Monday, 28 May 2012

The Archaeological Paradox of the Jade Axes

Jade polished axes are the most beautiful and perplexing artefacts in the archaeological world.
Jade Axe found in the British Museum

 I don't believe that there is a better illustration of a highly sophisticated and technically accurate culture than the one that could have produced this artefact.  So why would the British Museum go and spoil it all, by informing us:

"Jadeite axes were entering Britain from the beginning of the Neolithic period, around 4,000 BC. One of the rare datable examples was placed as an offering besides a 6,000-year-old wooden trackway in Somerset."

So the British Museum, a pillar of the historical and archaeological establishment suggest that these most wondrous objects are Neolithic, made about the same time of Stonehenge, which has some logic as the monument like the axes are a testament to a great civilisation.

BUT HANG ON!  how do you date a piece of rock?

You can use Chlorine-36, this was used to date the cutting of the Welsh Bluestones of Stonehenge as 12,000BCE.  But they have not, why?  Is it because the Bluestone dating left egg of the Archaeologists faces as their date for Stonehenge Bluestone was just 9,000 years out!

So how were these artefacts dated?

Well, the one you saw was not dated, that's why its has a variation of two thousand years - and at best that's a guestimation based on other finds.

According to the CBA Issue 96, Sept 2007:

"The recent ban placed on the proposed export of the privately-owned jade axehead from Newton Peverell, Dorset (News, May/Jun) has brought these beautiful Neolithic objects into the public eye once more. Well over 100, in various shapes, sizes and shades of green, are known from Britain and Ireland. They have been the subject of speculation and study both here and abroad for over a century. Early suggestions that they came from China were soon replaced by claims that they were made from Alpine rock, and various attempts have been made by geologists over the years to find the sources.

To date, however, only two jade axeheads have come from firm British archaeological contexts: the Cairnholy fragment, from a deliberately-broken axehead, found on the paved floor of the tomb's "antechamber"; and a pristine, complete specimen, found in 1973 beside the Sweet Track in Somerset. This wooden trackway is dendro-dated to 3807/3806Bcand the axehead could have been deliberately deposited not long after its construction. As for the Cairnholy fragment, opinions as to when it was placed in the tomb differ but a date of around 3800Bcis quite plausible, given the early Carinated Bowl pot found in a primary deposit in the tomb's forecourt. Other specimens, found in Neolithic enclosures in southern England at Hambledon Hill, Dorset and High Peak, Devon were frustratingly unstratified."

Over 100 have been found and in the past the craftmanship was so great and unexpected they believed they come from China!!  (Interesting no-one explained how they got to Britain, via hunter gathers tribes that didn't sail boats). But the dating of these artefacts is bordering on fascicle - found BY the trackway dated 3800BCE and a tomb with a piece of pot dated 3800BCE.  I like the Neolithic Connection of certain sites with the admission that they were unstratified - Hambledon Hill has ALSO been carbon dated as Mesolithic - so why can't it be Mesolithic in date if it was 'unstratified'?

It's a joke!!! - So what is the truth about these axes?

Now, thanks to the pioneering work of Pierre Pétrequin (of the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique and the University of Besançon) and his wife Anne-Marie Pétrequin over the last 16 years, this has been achieved. Their research, which has morphed into a current three-year, million-Euro, international project funded by the French government, is revolutionising our understanding of every aspect of these objects, not just here, but across the whole of Europe

By 1979 a number of British jade axeheads had been analysed and found mostly to be jadeite, with omphacite also significantly represented; but where they came from remained uncertain. There the matter lay, with little fresh research being done for the next 25 years. But in France the Pétrequins were busy. In the 1990s, with Serge Cassen (CNRS Nantes), they initiated a Europe-wide database of all jade axeheads longer than 140mm, gathering information on mineral composition, shape, colour, finish, context and date. They also undertook challenging fieldwork high in the Italian Alps to look for primary raw material sources and evidence for their exploitation

Monte Viso
Most continental geologists and archaeologists believed Alpine jades had been gathered only from secondary sources in downslope river valleys and screes. The Pétrequins rejected this, and in 2003, after 12 hard seasons of exploration in the Italian Alps and the northern Apennines, they were proved right when they found high-altitude quarries – 1800–2450m od – at the south-east foot of Monte Viso, 60km south-west of Turin.

Then in November that year, they struck green gold again, in the vicinity of Monte Beigua, part of the Voltri massif, immediately to the north-west of Genoa. But this was to be a bittersweet discovery. In the summer of 2004 mineral collectors smashed three massive boulders that had been worked during the Neolithic and removed around 1500kg of the rock. To date, nothing appears to have been done to prevent this happening again.

The Pétrequins' fieldwork around Monte Viso in 2004 and 2005 – just published in English in the European Journal of Archaeology – revealed good evidence for rock extraction and working in several areas. Reliablyassociated charcoal samples have produced dates demonstrating that these sources were exploited from as early as 5200BC.

I love the last throw away line of this report "
The exploitation must have been seasonal." - yes we have found that this site is ancient in fact we found carbon dating of 5200BCE, but I can't possibly be that date, as it means we have history complete wrong!! BUT just think for a minute about this statement.  They are saying Mesolithic People found this site at 2000+ feet and did not take the Jade? So why be there in the first place - complete nonsense.

The Alps showing the network of rivers that would allow the transport of Jade  in the Mesolithic

So we have Jade dated at 5200BCE, Stonehenge dated at 8500BCE and St. Michael's Long Barrow in Carnac dated at 6300BCE all rejected as they do not fit the current conventions - complete rubbish!
Moreover, the report ALMOST reveals the truth when it says:
By around 4500BC if not slightly before, blocks of the exceptionally rare, pale green jadeites from Monte Viso and Monte Beigua were being transferred over 200km to the north-west fringe of the Alps, to be made into fine long axeheads. These then found their way – via southern France or the Paris Basin – to Brittany, where they were reground and repolished into a thinner, regionally-distinctive shape for burial in the famous massive Carnactumuli, alongside copies made from local fibrolite and imported Spanish beads of variscite (callais). These are the axeheads shown on the Breton menhirs and on the famous passage tomb at Gavrinis. The Alpine sources continued to be exploited into the first half of the third millennium, but the main period of production for very long-distance movement seems to have ended by 4000BC.

The first thing to observe is that the 4000 - 2000BCE for jade artefacts has suddenly become 4500BCE - something to do with the 5200BCE carbon dating?  And the fact that these objects are being transported all over Northern Europe and Spain, with no mention of the transport needed for such a trading venture - really can't see too many donkey rides from Italy to Ireland or Spain somehow. And the fact that this trade stopped by 4000BCE - but hang on wasn't the British Museum artefact dated 4000 - 2000BCE?  This is after the manufacturing finished, so where does the logic for that date come from?

The article contradicts itself at the end by stating:
"Most recently Pierre and Anne-Marie Pétrequin's Projet JADE has taken a Europe-wide approach, locating axehead sources high in the mountains of northern Italy. First quarried were the dark green eclogites on Monte Viso, by 5200BC. From the first half of the fifth millennium, the exceptionally rare, pale green jadeites from Monte Viso and Monte Beigua were being worked, as well as nephrite from the Swiss Wallis. In Brittany the imported axeheads were copied in local fibrolite, and in Britain and Ireland Yvan Pailler's work has shown that copies were made here in local rocks too."

Wait a moment Jade was first quarried by 5200BCE?  So doesn't make Jade Axes MESOLITHIC??

Later Neolithic Stone Axes from The British Museum - dated 4000BC

In conclusion, from this report, we find that at 5200BCE there was a society with such ability and organisational skills that it was able to locate, manufacture and transport Jade goods throughout Northern Europe over vast distances.  This was the finest and best quality tools in the history of the stone age, but this industry ended in 4000BCE and the axe tools returned to become primitive and of inferior quality.

This is clear EMPIRICAL evidence that in the MESOLITHIC (if not before) lived a civilisation which was so sophisticated it could locate, manufacture and trade throughout the ancient world.  Moreover, these facts are not correctly publicised by the establishment's institutions like the British Museum as they contradict the 'dumbing down' of our history, which is nothing short of either a conspiracy or sheer incompetence.

Monday, 21 May 2012

The Ultimate Civilisation?

By Robert John Langdon

Dawn of the Lost Civilisation takes you on a journey into the 'Ascent of Man'.  From our humble beginnings in Africa to the ultimate civilisation located in the Garden of Eden that our mythology remembers as  Atlantis, Avalon, Shangri-la and Utopia.

The philosophical 'overture' of the book takes a critical look at our own society with its materialistic values in comparison to how we used to live in harmony with our environment and planet.  This 'primitive' concept is examined and questioned, the conclusions of the book are quite 'profound', but to help readers consider how these academically ancient 'primitives' did live for a period five times longer than our own civilisation, without destroying the fabric of this fragile planet.

Therefore, I have introduced a few video's as an alternative blog, I hope the format is constructive.  These videos have been created by a growing number of 'non academics' who understand the complexities of natural living, some call it 'experimental archaeology', I call it a common sense approach to how our ancestors lived.

The first video looks at how a basic bow is produced with natural stone tools, Dr Jacob Bronowski would ask you to try and understand the motivation in producing the bow, when the stone tools had been adequate for nearly two million years.

Ray Mears make it look so simple, but to our civilisation is a 'lost art' beyond the average persons ability (hence the TV programme) but to our ancestors this was 'common knowledge' and even children/adolescence's would have needed to understand these techniques and use them on a day-to -day basis to survive.  This is 'basic bow technique' is shown by the two experts producing a bow that could fire an arrow about 20 - 30m, the bows found in the Mesolithic were made of two-woods and could shoot over 200m, with 'microliths an even more complicated structure allowing the 'instant kill' of the hunted animal.

On this video Ray discovers a binding that I have been told has lasted over 10 years before deteriorating.

The next video give s an indication of how the Mesolithic Environment would have looked like some 10,000 years ago after the Ice Age, the Reindeer moved north from central Europe and the people followed them into the 'tundra', which you might be quite surprised by just how green and forestry the landscape would have looked.  For those archaeologist, notice how they farm the animals with fences, it calls into question the 'banjo enclosures' traditional archaeologists believe to be animal enclosures - why bother cutting a ditch??  Also notice how they use the reindeer like mules for travelling.

Another great mystery of the Mesolithic is the lack of 'houses' , where they were and how they looked.  Traditional archaeologists who were influenced with the African tribesmen create a 'round mud hut' that oue ancestors lived in, if you ever visit a 'reconstructed prehistoric settlement.  These ideas are based on the remains of round stones and central post holes in settlements.  But if our Victorian archaeologists had travelled east instead of south then these site would have looked a lot different as these are the Eastern Ancient Round houses using the same shape and post holes of conventional sites.

And if you wondered what was the fabric placed on top of the house because they don't have reed in abundance like in Britain, here is a prehistoric way to make a felt blanket without weaving.

So what else can we build with natural material - my favourite subject - THE BOAT

Much too complicated for the average Cro-Magnon/Palaeolithic man to build?  It was a evolutionary step up from the first boats used, made from just reeds.

And I know what your thinking, it will never float................... let alone take passengers.

And if you think this is impressive, look what you can do if the whole village joins in.... a FLOATING village, no wonder we cant find their houses.

Here is a video of RA II that crossed the Atlantic - so long ago that no video available only this scale model.

Archaeologist would have your believe that we had the technology and skills to build Stonehenge, but couldn't make boats or floating islands - makes perfect sense to me.

But did they wear cloths and have bags or even hats?  We found woven cloth imprints in caves of Cro-Magnon's in 17,000BC - so what is available rather than the 'traditional' caveman fur-skin?

Now finally, how did they move those stones to Stonehenge?  Sadly all those machines, all those hundreds of slaves pulling ropes and more importantly, all those Archaeologist were WRONG!

The solution............ they simply just picked up the stones on poles and walked....     don't believe me?

These works also utilize a force multiplier that was previously unknown (see Cunningham "Techniques of Pyramid Building in Egypt" Nature Vol. 332 3 March 1988) with an ideal mechanical advantage of 24. Equivalent to 24 pulleys, this system needs no point of attachment and has negligible friction. (The fastest way to work the force multiplier, high gear with a mechanical advantage of 1, is to lift all the pole ends at once as was done in "Walk Like an Egyptian. "Force Multiplier Obelisk I" and "Force Multiplier Obelisk II Horizontal" work on the same principle.) A lecture on the basic theory can be found on

What you also should bare in mind is that a Cro-Magnon is twice the size of a 'modern man' as seen here - they would only needed 1 person per side a total of just 8 people travelling 6 mph.

****************   STOP PRESS    ***************

The good news is that our first shop selling our books, models, maps and other collectables as stone tools all connected to the Trilogy 'Prehistoric Britain' is about to be launched.  This is the first of a franchise of shops to be open in the next five years, and is due to be open in Rottendean, just outside Brighton in Southern Britain on 1st July 2012.

The bad news is because of the launch date for the shop, we have had to put the publication date of 'Dawn of the Lost Civilisation' back a year until June 2013.  But because of the excessive material we have produced for the second book, we have decided to bring forward the second Edition of 'The Stonehenge Enigma' and place this new material such as the diagrams of how the Stonehenge temple looked and the connection to the 'Golden Ratio' we have found within the foundation structure.  And this book will be launched in September 2012.


(by Robert John Langdon)

Sunday, 13 May 2012

Stone Circle Secrets - Revealed

By Robert John Langdon

Stone circles have always been a mystery to archaeologists.  The fact that prehistoric man took such care, time and attention in building such monuments has lead them to believe that these structures are very important to this society - but sadly, don't have a clue why they were constructed!!

Typical Stone Circle

Many ideas from astronomical eclipse calculators, to meeting places for the lost souls of the dead have been suggested, all of which do not answered the most simplistic of sensible questions as - why not make it out of wood - which was easier to move and less physically taxing. For the Altanean/Cro-Magnons wantd theses objects to last a very, very long time.

Fortunately, the reasons for such constructions are, like most aspects of history, quite simple if you keep an open mind.  For even to day, we still use similar objects in our countryside to help us get around.

Modern Day Standing Stones
They are landscape 'sign posts' or as we call them today 'information boards' as seen here at the Devil's Dyke on the South Downs.  Now just consider, in 5,000 years time, how these information boards (illustrations missing of course) would look and how future archaeologists will consider there function.  Looking at the angle of the stone, would they not imagine that they are a 'star alignment' system??

So why have these 'navigation aids' and why not use maps instead?

We they probably had both (as we do today!) and these were used as a base to check not only direction but the season of the year.   It may sound strange to talk about not knowing what date of month it is currently, but to our ancestors days and weeks were far less important that the seasons as this was a 'nautical nation' and the season would reflect the expected wind and daylight available for journeys.  Especially if the Stone circle (as the one above) are placed by the sea, tracking marine routes to other islands and continents.

Consequently, additional (non-directional) stones would have been added to make the stone circle act like a seasonal sun dial, that could track the setting of the sun against the stone uprights.  The problem we have, like the archaeologists of the future with our own version of these 'navigational aids' is when the writing/drawings are gone - the meaning disappears.  An observation that supports this idea is that the stones of  Stone Circles have their 'flattest' face is facing the centre.

Was this because these were painted or carved with a 'relief' of the area?

Modern Bronze Relief Map - looks remarkably like a face of a stone upright

So why can't we see the relief markings today?

Of course our modern bronze version would last the rages of time better than stone - but they did not use Bronze, they could have also used wood, but that would have rotted in just 25 years.  But we do STILL have old stone markers around, to test how bad the deterioration would look.

Milestone in prime condition - its meaning is clear
A Roman milestone after 2000 years of erosion 

A Neolithic Standing Stone (Milestone) after 5000 years-  all carvings and paint are gone

The original Mesolithic Stone Circles of the Atlanteans/Cro-magnons - such as Stonehenge would have been built for this maritime society, and so should indicate the general direction of 'other' settlements in the vicinity.  As we have fully described in 'The Stonehenge Enigma', the three main 'round barrows' at Stonehenge are surrounded by moats and with direction stones at the top.  These are the Heel Stone, The Northern Station Stone and the Southern Station Stone, that point to 'Durrington Walls/Woodhenge, Avebury and Old Sarum respectively.

Stonehenge showing the Three Moated direction finders

Once the Direction was established, then the boats would follow the Mesolithic 'Long Barrow' pathway markers on the bank of raised water levels.  Later in the late Neolithic, when the waters receded new pathways to the same settlements could be reached overland for the first time and 'Round Barrow' markers with standing stones were used instead.

Later in history (in the Bronze and Iron Age) after the initial builders had gone, leaving only myth and legend on how and why these monuments were build, these later generations added more stones to some stone circles or they completed 'copy circles' to the environment in an attempt to mimic the ancestors and pay homage to their greatness - We have seen this with 'Round Barrows' that attracted burials and cremations some 2500 years after they were first constructed, as they were unaware of there true meaning - this has sadly confused archaeologists on the dating of these sites.

Is there any proof of this idea? 

Old Sarum to Danbury, Round Barrow walk

Alfred Watkins in his book  'The old straight track'  created the concept of "ley lines" which is generally thought of in relation to Alfred, although the stimulus and background for the concept is attributed to the English astronomer Norman Lockyer.   On 30 June 1921, Alfred Watkins visited Blackwardine in Herefordshire, and had been driving along a road near the village (which has now virtually disappeared). Attracted by the nearby archaeological investigation of a Roman camp, he stopped his car to compare the landscape on either side of the road with the marked features on his much used map. While gazing at the scene around him and consulting the map, he saw, in the words of his son, 'like a chain of fairy lights'  a series of straight alignments of various ancient features, such as standing stones, wayside crosses, causeways, hill forts and ancient churches on mounds. He realized immediately that the potential discovery had to be checked from higher ground when during a revelation he noticed that many of the footpaths there seemed to connect one hilltop to another in a straight line. He subsequently coined the term "ley" at least partly because the lines passed through places whose names contained the syllable ley.

Alfred was probably correct, as we will see later, but although (like a Roman Road) these tracks quite sensibly will be straight (quickest route) water and rivers will cause them to 'go around' marshland, bog and water.  And this concept of higher water levels in the prehistoric he never conceived.

Another researcher who came to the same conclusion was Peter Davidson, a retired engineer, who published a paper called 'Megalithic Aids to Navigation'.  Peter spent 30 years tracing patterns of settlements, monuments and artefacts from prehistoric sites on both sides of the channel and Irish sea.  He suggested that these markers steered ships into safe anchorages and 'dead-reckoning' from one stone circle to another.  In fact you can find Stone Circles on the entire coastline from Scotland, Ireland, Wales, Cornwall, France, Spain  and even the Mediterranean - clearly showing the prehistoric trade routes.

Were these stones maps of the area, later to become milestones?

So the solution was in fact quite simple, they are direction finders or 'navigational aids' for boats and ships, when the waters receded in the Neolithic they would have stood at the crossroads of several pathways and the pathways would be marked with both 'round barrow' and standing stone dependent on the environment.  These roads were used at first in the Neolithic and then Bronze, Iron and even the Roman took them over, as Watkins will tell you they were as straight as the environment gets.  If you still need further persuading then here is an article from CBA magazine showing archaeological proof - including the Standing/milestone/Stone that was replaced by a wooden post in the Bronze Age.

Evolution of a road - Notice the post/stone hole in the centre.


(by Robert John Langdon)

Thursday, 3 May 2012

Europe's first houses

By Robert John Langdon

'Dawn of the Lost Civilisation' looks at the society that built Stonehenge, the other megalithic structures of prehistoric Northern Europe and parts the Mediterranean.  The conclusion of this book is that during the Neolithic Period (4500BCE - 2500BCE) the 'ground water levels' that were high due to the last Ice Age, diminished and our ancestors had two options - to leave Northern Europe in their boats or to settle on the land in places we now call villages.

Crannog, used by boats to moor against as a temporary shelter - its was not originally a house
This transition was not 'overnight' but a period of many generations, for when the waters subsided, it left a river terrace that would be fertile and ideal for agriculture - as detailed in one of my previous blogs:

River terrace, perfect for farming.

The blog showed that Nitrogen-15 was present in the soil of prehistoric fields (this isotope is produced when land is flooded as nitrogen is a reside of water interacting with the riverbed).  This clearly contradicts the traditional archaeologists theory about 'land clearance'  - but recent 'real' studies obtained when vast areas of the Amazon rain forest was deliberately cleared by the government for farm use,  shows that that is not possible as the soil is 'barren' of minerals.  This is the consequence of a forest that has covered the land for many thousands of years.  The only way to 're-fertilise' the land is to send hundreds of cows walking about on your fresh cut forest leaving hundreds of years of 'cowpats'.  Therefore the farming the river terraces is your only option.

So where was the first houses?

Star Carr has claimed to have the first house on its site dated 9000BCE

I wouldn't take for gospel all the 'experts' said about the finds - you use spears for fishing and bows for land mammals - I blame the teachers.  But what is more important (in fact critical but forgotten) is that this site is on the water, even the archaeologists accept that now, but as always they say 'its a lake', when in fact it was a river and the river flowed to the sea and just off the coast is a place called Doggerland, which we will show in the book is home to the 'so called' mythological place called Atlantis as written about Plato.

Sadly for the archaeologists this is not a 'true house' as it was found 'on waters edge' it would have been a 'Cannock'  - a dwelling at the end of a wooden walkway (as seen on the video), more of a shelter than a house, as this civilisation lived on their boats for a majority of the time and maybe camped out occasionally - a bit like if you had a boat on the Norfolk broads, you moor up for food and drink during the evening and normally (if sober) go back to your boat to sleep.

Mooring up for the evening - you can sleep on the walkway if you wish, the boats nicer though!

So where are the first houses of this civilisation?

Its in Poland in a town known as Brzesc Kujawski on of Several large settlements that flourished between 4500BCE and 4000BCE on the lowlands of north-central Poland. About 10 kilometers west of Brzesc Kujawski is the settlement of Oslonki , excavated by Ryszard Grygiel and Peter in 1989-1994. Like Brzesc Kujawski, Oslonki is located on a low crest of land surrounded on three sides by water. In addition to thirty long-houses and eighty rich graves like those at Brzesc.

I know of another place that was on lowland surround on three side by water!

"The settlements are found primarily in the region known as Kujavia located to the west of the Vistula River, an area of low, rolling terrain with many streams, lakes, and marshes. Brzesc Kujawski and similar sites are important because they represent the first large agricultural settlements on the lowlands of northern Europe and for their presence on the frontier between farming societies to the south and the foraging peoples to the north.

Agriculture had come to Kujavia a thousand years earlier, as indicated by the appearance of settlements of the Linear Pottery culture, but it developed very slowly as the farmers adjusted to the new terrain and soils. The Linear Pottery settlements existed as small frontier outposts among the indigenous Mesolithic hunter-gatherers. After several centuries, large Neolithic settlements sprang up at Brzesc Kujawski, Oslonki, Krusza Zamkowa, and several other locations about 4500 b.c. 

First burials for the new farmers, showing changes to society and ceremony  -  shouldn't they be under a round barrow?

The Neolithic settlement at Brzesc Kujawski was discovered in 1933 by farmers digging gravel from deposits beneath their fields on a low ridge of land bordering Lake Smetowo. While digging, they found artifacts and skeletons. Luckily, an archaeologist named Konrad Jazdzewski (1908-1985) was working nearby, and when he learned of these discoveries he came to investigate. He immediately recognized that this was potentially an important find and began excavations. Over the next six years, he cleared the topsoil from more than 10,000 square meters, exposing one of the largest Neolithic settlements discovered before World War II.

Jazdzewski noticed that one of the most apparent Lengyel features at Brzesc Kujawski was the long narrow trenches dug into the clay and gravel subsoil, sometimes reaching a meter or more below the surface. These trenches formed trapezoidal outlines 20 to 30 meters long, 5 to 6 meters wide at one end and 2 to 3 meters at the other. Clearly, these were structures of some sort because there were indications that the trenches had held upright posts. Among these trapezoidal enclosures were large pits with very irregular bottoms dug into the clay subsoil".

So far so good then - now read the next extract - you couldn't make this up if you wanted too!!

"At the time, the prevailing belief was that Neolithic people lived in the pits, which were thought to have been roofed over with flimsy shelters. But what were the trapezoidal post structures? Archaeologists who had recently excavated Linear Pottery post structures at Koln-Lindenthal in Germany had proposed that they might have been barns or granaries. They could not imagine people living in them."

Archaeologists (because of their inadequate and closed minded training, could not believe that these primitive hunter-gathers could build a house, so they told everyone that they lived in the ditch  with an animal skin as a roof (no doubt attached to the perfectly secure wooden post) -  It beggars belief!! 

Even today they are suggestion that they are barns or granaries and people could not live in them - Is this because archaeologists have portrayed these people as 'fur covered primitives' that could only live in round mud huts, like our African ancestors - But it is a step up from living in a watery pit I guess!

"But one of Jazdzewski’s workers remarked that if he had to live in one of the muddy clay pits, he would break his legs slipping around in it. Jazdzewski concluded that the Lengyel timber structures at Brzesc Kujawski really were Neolithic houses and that the pits served some other purpose."


A 'worker', some manual labourer had to break the news to Jazdzewski (Konrad Jażdżewski (1908–1985) a Polish professor of archeology, doctor honoris causa at the University of Łódź.) an academic Professor of Archaeology that his ideas we NUTS! and the result of closed minded academic twaddle - its amazing that 70 years on nothing has changed in the archaeology field and to prove that look at the new modern interpretation.

"Eventually this view prevailed, and archaeologists now know that the big pits in fact were the places where clay was dug for plastering the walls of houses built with timber posts set into foundation trenches. At Brzesc Kujawski, more than fifty such houses have been found, both during Jazdzewski’s excavations in the 1930s and during further excavations by Ryszard Grygiel and Peter in the 1970s and 1980s. They are oriented along an axis running northwest-southeast, with the wide end toward the southeast. The reason for this orientation of the houses or for their trapezoidal shape is not clear. Many of their outlines overlap, indicating that they were built and rebuilt at different times. Burned clay plaster in the filling of the foundation trenches indicates that a number of the houses were destroyed by fire. The nearby clay pits were filled up with debris, animal bones, charred seeds, and artefacts like broken pieces of pottery. Other pits were used for storage or as the locations of workshops"

Clay pits for god sake!!  Lets see clay foundations and rain..... its the blind leading the blind!!

"Scattered among the houses at Brzesc Kujawski are also nearly sixty graves. Most graves contain skeletons that are in a crouched position with their arms drawn up to the chest. Males always lie on their right side and the females on their left, with their heads pointing toward the south or southeast. Archaeologists do not know the reason for this practice, but clearly it reflected an important fundamental belief. Accompanying the skeletons are artifacts. Many of the male graves have flint blades or axes made from large deer antlers, whereas female graves often contain copper ornaments, shell beads, and bone arm-rings."

The copper ornaments are important, this proves they used metals much earlier that tradition archaeologists believe.  The book shows that Plato refers to their use of metals in the Mesolithic Period.

"The copper artefacts found at Brzesc Kujawski and similar sites in Kujavia represent the earliest known use of copper in this part of Europe, around 4400 b.c. Although the source of the copper has not yet been established, it was probably either in the Alps or in the Balkans, hundreds of kilometers away. It was smelted and then hammered into ribbon, not cast. From the copper ribbon, metalworkers made beads, pendants, and head ornaments."

The copper was from probably the Balkans as the trade routes we have found go from Doggerland down to the black Sea through Poland.

"Some burials had lavish displays of copper, whereas others had none. After a short time, the copper supply was cut off, and the latest burials at Brzesc Kujawski do not contain such ornaments."

This is where archaeological linear evolutionary process falls apart again - if these people had copper and knew how to use it, why did later burials have no copper?  Did this civilisation leave (that's the normal excuse) and a non-copper race moved in? Or did the trade routes 'dry up' as predicted in my hypothesis and the boat people that brought the copper in the past move on?

"The inhabitants of Brzesc Kujawski and its neighboring settlements also acquired flint from sources more than 200 kilometres away in southern Poland. When they really needed a sharp edge they used "chocolate" flint (with a deep brown colour) and Jurassic flint from these distant quarries. In addition, they made stone axes by grinding local stones into shape. Antler axes were made by breaking off the base of a thick beam of red deer antler, then grinding it to make an edge. Experiments done in Denmark indicate that such antler axes could have been used for cutting soft wood. It is also possible that they were used in the killing and butchering of livestock."

So what do these houses look like and why did the archaeologist call them trapezoidal?

Brzesc Kujawski

Have we not seen this shaped structures else where in this blog and my last book but moreover on the hillside of Britain?

Typical 'Long Barrow' with a moat surrounding them

West Kennet 'trapezoidal' - lets not link them together, otherwise the archaeologists are wrong!!

We know from our research that Long Barrows were a copy of the boats which our ancestors used for homes during the Mesolithic period.  If your making your first home on dry land, would you not therefore transfer the same skills and design to your first boat house?  This gives us an understanding of the structure size and shape of the missing boats, which my new book fully illustrates.

It does leave a final question about dates!

According to 'traditional' archaeologists Long Barrows are late Neolithic  (dated by the contents rather than the construction) this same design is found in a wooden house 2,500 years before the Long Barrows were supposed to have been erected.  So we have a chicken and egg senario here, what came first?

This question fortunately, is easy resolved as the design of the houses changed not long after the first houses were built.  The traditional 'long house' is oblong not trapezoid.  Consequently, archaeologists are asking you to believe that the design of the 'Long Barrows' reverted back 2,500 years, for if at the same time they were making oblong house, why on earth would you made a trapezoid mortuary to the afterlife, which remarkably look like the houses we built two millennium ago??


(by Robert John Langdon)