Episode 2

Hancock always says that there is no mainstream in archeology and it is either

done methodologically, scientifically, or it is not. In Hancock’s introduction, he says: “The
notion of a lost advanced civilization of the Ice age is extremely threatening to the archeology
because it rips the ground out from that entire discipline. It removes the foundation.” – Graham
Hancock, Netflix’s Ancient Apocalypse, 00:38
All of that, however, is untrue. I see why Hancock could see it that way, but the truth is
that every single archaeologist I am aware of would be overjoyed to unearth any hitherto
undiscovered Ice Age civilization. or age, for that matter. Regardless of how far they've come.
At what cost? Pure fame and glory, or let’s say a semblance of standing in the society.
We are humans after all, like everyone else. Breakthroughs also offer fantastic publishing
opportunities, opportunity to share your work with an interested audience, and the chance to
finally demonstrate to your parents that your college investment was worthwhile.
Hancock's claim is exceptional; therefore, one could be skeptical of it. That's because
extraordinary claims necessitate extraordinary evidence, empirical in nature. Testable
information that offers some level of predictability or consistency. That is why we are wary on
carefully measuring things to the nearest meter, or even smaller. We keep attention to detail on
small things, all to ensure we have quantifiable, testable data.
The funny thing is: There is no such way that a lost advanced civilization of the last ice
age would pose a challenge to an archaeologist, radically or even lightly. But I have one question
that’s been living rent-free in my head since I watched this series: Would it utterly ruin our field
of study? Delete the foundation of it? Without a doubt. The field has a scientific foundation. Yes,
we would have to add a few additional paragraphs here and there, a few chapters here and there,
and even entire textbooks. However, it wouldn't alter our understanding of other cultures. The
Romans don't just vanish overnight. In addition to creating the Giza Pyramids, the ancient
Egyptians also developed a hieroglyphic writing system. The Mayan and Aztec continued to
exist as before.
In the prior episode, Hancock never clarifies his use of the term "advanced." In this
instance, he also didn't. Compared to the items in the bag in Pulp Fiction, this Mystical artifact is
harder to define. Also left out is a description of what would characterize this alleged
civilization. Who could possibly know they found it? He offers absolutely no proof that his
Mystical artifact is real in any way. Instead, he asserts, "It's a fog because there are no
documents; we have to piece together our view of the past from fragmentary data."
Hancock uses the apparent lack of empirical material that prehistory gives because it
occurred before papers and writing, like most individuals who promote pseudoscience, to
introduce his own presumptions and hypotheses. It appears that he is counting on his readers and
viewers to at least accept them on level with archaeologists' presumptions. Since these events
were not recorded, anything and everything is possible. Correct?
Hancock approaches the site of Cholula in Mexico. He meets with archaeologist Geoffrey
McCafferty there, who gives him a tour of the Cholula pyramid, the largest man-made pyramid
in the world in terms of volume. Almost twice as large as the Great Pyramid of Giza but built of
adobe instead of limestone. Hancock appears to think that underground features are a common
characteristic among all pyramids, although the chamber at the base of the Great Pyramid at Giza
was likely Khufu's composed burial chamber before it was abandoned in preference of a chamber
higher up in the building. Herrera-Sánchez, G (2021) In any case, it wasn't already there like the
spring in Cholula but rather was dug when construction started.
The conflict arises when Hancock provides his interpretation of the Giants of Cholula
story before critiquing archaeologists for disregarding it as a source of evidence. Implying that
the small brown people of Cholula were less intellectually capable and that it's a good thing these
sophisticated foreigners showed up to give them some "advanced culture," McCafferty, G.G.
(2001). He says something about how these might not be physical giants but "intellectual giants."
Prior to the arrival of Christian colonizers who had a substantial influence on the Mexica people
and pushed them to become Christians, there is scant proof that this myth even existed. And
across Mesoamerica, notably in Mexico, this culture occurred frequently. Sometimes at the
hands of Christians, and other times by willing Mexica merely seeking to cling onto some of
their own religious and cultural traditions. McCafferty, G.G. (2001)
Parallel to episode one, this ended up being a narrative told by Hancock without the
introduction of empirical evidence and a lot of hypothetical questions. Besides, Hancock never
clearly states what he means by an "advanced civilization." He makes the implication that they're
somehow higher than the folks where he is. He furthermore argues that because they either
constructed it or taught the ape-like brown people how to construct it, his so-called "advanced
civilization" is to blame for all the magnificent structures.

References:
McCafferty, G. G. (2018). Mountain of heaven, mountain of earth: The Great Pyramid of
Cholula as sacred landscape. In Landscape and power in ancient Mesoamerica (pp. 279-316).
Routledge.
McCafferty, Geoffrey G. "Reinterpreting the great pyramid of Cholula, Mexico." Ancient
Mesoamerica 7.1 (1996): 1-17.
Herrera-Sánchez, G., Suárez-Dominguez, E. J., Arvizu-Sánchez, E., Gallegos-Villela, R.
R., Valle-Chavarría, L. G., & Calvillo-Villicaña, M. E. (2021). The Similarity in Orientation for
Ancient Construction at Mesoamerica and Three World Cases. Civil Engineering and
Architecture, 9, 1456-64.