http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ mirrored file
For complete access to all the files of this collection
see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php
==========================================================

	
*Megalithic Cairns and Stone Chambers in Germany * 
*/The ?Hälden? as the missing link between the Megalithic cultures of
western and northwestern Europe, and Etruscan necropolises /*
	
*K. Walter Haug *
Karlsruhe* · 2002 *
* * 	 	** 	

*Summary  *(English)* · Zusammenfassung * (deutsch)

/*Images will open in a separate window, when clicking on 'Fig.1 ' etc.
Please bear in mind that loading the image can take a few minutes, due to
the size of the images. The same applies when clicking on the thumbnail
images. */

New discoveries demand a reassessment of conventionally held theories,
dogmata, or paradigms.What I found is a completely new and unexpected kind
of Megalithic cairns in a region that has, up to now, never been suspected
to possess such prehistorical remains, namely southern Germany. The reason
why these staggeringly imposing monuments have never been recognized, or
identified, as such has to been seen in their - as it were "camouflaged" -
concealed location, hidden under debris and vegetation, in what had
erroneously been thought of as ancient quarries. People who actually
visited such places containing gigantic cairns, thought that they were
simply rubble heaps from former quarrying work at some time in the past.
And in fact many of them were misused - "cannibalized" as it were - as
quarries, because it was relatively easy to carry away the already
perfectly worked freestone blocks or slabs.

As for the "Zwerchhälde" of Sternenfels near Karlsruhe *(Fig. 1) *, I
found building-steps *(Fig. 2) *and three ringwalls including the facade.
This prehistorical structure is nearly 20 m high and must be regarded as
the highest of all European Megalithic monuments.My excavation work, which
I describe in detail in my book *1 *, has conclusively shown that the
architecture of these monuments is identical with that of the cairns of
Brittany, and of Egyptian stepped pyramids *2 *. An inner core, which is
represented by the tomb chamber, normally a dolmen or a tholoi, is
surrounded by circular dry-stone arrangements.Whereas the "Zwerchhälde"
consists of three single structures on three distinct steps, which are
deepend into the rock of the hillside (see the map in German *Fig. 3 )*,
other monuments form regular necropolises.

At Schmie (near Maulbronn with its famous monastery) we found the
"Sommerhälde" or "Steingrube" with 20 cairns in one rock-necropolis *(Fig.
4a) *, which is very similar e. g. to the Etruscan rock necropolis
Cerveteri 80 km north of Rome *3* . *(Fig. 4b) * In both cases the rock
high up on a hillside was removed to get a huge platform on which the
tumuli could be erected. From this mountain-steps the view on the lower
countryside is majestic. From the other direction, these monuments
originally could be seen from a great distance, but nowadays they are
covered by dark woods.

Imagine what the landscape of central Europe must have looked like in
those ancient times with such imposing structures! It would have been
reminiscent of Etruria, Egypt, or Mesopotamia.

These monuments have been built throughout of stone, a feat which,
indoctrinated with the current mainstream paradigm, nobody would have
expected, up to now, from Germanic, Celtic, or pre-Celtic "barbarians", as
they are described by the authors of antiquity.

Tentatively we assume a possibly widespread occurence of this newly
discovered kind of cairn-like structures throughout the whole European
continent, especially along the central mountain chains once called
Hercynia Silva, perhaps even from the Iberian Peninsula to the
Carpathians.

First instances have already been reported from the northern rim of the
German highlands to where they approach the Alpine piedmonts:

*1)* Near Horn and the famous "Externsteine" is a gigantic monument in
alignement with them, the "Bärenstein" (see Giganten der Vorzeit and the
map *Fig. 5* ). It is more than 250 m long, with a height of 20 meters.

*2)* Würzburg: On the "Marsberg" hill at the south-side of the city, we
(Uwe Topper, Gernot Geise, a.s.o.) found a large necropolis of cairns in a
huge "quarry" *(Fig. 6) *.

	cairn9 *Fig. 9: Marsberg; dry-stone walls *

*Fig. 12b: Marsberg; passage*

	On the Marsberg _occur_ blocks of hewn limestone big as a man with
straight edges *(Fig. 7 & 8) *, ruins of former dry-stone walls
surrounding the different steps of the cairns *(Fig. 9 , Fig.10 & Fig.11)
*. In three of the cairns we found *4* narrow and even high passages to
possibly unopened chambers *(Fig. 12 a ,12 b, & 12c )*. The outline of one
passage in form of an elbow is known from Britanny, e. g. in the Morbihan
county the dolmen of Goerem *(Fig. 12d) *. On the "Sonnenstuhl", the next
hill, there is another necropolis of long-barrows* (Fig. 13) * in the
wood.

*3)* Schmie, the "Sommerhälde", also known as "Steingrube": four portals,
or gateways, in the cairns are visible *(Fig. 14) *. The passageways are
covered by big stone slabs. In one you can see upright stone blocks of a
unique form, rectangular, rather slender and long. The corners have narrow
rims which have been deepend by chisel. The cairns remained in relatively
good condition (See the photographs *Fig. 15 *, *Fig. 16 *, *Fig. 17 *,*
Fig. 18 *, *Fig. 19 , Fig. 20 & Fig. 21) *.

cairn12b

*4) *Kürnbach near Bretten, the "Sommerhälde": one chamber can be
inspected and is built of dry-stone walls, covered by stone slabs *(Fig.
22 * and *Fig. 23 * ) The cairn of the chamber is 60 meters long, 10
meters broad and 3 meters high, and has been erected close to the edge of
the hillside.Connected to this monument are seven large steps of stone,
each 60 meters in length, too, and leading to the valley below over a
height of 80 meters *(Fig. 24) *.; compare the computer-reconstruction
(*Fig. 25 *).

	*Fig. 20: Steingrube at Schmie * cairn20

*5)* Sternenfels, the "Burghalde". This three stepped mound with a
vanished castle on it is connected to an old legend, which says that a
Caesar was buried beneath it (*Fig. 26* ).

*6) *Sulzfeld, the "Kruschhälde". It seems to be a triangular and three
stepped monument with a length of 300 m on each side(see Giganten der
Vorzeit ), completely hewn into in the rock! (*Fig. 27* ).

*7)* Untergrombach/Bruchsal: In a dominant position at the top of a hill
called "Köpfle" (small head or mountain) there are 10 long-barrows in a
"quarry"?, 80 meters long, strictly lined up and west-east oriented like
most Megalithic "Hünengräber" of northern Germany *(Fig. 28 )*. From this
place one has a breath-taking view over the valley of the Rhine.

*8)* Heidelberg, opposite the famous castle: a rock-necropolis of numerous
cairns on the "Heidenknörzel" offers an impressive view over the river
Neckar and its valley *(Fig. 29) *. Close by the neighbouring hill, the
"Heiligenberg", formerly had a huge oppidum and a Mercury temple on it.

*9) *Near Pforzheim, among the foothills of the Black Forest, the
"Maihälde" close to the road between Brötzingen and Birkenfeld.

*10) *In the Black Forest we found the "Heidburg" near Haslach/Kinzigtal,
a prominent hill with a rock-sanctuary and a well-pit on the hollowed top.
Two big and steep cairns are flanking the narrow and precipitous access to
the first of two high rock-steps.

There are many more cairn-locations in the ?Kraichgau? and ?Zabergäu?,
especially near Kürnbach and Sternenfels, e. g. near Oberderdingen, the
very huge ?Sommerhälde?. A big monument is found between Maulbronn and
Knittlingen, the ?Reichshälde/Brandhalde?, three rock-steps are reaching
from the valley to the top of the hill, on each of it extraordinary tall
cairns were erected. At the foot of the first step-building a complex of
lined up earth-walls is ending *(Fig. 30 )*. Especially the main wall in
the centre is very high and broad and bears even a dug out hollow way in
its knoll. One may imagine that important personages in ancient times were
walking on this bulwark in procession directly to the tomb of the
ancestors.

*The ?quarries?/necropolises*

First it was necessary, to untangle the story of these ?quarries?. It is
dissapointing, how little is known of these ancient structures.
Quasi-industrial quarry-work doesn?t go back for more than about 200
years. One lucky find in the archives is a report from the year 1760 and
relates to the year 1576. The ?Steingrube? (stone-pit) of Sternenfels was
used as a supplier of building blocks at this time. But already in 1496
and 1499, when the town-wall and the Gothic church of Kürnbach was built,
this quarry must have been in use. Today one can inspect this very old
quarry.

It is totally empty, no blocks of stone of greater volume have been left
behind. The stone-ground is even, so that quite recently buildings of a
manufacturing district have been erected in there. Other regular quarries
are now containing football-fields, rifle-ranges, even a complete holiday
camp with a great number of bungalows, all installations which need large
areas and a flat ground. In Maulbronn, the first settlement in the Middle
Ages, the ?Schafhof?, was raised in an ancient quarry, and even the
monastery is situated in one, the walls of rock are concealed by high
masonry.

You can calculate how many thousands of tons of stone left these quarries.
If there are rubble heaps in such regular quarries, you will find them
only in small parts of it, mainly beyond the rim, beyond the area where it
would have been a hindrance for quarry-work.

That kind of quarries, however, which I am introducing here, shows quite
another external appearance. In these we find a different kind of ?heaps?.
They are situated in the excavated interior of those quarries, and on
first sight appear almost indistinguishable from real, massive rubble
heaps. They are very steep, often several of them are standing closely
together, letting only room for narrow lanes between them. But these
?heaps? are not made up of rubble, i. e. of fragmented and broken stone
material: under a surface layer of earth and debris we find carefully laid
out stones, often very big, i. e. of a Megalithic character. You wonder
what could have been the reason that this material never left the place.
The highest and steepest ?heap? reaches 20 meters, hights of from 10 to 12
meters being normal.

It is very simple to find such old necropolises, because you must only
differentiate between regular quarries, in which stones were broken out of
the walls of rock, and which are now completely broached. In the
topographic maps they are marked without heaps. Only the outlines were
recorded. Irregular quarries, which are almost intact necropolises, are
always full of indrawn heaps.  But this doesn´t mean that they have never
been touched by quarrying work. In reality they were also used as
suppliers of stone, because it was so easy to take away the already fitted
blocks of the ruins. Therefore the best parts of the cairns, the very
precise worked facades, are lost. Even now you can make use of the blocks
and slabs which are lying around everywhere or still sitting in the
masonry. Only the fact, that stone-mason-work has almost died out,
protects this big sources of sand- and limestone-blocks. Nowadays such
weed-grown places have become nature reserves.

If you study the topographic maps of these ?quarries?, you find hints to
pagan times, in which the origin of such necropolises has to be assumed,
e. g. names like ?Teufelsbruch? at Walzbachtal (devil´s quarry),
?Hexenbruch? at Würzburg (witch´s quarry) or Heidenknörzel/Heidenkanzel at
Heidelberg (pagan´s pulpit). The often found designation ?Hälde? may
conceivably be related etymologically to Old High German ?helden?
(inclined not vertical, cf. German ?Halde? or Old English ?hieldan?),
which means ?rubble heap?. But in the German language we have the same
term word-for-word translated ?Geröllhaufen?. ?Halde? must be a very old
noun, because its verb seems to be in Old High German ?farhelan?, New High
German ?hehlen? (to cover, to hide, to conceal). In the Slovenian
langugage we have the same noun ?halda? and verb ?halic? with the same
meanings.

Only this fact refers to Indoeuropean times. The German adjective ?hohl?,
engl. hollow, which may belong to the same root, shows that we have to
expect hollow spaces in such ?Hälden?, and actually we find stone chambers
in it. Also some connections with German ?Held? (hero), the persons which
were buried under and probably have been doomed to the Germanic godess of
death, Hel or Holda, cannot be ruled out. In view of the great age of
these prehistoric constructions the possibility cannot be excluded,
however, that the word ?Hälde? may be of pre-Indoeuropean origin,
according to the researches of Prof. Theo Vennemann probably ?Vasconian?
*5* .

The ?Kriemhildenstuhl? (the chair or throne of Kriemhild of the Nibelungen
saga) is called a ?Roman quarry? since the excavations of 1934/35 and
1938, when several Roman inscriptions on the quarry walls were found. But
the excavator`s opinion, Dr. Sprater *6* , had been contradicted at the
same time by Dr. Stoll *7* , who said that Roman quarries generally have
no such grooves, which are stretching over the whole surface of the quarry
walls *(Fig.  31) *.  This scientific dispute was unfortunately
overshadowed by the postwar fascist/antifascist conflict. It has to be
stated here that the Kriemhildenstuhl grooves are absolutely identical to
Egyptian quarries *(Fig. 32) *.

In Egypt exhausted quarries were used as necropolises. You can find there
stone chambers in the rock walls or shaft graves in the stone ground.
Temples of the dead were hewn into the rock and a sculpture of the Pharao
and a sphinx were erected. A fairly comparable necropolis is located near
Gebel Silisila *(Fig. 33 )* and it shows the same kind of ?heaps? standing
closly together like here. Dr. Klemm *8* describes these heaps as
absolutly identical to ours. They are not heaped up like ordinary rubble
heaps, but piled up orderly with blocks and slabs. No effort was taken to
find out the true character of these cairn-like constructions.

There are indications that the excavations at the Kriemhildenstuhl of 1935
and of 1938 destroyed a big cairn, which towered up in front of the quarry
walls, because the excavators were only interested in the petroglyphes and
were in a hurry - e. g. the material was not rubble but big blocks of
stone, the same as were found in the murus Gallicus behind. And Dr.
Sprater says that the material of 70 meters of the murus Gallicus above
was found in the quarry. But is it possible that this missing part of the
murus Gallicus could have been rolled down in the quarry during quarrying
work? The quarrymen would rather have removed it before it became
dangerous. It seems to be that there never was a murus Gallicus above,
because it was not necessary to protect this part. The steep rock walls
were hindrance enough. And above all we cannot decide if these stones were
of a ring wall or of a cairn, because both buildings are of the same
masonry.

The grooves are supposed to have been the result of a method of
stone-cracking, by which the quarrymen are cutting drills in the rock to
put in the crowbar. But this scrap-chisel-method doesn?t cause grooves
over the whole surface of the quarry walls, because the drills only reach
a few centimeters into the rock - as deep as the chisel is long - and the
rupture occures smooth. Therefore it is obvious that the grooves must have
been attached later. At the Kriemhildenstuhl, there are 40 petroglyphs
between the grooves. Similar grooves you can inspect at the ?Zwerchhälde?
of Sternenfels *(Fig. 34 )* and at the ?Sommerhälde/Steingrube? of Schmie.

You will agree with me that it is totally unusual for an ordinary quarry
that walls of stone are surrounding it. But in our case we are
confrontated with this phenomen frequently. In most cases the wall of dry
layed stones towers above the surrounding walls of rock, e. g. the
Heidenburg of Haslach/Kinzigtal, which is a rectangular room hewn into the
rock of a small and steep hilltop. Here you see a form of murus Gallicus
raised on the walls of rock, to create a higher room. At the Zwerchhälde
of Sternenfels this special form of murus Gallicus surrounds the
intermediate one of three terraces, on each of these rock steps buildings
are erected. The wall of rock on the valley-side is only a narrow rib,
which is incorporated into the wall of stones, too, and a door was broken
through *(Fig. 35a & Fig. 35b) *.

Also in the Heidburg, parts of wall on both sides of the door are higher
than usual. At the Sommerhälde of Oberderdingen, which is closed to the
valley by the same form of rock-stone-wall, the chamfered quarry wall
beneath the murus Gallicus overhangs, a fact which is incompatible with
normal quarrying work. You can observe overhangig and bevelled parts of
quarry walls also at the Zwerchhälde and at the Maishälde of Sternenfels.
At the Sommerhälde of Oberderdingen we came across a special phenomen.
Here the natural rock wall, which is in every case a narrow rib, was
broken off between two intact parts, and a wall of stone was erected to
fill this gap. On both sides the joint between rock and edifice is a
vertical and precise line. You enter this ?quarry? through a rock door,
too.

It is well-known that prehistorical grave-monuments were protected by
ditches and walls, e. g. the long barrow of Fussel´s Lodge is flanked by
two ditches, the tumuli of the Etruscans and the mounds of the Celts were
surrounded by ditches. The mastaba of Saqqara, the pyramid of Djoser, even
the Cheops Pyramid were similarly surrounded. From this point of view, we
should suspect that it must have been important personnages which were
buried in such places.

The phenomen, that natural rock and artificial edifice were combined to
produce a solid wall, cannot have been confined to this purpose. The
cairns are mostly joined to the quarry wall. Therefore we must presume
that the cairns hide portals in the wall of rock, which lead to grave
chambers. We have to remember the Egyptian quarries with their shaft
graves and adits, which are now visible because ?rubble heaps? are absent.
Formerly there could have been the same ?rubble heaps? as in Gebel
Silsila, which seem to me to be cairns. Because the Egyptian quarry heaps
are always of lime stone, these former cairns could all have been
converted to chalk and cement. In the chapter about the stone chambers, I
present a promising indication for such a rock chamber on the Marsberg
near Würzburg.

Sometimes you find such a quarry together with a ?Burgstall? or
?Viereckschanze?, a form of so far somewhat enigmatic bulwark of
pre-Christian times, which in almost all cases has not at all been
investigated: The Herdhälde quarry of Sternenfels (Burgstall), the quarry
of Freudenstein (Burgstall) and the Brandhälde quarry of Knittlingen
(Viereckschanze, which was used as a place of execution until 1800).

Not far away from the rock-necropolises you find the former residence or
seat of a court, where the personage of high rank, buried there, had once
resided: Celtic oppida, so called ?Fürstensitze? (seat of a sovereign), at
the Kriemhildenstuhl the ?Heidenmauer?, in Würzburg the ?Marienburg?,near
Heidelberg the ?Heiligenberg?, in Untergrombach the ?Michelsberg? (a
Neolithic rampart, which gave its name to a whole culture and period), and
many other oppida, which are not identified as yet but are perceptible by
their topographic situation.

It is revealing for the state of research of German archaeology, when Dr.
Franz Fischer *9* * *wrote : ?Auch wenn die Erforschung dieser Oppida in
Südwestdeutschland noch völlig unzureichend ist, darf angenommen werden,
daß in jedem Einzelfall wenigstens für kürzere, meistens aber längere Zeit
eine nicht ganz geringe Bevölkerung vorhanden war; trotzdem kennen wir zu
keinem südwestdeutschen Oppidum bisher die vorauszusetzende Nekropole -
von den kleinen, im Land verstreuten gleichzeitigen Siedlungsstellen ganz
zu schweigen? (?Although these oppida in southwestern Germany as yet have
only been investigated in a wholly inadequate and unsatisfactory manner,
we may assume that in each case there has to have existed, for shorter or,
in the majority of cases, longer periods of time, a rather considerable
population. Even so we do not know as yet of any of the necropolises,
which must have been associeted with the oppida of southwestern Germany,
not to speak of the smaller settlements in the surrounding countryside?).

There are imposing residences of Celtic princes, but no one knows where
they were buried. For this reason it is more than probable that the
discovered structures, huge buildings of stone slabs with Megalithic
chambers in misunderstood ?quarries?, are the sought-after necropolises!

When I informed officials at the Department of Ancient Monuments in
Karlsruhe of my first discovery, the Zwerchhälde cairn, one of them became
very annoyed that this huge monument should have been erected in a quarry.
He didn?t know of any archaeological example for such a case. But in Italy
there are examples enough. In Cerveteri 80 km north of Rome there is the
Etruscan Banditacci necropolis, which is nothing but a vast quarry in
which the tumuli are closely arranged in a series. The foundations of the
tumuli are cut out of the rock. If you see how packed the cairns are lined
up in the quarries over here, you become aware of the parallels between
ancient German and Italian necropolises.

We definitely expect that in the course of time a whole advanced
civilization of ancient times will come to light, which has so far been
totally overlooked, and has perhaps become partially destroyed before
reaching its mature phase. So far we can only speculate how the facades of
these monuments formerly looked like, and which kind of unknown
architecture lies hidden under the debris produced by nature and much
later quarry workers.

*The 'rubble heaps'/cairns*

So long as archaeological excavation results are wanting, the
architectural analysis is the only way to substantiate these overwhelming
monuments. The best example for that kind of architecture I have found is
the Cairn of Barnenez in France, which shows in the cross section many
retaining walls *(Fig. 36a) *.  But Egyptian stepped pyramids also have
such onion-skin-like walls *(Fig. 36b) *. Most people think that the steps
of pyramids have been constructed as platforms, one on the other. But in
reality, the pyramids of the first five dynasties show that every step is
a wall, the deepest wall at the outside builds the deepest step, and so
on. In the centre of a pyramid you must imagine a tower or better an
obelisk *10* . The same principles apply to Megalithic cairns and also to
the buildings which I have excaveted, especially the ?Zwerchhälde? in
Sternenfels shows three retaining walls. In Schmie you can see it at two
cairns.

Most of the longbarrow-like ?heaps? are oriented west-east *(Fig. 37) *,
identical to the Megalithic ?Hünengräber? of northern Germany (ten
parallel specimen at the Köpfle quarry of Untergrombach). Connected with
the very long cairns (as long as 250 m) are smaller buildings, also
longbarrow-like, but north-south-oriented, arranged in pairs and linked to
the big one (the Rohrhälde quarry and the Sommerhälde quarry of Kürnbach)
*(Fig. 38) *.

The extraordinary aspect of southern German Megalithic cairns is the
smooth and exact surface finish of the very heavy slabs of sandstone and
limestone. There are the well-known big but mostly rather shapeless and
clumsy megaliths of the dolmens of the Atlantic West and North of Europe.
They seem to be boulders or crudly hewn blocks of very primitive
quarry-work. But the slabs over here are always perfectly worked. Mostly
they have a rectangular form with perfect corners, cut very precisely.
*Fig. 40: Wall of the Steingrub at Schmie * cairn40

*Fig. 42: Marsberg *
	

For example the facades of the ?Kruschhälde? of Sulzfeld *(Fig. 39 )*, of
the ?Sommerhälde? of Schmie *(Fig. 40) *, the ?Sommerhälde? of Kürnbach
*(Fig. 41) * and the cairns of the Marsberg-necropolis near
Würzburg-Randersacker *(Fig. 42) ,* where one example shows the slabs of
the facade standing on the narrow side, like the standing stones of the
?Hünengräber? of northern Germany. But those are arranged with erratic
blocks in a more or less natural state, instead. The ashlars here are as
heavy as the mysterious blocks of the well-known Megalithic cultures, the
majority weighting many tons.

cairn42

Therefore they are more comparable to constructional blocks of Etruscan
tumuli which are always well fitted and consisted of tuff or sandstone,
for example the necropolis ?Crocifisso del Tuffo? *(Fig. 43 )*.

It is a known but neglected fact, that the Iron age Etruscans also built
cairns and dolmens, which are typical for the northern and western
European Megalithic cultures, of the Neolithic and the Bronze age, for
example cairn-like tumuli of Saturnia and Populonia *(Fig. 44) *with a
dolmen-chamber. And they also have tumuli with tholoi-chambers like
Megalithic corbelled roofs of the North and West, for example the tholos
?La Montagnola? of Quinto Fiorentino *(Fig. 45) *.

*The stone chambers*

It was a lucky moment when I recognized the ?Zwerchhälde? of Sternenfels
to be the biggest Megalithic monument of Europe, which was misunderstood
for centuries as an ordinary rubble heap of a quarry. But there ist no
other explanation possible, because this ?heap? fills the whole quarry, is
nearly 20 m high and so steep that it simply could not consist of rubble
at all. It would have been already collapsed a long time ago, if not
constructed throughout of massive walls. I informed officials at the
Landesdenkmalamt in Karlsruhe (Department of Ancient Monuments) about this
discovery, but they didn?t believe me, because there was no Megalithic
portal visible. Not before spring 2000 we found the first stone chamber,
well-preserved and passable, not at this quarry but at a distance of only
3 kilometers, the Sommerhälde chamber near Kürnbach (See* Fig. 22 & Fig.
23 *), but still the officials did not react.

*Fig. 50: Sommerhälde, excavation * This stone chamber is constructed of
walls, which are built without mortar. The ceiling consists of heavy slabs
of sandstone. This kind of architecture is not of the present, of the
Middle Ages or of Antiquity, it is typical for the Megalithic period. The
ground plan of the chamber is of an L-form, like chambers in the
Morbihan-region of western France, e. g. of Goerem (see *Fig. 12d) *. You
can compare the portal and the chamber to the reconstructed cairns of
Bougon in western France *(Fig. 46) *, or to the cairn of Barnenez *(Fig.
47 )*. The dimensions, too, are comparable. The contours are almost equal
*(Fig. 48 & Fig. 49 )*. In Barnenez you have eleven chambers, here only
one, but there are indications of more chambers, which are now destroyed,
because a big part of the building is missing. We digged out the former
extent of the outer wall *(Fig. 50 )*. It is always straight, but the
corpus of the remaining structure recedes. So we have to conclude that
this part of masonry was pillaged. If there had been other chambers with
such big stone slabs, they could have been used for stone-mason work.  
cairn50

Martin Kößler, the first discoverer of this stone chamber, informed the
Landesdenkmalamt already in 1992, but one the officials misconcepted it as
a shelter from the times of the Thirty Years War (17th century). In the
same ?quarry?, Kößler stumbled on the next stone passage, the ?Steingang?
*(Fig. 51a )*, which stretches parallel to a rock wall deep in the ground
*(Fig. 52 )*. Looking from above we can see that it is covered with long
and narrow stone slabs, the visible examples are worked out uniformely,
similiar to those in Saqqara/Egypt *(Fig. 51b )*. And when we made
photographs of the interior, we detected that the covered parts have the
same stone slab ceiling. The ?Steingang? is the first aim of our
excavation project and after all, we got an excavation license for it by
Dr. Biel of the Landesdenkmalamt in Stuttgart.

In Schmie we know four visible portals and another two which are still
covered. But this necropolis posseses not less than 20 cairns and
therefore we must assume a similar number of stone chambers or more.
Because this big cemetery completely belongs to private hand, it was not
possible to make excavations. And the proprietors are not willing to give
us permission at the moment, although the portals look really promising
(see *Fig. 14 , Fig. 15 , Fig. 16 , Fig. 17 & Fig.18 )*.

The ?Keller? is the most visible entrance one of the cairns at Schmie. The
name ?cellar? suggests, that the chamber is subterranean, maybe accessible
over a staircase leading downwards. There were no more informations
available from the owners, only a sad story about some young rascals, who
walled in a playfellow for three days in this passage, before the police
came and released him. At this time in the 1970ies the portal was filled
up with rubble, to prevent people from entering.

The ?Schmiede? is said to have been a depot of a stonemason, who converted
the big blocks and slabs of the cairns. The rear part of the chamber was
separated by a wall, to keep children away and the portal was narrowed
down. Now the entrance and the ground in front of it is filled up nearly
to the ceiling.

The portal, which we call (after the discoverer) ?Dübbers I? was found on
the 1st of April 2000. The ceiling slabs are broken, but the edifice of
the dry layed walls is well visible. ?Dübbers II? was discovered on the
2nd of April 2000 and is filled up to the ceiling by rubble. The entrance
is covered by an intact, heavy and massive stone slab, also the whole of
the following passage, which we photographed by a cautiously inserted
camera. Because a permanent cold draught comes out, we presume a big and
maybe undisturbed cavity behind. Two more but almost complete covered
entrances are demonstrable in the ?Steingrub? (stone-pit), which in the
automobile tourist-map is already called ?Steingrab? (stone-grave).

The most promising stone passage we discovered on the Marsberg near
Würzburg-Randersacker in 2001 in compagny of Uwe Topper and Gernot Geise
and more friends. (see* Fig. 12b )*. This imposing tunnel is accessible
walking upright *(Fig. 53 )*. The walls consists mostly of compact stones,
partially of big blocks at the base. Massive stone slabs cover the narrow
passage. After entering 10 - 12 meters you reach a right angle turn to the
left, and within roughly 8 meters the ceiling or roof of big slabs becomes
stepwise lower and ends at the deepest of the ceiling-slabs* (Fig. 54 )*.
Parallel to the first ceiling-step there is a stone-step on the ground.
The others are covered under rubble. Therefore we must presume that,
paralell to the stepwise lowering ceiling, the steps of a staircase are
leading down to an unknown and blocked chamber.

This reminds us of Etruscan tumuli-chambers, which are also excavated
maybe 6 or more meters down into the rock, and are only accessible by very
steep staircases. When we consider, that Etruscan necropolises developed
out of the rock, because it was the perfect protection for such chambers,
we have to assume that Celtic necropolises had the same intention. So far
nobody did suspect such parallels!

*Problems of diffusion and migration*

The Megalithic territory spreads all over Europe, but its center of
diffusion lies in the Atlantic West and North of the continent. You find
such monuments in northern Germany as far south as Hesse, also in
Switzerland up to the German border, in France in the Vosges also near the
German border, but the whole of southern Germany is a Megalithic Terra X.
Now the new finds close this gap.

It is still to early to date these discoveries to a distinct epoch, so
long as dateable finds have not been made. Investigations of the stone
chambers have not been possible so far, because no official license had
been issued (but now a license was given for the ?Steingang? of Kürnbach).
Only some petroglyphs at the rock walls point to Neolithic but also Roman
times. The engravings of bull-skulls at the Zwerchhälde in Sternenfels
*(Fig. 55 )* and at the Sommerhälde in Kürnbach *(Fig. 56 )* seem to be
very equal to similar ones at the Neolithic alleé couverte of Züschen in
Hessen *(Fig. 57 )*. The outline of a running horse at a ceiling-slab in
the passage of a Würzburg cairn *(Fig. 58 )* is reminiscent of such of the
40 petroglyphs at the rock walls of the Kriemhildenstuhl near Bad Dürkheim
*(Fig. 59 )*. This ?quarry? is, you know, dated to Roman times. But even
the responsible excavator Dr. Sprater pointed out the similarities of some
symbols to Bronze Age and Neolithic engravings of the north, especially to
such of the rocks at Bohuslän in Sweden.

It seems rather strange that the ground plans of Megalithic monuments of
very different times and regions should be similiar. If you compare the
layout plans of the Megalithic grave ?Maes Howe? on the Orkney Islands
(2600 B.C.), the Mycenan tholos ?Treasury of Atreus? (1300 B. C.) and the
Etruscan ?La Montagnola? (700 B. C.), you find no great differences *(Fig.
60a ,60b & 60c )*. This kind of grave-architecture is said to be
stretching over a period of at least 2000 years, not counting the first
corbelled roofs occuring at least 1000 years before. How shall people have
been able to pass on such sophisticated principles of architecture over
such incomprehensible spaces of time, over distances of many thousand
kilometers?

Recent discoveries implicate, that there are much more relations, for
example to the megalithic findings in Northern America. The excavations of
2003/2004 in Oberderdingen on the Ölmühlenkopf-hill which happened beneath
a cairn (80 x 60 mtrs.) discovered a rock-altar with an oblique table-top
and a chamfer, that seem to have contained the blood of an ancient
immolations *(Fig. 61a & 61b )*. Such a sacrificial table beneath a cairn
is known at Mistery Hill, North Salem, New Hampshire, 40 miles north of
Boston ? America´s Stonehenge *(Fig. 62a & 62b )*. Dr. Barry Fell of
Harvard University has found various inscriptions including Ogham,
Phoenician and Iberian Punic script throughout this site. As Dr. Christine
Pellech, Vienna, Austria saw the quarry walls of Sternenfels, she
recognized at once the same scripts between the grooves *(Fig. 63a & 63b
)*. Buth the shock of all were five little groovings in a line, each not
more than one hand distant of the other and not bigger than a thumbnail,
showing animals, especially vanished species like mammout and rhinoceros
*(Fig. 64 )*.

*Problems of chronology*

This discovery seems to be completely unbelievable. But if you consider
the ideas of the chronology-reviewers, f. e. Dr. Horst Friedrich, who
wrote an interesting book about the ice-age * 11 *in which he traces back
the expansion of glaciers to only one global cataclysm, you have to reduce
the huge geologic period (~100.000 years) to an only short time of maybe
weeks or hours.

The new findings point out that the spread of Megalithic monuments is not
limited to the coastal regions but ranges all over the interior continent.
From such a point of view it seems more probable to see the new
discoveries in southern Germany at least as a link between the
north-western European Megalithic cultures and Etruscan necropolises,
because the periods in question stretch over the whole Neolithic period,
the Bronze Age and the Iron Age, nearly 5000 years. Have the Megalithic
monuments of southern Germany been produced during the Iron Age?

It is thought-provoking, why the Celts of the Iron Age should have been
able to invent the iron-plough, but allegedly were incapable of using iron
chisels and pickaxes to hew stone for architectual purposes. Greeks and
Etruscans built temples and monuments of stone, but Celts should have
built only mounds of earth? There are many prehistoric iron-pits in the
whole of southern Germany. Should this metal have only been used to
produce iron-swords and lances? This seems to be rather a prejudice, based
on antique traditions about barbarians of the north, mere propaganda.

Some nonconformist scholars have developed theories about a necessary
shortening of our official chronology and calendar. Heribert Illig has e.
g. argued *12 *, that the whole Megalithic period could be a phenomen of
the Iron Age.

It is rather impossible to produce such perfect ashlars, as we find in the
southern German rock necropolises, with Stone Age implements only.
Heribert Illig and Gunnar Heinsohn* 13 * pointed out very convincingly,
that the pyramids at Gizah must have been built by using iron tools, as
Herodot indeed reported. Especially the granite sarkophag of the king´s
chamber of the Cheops Pyramid can only be worked out by steel, emphasizes
Illig.

Could it be that because in southern Germany iron was so easy to get, the
slabs for chambers and facades could be worked very precisely? Were people
in the northern and western regions forced, because of the lack of iron
and quarries, to use the boulders as they found it? Maybe this is the
reason, why similar gigantic monuments of the north have a more primitve
outlook.

This might suggest that Neolithic and iron-using cultures existed
contemporaneously in northern and southern Germany and built the same
long-barrow-like monuments of stone. And beyond chronological
considerations it is possible that the monuments of the south were
prototypes for the north and west of Europe, maybe even for the south. We
know only two huge rock-necropolises of the Etruscans, but here we have
many of them, many of them still undiscoverd, and the Würzburg necropolis
is more spacious than the Banditacci necropolis of Cerveteri. It has a
length of 1,5 km, the Cerveteri-necropolis stretches only 1,2 km.

During the last two centuries, since Montelius, the founder of the present
archaeological chronology, the period of the ?Urnenfelder- und
Seevölker-Wanderung? (1200 - 800 B. C.) was discussed intensively,
especially by Jürgen Spanuth *14 *. It was ascertained that from central
Europe expansive migrations of nations started, which led to all
directions, as mentioned by authors of antiquity, to Italy, to the
Balkans, to Greece, Anatolia and the Levant. Egypt was nearly conquered by
the ?Sea Peoples?. The Australian archaeologist John Dayton *15 *followed
these traces to Egypt and found also chronological incongruities. Under
this aspect it seems more likely, that during this period Megalithic rock
necropolises of central Europe reached northern Italy.

The Celts also conquered the Balkans, Greece, Anatolia, where they founded
the Celtic kingdom ?Galatia? and, what is only transmitted in an ignored
Byzantine source, the Levant and Syria. Celtic torques were found in
Ugarit. Could it be possible that the celtic migrations of 387 and 269 B.
C. are identical to the migrations at the end of the Bronze Age? We cannot
discuss the problems of migration and diffusion without considering
problems of chronology. There are indeed reasons to question the
chronological framework of archaeological datings. Heribert Illig and
Gunnar Heinsohn want to take out approximately 2000 years of Egyptian
dynasties and European prehistory, and 300 years of the Christian
calendar. Chronology-reviewer like Christopher Marx (RMNG) and Anatolij
Fomenko *16 * suggest, that the whole time before 1350 Anno Domini was
completly faked by medieval historians, which would confirm my discovery
of an older Ars Mundi calendar in South-West-Germany before about 1500*1
*. This calendar counted the year 1496 as III496 (3496).

One could argue that the elobarated methods of C14-, dendro-chronological
and warven-dating confirm the present chronology. But on which doubtful
procedures and wrong premises these methods are based, you can read in the
very competent book by Prof. H. U. Niemitz and Chr. Blöss ?C14-Crash?*17
*. These methods are suspect, because they are adjusted to standards which
are relying on established chronology. Libby, the founder of the
C14-method, calibrated it at already predated finds from Egyptian tombs.
But I´m convinced that it would be possible, to new-calibrate the
C14-method at a shortened chronology and it would produce much better and
more precise results than the inexplicably wide-spread dates used today.

*The prospects*

Because people used these old ruins at every time in history as stone
suppliers, their image as ordinary quarries is established. Even the
official archaeologists are influenced by this common misconception,
because these necropolises were indeed misused as quarries over a long
time. In the words of the officials they are considered as ordinary heaps
which are surrounded by walls to protect the quarrymen from crumbling
rubble.

But there exist no reports that quarrymen did such senseless work, and if
you imagine yourself in the situation of such a quarry, you realize that
the quarrymen always had to work for the rubble heap. All material seems
to be heaped up and none left the place. And if this heaps may really
consist of rubble it would be senseless to draw a wall around, because
every new rubble had to be heaped up over the wall and would cover this
wall at the end. Because a rubble heap is growing, the next wall has to be
build, a so-called Sisyphos-work, for which no-one ever paid a dime. If
the walls should have been built after the stoppage of quarrying work,
there was no reason to do this, because it would have been easier to close
the whole quarry to protect people. Above all in former times accident
preventions did not exist. And it is absolute nonsense to wall in an only
three meter high ?heap? including a stone chamber, like you find in
Kürnbach.

In 1990 I found the first cairn, the ?Zwerchhälde? of Sternenfels, and
there was no portal visible. But since the year 2000 we count about six
chambers in the Kraichgau and Zabergäu region and three perfect preserved
stone passages near Würzburg, one which promises an undisturbed chamber
deep in the rock and can be explored easily. It was not possible to search
for dateable material, so long as no stone chamber was identified. But as
we found the first one in Kürnbach, I contacted a real specialist, the
archaeologist Dr. Diether Ziermann of the ?Landesamt für Kultur und
Archäologie? in Stade /Westfalen. He wrote a Megalithic standard work *18
*and he was alarmed as he saw the photographs of the portals and monuments
we disvovered here. He cannot understand, why the officials hesitate to
investigate it. But he is not from this region and the official
departements are reluctant to begin digging work because of lack of funds.

For that reason we started an application at the end of may 2001 to be
allowed to begin with a first re-approved dig, although strictly speaking
as yet no member of our ?Cairn-Forschungsgesellschaft? is qualified for
sophisticated excavation work. And it is doubtful if eventual finds would
not be recognized. But in Baden-Württemberg it is possible that laymen
like us get permissions for excavation projects. So we had to dig. The
obvious results you saw in this report.

But we need support in every way. Only with finds, which can be dated
precisely, we can convince the archaelogists of the official departements
in Karlsruhe and Stuttgart, which are responsible for the excavation and
preservation of such ancient monuments, although our architctural report
should be illuminating enough. This is our main problem at this moment. We
are lucky that the university of Karlsruhe in Baden gives us support.
Philipp Heidinger from the Departement of Geophysics and his collegiate
friends have been making geomagnetic and geoelectric surveys since 2004 to
detect cavities or vugs, the suspected undiscovered and inviolated burial
chambers with rich grave goods. Though the earth detections are very
elaborate and time-consuming we found two until now unknown hollows in the
cairns of Sternenfels and Kürnbach *(Fig. 65 )*. So we can say, there is a
totally brandnew field of research and a good chance for young
archaeologists to start their own excavation project! Almost 9 or 10
discovered stone chambers are waiting for research! We only need sponsors!

Our appeal: Come and see the cairns! You are welcome! We hope you will
realize the dimensions of these discoveries. For us there can be not the
slightest doubt that these monuments belong to the cultural heritage of
all mankind, but especially of Germany, which from now on must be
categorized among the great civilizations of prehistory, and, according to
chronological considerations, the time of Antiquity.

This contribution is meant only as a first announcement for readers, who
are fluent in reading English texts but are unable to read my above
mentioned book, which has so far only been published in German. I hope
that further articles with more and detailed information about excavation
results of these most remarkable prehistorical monuments will follow. And
I do hope that this text, taken together with the accompanying photos and
other illustrations, will in the meantime already convey a realistic
impression to my readers of what we are speaking about.

/Thanks to Dr. Horst Friedrich (Wörthsee) and Uwe Topper for helping with
this English version /
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Literatur/ /*

1. *Haug*, K. Walter, ?Die Entdeckung deutscher Pyramiden ?
Sensationelle Megalith-Ruinen einer versunkenen Hochkultur im
Mittelgebirge?, Cernunnos, Walzbachtal 2003, (ISBN 3000076395).*//*
2. *Giot*, Pierre-Roland, ?Barnenez?, Editions Ouest-France, Rennes
1991.*//*
3. *Moretti,*Mario ?Cerveteri?, Istituto Geografico de Agostini,
Novara 1978.*//*
4. *Haug*, K. Walter ?Sensationelle Megalithanlagen bei Würzburg?,
Synesis 5/2000, Efodon.*//*
5. *Vennemann*, Theo, ?Etymologische Beziehungen im Alten Europa?,
in: Der Gingko-Baum, Germanistisches Jahrbuch für Nordeuropa, 13.
Folge, Helsinki 1995.*//*
6. *Sprater*, Fr., ?Die Pfalz in der Vor- und Frühzeit, Limburg und
Kriemhildenstuhl?, D. Verlag d. Historischen Museums d. Pfalz i.
Speyer, 1948.*//*
7. *Stoll*, A., ?Mannheimer Geschichtsblätter XXXVI, Der
Brunholdisstuhl am Ringwall über Bad Dürkheim?, Hg. Mannheimer
Altertumsverein, 1935.*//*
8. *Klemm*, R., D., ?Steine und Steinbrüche im Alten Ägypten?,
Springer, 1993.*//*
9. *Fischer*, F., a. o., ?Die Kelten in Baden-Württemberg? Theiss,
1981.*//*
10. *Lehner*, Mark, ?Geheimnis der Pyramiden?, Orbis, 1997.*//*
11. *Friedrich*, Horst, ?Jahrhundert-Irrtum Eiszeit?, Efodon, 1997.*//*
12. *Illig*, H.,  ?Die veraltete Vorzeit?, Scarabäus 1988.*//*
13. *Illig, *H, &* Heinsohn*, Gunnar , ?Wann lebten die Pharaonen?,
Scarabäus 1990.*//*
14. *Spanuth*, J., ?Die Atlanter?, Grabert , Tübingen 1977.*//*
15. *Dayton*, J., ?Minerals, Metals, Glazing & Man or Who was
Sesostris I??, Harrap London, 1978.*//*
16. *Fomenko*, A. ?Emperico-Statistical Analysis of Narrative
Material... Vol 1+2, Kluwer Academic Puiblishers, Dordrecht 1994.*//*
17. *Niemitz*, H-U., & *Blöss*, C.: C14 Crash, Mantis, Gräfelfing
1998.*//*
18. *Ziermann*, Diether, ?Baustoffe und Konstruktionsformen
neolithisch/frühbronzezeitlicher Grabarchitektur Westeuropas?,
Verlag Peter Lang, Ffm. 1991

*Summary*

A tentative survey of lately discovered, so far unsuspected prehistoric
monuments in southern Germany is presented, which seem to belong to the
Celtic period of the beginning Iron Age, but also to the Megalithic
cultures. These may be compared to the Cairns of Britanny, Ireland and
Scotland and to the ?Hünengräber? of northern Germany and the longbarrows
of Great Britain, but we also find affinities to Etruscan necropolises,
dolmens and tholoi and even Egyptian step pyramids. Though known for a
long time and even recognizable in topographic maps, the true nature or
destination of these most imposing prehistoric monuments and its stone
chambers has so far not been realized, because they were misunderstood as
overgrown rubble heaps within ancient quarries. Quite obviously we have
here unexpected evidence for cultural diffusion during the Megalithic
period, and it is in this connection that also the reliability of our
mainstream chronology for these times is discussed.

*Zusammenfassung*

Es wird ein erster Überblick gegeben über versuchsweise der keltischen
Eisenzeit, aber auch den Megalith-Kulturen zuzuordnende, neu entdeckte
Monumente im süddeutschen Raum. Es handelt sich bei diesen um am ehesten
mit den Cairns der Bretagne, Irlands und Schottlands oder norddeutschen
Hünengräbern und britischen longbarrows vergleichbare vorgeschichtliche
Bauwerke, aber auch Ähnlichkeiten zu etruskischen Fels-Nekropolen, Dolmen-
und Tholoi-Gräbern und sogar ägyptischen Stufenpyramiden sind zu erkennen.
Die Bedeutung dieser Bauwerksruinen und ihrer Steinkammern wurde bisher
nicht erkannt, weil man sie für überwachsene Abraumhalden innerhalb alter
Steinbruchareale hielt. Im Zusammenhang zur nunmehr noch deutlicher zu
erkennenden megalithzeitlichen Kulturdiffusion wird die Frage der
Zuverlässigkeit unserer Mainstream-Chronologie diskutiert.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
* I would like to write a Comment  to this text: *