Kitabı oku: «The Mystery of the Crystal Skulls», sayfa 3

3. THE KEEPER OF THE SKULL

Through our telephone conversations with Anna it was now becoming increasingly clear that the incredible claims about the crystal skull’s paranormal powers had continued unabated ever since its original discovery. From the moment that the skull had been recovered from deep in the jungle, it had been widely recognized that there was something very strange, extraordinary and powerful about this object. But, over the years, it seemed to have escaped being labelled or categorized. In fact, from what we could tell, it seemed quite simply to have defied explanation altogether.

By now, Ceri and I were quite convinced that the skull would make an excellent subject for a documentary investigation. We mentioned this to Anna and explained that we would need a lot more information. All Anna was prepared to say, however, was that if we wanted to know more about the skull then we would have to ‘come and meet him’ for ourselves.

The strangest thing was that in speaking to Anna on the telephone we kept getting the impression that when she was talking about the skull she was actually talking about a real person. She spoke about the crystal skull as ‘he’ or ‘him’ and used the same affectionate tone that people often use when talking about their children, grandchildren or even a much-loved pet.

We were intrigued, but it seemed that the only way for us to find out more was to take Anna up on her kind offer and make the trip out to Canada. This would not only give us the chance to see the crystal skull for ourselves, but also to make the necessary arrangements for our documentary. This was a bit of a risk, as we had just blown all our money on the trip to Central America and at this stage had no guarantee whatsoever that the film we intended to make would be commissioned at all. But, in what must have been a temporary fit of madness, we decided to make the trip to Canada all the same.

It was during the cold snows of the Canadian winter that we arrived at Anna’s neat modern house in the quiet little town of Kitchener, near Toronto, Ontario. A greater contrast to the steaming tropical jungles of Belize we could hardly imagine. But Anna, looking much younger than her years, greeted us warmly and she and her nephew Jimmy, who was in his late thirties and also visiting, were wonderfully hospitable during our short stay.

As soon as we arrived, Anna led us into her small sitting-room to ‘meet’ the crystal skull. As we entered the room, our eyes were immediately drawn to the skull, which was placed on a black velvet cushion on the coffee table. It was absolutely flawless, remarkably anatomically accurate and exactly the same size and shape as a small adult’s head, yet it was almost totally transparent. It really was magnificent, the most exquisitely carved and beautiful object that either of us had ever seen. It was like gazing on perfection (see plates 1 and 2).

‘I’m only the caretaker,’ Anna began. ‘The skull really belongs to everyone. He has brought lots of happiness to people. I show him all over the world. I’m asked to go here, there and everywhere – Australia, New Zealand and even Japan. But I particularly like people to come here so that I can see their joy and happiness in my own home.’

As she was speaking, I found myself staring at the skull, captivated. The way the light seemed to be captured, channelled and played around deep in its interior and reflected back off its silky smooth surface was totally mesmerizing. There was some strange, almost indefinable quality about looking at the skull, but I couldn’t figure out quite what it was. It was as though the skull was holding me there, somehow communicating with my unconscious mind. It was as if some part of my mind was stirred in a subtle, almost incomprehensible way. I was totally absorbed.

Anna spoke to me, but I didn’t hear. She had to tap me on the shoulder before I realized that she was saying something. ‘I don’t normally allow people to do this, but you can pick him up if you like.’

‘I’m sorry, I wasn’t with you,’ I replied.

‘Oh, that’s perfectly normal,’ chuckled Anna. ‘The skull usually casts a spell over people when they meet him. They often seem to go into a trance for a few moments.’

I lifted up the crystal skull. I was surprised at how heavy it felt. ‘It weighs almost 12 lbs [5 kg],’ said Anna.

I handed the skull to Ceri, who commented that it was ‘deathly cold’ to the touch and quickly placed it back on the table.

‘There’s nothing to be frightened of,’ said Anna. ‘People are often frightened when they first see the skull,’ she added.

‘It’s not surprising, really,’ said Jimmy. ‘Just look at how the skull has become a symbol to be feared. It’s either in horror movies, Friday the Thirteenth and all that, or it’s a warning on a bottle of poison.’

It was true, the skull did always seem to be a fearful image in our culture. Its primary purpose always appeared to be to terrify people or warn them of danger.

Anna continued, ‘People usually come to see the skull in twos and threes and often one of them is nervous about seeing him. But the next thing you know they are sitting right near to the skull. They say, “It’s not what I thought it would be. It’s beautiful.” And the joy comes into their faces and they are happy.’

This struck me as rather curious. Here was an image of death that Anna claimed actually made people feel happy. At first I didn’t understand it. But I have to admit that, after a while, I started to feel sort of warm, almost cosy, in the skull’s presence. I began to think about it. Perhaps meeting the skull was a way of overcoming our fear of death, of meeting the very image of our future selves. We normally try to push all thoughts of death away. And yet here I was staring the very image of death in the face.

As I was sitting there looking at the beautiful, pristine, clear nature of the crystal, it occurred to me that perhaps the very reason why the skull had been carved out of a transparent material was so that it did not represent any one person. It could be anyone’s skull. Perhaps that was it – the skull was meant to represent each and every one of us. After all, each of us has a skull within us, buried under our skin, and one day that will be all that will be left of us. So, of all the symbols available to humanity, what could be more universal than a skull? For it is a symbol that speaks to every living person.

As I examined the skull, its smooth contours and hollow eye sockets, I thought about how I would one day die and that I too would be little more than an empty skull. Not only me, but everyone I knew and cared about would go the same sad way. I wondered if perhaps that was the purpose of the crystal skull, to remind each of us of our own mortality and of the very short time that each of us has as a living being on this Earth.

But there seemed to be more to it than that. In any case, who needs a reminder that they are going to die? Surely that couldn’t be the only reason for making the skull. If it was, then it was a bizarre and macabre one.

I held up the separate jaw-bone. It was beautifully crafted, with each tooth picked out in fine detail. Perhaps the skull only seemed macabre to me because of the attitude I had towards death, because it was something that I didn’t want to acknowledge. As I slotted the separate jaw-bone carefully back on to the skull, it suddenly struck me that that stark, cold image of death actually concealed a powerful message: it reminds us that we are alive! I remembered something I had heard somewhere – that it is often only when people are closest to death, when they are in a sense staring death right in the face, that they feel fully alive and able to truly appreciate life. Could it be that the crystal skull was also here to help us appreciate life?

I moved the skull around, watching the way in which it caught the light. Had it been designed so that as we look upon its cool chiselled contours we are reminded of the feel of the soft skin on our own faces and the warm pulse than runs through our veins?

But there was still something further, something about the skull’s transparent nature. For this was an image of death that you could almost see through, right to the other side. It was as if this death’s head was telling us that death is actually something that we can transcend, something we can go through and come out the other side.

I put the crystal skull back on its velvet cushion on the coffee table, next to a framed black-and-white photograph of Frederick Mitchell-Hedges. Anna was just beginning to tell Ceri that her own good health and longevity were all thanks to the crystal skull. I had to admit, she was a very spritely 88-year-old with unusual amounts of energy. ‘The skull gives you health, happiness and joy of life,’ she explained. ‘He is always in my room, even when I am sleeping. I know the skull protects me. All through my life he has protected me.’

Ceri drew my attention to the tiny bubbles she had noticed deep inside the crystal skull. They were laid out in softly curving planes, glittering within the body of the crystal like tiny stars within a distant solar system on a very clear starry night. It was amazing to think that these tiny bubbles must have been trapped in the crystal as it was being formed many millions of years ago.

As I gazed on, I couldn’t help getting the feeling that there was still far more to the crystal skull than I had so far been able to fathom. It was more than just a reminder of our own mortality. There was something else, something beyond that. But it seemed that the real significance of the crystal skull was as yet intangible to me.

Anna was discussing the visitors who came to see the skull. ‘The skull brings people together in many, many ways. It’s always a happiness for me to show it to people, to see the joy it brings them. So many people come, sometimes as many as 14 people, sometimes 18. I have a lot of Indian people. American Indians and Canadian Indians stay with the skull for hours and I can’t tell them, “Well, it’s time for you to go.” The skull is loved very much by everyone who comes to see it. I’ve even had the actress Shirley Maclaine come to work with the skull.

‘I welcome people because it’s a way of giving a little happiness and really, it’s the skull that does that. I call it “the Skull of Love,” just as the Mayans would think of it.’

‘The sun has come out,’ said Jimmy. We looked out through the windows to see pale wintry sunshine on the road outside. Jimmy offered to show us how the skull responded to sunlight so we followed him out into the garden.

I was fascinated by the way that the skull reacted to light. It appeared completely different depending on how it was lit, almost as if its face were changing, and as it was changing so too were the patterns and refractions of the light inside. I held it up to the sunlight. Although the sun was not particularly bright, the effects on the skull were none the less beautiful. The prismatic qualities of the crystal created a display of reflections that showed quite clearly all the different colours of the rainbow. It was stunningly beautiful.

I was interested to know how the skull looked in really bright sunshine. ‘Well, it gave me a shock,’ said Anna, as we settled back down with a pot of tea. She told us how she had been showing the skull to a group of schoolchildren. She had put it on its cushion and then turned her back to talk for a few minutes, only to hear the children shrieking, ‘It’s smoking, madam!’ Anna turned around to see that the cushion was beginning to catch fire.

Jimmy explained that the prismatic qualities of the crystal are such that if the sun’s rays are very strong and fall at a particular angle onto the back of the skull, they are focused and condensed and appear as a bright, sharp beam of light out of the skull’s eyes, nose and mouth. ‘If this happens for more than a few minutes then the skull can actually start a fire,’ he added.

‘This was one of the things that the Mayans used the skull for,’ said Anna.

We were interested to know exactly what the skull’s uses had been.

‘The Mayans used the skull for many things, but particularly for healing,’ said Anna. ‘If you are ever worried or not feeling well or anything like that, you just go to the skull and it gives you health, happiness and joy of life.’ She continued, ‘I have a tremendous amount of letters. I love to read those letters from people who are being healed by it.’

‘Remember Melissa,’ said Jimmy.

‘Oh, that little girl who had the bone marrow trouble,’ replied Anna. ‘She came to stay with us for a few weeks, and I gave her a photograph of the skull and she carries that photograph with her everywhere. Anyway, she came back to tell me that her bone marrow is fine and she can walk now. That’s the biggest joy of my life really. Another lady, only last month, she had an operation but she wasn’t doing very well. So she came and she saw the skull and sat with him for a very long time. She sent me a letter the other day to say that she is now healed.’

I was puzzled. If the skull really had the power to heal, why had Anna’s father even in his written account referred to it as ‘the Skull of Doom’ and claimed that the ancient Maya had used it ‘to will death’?

Anna explained, ‘The Maya told us that it was a healing skull. It was actually used for many, many things, but particularly for healing. But, you see, for the Maya, death itself was sometimes seen as a form of healing.’

‘The way I understand it,’ added Jimmy, ‘is that for the Maya death was the ultimate way to access the other dimensions they believed in and the skull was used to help this final transition to the other world.’

‘I can tell you exactly how the Maya used it during the willing death ceremony,’ said Anna. ‘This came about when an old medicine man or priest was getting too old to carry on their work and a young person was chosen to carry on the work of the elder. When the day came, the old one would lie down and the young one would kneel down beside them and they would both put their hands on the crystal skull. Then a high priest would perform a ceremony and during the ceremony all the knowledge and wisdom of the old one would pass on into the young one through the skull and the old one would pass away during the ceremony and go to sleep forever. And that was the willing death ceremony.’

Anna went on to explain that she had been looking after the skull for many years now and letting people come to her house and experience its power for themselves. She said the Mayan people knew what she was doing with the skull and that they were very happy about it. She said that before she died she wanted to ensure that the work she had been doing would be carried on. ‘This is what my father would have wished and it is the wish of the Maya people too.’ She added, ‘I think I have someone in mind already to take over the care of the skull when I’m gone.’ She said she was also planning a final visit to Lubaantun. We wondered whether Anna was planning to give the skull back to the Mayan people, but she said the skull would not be going with her.

In Annas opinion, the crystal skull was bequeathed to her and her father for a reason, a reason whose time would come. ‘The Mayans told me that the skull is important to mankind. It is a gift from the Mayan people to the rest of the world.’ She added, ‘The Mayans have a lot of knowledge. They gave us the skull for a definite reason and a purpose. I am not exactly sure what that reason is, but I know that this skull is part of something very, very important.’

We of course wanted to know more, but all Anna would say was, ‘You will just have to ask the Mayans.’

4. THE MYSTERY

Every now and then in the history of mankind there comes a discovery so unique and so incredible that it cannot be explained according to our normal set of beliefs and everyday assumptions, a discovery so remarkable that it challenges our normal view of history, and therefore our whole view of the world today. Could it be that the crystal skull was just such a discovery?

After all, we had always assumed that we were more advanced and developed than our simple and primitive ancestors. Everything we had learned about human history seemed to have shown that civilization had logically evolved in a constantly improving fashion over the millennia, so that we now found ourselves, almost by definition, living at the very pinnacle of mankind’s evolutionary development.

The crystal skull appeared to challenge this view. For how could such ancient and ‘primitive’ people have made something so accomplished? Indeed, where exactly did the Maya, with their elaborate cities, their complex hieroglyphics, their mathematics and calendrics, and their knowledge of astronomy, fit in with our simple model of a constantly evolving and improving human history?

The skull was a mystery. Not only was it beautiful to look at, but it seemed that nearly everyone who had come into contact with it had some strange tale to tell of unusual experiences or inexplicable phenomena. Whatever its real powers, the skull certainly seemed to have us entranced.

Now we knew crystal skulls were not just the stuff of legend, there were other questions to consider. Were there any other skulls like Anna’s? What did her skull have to do with the ancient legend? Why did some people, including Anna’s own father, consider it evil, whilst for others, such as Anna, it was a force for good? And had the ancient Maya really made such a beautiful and sophisticated object themselves?

After our visit to Anna Mitchell-Hedges, these questions remained unanswered. But our desire to find the answers was now even more pressing. We began by trying to find out more about the ancient Mayan civilization. From the books we were now reading it seemed that archaeologists had managed to reconstruct quite a vivid picture of it from the detailed inscriptions, monuments and artwork the Maya had left behind. They had a pretty good idea of many of their ancient customs, rituals, knowledge and beliefs, and in some cases very specific information, such as the birth dates of kings and the names of their ancestors for up to seven generations.

So we now began talking to various Mayan experts and archaeologists, hoping that they might be able to tell us more about the crystal skull. Did the Mayans make it at the same time as they built their great cities, only to abandon it and perhaps others like it on their sudden departure? Could the crystal skull perhaps give us some clues as to why they left? How had it come to remain in the temple ruins?

We also wanted to see whether there were any other clues as to how the Mayans might have made the skull or how they might have used it, or even, as Frederick Mitchell-Hedges had suspected, whether it in fact dated back to some even more mysterious pre-Mayan civilization.

But as we began our further investigations it soon became apparent that these were questions to which there would be no easy answers. Despite the details archaeologists had uncovered about some aspects of Mayan history, whole chunks of knowledge seemed to be missing.

Indeed, as we continued our investigations we realized that we had unwittingly stumbled into a veritable minefield of great archaeological controversy. For not only was there heated debate about who the Maya were, where they had come from and where they had disappeared to, but one question in particular seemed to divide the archaeological establishment perhaps more than any other, and that was, where had the Mitchell-Hedges crystal skull really come from?

As we were to discover, the controversy began even with the site of the skull’s original discovery – Lubaantun. Mitchell-Hedges himself was of the view that the site was really pre-Mayan in origin. He felt the evidence from the site suggested that pre-Mayan peoples were involved in its construction and that it actually dated back to a much earlier period.

What had made Mitchell-Hedges suspect that Lubaantun might have been pre-Mayan was that, as we ourselves had noticed, the building techniques used there were so very different from those used at every other Mayan site. In their Recent book The Mayan Prophecies¹ author-historians Adrian Gilbert and Maurice Cotterell point out that the style of construction was remarkably similar to the techniques used by the even more ancient Incas of what is now Peru in South America. There are certain similarities between Lubaantun and the famous ancient Inca sites such as Machu Pichu, hidden high up thousands of miles away in the Andes. Gilbert and Cotterell suggest that whoever built Lubaantun might have enlisted the help of or learnt construction techniques from the ancient Incas of South America. Or perhaps both the ancient Maya and Inca had learned their construction techniques from some other civilization even more ancient than their own. This raised the question, had the crystal skull originally come from this same mysterious pre-Mayan civilization?

Mitchell-Hedges believed this civilization to have been the legendary Atlantis. Though this struck us as rather unlikely, he did in fact later find evidence that there had been some sort of pre-Mayan civilization in this part of the world during his later excavations of the Bay Islands off the nearby coast of Honduras. He donated several specimens from these digs to the British Museum in London and the Museum of the American Indian in New York, and Captain James Joyce of the British Museum wrote to comment:

‘It is my opinion that [the samples] represent a very early type of Central American culture; probably pre-Maya. The fact that they appear to bear relations with the pre-Conquest civilisations of Costa Rica, early Maya, and archaic Mexico, suggests that this is an early centre from which various forms of culture were diffused over Central America…

‘The results [of further research] are likely to shed new light on the current ideas of the origin and development of the American aboriginal civilisations…

‘I consider that your discovery is of great importance.’ ²

George G. Heye, then Chairman and Director of the Museum of the American Indian, had also written:

‘In every way we concur with the findings of the British Museum in regard to your amazing discoveries made on a chain of islands off the coast of Central America… The specimens … are of a hitherto unknown culture…

‘[They] open up a new era in scientific thought relative to the age and history of the original inhabitants of the American continent…

‘Your discoveries open up an entirely new vista in regard to the ancient civilisations of the American continent, and must compel archaeologists to reconstruct their present scientific theories in regard to the riddle which has existed for so many years in Central and South America. In fact as further work is done and more knowledge gained, in my judgment it will make fresh history, and open up a reconstruction of thought on the antiquity of cultural civilisations of a world-wide character.’ ³

We managed to track down an archaeologist, Dr Norman Hammond of Boston University, who had spent some time at Lubaantun during the 1970s carrying out further excavations of the site. Chris called Dr Hammond to ask him who he thought had really built the city. Dr Hammond was quite happy to talk about this and said that he believed it was the Mayans and the Mayans alone, without any external assistance, who had built Lubaantun. In his opinion the site had been built around AD 700 and abandoned around AD 850. It did not bother him at all that the buildings were constructed so differently from those at most other Mayan sites, as there were even examples of sites in the Mayan area that were built from red bricks and mortar like many modern homes, instead of from the usual blocks of cut white limestone. In Dr Hammond’s opinion, Lubaantun, like these other sites, was entirely Mayan and he would not countenance the view that any other people, whether Incas, Atlanteans or whoever, had been in any way involved.

But it was when we turned to the question of the crystal skull itself that we discovered that Dr Hammond’s views were about to drop a real bombshell onto our investigations. The minute Chris raised the subject of the skull Dr Hammond stated quite clearly and categorically that in his opinion, the crystal skull was irrelevant to Lubaantun, that it had never really been found there at all! He said that there was no evidence that Anna Mitchell-Hedges had ever even been to Lubaantun in the first place and that the story of the skull having been found there had only surfaced after her father died. He said that Anna Mitchell-Hedges’ own claim was the only evidence of the find.

By now we knew the crystal skull’s discovery had been controversial, but we didn’t know it had been quite as controversial as that. Norman Hammond said, in no uncertain terms, that he didn’t want anything more to do with the subject. We were horrified. We were about to make a film telling Anna Mitchell-Hedges’ fascinating story, when a respected archaeologist suddenly claimed the whole thing was pure invention. What were we to do?

As we were fast finding out, it was one thing trying to get our film off the ground but quite another trying to determine the truth about the Mitchell-Hedges crystal skull. The truth seemed to be slipping through our fingers like grains of sand on a beach. If Anna Mitchell-Hedges had never really been to Lubaantun, how was it that she appeared to have all the photos to prove it? If the party had not really found the crystal skull there at all, why would Anna have invented such an incredible story?

It seemed that what had really got people wondering about the true origins of the skull was a series of puzzling discrepancies that appeared to exist between Anna’s detailed account of the skull’s discovery and her own father’s virtual silence on the issue. Even in his own autobiography, Frederick Mitchell-Hedges said very little about the skull. In fact, in a later American edition, published in 1955, he makes no mention of it at all. In the original edition he refers to it only briefly and somewhat enigmatically as follows, in a section of his autobiography mostly devoted to a later trip to Africa:

‘We took with us the sinister Skull of Doom of which much has been written… ⁴

If much had been written on the skull we certainly hadn’t been able to find it. But the plot thickened further when we read the remaining scant details Frederick Mitchell-Hedges offered about the skull:

‘How it came into my possession I have reason for not revealing.

…It is at least 3,600 years old and according to legend was used by the High Priest of the Maya when performing esoteric rites. It is said that when he willed death with the help of the skull, death invariably followed. It has been described as the embodiment of all evil. I do not wish to try and explain this phenomena.‘⁵

However, he did add, at the end of the same chapter, ‘Much more of what we discovered [is] to be told in a book which Sammy will write.’⁶

This lack of information in Frederick Mitchell-Hedges’ own account of the discovery, perhaps more than anything else, perhaps more even than the incredible claims made about the skull’s magical and healing powers, was why it had stirred up such incredible controversy, particularly amongst those in the archaeological establishment. In the light of his secrecy, some degree of scepticism was now completely understandable. But it had led to some pretty wild speculation.

Dr David Pendergast, Mayan specialist at the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto, wondered whether it was perhaps possible that Frederick Mitchell-Hedges had even planted the crystal skull himself for Anna to discover. The fact that she had found the skull on her seventeenth birthday made him slightly suspicious. Could it really have been an incredible present from her father, which he had painstakingly planted with the intention that she might discover it apparently quite by accident on her birthday?

The problem was that even if this were the case, it still begged the question as to where Frederick Mitchell-Hedges got the crystal skull from himself. David wondered whether it was possible that he might have found the skull somewhere else or bought it previously, presumably at vast expense. But the question then would be, how had he managed to transport it without anyone knowing all the way to Lubaantun through the rainforest?

A possible origin for the skull emerged when we took another look at the writings of Sibley Morrill. It appeared from his account⁷ that Morrill also had some doubts about the Lubaantun discovery story. He had his own theory as to how Mitchell-Hedges might have obtained the crystal skull.

It was apparently widely rumoured towards the end of the nineteenth century that the Mexican President, at the time Porfirio Díaz, owned a secret cache of treasures thought to include one or more crystal skulls. These treasures were said to have been handed down from one Emperor to the next and to have given the owner the powers necessary to rule.

The end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth was a time of great turmoil, citizen unrest and civil war in Mexico, and ultimately the President was deposed. It was rumoured that his treasures were ransacked and divided up amongst the rebels as their spoils of war. One of these rebels was none other than the bandit turned national hero Pancho Villa, at whose side Frederick Mitchell-Hedges claimed to have been forced to fight back in 1913-14. This led some to speculate that Mitchell-Hedges’ crystal skull might actually be one that originally belonged to the line of Mexican Emperors and that Mitchell-Hedges might have obtained it from Pancho Villa’s men, who in turn may have stolen it from the Mexican President.