A Little Bit Different History

Hello everyone!

I recently read an article about neighboring Georgia which said that they had possibly discovered Mayan ruins in a Native American mound. The article, http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/12/22/1100-year-old-mayan-ruins-found-in-north-georgia/ , stated that archeologists had found Mayan ruins that were 1100 years old. The only evidence the article offered up was gathered from soil samples and pottery shards. No details were given as to how the pottery shards were of Mayan origin or design and so on.

I waited, because people will claim anything, until I read the original article that this article got its information from. The article, http://www.examiner.com/architecture-design-in-national/massive-1-100-year-old-maya-site-discovered-georgia-s-mountains, did list further evidence. First that the Cherokee have Mayan words in their language (which could be pure coincidence), that pottery shards were found (again no explanation of the shards), and that there was a rock wall suggesting a permanent structure. The importance of that last piece of evidence is because the Cherokee did not typically have permanent shelters. 

The evidence offered up by this article is clearly circumstantial. For one, the Indian mounds within Georgia and the surrounding area have already been identified as belonging to a Mississippian culture  like those that constructed Moundville. Secondly, if there really had been a Mayan city in North America, there would be more evidence of it in the archeological data. Archeologists wouldn't have found possible pottery shards from the Mayans in only one area. There would have to be shards from the sites of  other tribes or cultures, because trade would have been necessary for survival. This is the only site with possible "pottery shards" which in all reality are probably Mississippian culture.

Now I know that a lot of people, online, are saying this is a hoax. I don't think its a hoax. I think its a vague description of archeological evidence in order to get grant money. Imagine if it was a Mayan city, people would be dying to know what happened to the Mayans, grant money would pour in.

However, I ask you to draw your own conclusions. A good point is made in this counter article, http://blogs.artinfo.com/artintheair/2011/12/23/ancient-mayan-ruins-have-not-been-found-in-georgia-duh/, by the fact that the author of the original article, Richard Thornton, is claiming that his ancestors, the Cherokees, are descended from the Mayans and so is he. Considering that 2012 is supposed to be the end world because of the Mayan calendar, it would be a good time to advertise that Mayan ruins were found in North America. (Which my response to that is this picture by Dan Piraro.)

But I digress. My real point here is the grant issue. I've been hearing a lot about grants since I started volunteering for this museum. I'm not exactly sure what to think of them completely. The only thing I do think is that we should be giving more money to our Archeologists, our museums, our historians. That way they won't have to loosely translate evidence so that it borders hoax creation. That way they won't have to look for grants just so they can have air conditioning in order to protect valuable documents. Of course realizing that the economy is the way it is, that's impossible right now. But perhaps in the future we can try to provide for the halls and diggers of history. If we had learned from the past, if we had learned from the Great Depression and the progressive movement of the 1890s to the early 1900s we would probably be in a better financial situation than we are in now. But that's getting too political.

Till next time.