Talk:Pyramids of Güímar

comment moved down

For a long time the ... used to believe that the pyramids - who was it that believed? --pippudoz 04:15, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

non-neutral

Sorry, i don't speak english, but this article is non-neutral. Pyramids of Güímar are tourist attraction. Archaeologists believe that the pyramids were heaps made by native farmers!

Seems Neutral to Me

Your English is fine. However, by your reasoning, one could say any archaeological site is just a heap of stones that serves as a tourist attraction. Are you claiming they're just a "montón de piedras" and not real structures?

The fact that the Güímar pyramids have been worked into ambitious theories does not detract from the significance of the pyramids themselves. Twalls

But this following maybe doest not:

The history of the settlement of the Canary Islands and the origin(s) of the settlers are still unclear. The passage to the Canary islands from the nearest mainland (southern Morocco) is difficult because of the strong sea currents. It is actually easier to approach from Europe and the Mediterranean area..

If you want my oppionion, it sounds like Europe has finally embraced or colonized her rightful grounds. Because those thousands of sub-saharan Africans doesn't find it a neutral statement that it is difficult. It does not discourage them. They are still sailing to the canary islands with their primitive dangerous boats. They are following the tradition of the Numidian king Juba II who discoverd it from modern Morocco. Although the languists seem to have accepted the assumption that the guanche language is a branche of the Libyan language. But i don't deny the Guanches are blue eyed, blondish and beautiful exactly like the Europeans. :D Best regards! Read3r 16:17, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

RM POV

This is what I removed - it's a combination of POV and original research (not to mention writing in the first person). Should have been posted here on the Discuss page:

The pyramids of Güímar were built by the local inhabitants towards the end of the 19th century. They served two purposes: to collect the large stones lying on the ground into a single pile in order to clear the rest of the ground for farming, and once gathered into a pile, the pyramidal structure was made so that the flat platform on the top, aligned approximately north-south, could serve as a drying place for those crops which needed to be dried in the sun. This structure is one of the most convenient formats for this purpose. I received this information from my wife´s grandfather, a resident in Güímar since his birth in 1908, and who died in 2004. He knew well and had often talked to those who had built the pyramids. Most of the local inhabitants of Güímar are aware of the history of the pyramids, but since their supposed prehistoric origins act as a tourist attraction, and since the town does not have many natural sources of empoyment as agriculture has declined, they prefer not to discuss the point.

Twalls 22:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Touristy hype

The only source from Google Books which mentions these "pyramids" is The Complete Idiot's Guide to Lost Civilizations, and that admits the mainstream view about their "recent manifacture" for touristy purposes. Enough said. It is sad to see Wikipedia in thrall to crackpotship. --Ghirla^-трёп- 22:09, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Lack of Citation and Neutrality

It seems to me that if this was neutral, it would be backed up by some citation. The only one listed is from Pliny, and many dispute the accuracy of travel logs from antiquity. Most say there is little evidence for the abandonment of the islands during the Roman period, and there is evidence that the natives diverged from the north African Berber population around 1000 BCE. If this article is neutral, show me the citations. Digsdirt (talk) 04:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

"Pyramids" are from the 19th century

You are right - the article is not based on reliable facts! I just changed the German Wikipedia article about the "pyramids". I´ve been in Heyerdahls museum in January. Even in the exhibition there is mentioned the archaeological excavation at the Güímar complex, where imported ceramics from the 19th century had been found in that layer, which runs under the "pyramids". I have read spanish articles about the excavation and I could write something about it, but I´m not writing good enough in English. You may find the spanish literature on the Spanish and on the German Version of the Pyramid article. If I shall write anything, please post here or send me a mail. Uli sh (talk) 20:08, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll read the German page. It seems very well-researched. Perhaps I can help bring some of the information over to the English page. Twalls (talk) 18:03, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I could translate it roughly, but I don´t know, how to go on then: Should I edit the Article itself - in bad English? Probably not. I could add an article version here in the discussion site - but is this the right place? Uli sh (talk) 08:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality issue

This was specifically about Heyerdahl and whether he is controversial or not. That was more or less a no-brainer and I've added a reference where the neutrality tag was and removed the banner as the issue is resolved.--Doug Weller (talk) 22:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Pliny

The translation doesn't mention Hanno, does Pliny definitely say it was uninhabited in Hanno's time, and how does he know that?--Doug Weller (talk) 22:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Translation by Banja star

I added this heading to structure the discussion. --Uli sh (talk) 08:05, 20 April 2008 (UTC) The following translation is made by banja star:

I have undertaken a full translation of the German page,

The ‘Pyramids of Guimar’ refer to six rectangular pyramid shaped terraced structures, built out of lava stone without the use of mortar . They are located in the district of Chacona, which belongs to the town of Güímar on the island of Tenerife. Whilst the structures have been accurately dated the 19th century, their original function has not, as yet, been adequately explained.
Local traditions as well as surviving images indicate that similar “Pyramids” (also known as, “Morras”, “Majanos”, “Molleros” or “Paredones”) could once have been found in many locations on the island, however, over time they have been dismantled and used as a cheap building material. Originally in Güímar itself there were nine pyramids,today only six survive.

Research history

In 1991 the well known adventurer and researcher Thor Heyerdahl became aware of the “Canarian Pyramids” by reading an article which had been passed on to him. Heyerdahl had hypothesised a transatlantic link between Egypt and Central America, due to this Heyerdahl became intrigued by the Guimar pyramids and relocated to Tenerife. There Heyerdal researched possible parallels between the Canarian terrace structures and pyramid structures in Egypt and Central America - both as regards construction features and the surfaces in between the “pyramids” which had served as ceremonial areas.

Controvesy in the local media

After Heyerdahl had formulated the hypothesis, that the Canarian “pyramids” formed both a temporal as well as geographic staging post on the road from Egyptian sun worshipers to the Maya, a huge controversy ensued. Which was fought out between historians, esoterics, archaeologists, astrophysicists, those with a general interest in history, Heyerdahl himself and nationalistic intrest groups in the local press.

Astrophysical Research

Research by Aparcio Juan and Esteban López, both associates of the University of La Lagunas’ Institute of Astrophysics, at the start of the 1990s had already shown that the long sides of some of the terrace structures at Guimar marked the direction of both solstices. Standing on the platform of the largest “pyramid” on the day of the Summer solstice it is possible to experience a double sunset, first the sun sets behind a mountain top, then it emerges again from behind the mountain and sets a second time behind a neighbouring peak. All the “pyramids” have stairs on their western side which were you to climb down them on either solstice you would find yourself facing exactly in the direction of the rising sun. However, considering the room that both these two facts make for interpretation, it is impossible based solely on these observations alone to conclude that the intention of the structures builders was indeed to create the aforementioned effects.

Excavations

Between 1991 and 1998 with the agreement of Thor Heyerdahl multiple excavations of the site by archaeologists of the University of La Laguna (Departamento de Prehistoria, Antropología e Historia Antigua) took place. In 1996 their results were presented at a colloquium and in 1998 Session published the conclusive proof delivered by the dating of the “pyramids”. According to the preceding geophysical Georadar-Survey 8 locations, each with an area of 25m², were investigated in layers down to the solid lava-floor. In doing so it was possible to establish three specific sediment layers. Starting from the top these were:
1) layer of thickness averaging 20cm, consisting of humos rich earth with many plant remains and roots; tracks from ploughing were clearly identifiable as were a broad spectrum of readily datable finds from the second half of the 20th century.
2) Layer of thickness averaging 25cm, similar in composition to the first layer, however containing less humos and a larger amount of small stones; a large variety of finds which could be dated to the 19th and 20th century were found, of which an official seal from 1848 deserves particular mention.
3) Layer of thickness between 25 and 150cm, composed out of small volcanic rocks, most likely put in place in one movement, which levelled the uneven stone underneath, the stones contained only very few finds- mostly a small number of pottery shards, of which some was local and some imported, both kinds were roughly estimated as belonging to the 19th century; the “pyramids” stand strategraphicaly directly on top of this bottom layer, therefore allowing only for an earliest date of construction of the “pyramids” within the 19th century.
Furthermore, under the border edge of one of the “pyramids” a natural lava cave was discovered, which had been walled up and gave up finds from the time of the Guanches. Since the “pyramids” lie stratigraphicaly above the cave, the Guanche finds from between 600 and 1000 A.D can only support conclusions on the date of the hole-network. The “pyramids” cannot be older than the 19th century, due to the imported ceramics previously mentioned.

Were Freemasons the creators?

In 2005 a book was published in Spanish by the two astrophysicists Aparicio Juan und Esteban López about “The Pyramids of Güímar: Myth and Reality”. Here they set out their theory that the “pyramids” were potentially built by the Freemasons. Whatsmore the "pyramids" were orientated towards the Summer solstice to indicate aspects of masonic symbolism. Amongst historians this theory is not generally acknowledged

The Pyramid Park

Following the completion of the excavations in 1998 the 65’000 square meter area surrounding the “pyramids” was made accessible to the public. Heyerdahl received financial support for this from his friend the Canarian businessman Fred Olsen, who owns the largest transport company on the Canaries and whose family came to the islands from Norway in the 1900s. An information centre provides visitors with information about Heyerdahl’s research trips and his previous ideas regarding the pyramids. Two pavilions contain exhibits relating to Heyerdahl along with models of his boats; a replica of the Ra II in its original size, amongst others. Inspite of the conclusions regarding the age of the “pyramids” outlined above Heyerdahl continues to maintain a belief “ in a possible relationship between the existence of the pyramids and the pre Hispanic civilisation on Tenerife”. The objects found in the Guanche cave are shown in the “museum” in heavily enlarged photos, whilst the imported ceramics from the 19th century are mentioned only briefly on an information board – without illustration.

Missing the text of the Spanish article about the result of the archaeological excavations the history of the reaction to the “pyramids” in the Travel guides puts forward pictures of bright flowers, as there is apparently no accessible literature in German – this example is taken from the Dumont-Travel guide from 2004.: “For a long time the area of Güímar was of almost no interest to tourist, most likely they simply drove passed. But since the famous ethnologist Prof. Thor Heyerdahl († 2002) established the Parque Etnográfico 'Pirámides de Güímar' around the Guance pyramids, the town has come to life. The step-shaped pyramids near Chacona have been respected for a long time. Canarian archaeologists undervalued the artistic stone monuments: they were simply volcanic boulders collected together by farmers. Hounded by Franco, who fearful of separatism banned everything, which was not Spanish, Guanche culture didn’t fit.””

Conclusion

Archaeologists have always maintained that the reason for the creation of the terrace structures followed from the practises of the rural population, who cleared cultivated land of stones and piled them up into these terrace shapes.

Heyerdahl, in contrast, suggested that the structures were in no way simple haphazardly piled up stones. The stones at the corners of the “pyramids” clearly show marks from being purposefully shaped, and the exterior sides of the objects have straight planes, since all the stones were piled up on top of each other with the flat sides pointing out. In any event Heyerdahl clung to the refuted hypothesis that the pyramids had something to do with Guanches until his death. The association of the Guanches and the pyramids continues to be elaborated upon both in “Pyramid park” and on its official website.

Aparicio and Estebans theory connects the facts that the “pyramids” were built-in the 19th century with the acknowledgement that they aren’t simply pointlessly stacked up piles of stones. This suggestion is currently under discussion by scholars.

Thus, the “pyramids” date has been roughly established and the idea that they were built by the Guanches or any even earlier culture has been scientifically ruled out. The reason for their construction and its socio-cultural background however, can only continue to be describe as unresolved.

Further Reading

• Maria Cruz Jiménez Gómez/Juan Francisco Navarro Mederos: El complejo de las morras de Chacona (Güímar, Tenerife): resultados del proyecto de investigación, XII Coloquio de Historia Canario-Americana (1996), Cabildo Insular de Gran Canaria, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria 1998, Volume 1.
• Juan Francisco Navarro Mederos/Maria Cruz Jiménez Gómez: El difusionismo atlántico y las pirámides de Chacona, in: Miguel Ángel Molinero Polo y Domingo Sola Antequera: Arte y Sociedad del Egipto antiguo. Madrid 2000, ISBN 978-84-7490-604-2, S. 241-253.
• Antonio Aparicio Juan/César Esteban López: Las Pirámides de Güímar: mito y realidad. Centro de la Cultura Popular Canaria, La Laguna 2005, ISBN 978-84-7926-510-6.
• Short summary fromLas Pirámides de Güímar: mito y realidad in Spanish.
• Juan Francisco Navarro Mederos: Arqueología de las Islas Canarias", in: Espacio, Tiempo y Forma, Serie I, Prehistoria y Arqueología, Bd. 10, 1997, S. 447-478.

See also

• Pyramids

Links

• Official page of the Ethnologic Park
• The Pyramids of Guimar

I posting it here because I'm not much of a geolgist, and it would be good if someone could indicate if the more scientific sections make any sense.Banja star (talk) 17:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Banja star, thanks a lot for translating! I just began to translate it too - but I counldn´t finish it yet. The german version bears on german books/flyers in two cases. This has to be removed I think. Perhaps there are examples of english travel guides which refer to "guanches pyramids"? Perhaps I edit my version of the translation here too - meanwhile I found some more things in the book of Aparicio. --Uli sh (talk) 07:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC) I just read your translation. I think it´s ok. The text may become better - but that´s not a question of translation ;) The only passage where I don´t know, if "Banja star" translated correctly is the part of the lava cave and the "hole-network"... The cave is only a few meters long and had been walled up probably in the 19. century. The dated specimen may only date the duration and time of use of the cave but not the pyramids. --Uli sh (talk) 08:13, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Not a bad translation. There might be some minor copyedits needed. I wanted to help with the translation too, but due to time constraints I wasn't able. Why are "pyramids" in quotes throughout the article? These are pyramidical structures, aren't they? They're pyramids, no quotation marks needed. Twalls (talk) 16:22, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

You are right. The text may be edited and improved, as soon as it is saved in the article. Should Banja star do this? --Uli sh (talk) 08:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thancks everyone for the comments, very constructive. I don't mind if you want to make copy edits, I haven't edited that any wiki articles myself so if people spot things that are wrong please go ahead and fix them. As regards the " " I just translated the text as was from the German. I imagine that they were meant to suggest that perhaps they may not be pyramids in a conventional sense. However, its our English wiki article, so if we don't like them away they shall go. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Banja star (talk • contribs) 11:20, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I have now edited the translation of Banja star with some more informations of the quoted literature. And I removed the "improve-advice". There are a lot more informations in the book of Aparicio and López, but I didn´t manage it yet to translate it. Uli sh (talk) 06:56, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Cited Names

I corrected the Names of the authors: In spain most people have two family names, the first of their father's, the second of their mother's family. 'Antonio Aparicio Juan' means: his first name is Antonio, his father's family is named 'Aparicio', his mother's family is named 'Juan'. In spain it's common then to shorten the double family name writing only the father's family name. So, if you want to shorten 'Antonio Aparicio Juan', you may name him 'Aparicio' in a citation. The same is valid for 'César Esteban López': 'César' is the first name, 'Esteban López' the last name. Uli sh (talk) 05:33, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Ethnographic park

I've flagged this section for non-NPOV, since it seems to attack the museum and its approach, and should be rephrased. Simon Burchell (talk) 08:39, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

"Heaps of Stone", "Piles of rocks"

Regardless of when or who built them, it seems overstated to dismiss the terraces as "piles of rocks". Clearly they are examples of high-quality mortarless stone masonry that demonstrate elaborate planning, even if they were in fact built by 19th century farmers. WaynaQhapaq (talk) 23:32, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

POV / disputed.

It appears that part of this article is a translation of the German wikipedia article, but changing "conclusive" to "inconclusive" and deleting the sentence about the 19th century ceramics as evidence for dating the pyramids. Adding disputed template. Bjohas (talk) 19:46, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit: The French article quotes from one of the research publications: Juan Francisco Navarro Mederos, Maria Cruz Jiménez Gómez: El difusionismo atlántico y las pirámides de Chacona, en: Miguel Ángel Molinero Polo, Domingo Sola Antequera: Arte y Sociedad del Egipto antiguo. Madrid 2000, ISBN 978-84-7490-604-2, p. 241-253, available on google books.

Various edits

Various edits to bring the article in line with research evidence and wikipedia articles in other languages. "Disputed" template could now be removed. Bjohas (talk) 20:34, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I presume 'may we be' is 'may well be'. If you've copied material from other articles you need to indicate which article as without some sort of link it's a copyright violation. I don't think many editors know that. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 20:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Have fixed the typo, thanks for pointing this out. I've just made minor edits, rather than directly copy. However, the English text (also talking into account discussion on talk page) does appear to be based on the German text, so I'll add a link to the German article (in line with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia). Bjohas (talk) 09:04, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 11:40, 13 September 2013 (UTC)