Notes
[1] Grady, Monica M.; A. L. Graham (2000). Catalogue of Me-
teorites: with special reference to those represented in the col-
lection of the Natural History Museum, London. Cambridge
University Press. p. 529. ISBN 0-521-66303-2.
[2] Notes. Nature. 35 (889): 36. 11 November 1886.

doi:10.1038/035034a0.
[3] Uranolithe fossile [Uranolithic fossil]. L'Astronomie (in

French). 10 (7): 114. 1888.
[4] Noorbergen, Rene (2001). Secrets of the Lost Races: New

Discoveries of Advanced Technology in Ancient Civilizations.
TEACH Services, Inc. p. 43. ISBN 1-57258-198-0.
[5] Short, Robert (2003). Out of the Stars. Buy Books. p. 69.
ISBN 0-7414-1504-6.
[6] Sagan, Carl; Jerome Agel (2000). Carl Sagans Cosmic Con-
nection. Cambridge University Press. p. 206. ISBN 0-521-
78303-8.
Chapter 43
AVM Runestone
The AVM Runestone, also known as the Berg-AVM conducted a preliminary dig of nine test-holes at and around
Runestone, is a hoax created in 1985 by students carving the site, on July 25, nding no evidence of Norse presence.
runes into a boulder near Kensington, Minnesota, not far They found a few Native American artifacts, including two
from where the Kensington Runestone was found in 1898. quartz akes, probably waste from arrowhead production.
In 2001, a carving expert and her geologist father found the
The discovery was announced in the Minneapolis Star Tri-
AVM Runestone, told the press that it was proof of early bune on August 11, 2001,[4] with Westin pre-empting accu-
Viking or Norse settlement in Minnesota,[1] and began an
sations by making it very clear that she had not carved the
investigation to prove its authenticity. The creators came stone. The team suggested that the stone might have been
forward with their story that it was purely a hoax and not an
made as a grave marker for some of the Norse explorers.[3]
artifact of Viking explorers. After a public display and press conference at Kensington,
the stone was taken to Wolters St. Paul laboratory for de-
tailed photography and analysis of the weathering of stone
43.1 Discovery and investigation and carving. The state archaeologist, Mark Dudzik, was
skeptical, maintaining the position that it was just not log-
ical to believe that Scandinavian explorers who, he ar-
In the spring of 2001, stone carving expert Janey Westin, gued, specialized in exploiting resources along coastlines
of Minneapolis, and her father, Robert G. Johnson, an ad- had penetrated to Minnesota in the 1360s. Russell Fridley,
junct professor in the geology department of the University a former director of the Minnesota Historical Society, ex-
of Minnesota, were making a systematic survey of stones in pressed a similar view with the observation that Its a great
the vicinity of the Kensington Runestone Park, for the Re- testimony to Scandinavian humor on the frontier.
search Team set up to further understanding of the Kens-
ington Runestone. Investigating a small island in a lake on Immediately after the announcement, local Norse enthusi-
the farm of Arlen and Ruby Sabolik, about 400 metres (1/4 ast Bob Berg came forward to report that he had found the
mile) from the 1898 nd site, on May 13, Westin found the stone while undertaking a similar survey in late 1994[5] and
carved letters AVM on a lichen-covered, pinkish-brown reported on it in April 1995 to the Viking research group
granite gneiss boulder[2] (about 110 cm or 43 inches long, of which he was a member. Their rm conclusion had been
weighing perhaps a tonne[3] ) which they had inspected pre- that it was a hoax, not worth further eort.
viously in dierent light conditions. They took photographs
and reported their nd. Two weeks later, they returned to
the site with Minneapolis geologist Scott Wolter and re- 43.2 Confession and explanation
moved lichen to reveal more inscribed characters: the date
1363 in the same pentadic numerals as seen on the Kens- On September 5, 2001, Kari Ellen Gade, then chair of
ington Runestone and a second line of three runes, possibly the Department of Germanic Studies at Indiana Univer-
ASU, XSU or XSV. Although the symbols of the top sity, and Jana K. Schulman, associate professor in English
line were similar to those on the stone found in 1898, those at Southeastern Louisiana University, wrote a letter to the
in the second line were not. Minnesota Historical Society. They explained that in June
In June, the Runestone Museum in Alexandria established 1985, while students at the University of Minnesota, they
a Special Committee to investigate the discovery and con- and three friends (who chose to remain anonymous) had
tacted archaeologists. On June 9, the site was carefully carved the AVM stone with a hammer and chisel[2] as a
mapped and documented; on July 11, the stone was re- test of willingness to believe in mystery artifacts (and for
moved. Three archaeologists from Minnesota institutions fun).[6] They also revealed that the odd runes on the second
128
43.4. SOURCES 129
line were supposed to read "ALU" (a pagan magical invoca- [7] Quotations from Barry Hanson writings in Jim Richardson
tion) in an older style of runes, but the chisel had slipped.[2] and Allen Richardson, Gonzo Science: Skeptics of the Kens-
ington Runestone: The Berg-AVM Runestone Fiasco
Breaking the news on November 5 on behalf of the Spe-
cial Committee, Scott Wolter who had found specic
points that bothered me during his scientic investigation
accepted the confession, saying I give them credit for
coming forward and admitting it. Westin was less forgiv-
ing: She had paid for transportation of the stone to its ini-
tial safe storage and had devoted time and energy that could
have gone into my work, where it belonged. Gade stated
that the confession was made specically because We saw
that people were being asked to make nancial contribu-
tions to have the rock tested ... we didn't feel it would be
right to carry this further. She also said I'm sorry that
people spent their time and money on the stone, but it was
clearly a fake.[6]
Local researcher Barry Hanson, in a book he was then writ-
ing about the original Kensington Runestone, explained the
main concerns that had emerged before the confession. The
scientic testing had quickly shown that the carved surfaces
had too much iron pyrite, which ought long ago to have oxi-
dized to ferrous sulfate if the carving was genuinely ancient.
Also, the site, though an island in 2001, ought to have been
underwater in 1363.[7]
43.3 See also

Elbow Lake Runestone, another hoax planted in Min-
nesota
43.4 Sources
[1] Tom Post. MPR: Proof or Hoax?". Minnesota Public Ra-
dio. Retrieved 28 March 2013.
[2] Henrik Williams The AVM Stone from Minnesota (Kens-

ington II) Archived June 4, 2011, at the Wayback Machine.
in Nytt om runer 17 (2002, publ. 2004)
[3] Second runestone examined in The American Edge (Fall

2001) Archived May 29, 2006, at the Wayback Machine.,
American Petrographic Services
[4] Peg Meier, Second mystery stone unearthed in Kensing-

ton, in the Minneapolis Star Tribune (Aug 11, 2001)
[5] Tim Post, "Proof or Hoax?" Minnesota Public Radio (Aug

14, 2001)
[6] Eric A. Powell, "Runestone Fakery, Archaeology, vol. 55

no. 1 (Jan/Feb 2002) Archaeological Institute of America.
Illustrated.
Chapter 44
Bourne stone
The Bourne Stone is an archaeological curiosity located in scendant communities. Altamira Press. p. 70. ISBN 978-0-
the town of Bourne, Massachusetts. 7591-1054-0.
The stone itself is a 300-pound chunk of granite, upon

which two lines of carvings were made. According to the Coordinates: 414436.0N 703548.7W / 41.743333N
Archaeological Institute of America,[1] the stone probably 70.596861W
started as a doorstep of a Native American meetinghouse
around 1680, then passed through several owners, land-
ing at the Aptucxet Trading Post in Bourne about 1930.
The stone has been displayed at the historical center since
2003.[2]
Barry Fell claimed in his 1977 book America B.C.: Ancient
Settlers in the New World that the markings are in an Iberian
script and language which he translates to A proclamation
of annexation. By this Hanno takes possession.[3]
In 2004, Larry J. Zimmerman explained his own theory
about the Bourne Stone in Collaboration In Archaeologi-
cal Practice: Engaging Descendant Communities. He invited
Norse runic expert Michael Barnes[4] to examine the stone.
Barnes stated that the markings were denitely not runic.
Zimmerman and Patricia Emerson, Minnesota archaeolo-
gist, suggested that the markings looked like Native Amer-
ican petroglyphs.[5]
44.1 References
[1] AIA Event Listings - The Bourne Stone - Bourne Historical
Society. www.archaeological.org. Retrieved 2015-12-16.
[2] Bourne Stone continues to bae the experts. capecod-

times.com. Retrieved 2015-12-16.
[3] Goudsward, David (2006-07-05). Ancient Stone Sites of New

England and the Debate Over Early European Exploration.
McFarland. ISBN 9780786424627.
[4] Yankee, Wicked (2012-10-31). Wicked Yankee: The

Bourne Stone - Bourne, Ma. Wicked Yankee. Retrieved
2015-12-16.
[5] Larry J. Zimmerman (2007). Chp Colwell-Chanthaphonh,

ed. Collaboration in archaeological practice: engaging de-
130
Chapter 45
Grave Creek Stone
nised the potential signicance of the artifact.[2]
The Grave Creek Stone and a plaster cast of the stone in the Smith-
sonian Museum of National Historys collection.
The Grave Creek Stone is a small sandstone disk inscribed

on one side with some twenty-ve characters, discovered in
Grave Creek Mound
1838 at Grave Creek Mound in Moundsville, West Virginia.
If genuine, it could provide evidence of a primitive alphabet, The rst published account of the nd, along with a woodcut
but the discovery that the characters can be found in a 1752 of the inscription, occupied the front page of the Cincinnati
book suggests that it is probably a fraud. The only known Chronicle of February 2, 1839, in an article written by Dr.
image of the actual stone is a photograph of items in the Thomas Townsend.[3] Another drawing of the stone, dif-
E.H. Davis collection (circa 1878) before the majority of fering essentially in its characters, was published in The
the collection was sold to the Blackmore Museum (now part American Pioneer in May 1843, accompanied by Abelard
of the British Museum). Tomlinsons eyewitness account of the stones discovery.[1]
He says that the stone was discovered on June 9, 1838,
about two feet from the skeleton in the upper vault. It
45.1 Discovery had no engraving on it, except for on one side.[3] In a
later statement, Tomlinson asserts that I removed it with
In 1838, an archaeological excavation of Grave Creek my own hands ... from its ancient bed.[2] A letter dated
Mound, led by Jesse and Abelard Tomlinson, uncovered April 10, 1839, written by Dr. James Clemens, who spent
the ruins of two large vaults, one situated directly below the two weeks at the Grave Creek site collecting data in the
other. The vaults contained several human skeletons and summer of 1838, appears to corroborate Tomlinsons ver-
a considerable amount of jewelry and other artifacts. Ac- sion of events. Clemens writes that Abelard Tomlinson,
cording to Henry Rowe Schoolcraft, a renowned geologist Thomas Biggs, myself, and others were present when the
who visited the site in 1843, the Grave Creek Stone was stone was discovered with the copper bracelets and the shell
discovered in the upper vault, along with seventeen hun- necklace.[3]
dred beads, ve hundred sea shells, ve copper bracelets, Peter Catlett, one of the workers involved in the excavation,
and one hundred and fty plates of mica. It was a small oers a conicting account: I was the man who found the
at stone, of an ovate shape, containing an inscription in stone ... The engraved stone was found on the inside of a
unknown characters.[1] Schoolcraft was the rst to subject stone arch. His testimony was supported by Colonel Whar-
the stone to a critical examination, ve years after its dis- ton, who claims to have spotted the stone amongst the loose
covery; he found it lying unprotected among broken im- dirt and debris being wheeled out of the mound that day.
plements of stone, pieces of antique pottery, and other like Stephen Williams, author of Fantastic Archaeology, con-
articles, suggesting that those who found it had not recog- siders Catletts story to be the most credible, explaining that
131
132 CHAPTER 45. GRAVE CREEK STONE
Tomlinsons description of the way the shaft and drift were Just like the inscription on the Grave Creek Stone, these
dug does not accord with any of the statements made by any symbols were found to resemble characters found in alpha-
of the observers of the excavations.[4] The same view was bets of the old world. Reid was compelled to conclude that
expressed by M.C. Reid, in his 1878 report, published in there is nothing in the form of the characters of the Grave
The American Antiquarian. Reid also pointed out numer- Creek Stone which require us to decide that they are old,
ous factual errors in Tomlinsons statement, concluding that that they are alphabetical, or if alphabetical that they are
it is very certain that Mr. Tomlinson is mistaken and that derived from any known alphabet.[2]
he did not nd the inscribed stone.[2]
45.4 Recent research

45.2 Artifact
At a meeting of the West Virginia Archaeological Society
The sandstone disk is about 1 inches (4.8 cm) wide, and in October 2008, the anthropologist David Oestreicher sug-
1 inches (3.6 cm) high. One side of the stone is inscribed gested that the inscription had been forged by James W.
with 23 alphabetical / pseudo-alphabetical characters ar- Clemens, a local physician who had nanced the excavation
ranged in three lines with a nal non-alphabetical symbol through loans. Oestreicher claimed to have found the source
on the lower portion. There are no inscriptions on the re- of the inscription; an 18th-century book on unknown let-
verse side. The stone had passed through various collec- ters on Spanish coins and monuments. Everything on the
tions, but its current location is unknown. While it was in stone, including impossible sequences of characters with
E.H. Daviss collection in the late 1800s, he made a cast of it the same mistakes, was copied directly from this book.[6][7]
which he deposited to the Smithsonians National Museum
of Natural History. The Smithsonian now has four casts of
the stone. The National Anthropological Association also 45.5 References
has a wax impression of the stone made by Davis.[5]
[1] Schoolcraft, Henry R. (1845). Observations respecting the
Grave Creek Mound. Transactions of the American Ethno-
45.3 Inscription logical Society 1. pp. 368-420.
[2] Reid, M.C. (1879). Inscribed Stone of Grave Creek

The 23 alphabetical / pseudo-alphabetical symbols in- Mound. The American Antiquarian 1(3). pp. 139-149.
scribed on the Grave Creek Stone have been the object of
much controversy. Henry Rowe Schoolcraft was the rst [3] Kelley, David H. (1994). Epigraphy and Other Fantasies.
to study this aspect of the stone. He strove to determine The Review of Archaeology 15(2).
whether or not the symbols were alphabetical by consult- [4] Williams, Stephen (1991). Fantastic Archaeology: The Wild
ing experts on the subject. His correspondence with noted Side of North American Prehistory.
antiquarians led him to the conclusion that inscription con-
tains four characters corresponding to the Ancient Greek; [5] McCulloch, J. Huston. Grave Creek Stone. The Ohio
four Etruscan; ve Runic; six ancient Gallic; seven old Erse; State University.
ten Phoenician; fourteen old British; sixteen Celtiberic, [6] Lepper, Bradley T. (November 11, 2008). Great nd in
with some resemblance to the Hebrew". However, he was West Virginia nothing more than a fraud. The Columbus
inclined to regard the whole inscription as Celtiberic.[2] Dispatch.
M.C. Reid performed an experiment in the late 1870s in [7] Steelhammer, Rick (October 13, 2008). Grave Creek
which he asked four people: a teacher and law student, a Stone hoax linked to Wheeling doctor. Charleston Gazette.
schoolgirl, a pharmacist, and a college professor, to cre- (subscription required)
ate for him twenty or more arbitrary characters not re-
sembling any gures or alphabetical characters known to
them. Since the Grave Creek Stone was inscribed using
only straight lines (which is quite common, since straight
lines are much easier to inscribe than those with curve),
Reid instructed the four participants to only use straight
lines or combinations of straight lines. To further simu-
late the actual inscribing of the stone, the individuals were
not allowed to improve upon their rst attempt (since one
cannot erase all or part of a symbol once it is inscribed).
Chapter 46
Narragansett Runestone
The Narragansett Runestone, also known as the Quid- Rock in summer 1964. He said that he had forgotten about
nessett Rock, is a 2.5 tonne slab of metasandstone located the incident until the stone was removed and recovered in
in Rhode Island, United States. It is inscribed with two rows 2013.[5][6] His account has been disputed by other local
of symbols, which some have indicated resemble ancient people, who state that they saw the stone before 1964, and
Runic characters.[1] have challenged other elements of his statements.[7][8]
The stone was stolen in 2012. On April 26, 2013, the Rhode
Island Attorney General announced that the rock was recov-
ered after an individual came forward with information.[2] 46.2 Media
The rock was moved to the University of Rhode Island
School of Oceanography for testing, but this proved to be The stone is referenced in episode 11 of season 1 of America
impossible.[3] Unearthed.[4]
In January 2014, plans were announced to move the rune-
stone to Goddard Memorial State Park in East Green-
wich.[4] In October 2015, the runestone was placed for 46.3 2012 Disappearance
long-term public viewing in Wickford, a village of North
Kingstown Rhode Island. The state Coastal Resources Management Council reported
that the runestone had been removed from the tidal waters
o Pojac Point between July and August 2012. In May
2013, the state Attorney Generals Environmental Unit and
46.1 Provenance DEMs Criminal Investigation Unit announced that they
had recovered the stone.
The Narragansett runestone was rst reported to the Rhode Town historian and independent columnist G. Timothy
Island Historical Preservation and Heritage Commission Cranston said that a Pojac Point resident had removed the
(HPHC) in the 1980s.[1] The New England Antiquities Re- stone, as he was tired of having tourists scouring the neigh-
search Association (NEARA) ran several studies and pub- borhood and shoreline looking for the stone. He said that
lished a number of papers in the 1980s and 1990s about the the resident who was not named was ordered by state
rock. According to NEARA, the stone was discovered by ocials to retrieve the stone after having sunk it in deeper
a quahogger in December 1984 while digging in the mud waters o the coast.[6] After the stone was recovered, in
ats of Narragansett Bay.[4] October 2015 it was placed for long-term public viewing
The HPHC was unable to nd any information about the in Wickford, a village of the Town of North Kingstown,
stone in any previous inventories of Narragansett Bay. They Rhode Island.
found that as early as 1939, the runestone was located
upland and may have been buried.[1] Recently, the inscrip-
tions on the stone were visible only for a short period of 46.4 See also
time between the shifting tides, due to dramatic erosion of
the shoreline at Pojac Point and the fact that the stone was Kensington Runestone
positioned 20 feet from the extreme low tide line mark.[1]
AVM Runestone
In 2014, Everett Brown of Providence reported that he and
his brother Warren had carved the runes on Quidnessett Heavener Runestone
133
134 CHAPTER 46. NARRAGANSETT RUNESTONE
46.5 References
[1] RI Attorney General and RI Department of Environmental
Management Joint Investigation Leads to the Return of the
Narragansett Rune Stone. State of Rhode Island. April 26,
2013. Retrieved 8 February 2014.
[2] Mysterious Narragansett runestone is recovered. The

Boston Globe. April 26, 2013. Retrieved 8 February 2014.
[3] Branchaud, Benjamin (March 5, 2014). Narragansett Rune

Stone inscriptions remain a mystery. Southern Rhode Island
Newspapers. Retrieved 6 April 2014.
[4] Church, Chris (January 31, 2014). Mysterious rune stone

moving to Goddard Park. Independent RI. Retrieved 9
February 2014.
[5] Rune stone records Viking visit in 1964 | Stone Wings.

Stonewings.wordpress.com. 2014-06-19. Retrieved 2015-
06-04.
[6] Church, Chris (2014-06-28). Man claims he carved rune

stone markings in '64 Independent Newspapers: North
East. Independentri.com. Retrieved 2015-06-04.
[7] Schieldrop, Mark (July 20, 2014). With Childhood Stories,

Locals Dispute Claim Narragansett Rune Stone was Carved
in 1960s. Cranston Patch. Retrieved 11 July 2014.
[8] Church, Chris (2014-07-10). Rune stone origin claim chal-

lenged Independent Newspapers: North East. Indepen-
dentri.com. Retrieved 2015-06-04.
Coordinates: 413412.1N 71278.2W / 41.570028N

71.452278W
Chapter 47
Oklahoma runestones
[2]

ley of the Gnomes).

stone.
modern creation.[3]
135
136 CHAPTER 47. OKLAHOMA RUNESTONES
period.[5]
2174-2.

16:1987.
47.5 See also

Chapter 48
Spirit Pond runestones
48.1 Interpretation and authenticity
Unlike the prehistoric monumental runestones raised in

Scandinavia, the Maine stones are small handheld objects
similar to the authentic Kingittorsuaq Runestone found in
Greenland in 1824.
Of the three stones, one contains a total of 15 lines of 'text'
on two sides. The map stone contains a map with some
inscriptions. Paul H. Chapman proposes that the map de-
picts the landscape visible from the 1,075 feet (328 m) high
White Mountain, the highest point in the vicinity of Spirit
Pond,[3] or the northern tip of Newfoundland.[4]
The inscriptions contain several instances of the use of
Inscription on the map stone pentadic numerals in arabic placement. The rst to study
the stones scientically was Harvard University professor
Einar Haugen. In 1974, after transcribing, he found the in-
dividual runes used to be inconsistent with 11th century Old
Norse, and that the text contains only a few Norse words
in a sea of gibberish.[5] He also noted peculiarities relat-
ing the inscriptions directly to the Kensington Runestone
inscription. Thus, he concluded that the inscriptions were
most likely created after 1932.[2]
Amateur researchers have been more sympathetic to a me-
dieval origin of the stones. Suzanne Carlson of NEARA, a
group of enthusiasts who believe there was a widespread
Viking presence in North America, suggests a mid 14th
century date for the inscriptions, although it is unclear how
Edward Larssons notes from 1885 show the use of "pentadic" runic
Carlson arrived at this date.[6] Similarly, amateur rune-
numerals to replace the Arabic numerals.
enthusiast Richard Nielsen claims a precise date of 1401.[7]
The Spirit Pond runestones are three stones with allegedly

runic inscriptions, found at Spirit Pond in Phippsburg,
Maine in 1971 by a Walter J. Elliott, Jr., a carpenter 48.2 See also
born in Bath, Maine. The stones, currently housed at the
Maine State Museum, are widely dismissed as a hoax or
a fraud.[1][2] If authentic, they would be more evidence of
pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact and Norse coloniza- Maine penny, a Norwegian coin supposedly found in
tion of the Americas. a prehistoric Maine archaeological site
137
138 CHAPTER 48. SPIRIT POND RUNESTONES
48.3 References
[1] Snow, Dean R. (October/November 1981). Martians &
Vikings, Maldoc & Runes. American Heritage Magazine
32(6). Archived from the original on September 29, 2007.
[2] Haugen, Einar (1974). The Rune Stones of Spirit Pond,

Maine. The Journal of Typographical Research 8(1).
[3] Chapman, Paul H. (July/September 2005). Where in North

America did the Vikings settle?" The Ensign Message 7(3).
[4] Chapman, Paul H. (1992). An In-Depth Examination of

the Spirit Pond Runestones. Epigraphic Society Occasional
Papers 21. pp. 114-138.
[5] Einar Haugen (1974). The Rune Stones of Spirit Pond,

Maine. Visible Language.
[6] Carlson, Suzanne. The Spirit Pond Stones and the Myste-
rious 'Facts of their Fabrication. New England Antiquities
Research Association.
[7] Nielsen, Richard (1993). An Old Norse Translation of the

Spirit Pond Runic Inscriptions of Maine. Epigraphic Society
Occasional Papers 22(1). pp. 158-218.
48.4 Further reading

Wahlgren, Erik (1982). American Runes: From Kens-
ington to Spirit Pond. University of Illinois Press.
48.5 External links

Transcription of Spirit Pond Number 3 (Figure 109) -
Facsimile of inscription stone
Coordinates: 434454N 694831W / 43.74833N

69.80861W
Chapter 49
Vrendrye Runestone
The Vrendrye Runestone was allegedly found on an early church in Rouen (the Rouen Cathedral?), later to be buried
expedition into the territory west of the Great Lakes by the under a pile of rubble when the building which housed it
French Canadian explorer Pierre Gaultier de Varennes et de was destroyed during World War II. The Minnesota His-
La Vrendrye, in the 1730s. It is not mentioned in the o- torical Society has oered a $1000 reward for the stones
cial records of La Vrendryes expeditions,[1] but in 1749 he rediscovery.
discussed it with visiting Swedish scientist Pehr Kalm, from
whose writings virtually all information about the stone is
taken.[2] 49.3 Speculated origins
Some people, in particular Hjalmar Holand, have specu-
49.1 Discovery lated that the inscription was in fact in Norse Runes and
is potentially related to the Kensington Runestone, the in-
According to Kalm, Vrendryes expedition found the tablet scription on which claims it was left in 1362 by an expedi-
on the top of an upright stone (referred to by some as tion west from Vinland. Holand argued that resources de-
a cairn). Kalms diary reported it to be about a French picting Tatarian writing (such as the Old Hungarian script
foot long, or nearly 13 inches (33 cm) long, and a hands and its ancestor the Orkhon script) available to the Jesuit
breadth wide (an early English translation gave this as be- priests in Quebec would have shown examples containing a
tween four and ve inches). On it were said to be inscrip- large percentage of characters which are identical to Norse
tions in unknown characters. The location where it was characters. The scripts are of separate origins, but presum-
found is disputed. Holand thought it was found on an ex- ably the similar use (engraving in stone) led to similar struc-
pedition in 1738 to a Mandan area along the banks of the ture of many characters.
Missouri in a location which may have been near present- Theodore C. Blegen wrote that some stones with runelike
day Minot, North Dakota. Father Antoine Champagne sug- markings actually carry traces left by small prehistoric crea-
gested that Kalms account, which had the expedition trav- tures which might mislead anyone who was not a profes-
eling on horseback, could not have been in 1738 as the Man- sional runologist.[3]
dan had no horses that early. Given that the distance from
Montreal was said to be 900 French miles, Champagne sug-
gested a location not far from Pierre, South Dakota. When
asked, natives of the area claimed that the tablet and stand- 49.4 References
ing stone had always been there together.
[1] La Vrendrye, Pierre, Journals and letters of La Vrendrye
and his sons, retrieved 2007-11-06
49.2 The stones fate [2] Kalm, Pehr (1748), Travels into North America (vol. 2, pages
279-81), retrieved 2007-11-05
La Vrendrye told Kalm that the tablet was sent back to [3] Blegen, T (1960). The Kensington Rune Stone : New Light
Quebec, where Jesuit priests concluded that it was written on an Old Riddle. Minnesota Historical Society Press. ISBN
in "Tatarian" writing. They reportedly then sent it to the 0-87351-044-5. pp. 175-176
French Secretary of State, the Comte de Maurepas. There
are no descriptions of the stone after that time, but it has
been claimed that it was shipped with other artifacts to a
139
Chapter 50
Nazca Lines
Coordinates: 144300S 750800W / 14.71667S military and civilian pilots. In 1927 the Peruvian archaeolo-
75.13333W gist Toribio Meja Xesspe spotted them while he was hiking
through the foothills. He discussed them at a conference in
The Nazca Lines /nzk/ are a series of ancient [6][7]
geoglyphs in the Nazca Desert, in southern Peru. They were Lima in 1939.
designated as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1994. Paul Kosok, a historian from Long Island University, is
The high, arid plateau stretches more than 80 km (50 mi) credited as the rst scholar to seriously study the Nazca
between the towns of Nazca and Palpa on the Pampas de Lines. In the country in 194041 to study ancient irriga-
Jumana, about 400 km south of Lima. Although some tion systems, he ew over the lines and realized one was
local geoglyphs resemble Paracas motifs, scholars believe in the shape of a bird. Another chance helped him see how
the Nazca Lines were created by the Nazca culture be- lines converged at the winter solstice in the Southern Hemi-
tween 500 BCE and 500 CE[1] The gures vary in com- sphere. He began to study how the lines might have been
plexity. Hundreds are simple lines and geometric shapes; created, as well as to try to determine their purpose. He
more than 70 are zoomorphic designs of animals, such as was joined by Maria Reiche, a German mathematician and
birds, sh, llamas, jaguars, and monkeys, or human gures. archaeologist, to help gure out the purpose of the Nazca
Other designs include phytomorphic shapes, such as trees Lines. They proposed one of the earliest reasons for the
and owers. existence of the gures: to be markers on the horizon to
The designs are shallow lines made in the ground by remov- show where the sun and other celestial bodies rose. Ar-
ing the reddish pebbles and uncovering the whitish/grayish chaeologists, historians, and mathematicians have all tried
ground beneath. The largest gures are up to 1,200 ft (370 to determine the purpose of the lines.
m) long.[2] Scholars dier in interpreting the purpose of the Determining how they were made has been easier than g-
designs but, in general, they ascribe religious signicance to uring why they were made. Scholars have theorized the
them. Nazca people could have used simple tools and surveying
Because of its isolation and the dry, windless, stable climate equipment to construct the lines. Archaeological surveys
of the plateau, the lines have mostly been naturally pre- have found wooden stakes in the ground at the end of
served. Extremely rare changes in weather may temporarily some lines, which support this theory. One such stake was
alter the general designs. As of 2012, the lines are said to carbon-dated and was the basis for establishing the age of
have been deteriorating because of an inux of squatters the design complex. Prominent skeptic Joe Nickell has re-
inhabiting the lands.[3] produced the gures using tools and technology available
to the Nazca people. Scientic American called his work
Contrary to the popular belief that the lines and gures can remarkable in its exactness when compared to the actual
be seen only with the aid of ight, they are visible from the lines.[8] With careful planning and simple technologies, a
surrounding foothills.[4] small team of people could recreate even the largest gures
within days, without any aerial assistance.[7]
On the ground, most of the lines are formed by a shal-
50.1 History low trench with a depth between 10 and 15 cm (4 and 6
in). Such trenches were made by removing the reddish-
The rst mention of the Nazca Lines in print was by Pedro brown iron oxide-coated pebbles that cover the surface of
Cieza de Len in his book of 1553, where he mistook the Nazca Desert. When this gravel is removed, the light-
them for trail markers.[5] Although partially visible from colored clay earth which is exposed in the bottom of the
the nearby hills, the rst to distinguish them were Peruvian trench produces lines which contrast sharply in color and
140
50.2. PURPOSE 141
tone with the surrounding land surface. This sublayer con- ied the ancient Nazca culture to try to determine the pur-
tains high amounts of lime which, with the morning mist, pose of the lines and gures. One hypothesis is that the
hardens to form a protective layer that shields the lines from Nazca people created them to be seen by their gods in
winds, thereby preventing erosion. the sky. Kosok and Reiche advanced a purpose related to
The Nazca drew several hundred simple but huge curvi- astronomy and cosmology: the lines were intended to act as
linear animal and human gures by this technique. In to- a kind of observatory, to point to the places on the distant
tal, the earthwork project is huge and complex: the area horizon where the sun and other celestial bodies rose or set
encompassing the lines is nearly 450 km2 (170 sq mi), and in the solstices. Many prehistoric indigenous cultures in the
Americas and elsewhere constructed earthworks that com-
the largest gures can span nearly 1,200 ft (370 m).[2] Some
of the measurements for the gures conclude that the hum- bined such astronomical sighting with their religious cos-
mology, as did the later Mississippian culture at Cahokia in
mingbird is 93 m (310 ft) long, the condor is 134 m (440 ft),
the monkey is 93 m (310 ft) by 58 m (190 ft), and the spider present-day United States. Another example is Stonehenge
in England.
is 47 m (150 ft). The extremely dry, windless, and constant
climate of the Nazca region has preserved the lines well. Gerald Hawkins and Anthony Aveni, experts in
This desert is one of the driest on Earth and maintains a archaeoastronomy, concluded in 1990 that the evi-
temperature around 25 C all year round. The lack of wind dence was insucient to support such an astronomical
has helped keep the lines uncovered and visible. explanation.[11]
The discovery of two new small gures was announced in Reiche asserted that some or all of the gures represented
early 2011 by a Japanese team from Yamagata University. constellations. By 1998, Phyllis B. Pitluga, a protg of
One of these resembles a human head and is dated to the Reiche and senior astronomer at the Adler Planetarium in
early period of Nazca culture or earlier, and the other, un- Chicago, had concluded that the animal gures were rep-
dated, is an animal. In March 2012, the university an- resentations of heavenly shapes. According to The New
nounced a new research center would be opened at the site York Times, she contends they are not shapes of constel-
in September 2012 to study the area for the next 15 years. lations, but of what might be called counter constellations,
The team has been doing eld work there since 2006 when the irregularly-shaped dark patches within the twinkling ex-
it found about 100 new geoglyphs.[9][10] panse of the Milky Way.[12] Aveni criticized her work for
failing to account for all the details.
In 1985, the archaeologist Johan Reinhard published ar-
50.2 Purpose chaeological, ethnographic, and historical data demonstrat-
ing that worship of mountains and other water sources pre-
dominated in Nazca religion and economy from ancient to
recent times. He theorized that the lines and gures were
part of religious practices involving the worship of deities
associated with the availability of water, which directly re-
lated to the success and productivity of crops. He inter-
preted the lines as sacred paths leading to places where these
deities could be worshiped. The gures were symbols rep-
resenting animals and objects meant to invoke the gods aid
in supplying water. The precise meanings of many of the
individual geoglyphs remained unknown as of 2013.
Henri Stierlin, a Swiss art historian specializing in Egypt
and the Middle East, published a book in 1983 linking the
Nazca Lines to the production of ancient textiles that arche-
ologists have found wrapping mummies of the Paracas cul-
ture.[13] He contended that the people may have used the
lines and trapezes as giant, primitive looms to fabricate the
extremely long strings and wide pieces of textiles typical of
the area. According to his theory, the gurative patterns
(smaller and less common) were meant only for ritualistic
purposes. This theory is not widely accepted, although
Nazca Lines seen from SPOT Satellite scholars have noted similarities in patterns between the tex-
tiles and the Nazca Lines, which they take as sharing in a
Archaeologists, ethnologists, and anthropologists have stud-
142 CHAPTER 50. NAZCA LINES
common culture. to measure, nor did she pay much attention to

the archaeological data Clarkson and Silverman
had unearthed. Her case did little justice to other
50.3 Alternative explanations information about the coastal cultures, save ap-
plying, with subtle contortions, Urtons represen-
tations of constellations from the highlands. As
historian Jacquetta Hawkes might ask: was she
getting the pampa she desired?[15]
Jim Woodmann[16] theorized that the Nazca lines could not

have been made without some form of manned ight to see
the gures properly. Based on his study of available tech-
nology, he suggests a hot-air balloon was the only possi-
ble means of ight. To test this hypothesis, Woodmann
made a hot-air balloon using materials and techniques he
understood to have been available to the Nazca people. The
balloon ew, after a fashion. Most scholars have rejected
Woodmanns thesis as ad hoc,[7] because of the lack of any
evidence of such balloons.[17]
50.4 Environmental concerns

People trying to preserve the Nazca Lines are con-
cerned about threats of pollution and erosion caused by
deforestation in the region.
The Lines themselves are supercial, they

are only 10 to 30 cm deep and could be washed
away... Nazca has only ever received a small
amount of rain. But now there are great changes
Satellite picture of an area containing lines: North is to the right. to the weather all over the world. The Lines
(Coordinates: 1443S 7508W / 14.717S 75.133W) cannot resist heavy rain without being damaged.
Viktoria Nikitzki of the Maria Reiche
Other theories were that the geometric lines could indicate Centre[18]
the ow of water, irrigation schemes, or be a part of rituals
to summon water. The spiders, birds and plants may be
fertility symbols. It has also been theorized that the lines After ooding and mudslides in the area in mid-February
could act as an astronomical calendar.[14] 2007, Mario Olaechea Aquije, archaeological resident from
Perus National Institute of Culture, and a team of special-
Phyllis Pitluga, senior astronomer at the Adler Planetarium ists surveyed the area. He said, "[T]he mudslides and heavy
and a protg of Reiche, performed computer-aided stud- rains did not appear to have caused any signicant damage
ies of star alignments. She asserted the giant spider gure to the Nazca Lines, but the nearby Southern Pan-American
is an anamorphic diagram of the constellation Orion. She Highway did suer damage, and the damage done to the
further suggested that three of the straight lines leading to roads should serve as a reminder to just how fragile these
the gure were used to track the changing declinations of gures are.[19]
the three stars of Orions Belt. In a critique of her analy-
sis, Dr. Anthony F. Aveni noted she did not account for the In 2013, machinery used in a limestone quarry was reported
other 12 lines of the gure. He commented generally on her to have destroyed [20]
a small section of a line, and caused dam-
conclusions, saying: age to another.
In December 2014, Greenpeace activists irreparably dam-
I really had trouble nding good evidence to aged the Nazca Lines while setting up a banner within the
back up what she contended. Pitluga never laid lines of one of the famed geoglyphs. The activists damaged
out the criteria for selecting the lines she chose an area around the hummingbird by grinding rocks into the
50.5. IMAGES 143
sandy soil. Access to the area around the lines is strictly

prohibited and[21][22] special shoes must be worn to avoid
damaging the UN World Heritage site. Greenpeace claimed
the activists were absolutely careful to protect the Nazca
lines,[23] but this is contradicted by video and photographs
showing the activists wearing conventional shoes (i.e. not
special protective shoes) while walking on the site.[24][25]
Greenpeace has apologized to the Peruvian people,[26] but The Whale
Loise Jamie Castillo, Perus Vice Minister of Cultural Her-
itage, called the apology a joke, because Greenpeace re-
fused to identify the vandals or accept responsibility.[27]
Culture Minister Diana Alvarez-Calderon said that evi-
dence gathered during an investigation by the government
would be used as part of a legal suit against Greenpeace.
The damage done is irreparable and the apologies oered
by the environmental group aren't enough, she said at a
news conference.[21] This also directed attention to other The Man
damage to geoglyphs outside of the World Heritage area
caused in 2012 and 2013 by the Dakar Rally.[28]
50.5 Images
The Spider
The Humming-
bird
The Pelican
The Condor
The Dog
The Heron The Tree

50.7 See also

Band of Holes
Blythe Intaglios
Celestial mechanics
The Monkey
Iper
List of archaeoastronomical sites by country
Maria Reiche
Marilyn Bridges
Simone Waisbard
Tourism in Peru
The Hands
UFO religions
Ungton White Horse
50.6 In ction
50.8 Notes
The Nazca lines were a plot element in Nancy Drews
[1] Unesco World Heritage (2009). Lines and Geoglyphs of
The Clue in the Crossword Cipher.
Nasca and Pampas de Jumana.
The Nazca lines are also a major plot element in An- [2] Golomb, Jason. Nasca Lines The Sacred Landscape.
thony Horowitzs novel Evil Star (novel). National Geographic. National Geographic. Retrieved 23
August 2016.
The Nazca lines are featured in the Super NES video [3] Taj, Mitra (August 15, 2012). Pigs and squatters threaten
game Illusion of Gaia. Perus Nazca lines. Reuters. Retrieved August 15, 2012.
[4] Katherine Reece, Grounding the Nasca Balloon, In the Hall

The Nazca lines are also depicted multiple times in
of Ma'at: It is incorrect to say that the lines cannot be seen
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
from the ground. They are visible from atop the surround-
ing foothills. The credit for the discovery of the lines goes
The Nazca lines are featured in the Master System to Peruvian archaeologist Toribio Mejia Xesspe who spotted
video game Nazca '88: The Golden Road to Par- them when hiking through the foothills in 1927.
adise, erroneously adapted in the Western as Aztec
Adventure [5] In the Antwerp edition of 1554, see: Pedro Cieza de Len,
La Chronica del Peru (The chronicle of Peru), (Antwerp,
(Belgium): Martin Nucio, 1554), page 141. On page 141,
The Nazca Lines marked the hiding place of an ancient Cieza discussed the Nazca region of Peru and then men-
weapon known as the Dark Heart in the Challenge tioned that: " y por algunas partes delos arenales se veen
of the GoBots animated series, and the prison of the seales, paraque atinen el camino que han de lleuar. (
Decepticon Pretender Dauros in Transformers: Super- and in some parts of the desert are seen signals, so that they
God Masterforce. [i.e., the Indians] nd the path that has to be taken.)
In 1586, Luis Monzn reported having seen ancient ruins in
The zoomorphic designs of the Nazca lines are repre- Peru, including the remains of roads": Luis Monzn (1586)
Descripcion de la tierra del repartimiento de los rucanas an-
sented in Yu-Gi-Oh! 5Ds as monster cards, used by
tamarcas de la corona real, jurisdicion de la ciudad de Gua-
the primary antagonists of the rst story arc.
manga. ao de 1586. in: Marcos Jimnez de la Espada, ed.,
Relaciones geogrcas de Indias: Peru, volume 1 (Madrid,
The Nazca lines are featured in The Mysterious Cities Spain: Manuel G. Hernandez, 1881), pp. 197216. On
of Gold cartoon in episode 19, linked to a ctional an- page 210, Munzn mentioned seeing ancient ruins, includ-
cient civilizations ying machine. ing " y hay seales de calles. ( and there are signs of
streets.) Munzn asked elderly Indians about the ruins. They [21] Kozak, Robert (2014-12-14). Peru Says Greenpeace Per-
told him that before the Incas, a people whom " llamaron manently Damaged Nazca Lines. The Wall Street Journal.
viracochas, " ( they called viracochas ) inhabited the Retrieved 2015-02-03.
area, and A stos les hacian caminos, que hoy dia son vistos,
tan anchos como una calle " (To those [places] they made [22] Neuman, William (12 December 2014). Peru is Indignant
paths, that are seen today, as wide as a street .) After Greenpeace Makes Its Mark on Ancient Site. The
New York Times. Retrieved 13 December 2014.
[6] Meja Xesspe, Toribio (1939) Acueductos y caminos an-
tiguos de la hoya del Ro Grande de Nazca (Aqueducts and [23] Briceno, Franklin (December 9, 2014). Peru Riled by
ancient roads of the Rio Grand valley in Nazca), Actas y Tra- Greenpeace Stunt at Nazca Lines. Retrieved December 11,
bajos Cienticos del 27 Congreso Internacional de American- 2014.
istas (Proceedings and scientic works of the 27th interna-
tional congress of American anthropologists), 1: 55969. [24] Video of Greenpeace Nazca Lines Protest. Retrieved De-
cember 13, 2014.
[7] Katherine Reece, Grounding the Nasca Balloon, Into the
Hall of Ma'at website [25] Vice News: Drone Footage Shows Extent of Damage From
Greenpeace Stunt at Nazca Lines By Kayla Ruble Decem-
[8] Nickell, Joe (2005). Unsolved History: Investigating Mys- ber 17, 2014
teries of the Past, The University Press of Kentucky ISBN
978-0-8131-9137-9, pp. 1316 [26] Greenpeace sorry for Nazca lines stunt in Peru. December
11, 2014. Retrieved September 9, 2016.
[9] Team nds more Peru geoglyphs. Japan Times. Jan 20,
2011. Archived from the original on 2012-07-15. Retrieved [27] Greenpeace Won't Name Activists Linked to Damage. 16
9 April 2012. December 2014.
[10] University to open center at Nazca Lines. Japan Times. [28] Dube, Ryan; Kozak, Robert (December 28, 2014).
March 22, 2012. Archived from the original on 2012-03- Peruvians Spar Over Protecting Ancient Sites. Wall Street
26. Retrieved 9 April 2012. Journal. Retrieved July 16, 2015. (subscription required
(help)).
[11] Cameron, Ian (1990). Kingdom of the Sun God: A History
of the Andes and Their People. New York: Facts on File. p.
46. ISBN 0-8160-2581-9.
50.9 References
[12] ROBERT McG. THOMAS Jr, Maria Reiche, 95, Keeper
of an Ancient Peruvian Puzzle, Dies, The New York Times, Aveni, Anthony F. (ed.) (1990). The Lines of Nazca.
15 June 1998 Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. ISBN
0-87169-183-3
[13] Stierlin (1983)
Haughton, Brian. (2007). Hidden History: Lost Civ-
[14] Brown, Cynthia Stokes (2007). Big History. New York: The
New Press. p. 167. ISBN 978-1-59558-196-9. ilizations, Secret Knowledge, and Ancient Mysteries.
Career Press. ISBN 1-56414-897-1
[15] Aveni, Anthony F. Between the Lines: The Mystery of the
Giant Ground Drawings of Ancient Nasca, Peru . Austin, Johnson, Emma. 2007. The 'Mysterious Nazca Lines.
Texas: University of Texas Press. 1 July 2006 ISBN 0-292- PARA Web Bibliography B-01.
70496-8 p.205
Kosok, Paul (1965). Life, Land and Water in Ancient
[16] The Theory of Jim Woodman - Science in the Sand. Re- Peru, Brooklyn: Long Island University Press.
Lambers, Karsten (2006). The Geoglyphs of Palpa,
[17] Haughton (2007) Peru: Documentation, Analysis, and Interpretation.
Lindensoft Verlag, Aichwald/Germany. ISBN 3-
[18] Shak Meghji, Flooding and tourism threaten Perus mys-
terious Nazca Lines, The Independent, July 17, 2004. Ac-
929290-32-4
cessed April 02, 2007.
Nickell, Joe. 1983. Skeptical Inquirer The Nazca
[19] Living in Peru. Peru: Nazca Lines escape mudslides, Liv- Lines Revisited: Creation of a Full-Sized Duplicate.
ing in Peru, February 20, 2007. Accessed April 02, 2007.
Reinhard, Johan (1996) (6th ed.) The Nazca Lines: A
[20] Manuel Vigo (2013-03-14). Peru: Heavy machinery de- New Perspective on their Origin and Meaning. Lima:
stroys Nazca lines. Peru this Week. Retrieved 2013-07-30. Los Pinos. ISBN 84-89291-17-9
Sauerbier, Martin. GIS-based Management and Anal-

ysis of the Geoglyphs in the Palpa Region. ETH (2009).
doi:10.3929/ethz-a-005940066.
Stierlin, Henri (1983). La Cl du Mystre. Paris: Al-

bin Michel. ISBN 2-226-01864-6
50.10 External links

Nazca Designs and Lines at Discover Peru
Tragedies ying over the Nazca lines

Chapter 51
Piri Reis map
World by approximately 1510, and in its claim to have used

Christopher Columbus' maps, otherwise lost, as a source. It
used ten Arab sources, four Indian maps sourced from the
Portuguese, and one of Columbus. More recently, it has
been the focus of pseudohistoric claims for the pre-modern
exploration of the Antarctic coast.
51.1 Description
The map is the extant western third of a world map drawn
on gazelle skin parchment, with dimensions reported as 90
cm 63 cm,[2][3] 86 cm 60 cm,[4] 90 cm 65 cm,[5][6][7]
85 cm 60 cm,[8][9] 87 cm 63 cm,[10] and 86 cm 62
cm.[11] These discrepancies are largely due to the damaged
corner. The surviving portion primarily details the west-
ern coast of Africa and the eastern coast of South Amer-
ica. The map was signed by Piri Reis, an Ottoman-Turkish
admiral, geographer and cartographer, and dated to the
month of Muharram in the Islamic year 919 AH, equiva-
lent to 1513 AD.[12][13] It was presented to Ottoman Sultan
Selim I in 1517.[4][14] In the maps legend, Piri inscribed
that the map was based on about twenty charts and mappae
mundi.[15][16][17] According to Piri, these maps included
eight Ptolemaic maps, an Arabic map of India, four newly
drawn Portuguese maps from Sindh, Pakistan and a map by
Surviving fragment of the Piri Reis map showing the Central and Christopher Columbus of the western lands. From Inscrip-
South American coast. The appended notes say the map of the tion 6 on the map:
western lands drawn by Columbus[1]
From eight Jaferyas of that kind and one Ara-
The Piri Reis map is a world map compiled in 1513 from bic map of Hind [India], and from four newly
military intelligence by the Ottoman admiral and cartogra- drawn Portuguese maps which show the countries
pher Piri Reis (pronounced [pii eis]). Approximately one of Sind [now in modern day Pakistan], Hind and
third of the map survives; it shows the western coasts of in [China] geometrically drawn, and also from a
Europe and North Africa and the coast of Brazil with rea- map drawn by Qulnb [Columbus] in the west-
sonable accuracy. Various Atlantic islands, including the ern region, I have extracted it. By reducing all
Azores and Canary Islands, are depicted, as is the mythical these maps to one scale this nal form was arrived
island of Antillia and possibly Japan. at, so that this map of these lands is regarded by
The historical importance of the map lies in its demon- seamen as accurate and as reliable as the accu-
stration of the extent of global exploration of the New racy and reliability of the Seven Seas[18] on the
147
148 CHAPTER 51. PIRI REIS MAP
aforesaid maps.[19] display to the public.

The map was depicted on the reverse of the Turkish 10 mil-
There is some scholarly debate over whether the 20 charts lion lira banknote of 1999-2005[34] and of the new 10 lira
and mappae mundi in Piris inscriptions includes the eight banknote of 2005-2009.[35]
Ptolemaic maps, the four Portuguese maps, the Arabic
map and the Columbus map.[20] From one perspective, the
number of charts and mappae mundi used by Piri equals
20,[16][21][22] while in the other, it could mean a total of
51.3 Analysis
34.[23][24][25][26] Some have claimed that the source maps
were found in the ancient Library of Alexandria,[27] based The map is a portolan chart, as shown by the four compass
on Piris allusions to Alexander the Great, the founder of roses (two large and two small) from which lines of bear-
Alexandria, Ptolemy I, who ruled Alexandria in the 4th cen- ing radiate.[36] Some analyses assert that the map is an
tury BC, and Claudius Ptolemy, the Greek geographer and azimuthal equidistant projection centered on Cairo, but a
cartographer who lived in Alexandria during the 2nd cen- 1998 analysis by Steven Dutch of the University of Wis-
tury AD.[20] Gregory McIntosh states Arab writers often consin Green Bay shows a better t with a point near the
confused Claudius Ptolemy, the geographer of the second intersection of the present-day prime meridian and the
century C.E., with Ptolemy I, one of Alexanders generals... equator.[36] There are extensive notes in Ottoman Turkish
Piri Reis has undoubtedly made the same error, resulting in around the edges of the map, as well as some interior detail
his believing the charts and maps were from the time of which is mostly inaccurate and fanciful.[36]
Ptolemy I instead of Claudius Ptolemy.[28] The Iberian peninsula and the coast of Africa are rendered
accurately; as for the Americas, the northern portion of
the South American coast is also fairly accurate and po-
51.2 History sitioned correctly with respect to Africa.[36] Much of the
Caribbean is also mapped fairly accurately and appears to
The map was discovered serendipitously on 9 October reect Columbuss maps of the area. The area represent-
1929, through the philological work of the German theolo- ing North America bears almost no resemblance to its real
gian Gustav Adolf Deissmann (18661937). He had been coastline (which is unsurprising, since by this time, it was
commissioned by the Turkish Ministry of Education to cat- still almost totally unexplored) except for one projection
alogue the Topkap Palace librarys non-Islamic items.[29] which might be Newfoundland; an island labelled Antilia
At Deissmanns request to search the palace for old maps may actually be Nova Scotia, since it has a note attached
and charts, the director Halil Edhem (18611938) man- which refers to the legendary voyages of Saint Brendan.[36]
aged to nd some disregarded bundles of material, which There is some suggestion that this area may represent the
he handed over to Deissmann. Realizing that the map Asian coast. Island groups in the east Atlantic are accu-
might be a unique nd, Deissmann showed it to the orien- rately placed, but are depicted out of scale.[36]
talist Paul Kahle, who identied it as a map drawn by Piri Although there are frequent claims for the extreme accuracy
Reis.[30] The discovery caused an international sensation, as of this chart, McIntosh, in comparing the Piri Reis map to
it represented the only then known copy of a world map of several other portolan-style maps of the era, found that
Christopher Columbus (14511506),[31] and was the only
16th-century map that showed South America in its proper The Piri Reis map is not the most accu-
longitudinal position in relation to Africa. Geographers had rate map of the sixteenth century, as has been
spent several centuries unsuccessfully searching for a lost claimed, there being many, many world maps
map of Columbus that was supposedly drawn while he was produced in the remaining eighty-seven years
in the West Indies.[13] of that century that far surpass it in accuracy.
After reading about the maps discovery in The Illustrated The Ribeiro maps of the 1520s and 1530s, the
London News, United States Secretary of State Henry L. Ortelius map of 1570, and the Wright-Molyneux
Stimson contacted the United States Ambassador to Turkey map of 1599 (the best map of the sixteenth cen-
Charles H. Sherrill and requested that an investigation be tury) are only a few better-known examples.[37]
launched to nd the Columbus source map, which he be-
lieved may have been in Turkey.[32] In turn, the Turkish
51.3.1 The Antarctic coast
government complied with Stimsons request, but they were
[33]
unsuccessful in locating any of the source maps. There are two major discrepancies from known coastlines:
The Piri Reis map is currently located in the Library of the the North American coast mentioned above, and the south-
Topkap Palace in Istanbul, Turkey, but is not usually on ern portion of the South American coast. On the Piri Reis
51.4. SEE ALSO 149
map, the latter is shown bending o sharply to the east unclear whether the mapmaker saw South America itself as
starting around present-day Rio de Janeiro. A more pop- part of the unknown southern lands (as shown in the Atlas
ular interpretation of this territory has been to identify this Miller),[40] or whether (as Dutch thought) he drew what was
section with the Queen Maud Land coast of Antarctica. then known of the coast with substantial distortion, but in
This claim is generally traced to Arlington H. Mallery, a any case, serious scholarship holds that there is no reason
civil engineer and amateur archaeologist who was a sup- to believe that the map is the product of genuine knowledge
porter of pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact hypotheses. of the Antarctic coast.[36]
Though his assertions were not well received by scholars,
they were revived in Charles Hapgood's 1966 book Maps
of the Ancient Sea Kings.[36] This book proposed a theory
of global exploration by a pre-classical undiscovered civi-
51.4 See also
lization based on his analysis of this and other ancient and
late-medieval maps. More notoriously, these claims were Geography in medieval Islam
repeated in Erich von Dniken's Chariots of the Gods (which
attributed the knowledge of the coast to extraterrestrials) Ancient world maps
and Gavin Menzies's 1421: The Year China Discovered the
World map
World (which attributed it to supposed Chinese voyages),
both of which were roundly denounced by both scholars Waldseemller map
and debunkers of fringe works, but which attracted huge
popular followings.[36] Johannes Schner globes, made in 1515 and 1520.
A more sober analysis of these claims was published by Also shows a Southern Continent at the South Pole.
Gregory McIntosh, a historian of cartography, who exam-
ined the map in depth in his book The Piri Reis Map of 1513
(Athens and London: University of Georgia Press, 2000). 51.5 Notes
He was able to nd sources for much of the map in Colum-
buss writings. Certain peculiarities (such as the appearance [1] To The End of the Earth, Jeremy Harwood, Struik Publish-
of the Virgin Islands in two locations) he attributed to the ers, 2007, ISBN 978-1-77007-608-2, p.69
use of multiple maps as sources; others (such as the errors
in North American geography) he traced to the continued [2] Nebenzahl 1990, p. 63.
confusion of the area with East Asia. As far as the accuracy
of depiction of the supposed Antarctic coast is concerned, [3] Soucek, Svat (1995), Piri Re'is, in Bosworth, C. E.; van
there are two conspicuous errors. First, it is shown hundreds Donzel, E.; Heinrichs, W. P.; et al., Encyclopaedia of Islam,
of kilometres north of its proper location; second, the Drake vol. 8, Leiden: Brill Publishers, p. 308, ISBN 90-04-09834-
8.
Passage is completely missing, with the Antarctic Peninsula
presumably conated with the Argentine coast. The iden- [4] Kahle 1933, p. 621.
tication of this area of the map with the frigid Antarctic
coast is also dicult to reconcile with the notes on the map [5] Mollat du Jourdin, La Roncire & le R. Dethan 1984, p.
which describe the region as having a warm climate.[36] 218.
It should be kept in mind that maps of the period generally [6] Portinaro & Knirsch 1987, p. 47.
depicted a large continent named Terra Australis Incognita
of highly variable shape and extent. This land was posited [7] Tekeli 1985, p. 676.
by Ptolemy as a counterbalance to the extensive continen-
tal areas in the northern hemisphere; due to a lack of ex- [8] Babinger, Franz (1936), Piri Re'is, in Houtsma, M. Th.,
ploration and various misunderstandings, its existence was Encyclopaedia of Islam, vol. 3, Leiden: Brill Publishers, pp.
not fully abandoned until circumnavigation of the area dur- 10701071.
ing the second voyage of James Cook in the 1770s showed
[9] Deissmann 1933, p. 111.
that if it existed, it was much smaller than imagined pre-
viously. The rst conrmed landing on Antarctica was not [10] Van de Waal 1969, p. 82.
until 1820, and the coastline of Queen Maud Land did not
see signicant exploration before Norwegian expeditions [11] Smithsonian Institution 1966, p. 104.
began in 1891.[38][39] In 1513, Cape Horn had not yet been
discovered, and indeed Ferdinand Magellan's voyage of cir- [12] Stiebing 1984, pp. 12.
cumnavigation was not to set sail for another six years. It is
[13] Hapgood 1966, p. 1.
150 CHAPTER 51. PIRI REIS MAP
[14] From the preface of Piris Kitab- Bahriye (1521), as trans- [34] Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey. Banknote Mu-
lated in Kahle 1933: This poor man [Piri Reis] had pre- seum: 7. Emission Group - Ten Million Turkish Lira - I.
viously constructed a map which, in comparison with maps Series. Retrieved on 20 April 2009.
hitherto known, displayed many more [and] dierent details,
[and] in which he had included even the newly published [35] Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey. Banknote Mu-
maps of the Indian and Chinese Oceans which at that time seum: 8. Emission Group - Ten New Turkish Lira - I. Series.
were totally unknown in the country of Rm [the Ottoman Announcement on the Withdrawal of E8 New Turkish Lira
Empire]; and he had presented it in Cairo to the Turkish Banknotes from Circulation, 8 May 2007. Retrieved on
Sultan Selim I, who graciously accepted it. 20 April 2009.
[15] Hapgood 1966, p. 2. [36] Dutch, Steven. The Piri Reis Map. Retrieved 2013-08-16.
[16] Kahle 1933, p. 624. [37] McIntosh 2000, p. 59.
[17] Inscription 6 on the map reads: In this age, no one has seen [38] U.S. Antarctic Program External Panel of the National Sci-
a map like this. The hand of this poor man [Piri Reis] has ence Foundation. AntarcticaPast and Present (PDF).
drawn it and completed it from about twenty charts and map- Retrieved 6 February 2006.
paemundi. These are charts drawn in the days of Iskender
dhu-l Karnian [Alexander the Great], which the inhabited [39] Guy G. Guthridge. Nathaniel Brown Palmer, 1799-1877.
quarter of the world. The Arabs name these charts Jaferya. NASA, U.S. Government. Retrieved 6 February 2006.
Translation from McIntosh 2000, p. 15.
[40] http://xoomer.virgilio.it/dicuoghi/Piri_Reis/PiriReis_eng.
[18] In this case, the Seven Seas are the Chinese Sea, the Indian htm Diego Cuoghi, Thorough article on Piri Reis and
Sea, the Persian Gulf, the Caspian Sea, the Western Sea Oronteus maps refuting the Antarctica claims.
(Atlantic Ocean), the Red Sea and the East African Sea (sea
surrounding the East African island of Zanzibar), as identi-
ed by Piri in Kitab- Bahriye (1521). Kahle 1933, p. 624. 51.6 References
[19] Translation from McIntosh 2000, pp. 15, 17.
Afetinan, A.; Yola, Leman (trans.) (1954), The Old-
[20] McIntosh 2000, p. 18 est Map of America, Drawn by Piri Reis, Ankara: Trk
Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, pp. 615.
[21] Afetinan & Yola 1954, pp. 24, 31.
Afetinan, A. (1987), Life and Works of Piri Reis: The
[22] Kahle 1956, p. 106.
Oldest Map of America (2nd ed.), Ankara: Turkish
[23] Tekeli 1985, p. 677. Historical Society, OCLC 19674051.
[24] Afetinan 1987, p. 27. Hapgood, Charles H. (1966), Maps of the Ancient Sea
Kings: Evidence of Advanced Civilization in the Ice
[25] Yerci 1989, p. 154. Age, New York: Chilton Books, ISBN 0-8019-5089-
9.
[26] Atil, Esin (1987), The Age of Sultan Sleyman the Magni-
cent, New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., p. 81. Deissmann, Adolf (1933), Forschungen und Funde
im Serai: Mit einem Verzeichnis der nichtislamischen
[27] Flem-Ath, Rand; Wilson, Colin (2000), The Atlantis
Blueprint, Little, Brown and Company, p. 18. Handscriften im Topkapu Serai in Istanbul, Berlin:
Walter de Gruyter.
[28] McIntosh 2000, p. 17
Flem-Ath, Rand; Wilson, Colin (2000), The Atlantis
[29] A. Gerber, Deissmann the Philologist, Berlin, 2010, 198- Blueprint, Great Britain: Little, Brown and Company,
201. p. 18, ISBN 0-316-85313-5.
[30] G. A. Deissmann, Forschungen und Funde im Serai, Berlin, Kahle, Paul E. (October 1933), A Lost Map of
1933, 111-122. Columbus, Geographic Review, American Geograph-
ical Society, 23 (4): 621638, doi:10.2307/209247,
[31] P. Lunde, Piri Reis and the Columbus Map, Aramco World,
43, 3, 1992, 48-59 JSTOR 209247.
[32] Hapgood 1966, p. 211. Kahle, Paul E. (April 1956), Piri Re'is: The Turk-
ish Sailor and Cartographer, Journal of the Pakistan
[33] Hapgood 1966, pp. 12. Historical Society, 4: 101111.
McIntosh, Gregory C. (2000), The Piri Reis Map of Fingerprints of the Gods (2001) ascii text. Citat:
1513, Athens, Georgia: University of Georgia Press, "...William Miller wrote:...The examinations that I
ISBN 0-8203-2157-5. have made of it show all sorts of errors that certainly
falsify any claim of unusual accuracy for this map...
Mollat du Jourdin, Michel; La Roncire, Monique;
le R. Dethan, L. (trans.) (1984), Sea Charts of the The Mysterious Origins of Man: The Oronteus Fi-
Early Explorers, Thirteenth to Seventeenth Century, naeus Map of 1532, by Paul Heinrich: the Oronteus
New York: Thames & Hudson, ISBN 0-500-01337- map and Creationism
3.
The Mysteries of the Piri Reis Map: by Diego Cuoghi.
Nebenzahl, Kenneth (1990), Atlas of Columbus and On the Piri Reis, Oronteus, and Philippe Buache
the Great Discoveries, Chicago: Rand McNally, ISBN maps; comparison to other 16th-century maps of
0-528-83407-X. America and Asia, debunking the Antarctica claims.
Portinaro, Pierluigi; Knirsch, Franco (1987), The Car- Ottoman-Turkish Historical Maps: includes a large (1
tography of North America, 15001800, New York: MB) but low-resolution image of the Piri Reis map
Facts on File, ISBN 0-8160-1586-4. (not as clear as Wikipedias image)
Smithsonian Institution (1966), Art Treasures of The Piri Reis Map by Steven Dutch, Natural and Ap-
Turkey, Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, plied Sciences, University of Wisconsin - Green Bay
OCLC 1027066.
Stiebing, William H., Jr. (1984), Ancient Astronauts,
Cosmic Collisions and Other Popular Theories about
Mans Past, Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books,
ISBN 0-87975-285-8.
Tekeli, Sevim (1985), The Map of America by Piri
Reis, Erdem, 1 (3): 673683.
Van de Waal, E. H. (1969), Manuscript Maps in the
Topkap Saray Library, Istanbul, Imago Mundi, 23
(1): 8195, doi:10.1080/03085696908592335.
Yerci, M. (1989), The Accuracy of the First World
Map Drawn by Piri Reis, The Cartographic Journal,
26 (2): 154155.
51.7 External links

Turkey in Maps: The Piri Reis margin notes, translation
from The Oldest Map of America (Afet Inan, Ankara,
1954).
Charles Hapgood commentary on the Piri Reis map,
photocopied from Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings
Steven Dutch, University of Wisconsin: debunking
Piri Reis pseudo-scholarship
Sacred Text Archive: pseudo-scholarship about an Ice
Age civilization, translation of the map commentary.
Piri Reis and the Columbian Theory by Paul Lunde:
ascii text from Aramco World Magazine (Jan-Feb
1980). Citat: "...There may, in fact, be an even simpler
explanation of the presence of Antarctica on the Piri
Reis map...
Chapter 52
Stone spheres of Costa Rica
Warning: Page using Template:Infobox ancient site with

unknown parameter precolumbian (this message is shown
only in preview).
The stone spheres (or stone balls) of Costa Rica
are an assortment of over three hundred petrospheres in
Costa Rica, located on the Diqus Delta and on Isla del
Cao. Locally, they are known as Las Bolas (literally The
Balls). The spheres are commonly attributed to the ex-
tinct Diqus culture and are sometimes referred to as the
Diqus Spheres. They are the best-known stone sculptures
of the Isthmo-Colombian area. They are thought to have
been placed in lines along the approach to the houses of
chiefs, but their exact signicance remains uncertain.
The Palmar Sur Archeological Excavations are a series
of excavations of a site located in the southern portion of
Costa Rica, known as the Diqus Delta. The excavations
have centered on a site known as Farm 6, dating back
to the Aguas Buenas Period (300800 CE) and Chiriqu
Period (8001550 CE).
In June 2014, the Precolumbian Chiefdom Settlements with
Stone Spheres of the Diquis was added to the UNESCO list
of World Heritage Sites.[1]
52.1 Description
The spheres range in size from a few centimetres to over 2

metres (6.6 ft) in diameter, and weigh up to 15 tons.[2] Most
are sculpted from gabbro,[2] the coarse-grained equivalent
of basalt. There are a dozen or so made from shell-rich
limestone, and another dozen made from a sandstone. They
appear to have been made by hammering natural boulders
with other rocks, then polishing with sand. The degree of Imagen Csmica, a work on ancient mysticism, Costa Rican Art
nishing and precision of working varies considerably. The Museum, San Jos, Costa Rica, sculpture of Jorge Jimnez Deredia
gabbro came from sites in the hills, several kilometres away
from where the nished spheres are found, though some un-
nished spheres remain in the hills.
152
52.4. PRE-COLUMBIAN HISTORY 153
View of the Farm 6 Archaeological site

Pre-Columbian stone sphere, located at the University of Costa Rica
as a symbol of tradition and ancient wisdom.
cation for spheres that have been returned to the National
Museum.
52.2 Geographic setting and loca-
tion
52.4 Pre-Columbian history
The archaeological site of Palmar Sur is located in the
southern portion of Costa Rica, known as the Diqus Delta,
and in the southernmost part of the Puntarenas Province.
The Diqus Delta is dened as the alluvial plain with the ge-
ographical boundaries of the Fila Grisera to the north and
east, the Pacic Ocean to the west, and the Osa Mountains
comprising the southern boundary. This area is dened by
two seasons: wet and dry. The dry season runs from De-
cember through March with the wet season comprising the
remaining months.
The Site is located in Palmar Sur, southern Costa Rica. The
site is located on approximately 10 hectares of property that
was previously owned by the United Fruit Company in the
alluvial plain of the Trraba River.
Palmar Sur airport park
52.3 Site description The stones are believed to have been rst created around
the year 600, with most dating to after 1000 but before the
Spanish conquest. The only method available for dating the
The archaeological site of Farm 6 has been dated to the carved stones is stratigraphy, but most stones are no longer
Aguas Buenas Period (300800 CE) and Chiriqu Period in their original locations. The culture of the people who
(8001550 CE). It was a multifunctional site accommo- made them disappeared after the Spanish conquest.[3]
dating a settlement and a cemetery, and remains of mon-
umental architecture and sculpture are also present on
the site. The monumental architecture consists of two
mounds which were constructed with retaining walls made 52.5 Post-contact history
of rounded river cobbles and lled with earth. The site con-
tains multiple locations where large stone spheres are found The spheres were discovered in the 1930s as the United
in situ. Additionally, since many of the stone spheres in the Fruit Company was clearing the jungle for banana planta-
region were removed from their original locations and serve tions.[3] Workmen pushed them aside with bulldozers and
as landscape decoration, the site has become a storage lo- heavy equipment, damaging some spheres. Additionally,
154 CHAPTER 52. STONE SPHERES OF COSTA RICA
inspired by stories of hidden gold workmen began to drill cluding mangrove forests located in the Terraba and Sierpe
holes into the spheres and blow them open with sticks of Rivers.
dynamite. Several of the spheres were destroyed before
authorities intervened. Some of the dynamited spheres
have been reassembled and are currently on display at the
National Museum of Costa Rica in San Jos.
The rst scientic investigation of the spheres was under-
taken shortly after their discovery by Doris Stone, a daugh-
ter of a United Fruit executive. These were published
in 1943 in American Antiquity, attracting the attention of
Samuel Kirkland Lothrop[4] of the Peabody Museum at
Harvard University.[5] In 1948, he and his wife attempted
to excavate an unrelated archaeological site in the north-
ern region of Costa Rica.[6] The government had just dis-
banded its professional army, and the resulting civil unrest
threatened the security of Lothrops team. In San Jos he
met Doris Stone, who directed the group toward the Diqus
Delta region in the southwest (Valle de Diqus refers to Modern Landscape of Palmar Sur, Costa Rica
the valley of the lower Ro Grande de Trraba, including
the Osa Canton towns of Puerto Corts, Palmar Norte, and The rich alluvial soils of this region facilitated historical
Sierpe[7] ) and provided them with valuable dig sites and per- agriculture since the 1930s. The United Fruit Company
sonal contacts. Lothrops ndings were published in Ar- dominated this southern region with banana plantations as
chaeology of the Diqus Delta, Costa Rica 1963. early as the 1920s in Parrita and Quepos. The UFCO en-
In 2010, University of Kansas researcher John Hoopes vis- tered Palmar Sur in the 1930s under the name of Compana
ited the site of the Stone Spheres to evaluate their eligibility Bananera de [9]
Costa Rica in an eort to avoid antimonopoly
for protection as a Unesco World Heritage Site. [8] legislature. Today the landscape is still carved into agri-
cultural elds which are owned by co-ops and consist of
plantain, banana, and palm plantations.
52.6 Historical background
52.7 Early researchers in the region
Scientic research in the alluvial plain, particularly on
United Fruit Company properties, began in the 1940s with
the work of Doris Zemurray Stone and Samuel Lothrop.
Lothrops work focused on excavation at a handful of sites,
one being Farm 4. His work aimed to document all archae-
ological sites containing in situ stone spheres, to record
the number of spheres and their dimensions, and to make
detailed maps illustrating both their arrangement and align-
ments.
After the work of Lothrop and Stone, research in the area
took a hiatus for nearly fty years. In the 1990s, Claude
Baudez and a team of researchers set out to establish a ce-
ramic chronology of the region by observing the change in
Remnants of UFCO occupation in Palmar Sur ceramic styles over time.[10] This was accomplished by ex-
amining the drainage ditches that were cut into the land-
Before the arrival of the Compana Bananera de Costa Rica, scape by the UFCO. Research carried out by Igenia Quin-
a branch of the United Fruit Company, and banana planta- tanilla, under the direction of the MNCR from 1991-1996
tions in the 1930s, vegetation in this area oered a great was performed in the region under the project titled Man
deal of biodiversity in both plant and animal resources. and Environment in Sierpe-Terraba focusing on settlement
Resources available to Precolumbian inhabitants in this al- patterns, occupational sequences, and resources utilized in
luvial plain consisted of riverine and ocean resources, in- the region.[11]
52.10. MYTHS 155
Francisco Corrales and Adrian Badilla, archaeologists with 52.10 Myths

the Museo Nacional de Costa Rica, have performed con-
tinuous research in the region since 2002. Their research Numerous myths surround the stones, such as they came
began in 2002 and focused on four archaeological sites in from Atlantis, or that they were made as such by nature.
the region containing stone spheres and of which comprise a Some local legends state that the native inhabitants had
circuit. These sites include Grijalba, Batambal, El Silen- access to a potion able to soften the rock. Limestone,
cio, and Farm 6. The purpose of the project was to assess for example, can be dissolved by acidic solutions obtained
the cultural signicance of the sites, to protect the cultural from plants. Research led by Joseph Davidovits of the
heritage, in addition to beginning research and studies at the Geopolymer Institute in France has been oered in support
sites.[12] Corrales and Badilla produced a booklet entitled El of this hypothesis.[15] However, most of the spheres were
Paisaje Cultural del Delta del Diqus which provides a quick created from gabbro, an acid-resistant igneous rock.[16]
overview on the history of the Diqus Delta, the history of
banana plantations and the UFCO, the natural environment, In the cosmogony of the Bribri, which is shared by the
archaeological sites in the region, and the importance of the Cabecares and other American ancestral groups, the stone
Diqus region as an UNESCO World Heritage Site.[13] Re- spheres are Taras cannon balls. Tara or Tlatchque, the
search has continued in the region by Corrales and Badilla god of thunder, used a giant blowpipe to shoot the balls at
focusing on the archaeology and the Precolumbian politi- the Serkes, gods of winds and hurricanes, in order to drive
cal structure in the Diqus Delta. Research emphasis was them out of these lands.
on chiefdoms and their associated archaeological indica- It has been claimed that the spheres are perfect, or very
tors. Their objectives were to study the archaeological sites
near perfect in roundness, although some spheres are known
containing stone spheres in the Diqus Subregion to gain an to vary over 5 centimetres (2.0 in) in diameter. Also, the
understanding of community conguration, activity areas, stones have been damaged and eroded over the years, and so
sequences of occupation, and the recording of monumental it is impossible to know exactly their original shape. A re-
architecture.[14] view of the way that the stones were measured by Lothrop
reveals that claims of precision are due to misinterpreta-
tions of the methods used in their measurement. Although
Lothrop published tables of ball diameters with gures to
52.8 Current research three decimal places, these gures were actually averages
of measurements taken with tapes that were nowhere near
Research is currently ongoing at the Farm 6 site under that precise.[17]
the direction of archaeologists at the Museo Nacional de
Costa Rica. The rst eld season in which archaeological
excavations were undertaken was in 2005. Objectives dur- 52.11 See also
ing this eld season included dening the area in which two
mounds were located, sphere alignments, and various exca- Olmec colossal heads
vations associated with mound 2. In 2007, as second eld
season was undertaken focusing on archaeological excava- Barrigones of Guatemala
tions of Mound 1. During this eld season, a stone sphere
was discovered in situ in association with the mound. Petrosphere
Stone ball
Kugel ball
52.9 Tourism
List of megalithic sites
Archaeo-tourism is a concept that is still relatively new in Moeraki Boulders
Costa Rica. To date, the national monument of Guayabo
de Turrialba is primarily the only archaeological site open
for tourism. Tourism on a smaller scale is occurring at the
site of Farm 6 but is open to visitors upon paying a nominal
52.12 References
fee to tour the museum display and then tour the grounds,
[1] Six new sites inscribed on World Heritage List. UNESCO.
viewing some of the discovery sites. It is no longer neces-
Retrieved 23 June 2014.
sary to have an appointment. Future plans of the MNCR
are to open the site to tourism on a larger scale and to in- [2] The stone spheres of Costa Rica. BBC News. 29 March
clude other sites nearby in the region. 2010. Retrieved 2010-03-31.
[3] Brendan M. Lynch (22 Mar 2010). University of Kansas Baudez, Claude; Borgnino, Natalie;
researcher investigates mysterious stone spheres in Costa Laligant, Sophie; Valerie Lauthelin
Rica. Retrieved 2010-03-24. (1993). Investigaciones arqueolgi-
[4] National Academy of Sciences (1877). Samuel Kirkland cas en el Delta del Diqus. Mexico,
Lothrup. Biographical memoirs, Volume 48. National D.F.: CEMCA. ISBN 0-00-000000-
Academies Press. p. 253. Retrieved 2010-03-31. 0. OCLC 000000.
[5] Tim McGuinness. Costa Rican Diquis Spheres: Sphere his- Corrales, Francisco; Badilla, Adrian
tory. mysteryspheres.com. Retrieved 2010-03-31. (2005). El Paisaje Cultural del Delta
[6] Eleanor Lothrop (September 1955). Prehistoric Stone del Diqus. San Jos.: Museo Na-
Ballsa Mystery. Picks from the Past. Natural History. cional de Costa Rica-UNESCO.
Corrales, Francisco; Badilla, Adrian
[7] Gazetteer of Costa Rican Plant-Collecting Locales: Diqus (2005). Investigaciones Arqueologi-
(or Diks) from the website of the Missouri Botanical Gar- cas en Sitios con Esferas de Piedra,
den
Delta del Diqus. San Jos.: Museo
[8] The stone spheres of Costa Rica. BBC News. 2010-03- Nacional de Costa Rica-UNESCO.
29. Retrieved 2010-09-12. Propuesta de proyecto Departamento
de Anthropologa e Historia,.
[9] Villalobos 2005
[10] Baudez, et al. 1993 Lothrop, S. K (1963). Archaeology of

the Diqus Delta, Costa Rica. Cam-
[11] Quintanilla 1992 bridge: Papers of the Peabody Mu-
[12] Corrales and Badilla 2002 seum of Archaeology and Ethnology
51. ISBN 0-00-000000-0.
[13] Corrales and Badilla 2005
Stone, Doris (1943). Preliminary in-
[14] Corrales and Badilla 2005, 2007
vestigation of the ood plain of the
[15] Joseph Davidovits. Making Cements with Plant Extracts Ro Grande de Trraba, Costa Rica.
(PDF). Retrieved 2010-08-13. American Antiquity. 9 (1): 7488.
[16] Haupt, Ryan (3 February 2015). The stone spheres of Costa doi:10.2307/275453.
Rica. Skeptoid Podcast. Skeptoid Media. Retrieved 17 Jan-
uary 2017.
[17] John W. Hoopes. Errors and Misinformation. Archived

52.13 External links
from the original on March 23, 2013. Retrieved 2007-06-
19. (mirror: Common Misconceptions) Stone Spheres, Diquis Delta, Costa Rica from
Landmarks Foundation
Egitto, A. (2007). A GIS analysis
Costa Rican Stone Spheres a website by archaeologist
of the archaeological relationships in
Tim McGuinness, Ph.D.
the Diquis Delta of Southeastern Costa
Rica. Cleveland State University. The Stone Spheres of Costa Rica a review by the Skep-
toid Podcast
Quintanilla Jimnez, I. (1992).
Prospeccin arqueolgica del Delta
Sierpe-Trraba, sureste de Costa
Rica: Proyecto Hombre y Ambiente
en el Delta Sierpe-Trraba (Informe
1)". Museo Nacional de Costa Rica.
Submitted to MS.
Quintanilla Jimnez, I. (2004). Las

esferas de piedra del Pacco Sur de
Costa Rica: descifrando el enigma
desde la arqueologa. Universidad
Autnoma de Barcelona.
52.14. TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES 157
52.14 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

52.14.1 Text
Out-of-place artifact Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out-of-place_artifact?oldid=765220062 Contributors: Danny, Shii, Fonzy,
Michael Hardy, Paul Barlow, Alo, DavidWBrooks, Amcaja, Bogdangiusca, Dysprosia, Sabbut, Robbot, Auric, Kadzuwo~enwiki, Mboverload,
Dumbo1, Noe, Robert Brockway, Naive cynic, Florian Blaschke, Jetre85, Roodog2k, Pavel Vozenilek, Ben Standeven, C1k3, Tjic, Ununnil-
ium, Kappa, 9SGjOSfyHJaQVsEmy9NS, Sukiari, Riddhill, Wytukaze, Moanzhu, Titanium Dragon, ~shuri, Czolgolz, Firsfron, Woohookitty,
ThorstenS, Marudubshinki, Matilda, Don Bratt, Gryndor, Ligulem, Cmouse, FlaBot, Kri, Chobot, RussBot, Michael Slone, Theredstarswl,
Epolk, Mike Schiraldi, Hydrargyrum, Calicore, GunnarRene, Dugosz, Woling, 2over0, Abune, Pentasyllabic, That Guy, From That Show!,
SmackBot, Menah the Great, Verne Equinox, Declare, Eskimbot, ProveIt, Hmains, Kmarinas86, SoGonzo, Hibernian, Blueshirts, Emurphy42,
ZacharyD, PiMaster3, Pwjb, Paul H., BullRangifer, Marcus Brute, Bn, Cjwalters, JoshuaZ, Jollyroger, Georey Pruitt, Caijun, EdC~enwiki,
John1014, DabMachine, Kavaiyan, AndarielHalo, TurabianNights, Amakuru, Tubezone, Mavarin, ProfessorPaul, Dpino, Cricketgirl, Doug
Weller, Ledzeppelin321295, PedroCarvalho~enwiki, Thomasroche, Joshtrick, Davkal, Mr pand, RobotG, JHFTC, QuiteUnusual, NCartmell,
LuckyLouie, Ingolfson, Rothorpe, Avicennasis, ClovisPt, SunSw0rd, Nodekeeper, Dlempa, Agricolae, WhyTanFox, Jtp123, R'n'B, Commons-
Delinker, J.delanoy, GQsm, Cephlapod, 83d40m, BrettAllen, Geekdiva, Donmike10, Inwind, Squids and Chips, Carfax6, The Duke of Waltham,
Fences and windows, Jeanmarc4554, Bentley4, Catneven, Gillyweed, Flyer22 Reborn, Alexbrn, Historicus800, Canglesea, Faithlessthewonder-
boy, Dave T Hobbit, Newzild, EoGuy, Boing! said Zebedee, SamuelTheGhost, Alexbot, Panyd, Sun Creator, Iohannes Animosus, Ankithreya,
AnotherLuke, DumZiBoT, Against the current, Lkovac, Skarebo, SilvonenBot, Aunt Entropy, Kbdankbot, Michaelholly, Addbot, Simonm223,
Verbal, Lightbot, OlEnglish, 1j1z2, Luckas-bot, Ptbotgourou, We66er, Nallimbot, Rejillo, Againme, Armchair info guy, AnomieBOT, Ck-
ruschke, Citation bot, Casperbear, Dcsozman, Xqbot, FrescoBot, LucienBOT, Timothyleary, I dream of horses, Xfansd, Tim1357, Fama
Clamosa, Dinamik-bot, BCtl, Jamsshadows, Ollyoxenfree, Terra Novus, ClueBot NG, Liveintheforests, Helpful Pixie Bot, BG19bot, Cita-
tionCleanerBot, William Aiden, Harizotoh9, MrBill3, GreenUniverse, BattyBot, Khazar2, Wunkt2, Me, Myself, and I are Here, Rico Viviers,
LahmacunKebab, BradleyFree, Tullamore92, Kjerish, Lut529096, Maltice, Jerodlycett, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 140
Acmbaro gures Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ac%C3%A1mbaro_figures?oldid=757950272 Contributors: Auric, Robert Brock-
way, DNewhall, Rich Farmbrough, Iamunknown, TheParanoidOne, InShaneee, Titanium Dragon, BRW, Firsfron, LowKey, GregorB,
Dasare1503, RussBot, Pigman, Gaius Cornelius, Salmanazar, Tuckerresearch, Piecraft, KnightRider~enwiki, SmackBot, Arenlor, Orphan-
Bot, Paul H., JFKCom, Nishkid64, Ser Amantio di Nicolao, Carnby, Georey Pruitt, Skapur, Tubezone, JeJ, Myasuda, Bellerophon5685,
Doug Weller, Jutski, A.J.Chesswas, RobotG, Aille, Arturo 7, Simon Burchell, ClovisPt, BloodontheTracks, STBotD, DOHC Holiday,
SamuelTheGhost, Johnuniq, SoxBot III, DumZiBoT, Aunt Entropy, MystBot, Addbot, Zorrobot, Samuel Pepys, Luckas-bot, KamikazeBot,
Againme, Armchair info guy, AnomieBOT, DrilBot, Smuckola, Ripchip Bot, DASHBot, EmausBot, Dewritech, Outriggr, Brattarb, Donner60,
ClueBot NG, Helpful Pixie Bot, Pawn n usa, DoctorKubla, Dhutch86, Cranberry Products, Thurmanukyalur, InternetArchiveBot, GreenC bot,
Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 48
Aiud object Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aiud_object?oldid=754539417 Contributors: Dan Koehl, Doug Weller, Biruitorul, Thomas-
roche, Katharineamy and Anonymous: 3
Ancient Discoveries Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Discoveries?oldid=744006919 Contributors: Auric, Luigi30, Drbreznjev,
Tabletop, Wavelength, TexasAndroid, RussBot, SmackBot, Jagged 85, Ga, Chris the speller, Sct72, AussieLegend, Andyross, Intranetusa, Cy-
debot, VaGuy1973, Austinm4m1, TAnthony, Ljscott, 83d40m, Kinghenrik, Monkeymox, Twinsday, AussieLegend2, MGA73, DrilBot, Jschnur,
Grapesoda22, O.Koslowski, Hvakshahtrah, Mogism, RyanChamberlyn, AlexTheWhovian, InternetArchiveBot and Anonymous: 23
Antikythera mechanism Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism?oldid=764756804 Contributors: AxelBoldt, Zundark,
Taral, Rmhermen, Maury Markowitz, Heron, Isis~enwiki, Olivier, Leandrod, RTC, Michael Hardy, Kku, MartinHarper, Wapcaplet, Paul Ben-
jamin Austin, Delirium, Skysmith, Paul A, CesarB, , Julesd, Glenn, Bogdangiusca, Andres, Cimon Avaro, Lb2, Mxn, Vroman,
Feedmecereal, Tom Peters, Emperorbma, Victor Engel, Reddi, Jm34harvey, Sbwoodside, N-true, Wik, Tjunier, Joshk, Tpbradbury, Itai, Tax-
man, Val42, Omegatron, Bevo, Wetman, Chrisjj, Lumos3, AlainV, Astronautics~enwiki, ChrisO~enwiki, Owain, Korath, Goethean, Altenmann,
Merovingian, Sverdrup, Der Eberswalder, Rursus, KellyCoinGuy, JackofOz, Xanzzibar, Mattaschen, GreatWhiteNortherner, Nagelfar, An-
cheta Wis, Giftlite, Knobunc, Laudaka, Fastssion, Obli, Bnn, Peruvianllama, Alterego, Ds13, Everyking, Jonabbey, Michael Devore, Henry
Flower, Joe Kress, Dumbo1, Falcon Kirtaran, Chameleon, Andycjp, Alexf, J. 'mach' wust, Gdr, Sonjaaa, HorsePunchKid, Cevlakohn, Kaldari,
Mzajac, JimWae, OwenBlacker, Bumm13, Tomruen, Kegill, Aecarol, Pmanderson, Cglassey, Robin klein, Sonett72, Deglr6328, DMG413,
Reex Reaction, Lacrimosus, Spiy sperry, CannedLizard, Rich Farmbrough, Stuart hc, Florian Blaschke, Antaeus Feldspar, Arthur Holland,
Dbachmann, Bender235, Cuppysfriend, Scumbag, Spitzak, RJHall, Sharkford, El C, Kwamikagami, Shanes, Diomidis Spinellis, RoyBoy, Nickj,
Neilrieck, Markussep, Wareh, One-dimensional Tangent, Shenme, Viriditas, Cohesion, Russ3Z, DaveGorman, Timl, Giraedata, Darwinek,
Grahbudd, DCEdwards1966, Espoo, Alansohn, Anthony Appleyard, Retran, PatrickFisher, Linmhall, Ninio, Axl, Harburg, Alex '05, Jaar-
don, Hu, Hadija, Polyphilo, Snowolf, Benna, SidP, Tony Sidaway, Spellcheck, Nightstallion, Japanese Searobin, Brookie, Zntrip, Lkinkade,
Velho, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), Mindmatrix, Zenkat, Daniel Case, Brunnock, Pol098, Dodiad, Chochopk, Cscott, Flamingspinach,
GregorB, Waldir, Dysepsion, Don Bratt, BD2412, Wachholder0, Metaspheres, Erikvanthienen, Jcmo, Mana Excalibur, Drbogdan, Rjwilmsi,
Nightscream, Koavf, Syndicate, Rillian, Jsone, Runarb, Toby Douglass, Fred Bradstadt, Maurog, FlaBot, G Clark, Usurper~enwiki, Pinkville,
Brettbergeron, SteveBaker, Mechasheherezada, Samkass, Alec.brady, Karch, Benlisquare, Bgwhite, Zentropa, Vmenkov, YurikBot, Wavelength,
Spacepotato, Deeptrivia, Arado, Jtkiefer, Stephenb, Grubber, GraemeSMiller, Gaius Cornelius, Rsrikanth05, Lusanaherandraton, Wiki alf, Iani,
Joshdboz, Joel7687, Dugosz, Rupert Clayton, Megapixie, Schlay, Howcheng, Chakazul, Ragesoss, Jpbowen, Ospalh, Bota47, Scope creep,
Tomisti, Admiral Rupert, CubicStar, TheMadBaron, Thnidu, Closedmouth, Spawn Man, SMcCandlish, Youssef51, Chris Brennan, Smurray-
inchester, David Biddulph, Allens, Kungfuadam, Jaysbro, Slipdisk101, Finell, Burton Radons, A bit iy, SmackBot, Nihonjoe, Tom Lougheed,
InverseHypercube, McGeddon, Jagged 85, Eaglizard, Eskimbot, Kintetsubualo, Alsandro, Master Deusoma, Ohnoitsjamie, Hmains, Smeg-
gysmeg, Anastasios~enwiki, Robertquail, Chris the speller, Juneappal, Ghost.scream, Fuzzform, MalafayaBot, Hibernian, Stevage, Colonies
Chris, CJGB, Bsodmike, Tamfang, Pasacho, Cplakidas, Oscar Bravo, Chlewbot, Eric Olson, Rrburke, Greenshed, Seduisant, Rarelibra, Wen
D House, Kingdon, Jedgold, Bigturtle, Jdlambert, OrangeAid, RafaelG, Clean Copy, DMacks, Just plain Bill, ILike2BeAnonymous, Gian-
carlo Rossi, PeterJeremy, Kukini, Bezapt, Ohconfucius, Bossk-Oce, Esrever, Mjg3456789, Fanx, Bucksburg, JorisvS, Mgiganteus1, Reuvenk,
DIEGO RICARDO PEREIRA, F15 sanitizing eagle, Fuzzbox, Fernando S. Aldado~enwiki, The Man in Question, A. Parrot, Ruby miette,
Major Bonkers, AxG, Jon186, PRRfan, Cratylus3, Neddyseagoon, Tasoskessaris, KJS77, Hu12, DouglasCalvert, Keisetsu, Ithakiboy, JMK,
Maestlin, Paul venter, Fsotrain09, DavidOaks, Mcwatson, RobinDaniel, Tawkerbot2, Chris55, Kurtan~enwiki, Dia^, Jere7my, Eric, Rawling,
Kris Schnee, 345Kai, ShelfSkewed, Ballista, WeggeBot, JettaMann, Myasuda, Phatom87, CMG, CumbiaDude, Cydebot, Lupine Proletariat,
Gremagor, Future Perfect at Sunrise, Max Ackerman, Reywas92, Steven91, Gogo Dodo, Travelbird, Katherine Tredwell, Doug Weller, Mike-
wax, Arcayne, SteveMcCluskey, NMChico24, Omicronpersei8, Mark de Solla Price, Tewapack, , Malleus Fatuorum, Thijs!bot, Kessaris,
Kablammo, Pampas Cat, Davefoc, Plausible deniability, Headbomb, Ruber chiken, Dtgriscom, Nadigmadhavi, Second Quantization, Rickin-
Baltimore, SanjayPrabhakaran, Nick Number, Escarbot, MoogleDan, Dieubussy, JimScott, Kkornack, Conradshields, M.t.wright, Arvy-vier,
Lkitrossky, Mdotley, Lordmetroid, Rossj81, Tillman, Wisl, SkoreKeep, Pixelface, Kadros~enwiki, VictorAnyakin, Lklundin, Klow, Gkhan,
DagosNavy, Xhienne, Deective, Harryzilber, Pipedreamergrey, V. Szabolcs, Sophie means wisdom, Aristoteles, Panarjedde, Wimstead, Den-
imadept, Cynwolfe, Geniac, Xoneca, Pseudothyrum, Magioladitis, WolfmanSF, VoABot II, EdwardLockhart, Nyttend, KConWiki, Vanished
user ty12kl89jq10, Torchiest, 28421u2232nfenfcenc, Thesavageirish, SunSw0rd, JaGa, GermanX, Onebadwebmonkey, Sasper, Robheart, Gold-
enMeadows, Jim.henderson, NuclearUmpf, ColorOfSuering, Yonaa, R'n'B, Nev1, Edgeweyes, JKoulouris, Numbo3, Maurice Carbonaro,
Athaenara, Algrif, Komowkwa, It Is Me Here, Igno2, Tikainon~enwiki, E. James Brennan, Rominandreu, Nwbeeson, 83d40m, Ontarioboy,
Flatterworld, GS3, Geekdiva, DorganBot, Donmike10, GreenWyvern, Mihas-bot, Plighto, Landy1282, Christosxx2, Hakudoshi2006, Inwind,
Izno, Idioma-bot, Reelrt, Martin Allen, VolkovBot, Mudwater, Derekbd, Macedonian, Chicagorob1, Martha Forsyth, Philip Trueman, Af648,
TXiKiBoT, Ormewood, Lorne ipsum, OverSS, Technopat, Paulburnett, Robotconscience, Seraphim, TedColes, JhsBot, GlobeGores, Brian
Eisley, Praveen pillay, ^demonBot2, Akerbeltz, Nedrutland, Gillyweed, Falcon8765, Thanatos666, AlleborgoBot, Darxus, MathPerson, Pericle-
sofAthens, TheXenocide, DrJunge, Kbrose, Soon Ju Lee, SieBot, EQ5afN2M, Nihil novi, Rob.bastholm, Cwkmail, June w, Crash Underride,
Flyer22 Reborn, Ipodamos, Scorpion451, R0uge, Brice one, Cyfal, Astrologist, Escape Orbit, Granite07, Athenean, ClueBot, Victor Chmara,
Pjholloway23, Arkalochori, Der Golem, Gavron, Dorkinglad, Pink ninjax, Mild Bill Hiccup, Piledhigheranddeeper, Singinglemon~enwiki,
Loginigol, Lessogg, Puchiko, Kitsunegami, AssegaiAli, Throttler, Crywalt, PixelBot, Conical Johnson, Estirabot, Holgerhj, Arjayay, Weygaert,
Lestrad, Manco Capac, JasonAQuest, La Pianista, Chaosdruid, Catalographer, Somekindofusername, DumZiBoT, Daveemtb, Heironymous
Rowe, AlanM1, XLinkBot, Fastily, Wikiuser100, Mitch Ames, Skarebo, SilvonenBot, Man, SkyLined, Nick Campion 2, Good Olfactory,
Kbdankbot, Addbot, DOI bot, Willboston, Sillyfolkboy, Favonian, ChenzwBot, Lilindi9, Zodiacal, Lightbot, Smeagol 17, Jarble, Luckas-bot,
Yobot, Donfbreed, JAKoulouris, Awhig, Ebygum, Mdockrey, AnomieBOT, Rubinbot, Jim1138, Materialscientist, Citation bot, Flipping Mack-
erel, ArthurBot, LilHelpa, Xqbot, Sketchmoose, Capricorn42, Omnipaedista, Alexscara, Kyng, IShadowed, Alexandersot, Teknopup, Vemon
Rox, FrescoBot, StephenWade, LucienBOT, Dave of Maryland, Citation bot 1, Kytaline, A412, Tom.Reding, Ezrdr, IVAN3MAN, Jikybebna,
Trappist the monk, Belchman, Andrew Goodson, JAG81, 564dude, RjwilmsiBot, Calcyman, Ripchip Bot, Balph Eubank, In ictu oculi, DASH-
Bot, EmausBot, John of Reading, Helium4, Dewritech, Syncategoremata, GoingBatty, Dimdomis, Finn Bjrklid, Ornithikos, GreenWyvern1,
Shearonink, Calienfj, ZroBot, Dnm, A2soup, Anir1uph, Dondervogel 2, H3llBot, Demiurge1000, Andattaca2010, Sbmeirow, Euzen, Prikytera,
Odysseus1479, Bomazi, Co2gas, ChuispastonBot, MrCleanOut, Petrb, ClueBot NG, Yiannis g, Fivasim, SilentResident, CommonEraCrusader,
BristlemeTimber, O.Koslowski, Magicmq, ERIDU-DREAMING, Wiki8man, Kenekaplan, Helpful Pixie Bot, Aubreyraider24, Bibcode Bot,
Lead holder, BG19bot, Guy vandegrift, Nikopolis1912, OpenMind, Dodshe, Aerach, Aireld20, Queen of Awesome, WP Editor 2011, Hari-
zotoh9, Samwalton9, BattyBot, Jina445, Mrt3366, Americanplus, Cyberbot II, ChrisGualtieri, Jionpedia, Saedon, Pea eton44, Irondome,
GloryuntoGlory, Mrmagikpants, FredSinClair, Cerabot~enwiki, MattSucci, Frosty, Mebenmelon, Antrum92, Flying Kiwi68, Rupert loup,
Thalij, Epicgenius, SomeFreakOnTheInternet, Camyoung54, Giaccomungo, 1angryscot, Icepick method, Songwright4ever, Fatehsmann, Goo-
dyntox, AddWittyNameHere, AtticTapestry, Herodotus419, SchlongDomination, Louieoddie, Anameisbutaname, Monkbot, Tigercompanion25,
Xmoussas, Sunmist, Drabkikker, Piledhighandeep, 14ABoumankhar, Naris, DiscantX, DucoGranger, Heal41hp, KasparBot, Nemoanon, Mys-
ticdan, Satirino242, GreenC bot, Kadros, Ad6bya, Redhat101, Vivian Tarmakakis, Giopastore, ASavasciyi, Bender the Bot, Troy Oakes, James
D Warburton and Anonymous: 692
Baghdad Battery Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baghdad_Battery?oldid=764960371 Contributors: Bryan Derksen, The Anome, Panair-
jdde~enwiki, David spector, Heron, PhilipMW, DopeshJustin, Nixdorf, Sannse, DavidWBrooks, William M. Connolley, Adam Bishop,
Reddi, Robertb-dc, Furrykef, Grendelkhan, Itai, Omegatron, Thue, Jerzy, Jason Potter, Rogper~enwiki, Ke4roh, Securiger, Mirv, Der Eber-
swalder, Auric, Hippietrail, Jsonitsac, David Edgar, Cyberia23, Cyrius, Spanky The Dolphin, Timpo, Marcika, Pashute, MingMecca, RatOme-
ter, Dumbo1, Bobblewik, OldakQuill, Vruba, Andycjp, Neale Monks, Rich Farmbrough, Guanabot, Vsmith, Dbachmann, Martpol, Goplat,
El C, Mdo~enwiki, KronicDeth, Haxwell, The Noodle Incident, Gershwinrb, R. S. Shaw, Jguk 2, Kjkolb, Hob Gadling, Obradovic Goran,
Hooperbloob, Calebe, Mark Lewis, Mark Dingemanse, AmbassadorShras, Titanium Dragon, DreamGuy, Jpotherington, Wtshymanski, Drat,
TenOfAllTrades, Ghirlandajo, Dan East, Kenyon, Japanese Searobin, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), Woohookitty, BillC, Chochopk, MiG,
Marudubshinki, Miroku Sanna, Graham87, Don Bratt, Bjason, Nanite, Allynfolksjr, Syced, FayssalF, Ian Pitchford, Elmer Clark, Gurch,
Preslethe, Ih8evilstu, Algebraist, Wavelength, Groogle, Zingus, Dialectric, Ragesoss, Kortoso, 2over0, Robotico, Arthur Rubin, JLaTondre,
Segv11, SmackBot, McGeddon, Bjelleklang, VarunRajendran, Bomac, Jagged 85, Declare, Srnec, Cattus, Thumperward, Epastore, William
Allen Simpson, Burns ipper, Wen D House, Drphilharmonic, DMacks, WhosAsking, Salamurai, JoshuaZ, James.S, IceHunter, Angelpeream,
Mahyar78, CuriousEric, Cydebot, Gproud, Doug Weller, Ghostexorcist, EvocativeIntrigue, Hypnosadist, Malleus Fatuorum, N5iln, Folantin,
TangentCube, Northumbrian, RobotG, Majorly, Prolog, Ingolfson, Xhienne, Harryzilber, Arturo 7, Sophie means wisdom, Garda40, Yill577,
Siddharth Mehrotra, Simon Burchell, Nyttend, ClovisPt, J0hnone, JoergenB, Tubadude1280, MartinBot, Amedico, Zaal117, CommonsDelinker,
Jmm6f488, Smite-Meister, Gzkn, Ironie, Inwind, Isenmouthe, TXiKiBoT, Someguy1221, Ekwonderland, Retiono Virginian, McM.bot, Inter-
netHero, Gillyweed, Spinningspark, Laval, PericlesofAthens, Thewumpus, Yintan, Crash Underride, Flyer22 Reborn, Originalheimdahl, Cyfal,
Twinsday, Ricardo Frantz, ClueBot, PipepBot, The Thing That Should Not Be, LonelyBeacon, Skihatboatbike, Excirial, Alexbot, Zomno, Gra-
ham1973, XLinkBot, Ost316, Myself1100, Addbot, C6541, Mpau0516, AkhtaBot, Favonian, Tide rolls, AussieLegend2, Luckas-bot, Yobot,
Amirobot, LibrarianJessica, Againme, AnomieBOT, Ld. Ata, RayvnEQ, Xqbot, PsuedoName, Rofrol~enwiki, Shirik, Grinofwales, Riven-
tree, JMS Old Al, Klacika, Trappist the monk, Mishae, EmausBot, WikitanvirBot, DieselBeetle, Heracles31, Armaiti, Rarevogel, ZxxZxxZ,
Tommy2010, rico, Akerans, Madi221997, NSEasternShoreChemist, Wingman4l7, Sripoonpak, Sbmeirow, Prikytera, J52Jarhead, ClueBot
NG, Gareth Grith-Jones, Icmer In Nyc, Widr, Helpful Pixie Bot, BG19bot, Marcocapelle, Masouddanesh, Sambo152, BattyBot, Chris-
Gualtieri, 9iowachick9, Hmainsbot1, , Hobbes147, SpookyGhostMan, Skepticthinker, DangerousJXD, Isambard Kingdom, SQMeaner,
Aardwolf A380, InternetArchiveBot, GreenC bot, Bender the Bot, Nitin-Nitin and Anonymous: 221
Bat Creek inscription Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bat_Creek_inscription?oldid=746572695 Contributors: Paul Barlow, Freechild,

Auric, Varlaam, Ukexpat, Longhair, Giraedata, Sesmith, SDC, Kbdank71, Rjwilmsi, Eldamorie, Preslethe, Kazuba, RussBot, Deucalionite,
Jade Knight, SmackBot, PiCo, Mangoe, C.Fred, Eaglizard, Hmains, Chris the speller, JonHarder, Backspace, Stwalkerster, Safalra, Cydebot,
Jackyd101, Anthonyhcole, Tkynerd, Hippypink, Doug Weller, Ebyabe, Missvain, Second Quantization, Dmitri Lytov, Nick Number, Simon
Burchell, Xact, The Anomebot2, Theroadislong, ClovisPt, Agricolae, Uyvsdi, BrineStans, Mzmadmike, Baxterguy, Sapphic, HuMcCulloch,
StAnselm, Til Eulenspiegel, Jerey Vernon Merkey, Gbbinning, Tesi1700, ClueBot, Mild Bill Hiccup, Werqzz, SamuelTheGhost, Excirial,
TheRedPenOfDoom, Catalographer, Good Olfactory, Addbot, Imeriki al-Shimoni, Holt, Favonian, Yobot, AnomieBOT, Citation bot, LilHelpa,
FrescoBot, Zimiamvia, Senra, Dominus Vobisdu, Mandelcook, Helpful Pixie Bot, LEJacobson, MrBill3, Batcreekstone, Hmainsbot1, Mogism,
ComfyKem, Jacobs Remnant, NMNH1, Stealthy1s, InternetArchiveBot, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 29
Brandenburg stone Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_stone?oldid=757282571 Contributors: Paul Barlow, Stevietheman,
Mangoe, Doug Weller, Deor, AnomieBOT, Citation bot, MrX, John of Reading, Unscintillating, Aerach and Bender the Bot
Calaveras Skull Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calaveras_Skull?oldid=759111109 Contributors: Bueller 007, Babbage, Keith Edkins,
Longhair, Stemonitis, Graham87, Rjwilmsi, Howcheng, Resolute, SmackBot, Headbomb, Activist, Dancingspring, Superjag, WolfmanSF, Glen-
doremus, Nono64, Peter Chastain, Truthanado, Minturn, Hexmaster, Royalmate1, Johnuniq, Aunt Entropy, Good Olfactory, Addbot, Otterath-
ome, Luckas-bot, Armchair info guy, AnomieBOT, Dankarl, Trappist the monk, Look2See1, H3llBot, Grapple X, Helpful Pixie Bot, BG19bot,
GreenUniverse, Monkeyplus, Monkbot, Factory, GreenC bot, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 10
Chariots of the Gods (lm) Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariots_of_the_Gods_(film)?oldid=763974015 Contributors: Kuralyov,
Bender235, Rugxulo, DoctorWho42, Bensin, Ser Amantio di Nicolao, Dl2000, Cydebot, Danrok, Lugnuts, Doug Weller, JAnDbot, Jmm6f488,
Donmike10, DavidRayner, Zombie433, PhilSchabus, MystBot, Addbot, LaaknorBot, JGKlein, OlEnglish, AnomieBOT, The Evil IP address,
Jonkerz, Dinamik-bot, John of Reading, SporkBot, Cogband, MrBill3, Ldavid1985, Kahtar, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 9
Coso artifact Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coso_artifact?oldid=752881483 Contributors: Bryan Derksen, DavidWBrooks, Nnh, Li-
onheart~enwiki, Goethean, Robert Brockway, M1ss1ontomars2k4, Ahkond, Alansohn, Ross Burgess, Tainter, SDC, GnniX, FrankTobia,
Neitherday, Markhoney, Hydrargyrum, NawlinWiki, Brandon, BOT-Superzerocool, AirLiner, Salmanazar, Nikkimaria, True Pagan Warrior,
SmackBot, BiT, Hmains, Bluebot, Emurphy42, Scwlong, Paul H., Marcus Brute, Delphii, Tsowell, Claidheamhmor, Bwalko, Redeagle688,
TurabianNights, Pjbynn, Bellerophon5685, Doug Weller, RobotG, NCartmell, Arturo 7, Tedickey, ClovisPt, SunSw0rd, STBot, Commons-
Delinker, Morefun, Mitchel1682, Brenont, Kromsson, John Nevard, Lucien leGrey, Doprendek, SchreiberBike, Johnuniq, Addbot, C6541,
Lightbot, Yobot, Armchair info guy, Materialscientist, Cecole, JIK1975, EmausBot, Look2See1, ZroBot, HammerFilmFan, Wingman4l7,
MisterDub, HandsomeFella, Psychicattorney, Helpful Pixie Bot, BattyBot, Fishycow, The Quixotic Potato and Anonymous: 46
Crystal skull Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_skull?oldid=764112424 Contributors: XJaM, Infrogmation, Michael Hardy, Paul
Barlow, DopeshJustin, Ixfd64, Skysmith, Ronz, Muriel Gottrop~enwiki, Cherkash, Jwrosenzweig, Markhurd, Jerzy, Pilaf~enwiki, Rossum-
capek, ChrisO~enwiki, Macarenaman, Sam Spade, Der Eberswalder, Rholton, Blainster, Gtrmp, Misterkillboy, Lestatdelc, Varlaam, Gadum,
Geni, Popefauvexxiii, Kaldari, Sharavanabhava, SAMAS, Sam Hocevar, Eiserlohpp, Urhixidur, Ukexpat, Adashiel, Silly Dan, Discospinster,
Rich Farmbrough, Kdammers, Vsmith, Bender235, ZeroOne, El C, Kwamikagami, Dbush, Bobo192, Wisdom89, Pharos, Alansohn, Gary,
Coma28, Sherurcij, VentrueCapital, CyberSkull, Ferrierd, Fritzpoll, Titanium Dragon, SeanDuggan, Pauli133, Ghirlandajo, Mattbrundage,
Dennis Bratland, Alvis, Woohookitty, TDude695, WadeSimMiser, Alfakim, GregorB, Pictureuploader, Demon!, Hyperzonk, Xiong Chiamiov,
Mandarax, Ashmoo, Jclemens, Sj, Rjwilmsi, Nightscream, Mike Peel, Nneonneo, Wwjdd, Jehochman, W00d, Patrick1982, Ian Pitchford,
Alphachimp, Ninel, LEX LETHAL, CJLL Wright, Mordicai, WriterHound, Mercury McKinnon, Sceptre, MightyAtom, RussBot, Sarranduin,
GusF, Hydrargyrum, Sjb90, Dysmorodrepanis~enwiki, Kdkeller, Awiseman, Irishguy, Gadget850, Darthkt, AEriksson, Secant1, Chase me
ladies, I'm the Cavalry, Closedmouth, SMcCandlish, Reyk, JQF, Dspradau, Elp gr, Eeee, NeilN, The Wookieepedian, Stepped, SmackBot,
ILBobby, PiCo, Elonka, Unschool, Haza-w, Norm Tered, KnowledgeOfSelf, Korossyl, PJM, Kurjak78, Wittylama, HalfShadow, Toxin1000,
Commander Keane bot, Chris the speller, Bignole, MalafayaBot, SchftyThree, Baa, Incoherent fool, Darth Panda, Firetrap9254, Emurphy42,
WikiPedant, Zhuravskij, AussieLegend, Hatchetsh, Chlewbot, Burns ipper, GRuban, LeContexte, Rarelibra, Pepsidrinka, Cybercobra, Om-
goleus, Savidan, Mesmith9, Angellcruz, Caudex Rax, SpiderJon, Salamurai, Lambiam, Nishkid64, Rayonne, Patranous, JoshuaZ, Hrmanu,
GVP Webmaster, Cjmcguinness, 041744, Ckatz, Georey Pruitt, Chrisch, A. Parrot, Meco, Fangfufu, Interlingua, Midnightblueowl, Jrt989,
Norm mit, Ra1d3n, BranStark, Iridescent, Kansas darling, Maestlin, Kjmatthews, Tawkerbot2, AarrowOM, JForget, CmdrObot, Hirokazu, Page
Up, Lord Hermes, Halbared, Hi There, Vannguy, Captainktainer, Mattbuck, Tallen, Ryan, Reywas92, Gogo Dodo, Dsine, Myscrnnm, Doug
Weller, EndlessVince, Dylant07, Pustelnik, Satori Son, Thijs!bot, Epbr123, Oliver202, Headbomb, Marek69, A3RO, Yettie0711, Alientrav-
eller, RobotG, Mousebelt, Shirt58, Trezjr, ShadowKinght, ClassicSC, JAnDbot, Husond, Cyclonius, Arturo 7, TAnthony, TracySusan, Simon
Burchell, Steveprutz, PacicBoy, Eric Ka Ming Zhang, VoABot II, Cadsuane Melaidhrin, Soulbot, ***Ria777, Froid, ClovisPt, Mainehaven, Der-
Hexer, Edward321, Garik 11, SlowMovingTarget, Ajgrovery, MartinBot, GaryLucas, Lordalius, Bus stop, Thirdright, Jaredroussel, J.delanoy,
JTConroy88, Richiekim, Thepaan, KrytenKoro, Laplandian, Alienburrito, Hellvig, Katalaveno, Johnbod, Plasticup, Alexb102072, Beloved-
freak, Cmichael, Pjmpjm, Warlordwolf, DorganBot, Ja 62, Jmauser, Bricology, Idioma-bot, FredNash, Tristanulysses, Murderbike, Quack-
Guru, Oshwah, Jomasecu, HenriLobineau, NPrice, GcSwRhIc, Chaospiral, Surrealmonk, KC Panchal, Bentley4, Maxim, Weetjesman, Petero9,
Staka, Pmcguirk5000, Brianga, Amercenier, Nagy, Deconstructhis, SieBot, Noh Boddy, Mangostar, Cole--jancsar, Cmsimike, Hgould01, Oda
Mari, Lanzarotemaps, Jack1956, Faradayplank, Fratrep, Kumioko (renamed), StaticGull, ClueBot, Djrango, Ideal gas equation, The Thing
That Should Not Be, 88x88, Superintelligenttalkingmouse, FieldMarine, Md1111, Spandrawn, Mjrauhal, DanielDeibler, PR GMR, Richerman,
TimBilly1224, T1o0m, Nighthornet, Otolemur crassicaudatus, DiotimaofMantinea, Arunsingh16, Jackson7777, Jusdafax, Strangerunbidden,
Lartoven, The Founders Intent, Jxd012, Promethean, Pdqttc, Mlas, Swordude369, Nyb.Thering, ScottosaurusRAWR, Thingg, Aggynn, Dr
jinks, Shamanchill, Alien97, Queerbubbles, XLinkBot, Kas0809, Avoided, HMFS, Aunt Entropy, Myjdcdnetwork, Good Olfactory, Kbdankbot,
CalumH93, Addbot, Digitaldoodler, Breed004, WmGB, 2k6168, C6541, Some jerk on the Internet, DOI bot, Jojhutton, Ashton.Sanders,
325jdc, Cst17, Dreamtimeprods, Wampoo, EscapedGorilla, Donkeybloodymary, Mayan-man, Pixie206, Firstlittlebird, User456246478845,
Wolfeye90, Slargle, Jaivee, Tide rolls, Lightbot, Trike12898, Luckas-bot, Fraggle81, TaBOT-zerem, Ram.bhat, ArchonMagnus, Mmxx, TestE-
ditBot, Gatwiki, Backslash Forwardslash, AnomieBOT, KDS4444, Groach1995, LeobenConoy, ThaddeusB, Jim1138, Fahadsadah, Kingpin13,
Jerichodrummer, Jimbob213, Materialscientist, Citation bot, OllieFury, RegardedDog, Fugat, Xqbot, Capricorn42, Nothingisayisreal, Mad-
die!, TootsMojo, Coeetalkh, Mayeldk4, GorgeCustersSabre, Shadowjams, PhilAuckland, Erik9, Grinofwales, Knee427, 117Avenue, Cita-
tion bot 1, Pinethicket, I dream of horses, Jonesey95, Maxurbahn, MertyWiki, RonaldKunenborg, Mercy11, Trappist the monk, DriveMySol,
Newt Winkler, Lotje, TokioKoos, Mechafern, Stevodakidd936, RjwilmsiBot, Thrind, Salvio giuliano, John of Reading, RainyShadow, RA0808,
Crystalskullexplorers, Wikipelli, ZroBot, John Cline, F, H3llBot, Wayne Slam, NixaNixa, Ravenhawk44, Mayur, Donner60, Svaran3b21,
Lampsalot, The Masked Booby, ClueBot NG, This lousy T-shirt, Cntras, Pepsimaxxxx, ScottSteiner, Marechal Ney, Widr, Baw546, Pluma,
Helpful Pixie Bot, KeXLim, Allecher, MrBill3, IloveyourPClongtime, BattyBot, HOTTUBGUY, Ultra Venia, Jakec, BenStein69, Babitaarora,
Sidneytrites1, Monkbot, Periodyssey, IkeyMorland, The big cock of the day, Sonicwave32, Mattbrown838, Jerodlycett, InternetArchiveBot,
GreenC bot, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 639
Dendera light Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendera_light?oldid=743614098 Contributors: Michael Hardy, Paul Barlow, Reddi,
Omegatron, Mirv, Foobar, CALR, Dbachmann, 9SGjOSfyHJaQVsEmy9NS, Joshlmay, Titanium Dragon, Suruena, Apokrif, Twthmoses,
Cuchullain, Rjwilmsi, Gryndor, Limulus, Quadraxis, Aeusoes1, Dugosz, Jcurious, Emijrp, That Guy, From That Show!, SmackBot, Kmari-
nas86, Fuzzform, Onorem, Krsont, Tktktk, Cydebot, Doug Weller, SteveMcCluskey, Amity150, Itsmejudith, RobotG, Fayenatic london, Arturo
7, Deposuit, RedMC, Jmm6f488, 83d40m, TXiKiBoT, Satseshat, Steven J. Anderson, McM.bot, Deconstructhis, 3rdAlcove, WurmWoode,
Relata refero, PixelBot, Muro Bot, Rickremember, WikHead, Addbot, AkhtaBot, Vatrena ptica, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Riad.Bot~enwiki, Mate-
rialscientist, Citation bot, DSisyphBot, SassoBot, Wolfymoza, HarrisonNapper, GORDON FRANCK, RedBot, Minimac, EmausBot, Faceless
Enemy, ZroBot, Terraorin, ClueBot NG, O.Koslowski, Helpful Pixie Bot, Jeraphine Gryphon, MrBill3, BattyBot, Iry-Hor, Master Armand,
TrnsltLife, FishDestroyer, Trollinitus123, The Quixotic Potato, Jason14mc, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 29
Dorchester Pot Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorchester_Pot?oldid=755212161 Contributors: Michael Hardy, Paul Barlow, DavidW-
Brooks, Auric, Gwalla, Chris j wood, Kappa, Pearle, Titanium Dragon, Mandarax, Sin-man, Rjwilmsi, Durin, Cmouse, Aaronwinborn, Kortoso,
KnightRider~enwiki, McGeddon, Chris the speller, Bluebot, Thisisbossi, Paul H., Ser Amantio di Nicolao, Bucksburg, Bwalko, Pimlottc, Ken
Gallager, Cydebot, Doug Weller, RobotG, Flubrain, Arturo 7, Albany NY, ClovisPt, Joybucket, Corvus cornix, AlleborgoBot, MopTop, Ad-
dbot, C6541, SiegfreidZ, Lightbot, Fraggle81, RibotBOT, Eugene-elgato, Dinamik-bot, BCtl, AvicAWB, Helpful Pixie Bot, Aerach, MrBill3,
InternetArchiveBot and Anonymous: 15
Eiserner Mann Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eiserner_Mann?oldid=712547711 Contributors: Shii, DavidWBrooks, Glenn, Indefatiga-
ble, Dimadick, Nagelfar, Pavel Vozenilek, Cmdrjameson, Stemonitis, Mrs Trellis, Asdert, Marudubshinki, Sin-man, Srleer, Irishguy, Rockero,
Salmanazar, Reyk, SmackBot, Betacommand, Olsdude, Cjwalters, JHunterJ, RhoOphuichi, RobotG, Ingolfson, Arturo 7, The Anomebot2,
ClovisPt, Gwern, Pdarley, Enderworthing, Hugo999, VolkovBot, Steven J. Anderson, Gamsbart, Dawynn, Lightbot, Bermicourt, Againme,
AnomieBOT, GermanJoe, Lmelinde, Khazar2 and Anonymous: 15
Eltanin Antenna Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eltanin_Antenna?oldid=756295749 Contributors: Bobby D. Bryant, SebastianHelm,
DavidWBrooks, Bogdangiusca, Eugene van der Pijll, Phil Boswell, DanielCD, Stemonitis, Uncle G, Rjwilmsi, Gdrbot, Mikeblas, IceCreamAn-
tisocial, Salmanazar, SmackBot, Elonka, Scwlong, Nima Baghaei, Storm05, Valenciano, Paul H., Bejnar, Tim Ross, Fenix down, Bwalko, Hu12,
CmdrObot, Cydebot, Doug Weller, Trusilver, Diodisegno, Bentley4, Kromsson, Fadesga, Lucien leGrey, Addbot, Lightbot, Yobot, Alekksandr,
Againme, Seashellz222, CXCV, Animalparty, ZroBot, Wingman4l7, Helpful Pixie Bot, Plantdrew, Monkbot, InternetArchiveBot and Anony-
mous: 18
Esperanza Stone Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanza_Stone?oldid=758151723 Contributors: William Avery, Shii, Auric, Sree-
jithk2000, Hugo999, AnomieBOT, Betocracks, SporkBot, $1LENCE D00600D, BattyBot and Bernhard Beier
Geofact Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geofact?oldid=759121959 Contributors: The Anome, Paul Barlow, Vsmith, Eleland, Rjwilmsi,
Chyel, SmackBot, Chris the speller, Madman2001, Takaji, AndrewHowse, Ntsimp, Alaibot, Think outside the box, Fabrictramp, Funandtrvl, Oh
Snap, Swamptortoise, EoGuy, Becky Sayles, AnomieBOT, Xqbot, Otutusaus, John of Reading, GreenTree998, Saectar, Liann2009, Ajmayin,
ZomberCrom, Demifuentes91, Equinox, InternetArchiveBot, GreenC bot and Anonymous: 6
Heavener Runestone Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_runestones?oldid=758415330 Contributors: The Anome, Gabbe, Glenn,
DNewhall, Dbachmann, Firespeaker, Rjwilmsi, Nihiltres, CJLL Wright, PaulGarner, SmackBot, Hmains, Chris the speller, Bluebot, SB Johnny,
OrphanBot, TurabianNights, Cydebot, Doug Weller, Storkk, Narssarssuaq, PhilKnight, Than217, ClovisPt, Berig, RobZep, Pleather, Trusilver,
David Trochos, Heironymous Rowe, Yobot, OpenFuture, ClueBot NG, Helpful Pixie Bot, Mandruss, Rubbish computer and Anonymous: 9
Helicopter hieroglyphs Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicopter_hieroglyphs?oldid=748493858 Contributors: JackofOz, BD2412,
Closedmouth, Doktor Waterhouse, McGeddon, Doug Weller, Mmortal03, The Anomebot2, Krahka, Riyadi, Rhododendrites, PCHS-NJROTC,
Ost316, Againme, Khruner, Stringence, Brandmeister, Mrellisdee, TranquilHope, GreenC bot and Anonymous: 10
Hidden character stone Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_character_stone?oldid=745125023 Contributors: Auric, Benjwong, The
Rambling Man, Markhoney, TenPoundHammer, Cydebot, Future Perfect at Sunrise, Doug Weller, CommonsDelinker, KylieTastic, ImageR-
emovalBot, Sevilledade, Addbot, Lightbot, Yobot, Timmyshin, Ripchip Bot, Shivankmehra, Champion, ChuispastonBot, Helpful Pixie Bot,
Fraulein451 and Anonymous: 7
Ica stones Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ica_stones?oldid=755240828 Contributors: Paul Barlow, Skysmith, CesarB, DavidWBrooks,
Glenn, Pingveno, SchmuckyTheCat, Auric, Orangemike, Geni, DNewhall, ErikNY, Salimfadhley, Discospinster, Vsmith, Warpozio, Bobo192,
Giraedata, Mnemo, Firsfron, LowKey, GregorB, Joe Roe, Kbdank71, Zbxgscqf, Alan J Shea, Kri, Theshibboleth, CJLL Wright, Just-
SomeKid, Apokryltaros, SFC9394, Salmanazar, Tuckerresearch, Zubisoft, SmackBot, Fuzzform, DKalkin, Huon, Valenciano, Paul H., Gildir,
Kendrick7, Kuru, Perfectblue97, IronGargoyle, JHunterJ, Hu12, StuHarris, TurabianNights, Tawkerbot2, OS2Warp, CmdrObot, Dsine, Doug
Weller, DumbBOT, SpK, Kathovo, Second Quantization, RobotG, Oliver Tlkes, Smartse, Kent Witham, MER-C, Skomorokh, James919, Clo-
visPt, Torchiest, WLU, Urco, Thirdright, J.delanoy, Enderworthing, Ian.thomson, Jeepday, GDW13, Joshua Issac, Idioma-bot, Uyvsdi, Satani,
Fourthark, Sapphic, Bob Killigan, Schnurrbart, Flamarial, Ravensre, Toddst1, Aramgar, Filam3nt, Troer, Binksternet, SamuelTheGhost,
Ilpt2000, Excirial, TheRedPenOfDoom, Maniago, Rrrr5, Sickopath, XLinkBot, Kolyma, Aunt Entropy, Good Olfactory, Addbot, MXVN,
Ka Faraq Gatri, Rubendg, Lansdowne5, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Againme, AnomieBOT, Rubinbot, LilHelpa, Alumnum, SassoBot, , Hap-
loidavey, LucienBOT, A little insignicant, Citation bot 1, Pinethicket, le ottante, ItsZippy, Mean as custard, Skamecrazy123, EmausBot,
Wikipelli, PunktUndPunktUndKommaStrich, ZroBot, Brattarb, DJ Project97, BabbaQ, Tzmbe1, ClueBot NG, ScottSteiner, Helpful Pixie Bot,
Digdig86, MrBill3, Treweeke Mall, DoctorKubla, Jack Douglas123, Khazar2, Saedon, B4r0nnn, Johnson LongMan, Ducknish, X Nilloc X,
TheTannerScreen, ThisStepCaptcha, JWoods searcher, TheBlackWatcher, Hillbillyholiday, Fellmann, Akksh, Perfect Red Cube, Perfect Purple
Pyramid, Ugog Nizdast, Justthefactsabout, JustaNote123, Eve the deer21, Perfect Orange Sphere, Monkbot, EricBreaux, NoLiesTruthOnly-
Please, ArtemisLogic, ScrapIronIV, SinisterGraphician, Jerodlycett, Bender the Bot, Abradamus and Anonymous: 145
Iron pillar of Delhi Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_pillar_of_Delhi?oldid=763583530 Contributors: Heron, Stevertigo, Paul Bar-
low, DopeshJustin, TakuyaMurata, Skysmith, DavidWBrooks, Glenn, Error, Bogdangiusca, Disdero, Timwi, Nataraja~enwiki, Doradus,
Itai, Moriori, RedWolf, Goethean, Bkell, Mervyn, Alan Liefting, Rudolf 1922, Catchanil, Darrien, Utcursch, Ukexpat, Jimaginator, Viren-
dra, Dbachmann, Flapdragon, S.K., Alren, Pt, Mjk2357, Russ3Z, Man vyi, Eleland, Keenan Pepper, Tancred, EmmetCauleld, ~shuri,
Ghirlandajo, Kouban, Ceyockey, Thryduulf, Anish7, Kralizec!, Vberger~enwiki, Rjwilmsi, Koavf, Gryndor, BjKa, SkiDragon, Srleer,
Knife Knut, Bgwhite, Ravi Chaudhary, Deeptrivia, Hydrargyrum, Rohitbd, Bjf, Dugosz, Muwaaq, Lockesdonkey, Tachs, Deepak~enwiki,
Salmanazar, Petri Krohn, Sturmovik, Kungfuadam, NeilN, Groyolo, SmackBot, Mangoe, McGeddon, Jagged 85, Ohnoitsjamie, Oli Filth, Hi-
bernian, Aktron, BlackTerror, Ohconfucius, Nishkid64, John, Carnby, Shyamsunder, Neddyseagoon, Quaeler, Wizard191, Rayeld, Basicde-
sign, Abdaal, Kkm5848, Rwammang, Doctormatt, Cydebot, Hebrides, Viscious81, Doug Weller, Thijs!bot, Bethpage89, Khened, Escarbot,
Peatcher~enwiki, RobotG, Fatidiot1234, Julia Rossi, LuckyLouie, Credema, Ingolfson, JAnDbot, Ekabhishek, Xn4, The Anomebot2, Ashishb-
hatnagar72, Atulsnischal, Balaiitk, DadaNeem, Inwind, Idioma-bot, Signalhead, VolkovBot, Amikake3, M96hardh, Sesamevoila, Vishwas008,
Rumiton, Andy Dingley, Sibenordy, Asch80, Lohost, Navin gupt, Wilson44691, Ctxppc, Boblitjr, RegentsPark, The Thing That Should Not Be,
Tr4v3l3r, Drmies, Der Golem, Rakeshsumit, Ssriram mt, Itzguru, Jotterbot, Nvvchar, Wikidas, DumZiBoT, Vinambrudu, Rickremember, Wik-
iuser100, Pgallert, Sandyiitr, Osarius, Addbot, Mr0t1633, Rdermyer, Franky1985, Enigmaace12, Tide rolls, Lightbot, Luckas-bot, AnomieBOT,
DoctorJoeE, Theseeker4, Citation bot, Xqbot, GrouchoBot, Haploidavey, Riventree, Lilaac, Zippymarmalade, Jauhienij, Untilwhen1, Vaazan,
Chronulator, RjwilmsiBot, Samdacruel, EmausBot, Hirsutism, The Blade of the Northern Lights, ZroBot, Mkrestin, H3llBot, ChuispastonBot,
Shashank artemis fowl, 28bot, ClueBot NG, CopperSquare, Meninblu, Mmarre, Helpful Pixie Bot, Titodutta, KLBot2, BG19bot, Oxyden-
drum, Mhakcm, Yowanvista, Ravi bhangaonkar, CitationCleanerBot, Tangerinehistry, William Aiden, BattyBot, Wikipedian247, Bharu12,
Cpt.a.haddock, Irul 901, Shirazibustan, Kude90, Evano1van, Hidden macy, 22merlin, Monkbot, Endriksohn, Bodhisattwa, Rubbish computer,
BodduLokesh, Marathas iitgn, MusikBot, Ira Leviton, IM3847, Filpro, Madan Inamdar, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 86
Kensington Runestone Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kensington_Runestone?oldid=765176640 Contributors: DavidLevinson, Ed-
ward, Michael Hardy, Paul Barlow, Modster, Liftarn, Gabbe, Karada, Skysmith, Glenn, Jengod, Mulad, Random832, Sertrel, Maximus Rex,
SEWilco, AnonMoos, Wetman, Pollinator, Rogper~enwiki, Moncrief, Mirv, Auric, Bkell, Hadal, JackofOz, GreatWhiteNortherner, Wiglaf,
Tom harrison, Orangemike, Theon~enwiki, Bradeos Graphon, Wyss, Varlaam, Bobblewik, Neilc, YusufMJH, Noe, Mzajac, DragonySix-
tyseven, Mike Storm, Kuralyov, Sam Hocevar, CyclopsScott, Ularsen, Ham II, Mzalar, Dbachmann, El C, Bobo192, Longhair, Enric Naval,
Mixcoatl, Firespeaker, Jonathunder, Orangemarlin, Coma28, Mceder, Richard Fannin, Water Bottle, Fawcett5, Kdau, Drbreznjev, Woohookitty,
ApLundell, Miss Madeline, Cbdorsett, KevinOKeee, Terryn3, Melesse, Gspong, Rjwilmsi, Jivecat, Daniel Collins, Cassowary, M0nster0, CJLL
Wright, Bgwhite, RussBot, Cunado19, ML, Bug42, NawlinWiki, SEWilcoBot, Awiseman, RGS31, Zwobot, Maunus, Sbachman725, Tuckerre-
search, Ageekgal, ColinMcMillen, H@r@ld, Petri Krohn, 2fort5r, ArielGold, Curpsbot-unicodify, sgeir IV.~enwiki, SmackBot, McGeddon,
BluePlatypus, Aardvark92, Jfurr1981, Stie, Zyxw, Wakuran, Hmains, Hraefen, Chris the speller, Roede, Barend, Rlevse, Fuhghettaboutit, Big-
turtle, Ericl, Ziggle, AThing, Ser Amantio di Nicolao, NormalGoddess, John, Bucksburg, JoshuaZ, Texteditor, Michael J Swassing, SmokeyJoe,
DagErlingSmrgrav, Norm mit, TurabianNights, DavidOaks, Vanisaac, Jon kare, Mcswell, Lokal Prol, Joshua BishopRoby, Cydebot, Caliga10,
Doug Weller, John Foxe, Walgamanus, Thijs!bot, Crosleyeld, RobotG, Manushand, Narssarssuaq, Arturo 7, Battlekow, Magioladitis, Appraiser,
Than217, ClovisPt, Deharpporte, Berig, Vicpeters, Farmboyjad, Naniwako, Garret Beaumain, DadaNeem, Jonathan66, Gwen Gale, Geekdiva,
Slr38, WLRoss, Funandtrvl, Vincent Lextrait, Someguy1221, Steven J. Anderson, Keithamassey, Room429, Kevinamassey, Jalo, Greswik,
Jmatthews1102, Imogenne, Rlendog, JabbaTheBot, Wilson44691, Goustien, Lightmouse, Inger E~enwiki, Cfwaidmann, Emptymountains, Im-
ageRemovalBot, Faithlessthewonderboy, ClueBot, Deanlaw, CasualObserver'48, Mrs.EasterBunny, Drmies, Gangdagr, David Trochos, Auntof6,
Awickert, TheRedPenOfDoom, Halcyon Dayz, Heironymous Rowe, Koro Neil, Kensingtondevotee, Good Olfactory, HexaChord, Addbot, Light-
bot, Yobot, AnomieBOT, ThaddeusB, OpenFuture, Citation bot, M2m2m2, LilHelpa, MauritsBot, Paleowiki, Garkeith, Addbc, Mario777Zelda,
Kylelovesyou, Hauganm, Bgagaga, Moby-Dick3000, Asbrody, JMilty, NeonPun, OgreBot, Citation bot 1, Chenopodiaceous, Pinethicket, Gin-
germint, Trappist the monk, 888n8, Davidjbroman, Brianann MacAmhlaidh, Jharrington401, RjwilmsiBot, Ghostofnemo, Mandy e, Vandevi-
ous, Wimerill, Globerunner1973, Afaram, Satchellmr, H3llBot, Donner60, Blahblah45890, ClueBot NG, A520, 1337 Tibet, Snotbot, Quick
and Dirty User Account, Helpful Pixie Bot, Tdimhcs, BG19bot, LancyMeadows, MrBill3, J.A.Biddulph, Dharma59, BattyBot, Cyberbot II,
Metalello, DoctorKubla, Khazar2, Stillbusy, Alex Bignell, Nouniquenames, Dickie birdie, Kennethaw88, Beaux569, Monkbot, Joe12121212,
Dwana76, Jerodlycett, Mizzou1993, Ntyler180725, Talpiottomb, Gunn Sinclair, Bender the Bot, WitchyOne333 and Anonymous: 184
Kingoodie artifact Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingoodie_artifact?oldid=755238863 Contributors: HarryHenryGebel, Auric,
Dumbo1, Devil Master, Kappa, Uncle G, LowKey, BillC, Alphachimp, Aaronwinborn, Salmanazar, Petri Krohn, SmackBot, Proof Reader,
Anachronist, Bluebot, Drjackzon~enwiki, Cokerwr, Glover, Kuru, Perfectblue97, Doug Weller, RobotG, Arturo 7, Sophie means wisdom,
Dekimasu, ClovisPt, Jmm6f488, Enderworthing, Barneca, Fadesga, Michaelholly, Addbot, C6541, Lightbot, OlEnglish, Againme, Tom.Reding,
EmausBot, Yiosie2356, MrBill3, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 9
Klerksdorp sphere Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klerksdorp_sphere?oldid=755240382 Contributors: The Anome, Llywrch, Cyde,
DavidWBrooks, Glenn, Rl, Auric, Xanzzibar, LLarson, Robert Brockway, Ukexpat, Cacycle, Pavel Vozenilek, Axl, Dave.Dunford, Ghirlandajo,
Sin-man, Quiddity, Denito, Jimp, Rsrikanth05, Thiseye, Zagalejo, Crisco 1492, TechBear, SmackBot, Saravask, Chris the speller, Professor
Chaos, Paul H., Tktktk, Twas Now, ErWenn, Captainktainer, Cydebot, Doug Weller, Noclevername, RobotG, ClovisPt, I guess, Aviatora, Alsee,
Trusilver, Enderworthing, Nothingofwater, ClueBot, Telekenesis, BOTarate, Gaura79, Addbot, OlEnglish, Luckas-bot, Fraggle81, We66er,
Againme, LilHelpa, Loge Reborn, FrescoBot, Askyles, FoxBot, Fama Clamosa, EmausBot, ZroBot, Gob Lofa, SupremoJunior, Vservo13 and
Anonymous: 40
Lake Winnipesaukee mystery stone Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Winnipesaukee_mystery_stone?oldid=757491752 Contrib-
utors: The Anome, DavidWBrooks, SatyrTN, Auric, Bkell, Chowbok, BRW, Sin-man, Kellywatchthestars, RussBot, MaxCosta, Ser Amantio
di Nicolao, TurabianNights, Ken Gallager, Doug Weller, Ju66l3r, RobotG, Arturo 7, Dunraven, Nyttend, ClovisPt, Enderworthing, C6541,
Ne116er, Againme, AnomieBOT, Citation bot, Faolin42, Helpful Pixie Bot, MrBill3, InternetArchiveBot, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 4
Llygadwy Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Llygadwy?oldid=756043585 Contributors: Auric, Varlaam, A Karley, Complainer, Cm205,
Hogyn Lleol, Skinsmoke, Iridescent, Doug Weller, Alaibot, Shirt58, DuncanHill, J.P.Lon, Jmm6f488, Biscuittin, YSSYguy, Geopersona, Jack-
StonePGD, Addedentry, Scil100, BG19bot, Hmainsbot1 and Anonymous: 4
London Hammer Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Hammer?oldid=763689600 Contributors: Auric, Safety Cap, McGeddon,
NatGertler, DjScrawl, Nwbeeson, Hy Brasil, Andy Dingley, Shorn again, Coinmanj, SchreiberBike, Dawynn, AnomieBOT, Archon 2488,
Ckruschke, , GoingBatty, Brattarb, Mareacaspica, BG19bot, BattyBot, Indigoatlas, Acetotyce, Johnsagent, DangerousJXD, Jobrot,
SteamGamer94 and Anonymous: 13
Los Lunas Decalogue Stone Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Lunas_Decalogue_Stone?oldid=755242338 Contributors: Stevertigo,
Palnatoke, Stan Shebs, Glenn, Wetman, Sam Spade, Auric, Humus sapiens, Varlaam, Elembis, Kuralyov, Kate, Rich Farmbrough, LDBear, Flo-
rian Blaschke, Carptrash, Jonathunder, Nsaa, RJFJR, BD2412, Rjwilmsi, MosheA, Sandstein, That Guy, From That Show!, SmackBot, Hmains,
Backspace, Georey Pruitt, TurabianNights, Doug Weller, Brainardo, Trefalcon, John Smythe, Jllm06, ClovisPt, STBot, Sm8900, VolkovBot,
Mzmadmike, Plazak, HuMcCulloch, WereSpielChequers, Cadwallader, Andstobax, XLinkBot, Addbot, Yclorfene, Lightbot, AnomieBOT, Ci-
tation bot, Prezbo, HowardJWilk, Spection, MrX, Iamdorian, Shearonink, ZroBot, Trick newbie, YahushaReigns, Widr, Helpful Pixie Bot,
BG19bot, CitationCleanerBot, 2bofhelp, Ajudkins, , DenghiComm, GreenC bot, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 24
Misra Gar il-Kbir Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misra%C4%A7_G%C4%A7ar_il-Kbir?oldid=711119385 Contributors: Genie,
Lysy, D-Notice, Pavel Vozenilek, -jkb-, Anthony Appleyard, Thryduulf, Vegaswikian, Eubot, Tranceliner, CmdrObot, Doug Weller, Sjlain, The
Anomebot2, JohnSaringer, Pietru, Ori, No such user, XLinkBot, Addbot, Sudika, Yobot, Sandris., Tremlin, RicHard-59, D'ohBot, Badastron-
omy, DrilBot, Diddycool, Zorro new, ZroBot, Brattarb, Xwejnusgozo and Anonymous: 12
Newark Holy Stones Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newark_Holy_Stones?oldid=738451484 Contributors: Skysmith, Glenn, Rich
Farmbrough, Mwanner, Longhair, Pearle, Firsfron, Woohookitty, Morning star, Gimboid13, BD2412, Koavf, Cholmes75, Reyk, SmackBot,
Hmains, Cush, Hebel, Cogito-ergo-sum, Seduisant, Doug Weller, MarshBot, Salad Days, Nyttend, ClovisPt, CommonsDelinker, Nothingofwater,
Mama5050, Keepfrozen, HuMcCulloch, Deconstructhis, StAnselm, Senor Cuete, Mr. Stradivarius, Andstobax, Niceguyedc, Good Olfactory,
C6541, Lightbot, Kwacka, Againme, AnomieBOT, Citation bot, Bob Burkhardt, Haploidavey, GoneIn60, H3llBot, Mcmatter, Og of Bashan,
Quick and Dirty User Account, MrBill3, Cyberbot II, DoctorKubla, Monkbot, Jerodlycett, Naterpotatertot, Whathappensnext, GreenC bot and
Anonymous: 12
Olmec alternative origin speculations Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olmec_alternative_origin_speculations?oldid=750982523 Con-
tributors: Paul Barlow, Rich Farmbrough, Dbachmann, Mareino, Ynhockey, Godheval, Czolgolz, Woohookitty, Sesmith, WBardwin, Josh Parris,
Ketiltrout, MacRusgail, Elmer Clark, CJLL Wright, Rmky87, Rockero, Maunus, Alarob, ArielGold, SmackBot, Herostratus, Kintetsubualo,
Wittylama, Durova, Luenlin, Thumperward, Trekphiler, Madman2001, Salsassin, Curly Turkey, Tim Ross, JzG, Ergative rlt, JorisvS, Norm mit,
Tmangray, Jwalte04, Doug Weller, Epbr123, Headbomb, ARTEST4ECHO, Leolaursen, Simon Burchell, Magioladitis, Appraiser, ClovisPt,
FishUtah, Olmec98, Gldavies, Cams0ft, Nono64, Vipinhari, Taharqa, Itzcoatl, Brenont, Noveltyghost, Andrewjlockley, Jdaloner, Gaia2767spm,
Victor Chmara, Ibasurik, Jagun, Drmies, SamuelTheGhost, Wkboonec, DumZiBoT, ShizRose, Jojhutton, Montgomery '39, Rich jj, Kovesh,
WaltFrost, Symmerhill, Againme, AnomieBOT, Citation bot, Ocelotl10293, Moxy, Citation bot 1, Jonesey95, Tom.Reding, Onondaga, Trappist
the monk, Cyanophycean314, Tbhotch, RjwilmsiBot, Wiking, EmausBot, Bollyje, Zoda8, ClueBot NG, Helpful Pixie Bot, DuoMind, Batty-
Bot, Cyberbot II, FoCuSandLeArN, Inayity, Mcguiregreen, Jore (J.D.) Meyer, Monkbot, Greatest student, Yuriko96, Ramonstephens720,
Chrissymad and Anonymous: 50
Pangboche Hand Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pangboche_Hand?oldid=763294492 Contributors: Bogdangiusca, Nv8200pa, Joy,
Meursault2004, Icairns, Parmadil, Phil s, Tastyummy, Ceyockey, Hochnebel, Gaius Cornelius, Irishguy, R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine), Bdve,
SmackBot, Elonka, McGeddon, Autarch, Seduisant, Badbilltucker, Silver Edge, Scottandrewhutchins, Dr. Blofeld, Vanish2, ClovisPt, Lor-
dAnubisBOT, Kevinkor2, Martarius, Agogino, TheRedPenOfDoom, DumZiBoT, XLinkBot, Maky, Addbot, Jaydec, Againme, Metricmike,
Lung salad, Mattharringtonnz, Khazar2, Melonkelon, Skepticatheist and Anonymous: 18
Poteau Runestone Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_runestones?oldid=758415330 Contributors: The Anome, Gabbe, Glenn,
DNewhall, Dbachmann, Firespeaker, Rjwilmsi, Nihiltres, CJLL Wright, PaulGarner, SmackBot, Hmains, Chris the speller, Bluebot, SB Johnny,
OrphanBot, TurabianNights, Cydebot, Doug Weller, Storkk, Narssarssuaq, PhilKnight, Than217, ClovisPt, Berig, RobZep, Pleather, Trusilver,
David Trochos, Heironymous Rowe, Yobot, OpenFuture, ClueBot NG, Helpful Pixie Bot, Mandruss, Rubbish computer and Anonymous: 9
Quimbaya artifacts Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quimbaya_artifacts?oldid=754089166 Contributors: Ljfeliu, Hmains, Wizardman,
Doug Weller, CommonsDelinker, Uyvsdi, Petebutt, WanderingFool, Addbot, Againme, Gtz, Sathandi, Pinethicket, Evanh2008, Yiosie2356,
Quick and Dirty User Account, Mogism, Espii4, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 9
San Pedro Mountains Mummy Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Pedro_Mountains_Mummy?oldid=755251482 Contributors:
Glenn, Fvw, Chl, Bearcat, Auric, Everyking, Sam Hocevar, Michael L. Kaufman, Discospinster, LindsayH, Grutness, Pauli133, Gene Ny-
gaard, Ghirlandajo, Woohookitty, Tabletop, Irishguy, Reyk, Bluebot, Ser Amantio di Nicolao, Cydebot, Doug Weller, Ebyabe, ThirdDragon,
John Adol, Husond, RIH-V, Amt1018, Jmm6f488, Puddytang, Uyvsdi, Thmazing, Explicit, BrendanBurke, BrianD1996, SoxBot, DumZiBoT,
Dthomsen8, Addbot, Legobot, Againme, AnomieBOT, Wikipe-tan, Full-date unlinking bot, KuduIO, GermanJoe, Bri3jor, Helpful Pixie Bot,
Khazar2, Reatlas, Iamboat, Ugog Nizdast, Monkbot and Anonymous: 18
Saqqara Bird Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saqqara_Bird?oldid=747229045 Contributors: Leandrod, Infrogmation, Glenn, Reddi,
Varlaam, Fjarlq, Rich Farmbrough, CanisRufus, Darwinek, Titanium Dragon, Deacon of Pndapetzim, Ghirlandajo, Richard Arthur Norton
(1958- ), Twthmoses, Emerson7, Kolbasz, Peter Delmonte, Sandstein, Luk, Crystallina, SmackBot, Mdd4696, Chlewbot, Greenshed, Bolivian
Unicyclist, Fuhghettaboutit, Scientizzle, Dr.K., ECLIPSE~enwiki, Iridescent, Doug Weller, JayW, Elikser, RobotG, Fayenatic london, ClovisPt,
Nayus Dante, R'n'B, Jmm6f488, Enderworthing, Nigholith, Johnbod, BrettAllen, Itsfullofstars, Northfox, Traveler100, Zhukora, Xaldin of
winds, Diego Cuoghi, Ancos, SamuelTheGhost, Xxdjsethxx, Dawoudk, Addbot, C6541, LaaknorBot, Soupforone, SPat, Yobot, ClockwerkMao,
RegenerateThis, AnomieBOT, ArthurBot, Xqbot, Khruner, Amaury, LucienBOT, Gingermint, Trappist the monk, TheLongTone, Stringence,
Updatehelper, RjwilmsiBot, EmausBot, Black Yoshi, RHM22, Wikipelli, Dcirovic, ZroBot, ClueBot NG, Muon, Wrathkind, Widr, Quick and
Dirty User Account, Helpful Pixie Bot, Wiki13, MrBill3, Khriz1298, ChrisGualtieri, Monkbot, Reader Account, DragonLadeeknows, Bender
the Bot and Anonymous: 26
The Starving of Saqqara Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Starving_of_Saqqara?oldid=760972836 Contributors: Auric, Lusana-
herandraton, Equilibrial, PKT, Magioladitis, BabelStone, Drpickem, Alekksandr, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 1
Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca head Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca_head?oldid=763281400 Contributors: Paul Barlow,
Paul A, Glenn, Selket, Florian Blaschke, Wtmitchell, Rjwilmsi, Makaristos, CJLL Wright, RussBot, Hellbus, Ptcamn, Gadget850, Skepticsteve,
Salmanazar, Petri Krohn, SmackBot, Miuki, Hmains, Clint H. Hoyt, Madman2001, Blake-, Ser Amantio di Nicolao, Twalls, Doug Weller,
Simon Burchell, ClovisPt, SunSw0rd, WLU, VirtualDelight, Jmm6f488, Johnbod, Miskwito, SheepNotGoats, Tesi1700, ImageRemovalBot,
WurmWoode, Hadrianheugh, Alivemajor, SamuelTheGhost, Ost316, Addbot, C6541, Againme, Citation bot, LilHelpa, Groovenstein, Fortdj33,
Citation bot 1, Geogene, RjwilmsiBot, OneDalm0, Quick and Dirty User Account, MerlIwBot, Nodulation, BG19bot, AwamerT, MrBill3,
Melbournesoldier, Monkbot, Jmcgnh and Anonymous: 12
Tucson artifacts Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tucson_artifacts?oldid=755728716 Contributors: Paul Barlow, Hoopes, Auric,
Scottperry, Gfannick, Mangoe, Hmains, Racklever, CRGreathouse, Cydebot, Doug Weller, JustAGal, Shirt58, Trilobitealive, Student7, Gen.
Quon, Til Eulenspiegel, EoGuy, TheRedPenOfDoom, 7&6=thirteen, OlEnglish, Yobot, AnomieBOT, Citation bot, Dunc0029, Pinethicket, Ge-
ogene, MrX, Msorenz, RjwilmsiBot, We hope, Donner60, $1LENCE D00600D, Vunil, Drsurf88, Quick and Dirty User Account, Safehaven86,
KumiokoCleanStart, Brutusbuckeye42, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 22
Wolfsegg Iron Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfsegg_Iron?oldid=755233834 Contributors: Paul Barlow, Emperor, Glenn, Auric,
Bobblewik, Mjk2357, Conny, Gene Nygaard, Byron Farrow, GregorB, Srleer, Wavelength, Hydrargyrum, Gaius Cornelius, Salmanazar,
Cattus, Ollj, Perfectblue97, Shattered, Editor Bob, CmdrObot, EdJohnston, RobotG, LuckyLouie, Steven J. Anderson, WereSpielChequers,
Alexbrn, Adamnmo, Addbot, Lightbot, OlEnglish, Bermicourt, Againme, AnomieBOT, Rubinbot, LilHelpa, Thehelpfulbot, GoingBatty,
Mikhail Ryazanov, Very trivial, Helpful Pixie Bot, Electriccatsh2, Monkbot, Maraofdelight, BU Rob13 and Anonymous: 12
AVM Runestone Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVM_Runestone?oldid=749556532 Contributors: The Anome, Deb, Stone, Geni, Hai-
ley C. Shannon, Soap, JoshuaZ, Doug Weller, Naniwako, Deanlaw, David Trochos, TheRedPenOfDoom, Scalhotrod, Good Olfactory, Addbot,
C6541, Brianann MacAmhlaidh, ZroBot, BattyBot, Mogism, InternetArchiveBot, GreenC bot and Anonymous: 4
Bourne stone Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourne_stone?oldid=736964036 Contributors: Billposer, Jackiespeel, Firespeaker, Se-
smith, Bluebot, D-Rock, Cydebot, Caliga10, Doug Weller, Ebyabe, ClovisPt, Svyatoslav, Jojalozzo, Ktr101, Yobot, OpenFuture, Citation bot,
FrescoBot, Lewishb, John of Reading, Faolin42, Helpful Pixie Bot and Anonymous: 3
Grave Creek Stone Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grave_Creek_Stone?oldid=757072514 Contributors: Xinoph, Chowbok, Rich Farm-
brough, CanisRufus, Thuresson, Longhair, Dbchip, Firespeaker, Guthrie, Wtfunkymonkey, Paxsimius, Common Man, Bluezy, SmackBot,
Colonies Chris, OrphanBot, Sarfa, Cydebot, Doug Weller, Barticus88, Dekimasu, ***Ria777, Wormcast, ClovisPt, Nono64, Remike~enwiki,
Fjbfour, Karmos, Mcadwell, Good Olfactory, FrescoBot, EmausBot, Hoa binh, MrBill3, DoctorKubla, Khazar2, Bender the Bot and Anonymous:
3
Narragansett Runestone Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narragansett_Runestone?oldid=758034708 Contributors: Orlady, 9SGjOSfy-
HJaQVsEmy9NS, Derek R Bullamore, Ser Amantio di Nicolao, Doug Weller, RFM57, Parkwells, Rhododendrites, TheRedPenOfDoom, Roxy
the dog, Bilsonius, AnomieBOT, KSpott, Faolin42, BattyBot, Dickie birdie, CyberXRef, Johnsoniensis, Just musing, Jerodlycett, Dilidor and
Anonymous: 4
Oklahoma runestones Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_runestones?oldid=758415330 Contributors: The Anome, Gabbe,
Glenn, DNewhall, Dbachmann, Firespeaker, Rjwilmsi, Nihiltres, CJLL Wright, PaulGarner, SmackBot, Hmains, Chris the speller, Bluebot, SB
Johnny, OrphanBot, TurabianNights, Cydebot, Doug Weller, Storkk, Narssarssuaq, PhilKnight, Than217, ClovisPt, Berig, RobZep, Pleather,
Trusilver, David Trochos, Heironymous Rowe, Yobot, OpenFuture, ClueBot NG, Helpful Pixie Bot, Mandruss, Rubbish computer and Anony-
mous: 9
Spirit Pond runestones Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_Pond_runestones?oldid=716251850 Contributors: Gabbe, 9SGjOSfyH-
JaQVsEmy9NS, Firespeaker, KevinOKeee, GregorB, CJLL Wright, Gaius Cornelius, Petri Krohn, Elonka, Hmains, Backspace, Peter Horn,
Namiba, Cydebot, Doug Weller, WANAX, Sufurq, ClovisPt, Mausy5043, LokiClock, Rlendog, Goustien, Faithlessthewonderboy, Catalogra-
pher, Algkalv, Addbot, Lightbot, Magicpiano, AnomieBOT, OpenFuture, Asbrody, MondalorBot, Gareth Grith-Jones, DoctorKubla, Hmains-
bot1, Johnsagent and Anonymous: 5
Vrendrye Runestone Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%A9rendrye_Runestone?oldid=746490016 Contributors: Glenn, Indefati-
gable, Auric, Bo Lindbergh, Firespeaker, Gene Nygaard, MatthewUND, Rjwilmsi, Its-is-not-a-genitive, CJLL Wright, PaulGarner, Deville,
Petri Krohn, Xaosux, Hmains, Ser Amantio di Nicolao, Cydebot, Caliga10, Doug Weller, Martin lindhe, ClovisPt, Berig, Chopin-Ate-Liszt!,
Garret Beaumain, Beou, David Trochos, Addbot, Lightbot, OpenFuture, MondalorBot, AvicBot and Anonymous: 5
Nazca Lines Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazca_Lines?oldid=764572102 Contributors: AxelBoldt, Magnus Manske, Andre Engels,
Roadrunner, Ubiquity, Infrogmation, Ixfd64, Lquilter, Cyde, Skysmith, Ahoerstemeier, Snoyes, Darkwind, Glenn, Ladogs, Timc, Hyacinth,
Itai, Hajor, Robbot, Ke4roh, Psychonaut, Wikibot, Giftlite, JamesMLane, Angmering, Adamk, Everyking, Vadmium, Keith Edkins, Alexf,
Eregli bob, OwenBlacker, SAMAS, Kevin B12, GeoGreg, JHCC, Avihu, Hwliang, Sonett72, Trevor MacInnis, MToolen, D6, Discospinster,
Vsmith, Prowsej, ESkog, Djrisk, BjarteSorensen, El C, Kwamikagami, Nigelj, Smalljim, Diceman, Nsaa, Perceval, Alansohn, AnnaP, Jaar-
don, Snowolf, Zenyu, Tycho, TahitiB~enwiki, Dragunova, Pedicini, GabrielF, Agutie, Ghirlandajo, Vanished user j123kmqwfk56jd, Cey-
ockey, Newnoise~enwiki, Ian Moody, Simetrical, Woohookitty, LOL, Gerd Breitenbach, ^demon, MONGO, Bbatsell, Turnstep, Dynamax,
Stevey7788, Mandarax, Sj, Rjwilmsi, TheRingess, Tintazul, Bensin, Tomtheman5, FlaBot, SchuminWeb, Crazycomputers, Leadgold, Pev-
ernagie, Preslethe, Tedder, Meyer, Victor12, Travis Wells, DVdm, YurikBot, Yamara, Bill52270, Rsrikanth05, JohanL, Grafen, Thiseye,
Saoshyant, Haoie, Scs, DeadEyeArrow, Maunus, Bantosh, Morcheeba, JoanneB, Scoutersig, Spliy, Mmcannis, Cm205, Amalthea, Smack-
Bot, McGeddon, David.Mestel, Jab843, Iph, Kintetsubualo, Crais459, Lonelymiesarchie, Gilliam, Ohnoitsjamie, Hmains, Bluebot, Gutworth,
Ctbolt, Konstable, Fuad Ramses, Mikker, Salmar, Dethme0w, Can't sleep, clown will eat me, Unatco, Alunsalt, TheGerm, Frap, DRahier,
OrphanBot, Burns ipper, Rassilon, Johan Reinhard, GuildNavigator84, Aldaron, Drphilharmonic, The PIPE, Yom, Drunken Pirate, Ohconfu-
cius, Ser Amantio di Nicolao, Valfontis, Titus III, John, AmiDaniel, Gausie, Chiwara, Sonikwlf, Evenios, Rescher, Mgiganteus1, IronGargoyle,
Shattered, Mr. Vernon, A. Parrot, Clsc, Optimale, OldDaedalus, Mr Stephen, Ajunk024, EdC~enwiki, Loxton, Xionbox, Dansh77, Irides-
cent, JMK, Colonel Warden, Hurricaneoyd, Ewulp, Courcelles, Tawkerbot2, Joey80, Urutapu, CmdrObot, Cyrus XIII, Dgw, FlyingToaster,
Moreschi, No1lakersfan, Sebastian789, Themightyquill, Dpino, Cydebot, ValerioC, Wikipediarules2221, UberMan5000, Doug Weller, Chris-
tian75, Walter Humala, DumbBOT, SteveMcCluskey, Vanished User jdksfajlasd, Rymich13, Thijs!bot, JAF1970, Epbr123, Jaxsonjo, Anupam,
Marek69, Regraves12, John254, Tapir Terric, NERIUM, Larspcus2, Hires an editor, AntiVandalBot, Seaphoto, ChargersFan, Shirt58, Lit-
tlebtc, LuckyLouie, JAnDbot, TheOtherSiguy, Timdew, Kilrothi, Secret Squrrel, Jllm06, Lucas(CA), Froid, ClovisPt, Jeery A. Davis, B9
hummingbird hovering, MartinBot, Anaxial, R'n'B, Alexcalamaro, J.delanoy, Jmm6f488, Numbo3, Maurice Carbonaro, All Is One, Eliz81, Ex-
transit, RoyBatty42, TomCat4680, Gzkn, Johnbod, Balthazarduju, NewEnglandYankee, SJP, Potatoswatter, STBotD, Lebob, Azmodes, Gizzah,
RJASE1, Idioma-bot, Coee3, CWii, ABF, Classical geographer, Omegastar, Philip Trueman, Hy Brasil, Oshwah, Zidonuke, Kneaderman,
Briant, Arnon Chan, Qxz, Someguy1221, JhsBot, BotKung, Themat21III, Uannis~enwiki, Blurpeace, Fudge 45, Rvn123, Alcmaeonid,
Wavehunter, AlleborgoBot, PGWG, Nick Denkens, Cosprings, SieBot, Ladymadrian, Caltas, Cwkmail, Felipet1326, Andersmusician, Glass-
Cobra, Flyer22 Reborn, Dangerousnerd, Oxymoron83, Faradayplank, Pierrelepage, Superdorito~enwiki, Buttscrape, Denisarona, Babakathy,
Stillwaterising, Elnon, Sfan00 IMG, Elassint, ClueBot, Daydavid, GorillaWarfare, Fyyer, The Thing That Should Not Be, Ericlord, TotesBoats,
Franamax, Der Golem, Verenti, Mild Bill Hiccup, Sw258, Boing! said Zebedee, Rang0r lord, Markreidyhp, Blanchardb, Parkwells, Azmurath,
Leadwind, Bbb2007, Excirial, Jusdafax, EBY3221, MacedonianBoy, Obiskatobis, SounderBruce, Bjdehut, Catalographer, Thingg, Versus22,
WutFR, Burner0718, Eraser Killer Alpha, XLinkBot, Ost316, WillOakland, Doc9871, WikiDao, Osarius, HexaChord, CalumH93, Addbot,
Poco a poco, Simonm223, Hellboy2hell, SI31, X0xkirstenx0x3, Xxmorningstarxx, Clayton Briggs, Bertrc, CanadianLinuxUser, Fluernutter,
Ronkonkaman, NjardarBot, Sillyfolkboy, LAAFan, Chzz, Ginosbot, Bungalowbill430, EdwinJs, Tide rolls, OlEnglish, Snigel2012, Mps, An-
grysockhop, Legobot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Ajh16, Carleas, Tea n Coee, SwisterTwister, AnomieBOT, ThaddeusB, Jim1138, Fahadsadah, Zach-
erystaylor, Rama1981, RandomAct, Materialscientist, Somkhishvili, LeJC, ArthurBot, Xqbot, Zad68, Novoneiro, Capricorn42, Gigemag76,
GrouchoBot, Shirik, RibotBOT, Surelyhuman, Conty~enwiki, Ginger74, Cekli829, Alexfenway, Edgars2007, Grbergs Gra Sng, VS6507,
FrankMJohnson, Bakkus, Markeilz, HamburgerRadio, Citation bot 1, Jerbnnon, FairlyOddStar, Pinethicket, Jewlrzeye, LittleWink, Tom.Reding,
Saforcer, Smuckola, Yahia.barie, , Jemr69, IJBall, JoonaZZ, TobeBot, NickVertical, Fawkey, Fama Clamosa, Luiscabrejo, Paulmpierre, De-
fender of torch, Ivanvector, E. Drselen, Minimac, 4deluxe, Hornlitz, DARTH SIDIOUS 2, Bluedillygal, Caitlynsmith, DRAGON BOOSTER,
Beyond My Ken, Skamecrazy123, BrendanFrye, Cricobr, Orphan Wiki, WikitanvirBot, Look2See1, Heracles31, Tommy2010, RegentProxy,
Dcirovic, Msudhakardce, Mz7, John Cline, F, Needarb, Governmentofperu, 12345678900987654321l, Alpha Quadrant, Bbudisin, Perseus,
Son of Zeus, Theshman1987, Donner60, Aldnonymous, Sergio handal, Sergio Handal, ChuispastonBot, Maedar, ClueBot NG, MelbourneS-
tar, Bigdgal, Motormaddness, SilverSurfer89, Widr, Gavin.perch, Wikiandes, Padung, Theopolisme, MerlIwBot, Oddbodz, Helpful Pixie Bot,
Gob Lofa, GoCubsGoCubs10, BG19bot, Dirtbikethomas, Ajinkya Pasalkar, Overanalyzer, MusikAnimal, Mark Arsten, Treva26, Silvrous,
NazcaCodeBreaker, Blackberry Sorbet, Snow Blizzard, OnderOtcu, Insidiae, Rhinomantis88, 220 of Borg, Wannabemodel, Earp1957, Vvven,
BattyBot, Globe Trekker, GoShow, Duman7391, Edwaali18, SpudMcCoy, GeoLines, Rgtiger92, Cuculcan2012, Hayhayrox1, Zeeyanwiki,
Peter Reynosa, Leon petrosyan, Elenatroyana, Foonarres, Telfordbuck, Arcane21, Missionedit, Acetotyce, SchmalLubnan3321, NYBrook098,
SayedUmaarKazmi, Zenibus, NottNott, Johny6667, SJ Defender, Automaticsteam, A6tf3t, Filedelinkerbot, Tmwarren, WikiWisePowder, Beth-
Naught, Abe Dogg, Alvaro-jordi, MollyMcHugh, Amortias, AmeliaSmithx, Ncard24, Gaurang sharma, B3njo578, SillySally22, Nastynacy22,
2slick4u, Cyfarwydd, IntriguingStar, Supdiop, KasparBot, NormanSchwarze, JorgeGNM, FaZe Ribs, CAPTAIN RAJU, Sss shukla, Sahil san-
jay shukla..., Karmaclub, CLCStudent, IF!nk, Cephus0, Ashleywhitneyorozco, Algea.05, Galo de Barcelos, GreenC bot, GrapefruitSculpin,
Cartoons Universe, Esteban in Hemet, Bender the Bot, Voltron23 and Anonymous: 847
Piri Reis map Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piri_Reis_map?oldid=764244909 Contributors: Csernica, Raven in Orbit, Hajor, Twang,
Olpus, Mervyn, Cyrius, Graeme Bartlett, Peruvianllama, Henry Flower, Varlaam, Nim278, Macrakis, Infradig, Ukexpat, MakeRocketGoNow,
Vsmith, Dbachmann, Saf kan, Kwamikagami, CeeGee, Enric Naval, Soufron, Grutness, Mceder, Andrew Gray, SlimVirgin, Dave.Dunford,
Bobrayner, Sandius, Odeveli, Al E., Male1979, Mandarax, Don Bratt, BD2412, Electionworld, Avia, Kalogeropoulos, Ev, Avocado, Itiner-
ant1, Gurch, EamonnPKeane, YurikBot, Hairy Dude, Varenius, Wiki alf, Karl Andrews, Maunus, Smaines, Petri Krohn, Entheta, SmackBot,
PiCo, Mangoe, Kim FOR sure, Jagged 85, AtilimGunesBaydin, Gcmarino, Srnec, Luenlin, Chris the speller, Bluebot, SoGonzo, Tarikash, Petlif,
Rrburke, Krsont, Paul H., Badgerpatrol, Kendrick7, Nishkid64, Richard19, BoH, Anakata, Cydebot, Doug Weller, RobotG, Simonkinahan, As-
troLynx, LuckyLouie, Tuor~enwiki, Gregorymcintosh, DuncanHill, Arturo 7, Magioladitis, Balloonguy, ClovisPt, EagleFan, Antiguobey, Eric
Deeson, Strikehold, WLU, Baristarim, WiiVolve, R'n'B, Jmm6f488, Enderworthing, Balthazarduju, Rocket71048576, Birczanin, VolkovBot,
Macedonian, EnterStanman, MCTales, Mustafa11~enwiki, SieBot, Happysailor, Faithlessthewonderboy, Newzild, Kafka Liz, David Trochos,
SamuelTheGhost, SchreiberBike, Al-Andalusi, Jim15936, Jlray, DumZiBoT, PaulBoxley, Aunt Entropy, Ordtoy, Addbot, LarryJe, Wikkidd,
Fhmann~enwiki, LuK3, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Bunnyhop11, Yiferic, Umbertoumm, Againme, AnomieBOT, Materialscientist, Ckruschke, Ci-
tation bot, Maxis ftw, RibotBOT, Zumalabe, Brutaldeluxe, Asfarer, FrescoBot, Emilius V, Citation bot 1, SuperJew, Pinethicket, Jonesey95,
Madmonkey1, Kiteagle, Mottobazza, MarleyEngvall, John of Reading, Dewritech, Seadiver777, Donner60, Concord113, Helpful Pixie Bot,
BG19bot, Darkness Shines, Egeymi, Hmainsbot1, Mogism, LahmacunKebab, 50seven, Bmh81, Iluvumerijaan, Ale Gandon and Anonymous:
120
Stone spheres of Costa Rica Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_spheres_of_Costa_Rica?oldid=763913375 Contributors: Axel-
Boldt, Dan Koehl, Hoopes, Twang, DavidCary, Kaldari, DragonySixtyseven, O'Dea, Dreiss2, Walden, Smalljim, Ghirlandajo, Dan East,
Woohookitty, Mindmatrix, Fxer, Sparkit, Fernando Reis, Quiddity, MikeJ9919, Rmpfu89, Rune.welsh, Srleer, Valentinian, Bgwhite, WAveg-
etarian, Bovineone, SEWilcoBot, Matthewobrien, Bhumiya, SMcCandlish, Groyolo, That Guy, From That Show!, SmackBot, Mdd4696, Baa,
Vergean, Garykiser, Rustypup49, WaldoJ, Pwjb, Paul H., Rigadoun, Gobonobo, Avs5221, Quibik, Rquesada, Seaphoto, Tillman, Awien, Simon
Burchell, Mgmirkin, Karl432, ClovisPt, J.delanoy, Jmm6f488, Johnbod, Carolfrog, Ipigott, Jevansen, Dogsgomoo, Vincent Lextrait, TXiKiBoT,
Someguy1221, Andy Dingley, Gillyweed, Macdonald-ross, Bfpage, Drtimmcguinness, Harry-, Mx. Granger, Icarusgeek, Soaringbear, Alexbot,
Erebus Morgaine, Theredgiant, Addbot, Revansatoda, CanadianLinuxUser, Lightbot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Magog the Ogre, AnomieBOT, Zach-
erystaylor, Xqbot, Mijcofr, Trappist the monk, Red Denim, Axxis10, EmausBot, Immunize, Look2See1, ZroBot, 111bennyboy111, H3llBot,
Spacecharly, ClueBot NG, Frietjes, Ramaksoud2000, Elspamo4, MusikAnimal, Thehumandignity, MrBill3, BattyBot, Cyberbot II, 069952497a,
TheOriginalMac, Monkbot, Arstempo, Filedelinkerbot, Bernard maurin, SA 13 Bro, Jerodlycett, Wingding341, BU Rob13, JJMC89 bot, Bender
the Bot, Megiroember and Anonymous: 63
52.14.2 Images
File:10_Commandment_Rock.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/10_Commandment_Rock.jpg License:
Public domain Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons. Original artist: Brainardo at English Wikipedia
File:1911-04-19RunestoneSale.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/13/1911-04-19RunestoneSale.jpg License:
Public domain Contributors: http://collections.mnhs.org/cms/display.php?irn=10670545 Original artist: Minnesota Historical Society and Olof
Ohman
File:20041229-Olmec_Head_(Museo_Nacional_de_Antropologa).jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/

20041229-Olmec_Head_%28Museo_Nacional_de_Antropolog%C3%ADa%29.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: No machine-
readable source provided. Own work assumed (based on copyright claims). Original artist: No machine-readable author provided. Luidger
assumed (based on copyright claims).
File:Acambaro080407025.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/Acambaro080407025.JPG License: GFDL
Contributors: Own work Original artist: Fchavez2000
File:Ambox_important.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b4/Ambox_important.svg License: Public domain
Contributors: Own work, based o of Image:Ambox scales.svg Original artist: Dsmurat (talk contribs)
File:Antikythera-proposed-1.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Antikythera-proposed-1.svg License: CC
BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Lead holder
File:Antikythera-proposed-3.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/Antikythera-proposed-3.svg License: CC
File:Antikythera-proposed-4.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/Antikythera-proposed-4.svg License: CC
File:AntikytheraMechanismSchematic-Freeth12.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/
AntikytheraMechanismSchematic-Freeth12.png License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: SkoreKeep
File:Antikythera_mechanism.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e8/Antikythera_mechanism.svg License:
Public domain Contributors: File:Meccanismo_di_Antikytera.jpg Original artist: Lead Holder
File:Antikythera_model_front_panel_Mogi_Vicentini_2007.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/
Antikythera_model_front_panel_Mogi_Vicentini_2007.JPG License: CC BY 2.5 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Mogi Vicentini
File:Archaeological_site_icon_(red).svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e9/Archaeological_site_icon_
%28red%29.svg License: CC BY 2.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Edgars2007
File:Ashoka_Pillar_Delhi.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/55/Iron_Pillar%2C_Delhi.jpg License: CC BY-
SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Sujit kumar
File:Bat-creek-tennessee1.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Bat-creek-tennessee1.jpg License: CC BY 3.0
Contributors: Own work Original artist: Brian Stansberry
File:Bat_Creek_Exam_5-28-10.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/Bat_Creek_Exam_5-28-10.JPG Li-
cense: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Hookedx (Scott Wolter)
File:Bat_Creek_Inscription_1890_Lithograph_Figure_7_Inverted.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d3/
Bat_Creek_Inscription_1890_Lithograph_Figure_7_Inverted.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: http://www.econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/
arch/batcrk.html Original artist: Cyrus H. Thomas
File:British_Museum_Aztec_or_Mixtec_mask.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/53/British_Museum_
Aztec_or_Mixtec_mask.jpg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Simon Burchell (Own work) Original artist: ?
File:Calaveras_Skull.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9b/Calaveras_Skull.jpg License: Public domain Con-
tributors: Originally published in Review of the Evidence Relating to Auriferous Gravel Man in California in the Smithsonian Report for 1899,
pages 419472, Plates I-XVI. Washington: Government Printing Oce, 1901. Octavo. Downloaded from http://www.archaeology.org/online/
features/hoaxes/calaveras.html Original artist: William Henry Holmes
File:Cherokee_Syllabary.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d2/Cherokee_Syllabary.svg License: Public do-
main Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons. Transfer was stated to be made by User:Mike.lifeguard. Original artist:
Sakurambo at English Wikipedia
File:Cladorhiza_concrescens_Agassiz_illustration.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Cladorhiza_
concrescens_Agassiz_illustration.png License: Public domain Contributors: Three cruises of the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey
steamer Blake in the Gulf of Mexico, in the Caribbean Sea, and along the Atlantic coast of the United States, from 1877 to 1880 Figure 541
Original artist: Alexander Agassiz (18351910)
File:Commons-logo.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Commons-logo.svg License: PD Contributors: ? Original
artist: ?
File:Computer_graphic_for_back_of_Antikythera_mechanism.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4b/Computer_
graphic_for_back_of_Antikythera_mechanism.jpg License: Fair use Contributors: Original publication: The Antikythera Mechanism
Research Project
Immediate The Antikythera Mechanism Research Project

Original artist: Tony Freeth
File:Computer_graphic_for_front_of_Antikythera_mechanism.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b8/Computer_
graphic_for_front_of_Antikythera_mechanism.jpg License: Fair use Contributors: Original publication: The Antikythera Mechanism
Research Project
Immediate The Antikythera Mechanism Research Project

Original artist: Tony Freeth
File:Creation_of_Light_Detail_2.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Creation_of_Light_Detail_2.png Li-

cense: Public domain Contributors: ? Original artist: Vanished user at en.wikipedia
File:Crystal_skull_british_museum_random9834672.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Crystal_skull_
british_museum_random9834672.jpg License: CC BY 3.0 Contributors: Rafa Chagasiewicz (Own work) Original artist: ?
File:Crystal_skull_in_Muse_du_quai_Branly,_Paris.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Crystal_skull_
in_Mus%C3%A9e_du_quai_Branly%2C_Paris.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Self-photographed Original artist: Klaus-Dieter Keller
File:David_face.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/83/David_face.png License: Public domain Contributors: ?
Original artist: ?
File:Decalogue_Holy_Stones.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Decalogue_Holy_Stones.png License: At-
tribution Contributors: http://www.econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/arch/decalog.html Original artist: J. Huston McCulloch
File:Dendera_light_002.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/Dendera_light_002.jpg License: CC BY 2.5
Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons. Original artist: The original uploader was Twthmoses at English Wikipedia
File:Der_Eiserne_Mann.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f0/Der_Eiserne_Mann.jpg License: Public domain
Contributors: User created Original artist: Chris Walters
File:Der_Eiserne_Mann_Closeup.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1e/Der_Eiserne_Mann_Closeup.jpg Li-
cense: Public domain Contributors: User created Original artist: Chris Walters
File:Details_of_the_top_of_iron_pillar,_Qutub_Minar,_Delhi.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/
Details_of_the_top_of_iron_pillar%2C_Qutub_Minar%2C_Delhi.jpg License: CC BY-SA 2.0 Contributors: India-0349 Original artist: Dennis
Jarvis from Halifax, Canada
File:EBoban.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/EBoban.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: ? Original
artist: ?
File:Edit-clear.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f2/Edit-clear.svg License: Public domain Contributors: The Tango!
Desktop Project. Original artist:
The people from the Tango! project. And according to the meta-data in the le, specically: Andreas Nilsson, and Jakub Steiner (although
minimally).
File:Edward_Larsson_1885_I.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Edward_Larsson_1885_I.jpg License:
Public domain Contributors: First published in DAUM-katta in 2003. Original artist: Edward Larsson
File:Eltanin_Antenna.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/Eltanin_Antenna.jpg License: Public domain Con-
tributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Escultura_con_esferas_de_J_Jimenez_Deredia.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/63/Escultura_con_
esferas_de_J_Jimenez_Deredia.JPG License: Public domain Contributors: Own work Original artist: Axxis10
File:Esfera_Precolombina_en_Univ_de_Costa_Rica.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/Esfera_
Precolombina_en_Univ_de_Costa_Rica.JPG License: Public domain Contributors: Own work Original artist: Axxis10
File:Esperanza_stone_1909.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/Esperanza_stone_1909.JPG License: Pub-
lic domain Contributors: Recreations of a Sportsman on the Pacic Coast, By Charles Frederick Holder, p. 135 Original artist: Charles Frederick
Holder
File:Farm_6_archaeological_site,_Costa_Rica.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/Farm_6_
archaeological_site%2C_Costa_Rica.jpg License: CC BY 3.0 Contributors: I (Anne Egitto) created this work entirely by myself. Origi-
nal artist: A. Egitto
File:Flag_of_Arizona.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/Flag_of_Arizona.svg License: Public domain Con-
tributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Flag_of_Peru.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Flag_of_Peru.svg License: Public domain Contributors:
Peru Original artist: David Benbennick
File:Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/48/Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg License: Cc-by-sa-3.0
Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Gearing_Relationships_of_the_Antikythera_Mechanism.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/
Gearing_Relationships_of_the_Antikythera_Mechanism.svg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Scott Shambaugh
File:Germanyfilm.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/Germanyfilm.svg License: LGPL Contributors: Own
modication of work from Commons Original artist: Ysangkok
File:Grave_Creek_Mound.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ef/Grave_Creek_Mound.jpg License: CC BY-
SA 2.5 Contributors: Own work (self-made photograph) Original artist: Tim Kiser (w:User:Malepheasant)
File:Grave_Creek_Stone_and_wax_cast.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/Grave_Creek_Stone_and_
wax_cast.png License: Public domain Contributors: http://www.econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/arch/grvcrk.html Original artist: Smithsonian Insti-
tution
File:Half_Shekel.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Half_Shekel.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors:
CNG coins Original artist: CNG
File:Hampson_effigypot_HRoe_2006.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/Hampson_effigypot_HRoe_
2006.jpg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons by Dmitri Lytov using CommonsHelper. Original
artist: Herb Roe, www.chromesun.com The original uploader was Heironymous Rowe at English Wikipedia
File:Heavener-runestenen.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/94/Heavener-runestenen.jpg License: Public do-

main Contributors: Transferred from da.wikipedia to Commons. - en:Image:Heavener runestone.jpg Original artist: en:User:Technogypsy at
en.wikipedia
File:Hieroglif_z_Abydos.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/Hieroglif_z_Abydos.jpg License: Public do-
main Contributors: Own work Original artist: Olek95
File:Ica_stones1.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/Ica_stones1.JPG License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors:
Own work Original artist: Brattarb
File:Ica_stones3.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Ica_stones3.JPG License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors:
Own work Original artist: Brattarb
File:Inscription_on_Iron_Pillar,_Delhi.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/Inscription_on_Iron_Pillar%
2C_Delhi.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Original photograph Original artist: Photo taken by en:User:~{}shuri
File:Iron_Pillar_of_Delhi,_upper_half,_cropped.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/Iron_Pillar_of_
Delhi%2C_upper_half%2C_cropped.jpg License: CC BY-SA 4.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: DoctorJoeE
File:Ironie_pile_Bagdad.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2f/Ironie_pile_Bagdad.jpg License: CC BY-SA
2.5 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Ironie
File:Kensington-runestone_flom-1910.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Kensington-runestone_
flom-1910.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Foldout illustration to book The Kensington Rune-Stone : an address Original artist:
Book author: George T. Flom
File:Kensington_MN_routes.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Kensington_MN_routes.jpg License: CC-
BY-SA-3.0 Contributors:
_Canada_topo.jpg Original artist: _Canada_topo.jpg: uploaded to en.wikipedia by Captain_Blood
File:Keystone_Holy_Stones.gif Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/Keystone_Holy_Stones.gif License: Attribu-
tion Contributors: http://www.econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/arch/decalog.html Original artist: J. Huston McCulloch
File:Kingoodie_Quarry_-_geograph.org.uk_-_170750.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/Kingoodie_
Quarry_-_geograph.org.uk_-_170750.jpg License: CC BY-SA 2.0 Contributors: From geograph.org.uk Original artist: Karen Vernon
File:Kung_Magnus_Erikssons_domsigill.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bc/Kung_Magnus_Erikssons_
domsigill.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Ilmari Salomies: Suomen kirkon historia I Suomen kirkko keskiaikana. Helsinki 1944. Orig-
inal artist: Unknown<a href='https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q4233718' title='wikidata:Q4233718'><img alt='wikidata:Q4233718' src='https:
//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Wikidata-logo.svg/20px-Wikidata-logo.svg.png' width='20' height='11' srcset='https:
//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Wikidata-logo.svg/30px-Wikidata-logo.svg.png 1.5x, https://upload.wikimedia.org/
wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Wikidata-logo.svg/40px-Wikidata-logo.svg.png 2x' data-le-width='1050' data-le-height='590' /></a>
File:La_Venta_Stela_3_detail.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/La_Venta_Stela_3_detail.png License:
CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: No machine-readable source provided. Own work assumed (based on copyright claims). Original artist: No
machine-readable author provided. Madman2001 assumed (based on copyright claims).
File:Lake_Winnipesaukee_mystery_stone_at_the_New_Hampshire_Historical_Society,_Concord_NH.jpg Source: https:
//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Lake_Winnipesaukee_mystery_stone_at_the_New_Hampshire_Historical_Society%
2C_Concord_NH.jpg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: John Phelan
File:Lignes_de_Nazca_oiseau.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Lignes_de_Nazca_oiseau.jpg License:
CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Marcito
File:London_Hammer.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/10/London_Hammer.jpg License: Fair use Contributors:
Original publication: Above photos
Immediate source: http://paleo.cc/paluxy/hammer.htm Original artist: Glen J. Kuban

File:Los_Lunas_Decalogue_Stone_Vandalized,_Aug._13,_2006.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/Los_
Lunas_Decalogue_Stone_Vandalized%2C_Aug._13%2C_2006.jpg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: I took this photograph myself. Orig-
inal artist: HuMcCulloch
File:Lneas_de_Nazca,_Nazca,_Per,_2015-07-29,_DD_39.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/L%C3%
ADneas_de_Nazca%2C_Nazca%2C_Per%C3%BA%2C_2015-07-29%2C_DD_39.JPG License: CC BY-SA 4.0 Contributors: Own work
Original artist: Diego Delso
File:Lneas_de_Nazca,_Nazca,_Per,_2015-07-29,_DD_46.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/L%C3%
File:Lneas_de_Nazca,_Nazca,_Per,_2015-07-29,_DD_49.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f7/L%C3%
File:Lneas_de_Nazca,_Nazca,_Per,_2015-07-29,_DD_50.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/L%C3%
File:Lneas_de_Nazca,_Nazca,_Per,_2015-07-29,_DD_52.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a5/L%C3%

File:Macoy_Masonic_Hebrew_with_text_1868_p134.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f3/Macoy_
Masonic_Hebrew_with_text_1868_p134.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Original publication: Macoy, Robert, General History,
Cyclopedia and Dictionary of Freemasonry, Masonic Publishing Co., New York, 3rd ed., 1868, p. 134.
Immediate source: Original source, in library of Worthington OH Masonic Lodge. Original artist: Robert Macoy
File:Misrah_Ghar_il-Kbir_4.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a5/Misrah_Ghar_il-Kbir_4.jpg License: CC

BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Lysy
File:Misrah_Ghar_il-Kbir_5.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Misrah_Ghar_il-Kbir_5.jpg License: CC
BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Lysy
File:NAMA_Machine_d'Anticythre_1.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/66/NAMA_Machine_d%
27Anticyth%C3%A8re_1.jpg License: CC BY 2.5 Contributors: No machine-readable source provided. Own work assumed (based on
copyright claims). Original artist: No machine-readable author provided. Marsyas assumed (based on copyright claims).
File:NAMA_Machine_d'Anticythre_4.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/NAMA_Machine_d%
27Anticyth%C3%A8re_4.jpg License: CC BY 2.5 Contributors: No machine-readable source provided. Own work assumed (based on
copyright claims). Original artist: No machine-readable author provided. Marsyas assumed (based on copyright claims).
File:NEO_nazca_lines_big.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/66/NEO_nazca_lines_big.jpg License: Public
domain Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Nat_arc_mus_ath_09.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/83/National_Archaeological_Museum_Athens_
09.jpg License: GFDL Contributors: Skyscrapercity.com Original artist: Lucretius
File:Nazca-lineas-manos-c01.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/Nazca-lineas-manos-c01.jpg License: CC
BY-SA 2.5 es Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Nazca_Lines_SPOT_1311.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Nazca_Lines_SPOT_1311.jpg License:
CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: http://gallery.spotimage.com/product_info.php?products_id=1311 Original artist: Cnes - Spot Image
File:Nazca_monkey.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Nazca_monkey.jpg License: Public domain Contrib-
utors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Olmec_mask_at_Met.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/Olmec_mask_at_Met.jpg License: CC BY 2.5
Contributors: No machine-readable source provided. Own work assumed (based on copyright claims). Original artist: No machine-readable
author provided. Madman2001 assumed (based on copyright claims).
File:Ottosdal1.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/Ottosdal1.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Own
work Original artist: Robert Huggett
File:Outline_map_of_Central_America.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/Outline_map_of_Central_
America.svg License: CC BY-SA 2.0 Contributors: This vector image was created with Inkscape. Original artist:

File:Palmar_Sur,_Costa_Rica_(2007).jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f0/Palmar_Sur%2C_Costa_Rica_
%282007%29.jpg License: CC BY 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Anne Egitto at en.wikipedia
File:PangbocheHand.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ea/PangbocheHand.jpg License: Fair use Contributors:
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=9&pos=61 Original artist: ?
File:Peithynen_-_displaying_Bardic_Alphabet_(coelbren_y_beirdd).jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/50/
Peithynen_-_displaying_Bardic_Alphabet_%28coelbren_y_beirdd%29.jpg License: Fair use Contributors:
http://www.museumwales.ac.uk/en/888/ Original artist: ?
File:Pentadic-Runic-Numerals-Edward_Larsson_1885.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3f/
Pentadic-Runic-Numerals-Edward_Larsson_1885.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: This le has been extracted from another
le: Edward Larsson 1885 I.jpg
Original artist: Edward Larsson
File:Photo_1-plane_front_view1.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/Photo_1-plane_front_view1.jpg Li-

cense: Public domain Contributors: the picture was taken by Dawoud Khalil Messiha who is sending this picture by himself. The picture
was not taken from any URL or other sources as it is the work of Dawoud Khalil Messiha. Original artist: Dawoud Khalil Messiha
File:Photo_2-plane_side_view1.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Photo_2-plane_side_view1.jpg License:
CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Dawoudk
File:Piri_reis_world_map_01.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/Piri_reis_world_map_01.jpg License:
Public domain Contributors: Bilkent University (lo res), erisi.com (hi res) Original artist: Piri Reis (circa 1467 - circa 1554)
File:Poggiapipe_indiano.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/Poggiapipe_indiano.jpg License: Public do-
main Contributors: K. Bharatha Iyer, Arte indiana (Arnoldo Mondadori Editore, 1964) Original artist: K. Bharatha Iyer
File:Portal-puzzle.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fd/Portal-puzzle.svg License: Public domain Contributors: ? Orig-
inal artist: ?
File:Pre-Columbian_Stone_Balls_at_Palmar_Sur,_Costa_Rica.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/
Pre-Columbian_Stone_Balls_at_Palmar_Sur%2C_Costa_Rica.jpg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: This photo was taken by myself.
Original artist: Matthewobrien
File:QtubIronPillar.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3f/QtubIronPillar.JPG License: Public domain Con-
tributors: Original photograph Original artist: Photograph taken by Mark A. Wilson (Department of Geology, The College of Wooster). [1]
File:Question_book-new.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/Question_book-new.svg License: Cc-by-sa-3.0 Con-
tributors:
Created from scratch in Adobe Illustrator. Based on Image:Question book.png created by User:Equazcion Original artist:
Tkgd2007
File:QutbIronInscription.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a0/QutbIronInscription.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-
3.0 Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons. Original artist: Deeptrivia at English Wikipedia
File:Rubik{}s_cube_v3.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Rubik%27s_cube_v3.svg License: CC-BY-SA-
3.0 Contributors: Image:Rubik{}s cube v2.svg Original artist: User:Booyabazooka, User:Meph666 modied by User:Niabot
File:Runes.Larsson.gif Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/Runes.Larsson.gif License: Public domain Contribu-
tors: Originally uploaded on en.wikipedia (Transferred by Jalo) Original artist: Originally uploaded by McGeddon
File:Runestone_shawnee_HRoe_2005.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/29/Runestone_shawnee_HRoe_2005.jpg
License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors:
I created this work entirely by myself.
Original artist:
Heironymous Rowe (talk)
File:Samaritan_doorpost.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3e/Samaritan_doorpost.jpg License: CC BY-SA
2.5 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Shuki
File:SchoharieC2.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/39/SchoharieC2.jpg License: CC BY 3.0 Contributors:
Own work Original artist: Paul Heinrich
File:SciAm1851_optimized.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e9/SciAm1851_optimized.jpg License: Public
domain Contributors: Scientic American Original artist: Scientic American
File:Spirit_Pond_map_stone.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/Spirit_Pond_map_stone.jpg Li-
cense: Public domain Contributors: Cover of book The Spirit Pond Runestones, le available here: http://home-and-garden.
webshots.com/photo/2597789000042975503VNQjVT Original artist: Unknown<a href='https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q4233718'
title='wikidata:Q4233718'><img alt='wikidata:Q4233718' src='https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Wikidata-logo.
svg/20px-Wikidata-logo.svg.png' width='20' height='11' srcset='https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Wikidata-logo.
svg/30px-Wikidata-logo.svg.png 1.5x, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Wikidata-logo.svg/40px-Wikidata-logo.
svg.png 2x' data-le-width='1050' data-le-height='590' /></a>
File:Stone_sphere.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Stone_sphere.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contribu-
tors: Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons by matanya. Original artist: WAvegetarian at English Wikipedia
File:System-search.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/System-search.svg License: Public domain Contribu-
tors: The Tango! Desktop Project Original artist: The people from the Tango! project
File:Text_document_with_red_question_mark.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Text_document_with_
red_question_mark.svg License: Public domain Contributors: Created by bdesham with Inkscape; based upon Text-x-generic.svg from the Tango
project. Original artist: Benjamin D. Esham (bdesham)
File:The_Iron_Pillar,_Kutab_Minar,_Delhi.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/18/The_Iron_Pillar%2C_
Kutab_Minar%2C_Delhi.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: http://digital.lib.uh.edu/u?/p15195coll29,110 Original artist: India Illus-
trated
File:The_San_Pedro_Mountain_Mummy.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/The_San_Pedro_Mountain_
Mummy.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Original publication: 1936
Immediate source: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ARvWQv9MHSM/TynRXorPVaI/AAAAAAAAA_c/A9DFi0NKvaY/s1600/untitledfg.bmp
Original artist: Unknown
(Life time: 1936)
File:UFCO_remnants.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/66/UFCO_remnants.jpg License: CC BY 3.0 Contrib-

utors: I (Anne Egitto) created this work entirely by myself. Original artist: A. Egitto
File:Unbalanced_scales.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/Unbalanced_scales.svg License: Public domain
Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Vaso_Dorchester.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/Vaso_Dorchester.jpg License: Public domain Con-
tributors: La scansione di opera bidimensionale non costituisce atto creativo. Original artist: Me
File:Venus_von_Willendorf_01.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/Venus_von_Willendorf_01.jpg License:
CC BY 2.5 Contributors: Own work Original artist: User:MatthiasKabel
File:Video-x-generic.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e7/Video-x-generic.svg License: Public domain Contributors:
? Original artist: ?
File:Wiki_letter_w.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6c/Wiki_letter_w.svg License: Cc-by-sa-3.0 Contributors: ?
Original artist: ?
File:Wikisource-logo.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Wikisource-logo.svg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Con-
tributors: Rei-artur Original artist: Nicholas Moreau
File:Wolfsegg_iron.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Wolfsegg_iron.jpg License: Public domain Contribu-
tors: Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons. Original artist: Editor Bob at English Wikipedia
52.14.3 Content license

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0

Out of Place Artifact

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Out of Place Artifact

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Out of Place Artifact

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What are some examples of out-of-place artifacts discussed?

What are some examples of out-of-place artifacts discussed?

What are some reasons why artifacts could be erroneously dated?

What are some reasons why artifacts could be erroneously dated?

Out-of-place artifact

4.1.5 Series 5 (late 2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

7 Bat Creek inscription 28

10 Chariots of the Gods (lm) 38

12.4.2 British Museum skull . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

21 Hidden character stone 65

23 Iron pillar of Delhi 70

23.2.2 Samvat 1109 inscription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

27 Lake Winnipesaukee mystery stone 90

27.7 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

30 Los Lunas Decalogue Stone 96

31 Misra Gar il-Kbir 99

32 Newark Holy Stones 101

33 Olmec alternative origin speculations 105

33.2.3 Osteological evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

34 Pangboche Hand 111

35 Oklahoma runestones 113

36 Quimbaya artifacts 115

37 San Pedro Mountains Mummy 116

38 Saqqara Bird 117

39 The Starving of Saqqara 120

40 Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca head 121

41 Tucson artifacts 123

42 Wolfsegg Iron 126

43 AVM Runestone 128

44 Bourne stone 130

45 Grave Creek Stone 131

45.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

46 Narragansett Runestone 133

47 Oklahoma runestones 135

48 Spirit Pond runestones 137

49 Vrendrye Runestone 139

50 Nazca Lines 140

51 Piri Reis map 147

52 Stone spheres of Costa Rica 152

An Out-of-place artifact (OOPArt) is an artifact of his-

1.1.2 Questionable interpretations Abydos helicopter: A pareidolia based on palimpsest

Nazca Lines: Supposedly impossible to design without

The Newark Holy Stones, used as extremely unlikely

Pacals sarcophagus lid: Described by Erich von

Piri Reis map: Several ancient astronauts authors, and

Quimbaya airplanes: Golden objects found in

Saqqara Bird: Supposed to depict a glider, but made

Shakkidog: Small humanoid and animal gurines

1.1.5 Erroneously dated objects The Tucson artifacts, a hoax.

1.2.1 Authors and works

[26] Heinrich, PV (1997) Mystery spheres: National Center for

[27] Coulam, NJ, and AR Schroedl (1995) The Keystone azurite

[28] Kuban, GJ, (2005) Moab Man - Malachite Man. The

1.4 External links

Archaeology from the dark side at Salon.com

he brought back. Eventually, the farmer and his assistants

[8] Blanton, John (October 1999). The Acambaro dinosaurs.

2.3 See also

[2] Isaak, M. (2007). The Counter-Creationism Handbook. Uni-

[3] DiPeso, C.C. (1953). The Clay Figurines of Acambaro,