Sunday, May 26, 2024
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
Unexplained Mysteries
You are viewing: Home > News > Archaeology & History > News story
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
All ▾
Search Submit

Archaeology & History

Tales of mysterious 'giants' still haunt Nevada's Lovelock Cave

By T.K. Randall
April 5, 2024 · Comment icon 15 comments
Lovelock Cave artifacts.
Some of the artifacts discovered in the cave. Image Credit: Public Domain Mx. Granger
For years, archaeologists have remained divided over the discovery of alleged giant skeletons and artifacts.
Measuring approximately 150ft long and 35ft wide, Lovelock Cave, which is situated in Nevada's Great Basin region, has long remained a site of considerable archaeological importance.

That said, a great deal of controversy has surrounded the alleged discovery of giant skeletons inside and other evidence of a race of giant people who were once said to roam the region.

The story goes that back in 1911, two miners who had entered the cave to excavate guano (bat excrement) had unexpectedly unearthed around 60 humans skeletons.

Some of them, they claimed, were very large indeed - standing around 7-8ft in height.

Sadly, the whereabouts of these skeletons remains unknown, but in the years that followed, subsequent digs inside the cave yielded the discovery of a multitude of other finds.
While many of these were nothing particularly unusual (such as arrowheads, basket weaves and ceremonial objects), the artifacts also included more curious items such as an enormous sandal that appeared to have been well used.

Measuring 15 inches long, the sandal would be the equivalent of a modern size 29 shoe.

A very large handprint that was double normal size was also found etched into the stone.

So could this mean that tales of giants in the cave could actually have some merit ?

Radiocarbon dating has dated the various artifacts in the cave back to between 2030 BC and 1218 BC, so whoever these people were it has been up to 4,000 years since they were there.

As things stand, without access to the skeletons allegedly discovered back in the 1900s, we may never know for sure if the cave's inhabitants were true giants or not.

Source: Mail Online | Comments (15)

Other news and articles
Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #6 Posted by Earl.Of.Trumps 2 months ago
First, can they ascertain the age of the Sandal and was the sandal checked for DNA? Their evidence of the existence of giants is quite good. On the other hand, where did the skeletons go? Also, there should be some other signs of these humans elsewhere throughout the region. Overall, I'd have to say - no, to the giants.
Comment icon #7 Posted by Harte 2 months ago
The only claim to giants in this cave that was ever made was made by a couple of people trying to make a dollar shoveling bat****. The way you're using the term, ANY report about ANYTHING is "giant-neutral." Harte
Comment icon #8 Posted by Piney 2 months ago
The DNA tests done years ago showed a relationship to the Shoshone/ Ute. The remains which MR dug up were normal sized and returned for reburial.  And there was no evidence whatsoever of giants. 
Comment icon #9 Posted by Tatetopa 2 months ago
I have no basis for this outside everyday observation of humans.  I attribute some of these stories to an effort to minimize Native American presence and maybe assuage some guilt.  White settlers may have driven off or killed the interlopers, the Indians, but the real civilizations of North America are giants, or Egyptians in the Grand Canyon, or Annunaki or something Biblical. 
Comment icon #10 Posted by Piney 2 months ago
Along with the "vast wilderness" trope when the land was actually "widowed". 
Comment icon #11 Posted by Earl.Of.Trumps 2 months ago
thanks for that, Piney. Any ideas about the sandal's age? And if they only found the one, that would be a tell. 
Comment icon #12 Posted by Piney 2 months ago
They find Indian sandals all over the Great Basin area. There was 2. What's the tell? I think the sandals dates about 2,000 years old but don't quote me because sandals were used in that area for over 9,000 years. 
Comment icon #13 Posted by Earl.Of.Trumps 2 months ago
If there was only one sandal, the TELL is, that it is a prop, more than likely. But now, you have to contend with a pair of sandals, which is natural. they *might not be* fake.
Comment icon #14 Posted by Piney 2 months ago
They have hundreds of sandals from all over the area dating thousands of years apart. That's a lot to fake.
Comment icon #15 Posted by C L Palmer 1 month ago
I also wonder how often the remains of "giants" are larger-than-average regular skeletons, or perhaps larger than expected for the group that lives there now. Also, estimations of size based on skeletal remains (when done my amateurs) will vary a great deal. But still, the height of populations varies a great deal, even when they are of the same racial/ethnic group, based on things like nutrition, disease, etc. So it would be interesting to see the remains they found and compare them to A. the Native Americans who lived in the area at the time the discovery was made, and B. their descendants ... [More]

Please Login or Register to post a comment.

Our new book is out now!
Book cover

The Unexplained Mysteries
Book of Weird News


Take a walk on the weird side with this compilation of some of the weirdest stories ever to grace the pages of a newspaper.

Click here to learn more

We need your help!
Patreon logo

Support us on Patreon


For less than the cost of a cup of coffee, you can gain access to a wide range of exclusive perks including our popular 'Lost Ghost Stories' series.

Click here to learn more

Top 10 trending mysteries
Recent news and articles