Ancient and ArchaeologyÌý permalink
The Case Of The Ancient Astronauts
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Ìý
Posted by Jo Freddie (U14920073) on Monday, 27th June 2011
Considering that The History channel have just shown "Ancient Aliens" giving credibility to the work of Erich von Däniken now would be a wonderful time to show the 1970's Horizon programme "The Case Of The Ancient Astronauts" that took von Däniken's work and shredded it into tiny pieces even finding the people who made some of the "Artefacts" for him.
Or at least make it available on iPlayer. -
Message 2
Posted by raundsgirl (U2992430) on Monday, 27th June 2011
Really! I thought Eric von D was firmly discredited years ago!
If that Horizon programme was made in the 70s it's quite likely that the tape was re-used. Round about that time the Ö÷²¥´óÐã had a thing about using the videotapes again, and some wonderful programmes were lost that way.
It always puzzles me why people can't believe that ancient peoples could be capable of feats of architectural and intellectual brilliance. Why do we have to have 'little green men from outer space' getting involved (were they descendants of The Mekon?). Surely a species that could colonise the world didn't need aliens to help them.
Also, why do the pictures that are supposed to represent visiting aliens look like OUR idea of astronauts? If they came from another planet, surely they would look like THEIR idea of astronauts! -
Message 3
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Monday, 27th June 2011
raundsgirl
I think we personally have been here before.. The human being a such is now so diminished in our culture that it seems impossible that people ever got by- or get by- without or the machines, mechanisms and devices of the modern world.
I well remember Fifties and early Sixties programmes like Attenborough's "Zoo Quest" series in which the incredible creativity and inventiveness of "primitive people" living sustainably within communties that had "got by" without us for thousands of years and more was immediately apparent for those with eyes to see.
Cass -
Message 4
Posted by raundsgirl (U2992430) on Monday, 27th June 2011
I don't know whether human beings are diminished, Cass. I think it's only been since the 50s and 60s or thereabouts that we have started to appreciate that our remote ancestors were not a bunch of primitive savages ('Dark Ages', so-called, for instance). It was only when we stopped being overwhelmed by our own cleverness; before that we couldn't grasp that people could be as clever in their own time as we are in ours.
-
Message 5
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Monday, 27th June 2011
raundsgirl
I would like to think that you are right.. But I suspect all this backward looking at the genius of the past which often seems to reflect that the people saying "wow look at that" really have never thought of anything original for themselves.
I often think of the tragic comments of Yehudi Menuhin about playing with Stephan Grappeli. Menuhin was just incapable of improvisation and playing spontaneously. I think that there is too much of this in our educational culture.
Naomi Klein in "No Logo" described her generation of US students c 1990 as feeling that they were living at the end of History. Everything had been done, and all that was left for them was to just fit into an existing groove.
Cass -
Message 6
Posted by Jo Freddie (U14920073) on Tuesday, 28th June 2011
There is some appeal to the thought process von Däniken promotes... Why can't I fit into my old jeans? Because space aliens shrunk 'em! Why can't I find my car keys? Because they were abducted by space aliens! Who rented all those dirty movies on pay-per-view? Space aliens!
-
Message 7
Posted by raundsgirl (U2992430) on Tuesday, 28th June 2011
Don't be silly!
Everyone knows that it's a species of household gnomes that does all those things!
You don't suppose aliens are going to travel hundreds of thousands of miles to shrink your jeans, surely? -
Message 8
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Saturday, 2nd July 2011
I'm not sure how much the AA programmes lend credibility to Daniken and his ilk. Having watched all of the shows I think that the so-called experts do a very good job of discrediting themselves.
Despite the flawed thinking behind the AA arguments put forward I do think that the programme provides a useful insight on the nature of belief and mythology on the 21st century.
Also, if you can take the commentary with a pinch of salt the programmes have showcased some stunning archaeological sights that many would otherwise be unaware of.
Watching the programmes with a critical mind can also lead to some interesting discoveries. Last weeks programme focused on megalithic structures and 'evidence' that 'aliens did it'. In order to lend credibility to the idea of such structures being built using alien anti-gravity technology (
) the AA theorists pointed to the 20th century construction of Coral Castle:
I hadn't heard about this structure and the story behind the site was completely new to me. However I certainly wasn't going to blindly accept that the multi-ton stones could only have been positioned single-handedly through the use of some lost exotic technology.
It didn't take long to find a more mundane explanation in the form of the stone moving experiments of W.T. Wallington and his Forgotten Technology website:
His theories and experiments are incredibly interesting an could offer some groundbreaking insights on the way that ancient monuments were built and lead us to rethink the amount of labour required for their construction. -
Message 9
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Saturday, 2nd July 2011
Scaramunga
I often recall reading Thor Heyerdahl's book about the mystery of Easter Island in the early Sixties. Almost at the end of his stay, in despair he told one of the locals that he was at a loss to work out how the ancestors had carved and put up the great heads. So his host offered to show him. I forget the figures but the manpower involved was much smaller than all the experts had speculated. They finished carving out a head half-carved in a quarry, showing just how easily worked the stone was. And a team of no more than 30 strapped it onto a tree-trunk shaped like a Y, dragged it to a site, and put it up.
I believe that we have forgotten just how potent a force is a group of people who really know how to combine their energies effectively.
Cass -
Message 10
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Sunday, 3rd July 2011
That's really interesting. Do you know where I can read more about this?
I think that part of the problem is the myth of linear progression in human development. In my view we should look at technological evolution in the same way as biological evolution - i.e. technologies come and go and take different directions depending on environmental and cultural pressures.
Instead there is a tendency to think that we are at the pinnacle of technological evolution and it's hard to comprehend the notion that our ancestors were simply better than us when it comes to certain tasks. In fact it's so hard to take on board that some people think that it makes more sense to believe that 'aliens did it', or some long lost advanced civilisation. -
Message 11
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Sunday, 3rd July 2011
Scaramunga
If the question was addressed to me, I am sure that copies of Thor Heyerdahl's book about his time on Easter Island are still around.. Wiki usually has a biography with a booklist.
I have always been surprised by subsequent programmes I have seen about EI that have made no reference to this episode.. Perhaps there has been some conspiracy- though I am not one for conspiracy theories- for Thor Heyerdahl work might be classed in the Levi Straus tradition of treating so-called "primitive" societies as different but equal- and perhaps in some way superior because their technology did not dictate their lifestyles- and they were often content with the possibility of a life made up of all the good pieces of that of their ancestors.
It probably suits vested interests to preserve "the mystery of Easter Island"- perhaps not dissimilar from the Loch Ness Monster, good for tourism and for those seeking funding for research.
With reference to money, I think that TH often went into places more or less alone and with little money.. And perhaps such a throw back to the adventurer and self-publicist, along with lack of photographic or corroborative testimony has led to his account being discounted... And if the islanders destroyed the evidence and denied the story ...
But as a lover of rugby his account of the amount of horsepower that could be generated by a few dozen Pacific Islanders working as a "pack" is perfectly credible to me.
Cass -
Message 12
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Monday, 4th July 2011
It has been said ebfore that people have a God-shaped hole in their brains. I think the alien-shaped hole is also there.
I recently saw a programm eabout engineers trying to re-create the Antikythera (sp?) Device. The "alien" aspect was mentioned but as one of the engineers pointed out, the simplest explanation is the best one to use and introducing aliens is actually more complex than believing humans could manfucature such complicated machines. -
Message 13
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Monday, 4th July 2011
Tony G
I think that it is so easy for people who have never improvised and "thought laterally" to think it such an incredible thing to do..
I did see a fragment of the "apeman" programmed in which some "boffin" was expounding on the genius behind the throwing stick..
It seems to me that back in the days when children (perhaps especially boys) played with sticks, stones etc, most of them worked out the fact that you can hit and throw with greater force by making the arm longer-in effect... Is this not what David knew against Goliath? The sling-shot is in part a simple arm extension.
As with the spinning of projectiles it only takes a chance happening when something spectacular happens for people to try to work out what was the key factor and to try to replicate it. Even chimpanzees can work out that extensions of arms/fingers can be useful, as shown in an ant-hunting technique.
These days we have such an "off the peg" culture that it is only in exceptional times that people discover how to "make do and mend".
Cass -
Message 14
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Monday, 4th July 2011
I suspect the book referred to is "Aku Aku". As noted, it was written by Thor Heyerdahl.
BTW - did you hear about the chimps using water to float a titbit up a tube till they could reach it? They were doing it mouthful by mouthful, then one realised that urinating into the tube got the reward much faster, and with less work. -
Message 15
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Monday, 4th July 2011
Ur Lugal
(a) I fear that it was a book I chanced to read in 1962-3 for simple reading practice (for someone else) and had no cause to remember the title.
(b) What an advanced chimp! Considering that contrary to Victorian concepts of "cleanliness is next to Godliness". We are now supposed to believe that fresh urine is harmless, a fact realised by the herding peoples of East Africa who used to wash the milk pails in fresh urine when they had finished, or the Inuit ladies who washed their hair in urine- water in its liquid form being a precious commodity in the winter. Apparently, however, over the years urine had a slight bleaching effect, so that old women almost snow-blind were almost blue-eyed and blonde-haired.
Was it Claire Bloom who believed in the medicinal properties of drinking her urine?
Cass -
Message 16
Posted by Daniel-K (U2684833) on Monday, 4th July 2011
Was it Claire Bloom who believed in the medicinal properties of drinking her urine?
Ìý
Sarah Miles is the actress most associated with that habit. -
Message 17
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Monday, 4th July 2011
Daniel K
It was probably Sarah Miles I had in mind...
Cass -
Message 18
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Monday, 4th July 2011
Didn't former Indian
prime minister Morarji Desai do that, too? -
Message 19
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Monday, 4th July 2011
Pass
Cass -
Message 20
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Wednesday, 6th July 2011
Thanks for the info Cass. I've only seen documentaries about Heyerdahl, which I find particularly fascinating, so I should probably take the time to read some of his books.
I'm not sure that 'conspiracy' is the right term, but there does seem to be a certain amount of snobbery towards 'alternative archaeology'. Considering some of the wilder theories out there I can understand this to some degree, but it also appears that some credible authors are dismissed merely because they don't have an academic archaeological background.
I think that this is slowly changing, but it's going to be an uphill struggle when you have the work of credible alternative researchers sharing shelf space with the likes of Daniken. -
Message 21
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Wednesday, 6th July 2011
Scaramunga
Pondering over what I had written about Heyerdahl and Easter Island, what he did of course would not have proved that the islanders in ancient times actually did it that way..
I recall hearing someone recalling their days in the British Empire (Rhodesia I think) when they were told to go somewhere and "build a bridge", without any knowledge of Civil Engineering- saying that all he did was to call the Foreman of his African labour force and tell him to build a bridge.. This he would then do using his knowledge of the locality and the resources that are at hand. ..
In fact one of my quarrels with "pre-history" has been the tendency to look at the lives being lived by "primitive peoples" and just postulate back to artefacts from earlier times that people must have used them in much the same way.. Arthur Youngs "Rural Rides" through the English countryside in the late eighteenth century revealed that each small region/valley etc had its own traditions and in many cases its own particular versions of basic tools.
But having had the chance to see Heyerdahl being intervewed on TV a number of times, perhaps he was also disadvantaged in being by academic training an Anthroplogist and not an Archaeologist. Much of his work was aimed at linking the Present to the Past.
In c1964 I read a book which I suspected might have been by him. It was called "In Quest of the White God" and the pseudonym of the author was Pierre Honore. Its thesis was contact between the Ancient Mediterranean and the Ancient Civilizations of Ancient Latin America. The end of the book dealt with some stones that a rubber collector had found in a creek up the Amazon during Brazil's brief rubber boom. This had led eventually to this collector making drawing of the markings on those old stones. Finding his records in some Library Honore had been fascinated, for- though written down in the Nineteenth Century- they seemed to be written in Minoan Linear B, which had not yet been discovered.
Honore went up the Amazon and paddled his canoe to the creek. And there saw the stones very obviously written in Minoan linear B.
Subsequently Heyerdahl was involved in the Rah I and Rah II expeditions that showed that a papyrus boat was capable of crosssing the Atlantic.
Cass -
Message 22
Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Wednesday, 6th July 2011
I'm not sure that 'conspiracy' is the right term, but there does seem to be a certain amount of snobbery towards 'alternative archaeology'. Considering some of the wilder theories out there I can understand this to some degree, but it also appears that some credible authors are dismissed merely because they don't have an academic archaeological background.Ìý
Should this really be surprising? In what other walks of life do people with professional training and many years experience throw all their beliefs out the window on the say so of someone outside the field?
Most archaeologists base their views of a lot of evidence and the general consensus built up over a prolonged period of time. Of course that can be wrong and people from outside the field can be right, but to abandon the established view for what is often very limited and flimsy evidence isn't rational. -
Message 23
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Wednesday, 6th July 2011
cloudyj
While accepting that, surely there is some value in the Hegelian Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis model..
I thought that almost the whole value of "dreaming spires" was that the people within them actually welcome and embrace challenge- even if it does mean playing "devil's advocate".
Professor T.S. Ashton in the preface to his Economic History of Eighteenth Century England mentioned boasting to his Oxford College common room that he had avoided all use of "isms" words. The result was a gentle put down. "Not even baptism".
Cass -
Message 24
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Wednesday, 6th July 2011
Of course that can be wrong and people from outside the field can be right.....Ìý
Which is why I find it disconcerting that academics will often dismiss alternative theories out of hand.
.......but to abandon the established view for what is often very limited and flimsy evidence isn't rational.Ìý
I agree, but then again I wasn't suggesting any such thing. I merely feel that some 'alternative' archaeologist may have some valuable insights, and I fail to see how it follows that I'm advocating a re-writing of history. -
Message 25
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Wednesday, 6th July 2011
Could you give examples when an alternative theory has been dismissed out of hand.
-
Message 26
Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Thursday, 7th July 2011
Could you give examples when an alternative theory has been dismissed out of hand.
Ìý
The established view of the dates for the original settlement of the Americas initially rejected the evidence being found at Monte Verde in Chile. Doubts were cast on the quality of the excavation and stratification of the site.
Having said that, it meant that the quality of evidence finally produced was irrefutable when it came to dating the site. -
Message 27
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Thursday, 7th July 2011
To be honest there aren't any specific examples that spring to mind.
It's just the impression I get from various programmes and articles I've seen over the years. The message that comes across is that if you don't have an academic background, then your ideas aren't even worth considering and I get the impression that some critics haven't even read the work that they dismiss.
Given the nature of TV media and journalism I'll readily acknowledge that the 'soundbite' criticisms I've heard could be misleadingly over simplistic and dismissive.
Having said that I have read some very good articles explaining some of the flawed thinking behind the theories of Bauval and Handcock. The positive thing that comes out of this is that some alternative historians/archaeologist take on board this criticism and endeavour to be more rigerous in their research.
The flip side is that others realise that they are never going to be taken seriously and see this as a licesnse to write what they want and come up with increasingly ludicrous theories that will shift product. -
Message 28
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Thursday, 7th July 2011
Well I'm not sure it was dismissed out of hand as it was subjected to the kind of intense scrutiny that accompanied other claims of very early human habitation in the Americas. This at least shows a willingness on the part of the skeptics to engage with the evidence. I think the issue here was not so much about the nature of contentious conclusions about history and archaeology but more about the relationship between established academics and those who champion what is sometimes referred to as alternative archaeology and so it seems a touch unfair to link Tom Dillehay and Mario Pino with the pyramidiots. Their excavation was organised by the Universidad Austral de Chile where both held academic positions so it is not as if they were not already part of the establishment.
Perhaps a better example would be the nineteenth century debate over the presence of stone age people in the Americas that was loudly championed by Charles Abbot after reports of what were supposed to be stone tools in association with long extinct mammals. His views were opposed by William Henry Holmes, head of the Bureau of American Ethnology, as much because of Abbott's status as a mere hobbyist. -
Message 29
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Thursday, 7th July 2011
Your last comment really has hit the nail on the head, the consumers of such material are by and large not really interested in evidence but are often attracted to a narrative of the outsider taking on the establishment and promising to reveal what people have either failed to notice o actively attempted to hide. Such a narrative is often particularly seductive when that establishment are supposedly closed and elitist as academia is often perceived to be. Never mind the attempts of many academics to reach out to the public, such marketing makes publishers and broadcasters far more money. Indeed one can argue that this method of marketing has been around as long as there has been printed text given the popularity of Galileo's debate into the two world systems which managed to highlight two theories about the position of the earth in the cosmos that had both been discredited by the time his work became popular in the Netherlands.
I am pretty sure that for the most part established historians and archaeologists are more than willing to debate the claims of theories from the alternative camp. I presume you have seen the Hall of Ma'at who tend to be very good at questioning alternative archaeology, or are able apologists for the establishment if you are more sympathetic to the claims of alternative archaeologists.
What this thread has not really addressed amongst all this talk of ancient aliens is an examination of why it is so many of these alternative theories seem to fall back on diffusional models for the dissemination of technology yet rarely ask where these Prometheus like groups actually stole the fire from in the first place. Obviously there are numerous social reasons behind the rise of specific theories such as to to justify or mitigate the current status quo. One might argue that many of these theories actually follow a similar pattern to the belief in a divine first principle, providing a ready explanation for types of phenomena that fits into an encompassing view of the world. That is certainly what Karl Popper suggested motivated a continued use of all encompassing conspiracies and I feel that they have much in common with the appeal of the alternative archaeology movement. Their removal of the divine as the cause of knowledge does give the superficial impression that they are thus rational theories however and seemingly provide them with a validity that they are on a par with those provided by the mainstream. -
Message 30
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Thursday, 7th July 2011
lol,
thank you for your erudite comments. Erudite as ever.
Kind regards and with esteem,
Paul. -
Message 31
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Friday, 8th July 2011
I couldn't agree more Paul....excellent post!
There are certainly some academics who do appear to take the time to look at the credibility of 'alternative' theories. I am however concerned that such academics may suffer from a certain amount of fatigue (there's just so much nonsense being published) and it's possible that some small nuggets of new knowledge may go unnoticed.
Thanks for the Hall of Maat link. I haven't come across the site before and I'll definitely have to investigate. I'm particularly interested in reading what is said about Bauval's 'Black Genesis' - I haven't read the book, but I was considering it as (on face value) it appears to ring true with my own thoughts on the origins of ancient Egyptian civilisation.
One might argue that many of these theories actually follow a similar pattern to the belief in a divine first principleÌý
I think you're right. However if you recognise this and set aside the the 'narrative' of their claims I think that these authors occasionally uncover valuable evidence that warrants further investigation.
Consider, for instance, Hancock's 'Underworld'. If you ignore his view that he has uncovered evidence of a single advanced seafaring culture that seeded the world with civilisation (seems like he's trying to fill a God-shaped hole), his findings do appear to indicate that civilisation may date back a lot further than is currently accepted. I also agree with his view that the search for more offshore archaeological sites could be extremely rewarding. -
Message 32
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Monday, 11th July 2011
I’m not sure that alternative archaeologists actually offer much in the way of new insights or aid in the dispersal knowledge. If you read through the articles on the Hall of Ma’at site it quickly becomes apparent that refutation is actually easier than one would first suppose. Few have any original ideas and as they tend to borrow copiously from one another so it becomes more a matter of changing a few names and the same template can be used time and again. Alternative archaeologists rarely do anything in the way of original research, tending to merely place the sites they focus on within their particular framework. They also tend to be blind to all but the most spectacular of monuments, it seems to be a contractual obligation that they must focus on the Giza complex, ignoring the more humdrum aspects of life such as domestic dwellings and manufacturing sites. While this may be attractive to the lay reader who probably does not want to bother with a detailed examination of functional site analysis, it does mean that alternative archaeology fails to place the monuments in their proper local contexts. Despite the fact that some alternative archaeologists might introduce people to sites they were previously unaware of, I would suggest that actually they are detrimental to the overall dispersal of knowledge as they create false associations between monuments from different temporal and geographic settings. More often than not their methods of dating are just plain wrong for that matter.
In any case, I cannot help feeling that Bauval is a little behind the curve in his work about Pre dynastic Nile civilisation’s links to the lush Sahara. While the whole Black Africa debate probably plays more toward the Afrocentric market, itself reliant on arguments that have been discredited in much of mainstream archaeology throughout most of the mid to late twentieth century, the attempt to use the site to demonstrate continuity between the supposed high civilisation of the ice age astronomers dating back to more than twelve thousand years ago and the construction of the pyramids seems more than a little spurious. Pages from Black Genesis are available on Google books and as such the sections I have read seem to follow the standard pattern of alternative archaeology by taking evidence out of the context it was initially presented; making speculative suggestions that the reader is then asked to consider as true in order to support further speculation and is very much self referential, quoting freely from the author’s previous works.
As the Hall of Ma’at site demonstrates, Hancock is in fact one of the worst offenders regarding this style of presentation even if he has attempted to make his more recent works seem like they have a scholarly veneer. While it may be tempting to view his ideas as evidence for the fact that complex societies have a much more ancient history than the currently established framework suggests he still does not explain just how their inhabitants performed such basic necessities as feeding themselves. Then there is the suggestion that all the evidence for this super civilisation was submerged. Examination of the development of complex societies would appear to show that complexity is related to the interaction of communities in different ecological niches of which the distinction between highland and lowland environments is one of the most apparent. Humans are notoriously messy but while lowland coastal sites continue to be the preferred environment for the largest urban centres it is still highly improbable that all trace of such complex societies would be limited to the coastal zone and thus disappear entirely with the rise in sea levels.
Mind you, thinking back the use of Royksopp to advertise the television series that accompanied the book meant Channel four’s advert breaks became more pleasurable and were at least partly responsible for my finding this site. I prefer the track used in ITV’s coverage of the 2002 World Cup however. -
Message 33
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Friday, 15th July 2011
Another excellent and insightful post.
Whilst I acknowledge the problems with many of the authors associated the Afrocentric movement, I do however think that a handful of them did engage in valuable research on precolonial African civilisation.
I think that Cheikh Anta Diop in particular was a much misunderstood scholar who contributed a great deal of valuable insights on Egyptian civilisation.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Ìýto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Ö÷²¥´óÐã iD
Ö÷²¥´óÐã navigation
Ö÷²¥´óÐã links
Ö÷²¥´óÐã © 2014 The Ö÷²¥´óÐã is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.