Deluge of Atlantis

Deluge of Atlantis
Deluge of Atlantis

Friday, February 28, 2014

Megalithic Giants of France and Spain Part 1

http://rephaim23.wordpress.com/2012/06/11/prehistoric-giants-of-france-and-spain/?relatedposts_exclude=1183


Prehistoric Giants of France and Spain

True Giants in Neolithic France: A subject overlooked for 100 years.
In my years of amateur study, I have come across internet references to“Meganthropus” and “Gigantopithecus” 8 to 12 foot tall Pleistocene “Ape men”. But these giants  have only been based on jaw and teeth (For which I shall address in another post). The best way to calculate height if an entire skeleton is lacking, is from the bones of arm and legs! Fortunately, such bones have occasionally been documented.
In 1890, Prof. Georges Vacher Comte de Lapouge, the famous French Anthropologist and Theoretician, documented very large human limb bones from the Bronze age tumulus of Castelnau-le-Lez, near the old Roman Fort of Substantion, “Sextantio.”
 The giant of Castelnau, reported in the New York Times after rigorous independent analysis by a highly esteemed pathologist from Montpellier School of Medicine. Image of Bones, an engraving on pg. 12 of “La Nature” vol. 18, Issue. 888.  June of 1890.
Professor Georges Vacher de Lapouge. Well regarded anthropologist, respected by Madison Grant and even included in Topinard’s journals. His Atheistic, Darwinian, Socialist, Anti-Semitic, Eugenicist views make his discovery of giant bones all the more noteworthy.
His calculations indicated the Neolithic giant man was about 3.5 meters tall, and several hundred Kilograms weight; 11 feet 6 in., and 1,000 pounds!  The size of these bones were truly remarkable, as Lapouge writes in La Nature: “The first is the middle part of the shaft of a femur, 14 cm length, almost cylindrical in shape, and the circumference of the bone is 16 cm.” 16 Centimeters is about 80% thicker than a normal 5 ft 9 in tall man’s femur, which generally averages about 8.5 to 9 centimeters in circumference at the middle part of the shaft. If the giant’s femur were proportionate to its girth, its length would also be about 80% longer, or about 33 inches – 84 cm.
My Reocnstruction: The femur of the giant of Castelnau, Right.
The femur of normal 5 ft 9 inch man, Left.
The bones of the Castelnau giant when compared to the bones of a normal skeleton of 5 ft 8 (1.73 m) inch man:
Illustration (I made): The Limb bones of the giant of Castelnau when placed in their proper positions give us the picture of a giant at least 3 meters tall (10 feet).
The femur of a normal man generally represents 27 percent of his full skeletally erect stature. We may indeed add 1 to 2 inches to this when we factor in shoes, skin, and hair. The most accurate estimates of height are based on the femur. If the giant’s femur were 33 inches long, we are looking at a skeleton 10 ft 2 inches tall, not including a few more inches of flesh and hair added to this. Taking into account all factors, the giant of Castelnau represents a likely human anomaly of 3 to 3.5 meters tall, between 10 and 11 feet.
In 1892, Dr. Paul Kiener of the University of Montpellier studied the bones and found them to be abnormal, but apparently of a “very tall race” (see NY Times). This opened up the question  of the giants of antiquity, but did not solve the problem of their origins.
But was he simply an anomaly? Prof. de Lapouge writes that in the same cemetery at Castelnau he found the base of a skull, lacking the os frontis, from a young man about 18 years of age. He says this skull exceeded all the skulls in dimensions, including the Polynesians. On pg. 11 of “La Nature” he estimated this boy to have been “well over 2 meters” tall — ( 2 meters is 6 ft 7 inches) Thus indicating a boy over seven feet tall. The skull had the morphological characteristics common to the dolmen people of Lozere (who were long headed Aryan types). Lapouge also mentions that several instances of giant bones were indeed reported from Lozere (100 miles North of Castelnau), but that they had been unconfirmed as if his writing.
Further discovery of large prehistoric bones in the year 1894 at Montpellier, France– 3 miles south of Castelnau– tends to re-open the question of the giants. This from the “Oelwein Register” November 8th, 1894:
Reports of giant bones at Montpellier tend to re-open the question of the Neolithic giants of southern France.
The above News Report mentions skulls 28 to 32 inches in circumference, and bones belonging to men between 10 and 15 feet in height. Sent to the Acadmy in Paris (French Acadmy of Sciences). The illustration below gives us an idea of how large such skulls would be:
Illustration (I made): The skull of a normal man, 21 inches circumference. The skull of the Montpellier giant, 32 inches circumference. Such a giant may have had over 3 times the cranial capacity of a normal man. Something like 4,300 cc.
The close proximity of these reports indicates perhaps a tribal element of giant stature once occupied the Neolithic coast of South France. That is my on-going theory anyways. Other scattered press accounts indicate seven to ten foot skeletons were occasionally uncovered in other regions of France, and in the Pyrenees Mountains of Spain, near the Franco-Spanish border region:
The Miami News, Dec. 26, 1918.
Skeletons of Seven foot tall Neolithic giants.
Freeport Journal Standard, April 15, 1933.
Skeleton of Giant 8 feet 7 inches long.
The Evening Tribune, Aug. 16, 1935.
13 foot long Skeleton. Reims, France.
The Oswego Commercial Times, Aug. 8, 1851.
All of these reports, when viewed separately can be explained away as anomalies or press exaggerations and “tall tales.” However, when they are seen in retrospect, and in light of the scientific bone measurements from the Castelnau giant, they may indeed offer strong circumstantial corroboration to a true and physical reality, that some “giants” did indeed inhabit France in ancient and prehistoric times, and in rather substantial populations as opposed to an occasional individual here and there.
Miguel Gomez Aracil, Spanish Mystery writer has compiled accounts of large skeletons in Spain and the Pyrenees Mountains:
On the mainland, and particularly in the north, is where more traditional accounts are collected.
Giants atavistic, considered pagan by the Christian religion, far from disappearing have survived in folk tales and we have been presented as belonging to a gigantic race, and not as a singularity. In Catalonia “gegants els” are still present in many festivals and performances. Have been integrated into popular festivals to the point that all counties have their own and are part of the cultural and historical heritage.
Locate local folk tales linked to numerous giant megaliths, menhirs and dolmens. The megalithic monuments were built (according to folklore) by giant beings overnight. In Portugal, the dolmens are still called Antas (tomb of the giant or construction of the giant), perhaps in honor of the giant Antaeus.
In Euskera megalithic monuments are called Mairuen Baratza (orchard or garden giants of the Gentiles, the latter name with which they are known in the Basque Country). Therefore, the universal tradition designates the dolmens and tombs of the giants could pose more of a legend, if you stick to the archaeological evidence.
In principle, a controversial site in the remains of these features is the dolmen of Oren, in Prullans, Cerdanya (Catalan Pyrenees). In 1917, it seemed, were discovered, among other pieces, femurs of 70 to 92 cm long.While there is much confusion about the veracity of the finding, the researcher Fernando Ledesma in his book The Cerdanya, emerald Pyrenees Magic ensures that found seven skeletons of the human species in the dolmen I, of great importance.
The Dolmen of Oren I. Skeletons of giants were allegedly found here in 1915.
The writer and journalist Miguel G. Aracil actually extends nine skeletons were discovered at the time of the Man of Cro.Magnon (when the man of this period did not exceed, as determined by official science, the 165 cm high). These remains were guarded by the Casanovas family at the Tower of Prullans, former mansion of the Marquis of Monistrol. Later, some of these remains were handed over to the Archaeological Museum of Catalonia.
Unfortunately here you lose track of this material, because the museum does not recognize ever seeing them.
The fact is that arquelólogos and scholars have found relatively often daunting human bones in the Iberian Peninsula. In Garos (Pyrenees of Lleida), to reconstruct the apse of the church, the pastor Mossèn Jaqquet found the remains of a giant three meters high with an iron nail into the skull. In the reconstruction of another church, in Urbasa (mountain system between Alva and Navarre) were found human remains of cyclopean size.
Have also been found human skeletons of gigantic dimensions in Castile Medinaceli found near a skull and several bones in Leon, in the Visigothic church Marialba, skeletons of three-meter wingspan, and also in Cantabria, Girona (Besalú). … Practically all the remains are missing today, perhaps a few dozen scattered among collectors of memories.
But the crucial question is: why no scientist entertains collect and study all the data, remains and evidence available?
Clearly that would ruin many scientific theories.http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/gigantes/esp_gigantes_1.htm
I have corresponded by email with Mr. Aracil. He mentions that a Dr. Campillo a forensic anthropologist, has studied the bones of the giant of Prullans and that these measurements are recorded in a book. I am attempting to verify this information. It is likely that this is DrDomènec Campillo  of the Archaeological Museum of Catalonia, and Archaeological Museum of Barcelona. Mr. Aracil says the bones of the Prullans giant are kept at the Museum of Montjuic, Barcelona.
More information to come…
SOURCE:

THE GIANT FOSSIL CASTELNAU Translation from French

THE GIANT FOSSIL CASTELNAU
The legends of antiquity, even those of many modern peoples in various states of civilization, frequently mention the races of giants on which we have no positive indication. By the hand of the imagination in these stories, there is a high probability for the existence of old men who have elements with modern man in the same relative size as large animals quaternary with their descendants today. It is well known that almost all species quaternary Elephants, Felines, the Bears, Hyeana, Bos, Cervus, Meles, Fiber, etc.., To small mammals and birds, reached enormous proportions, and advocate for living conditions of their time. there would be nothing improbable in supposing that man also has a key greater. However, the two races quaternary well authenticated, that Neanderthal was at best of average size, and the Cro-Magnon did not exceed our great races today, the Polynesians, for example. We read this same argument made to establish the relatively recent origin of man and to argue that its type is still in the upswing of the physical evolution.
The footprints of giant sandstone quaternary Carson City (USA), who made so much noise there fifteen years and
implying by their size and spacing of men over 3 meters, are now regarded by American scientists as produced by a giant sloth, which we know nothing else.
Finally, if one leaves aside the bones of elephants presented several times as bones of giants, the earth has never fought above the bones of very large sizes of our time.
There is not anything to conclude the current giants. We do know, in fact, not one that seems to owe its size to atavism, and recent research on acromegaly even allow. wonder if we should not seek in disorders of innervation of the cause of the exaggeration of pace of growth in giants not just great individuals in a race of tall.
A shadow of hope has been, lately, given the anthropologists by various researchers who claim to have found in dolmens, and in particular those of Lozere, human bones of gigantic dimensions, but these pieces have never been produced it can be assumed that there was error. The Neolithic man introduced, indeed, sometimes in their graves the bones of large Pleistocene mammals, mammoth and rhinoceros (hole Chaleux Belgium).
The strange discovery I made in the prehistoric necropolis of Castelnau, near Montpellier, seems to me not expected to resolve the issue, but it reopens the debate, and it provides a positive solution.
The necropolis of Castelnau is a vast cemetery that I searched last winter, which included hundreds of graves from the period of polished stone and bronze, beneath a layer probably more recent. She provided a series of about forty well-preserved skulls and many others damaged. Among them is a huge skull base and without frontal, which requires an individual well above the height of 2 meters, and a common morphological type in the dolmens of Lozere. The piece is from a healthy subject, about eighteen years.
But I found even better. In the land of a vast mound, shaved since ancient times and containing cists of the Bronze Age more or less abused by the superposition of the first burials of Iron Age I found fragments of bone feature sizes much more unusual. I think it unnecessary to note that these bones are undeniably human, despite their enormous size, and the only doubt they can raise concerns about the significance of this unusual volume.
The first part is the middle part of shaft of femur. It distinguishes the hole feeder, and above a trace of injury healed. The circumference of the bone is 0m, 16, the length of the fragment, 0m, 14, almost cylindrical shape, the linea aspera strong enough no tendency to pilaster.
The second piece, the more marked is the middle and upper part of shaft of tibia. The epiphysis is destroyed, leaving only the anterior pons. The circumference of 0m, 13, the nutrient foramen, the length of fragment, 0m, 26. The cup is an equilateral triangle. The oblique line, very visible, reached 0m, 11, long.
    
The third, very singular, was regarded by good anatomists as the lower part of a humerus, by others as that of a femur, and indeed looks as little as one rather than another . The appearance is rather that of a distal femoral epiphysis without, but the bone is quite forlenient curved, cut, elliptical very regular and highly elongated, with an identical form throughout the length of the bone and if looks after the enlarged end, we recognize clearly the characteristic profile of the distal end of the humerus, the beginning of the trochlea and the ear-trochlea of the condyle and epicondyle. The bones also showed when I raised a protuberance very bruised and was soon to fall to pieces, having the shape of a condyle and no morphological analogy with the tibio-femoral .
    
But I believe rather femur teratological this paradoxical piece of normal size if it looks like the femur, but double the average if it is for the humerus. Placed next to a normal humerus from the same source, it gives an impression that its gigantic nature, in my opinion, does not justify. Otherwise, he should see a humerus amended by the necessity of supporting a weight of several hundreds of kilograms and adapted to the station, if not walking quadruped.
As his physical condition this piece suspect is not related to two others that may arise, however, a single individual. These volumes were more than double the normal pieces to which they correspond. Judging by the usual intervals of anatomical points, they also involve lengths almost double.
The three bones attributed to giant Casteliinu. In the middle humerus Perlora normal size.
The subject would have been a likely size of 3m, 50. We can therefore, by induction sufficiently probable, recognize the existence of a giant necropolis whose Castelnau we have preserved the remains. Its antiquity is beyond dispute: the conditions of deposit of debris, they should be older than the rock roses, and these have been reported by A. Mortillet of the inorganic-gian period, beginning the bronze, because of the presence of bronze wreaths on the heads of several skeletons. I even believe that these bone fragments have been brought from the valley floor with mounds of earth, and in a very advanced state of decomposition. They have entirely the appearance of fossil bones of Quaternary breccias Valley.
The giant likely Castelnau has been living during the Quaternary or the beginning of modern times. Remains whether it involves a population of giants.
The bones are in a state of conservation does not say if they come from an individual with general hypertrophy of the skeletal system (gigantism) or a young person still a race truly gigantic. The appearance is abnormal, but we realize that the first eoopd’œil irregular surfaces is mainly due to the action dissolvanted’unsol rich in carbonic acid and impressions roots. The bones of young mammals Quaternary often this aspect. Mr. Delage, professor of paleontology at the University of Montpellier, looks like weathered bones posl mortem and nonpathological M. Saba – tier, Professor of Zoology, is the condition for sure. The issue is so delicate that examination, histological itself has been able to provide the solution. – In summary, the discovery of Castelnau reopen once more the question of the giants of antiquity. It should be noted that traditions place, almost to the point of the valley where the bones have been taken, the cave of a giant. It is curious that the origin of the legend was discovered at this point a part of the skeleton with mounds of earth brought from Castelnau we have provided bone.
G. From Lapouge.
La Nature: revue des sciences et de leurs applications aux arts …, Volume 18issue 888, pg 11-12
 By Gaston Tissandier  – 1890

No comments:

Post a Comment

This blog does NOT allow anonymous comments. All comments are moderated to filter out abusive and vulgar language and any posts indulging in abusive and insulting language shall be deleted without any further discussion.