Monday, August 20, 2007

Mystery of missing artifacts, solved

Often in science, the fact that some things can not be seen matters more than the fact that some other things can. In addition to large artifacts such as (segments of) roads, aqueducts, buildings, stone walls and chambers, archaeological sites featuring (co-)Roman settlements are usually rich in small artifacts such as jewelry, coins, statues, glass, cookware, pottery, tablets, arms, etc. If indeed Visočica was shaped by man, a logical question arises: Why isn't there such richness in small-sized artifacts found on Visočica too?
.

Examples of artifacts from metal and Roman eras. Nothing of the sort has been found on Visočica, despite extensive earthwork undertaking.

Apart from trivial explanations (such as that no one has dug deep enough; or that no one has looked in the right places yet; or that the site was looted), the answer is quite obvious within the context itself: the hill's primary intent had been for military and not settlement purposes. Namely, since safety and to it related regularity of the form was the strategic (primary!) task for the peak's occupants, the slopes had to be made flat, clean and unobstructed, and subsequently maintained as such, at all times. In fact, given its primarily military purpose in ancient times, Visočica was most likely an area permanently banned for settling of civilians. What a better proof for this than a total lack of small artifacts (not) found anywhere on the slopes. This is in a dire contrast to what is found on the summit (a National Monument – protected area with remains of Roman and midieval forts) or at the hill's foot, or everywhere around the hill for that matter.

But what about the missing traces of attacks and battles on the Visočica slopes then? Surely enough, all sorts of objects including weaponry and armament, siegecraft equipment in general, as well as stocks of material of any sort, had to be removed both before and after a battle so that the slopes were brought back to its safest state possible - that of total controllability. Finally, instead of some magical "thermal energy steaming from within" explanations, it is exclusively the regular and permanent maintenance of the slopes (for at least a millennium or so!) that can be credited for Visočica being an erosion-free hill. So the maintenance for many centuries is why the central Bosnia’s harsh environment didn't “take care” of the hill's form and then consequently turn Visočica into just another eroded hill of uninteresting looks. It happened simply because man has intervened with nature so as to not allow her to take course...

Finally, it seems plausible that it was precisely the Romans who shaped Visočica, because not only that small-item artifacts from the Roman era are missing (after all the bulldozing earthworks by Osmanagich's followers), but, more importantly, any artifacts from the pre-Roman (stone; metal) eras are practically missing as well! Most likely then, the hill's wasting began with the Ottoman occupation of Bosnia, when Visočica as well as other inner-Bosnia's hills had obviously lost their strategic significance for that has been the first total occupation of the country.
.
There's no a "Space civilization" magic to Visočica and other apparently shaped Bosnia’s hills. They already represent however a first-class monument to permanent and well-organized attempts at keeping the access to Roman posts (medieval towns) safe from all directions, and at all times. As such, the entire hill too, not just its summit and surroundings, well deserve to be placed on the UNESCO World Heritage List.

5 comments:

stultitia said...

Dear Mr. Omerbashich,

Warm greetings to you and my deepest congratulations on your very interesting blog. Thank you for posting on your blog the photo from our APWR collection – the one on the right side featuring bulldozer activities at the Pljesevica hill. Please feel free to use more of our photo material from the same APWR gallery: http://apwr.fotopic.net/.

Concerning your theories about Visocica an other Bosnian hills being shaped into huge pyramids by Romans for military purposes... I would strongly recomend to you to get hold of and read the monograph on the history of Visoko by a group of authors, published in 1984. The chapter (some 50 pages) concerning the 'Roman period' in the region is written by dr. Ivo Bojanovski, a renown Bosnian expert on the Late Antiquity and especially on the system of the Roman roads in the Balkans (hodology). To me, it would be very difficult to believe that this man who studied Late Antiquity in Bosnia for decades and who was able to locate actual portions of Roman roads in the Visoko valley (and in other places) based solely on toponyms and unusual looking formations – would miss such a huge Roman undertaking as the one you are describing.

Furthermore, as Bojanovski explaines, there were no such huge Roman garrisons in the region - as you suggest - simply because after the turbulent years of the Octavius' wars in the Illyricum, the local population became pretty much Romanized, as evident on the remains of various stelae of the local noblemen, the Romanized members of the Desitiats (principes). Their prime seat was concentrated around the nearby town of Breza – some 10km from Visoko – and there are more remains from that period than in the Visoko valley.

Also, before you proceed with postulating your theory, I would strongly recommend to you to take into account the collection of artefacts from the Late Antiquity from the Franciscan gymnasium in Visoko, collected in the wider area over the years.

Otherwise, without placing your theories into this well-known historical context, one could get an impression that you are only criticizing Osmanagic in order to justify the whole idea behind his project and the existance of the Foundation. What is needed is a sober contextual scientific approach, not just another pyramid-shaped fantasy.

Sincerely,
Stultitia

Dr. Mensur Omerbashich, Ph.D. said...

Ave carus Stultitia,

Thanks for your sharp advice. I’ve been following the pyramid story as well as APWR activity for some time now. Please allow me to congratulate you all on your vigilance and effort.

I am neither a historian nor an archaeologist, and I certainly don't pretend to be one or the other. Therefore, it's all too easy for me to miss some valuable points they make. I’m assuming your background is in humanities? (I do respect your wish to remain anonymous, so you don't have to answer that.) I thank you for the info, and I will try to find the recommended readings.

Ivo Bojanovski was neither a geoscientist nor an engineer, and I'm sure he never pretended to be one or the other, either. Therefore, it was all too easy for him to miss some points I make. As you point it out correctly, he used toponyms only, likely for lack of historical documents on Bosnia in the Antiquity and Mid-Ages. You will agree that lack of evidence doesn’t mean there is no evidence; that’s precisely where multidisciplinary research can flourish. If you scroll down my blog you will notice an earlier post on Vegetius's work, the only complete record of Roman military knowledge (and not the last word on it, I'm sure). I don't know if Bojanovski had a copy, but most likely not. I advise you to read it, so that you can get a feeling on how grand Roman knowledge of construction and surveying really was, not to mention strategy and naval war affairs. I don’t suggest Visočica featured any “huge garrison” as you call it. But any-size military outpost on its summit had to be secured against siegecraft, otherwise what's the point of a post that can be easily lost. Hence the tunnels/counter-tunnels could as well be a proof for this, or of earlier/later activities perhaps even of the Ottomans attacking. I hope you realize that to flatten hill slopes is not such an impossible undertaking at all – see my today’s post with an example of Inca terraces as part of their anti-erosion (among others) strategy. The same continues to be part of engineering practice today, so why not allow for it somewhere (chronologically) in between too? Besides, I'm suspecting that any military who wanted to secure the slopes would have used cheap labor composed of slaves, barbarians, peasants, thieves or what have you, so it would have been all too easy an undertaking in terms of work hours and expenses (primary the labor, as by far the largest expense in any large-construction budget) to even make it to a recorded history document.

Note that I don't insist to be right on the spot with Romans, I leave that to specialists. I offered a view that hopefully could complement what historians and archaeologists do and say. To that effect, I try to stick to the "(co)-Roman" qualification, meaning: any humans from metal eras to the medieval period, i.e. not those humans (or Aliens for that matter) that Osmanagich proposes. Speaking of whom -- worry not: I am equally disgusted by the whole pyramid scheme and looting of Visočica as you are, so there is no need for you to fly off the handle.


Yours,
Mensur Omerbashich

P.S. Blog comment forms are not nearly as friendly as email is, so feel free to write me an email if you expect some extensive communication from me.

stultitia said...

Dear Mensur,

Nowhere did I state that Bojanovski used toponyms only. As a historian, archaeologist and professor of classical languages, I'd say he was pretty qualified to recognize a Roman structure. It would be at least courteous of you to first familiarize yourself with at least his work related to Visoko (if not the rest of Bosnia) before dismissing him in a way all too familiar to us who follow this pseudoscientific charade for over a year now.

Cheers.

Dr. Mensur Omerbashich, Ph.D. said...

Dear Stultitia,

The reason why I said Bojanovski used toponyms only (why I avoided mentioning his interpretations of topography), was precisely because I wanted to be polite. Simply, I never read his book (I said I would look for it, remember?), though from what you told me it’s quite possible that I won’t find it to be a very reliable source on topography in the Visočica case (he hasn’t recognized anything out there, as I gathered from your own words). Imagine what the world would look like however if new generations of scientists with various specializations wouldn’t be filling the gaps from their predecessors’ research... So forgive me for believing that I, as a geodesist, have all the rights in the world to object to anyone's (let alone non-experts’) (mis)interpretations of topography, be them my colleagues or archaeologists for that matter. Because all I'm doing here is giving a qualified opinion that states some hill(s) might be artificially amended to the present shape. I don't know anything about your qualifications but I hope that you’re not mimicking the infamous Foundation’s methods for diminishing qualified scientists. I’m sorry if you see research black-and-white, but it usually isn't. So I won't apologize neither to proponents nor opponents of the "pyramid" hypothesis just because my finding might fall somewhere in between those two diametrically opposing views. Now that would be really wacky to expect.

Regards,
Mensur Omerbashich

SilverHubble said...

Ave Carus Mensur Omerbashich,

I, too, wish to applaud you on your wonderful work. I live in "Gaul" and daily I watch as the "Luminous Debris," as Gustaf Sobin so aptly named it, is (re)discovered and all too quickly (re)buried in order to build pre-fabricated, strip mall structures for contemporary society. It is my habit to comb these hills of Provence in search of ancient chariot ruts, the odd morsel of terra cotta and the round stone missiles of the oppida. Thus, embracing vestigia... I am actually writing to you in the hopes that you might tell me when the pyramidal form, whether for tombs or trophies, first appeared in Roman architecture. Everything I find on the subject is rather vague. I have found dates ranging from 69 BC to circa 12 BC. Reasonably, I think it would have made its appearance soon after Egypt became a province... I would appreciate any guidance.

Very Best Regards,
Bethany Atherton
Carry le Rouet