Jump to content

Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca head: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Added wiki link for Lanzarote
Added external links -- HM
Line 28: Line 28:


</div>
</div>

==External links==
*[http://www.unm.edu/~rhristov/calixtlahuaca.html Calixtlahuaca's Head] by Romeo H. Hristov
*[http://econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/arch/calix.htm The Calixtlahuaca Head] by J. Huston McCulloch


[[Category:Out-of-place artifacts]]
[[Category:Out-of-place artifacts]]

Revision as of 20:30, 12 November 2010

File:Tecaxic calixtlahuaca head.jpg
The Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca head

The Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca head is a terracotta head, probably originally part of a larger figurine, discovered in 1933 among pre-Columbian or just post-Columbian grave goods in the Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca zone in the Toluca Valley, approximately 65 kilometers southwest of Mexico City. Because the head appears to be similar in style to artifacts of Roman origin, some believe that it is evidence of pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact.

An assessment of the case was made in 2001 by Romeo H. Hristov of University of New Mexico and Santiago Genovés T. of National Autonomous University of Mexico.

A thermoluminescence test performed in 1995 by P. Schaaf and G.A. Wagner in the FS Archäometrie unit in Heidelberg, Germany, established its age range to somewhere between the 9th century B.C. and the middle of the 13th century A.D, confirming its pre-colonial provenance. However, Schaaf and Wagner have objected to the way the dates were described by Hristov and Genoves.[1][2]

Bernard Andreae of the German Institute of Archaeology in Rome, Italy, who examined photographs of the artifact, stated that he believed that it was Roman and proposed the 2nd century A.D as its date of origin, based on the hairstyle and the beard.

Researchers who have analyzed the artifact have come up with two very different possibilities:

  • A hoax: according to an informal declaration by Paul Schmidt, an archaeologist at UNAM, the head was planted in the site by a participating archaeologist, Hugo Moedano, in an attempt to play a practical joke on José Garcia-Payón, supervisor of the dig. Schmidt moreover stated earlier that Garcia-Payón was not present during the entirety of the excavation. Garcia-Payón’s son insists that his father stated that he was on the site at the time of discovery. According to Hristov, these allegations are hearsay, and because the individuals directly involved have since died a confirmation or refutation of the allegations has become impossible.
  • An import from an early European visitor who came to Central Mexico. According to Hristov, it is highly dubious that a European could have come before the conquistadors without any reference about it in historical tradition in Nahuatl. Indeed, Moctezuma II was informed very quickly about the Spaniards' arrival in 1518 and the news received very strong attention from Aztec nobility. However, Hristov notes that other historians have considered the possibility of a Norse visit to the region and that the figure bears a possible resemblance to a Norseman or Viking. Hristov argues that a Roman, Phoenician, or Berber ship, or the drifting of such a shipwreck to the American shores is the best explanation. Hristov claims that the possibility of such an event has been made more likely by the discovery of evidences of travels from Romans, Phoenicians and Berbers in the 5th or 6th century B.C. to Tenerife and Lanzarote in the Canaries, and of a Roman settlement (from the 1st century B.C. to the 4th century A.D.) on Lanzarote island.

See also

References

  1. ^ Schaaf, Peter (8 April 2000), "letter", New Scientist (2233): 64–65. {{citation}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  2. ^ Schaaf, Peter (2001), "Comments on "Mesoamerican Evidence of Pre-Columbian Transoceanic Contacts" by Hristov and Genovés", Ancient Mesoamerica (12): 79–81. {{citation}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)