It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
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...
Originally posted by reficul
where did they get the horses from? must have been after the spanish invasion,no?
Originally posted by reficul
where did they get the horses from? must have been after the spanish invasion,no?
Originally posted by reficul
where did they get the horses from? must have been after the spanish invasion,no?
# 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.
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).
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).
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