A Theory About Pyramids that Could Change the Way We Write the History of the New World and the Old





Mr. Schoch, a full-time faculty member at the College of General Studies at Boston University since 1984, earned his Ph.D. in geology and geophysics at Yale University. Mr. McNally is a writer and poet whose early education in classical Latin blossomed into a lifelong fascination with ancient civilization and mythology. They are the authors of Voyages of the Pyramid Builders (Tarcher/Putnam, 2003).

Book of the Month Club offers  the very best in fiction and non-fiction.

When most of the academics trained in the study of the ancient world look at pyramids on different continents, they see proof of humankind's division into distinct, separate civilizations. We see something quite the opposite: compelling evidence of the underlying unity of civilization.

At its most extreme, the orthodox viewpoint goes something like this. Civilization dates to no earlier than the middle fourth millennium B.C. It began in Mesopotamia, then spread to Egypt, and subsequently throughout the Old World. Other civilizations arose on their own - and much later - in the Americas, where they remained disconnected from Asia and Africa until Columbus piloted his three small ships across the Atlantic. The Old World and the New World each invented civilization independently.

I (Schoch) first came to understand there was something wrong with this view while investigating the origins of the Great Sphinx of Giza. As a geologist, I knew that the weathering patterns of the Giza plateau indicated that the Sphinx was carved in stages. In addition, the oldest portions went back much farther than the conventional 2500 B.C. date given the sculpture; the earliest part most likely predates 5000 B.C.

That finding raised a significant question. Even a first-draft Sphinx could only have been built by a sophisticated people, one that had achieved civilization well before the 3500 B.C. date when civilization supposedly arose. Who were these unknown people? And what happened to them?

The firestorm of academic controversy ignited by my research on the Sphinx led to our earlier book, Voices of the Rocks (Harmony, 1999). We argued that civilization arose earlier than generally believed, but much of the early history of humankind has been lost to natural catastrophes.

Yet we knew this was only the first word on the subject. We wanted to go deeper into the question of civilization's origins. The pyramids offer a path to the deep past.

As much as they symbolize the mystery and magic of ancient Egypt, pyramids are not uniquely Egyptian. Pyramids of various sorts also appear in the ancient African kingdom of Kush, along the Nile between the third and fourth cataracts; as ziggurats in ancient Mesopotamia and Sumeria (the likely source of the biblical account of the Tower of Babel); in England and Ireland, taking such forms as Silbury Hill and Newgrange; in India and throughout Southeast Asia, in the distinct style of the Buddhist stupa; at Angkor Wat in medieval Cambodia; at Indonesia's Borobudur; in ancient China; at Teotihuacán, Tenayuca, Tenochtitlán, and other sites in the Valley of Mexico; in the ancient Olmec and Mayan realms of southern Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, Belize, and El Salvador; along the Mississippi, at Cahokia and other ceremonial centers; and in Peru's coastal region, among the people who were the ancestors of the Inca empire, and in that country's northern Andes, the Inca heartland.

How can it be that a form as distinctive and powerful as the pyramid was built in such widely separated locales? Most scholars would answer that the world's many pyramids are the product of coincidence and convergence - peoples of different cultures imitating forms in nature, such as the mountains of Mexico or the sand dunes of Egypt. But is this the final word on the subject? Is it an oversimplification? Could it be that pyramids around the globe share a common cultural heritage?

These questions are the focus of our most recent book, Voyages of the Pyramid Builders: The True Origins of the Pyramids from Lost Egypt to Ancient America (Tarcher/Putnam, 2003). In it we trace the many pyramid-building cultures back to what may be their ultimate source: Sundaland, a continent-sized stretch of land in Southeast Asia (located under the current southern reach of the South China Sea) that was inundated by rising sea levels after the end of the last ice age, a catastrophic event that may have been connected to cometary activity in the skies observed by the inhabitants of Sundaland.

As we argue in our book, pyramids are symbolically connected with comets, and the Sundalanders may well have originated the ancient pyramid tradition, then carried it with them as they fled the rising waters. Those who went northwest contributed to the cultural mélange that gave rise first to the pyramid cultures of Sumeria, Egypt, and Mesopotamia and later to those in India, Southeast Asia, and China. Sundalanders heading east may have gotten as far as Peru, where pyramids rose at Aspero at the end of the fourth millennium B.C. The American pyramid tradition died out until it was reinvigorated, from the twelfth century B.C. on, by Pacific Rim mariners, primarily Chinese. This contact contributed to the pyramid building of the Olmecs, which spread across Mesoamerica and later into the Andes.

Such ideas remain unpopular, in part because they smack of extreme "diffusionism" (a dirty word to many scholars) and undercut the Old World-New World division on which much of the academic orthodoxy is based. As Lisa Wynn points out in her doctoral dissertation on "Egyptology" (Princeton University, 2003), many researchers in this discipline instinctively reject alternative theories because they feel such thinking belittles indigenous Egyptians by suggesting that not all of their accomplishments were totally independent and original. Likewise, uncovering Old World precedents and influences for New World pyramids is said to constitute an insult to the Olmecs and the Mayans. Nonsense. The builders of Chartres' Gothic cathedral are no less geniuses because earlier architects had erected great cathedrals. The same holds true of the pyramids.

Joseph Campbell, that ever-astute student of mythology, argued that under the world's many, apparently different mythologies lay an ancient core of common archetypal story, one joining us all. Pyramids carry the same message: All humankind shares a common history, one in which civilization began in a single place and spread across the globe.

 



comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


stephen hanlay - 7/1/2005

atlantis is a real place that exists at the moment.
around 12,500 years ago the pincess alexandria attempted a coup against the empress.
atlantis was a place of advanced technology, beyond what we even have today.
the coup turned out badly and the misuse of atlantis's advanced weapons shifted the whole continent slightly out of dimensional phase, there it has been stuck till now.
travel is possible to and from atlantis (advanced phase shifting tech) and atlanteans regularly travel back and forth.
why isnt this common knowledge? think about it. the world would be turned upside down. everyone knew it was a real place up until recent times, when it has just become a myth, i dont think people could just comprehend it now.
that is the truth,
from the mouth of a repentent exile,
sincerely.


eva geza - 2/3/2005

i'm surprised the list including pyramids around the world only mentions "pyramids throughout southeast asia". why not mention australian pyramids? especially the golden pyramid of gympie, queensland, australia? what about the pyramids in japan, in samoa?


Doug Yurchey - 1/20/2004

I was really trying to make contact with Howard Oliker. He had written to me more than a year ago concerning my Atlantis-Tesla theory. I had a computer crash & lost his e-mail address. If you could have him e-mail me (I have a new e-address)that would be great - that is, if that is possible.
MUCH THANKS. Doug


ataelkareim - 10/8/2003

i want to know the place of pyramid acording to astronomy. and the last discovery. and the dimension of pyraminds


gerry - 9/24/2003

sorry to go off topic but would you have a contact number for .

R. Cedric Leonard
Thanks.

Gerry in Spain


more than the eyes can see - 9/4/2003

My theory is I believe the pyramids are alot larger than told. I believe that the part of the pyramids that you see is just the tops of a bigger picture they are probably 10x bigger than what you see, these things have been here a long long time, wind and sand have been blown around and buried most of the stuff of old and if you can believe in e.t.'s then try giants/nephilim roaming the earth Genesis 6:4(referenced them as basically evil who followed their leader satan here to try to corrupt and destroy the original pure genes from Adam). Try these unclean beings building places to worship their idles and pagan gods, my theory is no more strange than an atheist who believes he came to exist from nothing. God on the other hand doesn't need to explain himself, he just is and no one on this earth can dismiss him because he exist even if you don't want him to he is the beginning and will be the end and there is more to these ancient places than you think.....


Greg Conquest - 8/11/2003

Using Joseph Cambell to buttress claims of diffusionism? You've shot yourself in the foot (or shot your comet into the ocean, take your pick). The things cultures around the world have in common are NOT due to cultural diffusion -- there is no common geographical or cultural origin of our many similarities. Instead, Joseph Campbell's genius allows us to understand how disparate cultures (and even individuals) do create similar myths and ceremonies because of our species behavior. There is a structure and style to our species instinctive behavior. This common or collective aspect is expressed with visible yet hidden common undercurrents through the symbolic filters that cover our base behavior. So, two separate cultures can develop similar gods and stories, and novelists and psychics can dream the same otherworldly visions -- all independent of each other.

And a comet affecting the world's sea levels? Go back and check your geology -- or maybe you're reading Velikowsky? There has been no evidence of this kind of interaction in the much broadr field of geology.

Greg Conquest


R. Cedric Leonard - 3/29/2003

I was glad to see the comment on my monograph entitled "A Geological Study of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge" written more than 20 years ago. I have a website which includes my latest researches on the subject of Atlantis which deals only with sober, scientific data. The URL is http://www.atlantisquest.com if you are allowed to include this on your website. I am very proud of the work that has been put into this effort. My book "Quest for Atlantis" is unfortunately out of print.


John Connery - 3/20/2003

Dear Dr. Schoch: I enjoyed your more recent book regarding the pyramids. I should tell you as a BU grad (1969), I went on to be an urban design and development consultant, but have never lost my love for history and in particular my "strange" compulsion to know as much as posible about the early development of the human race. As a student in an anthropology class I was humiliated when as a 19 year old I sugested that the rise of civilization theory and the populating of the Americas did not make sense; and blathered on to reveal my unsubstantiated coastal migration theory. I went "underground" from that point, but never stopped believing what the professor was "preaching" in 1966 was dead wrong. All my adult life, I have tried to read everything on ancient civilization and the rise of human kind, given my non-professional training in said area.

As a casual but interested observer over the past 35 years, I think I have been vindicated, as first "Clovis" and so much else has fallen from the status of dogma. As a person who chose a differnt path in life , but never stopped wondering what if, I want to write and tell you keep pushing the envelope. You may need to rework parts of you theory but unless you and others keep probing and asking what seem to be obvious questions and linking natural forces with cultural reponses, we will never get to know the truth. We are just beginning to glimpse the true outline of human development. Keep it up. I have always been proud of Boston University, regardless of that day in class long ago when I learned the sting of public humiliation. After reading your books, you have made this alum even prouder.


gary - 2/14/2003

Do you think that people are scared to know what is the real meaning behind the pyramids.


The E Factor - 2/10/2003

My apologies for the double post and the poor grammar - it wont happed again


The E Factor - 2/10/2003

The exsistance of the pyramids indeed reign as the greatest enigma of modern man. The question is who built them, when, and for what purpose ? The facts are many , yet conclusions remain elusive. My opinion is as follows.

In millenia past - say 5000- 10,500 BCE there exsisted on Earth an advenced ciziliztion of man. A civilization highly advanced in astronomy, mathematics, agriculture, and other high skills. These people were keenly aware of the astronomy of their day and knew that a catastrophe was impending on their very survival. Cometary impact destroyed this civilization, but not before they where able to create the edifices that prove their exsistance to us now, yet continue to be shrouded in mystery.

In a global catastrophe, the magnitude of which has not been even remotely witnessed since, the advancement of these peoples was brought to an end. Survivors there where, but few in number and lost in a world of climactic upheaval. As time passed, these survivors repopulated , first along coastal waterways, then further , across the expanses of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans.

The Pyramids of old still stood. Shaken yes, but intact, and served as a reminder to the surviving hoardes that greatness had bbeen achieved in time past, and the future of mankind, at least in the primative sacle was preserved. THe enigma of the pyramids spread throughout the world, where on each continent they where revered , and though of as places of worship and or burial / sacrifice. The tomb theory of Zahi Hawass and the Egyptian governemnet is true to the extent that the purpose of the pramids to these later survivor races was indeed as stated.

The current theory on the data regarding the dating of the sphinx helps to illustrae this point. Being not omnly built in laborious stages, but also showing signs of water, not wind, erosion do much for the case of erection from antiquity. To me it seems rather obvious that the buliders of the oldest pyramids where well in advacne of the current theory as far as civilization is concerned. THe argument for ancient civilizations will not be settled any time soon I fear.

I look forward to any comments

Regards

EJF


The E Factor - 2/10/2003

The exsistance of the pyramids indeed reign as the greatest enigma of modern man. The question is who built them, when, and for what purpose ? The facts are many , yet conclusions remain elusive. My opinion is as follows.

In millenia past - say 5000- 10,500 BCE there exsisted on Earth an advenced ciziliztion of man. A civilization highly advanced in astronomy, mathematics, agriculture, and other high skills. These people were keenly aware of the astronomy of their day and knew that a catastrophe was impending on their very survival. Cometary impact destroyed this civilization, but not before they where able to create the edifices that prove their exsistance to us now, yet continue to be shrouded in mystery.

In a global catastrophe, the magnitude of which has not been even remotely witnessed since, the advancement of these peoples was brought to an end. Survivors there where, but few in number and lost in a world of climactic upheaval. As time passed, these survivors repopulated , first along coastal waterways, then further , across the expanses of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans.

The Pyramids of old still stood. Shaken yes, but intact, and served as a reminder to the surviving hoardes that greatness had bbeen achieved in time past, and the future of mankind, at least in the primative sacle was preserved. THe enigma of the pyramids spread throughout the world, where on each continent they where revered , and though of as places of worship and or burial / sacrifice. The tomb theory of Zahi Hawass and the Egyptian governemnet is true to the extent that the purpose of the pramids to these later survivor races was indeed as stated.

The current theory on the data regarding the dating of the sphinx helps to illustrae this point. Being not omnly built in laborious stages, but also showing signs of water, not wind, erosion do much for the case of erection from antiquity. To me it seems rather obvious that the buliders of the oldest pyramids where well in advacne of the current theory as far as civilization is concerned. THe argument for ancient civilizations will not be settled any time soon I fear.

I look forward to any comments

Regards

EJF


Serious Barg - 2/10/2003

Atlantis was divided in 10 kingdoms. The most prominent ancient city therefore is tihuanaco. Another kingdom may lie under the water of lake titicaca at bolivia. Ruins have been found there and the cocal myths speak of a lost civilisation. The evidence of the existence of Atlantis is becoming more and more overwhelming. Exiting times are coming!


J.Iuliano - 2/10/2003


A MATHEMATICAL HAIKU

Sources for Cheops pyramid constructs:

Flinders-Petrie (1883)....section 144
http://members.optushome.com.au./fmetrol/petrie/C21.html
height... = 5776 English inches
base leg = 9073 English inches

Churchward/Ramsey (1910)....
http://www.charm.net/~ces/trade/tback.html
height ....= 486.256 English feet
base leg = 763.81 English feet

Howard Vyse (1830's).....
from the book, The Geometry of Art and Life, by Matila Ghyka,p.22
height.....= 148.2 meters
base leg = 232.8 meters

Sources for four fundamental forces of Nature:

Quantum Theory: A Modern Introduction ,by Michio Kaku, p.6
a(em) = 1/137.03599976 = fine-structure constant
1998 NIST...
http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?alphasearch_for=all!
Kinoshita's number....1/137.035999935
http://www.tc.cornell.edu/er/media/1996/kinoshita.release.html
a(s) = stong nuclear force = 14
G(w) = .0000116639 Fm = fermi-coupling charge = weak nuclear force
1998 NIST...
http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?gfsearch_for=all!
G(n) = 6.6739*(10^-11) mks =gravitational constant
University of Washington, 2000 study:
http://www.aip.org/enews/physnews/2000/split/pnu482-1.html

Sources for Beta, (37) :
37 Egyptian dieties...
http://www.themystica.com/mystica/articles/h/hex.html
.37 Beta,anamolous exponent for second order phase transitions
http://webphysics.iupui.edu/251Sp97GFApr28.html

Source for Fermat Last Theorem harmonic mean constant...(1/37+1/57)
Rubidium(37) Lanthanum(57) connection:
http://www.dgleahy.com/dgl/p23.html

.................BASE 10 AND CHEOPS CONSTRUCTS..................

Flinders-Petrie:..........ht = 5776..............bl = 9072.29727
Churchward/Ramsey: ht = 486.2560047...bl = 763.81
H. Vyse :..................ht = 148.2..............bl = 232.7922759

((10^ (2*ht/bl))^-1)..........*...........(.37^2)....=...a(em) = 1/137.03599976..
((10^ (1*ht/bl))^-1)../.(1/37+1/57)/.(.37)........=...a(s) ...= 13.99999696
[[(10^ (7*ht/bl))*c]^-1]..........*............(10^8) =.. G(w)...= .000011663956
[(10^((2*ht/bl)-34))*3/(bl^2)/ht]^(1/4)............=...G(n)....= 6.67392*(10^-11)
(bl^2)*ht/3 = volumne of pyramid

...................RADIAN AND CHEOPS CONSTRUCTS..................

Flinders-Petrie: .........ht = 5776.................bl = 9072.918506
Churchward/Ramsey..ht = 486.2566061.....bl = 763.81
H. Vyse....................ht = 148.2................bl = 232.791998

[(180*ht/2/bl)^(ht/bl)*.....37/ 5700.................= sqrt a(em) =.08542454308
[(180*ht/2/bl)^(ht/bl)/...(.37+ .57).................= a(s)...........=.13.99999696
[(180*ht/2/bl)^(ht/bl)*((1/37+1/57)^3)../37/2.7 = G(w).........=.00001166391
[(180*ht/2/bl)^(ht/bl)*((1/37+1/57)^9)/(.37^2) = G(n)...........= 6.67288*(10^-11)

........FERMAT LAST THEOREM AND CHEOPS CONSTRUCTS.........

Flinders-Petrie..........ht = 5776..................bl = 9072.2972
Churchward/Ramsey.ht = 486.2560047......bl = 763.81
H.Vyse....................ht = 148.2.................bl = 232.7922759
z = 7.999999806......y=8.000081207

[(sqrt(e^(Pi+z)))*(1/37+1/57)]^2................... =1/a(em) = 137.03599976
(sqrt(e^(Pi+z)))*..............(10^(2*ht/bl)..........=a(s)......=13.99999696
sqrt[[log[(sqrt(e^(Pi+z)))*(1/37+1/57)]]*2*ht/bl]/(10^5) =G(w) ....= .0000116634
h*c*[[(e^(Pi+y))* 37*18]^2]*(1/4)*ht/bl............=G(n)...= 6.6739*(10^-11)
h =Plank's constant = 6.626067801*(10^-34) Joules
c = metric speed of light = 299792458 mps

.........."COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS" AND CHEOPS CONSTRUCTS.......

Flinders-Petrie..........ht = 5776.................bl = 9072.29727
Churchward/Ramsey.ht = 486.2560047.....bl = 763.81
H.Vyse....................ht = 148.2................bl = 232.7922759

[288^(ht/bl)]/100 = cos 1/a(em) = cos 137.03599976
ht = 486.25611...bl = 763.81

x = 143.999987919

(10^(x/...37)) / 37/18..................= sqrt (1/a(em) =11.70623764
[sqrt(e^(Pi+z))]/(10^(x*2/37))*(1800^2)................= a(s)......= 13.99999696
[sqrt[[log[((10^(x/...37))/..37/18]]*2*ht/bl]]/(10^5)= G(w) = .0000116640294
h*c*[[[(10^(x*2/37))/(1800^2)*a(s)]^2]*37*18]^2]/2/Pi=G(n)=6.6739*(10^-11)
x = 144.0003127 in gravity formula

"collective unconscious" constant = 10^(144/37) = 7796.36013

SEPHIRA MALKUTH: "288 sparks from broken vessels"
10^(288/2/37) = 7796.36013
http://www.inner.org/HEBLETER/tzadik.htm
http://www.thirtysevenbooks.com/Arizal/Pinchas5761.htm
http://www.levity.com/alchemy/luria.html
http://www.koshertorah.com/thk7.html
180/2 = total consciousness
32 =total paths of wisdom

288^2 = 82944
10^(82944/32/37/18) = 7796.36013
DG Leahy
http://dgleahy.com/dgl/p22.html
Carl Munck
http://www.greatdreams.com/gem1.html

PLATONIC CYCLE: 25920 years
10^(25920/37/180) = 7796.36013
http://www.earthmatrix.com/platonic/nineveh.htm
http://www.expresso.co.cr/centaurs/steiner/epochs.html
http://wn.elib/steiner/Lectures/CosHuMet_synopsis.html
http://www.ascension2000.com/fm-ch06.htm

HINDU..KALI-YUGA: 108 time unit
(sqrt(37/108))*2*37*180 = 7796.383777
(sqrt(37/108))*2*37/10 = 10^(ht/bl).....ht = 486.25726, bl = 763.81
http://www.hubcom.com/tantriic/subha.htm
http://philtar.ucsm.ac.uk/encyclopedia/hindu/ascetic/iskcon.html
http://uk.geocities.com/tantraifc/mother_kali_tara.html
http://www.wordman.com/gallery432/432myth.htm


RAY TOMES: harmonics of 34560 and 24
10^(34560/24/370) = =7796.36013
http://www.theosophy.com/theos-talk/tt05743.html
Cycles in the universe and harmonics theory
http://www.theosophy.net/tw-html/tw7812.html
http://homepages.kcbbs.gen.nz/rtomes/conf-1.htm

ISLAM and KUNDALINI (3.5)....... 57*2 Suras in Koran
((7/2)^(1/4)) * 5700 = 7796.369679
http://www.powells.com/subsection/IslamQuran.html
http://www.starryarch.org/GnosticMassNotes.htm

STONEHENGE: diameter = 288 units
10^(288/2/37) = 7796.36013
http://www.celticnz.co.nz/US9.html
http://www.celticnz.co.nz/US14.html
http://www.christiaan.com/stonehenge/info/period_i
http://www.vortexmaps.com/htmla/hengetor.htm

MIRINGA TE KAKARA...(crosshouse:New Zealand)288
http://www.celticnz.co.nz/mnz_pt4.html

AZTEC/MAYAN..sacred Alautun number (long count) 2304=(8^2)*(6^4)
10^[(8^2)*(6^4)/37/18/32] = 7796.36013
http://www.earthmatrix.com/serie56/maya56.htm
http://www.geocities.com/teufel_pi/papers/mayan.pdf
http://www.earthmatrix.com/great/pyramid.htm
http://www.earthmatrix.com/abstract/abs50-59.htm

SUMERIAN..goddess INANNA (252)..HINDU YUGA..108
10^(252-108)/37)) = 7796.36013
http://www.netmastersinc.com/secrets/108_essay.htn
http://www.zenforum.com/ForumE/showthread.php3?threadid=783
http://www.jainworld.com/jainbooks/guideline/111.htm
http://www.omsakthi.org/worship/mantra.html

CHRISTIAN..Book of Revelations...144,(37*18),1260,70,9505
10^(144/37) ..........= 7796.36013
10^((1260/666)+2)..= 7796.36013
10^((70/37)+2).......= 7796.36013
10^((9505/37)-256) = 7796.36013

37*18...chapter 13; verse 18
144......chapter 14; verse 1
1260....chapter 12; verse 6 (42 months)
70.......chapter 17; verse 3
9505...number of hours in one day + one month + one year + one hour

More on the "collective unconcious" harmonic 288:
http://www.thehope.org/njpapxd-144000.htm
http://www.mysterypark.ch/download/pdf/mysteries_mayaland_e.pdf
http://www.sciencenews.org/sn_arc99/1_23_99/mathaland.htm
Philippe de Vitry...1200 AD
http://www.ascension200.com/Shift-of-the-Ages/shift20.htm
http://www.dprins.demon.nl/convergence/9902.html (Edgar Cayce)
http://www.goddesschess.com/archives/ch300.html #(318,317,325)
http://www.bdcol.ee/astrolog/texts/lesson.asp
http://www.hooper-home.net/TEMPLE/Chap1~09.htm
http://www.celticnz.co.nz/US4.html

all off Google search engine for: "sacred number 288"

J.Iuliano






J Iuliano - 2/10/2003

One of the strangest mathematical holographic properties of the dimensionless value of the fine-structure constant...a(em) = 1/ 137.036.... is it's ability to transcend different geometric measuring systems. There are three different scaling systems to measure the angles of geometric forms: the GRADIENT..(100 = 360)..., the RADIAN...180/Pi... and the DEGREE..Sumerian; 360 degrees equals one circumference. The amazing thing is that the Eulerian identity...i ^ i...( the sqrt of negative one to the sqrt of negative one power) links these measuring forms:

Let 1/a(em) = inverse fine-structure constant = 137.036004346...
Let i ^ i = 1/ sqrt (e^Pi) = .207879576351...
10 = sqrt of gradient = sqrt 100
cos = measure in radians
COS = measure in degrees

....then it can be demonstrated:

[( cos 1/a(em)) ^ ( COS 1/ a(em))] / sqrt 100 = i ^ i = .20787957505

....or:

[( cos 137.036004346) ^ ( COS 137.036004346 )] / 10 = i ^ i =.20787957505

The value 137.036004346 is 99.9999971 % of the Stanford cesium experiment of the fine-structure constant (2001)...1/137.0360005...Since i^i = 1/ sqrt ( e^Pi ) , then unity (1) can be shown as:

[( cos 137.036004346 ) ^ ( COS 137.036004346 )] * (sqrt (e^Pi)) /10 = 1

The connection to the Sumerian 360 degrees as symbolicaly relating to the Hebrew/Leahy number constant 288, where 288 is viewed as the in-toto cosmic egg of the ZPE field , which is then fractured by alternating the power ratio of the Cheops constructs...ht/bl to bl/ht... with Leahy's "thinking NOW created 100" as the activator between alternating power functions:

Let Cheops height = ht = 486.258404 ft ...( Churchward / Ramsey 1910 expedition = 486.256 ft)
Let Cheops Base leg = bl = 763.81
288 = Sephira Malkuth = cosmic egg..Leahy = 82944 = triple logic cube

[[ 288 ^ ( ht/bl )] /100] ^ (bl/ht) = i ^ i

.....to show eqivalencies to the fine-structure form of the RADIAN to DEGREE bridge:

[( cos 1/a(em) ) ^ ( COS 1/a(em) )] / 10 = i ^ i = 288 / ( 100 ^ ( bl/ht ))

....to simplify the fine-structure form:

( cos 1/a(em) ) ^ ( COS 1/a(em) ) = 10* i ^ i = 288 / ( 10 ^ ( 2*bl/ht) )

....this equation shows the Cheops constructs ratio as logrithmic metrology units , that define the connection between the radian and Sumerian measure using the only dimensionless constant in Nature, the " light " constant, fine-structure. This means that fine-structure is the " germ of metrology " and this fact was known from ancient times , being that the Kabbalic Sephira Malkuth...288 sparks from un-broken vessels.. pre-void.. and the Sumerian standard of measure 60 * 6 = 360 existed in documents dating beyond 4500 B.C.. Cheops itself can not be dated, it just exists!!..existing as the measuring device.( a thing to be measured from). Where does 288 come from? It is the total symbolic sum of all the chaoticness than can exist as infinite energy, (analogous to infinite integers ) . Just as the integer 37 can " organize " all natural numbers into 37 distinct decimal 3-peat patterns; Beta (.37) the anamolous second order phase transition temperature constant " organizes " the chaotic infinite energy of the cosmic egg (288), again Feigenbaum (F) is the form of the " release " structure , while Cheops is the measuring device:

Let ht = height Cheops pyramid = 486.256004421 ft
Let bl = base leg Cheops pyramid = 763.81 ft
Let a(em) =fine-structure constant =1/137.035999701..(1998 NIST = 137.0359997)

UNITY equation:

[[ ( .37 ^2 ) / a(em) ] ^ ( 2* bl / ht ) ] /10000 = 1

...which can be restated:

10 ^ ( 2* ht/bl) = ( .37 ^ 2) / a(em)

...since Feigenbaum is the " extracting " device of the chaotic infinite energy realm ( 288 = cosmic egg ) by an exact angle turn ( tan in radians) which means by fracturing the " egg " with an angle turn exactly equal to, tan F , creates the second factor of the egg, Leahy's " thinking Now created 100 " to the pi-th power:

Let F = Feigenbaum constant = 4.6692043132..( actual = 4.669201609...)

THE COSMIC EGG: Sephira Malkuth ...288 sparks

[ ( tan F ) ^ (-1/2) ] * ( 10 ^ Pi ) = 288.0000001

...to expand to the collective unconscious form:

THE COSMIC EGG : collective unconscious ...82944:

(( tan F ) ^ -1) * ( 100 ^ Pi ) = 82944.00006

...which translates to the Eulerian identity :

i ^ i = 288 /( 100 ^ ( bl/ht ) )....ht = 486.258404...bl = 763.81

J.Iuliano




D. Allen - 2/9/2003

...since it's inaccurate. Basic reading for the subject would be Hamlet's Mill by Santilla and von Deschend as it explores the common link through folklore throughout the ages and alludes to a much more complex picture of the delineation of knowledge from ancient history and folk tales.

Additionally the Mesoamerican flood tales that you are seemingly looking for can be found in the Popol Vuh as translated by Tedlock, I think you can google for it. You can also link the fishermen of Titicaca with the boatmen of the predynastic Nile by the use of the exact same designed reed boats over the last couple thousand years. Or if you want, again at Titicaca the only evolutionary ancestors of the now fossilized fauna of the salt saturated lake can only be found some 10,000 ft below in freshwater tributaries. My friend the amount of evidence is frightening when faced with the fact that all the mainstream can do is meet it with unsolicited rejection sans refutement. The only people I have ever seen deny this academics because it slapped at the face of their $100,000 degrees, or laymen who simply havn't done the reading...I suggest you do the reading and then judge for yourself.


D. Allen - 2/9/2003

The Pyramid enigma is much larger than this brief article allows for(which is mostly a book promotion anyway) so arguing on it's merits alone is tremendously short sighted. Setting aside their allegorical and astronomical interpretations that mainstream academia obdurately refutes pyramids still present several other questions that cannot be answered by orthodox theory:

Why did the most complex, elaborate, and efficient pyramids appear first without rough-drafts or prerequisites?

Why did pyramid building techniques then degrade so quickly and severely over time?

Why does the continuing stream of geological evidence suggest that pyramid groups were build in spurts around the globe with many of the coalescing together?

None of this even scratches the culturo-societal question of functionality that develops into a larger puzzle the more we understand the daily lives of these distant peoples. Nowhere in our current written history is there a factually documented case of building monolithic structure for the simple sake of building or for egoistic purposes and yet we continue to cling to the belief, without evident documentation, that in a time so far lost that we no longer understand it that was "simply the way it was".

I believe that Schoch, West, and Hancock all do a great job of presenting evidence and bridging that evidence to conclusions without requiring the reader to accept their belief as fact. If you are open to new ideas then by all means pick up one of their books. One of my personal favorites was Fingerprints of the Gods by Hancock.


zx - 2/9/2003

Atlantis was not a single city. Are you from USA? Atlantis was a continent not LA or NY or anything.


Harry Dale Huffman - 2/9/2003

Thank you. The last time I checked out that route, none of the companies involved could handle a book with many color illustrations (mine has 196 of them--my motto was "seeing is believing"). I'll look again; but I've been told that a major publisher is the way to go for such a heavily illustrated book.


Harry Dale Huffman - 2/9/2003

I notice that my reply to "Barry" has shown up as if it were a reply to you. This one will be yours. I am dying to tell the world about the Sphinx, and many other equally famous mysteries. But it's the world I want to hear it, not just a few, and certainly not that admittedly rare person who would take it and put it out as his/her own (since I haven't published yet). I don't want to tempt anyone to do that.
Last week, I thought I had figured out an announcement that I could give to the media, without giving away too much. It included a way for anyone to verify my claim (!) I sent the announcement to the three major networks, the local paper, and to Science magazine. I steeled myself for the ____ to hit the fan, but knowing that in any public confrontation I had the facts to win the day... No replies (from SCIENTISTS, no replies!), no announcements, no letter in Science. Deafening silence.
To prove I know the secret of the Sphinx, I would have to reveal the central discovery behind all of the "ancient mysteries". Of course I will do so, but not here, not now, in this little backwater of communication.


Harry Dale Huffman - 2/9/2003

I am a professional research scientist in physics and mathematics, with over twenty years in the industrial hi-tech and academic sectors. I am that "open-minded, competent scientist" that believers in a "lost civilization" have called for for so long. Surely that keen mind of yours can think of reasons why someone with THE answer would not simply throw it all onto the web, as the greatest "freebie" ever; did you ever hear of "cast not your pearls before swine"?


Rachael - 2/8/2003

while i agree that symbols only have meaning if u believe they do; i fail to see how the fact that a bunch of hippies didnt see anything more than stones means that stonehenge dosent mean anything. perhaps i misunderstood. after all the point is to try and figure out what the original builders saw in the symbols...not to give them our own meanings...or to strip them of all meaning because they are alien to us.


Rachael - 2/8/2003

well said Mr Lewis. i find it very difficult to believe that around the world people woke up and decided to creat civilizations...the answers are out there its only a matter of time.


George Bain - 2/8/2003

Mr Huffman, you can do your own publishing and get an ISBN number and a listing in Amazon by looking at where all aspects of self publishing are revealed. It will cost you a modest amount but you can derive royalties on sales if your book is worth over about $16. Take a look


Kish - 2/8/2003

It is truely amazing to learn that all cultures in the world built the massive buildings which were feats of archtectural ingeniouty and wonder. Perhaps, though itmay seem a bit far fetched all those ancient people saw some sort of aircraft which was shaped like a pyramid, and build these buildings in the image of their "gods" possibly beings from another more advanced world out of respect for them perhaps. If this theory is correct then it is possible to assume that these beings will return to earth someday soon to see how we as a race are faring? Just some of my thoughts.........

Regards,

Kish


Adrian James Martyn - 2/7/2003

In no way can the five thousand year old construction commonly called Newgrange (located in Co. Meath, close to the east coast of the Republic of Ireland) be described as a pyramid. It is a circular, dome shaped formation. I am not against the idea of there being some truely ancient, now forgotten, civilization once existing who left their imprints in such monument. What I am against is spurious ascriptions. It only damages such cases.


Spartan - 2/7/2003

In my opinion, I think that the theory of an ancient root civilization is almost certanly correct. I mean, there's just too much coincidence in many of the myths found around the world, is it all just coincidence?

Establishment historians of our day now are adament on holding their rigid views on pre-historic times. This, I believe is because of their inability to admit that they have been wrong for so long about our past.

Anywho, to make a long matter short, I think it is only a matter of time before the evidence gets to be so much that the establishment intellectuals are forced to admit their view of history is wrong.


Mobius - 2/7/2003

I've noticed that the anatomy of an atom is similar to the anatomy of the solar system and that whether you look through a microscope or a telescope the patterns in the universe all relflect each other. I was wondering if the diffusion theory here stated as a great civilization spliting apart to seek new areas of the planet to inhabit as life where there were became potentially bleek could be a possible model for life in the universe.? Is it so far fetched? Animals here on Earth, and humans alike, when the current surroundings/living area become inhospitable or a tradgedy seems eminent they leave for safer gorund. there is over whelming evidence that there was once life on Mars a ton of which can be found here http://www.enterprisemission.com there's more theories about other moons here in our own solarsystem not to mention that our solar system is only on the edge of our galaxy. could it be that life on Mars became endangered and a great many left to find safer ground...like earth?

I often feel like I'm searching through a family tree on a global level. Finding where I am and then where my people came from and their people and their people and so on until one gets back to Mesopotamia and Sumeria and from there now we may be seeing that their people came from Sundaland. Where did their people come from?

I'm curious as to the liniage of myself, my family and my species. Home has multiple meanings to us today. My family came to this country from another one and they call this country home, they call the house the live in home, but the warm fuzzy feelings and the real peace comes when they say they're going home and are reffering to the country of origin. I want to find 'home'.

Any ideas?


Love ALL Ways,
Mobius


t. parton - 2/7/2003

i'd read your book if it was published. but since it's not why don't you give a preview? what does the sphinx maen?


SJT - 2/7/2003

would also appreciate a reco'ed reading list on Atlantis. ericdalbello@hotmail.com


Joan Moreno i Maurel - 2/6/2003

If you are not able to publish your book, I suggest you to put your theory on the internet. It's easy. If you want to contact me, here you have my email: jmm22@hotmail.com

Best regards


Joan Moreno i Maurel - 2/6/2003

Hello, .. 30 years reading about Atlantis!, please, could you tell me some interesting books about it! Thanks!! My email: jmm22@hotmail.com


Barry - 2/6/2003

Hi Oscar,
Your comment: "...it is possible that building a large symbolic edifice is such a crazy idea that only one culture could think it up...." is putting the cart before the horse a lttle.

IF there was a 'lost civilisation' then it could have easily existed initially on its own - so it was the only one around to think up the pyramid premise. Then later they could have dispersed the idea. Other, later societies might have modified the theme but it is not a crazy idea (necessarily) for one culture to 'think it up' if there was only one culture at the time...

Sorry if I haven't expressed that very well.

Regards, Barry.


Barry - 2/6/2003

If you can't find a publisher then put it on the web - or do you not have the guts either.

Or grow up.


howard oliker - 2/6/2003

I think Davod Wilson hit the target. western civilization's pride in the idea of the first technology is part of the problem too. i have been read about & collecting books about atlantis for 30 years. there seems to me no doubt of the existance of a technical civilization predating sumer & egypt (atlantis). Sumer & Egypt inherited the remnants of this technology. all over the planet we see evidence...the great pyrimid, biblical references to spining lights, destruction of sodom & gomorrah, sound technology to move things, lenses as telescopes, stonehenge, the maya calander. the list goes on and on. some day soon enough of the people in positions of power in the academic community, who control the reasearch, will die off or retire, leaving the younger researchers to rewrite out history with less opposition.


David Wilson - 2/6/2003

I think that Atlantis had to be real as the story has been told for generations the same way the great flood has. So I think Atlantis must have been the most amazing city ever built for the story to last this long. I don't know why archaeologists don't want to look for it unless they know that if they do they'll find it and every book they wrote about pre-history civilisation will be nonsence, so until archaeologists put History before there pride we'll never know if its real or a myth


Vinayak Kamat - 2/6/2003

Can you put some more light on what you meant in your PS: about the "Discovery Zaheee HawASS ". are you referring to Discovery Channel's documentory or something. If so, kindly let me know the date of its telecast. I am deeply interested in the Perus Caral and the like...Thanks---Vin


Harry Dale Huffman - 2/6/2003

In a sense, yes; whatever is affecting lots of people around the world is unarguably important. As a scientist, dealing with the difference between belief (or speculation, or guessing) and fact, more important to me is the fact that without hard knowledge of the ancient past, mankind is held in thrall to the traditions regarding it, and the emotions attached to it.


sam duncan - 2/6/2003

There is a difference between mounds and pyramid are quite different. While moving a tons of dirt or moving 2 millions stones to form a structure that is only 4 inches off is not comparable. And it is only symbolic if that is what you read into or want to read into it. Remember, Stonehenge was only considered to be a bunch of stones in a circle until the 1960s.


maggi thickstun - 2/5/2003

History and pre-history are generating more interest for a wider audience than ever before. Perhaps that's the most important facet of all.


Oscar Chamberlain - 2/5/2003

A pretty good argument. I suppose it is possible that builing a large symbolic edifice is such a crazy idea that only one culture could think it up. Certainly I cannot disprove that.

But while the geometry (and size, I suspect) are indeed symbolic, the society still has to build it. And pyramids are easier to build well than other large structures (If I did not say "large" in my first posting, then I made a mistake)

Finally, one does not have to be Jungian to see all humans, and certainly all human societies as symbol making. It's probably inseparable fom the capacity for language.

And perhaps those societies that stumbled on the pyramid form--as I contend--found its stability as symbolic in itself: the durability confirming the sacredness.


Harry Dale Huffman - 2/5/2003

There is not enough factual sinew to hold this theory together; it takes factual support from several independent sources, all pointing to the same conclusion, to prove that conclusion. I'm sorry, Dr. Schoch is more or less right about the much greater age of the Sphinx, but the rest of his contribution is just that of another interested writer carving out his own personal franchise within the field, without regard for proof. I know: I have the proof. As I told Schoch last year, I know exactly what the Sphinx means, and when it was built--because I know the key to all the ancient mysteries. I call on all readers to ask about my book, The End of the Mystery, which when I can find a publisher and get it published, will end all of this speculation.


Harry Dale Huffman - 2/5/2003

There is not enough factual sinew to hold this theory together; it takes factual support from several independent sources, all pointing to the same conclusion, to prove that conclusion. I'm sorry, Dr. Schoch is more or less right about the much greater age of the Sphinx, but the rest of his contribution is just that of another interested writer carving out his own personal franchise within the field, without regard for proof. I know: I have the proof. As I told Schoch last year, I know exactly what the Sphinx means, and when it was built--because I know the key to all the ancient mysteries. I call on all readers to ask about my book, The End of the Mystery, which when I can find a publisher and get it published, will end all of this speculation.


Harry Dale Huffman - 2/5/2003

"references to similarities in symbols or technologies that cannot be explained so easily would be far stronger evidence". Again, precisely--only make "references to similarities" more like "factual proof of a common source for widely separated symbols or technologies", and you have my book. The End of the Mystery--just what it says.


Harry Dale Huffman - 2/5/2003

Guess again. All of the current speculation, pro or con, is worth precisely nothing in the face of fact. I have discovered the facts, and my work dispenses with "guessing and hoping no one will notice the flaws". Remember the title of my book: The End of the Mystery. It will come out, I guarantee it.


Harry Dale Huffman - 2/5/2003

Precisely. People are so skeptical today, I can't figure out how to get a hearing, to insure both wide public exposure and my claims to discovery (not to mention making a living from my hard and spectacularly successful work).


Harry Dale Huffman - 2/5/2003

I am a scientist, apparently that first "open-minded scientist" that believers in "alternative" theories have long called for. I began my own study in 1996, and in 1997 I found the key to all the "ancient mysteries". When the truth comes out, everyone who thinks he or she has a franchise on the subject will jump on it, and I want all of my discoveries in the hands of the public before that can happen. I need to get my book, The End of the Mystery, published, but I haven't connected with an insider in the publishing industry who is favorably inclined and willing to look at the book, no doubt because I won't prattle about my findings without some assurance that I won't be ripped off. Believe me, you don't need any of the current crop of authors in this field; my book will end this age, which began at the same time as mankind's known history, and open the next.


Keith Mann - 2/5/2003

What's so special about pyramids? Surely any Tribe seeking to stockpile their collection of Enemy Heads - or even just Watermelons - would very soon grasp the basics !!


Lloyd Drako - 2/5/2003

Of course we should all strive to think out of the box, and of course absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Personally I would like to drain the South China Sea: doubtless the Sunda Shelf harbors all sorts of archaeological sites relevant to the early dispersion of Homo, the origins of various domesticated plants and animals, possibly even an early civilization or two. See "Eden in the East," by Stephen Oppenheim, for a fairly reasonable argument concerning a Southeast Asian origin for the flood story and much else.


Phil Vermiglio - 2/5/2003

Ancient Sumerian prose vividly details archaeoastronomy that astronomy software puts at the 21,460 BC spring equinox
for the Great Flood. Other texts indirectly but overwhelmingly
set a 20,364 BC Sphinx / Egyptian creation after the flood waters subsided. Likewise, the Great Pyramid has a genesis of 11,542 BC. Mirroring the sky was paramount to the ancients but
nobody has remotely hit the key chords in their theories. MysteriesUnsealed.com


Mark Long - 2/4/2003

I heartily agree with the thesis of Schloch and Mcnally that civilization is far older than we have previously imagined. With regards to the pyramid of Borobudur on the island of Java, I have spent the past six years researching its design with an eye to astronomical considerations, which I have posted at my Web site at borobudur.tv.

This man-made pyramid-mountain represents not a sudden flowering of technology but rather the culmination of a civilization that was connected with Europe and Mesopotamia by means of the spice trade nearly 2,000 years ago and the seafarers of island SE Asia explored a stunning swath of the world's equatorial region long before Columbus was born.

Our ability to aprehend the age of this civilization is, however, hampered by the tropical climate of SE Asia, which removes from the archaeological scene all evidence of the ancient texts that undooubtedly once existed, which were written on palm leaves.


Neal Webb - 2/4/2003

This city has been dated to 4500-5000 years old, complete with huge pyramids and an Incredible ancient ampitheater. Among the mounting pile of evidence that proves ancient cultures could not have developed independently is the fact that all pyramid building culturs all over the world all implied a govern system acting with no separation between church and state.


Ps. Early this March on the Discovery Zaheee HawASS will be telling us how they built the pyramids at Giza, Ahhh let me guess? GOD forbid "They weren't slaves!"


Jaimi - 2/4/2003

There are equally compelling arguments why the pyramid is an illogical form to adopt for use by an ancient culture. The strongest in my mind is the sheer waste of materials used to accomplish very little in terms of functional space. This is also augmented by the fact that these temples appear side by side with other buildings of conventional shape. The use of the geometry isn't functional in purpose, it's symbolic, and if it were intended to be more functional it would have all been conventional.


Oscar Chamberlain - 2/4/2003

Morrigaine, you speak of greater evidence. Hopefully that greater evidence that you mention is in Schoch and McNally's books books, because it was not in that article.

They selected pyramids to be their primary example. It is a bad one made weaker by their unwillingness to give even one reason why their explanation is better than existing ones.

The one other example they give, that of the Sphinx, is more specific, but in isolation it only suggests a local mystery. One worth solving to be sure, but not one that points to a world-influencing culture.

As one other commentator pointed out, references to similarities in symbols or technologies that cannot be explained so easily would be far stronger evidence. If Schoch and McNally have such evidence, let them share it. Or let them follow up the comments here by discussing why traditional diffusion or trial and error are not sufficient explanations for the pyramids.

You are right that new paradigms sometimes begin as inspirations. Sometimes they even begin as beliefs not yet based in fact that seem somehow better. To use your example, Galileo was attracted to the Copernican model, in part, because it was more beautiful, more satisfying aesthetically, than the epicycles of the revised Ptolemaic model.

But he did not expect others to accept the Copernican model on the basis of its beauty. Galileo took observations, modified the theory where appropriate, and only asked others to accept his conclusions on the basis of those observations.

History cannot have the same type of rigor as physics and astronomy. But when introducing a grand new theory to a wider audience, one needs to do more than make the vague references on which this short article stands.


morrigaine - 2/4/2003

i disagree Mr. Chamberlain, as far as i gather the existence of an antediluvian civilization is a perfectly plausible theory. technology is advancing true but this advancement is very recent in the scale of things, it is only a matter of time before history as we know it is turned upside down. the theory proposed, is just that at this stage a theory. to call a theory history is laughable; but to dismiss a theory simply because you can not prove that it is true or false is absurd.

also, the theory is based on more than the fact that the civilzation "could" have existed and the occurence of pyramids around the world. the theory has much support in ancient documents and firmly rooted beliefs from civilzations around the globe. if anyone bothered to their homework they wouldknow that the similarities between ancient civilizations run much deeper than pyramids.

when galileo argued that the sun, not the earth, was the center of the universe there wasn't much proof to support his claim,and after all, everyone knew that the earth was the center of the universe. historical examples such as this should show just becuse a theory sounds radical and is not widely accepted at first glance does not mean that the theory should laughed out of existence.

thinking outside of the box does not mean thinking outside of logic- i have no idea where you got the from. thinking outside of the box is learning to realize that much of what is currently taken for fact started as a theory that everyone like and supported, and because of this support they found evidence to support the thoery and before long the theory was accepted as fact. the problem is that when dealing with such an ancient world most of what one is doing is guessing, holding their collective breath and hoping that no one is going to come along and burst the bubble they have created to house their perfect little world. all that can truly be said about the ancient past is that we know next to nothing about it. if you can learn to think outside of the box you will come to find that the world is a much larger and grander place than you could ever have imagined! however you must also know that it is a place filled with many more questions and far fewer answers than the little box in which we so ignorantly dwell.

Chris and Graham are "good scholoars" and they are challenging long held beliefs with a growing mound of evidence that is sure to shatter many glass notions about the origins of civilization!


Oscar Chamberlain - 2/4/2003

I have no problem with thinking outside of the box on the question of the origins of complex civilizations. Personally, I would love to see a proof of a previously unknown civilization. It would be so much fun. And it would explain some anomalies.

I do have real problems with thinking outside of all logic and calling it history.

The authors conclude that a common civilization for which there is no direct evidence did exist. On what do they base their conclusions? Two things.

The existence pf pyramids in different cultures (which can be explained more easily by physics and technology)

and because that civilization "could" exist.

That's it.

To that sort of logic and evidence, the proper response is laughter.

And that is a shame, because it makes it harder for good scholars to challenge long-held conclusions.


JOHN LEWIS - 2/4/2003

I have struggled long and hard with the established view that civilisation emerged fully formed around 3500/4500 BC.I am convinced that evidence will eventually be found to prove this not to be so.These types of articles are essential to help nudge the scientific community into looking for that evidence.


Christopher F. Ash - 2/3/2003

Some of you may find my informal essay, "God's Garden" of possible interest (GrahamHancock.com "Underworld" section: http://www.grahamhancock.com/underworld/AshCF1.php?p=1). While I spring-board into my subject matter from Graham Hancock's latest book, "Underworld," my purpose is larger than a mere enhancement of Hancock's argument.

Parts I and II address deficiencies in Hancock's "Lost Civilization" hypothesis and point to a possible means of addressing those deficiencies.

Parts III and IV argues for a reappraisal of the nature of the Ice Age world -- particularly the type and chemical composition of soils found exclusively on the continental margins.

Part V (probably the best of all sections) proposes a new model for the origins of agriculture which unites the work of Binford and Childe via Hancock -- I think a surprising conclusion.

Christopher F. Ash

p.s. Comments are welcome. You may opt to post these at the GrahamHancock.com Mysteries forum where I am certain to see them.


Lloyd Drako - 1/31/2003

Doesn't it seem more likely that the pyramid form found in Egypt, Mesoamerica, the Mississippi Valley and elsewhere is merely the result of the grandiose aspirations of primitive and ancient societies coming up against their technological limitations? If you want to build something really big to impress posterity, and magnify your own position by commanding the maximum available labor force, but have only soft metals, stone and muscle power, the pyramid is quite simply the largest structure you can attempt without risking catastrophic collapse. Diffusion (from Sundaland or anywhere else) is not ruled out a priori, but why was it the pyramid form that diffused, not things such as the wheel, ferrous metallurty or rice and wheat?


Ross A - 1/31/2003

Good Point. The major early civilizations (Chinese, Indian, Mesopotamian, Egyptian) all came from river valley settlements, their cultures went on to influence countless subsequent cultures, and all of them have myths about traumatic floods.

So, is it more reasonable to suggest that their cultural influence is the reason for the endurance of Flood Myths, or that there was a single culture once? I'm inclined to believe the former rather than the latter, but it's not entirely unreasonable that ancient flood myths are a throwback to the great thaw that occurred roughly 8,000 years ago - this event pretty much kicked off the origins of Human Civilization.

That said, I just can't abide the idea of a "lost" continent, nor the idea of a "lost" advanced civilization that we all sprang from. It feels to me too much like mythical Golden Age Hooey, Atlantean nonsense. Perhaps it's my Secular Humanistic upbringing, but I'm inclined to think that 8000 years ago, things were more, not less primitive than they were 5000 years ago.

Another thing leaves me confused. If the civilization in question, "Sudandaland", really did exist, it still does not follow that such a culture is the prototype for all human culture. According to statements in this very article, they wouldn't have migrated until the end of the last Ice Age, by which time the Land Bridge across the Bering Sea, (as far as I know the only plausible way ancient humans could possibly have reached North America before durable ships were invented), had long since become submerged under the Pacific ocean.

Finally, and I know this is petty, Sudandaland is a silly name. Just writing makes me feel stupid. No disrespect is intended towards the author of this article, but I have to call this one out.


Oscar Chamberlain - 1/29/2003

There is no need to posit a common cultural heritage to explain the existence of pyramids around the world. Nor do you need the "mountains as models" argument.

If you want to build a really large, long-lasting structure with blocks and no mortar (and particularly if you want chambers in the structure)the pyramid is the best choice.

It is a far more stable form than a tall narrow tower or obelisk. The weight is distributed so that the blocks hold themselves in place. The lack of mortar is actually an advantage because it allows minor shifting to relieve stresses caused by Earth movements.

Some of these advantages can be ascertained by model building, which is a likely first step in the creation of an edifice in any ancient culture.

So the appearance of pyramids around the world in cultures with a roughly similar level of technology does not need to be explained by the diffusion of ideas. It can be explained as the most logical outcome of trial and error.

Does this disprove diffusion or the existence of Sundaland? No. But it is a simpler explanation than diffusion across great oceans. And it does not require positing a great culture for which there is no direct evidence on a continent that no longer exists.


William R. Clay - 1/29/2003

Authors Schoch and McNally offer up a unique view of the world and civilization's development in it. Is their concept a correct view? That is not as critical a question as Schoch's comments on the resistance offered toward their thesis. This "resistance" I find disturbing. The outright rejection of freshly minted concepts is a hallmark of closemindedness. That I reject! While I cannot say how I feel about Schoch's and McNally's thesis, at least at this point; I may say that I am more than willing to read and explore it.


Gregory T. Cushman - 1/29/2003

This is a hoary tale of the unity of myth. Neither the Inca nor Olmec-Maya have significant flood myths (though I'm sure you can find one somewhere in their mythology). Why? Neither Andean nor Mesoamerican civilization has its origins in a "river valley." This is diffusionist bunk! Why is it so hard for some people to admit that invention is usually not a one-time event?


Alec Lloyd - 1/28/2003

Well, what do you know? R. Cedric Leonard has a web site. Ain't Google wonderful?


Alec Lloyd - 1/28/2003

There was a book by Otto Muck that postulated an Atlantean civilization was responsible for the pyramids on both sides of the Atlantic. Muck was a German rocket scientist (no really) and invented the Schnorkel for the U-boats, so he mixes lots of physics in. A fun read, if nothing else. It's call "Secret of Atlantis" and despite the subject matter, stays away from the "space aliens using power crystals" stuff the topic usually calls forth.

A fellow named R. Cedric Leonard did a monograph on the mid-Atlantic ridge 20 years ago. MSU still has a battered copy, butI've never found the book for which this was the core research.

I can't help but wonder if the continent mentioned above has any relation to "Lemuria," which also has some support among the UFO-tin foil-lined-hat community.

It's too bad that reasonable (and skeptical) examinations of suchy subject tend to be left to crackpots and TimeLife books.


Fascinated - 1/28/2003

Isn't it also the case that the Incas and other ancient civilizations in MesoAmerica have a flood story that very much resembles that of the Euro-Asians?

Subscribe to our mailing list