It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The determination that it is specifically Roman from circa AD 200 therefore relies entirely on the artistic evaluations of Heine-Geldern, Boehringer and Andreae, since the TL age range is consistent with many other pre-Columbian possiblities. (A more precise TL date given in the Hristov and Genovés article, viz. 1780 ± 400 B.P., was based on a preliminary calculation made from the same test results, but should now be disregarded in light of Wagner (2000) and Schaaf and Wagner (2001). See Hristov and Genovés (2001) for further details and a reply to other objections to the find.)
Even granting the possibility that a Roman ship might have reached the New World 1800 years ago, how could a relic of such a visit have ended up in a barely pre-Hispanic Mesoamerican burial? Hristov and Genovés cite two dozen instances in which clearly older Mesoamerican objects appear in later burials. The most dramatic of these is a 3000-year-old greenstone Olmec mask that was found in a 500-year-old Aztec burial offering inside the Great Temple of Mexico-Tenochtitlan.
Originally posted by pieman
Seventeen. My last word. I won't take a penny less, or strike me dead.
Originally posted by spitefulgod
WOW, this is incredible news, when can we start digging this crap up to lay a new motorway?