The Upcoming Week in "Forbidden Archaeology"

9/18/2016

If you've been following the progress of Forbidden Archaeology this semester, you know that the next few classes we'll be bringing our focused discussion of giants to an end (I say "focused" because ideas about giants also play into the upcoming sections on Ice Age civilization and pre-Columbian transoceanic contact). We've talked about the ancient origins of giant mythologies, shreds of which are found in some of the world's earliest known written documents. We've talked about the giant mythologies of post-Roman Europe and the early engagement of science with the physical "evidence" for giants. We talked about how European ideas about giants were transplanted to the United States in the late 1700's and how those ideas apparently changed to fit the social, political, and archaeological circumstances that were present in the young United States. We discussed current ideas about giants connected to Young Earth Creationism, and we dipped our toes in the Nephilim Whirlpool just long enough to see that it is, frankly, ridiculous. On Friday, we circled back around to the question of an "ancient race of giants in North America."

This week we'll be talking more about the question of "giants" in prehistoric North America. It's going to be a fun week: the first blog posts are due, we're going to have a debate on Friday, and we're going to have Jim Vieira as our guest in class on Monday and Wednesday.

I'll be going to the airport in a few hours to get Vieira, feed him, and take him to his hotel. He'll be talking to the class tomorrow morning -- I'll have a little bit of housekeeping to discuss with the students, but after that Vieira will have the floor. We're going to use Wednesday's class with him for questions and discussion.

On Monday after class I'll give Vieira a walking tour of campus and downtown, lunch included. Two of my students are going to interview him on Monday afternoon for part of a project they're working on. Those same students are going to tape a co-interview with me and Vieira on Wednesday afternoon. I'm not yet sure what we'll be doing on Tuesday, which I have kept open to remain flexible. He'll be coming to my house for dinner tomorrow night. Vieira will return to Vieira Land on Thursday afternoon.

I'm really curious to see where Vieira is on issues related to giants and other things he's been working on for a long time. My opinion is that after you throw out the obvious hoaxes, fabrications, and gross misrepresentations, disregard the "double rows of teeth" (which I think I have demonstrated pretty conclusively is just a linguistic mirage), and adjust for some patterned over-estimates of height, you're still left with the possibility that relatively tall individuals are over-represented in the earthen mounds of eastern North America. In other words, I think there's a legitimate question buried in all of this. That's what I'd like to talk about, and I hope we can get there.

Stay tuned!

GEE

9/18/2016 12:16:03 pm

Andy, I look forward to the results of Jims visit.

Jim

9/18/2016 12:40:33 pm

This could be huge ! :)

Graham

9/18/2016 04:21:26 pm

Looking forward to reading the results of the visit as well. Also looking forward to reading what happens when you get around to Afrocentrism.

RiverM

9/18/2016 05:50:31 pm

Sounds like a fun week for all. Jim's passion and enthusiasm are infectious. I recommend his 2012 TedX talk from beautiful Shelburne Falls, MA for a primer. Count me jealous to miss out out on dinner and conversation.

Andy White

9/18/2016 06:28:07 pm

I played a few minutes of that in class and encouraged the students to watch the rest. Jim's flight was delayed, so I'm now sitting in the airport waiting for him.

Gunn

9/19/2016 08:21:08 am

Andy: "...you're still left with the possibility that relatively tall individuals are over-represented in the earthen mounds of eastern North America."

I was just thinking that in some cultures past, tallness may have been overemphasized in leadership roles, which may have caused more tall Native Americans to be buried in mounds.

I'll further the notion based on the possible concept that more "important" people were mound-bound than ordinary citizens, in some Native American societies and communities.

Andy, this is mere speculation offered on the subject, as something to possibly consider as a factor for the unbalance in tallness you seem to have noticed.

E.P. Grondine

9/20/2016 07:52:05 am

I find it interesting that many people have not read either Webb and Snow, nor Dragoo and Neuman, yet will "hypothesize" in a data free manner.

Dragoo had his own "big man" theory, but then he had the advantage on you, having actually dug up big men, and was simply trying to explain that data.

What Dragoo did not have was the data on mt DNA haplogroup distributions. Aside from everything that I have presented elsewhere, I can add to this eyewitness data that the height gene sometimes expresses among both modern Cherokee and more frequently among Osage.

It would probably help if the geneticists could gain their agreement to giving samples, and then analyze them.

Gunn

9/20/2016 07:59:15 am

In other words, Andy, if tallness were a factor in leadership roles, connected to imagined or real battle prowess, that leader's children and extended family might be a bit taller than the average person, and these families might be over-represented in the target population, as seen in mound excavations, possibly giving you this somewhat fractured-seeming data.

Maybe you could call this the "George Washington" effect?

E.P. Grondine

9/21/2016 05:41:29 am

Hi Gunn -

While the excavated remains were largely male, the "big man" hypothesis can not be true, as in the main population that survived to first European contact height was universal::

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-D4OK8Vcj7E

Gunn

9/21/2016 07:11:11 am

This doesn't completely agree with Andy's findings. There must be a reason for the imbalance Andy seems to have come upon. I'm trying to think of something to explain this odd phenomenon, rather than trying to explain it away.

How could height be universal in the Eastern US during the period of time being considered if some statistical proof seems to indicate otherwise? I've come up with something to possibly explain the "quirk" apparently being seen by Andy.

Do you, yourself, have any ideas about the seeming discrepancy, E.P. Grondine? Thanks.

Andy White

9/22/2016 01:12:49 pm

E.P.,

I'm not familiar enough with post-contact indigenous mythologies in the eastern woodlands to comment on whether or not they describe what you claim in your video, but I'm skeptical. You make several normative statements about "Native Americans don't do this" or "that's not the native way" that are surely overly simplistic. And I know of no evidence showing uniformly great stature among the prehistoric peoples of the eastern woodlands.

I think the "Big Man" hypothesis makes logical sense as a starting point for trying to understand if there's any reality underlying the flood of "giant skeleton"accounts from the late 1800's.

E.P. Grondine

9/23/2016 08:05:57 am

Hi Andy, Gunn -

"'m not familiar enough with post-contact indigenous mythologies in the eastern woodlands to comment on whether or not they describe what you claim in your video, but I'm skeptical. You make several normative statements about "Native Americans don't do this" or "that's not the native way" that are surely overly simplistic. And I know of no evidence showing uniformly great stature among the prehistoric peoples of the eastern woodlands."

I do not know of any evidence showing large stature among all of the peoples of the eastern woodlands either, and I HAVE NEVER MADE THAT CLAIM. What I do claim is that there was a population group of people of large size, in very specific places and at generally specific times.

As far as your lack of knowledge of the native american oral corpus and moralities goes, as practicing archaeologists you need to remedy those deficits.

To sum up, the Andaste were not ancient alien hybrids, nor Nephilim, nor Nephites, nor some other occultist nonsense people, they were assholes and remembered as acting that way by their neighbors.

In closing, this particular exchange with you, I need to note here that Jeff Wilson has located Puttnam's excavation notes for Serpent Mound, as well as his glass plates. The main burial in the large mound was of an individual whose disarticulated skeleton measured 8.9 feet from the top of its skull to the top of its ankles.

Bob Jase

9/19/2016 08:53:47 am

I hope Viera addresses the question of why all those giants built structures they couldn't have fit into.

GEE

9/19/2016 06:25:53 pm

Andy, I hope you are having an awesome visit.!!!

E.P. Grondine

9/20/2016 07:36:08 am

Hi Andy -

Given the data:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQFjoWZeHDMQln37vSd1heFOfte_O_Rhp

it's going to be an interesting week as your students analyze how this was turned into the nonsense we see today.

I hope that you have made this piece required reading for your students:

http://www.danieljglenn.com/the_podcasts/Stelle/Documentation/He%20Walked%20Among%20Us%20Part%201.pdf

as it explains a lot of what is going on.

Denise

9/20/2016 08:44:44 am

Hi Andy,

If Veira brings up Nine Men's Misery (where one of the victims from Rehobeth, MA was claimed to be a giant, he used it in his show), just let him know that my uncle Bob Billington (head of the Rhode Island Tourism Council, who he interviewed in that episode), did indeed ask about the remains.

We know they were moved from the original burial place to the old Cistercian Monastery in Cumberland. There is a sealed "burial vault" on the grounds, which Viera expressed interest on camera a desire to break into. Since that aired, my Uncle did some investigations as to the current whereabouts to the remains. He was informed by the Rhode Island Historical Society that the remains are not in the vault at all, it just serves as a monument. No one knows where the remains are now, which unfortunately will just play into some people's belief in a conspiracy theory. But my Uncle is an extremely honest individual who is not interested in politics, just in promoting the heritage of the area.

Just some FYI, since in the show Viera did mention wanting to follow up with my Uncle on this.

Joe Scales

9/21/2016 10:07:45 am

I admit that I'm not well versed in the giants among us issues sensationalized on certain television programs, but wouldn't a genetic disorder like Sotos Syndrome explain any anomalies discovered in this regard?

Andy White

9/22/2016 01:15:42 pm

I think that some of the anomalously large remains could be related to pituitary disorders or something similar (there's a nice paper out there on an actual case of gigantism in a Roman skeleton), but that won't explain away the whole historical/social/archaeological conundrum by a long shot.

Comments are closed.

The Upcoming Week in "Forbidden Archaeology"

Archives

Categories