This head of a 2nd Century Roman statue was buried with a pre-Columbian body in Mexico. This basically confirms that Romans discovered the Americas and traded with them despite no recorded evidence on either side of these transactions.
Explain this and post other weird shit from history. Please refrain from alienposting.
...how can you tell it's "Roman"?
Das rite
>This basically confirms that Romans discovered the Americas and traded with them despite no recorded evidence on either side of these transactions.
You just contradicted yourself user.
What the fuck are you talking about? Neither side has recorded these trades but the existence of this head shows that there must have been at least a single trade between Romans and the Americans. This is an "out-of-place" artifact. It shouldn't exost, but it does.
Many historians and Roman archeologists confirm it to be of the Roman style from about the 2nd century.
This is not how Occam's razor work. It's more likely that this is not a Roman head. This is not enough.
Unironically Atlantis. Central Mexico was a huge part of the Atlantean Empire.
>Vikings bring plundered stuff with them to Canada
>Canadian natives sell it to the Mississippian Indian trading empire
>Mississippians trade it to the ancient Mexicans
>ancient Mexicans bury it with a dead guy
>Romans discover a gigantic new landmass hundreds of miles away with a whole new civilisation
>not one Roman writer bothers to record this
???
>a single roman teracotta head = discovery
The least likely outcome is that this is not a Roman head. You can look it up and see that it has been confirmed to be of the Roman style.
To say that it isn't Roman means that some random guy in Mexico created a Roman-style statue, which is also the only Roman-style statue every found in thr Americas from pre-Columbian times. You honestly have a better chance of arguing that a time traveler brought it to Mexico.
>Mississippian Indian trading empire
WE
>confirmed
2 historians said it's a Roman head and that's it.
You anons are getting fucking baited. This motherfucker doesn’t even have a source and you’re gonna argue with him?
It is a real artifact and a real story, the origin is up for debate though.
The burial is not entirely pre-columbian however the object itself is dated at its oldest to the 9th century AD, very much not Roman.
Great argument, big boy, would you like a cookie for that exquisite response?
You're aware of the Mississippian culture no?
I'm not Op, I'm just capable of using the internet like someone who isn't retarded. You must be the other guy.
I'm actually from MS, pls enlighten me
I was gonna respond but you're entirely right. Back to shitposting in those other threads, I guess.
How the hell am I supposed to find the same article you’re reading by using google? I wouldn’t know if it was the one you read and if anything, you probably got the article from The Sun.
So fuck off with “duhh i can use the internetz :D”. Provide a source or stop being retarded
How the hell am I supposed to find the same article you’re reading by using google? I wouldn’t know if it was the one you read and if anything, you probably got the article from The Sun.
So fuck off with “duhh i can use the internetz :D”. Provide a source and stop being retarded
They built dozens and dozens of mound cities with populations of up to 40,000. They engaged in long distance trade, sometimes with the Aztecs and up the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers. They date from 800-1600 AD and probably collapsed due to European diseases. Earlier mound building cultures existed to, the Watson mound for example is a series of rings of unknown purposes that was built as early as 5400 years ago. A more tentatively dated structure in Louisiana was dated to 6500 years ago.
But yeah they totally traded with the Aztecs aswell as tribes in Canada.
>hold my hand and do my research for me
I have an alternative course of action.
Kill yourself tonight.
There was a large pyramid-building civilization with cities all along the length of the Mississippi river during pre-Columbian times.
Pic related was right next to where St. Louis is today, and there were many other sites.
HELLO MICHAEL, VSAUCE HERE
>covered in grass but with an obvious underlying structure
How about people not be morons and accept that these are stone brick pyramids that got covered by Earth over time like every single other pyramid in the Americas.
No, they're definitely earthworks.
I know that whenever I stack dirt at right angles in a wet climate, it will retain it's sharp angles over hundreds of years. Every single pyramid in the Americas had to be dug out of the mound it was buried under.
I saw these as a kid and didn't think anything about them. Where should I visit as an adult?
The oldest boomerang was found in Poland.
Not sure they're worth visiting, however Im sure theres a museum that holds artifacts from them
Both are pretty shitty from what I recall.
now it's 3. t. certified historian
woops my bad, Watson mound is the latter one, the one dated to 5400 years ago was poverty point
the first gun was discovered in what became the Incan Empire
they called them Thunder Sticks in their own language
It's definitely earth. People have dug into it, and there's also been extensive conservation work to maintain it in the last several decades.
There may very well have been a voyage at some point from Europe and/or Africa to America which didn't make it back. No one bother to record it because it was deemed a failure in the eyes of whomever funded it. Or it was adventurers who fails, just saying they were travelling west and never returned.
These people die or disease/are killed by the indigenous people. One of the indigenous people finds a little terracotta statue and keeps it, while the rest of the people are buried in an unmarked grave.
This is a plausible explanation of it without going into "muh Atlantean/muh Romans discovered America", and that's assuming the head is indeed Roman.
Also, European people had a view of the "Antilles" (? not sure of spelling ?). So it is possible people had known of lasts to the west before the voyage of Columbus.
>looks up Antilles
>sees this on wikipedia
The word Antilles originated in the period before the European conquest of the New World, Antilia being one of those mysterious lands which figured on the medieval charts, sometimes as an archipelago, sometimes as continuous land of greater or lesser extent, its location fluctuating in mid-ocean between the Canary Islands and India.[3]
Why is it even a question that Europeans knew something was there? They clearly did, just not exactly what? The same is probably true for China and North Africa.
so poles and abbos are the same people!?
There's one in Moundsville Wv I've been to a few times. It's right across from a big ass out of service penitentiary where crazy shit used to happen. Both are pretty cool desu.
>where crazy shit used to happen
Injun spirits, no doubt.
WE WUZ WINGED HUSSARS!
This. Where do you think “-TLAN” in Nahuatl comes from? That’s right, ATLANtis!
Cuneiform inscription found in Malta dating to the 13th century bc, how the fuck did it get there?
>a forgotten continent exactly in the direction atlantis was supposed to be isn't atlantis
>it's not sunken so it can't be atlantis
Archaeology is not the study of unique objects, as the unique doesn't imply anything of value when you study societies and regions. Even if it's roman style where's the writings about that? Any roman ceramics?
What are you referring to?
>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 between Rome and the Americas, a view strongly promoted by archaeologist Romeo H. Hristov.[1] However, several other explanations for its presence have also been put forward.
america obviously.
