i Mississippi’s Prehistoric "Great Wall" A Mysterious Structure Whose Builder No One Knows-Or a Natural Formation?.... Page 63

The Ooparts Collection


20th Century Dinosaurs

Dinosaurs in Literature, Art & History

Eyewitness Accounts

There Were Giants In The Earth in Those Days

Mega Fauna

Those Sophisticated "Cave Men"

Search for Noah's Ark

DNA, The Ultimate Oopart

The Bone Yards

Underwater Cities, Monuments?

Ancient Atomic Knowledge?

Salvation. What Must You Do To Be Saved?




Mississippi’s Prehistoric "Great Wall" A Mysterious Structure Whose Builder No One Knows-Or a Natural Formation?.... Page 63

by Chris Parker, Copyright, s8intcom 2007

The Ancient Texas Rock Wall

Don't Mess with "Prehistoric" Texas? Prehistoric, Megalithic Construction in the Lone Star State

Ancient "Tiled" Floor Declared Nature, Not Nurture

Mississippi's Great Wall in 1901, from, David Ives Bushnell's 1904 book, "Mississippi River Valley".

Click and Drag Photo to Resize

Let us say, just for the sake of argument, that you and I are not idiots. And, if that’s too far to go for you, let us just assume that you are not an idiot.

Could you, given your high intellectual status be able to determine, given as much time as you wish whether or not a stone wall, covering more that four square miles, is in fact man made or completely natural?

No, you could not.

At least, that would seem to be the case, because even scientists trained in geology were apparently wrong when a number of them declared that the huge stone wall, known as the Great Mississippi Wall and the Brandywine Wall was a giant product of an ancient race.

They were eventually overruled by the orthodoxy, just as were those who claimed that the great wall in Texas was an ancient man made artifact. The fact that virtually no one has heard of either of these large structures is proof that the orthodoxy has won (and/or could be right).

Incidentally, one could perhaps be forgiven for studying such an artifact to determine whether or not it is a natural formation or a product of man—but if one were to do the same thing with respect to a biological artifact, the ruling paradigm has declared such an investigation; “unscientific”. Clearly then, looking for evidence of design is barely tolerable in geology and certainly, unforgivable in biology.

Now, if you were able upon investigation to see evidence of; regular shaped and sized blocks, ninety degree angles, the appearance of the whole affair being plumb lined, mortar between regular blocks etc., be forewarned that such apparent evidence of design and more has been seen in other suspected man made artifacts which have long sense been labeled; “natural”.

The foregoing is not to suggest that there are not in fact natural geological features that give the appearance of design, there no doubt are. The point is, it is very hard to get the paradigm to accept as man made an artifact that would by its existence, challenge elements of the ruling scientific paradigm.

Mississippi’s Great Wall
A Mysterious Structure Whose Builder No One Knows.
November 7, 1900
The New York Times

"From the New Orleans Picayune. One of the scientific puzzles of the State of Mississippi is the “Brandywine Stone Wall”. It has long been a problem that is yet unsolved.

Some time ago Mr. Thomas Watson of Hazlehurst sent Gov. Longino a pencil drawing of an immense pile of stone in the southeastern portion of Claiborne County, suggesting that the stone might be utilized in building the new Capitol.

In a letter which accompanied the drawing Mr. Watson stated that these stones, piled high on each other, cover an area four miles square. Each stone is six feet long, three feet wide, and two feet thick, and they are joined together with an excellent quality of cement.

No man knows how they came there. They may have been there for thousands of years. The builders, The Jackson News thinks, were some prehistoric race—it could not be otherwise.”

The article then goes on to mention another possible megalithic structure in Mississippi that many supposed was connected with the Great Wall. This structure, known as the "Chinese Wall", was reported to begin below the City of Raymond in Hinds County, and to continue to wind through Copiah County where the “Great Wall” was located.

It is called in the article, “one of the wonders of the world” and was reportedly wide enough for two to three wagons abreast to traverse simultaneously.

Concurring letters on the subject had been received from the warden of the federal penitentiary at Leavenworth and from Dr. T.B. Birdsong. The previously mentioned “Mr. Watson” had apparently spent more time studying the geological feature or artifact, as the case may be and had assembled and reported the following “facts” concerning it;

“He calls it the “Brandywine Stone Wall” and says this wonderful and massive structure or parts of structure of masonry done in stone, which has withstood the ravages of time for perhaps thousands of years, still stands an enduring relic of a prehistoric civilization and a knowledge of the art of building not inferior in many respects to the present day.”

Most of the wall, he reports, is buried in the southeastern portion of Claiborne County near the Copiah County line. He noted that the wall runs northeast to southwest, overlooking the valley of Brandywine Creek from which he derived its name. He further says;

“They are built of white or grayish white stone of immense size, weighing from two to three tons, measuring from 6 to 8 feet in length and three feet wide by two feet thick.

These blocks, or slabs, are laid in a very fine quality of cement and as perfectly as brickwork. The joints are perfect and very close.

At one place the top of the wall is exposed by the earth being washed away to a width of 60 feet and a length of 90 feet; this exposure has the appearance of a brick hearth”.

Clearly indicating at least the uniformity of the huge stones, Watson mentions that a number of them had been quarried in recent times to be used by local builders. They had removed stones to three levels of slabs, or six feet, to a width of eight blocks, or 24 feet and a length of 25 blocks or 150 feet. He mentions that portions of the wall are visible above ground over an area of four square miles.

Click and Drag Photo to Resize

“The sides and angles of the blocks of stone are so perfect that they resemble pressed brick. The tops of these walls are perfectly horizontal and without regard to the unevenness of the earth’s surface.

The seams between the tiers are perfectly straight, and each block of stone is perfectly horizontal in position, and these blocks are smoothly dressed on the edges and ends, while the broad surfaces are rough, showing a broken surface brought down to a level plane, but not dressed.

They are held so tightly together by the cement that it is with great difficulty that they are broken up”.

Cave-ins near the wall to Mr. Watson’ mind, indicate that great caverns and perhaps an ancient subterranean city are also present. Many other witnesses had visited the area and had agreed with Mr. Watson’s views regarding the wall.

Mr. Watson goes on to say in his letter that a personal inspection of the area will convince even the most skeptical individual or and/or scientific mind that the feature is unquestionably man made.

In this assertion, Mr. Watson would prove incorrect.

Approximately one year letter, Mr. David Ives Bushnell, of Clarksdale, made an excursion to Brandywine to visit, he said, the “so-called” prehistoric wall of that district. He wrote about his self described, “brief visit” which took place in 1901 in his book “Mississippi River Valley” , in the chapter entitled; “The Cahokia and Surrounding Mound Groups” 1904.

After investigation, Mr. Bushnell decided that the “wall” was "simply a perpendicular stratum of white sandstone of natural formation which presents several outcrops near Brandywine.

At the surface the stone is broken by natural cleavage with blocks of general size of say, 4’ 5” x 2’ 6” x 2’ 1 1/2'’.

Between these is a soft deposit of so-called “Cement” found upon examination at the Mineralogical Museum of Harvard University by Dr. Palache , to consist of decomposed sandstone, produced by weathering possibly, with perhaps some admixture of iron”. (iron is often an ingredient in cement).

So there you have it. That was the scientific verdict on the Mississippi Great Wall. The year after this 1900 article appeared, according to the “Appletons' Annual Cyclopædia and Register of Important Events of the Year, 1901”, a “subscription” was being raised in order to send scientists to study the “Great Wall” where some thought an ancient city might be buried.

This however, along with the scientific judgment rendered in Bushnell’s 1904 book was practically the last words heard on the “Mississippi Great Wall”.

In 45 years from the date of that New York Times article, American science would successfully test the first atomic bomb but back in 1900, apparently neither Mr. Watson, Dr. T.B. Birdsong the warden at Leavenworth nor various interested others weren’t sophisticated enough to see that the apparent intelligent design features of the Mississippi Great Wall in reality had completely natural origins(according to science).


1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64 Next>>>