New city found, 5,500 BP

Scientists discover ruins in Peru dating 5,500 years


external image


View of the circular square built about 5,500 years ago at the archeological complex of Sechin Bajo, at the mountain range of the Casma region, in Ancash area, Peru, 24 February 2008. The complex, considered to be the most ancient in Peru, was discovered by a team of Peruvian and German archeologists a few weeks ago.

EPA/EL COMERCIO NEWSPAPER

reply to post by Hanslune

---

Sounds interesting but I cant get the image to load, it might just be me as my net is slow tonight.

Can you host the image here on ATS?

Can you also add a link please?

Regards S_G

It was just me the picture is working fine now, small shot though.

I notice the OP is off line, does anyone else have a link to more information as I find the picture quite amazing, if the thread title is to be believed.

I found these articles about this new find.


Archaeologists find 5,500 year old plaza in Peru

Scientists find 5,500-year-old plaza in Peru

Michelle

They think there exists evidence of even older structures beneath.



news.aol.com...

This is good stuff.

This is fascinating, I love hearing about new finds in the archaeological field, however I would like to know why this is in the myths and legends forums, since this city is a fact, unless I missed out on some sort of tie in?

reply to post by RuneSpider

---

Just to note it's actually in the Ancient civilizations, myths and legends.

But I agree it's very fascinating to hear about newly discovered ancient artifacts. Peru was definitely an ancient metropolis of sorts dating back to 3000bc or earlier...

oh, Peru...


i thought you might be posting about the city found in Egypt, built some 7,000 years ago or more

andrewcollins.com...


Peru, on the west coast of South America, those guys were isolated indeed,

The press reports on the neolithic finds have been (by the media) mixed with the Graeco-Roman finds at/near the same location. Reference to limestone and granite seems to apply to the later Roman period and not the neolithic.

I haven't read the paper yet