The loving embrace of a mother and her child lasts for 4,000 years, Chinese archaeologists reported after finding their interlocked skeletons.
Skeletal remains show the mother kneeling down on the ground with her arms around her son in central China
Archaeologists unearthed proof of a mother’s love in Qinghai province, China, when they discovered the 4,000-year-old skeletons of a mother and child still locked in a dying embrace.
The two skeletons are frozen in time, preserved in the stance they took in their final moments before an earthquake wiped out China’s “Pompeii of the East” around 2,000 BC.
The mother’s arms are draped around her son in what archaeologists believe to be both an embrace and an attempt to protect her son as catastrophe hit.
The mother was trying to shield her child from a massive earthquake that struck China in 2000 BC and triggered massive floods; the event is sometimes referred to as ‘China’s Pompeii’. The site is riddled with tragic scenes.
Lajia Ruins Museum, located in northwest China’s Qinghai province, is a 4000-year-old earthquake relic, with very well preserved artefacts and skeletons.
The entire disaster scene is so shocking it has been likened to the Pompeii tragedy. Pompeii was a Roman city wiped off the face of the Earth after a volcanic eruption and buried under ash and pumice.
Archaeologically, the entire site is stunning: it paints an incredibly well-preserved picture of an important ancient event.
It is also very important because it holds early clues to an early Bronze Age civilization that lived in the upper Yellow River region and of which we know very little about. But from a human point of view, it’s just heartbreaking.
These people had a rough fate, they were killed by a disaster they could do nothing to protect themselves against; they couldn’t even protect their children, try as they might. It’s a testimony to nature’s strength, and how weak we sometimes are against it.
I just hope they don’t separate the two skeletons. I’m not sure why – it’s not for a religious reason – but it just seems wrong to separate the two.
Source: ancient-archeology.com
