Yes, it is a fact. Here is a statement by archeologist Wade Miller:
"I have Carbon-14 dates on horses that are as recent as 800 years. Other dates are only 1200 years to 1400 years ago."
Not a "fact" but a claim by Miller. His claim is, interestingly enough, not made in a peer reviewed journal where he would be expected to provide the bona fides of the lab where the analysis was performed as well as all the calibration details, especially when the analysis is being used to support such an extraordinary claim.
It is not a red herring. The Curly horses of North America, which persist to this day, are not closely related to any known Asian horse. Where did they come from? And when? There is no evidence that the Spanish brought them over, and no Spanish breeds even look like them.
A red herring and a patently false claim to boot (see: "Iberian Origins of New World Horse Breeds". Jhered.oxfordjournals.org.doi:10.1093/jhered/esj020 )
Henry C. Mercer in his book "The Hill-Caves of Yucatan", talks of finding several horse bones, which were not fossilized. These bones were not carbon-dated, but later examined by paleontologist Edward D. Cope, who determined that they were the Mexican horse.
If not dated, what is the point?
Another discovery of ancient horse bones was found in a cenote at Mayapan. Bones from both the Mexican horse and the Western horse were found along side pottery fragments. (Journal of Mammalogy, Vol. 38, May 1957, No. 2)
Dr. Peter Schmidt of ENAH (Escuela Nacional de Antropología e Historia) found 44 horse bones mixed with ceramics from level one to level 7 at Loltun cave, level 7 being carbon dated to 1805 BC. (Origenes Del Hombre Americano, by Alba Gonzalez Jacome, Sept 1987) He suggested that the survival of the Mexican horse may need to be extended to the beginning of the ceramic era.
No, that is a gross misinterpretation of the find.
A summary of the animal remains in the Loltun Cave was provided by the Hatts, who in 1929 and 1947 explored fourteen “cenotes” and dug in nine of them:
"The time range represented is from over 28,400 yr BP. Not all taxa are found throughout this long period, but they can be divided into three main groups (Table 10.3). Group I (Holocene and Pleistocene) is formed by those species that occur through most of the stratigraphic sequence, accounting for more than half of the identified of the identified species (n = 39, 57.3 percent). Group 2 (n = 18 species, 26.5 percent) is composed of those species found only in the Holocene sediments. Species that occurred only in the Pleistocene strata constitute Group 3. "
"Table 10.3 Mammal Species from Loltun Cave Divided According to Their Temporal Record in the Excavation.
Group 1- Holocene and Pleistocene
Didelphis marsupialis, Marmosa canescens,M. Mexicana, Cryptotis, Cryptotis mayensis, Peropteryx macrotis, Pteronotus parnellii, Mormoops megalophylla, Chrotopterus auritus, Glossophaga soricina, Stumira lilium, Artibeus jamaicensis, hiroderma villosum, Desmodus rotundus, Diphylla ecaudata,Eptesicus furinalis, Lasiurus ega I. Intermedius, Nyctinomops laticaudatus, Herpailurus yagouaroundi, Leopardus pardalis, L. wiedii, Puma concolor, Panthera onca, Conepatus semistriatus, Spilogale putorius, Nasua narica, Mazama sp, Odocoileus virginiamus, Pecari tajacu, Sciurus deppei, S. yucatanemis, Orthogeomys hispidus, Heteromys gaumeri, Oryzomys couesi, Ototylomys phyllotis, Peromyscus leucopus, P. yucatanicus, Sigmodon hispidus, Sylvilagus floridanus.
Group 2 – Holocene Only
Philander opposum, Pteronotus davyi, Carollia brevicauda, Centurio senex, Natalus stramineus, Myotis keaysi, Eumops bonariensis, E. underwoodi, Promops centralis, Molossus rufus, Dasypus novemcinctus, Canis familiaris, Urocyon cinereoargenteus, Bassariscus sumichrasti, Procyon lotor, Mustela frenata, Coendou mexicanus, agouti paca
Group 3 – Pleistocene Only
Marmosa lorenzoi, desmodus cf. D draculae, Canis dirus, C. latrans, C. lupus, mephitis sp, Cuvieronius sp, Equus Conversidens, Bison sp, Hemiauchenia sp, Sylvilagus brasiliensis" page 267
Note that Equus Conversidens is listed as ONLY Pleistocene. The Bison reference is to a now extinct species that was extanct during the Pleistocene era. This is likely what Mercer originally thought were "cattle" bones."
Now, where were the Pleistocene animal remains found? The next citation makes it very clear:
"The Pleistocene mammal fauna from Loltun Cave consist of those remains from the bottom of Level VII downward and is represented by fifty species (Groups 1 and 3) in forty genera, twenty-three families, and nine orders. This variety is one of the largest from the late Pleistocene of Mexico (Arroyo-Cabrales et al, in press; Kurten and Anderson 1981). Furthermore, it is the most diverse fossil mammal fauna for the Neotropical region of North and CentralAmerica (Fernasquia-Villafranca 1978; Webb and Perrigo 1984)."
There was only one citation that made the dating of the horse bones seem questionable, and it certainly wasn’t placing them up in level V. This citation does not contradict the previous one, because we already know the scientists say that the demarcation between the Pleistocene era and the Holocene era could be in the bottom of Level VII. This would be around 9,500 BC.
"To date, a comprehensive publication on the site has not been produced; however, several studies have reported on some of the important findings from the excavations by INAH. These findings include layers with ceramics and lithics, and layers with only lithics in association with extinct animals. These ceramic lithic layers are important for assessing the purpose and lifestyle of the first human beings that occupied the Yucatan Peninsula. Other studies cover lithic morphology and typology (Konieczna 1981), and biological remains, such as mammal bones (Alvarez and Polaco 1972; Alvarez and Arroyo-Cabrales 1990; Arroyo-Cabrales and Alvarez 1990), mollusk shells (Alvarez and Polaco 1972), and plants (Montufar 1987; Xelhuanzi-Lopex 1986).
It is clear that Loltun Cave is an important site because of the presence of lithic tools and Pleistocene fauna, though doubts still exist about the stratigraphic and temporal associations. The presence of Pleistocene Equus conversidens in ceramic layers has been interpreted as possible proof of the survival of the extinct horse into the Holocene (Schdmit 1988)."
Level VII is a ceramic level, and we already know that the animals were at the bottom of Level VII. There is uncertainty as to whether the demarcation between the Pleistocene and Holocene eras would be in Level VIII or at the bottom of Level VII. The rest of the citations in this book accept the placement of the demarcation in Level VII.
Now could this be evidence of the horse in the BoM time period? Nonsense. This is like Sorenson’s earlier statement that supposedly finding pockets of extinct animals surviving into 8,000 BC would constitute evidence for the BoM. We are still talking about many thousands of years prior to the BoM time period.
Yet another citation refers to this particular find. The following is obtained from the text “The Cambridge History of the Native Peoples of North America”, page 62, which is available from a google book search:
"Currently, only one site in Mesoamerica supports the hypothesis of human occupation in lowland environments before 12,000 years ago. In the Puuc Hills of northern Yucatan, the lowest levels of excavations reported by R. Velazquez at Loltun Cave have produced some crude stone and bone tools along with the remains of horse, mastodon, and other now extinct Pleistocene animals. Felines, deer, and numerous rodents round out the archaeological assemblage. No radiocarbon dates have been forthcoming for this proposed early components that underlies later ceramic occupations. On the basis of stone tool typology and faunal association, MacNeish has proposed that the lower levels of Loltun Cave are somewhere between 40,000 and 15,000 years old."
This citation demonstrates that the horse remains were identified as extinct Pleistocene animals, and were located in the lower levels underlying the ceramic levels.
To summarize this section, here are the “if….then” questions that need to be evaluated in context.
if the horse did exist in Mesoamerica during Book of Mormon times, then not a single bone or tooth from any of these horses has ever been discovered, despite the fact that the remains of an abundance of other animals have been discovered in Mesoamerica
if horses existed in ancient Mesoamerica during the Book of Mormon time period, then despite the fact that ancient Mesoamericans depicted many animals in art and ideology, they never depicted a horse or included the horse in any of their mythology
if the horse existed in Mesoamerica since Jaredite times, then it left no trace of the sort of social evolutionary impact that we see in other cultures that possessed the horse
if the Book of Mormon “horse” is really a tapir, then tapirs were domesticated only by one small group of people, never to be replicated by anyone else, despite sharing characteristics that disqualify large mammals from domestication
It is clear that each of these proposals is highly unlikely, and fails to fit within the context of not only what we know about ancient Mesoamerica, but what we know about the history of other peoples in other parts of the world, as well.
With thanks to:
http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com/
