Peruvian mass grave unearthed where 60 people were sacrificed 1,100 years ago

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 07:23 AM
link   
Peruvian mass grave unearthed where 60 people were sacrificed 1,100 years ago


A tomb containing the 'perfectly intact' remains of 60 people - who were slaughtered in sacrificial offerings more than 1,100 years ago - has been discovered in Peru.

Archaeologists found the mass grave, in an eight metre deep and 150 metre wide pit, in Lambayeque on the country's northern coast.
They also unearthed the remains of dogs and horses at the site, which is next to a key Sican ceremonial centre, in the historical Pomac Woods, 500 miles north of Lima.


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...




posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 07:24 AM
link   
Not a whole lot of info but the announcement is interesting none the less. I was hoping for some more info about what they are referring to as perfectly preserved so hopefully as this new info is investigated we will hopefully get more info.

Nothing like finding a snapshot of history with writing on the back that we cant quite make out yet.



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 07:27 AM
link   
where did they get the horses from? must have been after the spanish invasion,no?



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by reficul
where did they get the horses from? must have been after the spanish invasion,no?


Lol hence my irritation at the lack of info in the release...

nice catch though.. That didnt really dawn on me..



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by reficul
where did they get the horses from? must have been after the spanish invasion,no?


Not an area i know much about if im honest. However, did native Americans (north) not have horses? If so, surely some could have been moved southwards over the centuries?

Like i say, not an area i know much about (history of the Americas) so forgive any obvious idiocy on my part!
Surely Hollywood hasn't lied to me about Indians on horseback?



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 08:02 AM
link   
How do they know they were slaughtered and why do they suggest sacrificial, why not from an enemy and why couldn’t it have been some epidemic, I wonder what age and sex they were.
Sorry I’m just thinking out loud, this is a very cool find, i wonder if they keep searching that they might find some trinkets and things.

Thanks for sharing this.


love and harmony
Whateva



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Yes, forgot to say what a good spot this was OP.

S & F




posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 09:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


just by looking at the 2 pictures of the excavation site in your OP link

it looks to me that these remains were at several different levels below the ground.. it seems some were buried
the customary 6 ft down while other skeletal remains were between 4ft and 6 ft lower than the most elevated remains...

some skeletal remains are laid out in arm folded repose and other bones are bundled up in fetal position
and there seems to be more than a few small hollowed out caves where a skeleton is packed into the space


the site does not look like a place where the bodies of ritual sacrifices were thrown into the 25ft by 450ft pit.
then covered in successive layers of dirt to begin another layer of sacrificed peoples



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by reficul
where did they get the horses from? must have been after the spanish invasion,no?





Great catch now...

This either throws the whole dating of the site into question or the source of the story is being a bit sensationalized and tossing out bogus details. Having said that. Any story about a dig in that part of the world is of interest to me.

S & F



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


But were there horses in North America? If so, it really isn't that much of a stretch to imagine some in South America - just because we haven't found any fossils yet it does not mean they were not there at some point (however brief).

I don't know, im just throwing it out there.



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 10:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Flavian
 


1100 years ago there were no horses in North America.

The horse was no longer indigenous to the Americas by this time. {Supposedly it originated in the Americas} and migrated West into Siberia over the now submerged Land Bridge at or around 15,000 BC. The Natives in the Americas {especially in Central and South America} when seeing the Spanish riding horse back first thought they were looking at one bizarre creature {Not realizing it was a horse and rider} and initially thought it was a mystical creature/being.


How horses evolved and where they originated from

# The modern form of horse evolved from small dog like animals that first appeared 60 million years ago.

# Over time wild ancestors of the modern horse evolved for millions of years in north America. They then spread to other parts of the world by travelling southwards to south America by crossing land bridges that connected north America to Europe and Asia during the ice age.


# Horses vanished from both north and south America in a wave of extinction that occurred at the end of the Pleistocene epoch, about 15,000 years ago.



This is why one should call the dating into question. Or, it could be revealing an unknown {Highly speculative} history of the Americas.
edit on 20-12-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Conquistadors used horses and dogs. They were present in the area, though half a century later - but nothing in the article suggests that people who were sacrificed 1100 years ago and animals are from the same time. Maybe it was much later attempt to humiliate pagan site by using it as a grave yard for animals? Or the opposite - to celebrate victory over some Spanish force.
Or maybe it was used by locals after Spanish conquest.
Just a theory of course.
But there are numerous accounts that locals were not familiar with horses, so i really doubt that it is 900AD native cavalry.



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Brilliant, thanks for the in depth info. I guess it really does call into question the article then. More bizarre (to me) is what would cause Horses to die off throughout the Americas during / following the Pleistocene. I have read the accounts about the cosmic bombardment - possibly some bacteria transported by the comets / meteors? Another out there theory!



Just bizarre they died off throughout the Americas but not elsewhere.

Another thought, if it is rainforest area then surely it aggregates land faster than other areas - so in other words they maybe out on the dates and it could be younger than first thought (and therefore would fit in with the Conquistadors).
edit on 20-12-2011 by Flavian because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flavian
Another thought, if it is rainforest area then surely it aggregates land faster than other areas - so in other words they maybe out on the dates and it could be younger than first thought (and therefore would fit in with the Conquistadors).



The majority of Peru is a dryer more mountainous/rolling hill region of South America. Having said that, I suspect Peru at one time had a much different environment ecology/history


But that is for one of my more outside the box threads




posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


The one larger image shows a large excavation field with different levels. The obvious answer is that the journalist version of the report has left out details. The earliest remains are Sican with later burial 'incursions' of material from later periods



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


A question for our resident archeologist - if the site is hill side, would remains from the same era not be at different levels anyway? You can't really tell from the pic where the site is although i have to admit it doesn't really look like a hill! It's more a general question than a site specific one......

Im sure you must take such things into account but if im honest it is something that has only just occurred to me! (making shame face now).



posted on Dec, 20 2011 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by Hanslune
 


A question for our resident archeologist - if the site is hill side, would remains from the same era not be at different levels anyway? You can't really tell from the pic where the site is although i have to admit it doesn't really look like a hill! It's more a general question than a site specific one......

Im sure you must take such things into account but if im honest it is something that has only just occurred to me! (making shame face now).


Simple answer Yes; more complicated answer excavating say a hill top fort can be tricky as the you have to determine strat for the top and the sides. Hills or mounds also shift downwards over time which complicates the procedure. You'll often see excavation taken in steps or unevenly (like the one shown) - and they'll sort out the stratigraphy later



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Flavian
 

horses are not native to the americas.the spanish first introduced the 'mustang' to mexico,that is why texas and some other southern states still have bands of wild mustang herds. later,the arabs brought their horses over,which actually give america its ' modern' cowboys!



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 06:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by Hanslune
 


A question for our resident archeologist - if the site is hill side, would remains from the same era not be at different levels anyway? You can't really tell from the pic where the site is although i have to admit it doesn't really look like a hill! It's more a general question than a site specific one......

Im sure you must take such things into account but if im honest it is something that has only just occurred to me! (making shame face now).


Simple answer Yes; more complicated answer excavating say a hill top fort can be tricky as the you have to determine strat for the top and the sides. Hills or mounds also shift downwards over time which complicates the procedure. You'll often see excavation taken in steps or unevenly (like the one shown) - and they'll sort out the stratigraphy later


Thank you for the response. Now i actually think about it, it seems obvious! Makes me wonder though how many sites have been "misread" over the years by people not properly taking things into account.

South America must be a nightmare for that. We see with the favellas in Brazil just how quickly different layers of the sub strata are exposed though top soil erosion (where trees have been removed owing to population). With such huge variety in South America, is must be a blooming nightmare working out the topograhpy and erosion rates before even getting on to any actual archeology!



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by reficul



Horses were in the Americas then died out the Spanish later brought them back

edit on 22/12/11 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join