I do not want to be told that the ideas I am putting forward are extravagant, because they have a sound basis. Pharaohs and Chinese emperors, Incas and Japanese emperors, were versed in the art of mummification from the earliest times. So why, I speculate, should not giants, ‘sons of the gods’ and the first progeny of the extraterrestrials, have practised this art as well?
If the first intelligent men were scions of spacetravelling gods, they certainly acquired sufficient scientific knowledge from their heavenly fathers and perhaps even the order: ‘Guard and preserve body cells. One day you shall use them to produce beings in your own image!’
When we were filing the photographs of our journey to Malta, my collaborator Willi Dünnenburger drew my attention to a characteristic of the Maltese ‘mother goddesses’. All the statuettes are of pregnant women. Not only are the bodies swollen as if they were going to give birth to triplets, but the figurines have no thighs. The lower part of the body is unwieldy and fat. The calves are no longer recognisable; the swelling starts from the feet.
We could get round this observation by saying that the prehistoric sculptors could not recreate the subtleties of the body, because they were too primitive. But that does not work, for shoulders and arms are very delicate and plastic in their modelling. Many figurines exhibit a hand with four fingers and outspread thumb held over the heart as if the woman wanted to express her pain or anxiety about giving birth.
Surely the sculptures hint that these wombs carried something more than a normal embryo? Were the bodies of the pregnant women dragged downwards by the abnormal weight of the foetus? Did tissue, amniotic fluid and unnatural pillows of fat blot out thighs and knees? Could these poor creatures only waddle along a few weeks before giving birth?
Seen from this point of view, even the clumsy ‘mother goddesses’ have their value as proof of the existence of giants in the past. Kebra Nagast tells us about wombs split at birth because the foetuses had grown too big. A Sumerian cuneiform inscription from Nippur says that Enlil, god of the air, violated the child of earth Ninlil. Ninlil beseeched the profligate:
‘. . . my vagina is too small, it does not understand intercourse. My lips are too small, they do not understand how to kiss . . .’
I do not venture to speculate whether Enlil was an extraterrestrial or a first generation descendant, but it does emerge clearly from the Sumerian text that his body and its parts were too big for the normal-sized earth maiden Ninlil.
In the West there is yet another secret over which the veil of the millennia lies. Even the archaeologists admit they have nothing valid to say about it and that is a lot for a guild which professes to know nearly everything. I am talking about Brittany on the French Atlantic coast, 2,300 km from Malta, as the crow flies.
Gourmets are not the only people who go there to sample the celebrated fish and vegetable dishes. Brittany has been drawing travellers, today we should call them tourists, for hundreds of years because of the many thousands of menhirs.
When I was spending a few days in Brittany last autumn, I went for a walk through the menhirs on the night of the full moon. I felt as if I was on another star or in the primaeval landscape of our earth.
The menhirs or ‘long stones’ (the translation from Celtic) threw long ghostlike shadows. The colossi became a wild phantasmagoria. In the shadows I saw the pictures that did not exist. Sometimes men’s faces, sometimes a mother with her child in her arms. Then lions, panthers, great crabs and spiders. They all slithered by me in the moonlight in oppressive silence. Prehistoric monsters, fabulous creatures, crouched in the distance ready to attack, yet when I came closer they became again the giant moonlit stone relics from prehistoric times. I had been on a time journey into the past.
The long stones stand in an as yet unexplained arrangement, that is to say they are not erratic blocks, not survivals of an Ice Age. These columns in rows of three and twelve look like a petrified army standing to attention. The smallest of the stone ‘soldiers’ are at least one metre high. The giant among them, the menhir of Kerloas near Plouarzel, is 12 m high and weighs 150 tons. The biggest ‘long stone’, the menhir of Locmariaquer, lies broken on the ground. When whole it was 20 m long and weighed over 350 tons!
Near Kermario, 1,029 menhirs stand in 10 rows on a site about 100 m wide by 1.2 km long. Near Ménec there are 1,169 long stones arranged in eleven columns, 70 of which diverge and form a semicircle, a formation which is repeated at Kerlescan with different figures. Out of 594 menhirs, 555 of them in rows of 13, 39 form a semicircle. Near Kerzehro there are 1,129 stones in rows of 10, near Lagatjat 140 in columns of three.
These data are not complete, but give an idea of the tremendous work that was carried out at some time in the past. The menhirs in Brittany have one thing in common with the megalithic complexes on Malta. Both of them must have been built before the last Ice Age, because, just as the ruts in Malta descend into the Mediterranean, whole columns in Brittany march into the depths of the Atlantic Ocean!
Often the natives have something revealing to say about the phenomena among which they live.
Breton farmers, when I asked what these stones columns meant shrugged their shoulders and admitted: ‘Personne ne sait!’ This admission of ignorance seems more rational than the Christian legend which others trot out at the drop of a hat. Saint Cornelius, who lived around the middle of the third century A.D., was pursued by Roman legionaries. He implored Christ for help and with his assistance turned the Roman soldiers into stones, the biggest of them being the officers. So military ranks were preserved even in the menhirs. Fabulous.
Another implausible explanation is that the whole region of present-day Brittany was once the sacred country of the Druids. That may well be so, but the Druids, the priests of the Celtic peoples, had their great period in the century of Caesar, i.e. the last century B.C. So if the Druids transferred their sanctuary inside the boundary of the menhirs, they could only have taken over an existing complex. Clever and thrifty of them!
We can also discard the claim that primitive nomads in the slumbering Europe of prehistory quarried the stones, then transported and erected them, in the same way as the eastern peoples who erected monuments in honour of their gods in Egypt and Babylon. Supporters of this version should understand (and know) that the megalithic age lay long, long before the epoch in which the Egyptian and Babylonian buildings originated. It dates back at least to the last Ice Age, to the time of the gods and the sons of gods.
What we marvel at in Brittany today can give only a vague idea of what was here ten thousand years and more ago. Men and nature, the great destroyers, have done their work.
In the middle of the last century the rumour that gold was hidden in the menhirs was rife in France. The gold seekers swarmed in, equipped with picks and sledgehammers. Gold fever shows no consideration. The long stones were savagely attacked. The remains of this great gold battle lie around and make a sorry sight. Menhirs that were once imposing are split in two, smaller ones have been smashed to bits. Today the government is trying hard to save the menhirs from further vandalism. The adults and children who clamber over the stones and do more damage every day take no notice of prohibitions. I find the carved initials with which stupid people want to perpetuate their memory particularly annoying.
As we walked through the ranks of the petrified legionaries on the fine autumn days, my daughter Cornelia asked me what I was asking myself: What was all this for? What do these thousands of stones, set up in rows of three, nine or eleven, mean? Were they tombstones? No. However hard scholars have looked, no graves have been found at the foot of or under the menhirs. They have been found in dolmens, the megalithic tombs lying underneath earth mounds. There are more than 3,500 of them in France.
Did the menhirs once have roofs? Was Brittany dotted with gigantic halls? The different lengths of the stones refute this theory, as do the results of recent research which found no tenons or mortises for construction purposes. Besides, the menhirs are either too
close or too far apart to make roofing possible. Where the stones are almost next to each other, it would hardly have been possible to move for menhirs. In places where the menhirs were far apart, there were no wooden beams or dressed stones long enough to connect them. Lastly, as the menhirs have survived the millennia—even though damaged—it should have been possible to find at least the remains of roofs. Nothing of the sort has come to light.
I have an acquaintance I meet once in a blue moon. He loves telling jokes, but has a very small repertoire. After the usual greetings comes his stereotyped question: ‘Have you heard this one?’ I quickly answer ‘Yes’, for he has certainly told it at least twenty times. I feel exactly the same when I read that the Breton menhirs, too, were part of a calendar. I can laugh at this theory as I do at my friend’s jokes, without taking any notice of either.
This theory involves Celtic priests or their colleagues from megalithic times getting their sheeplike congregation to fetch thousands of stones and erect them in precise arrangements simply to find out which season was due from the ‘geometry’ of the stones or their shadows. The British astronomer Fred Hoyle thinks that the priests wanted to impress or frighten the people with the complexes. What, after the people themselves had dragged the massive stones into place?! The priests could certainly have made an impression by predicting an eclipse of the sun or moon, but here again the stone lines give not the faintest hint of the primitive observatory which would have been necessary.
My vehement objection to the calendar theory: simple predictions can be obtained with much less trouble. If such a complex made it possible to announce the advent of a spring tide, for example, it would be ridiculous. Spring tides occur twice a month owing to the attraction of the moon’s mass. The seasons change according to an eternal rhythm. I venture to call my ancestors idiots if they assembled these stone masses to form a calendar simply for banal announcements like that. Basta.
To put it scientifically, an axiom is a self-evident truth or universally received principle. Theoretical assumptions can be deduced from axioms. In this way systems which are perfectly logical in themselves can be built up. I am going to allow myself to build up a theory from axioms:
First assumption: The menhirs in Brittany were not assembled by men of present-day stature.
Justification: Weight and number of stones.
Second assumption: The menhirs were assembled before the end of the last Ice Age.
Justification: Stone columns vanish into the depths of the Gulf of Morbihan.
Third assumption: The complexes were intelligently planned and built.
Justification: The arrangement of the menhir is not a chance one.
These three axioms throw up new questions and permit conclusions. At the end of the Ice Age, who had the bodily strength and also the bird’s eye view needed to set up such gigantic complexes of thousands of menhirs?
Giants!
Giants from early non-historical times are documented in traditions. Datings place them at the end of the last Ice Age and they would also have had the mental faculties and the strength needed to erect the menhirs.
To what race did the giants belong and what was their origin? Mythologies and religious traditions claim that they were descendants of the gods.
Another question: were the giants intelligent or stupid? The products they left behind will show if they were intelligent. Of course, we have to decide whether megalithic complexes like those in Brittany served an intelligent purpose or were merely some stupid occupational therapy.
The deliberate arrangement of the complexes alone proves that they were laid out to a fixed plan. Anyone who plans is intelligent. Axiomatic conclusions: intelligent giants extracted thousands of menhirs from the rock and transported the heavy stones to chosen sites where they erected them and arranged them in columns.
What goal were they trying to achieve?
The German engineer Rudolf Kutzer from Kulmbach has made a bold speculation. He thinks that the menhirs were arranged to form a signal antenna which could possibly have been connected to an amplifier for cosmic energy.
Are there any indications to justify this audacious claim?
Menhirs consist of quartz-bearing stone, occasionally with traces of iron. Quartz is one of the hardest minerals, consisting of the chemical element silica, SiO2.
Anyone who was ignorant of the special qualities of quartz will have learnt about them from the new generation of watches. In 1880, during their investigations into the electrical behaviour of crystals, Jacques and Pierre Curie discovered what is known as piezoelectricity which occurs when quartz crystals are subjected to pressure, pulling or turning in a specific direction. Using these minimal energies, watches can be kept going for a year or more.
Even as children we used small quartz crystals when we concocted simple radio receivers out of old boxes. We ran a very fine needle over the quartz. When a certain point was found, there was a noise in the earphones and we heard a nearby transmitter as if from a great distance. What happened to us little do-it-yourself boys?
Quartz picks up oscillations like an aerial and repeats them in concentrated form from a specific point. After a careful search, we had found the point via which the frequency of the transmitting station reached us—without any electrical amplification!
This special quality of quartz made Kutzer ask: were the menhirs ‘charged’ in some way? Were they ‘stimulated’ by some kind of energy unknown to us? Did they emit oscillations when connected with each other? Or did they receive oscillations from the cosmos? Questions unanswered as yet, but what do we know today about the possibilities of a future technology which may have been a past one for the extraterrestrials? As science is always striving to understand the past with present-day logic, everything that does not fit into the frequently ludicrous picture of inherited axioms goes by the board.
Strangely enough telephone wires throughout the world are still mainly carried on wooden poles, although wood is known not to be a durable material. It rots, decays and is highly inflammable. Nevertheless, wooden telephone poles are ‘planted’ in concrete sockets in many countries.
Archaeologists at work 5000 years hence:
Over hill and dale lumps of concrete with round holes in them protrude from the ground. Analysis clearly show traces of wood in the concrete pores.
The neatly arranged rows of concrete blocks lead to the conclusion that their ancestors (around the turn of the second millennium B.C.) practised a religion in which the rows of blocks had a special significance, otherwise the people of those days would not have taken such trouble to cover countries and continents with the heavy blocks. This explanation is opposed by another theory which says that the concrete rows were signposts, directional aids for large-scale migrations. Needless to say, the immortal calendar theory also rears its head again.
The only snag is that none of the theories can explain the clearly demonstrable traces of wood! So some scholars assert that torches were stuck into the concrete. Wood was dipped into inflammable fluid and ignited. Even before this theory can be included in the literature, critics object that it is absurd, because the concrete blocks are much too close together for communication by fire signals. When a young archaeologist says that they might have held telephone poles, there is a roar of protest. The men at the end of the second millennium were intelligent and possessed an astonishing technology. Firstly, radio was widely used, secondly, they would never have made telephone poles of wood, because other finds proved that they commonly used various metals. That is how, anno A.D. 7000 they will ‘prove conclusively’ that the concrete bases in the earth could not have been sockets for wooden telephone poles, because they did not exist around A.D. 2000.
Is our logic more conclusive?
As I write this, I can hear critics whisper mockingly in my ear: ‘Didn’t you say that giants of the megalithic age had assembled stones to form a giant antenna! If the giants, your giants, had any idea how an antenna worked, they would have used some
kind of metal instead of the long stones!’ How logical is this logic?
If we set up a forest of antennae today, as is planned in Project Cyclops, we should naturally use metal. The NASA Ames Research Centre’s programme includes a vast site with 1500 directional antennae, each with a diameter of 100 metres. The giant antennae will rest on thousands of concrete sockets. But in thousands of years, even the metal of the Cyclops antennae will be rusted, reduced to atoms, washed by rain and blown away by winds. What will remain? The thousands of concrete sockets geometrically arranged on the ground. The ground, being very hard itself, will have protected them from corrosion.
Perhaps the technologists of generations to come will invent a system of transmission into and reception from space without metal antennae. Perhaps they will set a quartz mountain oscillating and use it as an antenna. Who knows? Did the first generation of the sons of the gods after the presence of the extraterrestrials who built the menhir complexes know such a process? Were they miles ahead in the use of the piezoelectricity in quartz?
Signs of the Gods? Page 11
