Elongated Skull in Paracas

Initial DNA analysis of Paracas elongated skull released – with incredible results

(Read the article on one page)

Paracas is a desert peninsula located within the Pisco Province in the Inca Region, on the south coast of Peru.  It is here were Peruvian archaeologist, Julio Tello, made an amazing discovery in 1928 – a massive and elaborate graveyard containing tombs filled with the remains of individuals with the largest elongated skulls found anywhere in the world. These have come to be known as the ‘ Paracas skulls ’. In total, Tello found more than 300 of these elongated skulls, which are believed to date back around 3,000 years. A DNA analysis has now been conducted on one of the skulls and expert Brien Foerster has released preliminary information regarding these enigmatic skulls.

It is well-known that most cases of skull elongation are the result of cranial deformation, head flattening, or head binding, in which the skull is intentionally deformed by applying force over a long period of time. It is usually achieved by binding the head between two pieces of wood, or binding in cloth. However, while cranial deformation changes the shape of the skull, it does not alter its volume, weight, or other features that are characteristic of a regular human skull.

The Paracas skulls, however, are different.  The cranial volume is up to 25 percent larger and 60 percent heavier than conventional human skulls, meaning they could not have been intentionally deformed through head binding/flattening. They also contain only one parietal plate, rather than two. The fact that the skulls’ features are not the result of cranial deformation means that the cause of the elongation is a mystery, and has been for decades. 

Artistic - Elongated Skull

An artist’s impression based on a Paracas skull. Photo credit: Marcia Moore / Ciamar Studio

Mr. Juan Navarro, owner and director of the local museum, called the Paracas History Museum, which houses a collection of 35 of the Paracas skulls, allowed the taking of samples from 5 of the skulls. The samples consisted of hair, including roots, a tooth, skull bone and skin, and this process was carefully documented via photos and video. Samples from three skulls were sent to the geneticist, although the geneticist was not given any information about what they came from until after the genetic testing, so as not to create any preconceived ideas.  

The results of a DNA analysis of one of the skulls are now back, and Brien Foerster, author of more than ten books and an authority on the ancient elongated headed people of South America, has just revealed the preliminary results of the analysis. He reports on the geneticist's findings:

It had mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) with mutations unknown in any human, primate, or animal known so far. But a few fragments I was able to sequence from this sample indicate that if these mutations will hold we are dealing with a new human-like creature, very distant from Homo sapiens, Neanderthals and Denisovans.

The implications are of course huge. “I am not sure it will even fit into the known evolutionary tree,” the geneticist wrote. He added that if the Paracas individuals were so biologically different, they would not have been able to interbreed with humans.

The result of this analysis is only phase one of many phases of analysis due to take place.  The next tests will involve having the initial test replicated, and conducted on other skulls, so that the results can be compared to see if there are any specific Paracas characteristics. We will update when more details emerge.

Watch the video interview with Brien Foerster revealing new details about the genetic analysis.

Featured Image: An elongated skull found in Paracas

By April Holloway


crazy stuff :), will be keeping an eye on this story

Same here. It's fabulous! This will prove that at least some beings on this planet had a single, non-split brain at one time in some places. I find it hard to believe that the skulls are only 3,000 years old. I theorize that sooner or later it will be discovered that they are much older than that.

I suggest you all keep your fantastic rumblings till the final dust settles. Non-split brains is a particularly ridiculous New Age wish fantasy that is not implied by the findings. Nor do the DNA results yet definitively give rise to the conclusion that the elongated heads were genetic or acquired, especially as not all skulls in this region, of the same time period were elongated. Perhaps one should let archaeologists of repute discuss the implications first, especially as the final results of this DNA analysis are not to hand. I have always been disappointed by those who take these speculations and then later spout them as facts, but never retract them when found to be wrong.

We'll said Sir. The world is wonderful enough without the new age bozos going around trying to invent stupid shit to fill in the gaps in our understanding.

Gnomon's picture

New Age Bozo?  I assume that you are refering to someone different to the "Old" Age Bozo . . . like an archaeologist, or paleontologist for example?

I would seem that too many people are unable to differentiate between knowing something and having an opinion about something.  Drawing conclusions from available information should not infer that those conclusions are fact.  Some know only what they have been taught and never question the validity of what they have learned, and a lot of them call themselves "scientists".

In regard to this subject, you refer to someone who has an opinion you don't agree with as a "Bozo" . . .an incompetant who has an opinion not worthy of consideration. Lkke most "experts" I've met, you flatter yourself.

Scientia Potentia Est

Well said, Gnomon. This kind of behavior needs to be called out. What are we going to have? The spirit of inquiry, or gatekeepers defending the authority of the status quo?

Gnomon's picture

Thank you Andrew. 

I get a little annoyed after so many years of hearing so-called Skeptics and Scientists go out of their way to denigrate people who have expressed some rather controversial hypotheses that contradict the historical interpretations made by some of the World's "Authorities" on the subject

I would think that Truth is very important, (but not in all situations), and that the input of other's would only improve our inherent myopic view when it comes to matters of personal significance.  I found that our cherished views often keep us from finding the truth.  

I think it was a Druid Master, ( or possibly Taliessin the Poet), who stated,and I paraphrase, "It is the mark of Wisdom that a man can listen to a fool and, even though his words be folly, learn from him".



I seek Wisdom


Scientia Potentia Est

I think this DNA test on these skulls points to another interesting theory ... that the practice of skull deformation among Inca populations could be the direct result of these Indians trying to emulate those beings that were probably foreign leaders to them and teachers... ancient primitive cultures often speak of how they were taught by beings that descended from the skies. I doubt the Incas would have practiced this odd behavior of deforming youth skulls to mimic naturally occurring ones if those with the larger elongated skulls did not in point off fact occupy positions of power and authority and wisdom in these communities. And if their DNA was so different as to not allow interbreeding with them then the Incas must have believed that the shape of the head was what yielded their power and wisdom, hence the practice. Since we have found denisovan and neanderthal DNA in human lineage, but not the DNA of these long-heads, it would seem that it would point to the possibility of these beings as having not been of terrestrial origin. And because of the tomb rituals associated with their burials, it would also seem likely that they were held in esteem by the ancient locals. Better we all think freely on this subject I say, instead of wallowing in self righteous and smug skepticism as do some. I tend to think as the late Lloyd Pye did on this subject. I applaud any who seek ideas 'outside the box' that currently coagulate in rigid and conformist academia.

So the facts about all these skulls that have actually been found all over the world are this.If you wish to know something as in physically see it then you'll need a plane ticket.But if you wish to study a brilliant archaeologist/ geographer /historian ......then go study the woman who found her own skulls and houses them in her museum.Maria Reich studied the Nasca plains her whole life practically by herself and what she accomplished and what she found is not a hoax or me differentiating incorrectly.The fact of the skull plates are as real as it get's and yes the volume of these is twice that of a human.You need to look into things more indepth for self before passing judgement.First verifying fact for you ....go check her out! If not your all talk.

Scientific orthodoxy is not objective at all. It's more like a box into which little new enters, and quite often serves as a defense against the new. It's interesting that it's not infrequent for the "amateurs" to have insight that the professionals can't or won't because of their preconditioning as well as the career rewards for not straying too far from the party line. One excellent example is the possibility of an advanced culture predating those we call "ancient Egyptians." The evidence is all there: advanced stone cutting not possible for the copper chisel and rock hammer wielding Egyptians of the third millennia BC, the water weathering of the Sphinx that caused geological erosion specialist Robert Schoch to say it was at least 7000 years old, the engineering wonders of the pyramids, etc., etc. Still Egyptologists cling to their house of cards time and story line. To my mind that kind of closed mindedness smacks of religion, not science.

exactly. it appears we have moved from the 19th century 'god of the gaps' theories to 'anything not terrestrial or human of the gaps' theories.

frankly, they both amount to the same thing: a refusal to take scientific literacy and specialization seriously. instead it's a desire to fill in whatever cannot be currently explained with something 'beyond'. this is probably one of the earliest means of resolving questions of the unknown that humans have exhibited and one of the least successful in terms of actually acquiring real answers.

Does this include scientific fraud?
Don't want to burst your little science worshipping bubble but I'll will let you into a little secret; those scientists have:
a) a biased towards philosophical naturalism.
b) they are human just like you and me
c) appealing to a consensus (Argumentum ad Populum), scientific or otherwise, is a logical fallacy.

Rupert Sheldrake, famous British biologist, has written a wonderful book on the prejudices of science: Science Set Free: 10 Paths to New Discovery.
When you read this book, you see the blinders of science and the limits it imposes on reality before it utters a word.


Spoken like a true asshole

;-) 95% of universe is... dark stuff - energy&matter - the 5% left we measure

woowoo puesdo wacky are terms used to describe ideas - no matter the level of evidence or lack there of

a buttoned mind limits & folks depending on pay checks from 'official' organizations had best tow the line... their wife/husband/kids depend on that constant flow of money

those outside the field have the luxury of not having to tow a line ;-)

Toe the line

those outside the field have other lines to tow.

Sir, we do not need your four letter gutter trash on this site. It is apparent to me that your parents didn't succeed in teaching you any manners. Typical these days I guess!

I agree......but it is really fun :)

Many things we have learned, were first considered insane and unbelievable ideas. An open mind is ALWAYS better than a closed one.

ancient-origins's picture

This is so true Melinda! This has been happening for millennia and yet people keep having the same attitude. Our civilization is what it is because of the few with 'insane' ideas, from airplanes to wireless communication...

It's a matter of always. Some people fear. They cannot accept that the old paradigms on which they funded their lives can result at the end as false. Especially those who claim to be "scientist" or Science addicted. Secondly, the "religious" ones or the "god" addicted, that is those who never will accept to be they themselves the main protagonist of their destinies.
Don't care about them. They need protection, not proofs. They are like little puppies needing someone who cares them because alone they'd feel lost.
They look for protection in the Science, or in some God or in the "values" of religions, in the pretended Darwinian truth, in all those "truths" never proved.
Science bases the 99% of her known truths on the only remaining 1% of what she doesn't know.
And that 1% will change all the previous 99% we think to be, currently, the truth. :)


The truth they have protected has nearly always been obsolete, framed in outmoded concepts, and defended zealously against heresy. Truth, under these conditions, has become a matter of authority rather than inquiry.

"Pretended" Darwin theory of evolution? "not proved"? "Especially those who claim to be "scientist" or Science addicted." - if you state these ideas, then why should i think positively of anything else you say, especially about science !? I find your nihilist statement very muddled and not well written. "Science addicted", indeed!!! Plus, science is always changing as new data is found, that's science - it is not dogmatic!

Ragnar Taltos's picture

"Plus, science is always changing as new data is found, that's science - it is not dogmatic!"

 The Powell Doctrine seems to refute the whole science being open and changing thing. 

“Under the Capitalist Sun, there is Nothing Sacred” Dr. Li-Chuan Chen

We are a self important species that has the temerity, hubris and based on fantastic ideas that there's a god or entity that "watches" over us and judges us. We believe that we are the only "intelligent" species in the Universe, a patently absurd notion. To infer that there's more to the Universe is to open oneself up to ridicule and attack from those locked into one opinion and afraid of ideas that don't fit with their beliefs. Because one doesn't believe, doesn't mean it's not true.

I find it very difiicult, and at the same time perplexing, that there exists such a total lack or disregard (ignorance?) of even the most basic understanding of gramar. And yet, I see it, more often then not from those professing a higher intellect. Nothing could be further from the truth! I am especially bothered that such gramatically inaccurate opinions are even allowed in a somewhat argumentive setting such as this site. If you do not have facts, if you do not know how to properly express yourself, then as it has often been said, “ let them think you a fool, tahn open your mouth and erase all doubt! “


If you are going to attack someone for grammatical errors, you may wish to cast an eye over your own post. Someone's linguistic eloquence, or lack thereof, is no reflection upon the validity of the idea they try to convey. Sheesh... Get me a pitchfork...there's agonna be aburnin
... Lols

To SandyTheHippy,
Has it ever occurred to you some people like puns? Typo or not, thought the term GNU-mans was brilliant, hardly an insult.
Used to design toys and PUNS were often what sold the product.

The pun isn't the issue...but again it becomes clearly apparent that when someone can't accept Opinion, the standard approach is to attack them using any means... Ascertaining that someones grammar is iffy is not evidence of their arguments invalidity....
So much for enlightened conversation and debate

The pun isn't the issue...but again it becomes clearly apparent that when someone can't accept Opinion, the standard approach is to attack them using any means... Ascertaining that someones grammar is iffy is not evidence of their arguments invalidity....
So much for enlightened conversation and debate

SANDYTHEHIPPY, you're 100% wrong here. One can learn by debates'differences of opinions. Liked his post especially the typo/pun. If you could'nt understand that after my last reply, well, that's just sad.

Again folks keen to share their opinion without correctly reading or understanding... I wasn't saying debate is bad..... I was saying... You know what, whydont you just make up my response, saves you reading.... Wow... Is there any hope for mankind when (basically) like minded (an assumption based on presence on this site) can't even communicate without only wanting to enforce their own, already formed, opinions... Never mind.....

Grock wrote "more often then not ". Dude, you shot yourself in the foot here, and the leg, nicked an arm, and blew a hole in your torso. It is more often than not. The use of then here makes the phrase complete nonsense. You should follow your own advice, or hire a proof reader.

Dude, I think you're overreacting, so he made a spelling mistake, it's a common mistake, a lot of people confuse then and than.

@Melinda. You're right, and part of keeping an open mind is also remembering that many of the things first considered insane and unbelievable were just that--insane and unbelievable.

Then show some respect and don't call it " fantastic rumblings", ok? You already assumed too much without a single fact to prove your jiber. You don't like what you see? Go home and cry then.

again, q dubs q dubs q dubs q dubs q dubs q dubs q dubs..........cant we have any fun? We dont take kindly to naysayers (unless youre a horse) sniffing around our fantasy land! What am i gonna do bout it? nothin................ im very fragile. Buuuuuuuuut, plz let our imaginations run wild and i suggest exercising your 1st ammendment right on top of a mountain at the top of your lungs til your vocal chords give out for a good several hours! harumph indeed!

...should let archaeologists of repute discuss the implications first,

The only BIG problem with that Quentin, is that any archeologist of repute, is tightly controlled. If they dared, examine and comment positively, they well know they would immediately lose job/fundung for even suggesting anything different to the daft theories. Some of these are that when we came out of the caves, we built the pyramids, that we are alone, that we came from chimp, via Lucy in Ethiopia. etc. Example of coverups. The many skeletons of giants unearthed by early American settlers soon disappeared when the Smithsonian's 'reputable' scientists were called in. Photgraphic evidence and witnesses said so. Why would they lie? Open www.theyfly.com and discover our origins, but only for the open minded. The 'scientists' will no doubt split their sides in laughter, as I guess you will too.

I visited that site and watched the first two videos.  The standing flying saucer is highly questionable.  1.  It didn't move.  That is not to say that they have to move.  In our  view they can do whatever they want.  I wan't sure it wants' a birdhouse.  2.  The point of view never changed.  That would have provided at least a slightly different perspective.  The tree in the background could have supported the notion that it wasn't supported by something.  


The first video is right on.  Mankind has made a bargain with the devil and it's too late.  


Many "flying saucers" are man made, no question about that!
So whether it is really from outer space or not is quite irrelevant to me...
The question is: who gave "us" the means of building them and what was the deal exactly about!
I don't we will get answers soon!

I checked out the site a bit, and watched the first vid also. The supposedly suspended object never moved. By definition then, it is not a UFO since it is not flying. I can't believe anyone is still trying to pass Billy Meier clips off as genuine, many that I have seen in the past were obvious fakes. Some were clearly models suspended on strings. Meier has never done anything to advance the scientific pursuit of ufology, and from all I've seen on him, he has been a detriment to the quest. John Mack, on the other hand, has done a lot more positive work.

I totally agree with what you wrote Thomast.
The bible about this is 3Forbidden archeology" by Cremo and Thomson.
It takes serious guts to go against the official (nonsense) theories!
Guys like David Icke and so many more are all pointing at other interesting ideas but one has to seriously want to know what the truth could really be !

"never retract them when found to be wrong.". Perhaps you should notice more the way "scientists" and "skeptics" and "debunkers" Never admit THEY were wrong when the reality of some suppressed idea becomes mainstream.
I am reminded of the ridicule heaped upon people who claimed that rocks had fallen from the sky - obviously stupid nonsense - until the reality of Metorites became established. Or the totally crazy people who claimed to notice how the shapes of continents fitted together - until Contental Drift and plate tectonics were discovered.
It's not just that people of this (ridgid and fearful) mindset reject evidence, it's that they use suppression and ridicule as if they were valid that pisses me off.

That last half line of yours. "it's that they use suppression and ridicule as if they were valid". The real problem with so many topics. One does not reach a truth when that goes on. It pisses me off too.

The fact that old time paint artists even thought to place those certain shaped objects into their skies. The fact that thousands and thousands of witnesses, "credible" (another peeve) people of science and power, Pilots that are in the skies for decades, people of all walks, seeing the same objects long before known technology of men could be what they all saw. They have been around for a long time if not our origin. The only thing that will bum me out, is if time travel is possible.

On the surface, it is a good idea to let archaeologists "of repute" look at this first. But then that is not exactly what you said, is it? You said "discuss the implications first." There are at least two problems here. The first is the question of the "implications" for whom, and for what? Another, these skulls have been around for a long time and archaeologists have in fact known about them but publicly have shown no interest. Or, I must admit the possibility that they have had interest, perhaps a lot of it, but had a look to the security of their own careers before doing or saying anything that might disturb the official model of human history and their jobs. In point of fact, if these stories were not printed here the public would still be in the dark about them, and insofar unable to make their own contributions to public discussion about them. But then you and a whole lot more like you are ready to tell otherwise intelligent and well educated people that they are not "archaeologists of repute" and therefore are not invited to the party. The public can pay your salaries but are not allowed to know what it is you (claim to) know, eh? And before you or others dismiss these comments as from one of those who has not been invited to the party, one of the uninitiated and therefore someone who should not be listened to, I spent from 1972 to 1998 as either a student or faculty member of a large university and I know the way of the networks and what has been called in recent years the "knowledge screen." As an example of the ongoing conspiracy of silence, of which Quenten walker's comments are a part, or at least seem to serve, B. Fell published his work on ancient writings on the American continent in the 1970's when I was studying anthropology. You would have thought it would have been a sensation in anthropology departments all across the nation. But the fact is I did not hear about it and had to stumble on a copy by accident 30 years later! So, readers should not imagine that these skulls will be handled any more responsibly than were the Dead Sea scrolls by the archaeologists and linguists "of repute." Those scrolls belonged to the whole world, and yet those men, ethical morons, sat on them with a proprietary strangle hold for almost 50 years!
My advice then is to stick with this web site and use it to help you to think for yourself. If you trust the official archaeologists of the official academy you may be long dead before the truth comes out. That is my view and that is my experience. JWC

Thank you for your balanced, common-sense post.

I'm always suspicious of, and annoyed by, people who are afraid of discussion. It so often seems that these same people who loudly proclaim themselves to be so open-minded and interested in truth, who turn out to be THE most dogmatic and afraid of truths that may upset THEIR beliefs. Just what would they do if those stupid "fairy" stories turned out to be true?


Register to become part of our active community, get updates, receive a monthly newsletter, and enjoy the benefits and rewards of our member point system OR just post your comment below as a Guest.

Our Mission

At Ancient Origins, we believe that one of the most important fields of knowledge we can pursue as human beings is our beginnings. And while some people may seem content with the story as it stands, our view is that there exists countless mysteries, scientific anomalies and surprising artifacts that have yet to be discovered and explained.

The goal of Ancient Origins is to highlight recent archaeological discoveries, peer-reviewed academic research and evidence, as well as offering alternative viewpoints and explanations of science, archaeology, mythology, religion and history around the globe.

We’re the only Pop Archaeology site combining scientific research with out-of-the-box perspectives.

By bringing together top experts and authors, this archaeology website explores lost civilizations, examines sacred writings, tours ancient places, investigates ancient discoveries and questions mysterious happenings. Our open community is dedicated to digging into the origins of our species on planet earth, and question wherever the discoveries might take us. We seek to retell the story of our beginnings. 

Ancient Image Galleries

View from the Castle Gate (Burgtor). (Public Domain)
Door surrounded by roots of Tetrameles nudiflora in the Khmer temple of Ta Phrom, Angkor temple complex, located today in Cambodia. (CC BY-SA 3.0)
Cable car in the Xihai (West Sea) Grand Canyon (CC BY-SA 4.0)
Next article