as a follow up to this thread
and this recent story
and the debunk of that story here
I have bought the reference quoted in Mr. Colavitos' article:
“A Pseudo Pre-Columbian Colossal Stone Head on the Pacific Coast of Guatemala,” Proceedings of the International Congress of Americanists (41st session, Mexico, 1974) vol. 1, pp. 519-521.
After reading it I will make clear what the small paper states and what is still unsure or open:
The article reports:
- The stonehead is located "on a finca called Las Victorias in the departement of Retalhuleu, Guatemala."
"Las Victorias is a small coffee plantation on the west side of the Quetzaltenango-Retalhuleu toll road, about fifteen kilometers north of the junction with the east-west coastal highway. The nearby community of San Felipe may be found on a good map. A dirty road leading to El Palmar runs thorugh the north edge of finca Las Victorias. The colossal stone head stands in an uncultivated narrow ravine only a few hundred meters north of this road and about the same distance west of the toll road."
- There are two more good resolution pictures of the statue included, both from 1941 or 1942 by Francis B. Richardson. The agreement of the statues pictures in those photos with the one visible in the ancient-origins.net article is so well, that I can say for sure that exactly the same type of statue (not the usual ones like these ( [www.ancientamerica.org] )) is depicted. Further it is extremely likely that it are the same stoneheads. Since the publication is from 1974 and the photos are from 1941/-42 it is impossible that the photos are faked and therefore it is (now) an established fact that this type of stonehead(s) exists/existed and very likely that it was the same stonehead, since it was found at the finca Las Victorias, the finca mentioned in the article of ancient-origins.net.
- Mr. Richardson pointed out to Mr. Parsons (the author of the conference article/paper) that there is a commemorative plaque in the photos "which was inscribed with the date of dedication. The plaque read, "E.G.M. 16 Abril 1936"."
- After having a look at the photos within the conference paper I have to agree that there is a plaque visible, the symbols on that plaque are alpha-numeric in latin and could read the above stated information.
- Mr. Richardson told Mr. Parsons that he got told that it "was created by the administrator of the farm as a memorial to his deceased wife. Apparently the initials pertain to that person."
- In the paper Mr. Parsons doesn't supply any new photos that he shot of the statue, but states that when he relocated it "in 1970 it already was laced with tropical vines and creepers and was considerably eroded. Moreover, the identifying inscribed plaque had disappeared."
- Mr. Parsons also reports that the current (in 1970) administrator of the finca "knew absolutely nothing about the history of the carving it was just there, ..."
- Based on the information Mr. Parsons heard from Mr. Richardson, which Mr. Richardson heard from someone, Mr. Parsons then states that the collosal stone head is a "pseudo" stone-head created by the mentioned administrator in 1936.
Personally I feel the following conclusions can be made:
- The statue is real.
- The statue is no longer in a good condition.
- The plaque is no longer applied to the stonehead.
- The statue has no pronounced female features.
Personally I feel the following is possible:
- The statue was not carved by the administrator of the farm, the administrator just dedicated the (statue-)head to his wife and applied the plaque to the statue or the plaque is of another origin.
- In 1970, the statue was not anymore in a good condition because of natural erosion, but because of intentional, or unintentional destruction, maybe just like reported in the article of ancient-origins.net
- Supporting the idea of ancient creation, or atleast creation by indians native to that region in my opinion are the so called "Warriors of the Clouds" in Peru. They are no fake and definitely show a quite siginificant similarity with the stonehead in Guatemala, supporting the idea that knowledge and creation of such-styled stoneheads could have existed even piror to 1936 in the times where the native indians still largely undisturbtedly inhabited that region.
Personally I feel we have to be very careful before we "debunk" something or state that something is true for sure.
I would really like to see that one day this stonehead gets excavated, if it has a body covered in ancient strata I feel it is very likely that it has been created in ancient times and therefore no fake and not created in modern times or 1936.
My ideas are something that can be proven and I feel should be investigated.
I would be happy to supply you with the two photos, unfortunately although not longer in print, the books do have a copyright to them.
Since the books (3 Volumes of articles of the said Congress in 1974, including the mentioned article with a total of roughly 1500 pages) were very expensive I offer the books for anyone interested in the photos and the original article, please PM me if interested.
I hope this new information, also about the two additional photos sheds some light on the topic and atleast clarifies that the photo visible at ancient-origins.net is very! likely no fake and that such a stonehead indeed existed.
Post Edited (21-Jul-15 18:29)
|The recently reported mysterious stonehead of guatemala - NEW information||1468||LostAges||21-Jul-15 14:14|
|Re: The recently reported mysterious stonehead of guatemala - NEW information||319||Skatha||21-Jul-15 23:20|
|Re: The recently reported mysterious stonehead of guatemala - NEW information||376||LostAges||22-Jul-15 08:31|
|Re: The recently reported mysterious stonehead of guatemala - NEW information||399||Skatha||23-Jul-15 18:13|
|Re: The recently reported mysterious stonehead of guatemala - NEW information||611||Jon Ellison||23-Jul-15 21:08|
|Re: The recently reported mysterious stonehead of guatemala - NEW information||362||LostAges||25-Jul-15 07:47|
|Mod Note > Quote Feature||399||Dr. Troglodyte||25-Jul-15 14:39|