Posts Tagged ‘Peru’

 

dscf0611-hdr

Skulls on display at the Paracas History Museum

1620794_449562995172725_549031043_n

LA Marzulli & Dr. Aaron Judkins

Back in 2014, I was asked by LA Marzulli of the Watchers Series fame to be a consulting archaeologist regarding the Paracas skulls in Peru. I wasn’t familiar with the elongated skulls so I was not biased towards one side or the other. I agreed to join the team along with Richard Shaw, Chase Kloetzke, Joe Taylor, Ron Moorehead, Jillian Peck, and Brien Forrester as our tourist guide.

10645251_10203266117195947_7979138143883338971_n-1

Chase Kloetzke & Dr. Aaron Judkins in Boliva

When we got to Paracas, we spent five days researching the skulls. I was asked to study four specific elongated skulls. Chase Kloetzke brought her forensic investigative field kit and together with Joe Taylor we got to work.  We were given exclusive permission to unwrap the only known infant elongated skull in Peru. It is estimated at an age of 2,000 years old. The mummy wrapping textile was extremely well preserved displaying colorful sea crabs embroidered into the head wrapping.  We were astonished at the preservation of the skull. In addition to the forensic work, Joe Taylor was given permission by the late Sr. Juan (former director of the Paracas Museum) to mold several of these elongated skulls.

Below is my written report on four elongated skulls from Paracas. This report was originally published in LA Marzulli’s book “On the Trail of the Nephilim Vol. 2”. It is also in my journal the Mystery of the Elongated Skulls.

ea10f2_3a868b0301754e1bb35256c6ce3f215e~mv2

Osteological Evaluation of 4 Elongated Skulls from Paracus, Peru ©

by Aaron Judkins, Ph.D. Consulting Archaeologist

February 18, 2014

 

Specimen Number 1:  Infant, elongated skull (15-22 months)

img_7412-hdr

General observations: 1 intact cranium; intact maxillae; 1 intact mandible

In general, the skull has been remarkably preserved. The general shape of the skull is elongated with red-auburn colored hair still intact. This made evaluation of skull sutures difficult to assess as this obstructed the view.

The general morphology of the individual visible cranial bones is within normal limits. There is the metopic (nasal) and frontal sutures noted which are non-fused. The sagittal suture cannot be assessed e xteriorly via the anterior view due to hair obstruction. However, it is noted via the interior of the skull as seen from the inferior view and is of expected configuration and is non-fused. Sutural bones (Wormian ossicles or Incan Bones) were not possible to visualize due to the hair. The foramina are of expected configuration. The skull is atraumatic with no trepanation noted. Skull measurements were conducted using both straight & elliptical digital calipers. Cranial volume was measured using rice to determine the weight. The weight was then converted from kilograms (kg) to cubit centimeters (cm3) to determine volume. The density of the rice (753 kg/m3) was factored in.

(Cranial capacity is a measure of the volume of the interior of the cranium (also called the brain-case or skull volume). The most commonly used unit of measure is the cubic centimeter or cc. The volume of the cranium is used as a rough indicator of the size of the brain, although this is not an indicator of the potential intelligence of the organism).

img_7421-hdr

Result: 

Cranial volume: 797 cm3. Normal range for age: 369-961 cm3

Conclusion: 

Although the configuration of the skull is elongated, the cranial volume is within normal limits.

Dentition:

All of the fully erupted teeth are deciduous and in good condition. There are no dental restorations or prostheses. There is no significant attrition.

Fontanelles: 

Unable to assess the  anterior, the posterior, sphenoidal (anterolateral), and the mastoidal (posterolateral) fontanelles due to hair obstruction.

Summary:

1. This is an excellent example of an infant elongated skull. It is not currently possible to reliably differentiate between male and female infant and young child skeletal remains or amongst the major racial groups within subadults.

2. Age assessment of skeletal remains is best done in the context of the entire skeleton. It is important to emphasize that when limited to the skull, age assessment of subadult remains is best done through a coordinated evaluation of such features as dentition and fontanelle closure, as well as radiographs and/or computed tomography (CT) scans. This is particularly key for studies of tooth development (calcification, eruption). However, this testing was not readily accessible nor available during the initial on-site examination. It is important to emphasize that the evaluation of a skull without these methods is preliminary. However, the ability to analyze such remains from the strict perspective of osteology is fundamental for evaluation.

3. Dental Age: Likely 15 – 22 months.Non-Dental: No older than 22 months. Evaluation for age was done by a consulting forensic Peruvian Dentist, Dr. Daniel Mendoza Alarcon who used odontological parameters based purely on visible eruption patterns noted.

4.  In the evaluation of subadult skulls, particularly when studying ‘typical’ eruption patterns, it must be stated that statistical data is based on populations, and may not necessarily be reflective of reality in an individual.

5. It is necessary to note the differences between primary and secondary dentition, eruption patterns, and controversies surrounding the timelines that ‘typify’ those eruption patterns.

6. The probability of Cuneiforme modeling [A specific cradle-boarding technique of the skull with pressure applied to the forehead and back of the skull to produce an artificially conical or truncated cone-shape] should not be ruled out. Differential diagnosis should include “cultural practices” by the Paracas culture.

7.  Applying the scientific principle of Ockham’s Razor; while it does not tell us that the simplest explanation is true, may provide the best explanation based on methodological grounds.

img_7426-hdr

 

dscf0606

Senior Juan from the Paracas History Museum holding the infant elongated skull 

 

screen-shot-2016-09-25-at-5-23-40-pm

Specimen Number 2: Adult, elongated skull (unknown age)

img_7432-hdr

General observations: 1 intact cranium; intact maxillae; intact mandible (not shown)

The skull is in good condition. The general shape of the skull is markedly elongated (in the anteroposterior plane), has a very high forehead, and a deeply sloping parieto-occipital region. The ectocranial morphology of the individual cranial bones is within normal limits. The foramen magnum is unusually large and the occipital condyles are very large and somewhat elevated although the general morphology of the individual visible cranial bones is within normal limits. The mandible is robust (not shown). There coronal suture is clearly visible with partial fu  sion noted. The sagittal suture is absent. Skull measurements were conducted using both straight & elliptical digital calipers. The hair is red-auburn colored which is mostly non-intact. This made evaluation of skull very easy to assess. The skull is atraumatic with no trepanation noted. Cranial volume was measured using the technique already described above.

Result: 

Cranial volume: 2,390 cm3. Normal range: 1,350-1,750 cm with 1,450 cm3 being average.    

Conclusion:

The cranial volume is much larger and outside of normal parameters.

Dentition:

The dental condition is poor. There is evidence of severe periodontal disease, and only 9 of 32 teeth remain. Caries and severe abrasion are noted.

Features of Sex:

The supraorbital ridges are bulging, and the supraorbital margins are well-rounded. The mastoid processes are large, and suprameatal crests (zygomatic arch extensions) are present. The nuchal area is large but not significantly ridged.

Summary:

1. Adult; probably male although sex and age are not definitively determined.

2. Cranial volume is much larger than expected and outside of normal parameters; unknown etiology.

3. Absence of the sagittal suture; cannot rule out craniosynostosis with marked dolichocephaly.

4. The skull appears to possibly share a few similar Polynesian traits but this is inconclusive at this time.

5. The probability of Tabulate modeling [The most common type of cradle-boarding practiced by the Paracas Culture] should not be ruled out. Differential diagnosis should include “cultural practices” by the Paracas culture.

6. Applying the scientific principle of Ockham’s Razor; while it does not tell us that the simplest explanation is true, may provide the best explanation based on methodological grounds.

screen-shot-2016-09-25-at-5-24-11-pm

Specimen Number 3: Adult skull (unknown age)

img_7541-hdr

General observations: 1 intact cranium; intact maxillae; no mandible

The skull is in overall good condition with no hair. The coronal suture is clearly visible with partial fusion noted. The skull is atraumatic with no trepanation noted. The sagittal suture is absent. Two markedly elongated parietal bones are possibly fused at the midline, and a small ridge/elevation sits at what would have been the site of the sagittal suture. The skull exhibits a mild sagittal keel and parietal bossing. The cranial s  utures are otherwise normally configured. The individual visible cranial bones is within normal limits.

Skull measurements were conducted using both straight & elliptical digital calipers.

Cranial volume was measured using the technique already described above.

Result: 

Cranial volume: 1,726 cm3. Normal range: 1,350-1,750 cm with 1,450 cm3 being average.    

Conclusion:

The cranial volume is within normal parameters.

Dentition:

Absence of most of the teeth in the maxillae.

Features of Sex:

Probably male with bulging supraorbital ridges.

img_7538-hdr

Summary:

1.  Adult; most likely greater than 30 years of age.

2.  Cranial volume is within normal parameters.

3.  Absence of s agittal suture with a mild sagittal keel and parietal bossing. Cannot rule out craniosynostosis with moderate dolichocephaly.

screen-shot-2016-09-25-at-5-24-31-pm

Specimen Number 4 Adult skull (20-24 yrs of age)

dscf0739

img_7551-hdr

General observations: 1 intact cranium; intact maxillae; no mandible; Paracas, Peru

The skull is small and in overall good condition. There is no hair. The skull is atraumatic with no trepanation noted. The forehead is somewhat sloping. This specimen has a deviated septum and flattened nasals. The coronal suture is clearly visible. The sagittal suture is absent. In the left temporal suture there are four extra bones. The occipital profile is markedly flat. A large sutural bone (Wormian ossicles or Incan Bones) is noted in the lambdoid suture. The skull has an appearance of having been flattened in the anteroposterior plane.

Skull measurements were conducted usin  g both straight & elliptical digital calipers. Cranial volume was measured using the technique already described above.

Result: 

Cranial volume:  929 cm3. Normal range: 1,350-1,750 cm with 1,450 cm3 being average.

Conclusion: The cranial volume is smaller than normal parameters for an adult skull. Unknown etiology.

Dentition:

Absence of the teeth in the maxillae. There is a one-half inch separation between where the front teeth were. Without the mandible, it is difficult to assess the degree of alveolar prognathism; however, the maxilla suggests at least a mild      degree of prominence.

Features of Sex:

Assessment of sex indicates female characteristics as there is a generalized gracility of the cranium.

Summary:

  1. Adult female; most likely between 20-24 years of age.
  2. Cranial volume much smaller than anticipated for suspected age.
  3. Absence of sagittal suture. Cannot rule out craniosynostosis with marked scaphocephaly.
  4. The nasal appears to possibly share similar Polynesian traits of flattened nasals with a deviated septum.

5. Prominent cranial sha pe anomalies. The probability of Annular modeling should not be ruled out. Differential diagnosis should include “cultural practices” by the Paracas culture.

6.  Applying the scientific principle of Ockham’s Razor; while it does not tell us that the simplest explanation is true, may provide the best explanation based on methodological grounds.

screen-shot-2016-09-25-at-5-24-52-pm

 

DISCLAIMER:

This report is meant only as a preliminary examination of the anatomical, anthropology and forensic sciences to learn more about its forensic osteology. Although my evaluation has been done with the original specimens, my evaluation is based solely upon the osteologic material and my opinions are based solely upon the material presented to me.

Cranial capacity was measured using rice to determine the weight. The weight was then converted from kilograms (kg) to cubit centimeters (cm3) to determine volume. Using this method was the only viable method available in the field and can only estimate cranial capacity.

Forensic investigations should also include additional studies that would be undertaken to formulate a basis of accumulated knowledge by forensic anthropologist &/or pathologist and the publishing of a peer-reviewed report. Definitive analysis should include laser scanning, function analysis by FORDISC 3.0 &/or 3D modeling.

My opinions regarding these skulls were made without access to the entire skeletons. This should not be considered a final report or definitive analysis of the specimens.

Aaron Judkins, Ph.D. http://www.AARONJUDKINS.com

REFERENCES:

1. Aufderheide, A. and Rodriguez-Martin, C. (1998). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Human Paleopathology. Melbourne, Australia: Cambridge University Press.

2. Krogman, W. and Iscan, M. (1986). The Human Skeleton in Forensic Medicine. 2 ed. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

3. Matisoo-Smith, E. & Ramirez, J. (2010). Human Skeletal Evidence of Polynesian Presence in South America? Journal of Pacific Archaeology. Vol.1, No.1.

4. Matshes, E. and Lew, E. (2006). Forensic osteology. In Forensic Pathology: Principles and Practice, D. Dolinak, E. Matshes, and E. Lew, Editors. San Diego, CA: Elsevier (Academic Press). 

5. Milner, Richard. “Cranial Capacity.” The Encyclopedia of Evolution: Humanity’s Search For Its Origins. New York: Holt, 1990: 98.

6. Powell, T.V. and Brodie, A.G. (1963). Closure of the Spheno-Occipital Synchondrosis. Anatomical Record, 147: 15-23.

7. Raven, Peter H. & Johnson, George B. Biology. Iowa: Brown, 1995: 443.

8. Scheuer, L. and Black, S. (2000). Developmental Juvenile Osteology. San Diego, CA: Elsevier (Academic Press).

9. Standring, S., Ed. (2005). Gray’s Anatomy: The Anatomical Basis of Clinical Practice. 39 ed. London: Elsevier (Churchill Livingstone).

10. Walker, Alan & Shipman, Pat. The Wisdom of the Bones. New York: Knopf, 1996.

11. Weber, J., et al. (2007). Morphometric analysis of untreated adult skulls in syndromic and nonsyndromic craniosynostosis. Neurosurgical Review, 31(2): 179-188.

Also see: 

Another Bone to Pick…With Peruvian Nephilim/Alien Hybrids

Ancient Elongated Skulls: Alien Remains?

Star Child Skull report here: 

IMG_8099

Saksaywaman or “Falcon” is a walled complex on the northern outskirts of the city of Cuzco. Like many Inca constructions, the complex is made of large polished dry stone walls, with boulders carefully cut to fit together tightly without mortar.

 IMG_8106

The best-known zone of Saksaywaman includes its great plaza and its adjacent three massive terrace walls. The stones used in the construction of these terraces are among the largest used in any building in prehispanic America and display a precision of fitting that is unmatched in the Americas. The stones are so closely spaced that a single piece of paper will not fit between many of the stones. This precision, combined with the rounded corners of the blocks, the variety of their interlocking shapes, and the way the walls lean inward, is thought to have helped the ruins survive devastating earthquakes in Cuzco. The longest of three walls is about 400 meters. They are about 6 meters tall. The estimated volume of stone is over 6,000 cubic meters. Estimates for the weight of the largest Andesite block vary from 128 tons to almost 200 tons!

IMG_8101                                                                                    

Clearly, the people involved in constructing Saksaywaman & Ollantaytambo possessed knowledge and a technology far superior to what is generally imagined. Civilizations do not always move in a forward direction; sometimes it regresses. And indeed, most of the time, both advanced and primitive civilizations are able to exist simultaneously in different parts of the world.

IMG_8055

                                                                          Ollantaytambo

The Incan culture who constructed these megaliths possessed an advanced civilization. The structures they produced show that they had a wide-ranging knowledge of mathematics and geometry; that they knew the technology needed to build monuments by calculating fixed points in hilly areas; that they used equipment (such as the compass) to determine geographical positions, and that when necessary, they could transport the materials needed for construction from many miles away. Obviously, they could not manage all this by using only primitive tools. Indeed, many experiments by researchers and archaeologists have demonstrated that it would have been impossible to construct these monuments under the conditions proposed by the theory of evolution. Researchers who have attempted to construct similar monuments by reproducing the imaginary “Stone Age” conditions postulated by evolutionists have failed dismally. These researchers have not only found it difficult to construct any similar structure, but have also experienced enormous difficulties in transporting these stones from one place to another. This shows yet again that people of that era did not lead primitive lives, as evolutionists would have us believe. They understood architecture, made expert use of construction technology and engaged in astronomical investigations. On the basis of these megaliths, therefore, it is impracticable to make interpretations about the daily lives of societies of that time. Their social relationships, beliefs, tastes and artistic understanding cannot be deduced with any measure of certainty.

Incan stonemasonry was all done more or less the same way so I’ll use Saksaywaman as an example. The stones were then dragged by rope to the construction site, a feat that required hundreds of men. The ropes were so impressive that they warranted mention by Diego de Trujillo [1571] as he inspected a room filled with building materials. The stones were then shaped into their final form at the building site and then laid in place.

The work, while supervised by Inca architects, was largely carried out by groups of individuals fulfilling their labor obligations to the state. In this system of mita or “turn” labor, each village or group provided a certain number of individuals to participate in public works projects. Although multiple regions might provide labor for a single, large-scale state project, the ethnic composition of the work-gangs remained intact, as different groups were assigned different tasks. Cieza de León who visited Saksaywaman two times in the late 1540s, mentions the quarrying of the stones, their transposition to the site, and the digging of foundation trenches. All this was conducted by rotational labor under the close supervision of Imperial architects.

Protzen, a professor of architecture, has shown how the Inca built long and complex ramps within the stone quarries near Ollantaytambo and how additional ramps were built to drag the blocks to the construction above the village. I personally saw the ramp leading up to the Temple of the Sun at Ollantaytambo. He suggests that similar ramps would have been built at Sacsayhuaman.

In regard to Incan buildings, Ancient Aliens focuses most of its attention on the curved or beveled edges of the stones. They say that it looks like the edges of these stones were melted. Notice as we listen to them build the case for this that the reason they believe this is true, is based entirely on the way the stones look.

Ancient Aliens: “There are signs in many of these stones that show very large amounts of thermal heat have been applied to mould the stones in such a way that they apply perfectly, so it really does raise a lot of questions.”

AA: “If you look at the style the Saxoman Wall was built, the blocks look as if they’ve been molded into putty. If you can mould stone into place then all of a sudden, as crazy as [it] sounds it makes more sense.”

Now melting granite or any other stone and reshaping it would leave unmistakable evidence in and on the stones themselves. In other words, if the rocks were melted, it would be easily provable, it would not be a matter of what the stones look like, it would be a simple yes or no question.

Ancient Aliens skips this step of proving or disproving their theory, instead they assume that the rocks were melted based on the look of the stones and move to the step of trying to figure out who would have had the technology to melt stones.

AA: “I have a stone torch that I use for sometimes shaping stone granite and it generates a temperature in excess of 3,000 degrees. That’s a lot.”

AA: “When we look back at the ancients and we see a technology that they couldn’t possibly know, there’s only two possibilities: either God did it, which we don’t think happened, or some high-tech civilization from another planet came and showed them how to do it, then took their materials and tools and went back home.”

I think there is at least one more possibility that Mr. Dunn may have missed.

Every shaped stone at any Incan site has what archeologists call “pit marks” or “pit scars”. They occur when stone hammers are used to quarry and shape the stone.

In addition archeologist have found a huge amount of Incan stone hammers at the quarries, and almost uniquely to the Incans, they are found at the building sites too, because the Incans only rough cut the stones at the quarries they did the finish work on site so the stones would perfectly fit with the stones around it.

Well how did the Incans accomplish these beveled edges? They used a smaller gauge stone hammer for the outer section. The evidence for this can be seen on every single stone that has these edges.

You can see that the pit scars are much more numerous and smaller on the edges, showing that more blows with a smaller stone was used to achieve the detail work.

Another reason this is no mystery to archeologists is because there are a large number of stones in various stages of construction in the ancient Incan quarries. These stones reveal that indeed the Incan stone masons were using some of the most basic tools, even for their time.

If you want to learn more about the details I will link you to some peer reviewed papers that can tell you more than you’d ever want to know. Including details of experiments done. For example a single scientist in 90 minutes accomplished similar cuts with similar tools. [Jean Pierre Protzen, “Inca Quarrying and Stone Cutting,” The Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 44, No. 2 (May, 1985), pp. 161-182]

All this makes what Mike Dunn says here one of the most off the wall things ever said in the Ancient Aliens series:

AA: “I can’t help but think that whoever was behind this thought the process through from beginning to end. They didn’t quarry the rock and then decide how the heck [they] were going to transport [it]. They knew, from beginning to end, what needed to be done with whatever techniques and technology they were going to use. In industry today there is kind of an adage: ‘keep it simple, stupid.’”

AA: “Based on his experience, Mike Dunn believes the simplest way to build the great walls of Machu Pichu would have been to transport small rocks to the site then melt them and use molds to fashion the exact size and shapes needed.”

So he says it’s simpler to melt the rocks – something so complicated that we don’t know how to do it. Is that really the simplest solution he could come up with?

And then to say that they poured the melted rocks into a mold? I mean look at these walls! Can anyone look at this and say “yeah that looks like they were made from the same mold?” These are not exactly bricks of the same size and shape. Unless he wants to say that they made a new mold for every block, in which case we would go well out of the range of this being the simplest solution.

As far as how the Incans moved the stones into place, they left us a lot of evidence behind in the form of ramps. There are Incan ramps all over the place still in existence today, in the quarries and at the building sites.

The Incans had one of the most massive work forces in the all the ancient world. They were like the Roman empire of the west, and they had an absolutely huge labor force at the ready for these types of projects.

So we know these rocks were not melted and put in molds as Ancient Aliens tells us. We actually know exactly how they made these rounded edges, because of the pit marks left behind as well as the huge number of stone hammers found in the quarries. There are no mysteries that require alien input with Incan stone work.

 

Peru 2014

Posted: November 27, 2013 by Maverick in Archaeology
Tags: , , , ,

Paracas Skull DNA

I am  headed to Peru in January with LA Marzulli on the Trail of the Nephilim.  I will be one of two American archaeologist as well as one Peruvian archaeologist.  Joe Taylor will also be with us who will do more castings, of the elongated skulls there along with Ron Moorehead will also accompany us.

I could use some prayer support, but there’s another matter which I want to bring up and it is this.  If any of you have some extra dollars and want to “sow” into Man vs Archaeology, now might be a good time to do so.

If you feel compelled to do so, you will get The Los Lunas Mystery Stone DVD, as well as my book, “Alien Agenda: the Return of the Nephilim” which will total a $40.00 value, if you donate $100.00 or more.

We are going to collect DNA samples from various sites and this is what part of your donations will go to.  We’re attempting to find out if these elongated skulls are the remains of a hybrid being, known as the Nephilim. The testing of the samples will reach about $7000.00 per sample!  There are many expenses on this trip, as I have to pay for my hotel & daily expenses such meals.

My airfare is paid so I’m going no matter what.  We will be gone for about three weeks.

If your interested in helping out please go to the donation button at www.AARONJUDKINS.com.   I’m not a 501c3, so your donations will not be tax deductible.

Thank you for investing into this work!

Maverick

Thank you to those who have donated! You make a difference! 

1. Sally Cline

2. Tye Towriss

3. Audrey Robinson – Canada

4. E.E. “Bud” Dallmann