The Roman Head from Mexico

[Arthes]

Greetings

Ah.. technically, not quite correct.

on looking at the line from Australopithecus to Paranthropus, especially Aethiopicus, surely that is a closer resemblance to a Gorilla than human, the offshot they descended from maybe?
Marcus M.....what do you say?
regards
Arthes

[Marcus Mummius]

Hi Arthes,

I don't know if I totaly understand what you mean? But I'll say some things and hope some of it helps...

The Paranthropines (aethiopicus, boisei, robustus,...) are (very likely) a dead branch from the evolutionary bush(better not to use the word three). They evolved from the Australopithecines (around 2,6million years ago if I remember correctly) like the Homo line did. But they were two seperate braches. It is very likely that the Paranthropus was a plant eater (it is clear if you loke at his jaws and teeth), the Homo rudolfensis, habilis, erectus etc. did eat meat. The Parathropus line seems to have died out a bit longer than a million years ago.

The last common ancestor of Man and the Apes(like the Chimpansee) is dated around 7million and 8 million years ago. Yes morfologicaly the parantropus is more like the Gorrilla than a modern man. But Evolutionary their lines are far apart.

Always be carefull because evolution often works in ways you wouldn't really expect. Just look at the Homo Florentientis, a nice example of 'retro-evolution' to adapt to the special ecological system of his habitat.

Kind regards,

[Robert Vermaat]

on looking at the line from Australopithecus to Paranthropus, especially Aethiopicus, surely that is a closer resemblance to a Gorilla than human, the offshot they descended from maybe?
Marcus M.....what do you say?

:?: We were talking about Neanderthal and Cro magnon (not) being relatives, weren't we?

Be careful Robert, these are far from straightforward signs. The morfological diferences among Modern Man are also vast!

You're right, of course, I was generalising. Older skulls also look different than younger ones.

[Gaius Decius Aquilius]

I think I have a plausible explanation for the Roman head in Mexico. Keeping an open mind I have put together contributions from this thread to form a hypothesis. Based on the observation that that the Romans were poor sailors, I suggest that a Roman ship with a cargo of pottery statues and a Roman soldier passenger got lost on a voyage to England and by making a left turn at the Canaries instead of a right, wound up in Mexico. The crew, undoubtedly Greek, and fed up with their Roman passenger, who's poor navigation skill got them into this in the first place, left him and his cargo in Mexico. They went back home, but of course, would say nothing about this to anyone.

The Roman soldier who would be have difficulty making friends in Mexico, being unable to even pronounce Tecazic-Calixtlahuaca, much less communicate further. It should be noted at this point that the domesticated house cat was unknown in Mexico at this time. The Tecaxic-Calitlahuaca culture in all probability domesticated the local crocodile as household pets and for rodent control, in the same manner as the western putty-tat. The lonely Roman soldier undoubtedly traded a pottery figurine for one of the adorable creatures, as an animal companion. Such crocodile - human relationships do come down to us as evidenced in the Peter Pan sagas. This would also fully explain the presence of the Roman artifact in the find context.

At some point an off-course Tor Heyerdhal type Kon-Tikkie raft carrying Buddhist missionaries made contact with Mexico. The Tecaxic-Calixtalahuacians, being glad to get rid of the Roman who was probably making a nuisance of himself bellowing commands in military Latin, and endlessly tooting on a tuba was given the Astrolabe of Ankythia. Remember, the Mesoamerican culture was advanced in astronomy. Using the Astrolabe, the Roman and the Buddhist missionaries were able to navigate to England where the Roman soldier along with his faithful pet crocodile joined back up with the Roman army. The missionaries went on to end up in Sweden, explaining the Birka find.

The Roman soldier then probably wrote his memoirs at Maiden castle. It is now suggested that his crocodile, mistaking the pile of papyrus for a small child ate it for lunch. The poor creature then expired being unable to digest a bad vowel conjugation. The beloved creature was then interred. During excavation I suspect a Dr. I. Jones, who was known to be active in the 1930s, probably made off the manuscripts which were found in the crocodile's belly. This is the same Dr. Jones of whom I wrote a previous post on, who found the Roman planes in a hanger in Egypt. (I recall Vortigen and other regulars contributing to that thread.) I note the suspicious disappearance of that thread from the RAT archive. Is there, I ask, a possibility of a larger conspiracy to keep The Truth of the mystic past from the people?

Gaisu Decius Aquilius
(Ralph Izard)

[Praefectusclassis]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[DAN OF BRITANNIA]

My theory is that Roman luggage handlers were worse than modern ones.

So this is probably the last remains of some Roman dignitaries lost holiday luggage, it may have resulted in some Mayan/Aztec chief arriving at his destination and finding out that his own suitcase had ended up in Parthia!

Either that or the postal sevice was getting really bad towards the end of the Roman Empire (like the current UK postal service is now) and they may have thought a package with Thessalonica written on it was meant for Teotihuacan instead - which shows the importance of writing a postcode/zipcode properly I guess!

Actually I shouldn't knock our post office because you'll think I'm being all political (I don't really want to be locked away for 90 days by Mr Blair's thought police for being cynical in public).

Looking on the bright side, it could solve our energy crisis... in order to split the atom cheaply - UK scientists should simply put it in the mail marked 'fragile' !!!!!!!

[Tarbicus]

(like the current UK postal service is now)

Just as well it wasn't made of gold - it may not have arrived anywhere at all :wink:

[hoplite14gr]

Thanks for the anthropology info.
As for the baggage handlers and navigators well it is just..plausible.
I will repeat that I agree with Sandra's comment that more solid evidence is needed to make plausibility a certainty.
Kind regards
Stefanos

[john m roberts]

In regard to the "blown off course" hypothesis of a Roman vessel arriving in Mexico: It would not be enough to be blown off course. You'd have to be blown off course with every cubic centimeter of your vessel crammed with casks of drinking water and other provisions. That's the only way for even a part of your crew to make the voyage alive. And, even in the absence of navigation instruments, people will still understand the difference between east and west. Since they're not out there trying to discover a new world, they'll make it their first order of business to head back east as soon as that pesky contrary wind stops blowing. It wouldn't keep blowing them west for the entire crossing. They'd be trying to get back home before the provisions ran out. Oh, and there's the teredo worms.

[Tarbicus]

Oh, and there's the teredo worms.

If that means the hull would have been eaten away by marine organisms within weeks, prior to the use of copper plating, check this out: (You need to copy and paste the link into your browser URL address bar for some reason - clicking on the red text will not work)

http://www.bruzelius.info/Nautica/Shipb ... Young(1867 )_Ch4.html

A Roman ship sunk in the Lake of Nemi was found to have been coated with bitumen, over which sheets of lead had been nailed with gilt nails. The seams of this vessel were caulked with tow and pitched, the material of the hull being larch.

And also:
Caligula's Nemi Ships

[Praefectusclassis]

The Nemi ships are not to be considered typical though.

[Tarbicus]

How come, out of interest, ye being of naval expertness and all that?

And that was the quickest reply of all time! hock:

[Praefectusclassis]

For one, they were in a lake, and therefore not meant to be seaworthy and secondly, they probably were the emperors floating palace, so likely more lavishly built than other ships.
Hulls were built so carefully with planks edge-joined by close set mortises that caulking (as described) was generally not necessary. BTW, Casson, Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World (where this comes from, p.208-10) reports that the Nemi ships had no caulking either! The situation is different on the ships built on the Atlantic and North Sea coasts of NW Europe.
It seems that the Nemi ships were atypical in having lead sheathing up to the gunwales, but ordinary merchant ships probably had only the underwater surface protected. Between the lead and the hull was a layer of tarred fabric. As an extra protection, part or the whole hull was covered in pitch and or wax.

[Tarbicus]

Thankyou O Salty Sea Dog.

[Praefectusclassis]

Arrrrrgh Matey! 8)