Rhine Canyon

Rhine Canyon Archaeology: Ancient Fortresses Fought War Along Rhine

The scientists would like to collaborate on the book, detailing their studies, but more work needs to be done. "It would help tremendously if we could discover a library," Voorst says plaintively. "But one must accept the reality of history: they did not have a writing system back then."

Van Gelder disagrees. "There are interesting cave inscriptions in nearby mountains," he points out. "They resemble the ancient Germanic runes but no one has yet deciphered their meaning." Scientists disagree on whether the ruinic inscriptions are real, Van Gelder concedes. "Tourists often plant false evidence that must be carefully evaluated," he points out.

Among the more interesting artifacts discovered in the ruins of the white tower is a small wooden box, bound with silver. Inside Dr. Van Gelder's team found three silver nuts. "The artwork is the most intricate I have ever seen," he says. He hopes to see the nuts and the box placed on exhibit in the Rhine Institute of Archaeology by 2010. "Some experimentation must be done," he concedes. "It appears the nuts may be actual biological artifacts and not merely stylistic replicas." Botanists are eagerly applying for grants to study the nuts.

Dr. Voorst's team also recently discovered signs of a great battle near the edge of the old forest at the foot of the bald hill. "At first we thought there was no connection to the fortress," he concedes. "But then we found two shields with emblems similar to those in the fortress." The combatants are difficult to identify as not much is left except a few large swords and many smaller, very crudely designed weapons.

"Is it possible there was a third culture living along the Rhine?" Dr. Voorst wonders. He looks around the room and scientists smile and shrug helplessly. It is clear they want to return to the field as soon as possible to study the remains more closely.

Rhine archaeologists have long debated just when man first settled in the region. Most archaeologists have suggested that, except for Neanderthals, there were no humans in the area prior to more than a few thousand years ago. But those ideas may have to be discarded under the weight of the new evidence that Drs. Van Gelder and Voorst have brought to lighht.

"There will be much debate and consideration," Van Gelder concedes. His past work has been warmly challenged by some peers. "Look at the so-called 'Snow Angel'," says Dr. Edward O'Leary of the Irish Archaeology Fellowship. "Why has no one but Van Gelder's team ever found such a creature?" Van Gelder speculates there may not have been very many of them. But he says more study is needed.

Science can be a very unforgiving discipline. Make one wrong claim and you may be forgotten forever, rebuked for failing to adhere to strict scientific principles. Do Van Gelder and Voorst believe their discoveries will be challenged? Yes. Are they willing to risk their credibility and careers on the confirmation of these discoveries?

"There can be no doubt," Van Gelder insists. "The evidence is incontrovertible," Voorst agrees. "Even so," he adds quickly, "Some people will insist on rewriting history as they see fit without regard for what the facts are. They will not change their minds no matter how many different ways you show them they are wrong." Van Gelder nods his head sadly. "It is true," he says. "We may have to wait 100 years before our work is acknowledged. But...it is well worth the wait."