The Peralta Stones

[EE THr]

Speaking of labyrinths and logic---

It seems to be that if someone were going to carve something very important on rock, they wouldn't just carve through existing lichen. I'm thinking they would use a flat rock or something, and rub off any existing lichen before they began carving. Especially if the carving was going to be intricate, like this one is.

Also, at first glance, it looks like the lichen grew all at the same time, because the patterns progress across the lines perpendicularly, rather than having separate patterns along the inside of the lines. And at some places, there seems to be as much, or more, growth inside the lines as there is beside them, because there is no shadow in those parts of the lines. But that's just my totally un-expert observation and opinion.

This is not a spiral. It is a labyrinth. And not just any maze-like design, it's The Classical Labyrinth. I think those are huge and important differences.

The King Minos Labyrinth was actually a maze (because it had many possible routes, while a labyrinth has only one route, and so it is easy to get into and out of), even though it was named "Labyrinth" back in it's day. (Just to distinguish the difference, I'm using the modern terminology for the two concepts.) Somehiker's labyrinth is a true labyrinth, by modern terminology, because all you have to do to walk it is follow your nose. You can't get lost.

Obviousely, it would be difficult to draw an exact duplicate of the King's "Labyrinth" maze, so when it was depicted, they used a simplified symbol to represent it---at some point this symbol became that which is currently referred to as The Classical Labyrinth. I think it's likely that very few people knew the actual layout of the King's "Labyrinth," anyway, so that would be another reason to symbolize it.


Additional clues to possible symbolic meanings are as follows---

Origin:
1540–50; < L labyrinthus < Gk labýrinthos; r. earlier laborynt < ML laborintus, L, as above
-----

Word Origin & History

labyrinth

Late 14c., from L. labyrinthus , from Gk. labyrinthos "maze, large building with intricate passages," especially the structure built to hold the Minotaur, from a pre-Gk. language; perhaps related to Lydian labrys "double-edged axe," symbol of royal power, which fits with the theory that the labyrinth was originally the royal Minoan palace on Crete and meant "palace of the double-axe." Used in English for "maze" early 15c., and in figurative sense of "confusing state of affairs" (1540s). Related: Labyrinthine .
-----

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/labyrinth
-----

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[Springfield]

.... This is not a spiral. It is a labyrinth. And not just any maze-like design, it's The Classical Labyrinth. I think those are huge and important differences......

Correct. Somehiker's carving is not a simple spiral, which is a common petroglyph design found all over the Southwest. This carving is the 'classic' labyrinth, although the two may be related (or not). A photo of an old Greek coin with the labyrinth is shown below - the comparison is striking.

As far as the lichen is concerned, you've made a good point. It's tough to determine from the photo whether the carving was made on top of lichen and was filled in with newer lichen later, or if the carving was made on clean rock and was covered with the lichen growth later.

 

[Cubfan64]

It would be interesting to have an expert examine the stone carving, but I'd be even more interested to have 2 or better yet 3 independent experts examine it and come to their own unbiased conclusions and see how closely they match.

Science is pretty good at some things, but I wonder how much interpretation, speculation and theory goes into examining something like this and forming a "scientifically sound" conclusion?

 

[EE THr]

Springfield---

The labyrinth picture you posted is the same as the drawing that somehiker posted, except that it is a mirror-image. Also the centers have a little bit different spacing, but the pattern is the same.

Imagine the odds that someone would come up with that same pattern, with all the turns, and especially that little "hump" in the center, without seeing the original one?

I think they are all related.

And the lichen photo that somehiker posted seems to have a dot in the center, which makes the drawing that somehiker posted, with it's extra space in it's center, seem possibly related to it.

 

[EE THr]

Here are the matching rock carvings.

This one is in Tintagel, Cornwall, England.


This one is in Meis, Galicia, Spain.


The one in Spain, I turned upside down and mirror image, for comparison.
The full original photo is below. It appears to be flat on the ground, so I guess the photographer went by the writing to determine which way was up.


There is no orientation stated for the top photo.

(Both are license-free, from Wiki, under "Labyrinth": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labyrinth)

And here is the lichen labyrinth which somehiker posted---


Note: On somehiker's photo, it's the walls are darkened, and on the European pictures the paths are somewhat darkened.

 

[cactusjumper]

Springfield,

"Correct. Somehiker's carving is not a simple spiral, which is a common petroglyph design found all over the Southwest. This carving is the 'classic' labyrinth, although the two may be related (or not). A photo of an old Greek coin with the labyrinth is shown below - the comparison is striking."

You are right that "Somehiker's carving is not a simple spiral", but neither is it a "labyrinth". There appear to be two entrances, and once you take the one to the right, it has a couple of options that lead to dead ends. That, by definition, makes it a maze.

The more I look at this thing, the more I doubt it's authenticity as anything but a modern day creation.

That, unqualified, opinion and five bucks will get me a decent cup of coffee.....maybe.

Take care,

Joe

 

[EE THr]

cactusjumper---

I modified my previous post to clarify the photo notations, and before re-posting, I saw your above. So I added somehiker's labyrinth photo, the one which I had enhanced, in order to better trace the path.

I don't think there are two entrances. What do you see?

I get to going cross-eyed looking at these things so much. But I think they all match.

 

[EE THr]

I guess I might as well add Springfield's coin picture (reversed) and the Pima-Maracopa logo (upside-down and reversed), so they are all in one spot for easier comparison---

 

[Springfield]

Springfield,

"Correct. Somehiker's carving is not a simple spiral, which is a common petroglyph design found all over the Southwest. This carving is the 'classic' labyrinth, although the two may be related (or not). A photo of an old Greek coin with the labyrinth is shown below - the comparison is striking."

You are right that "Somehiker's carving is not a simple spiral", but neither is it a "labyrinth". There appear to be two entrances, and once you take the one to the right, it has a couple of options that lead to dead ends. That, by definition, makes it a maze.

The more I look at this thing, the more I doubt it's authenticity as anything but a modern day creation.

That, unqualified, opinion and five bucks will get me a decent cup of coffee.....maybe.

Take care,

Joe

Well, you're straining at gnats Joe, I guess for the sake of arguement. You are asking an important question, though, IMO: is somehiker's labyrinth carving a 'modern day' creation? Well, I guess you'll have to define 'modern day' before we can consider the possibility.

More important to me, whether the petroglyph was created 1930's ce, or 500 bce, is the choice of this symbol, what it represents, who carved it and why they used it in central Arizona? Another speculative, but logical question: is somehiker's carving related in some way to the labyrinth symbol reported found at Casa Grande? Hmmm ... another thought (a bit out of the box): that Mexica painting of Chicomoztoc. When I can get to my other computer and retrieve a copy of it, I'm curious to take a look at it again.

Next time I go to Kona, I'll get you some decent coffee.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Springfield: You posted -->Next time I go to Kona, I'll get you some decent coffee+
**************
Make that two please.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Cubfan64]

Joe, I only see one entrance on SH's photo as well. Are you following the dark lines as the path, or following the wider light colored section as the path? I interpretted it to be the wider light colored path that goes right up the middle from the bottom and starts circling around to the left.

Springfield - my first thought also was the painting of Chicomoztoc I had seen, but after looking at it again the other day I didn't really see any real similarity.

 

[Springfield]

....Springfield - my first thought also was the painting of Chicomoztoc I had seen, but after looking at it again the other day I didn't really see any real similarity.

Cub, I didn't mean a similarity in style or shape - the petroglyph is a symbol, the painting is a 'story'. I was referring to the 'idea' of each. Notwithstanding Minos' maze, the idea of the labyrinth is that of a pilgrimage or quest - it's why we see so many of them constructed in cathedrals and church courtyards. The catholic churchyard in Old Town Santa Fe has a nice one. The Mexica painting tells the story of the journey back to their place of origin - another quest of sorts. Maybe just a coincidence, because the idea would imply that an underground Mexica site may exist somewhere in central Arizona. There are of course plenty of rumors to that effect, but no evidence.

 

[cactusjumper]

Paul,

It's true that I assmume that the dark lines in the maze are the path, and the lighter colored (lichen) is the walls. If that is delving into minutia, I am guilty.
It seems that everyone looking at this will see it in their own way. In it's own light, I suppose it is some kind of "vision quest".

I am only offering my opinion here. Could be right.....could be wrong. Find the other opinions valid and all interesting.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Blindbowman]

some good thoeries .. in may opioion the drawings say very diffrent detailed statements on a spiritaul level .. note the english drawing the end start and finish in a cross pattern over the cross that is visable in the center .. yet this may show the two sobjective veiws one faith of the cross . and the other is one simbolic of a X ..the cross vs X the cross stands as the winning simbolic in this drawing ..controlling the out come ..

the one from Spain shows a path of a trangle and its patterns to the center of the pattern .. to me .. IMHO this drawing tell s of the traingel 's path to the center of a nother place of under standing , or triberal home land .. the jorney of Spain into the new world or something of that nature .. i dont know if this drawing came from Spain but if these is where it was found .. that could very well be its meaning .. and all of these drawings are diffrent ,, but native to triberal art and spiritaulisum ..........

so my over sight maybe diffrent then others ...in fact i well also say if you look at the Spainish drawing the trangle showing the outsider .. seeking the inner knowing of center of the unknown to them .. thus . the out siders jorney to the to find the meaning of the unknown .. a very wide under standing of a complex . simbolic but this would hold true for all 3 drawings .. all being complex in nature in spiritraul in meaning . and all related from the starting points to the ends of the patterns .. makeing them all readable with one level of under standing .. the logic is there and stands out IMHO ..

why because the ones that started with outsider points ended after seeking the center of the pattern yet the other started with two side of the same under standing yet ended faceing each other from oppisite dirrections ..

as well as the frist mine drawing evoling from the stages of the frist two drawings .. they being the older of the drawing of the group .... that would tell me at one point the native tribers that created the drawings if real .. they had at one time lived in those areas as well as where the last drawing was found at the mine ..

something of the x like saxton were invaded by others from out side there known world .. a lot of early saxton had tribes a lot like native American tribes .. yet we could be talking about vikings or some near related tribe of that type ..

IMHO

ihave not studied these drawing for a more then a few days and thats my frist impression of them and their meanings ..

 

[cactusjumper]

From "In The Hands Of The Great Spirit" by Jake Page, there is this:

"In the late 1970s, one of the nation's leading anthropologists visited the Hopis and, in a meeting, set out to explain the latest archaeological findings as to their origins. A Hopi man who was, among other things a successful entrepreneur and world traveler, as well as a snake priest, rose to object, saying that was all very well, but the Hopis, to a person, knew that the real truth of their origins lay in their migration through three previous worlds into this one, aided along the way by Spider Grandmother. The hole from which they emerged, called the sipapu-located not far off, near the confluence of the Little Colorado and the Colorado Rivers-was a site well known to the Hopis, and they often made pilgrimages to it.".......

"Similarly, in the lands along the upper Rio Grande, many sipapus exist, secret places that might be thought of as the earth's navel and, in a sense, the center of the universe. Every tribe on the continent has honored such places, where this world came about and where the people learned, through long and arduous challenges and with the aid of the spirt world, how to conduct life."

Many believe that this type of design denotes such places. While all of the tribes have slightly different origin stories, the theme remains constant and familiar and, often, the design remains the same.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Blindbowman]

you like that theory , did ya ?

OK the the english drawing tells us the truth .. the X surrounding the cross .. its not a X it stands for the roman number 10 roman corss or roman vatican .. the drawings were all made by the jesuits or monks related to the roman vatican or someone within the faith at the time the drawings were made .. , like the templar ! they are not tribeable at all ...

makes you wonder dont it ...?

 

[somehiker]

Gentlemen:
I'm really enjoying reading your posts.It is a welcome development to see so many apply their research skills and debating abilities to a serious and worthwhile discussion.Serious because it deserves examination and thought,and worthwhile because it brings ideas to the table.
A couple of years ago I purchased a small digital video camera to supplement the digital camera that I had bought just before the previous trip.I had found that video files shot with the digital camera were to large to share and the battery life was too short for this use to be very practical.I have since made extensive use of the flip-style video camera to take many short 360 deg panoramic videos that allow me to review every area where I have done so at leisure,in slow motion and in greater detail through magnification than possible while on site.The photo of the carving is a "snapshot" taken from one of those videos.
The insets are still photos taken in the immediate area.
I have,so far been unable to find any references to similar carvings anywhere in Mexico.Unlikely,therefore,that the Mexica,etc. were responsible.It seems to be a local thing,perhaps as Joe suggests,a modern creation or copy of the one at Casa Grande.At this date,I can only show you what I have,with no close-up observations from which to judge the depth of the carving or the thickness of the lichen.I will have to add it to the list,which seems to be growing,rather than shrinking.
There is no mention of any maze in Dutchman lore that I am aware of,nor any similar form carved on any of the known Stone Maps.Nothing seems to tie the carving to any of the other maps,other than possibly the location,which also has (above the canyon),a geological formation which I suspect may be indicated on one of the other well known maps.That natural formation reminds me (visually) of a spanish or mexican style bullring.

Regards:SH.

 

[EE THr]

Joe---

Because some of the rock carvings I've shown have light paths, and some have dark paths, it gets very confusing (for me, anyway).

In fact, though, somehiker's lichen labyrinth has light paths and dark walls, just like the drawing which accompanies it.

The Spanish one has a dark path, with light walls.

And, to add to the confusion, the English one, due to the deeply carved lines combined with the lighting and shadows, has both very dark and very light walls. So I made the path a neutral brown color in the enhancement.

Plus, even more confusing, both the English carving, and somehiker's lichen labyrinth, have a wide path and narrow walls, while the Spanish carving has just the opposite, which is wide walls with a narrow path. Whew. See why I said I went cross-eyed?

It can be a real eye strain, but if you really take each one at a time and trace it through, you can see that these three, and Springfield's coin symbol, and the Pima logo, are actually all the same "Classic Labyrinth."

On the Spanish carving, as can be seen in the original photo below my enhanced version, there is no "triangle entrance." I had to put something there so I could set my eyes to start on the path instead of seeing walls for the dark narrow lines, as is customary. So I extended the line outside the labyrinth, and still had trouble "focusing" on it, so I put the big triangle there.

The English carving, however, does have a dark circular splotch at the beginning of it's path, which is in the original. I don't know if is intentional or just a stain, though.

Since I had posted links to the original (un-enhanced) photos, I figured everyone interested would know the difference. Looking back, I think I should have posted both, original and enhanced, versions side-by-side. Sorry about that.

Also, I don't see any X or other symbols in any of the centers, except the possible circled dot in somehiker's lichen labyrinth.

Does anyone recognize anything about the writing in the original, larger, Spanish photo?

 

[Blindbowman]

i believe the jesuits created these drawings as placer markers .. i wont rule out the templar but i really dont beleive its them for one the tayopa sites relationship to one of the spiral staircases .. so will not rule out the templar ,, do i think they are made by the templar .. no i dont ..

EE ..look at the ends of the english drawing ... trace each drawing with your finger threw its path and you will note , that the north west end of the center line ends on the outer southeast if you draw a line from the starting point to the other end you have one line of the X do the same for the other line and you end up with a larger X around what looks like a cross,,the cross comeing from a X or surrounded by the X

and there is also one of these drawing at the Utah site ..

so the fact that all of these drawings could have very well been made by one group then we have to logically see how they relate and the fact is they do share the same translation factors .. so they are most logically made by one group .. who .. the only group related dirrectly by research to the area is the jesuits ..and they do in fact use the number 10 in the stones ....we must also under stand that as in all things the jesuit evoled as well .. maybe not in the same way as we under stand today .. by they used new math and languages as they learned them a long the path of life .. and monkes or jesuits in this case were prefectionist and used secercy when need that was developed over a long span of time and could have shown up almost anywhere threw the span of history ..

in this case we know the jesuit at tayopa did in fact relate to the pope and vatican by my research .and dose put them at all 3 locations ..

logic says these drawings were made by the jesuits ...


SH.

i can not relate the drawings to any one give location with out knowing where the drawing was found and the details of the surrounding area .. . most of the drawings i have seen of this type do in fact relate to a land marker or way point on a path to where ever they are going at the time .. or as a focus point ...

and joe .. yes the native tribes do use drawings that look very close to these but do not use the same patterns as far as i know

as in the Utah drawing .. the spiral stands by it self with out any hidden meaning added into the drawing .. and this may have been how the jesuits learn the native ways and left messages to record the hiistroy of things shown to them or leave a path for the future jesuits to relocate what they had seen along the way ..

i am not saying this is fact .. IMHO these things are posable of the drawings and the logic behind their meanings ......

in fact let me add one point to the over sight ..

look at the Spainish drawing .. ok if the drawing was done by templar why ..

the templar could have reach the AZ sites but we may never be able to prove that .. but i can and have proven the jesuits did . and the jesuits did have contack with the Spanish at tayopa . linking two of the drawings dirrectly to the jesuits and the roman vatican ...

2 out of 3 .. logic wins out ...

not templar ... Jesuits !

if the location of the drawing in the supers was shown in detail it may in fact be on the stones .. if it is i would know as soon as i saw the location of where the drawing was found ..

and let me add the drawings all look to be about 3/8 to 1/2 inch deep .. 1/4 inch would be to easy to fade away and any more then 1/2 would be unlikely to take that long to created ...with older tools of the time ..

and what is clear is the group dose in fact have stone working skills and mason ablities ....seen in the tayopa /Peralta stones as well as here in these drawings .. useing the same numbering system .. // no IMHO these are Jesuit created !

i was being honest ,, i will be going back the supers one more time and then i will be retireing ..... you guys may get chance to talk to me at the Rendenous this year and after that i will no longer be TH ...

 

[Springfield]

From "In The Hands Of The Great Spirit" by Jake Page, there is this:

"In the late 1970s, one of the nation's leading anthropologists visited the Hopis and, in a meeting, set out to explain the latest archaeological findings as to their origins. A Hopi man who was, among other things a successful entrepreneur and world traveler, as well as a snake priest, rose to object, saying that was all very well, but the Hopis, to a person, knew that the real truth of their origins lay in their migration through three previous worlds into this one, aided along the way by Spider Grandmother. The hole from which they emerged, called the sipapu-located not far off, near the confluence of the Little Colorado and the Colorado Rivers-was a site well known to the Hopis, and they often made pilgrimages to it.".......

"Similarly, in the lands along the upper Rio Grande, many sipapus exist, secret places that might be thought of as the earth's navel and, in a sense, the center of the universe. Every tribe on the continent has honored such places, where this world came about and where the people learned, through long and arduous challenges and with the aid of the spirt world, how to conduct life."

Many believe that this type of design denotes such places. While all of the tribes have slightly different origin stories, the theme remains constant and familiar and, often, the design remains the same.

Take care,

Joe

It's embarrasing to hear stories about white pointy-heads lecturing lowly savages about themselves, isn't it?

The sipapu idea is a quaint campfire story to most tourists, but as far as I'm concerned, if we value reality, we might lend an ear to what the Hopi and others have to say about it and other things. Of course, the new age woo-woos have sullied the old legends with their own self-serving nonsense, but there are a few decent publications that offer some insight - Book of the Hopi by Frank Waters is as good a place to start as any, I guess. Don't you wish you could get the straight skinny from the old traditionalists that keep the true faith? Not the tribal spokespeople, but the viejos you occasionaly see tending that stunted corn up on the mesas.

You know, every major ruin in the Southwest had at least one kiva which were the spiritual and political centers of the community. It was underground, it was by invitation, and it was accessed by a small hole in the roof - the sipapu. If we believe what these ignoorant savages had to say, we would realize that possibly the kiva was a representation of some important underground venue and the sipapu was the way in and out. Or maybe they built all these kivas just to be quaint.