Where Are the Remains?
A provenance investigation tracing reported discoveries from excavation to institution, transfer, reburial, loss, or an unresolved end of the paper trail.
← Return to The Giants ArchiveWhat Should We Expect to Find?
David Pinter · Curator
When we ask, “Where are the remains?”, we must first consider what we should reasonably expect to find.
The biblical record describes a world in which extraordinary stature was associated with the Nephilim and, after the Flood, with peoples remembered by names such as the Rephaim, Anakim and other giant clans. Some biblical descriptions are striking. When the Israelite spies entered Canaan, they returned terrified by what they had seen:
“And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.” Numbers 13:33, KJV
Whatever conclusions we ultimately draw about the dimensions of these ancient peoples, I do not believe we should assume that a giant living centuries after the Flood must have possessed the same extraordinary stature attributed to the earliest giants.
The world described after the Flood appears increasingly different from the world that preceded it. Scripture records a dramatic decline in human longevity across the generations following Noah. The natural world also preserves evidence of forms of life whose dimensions can astonish us today, from enormous prehistoric animals to ancient plants and ecosystems unlike those familiar to the modern world. Conditions changed.
If extraordinarily large beings existed in the earliest periods described by Scripture, their descendants would have lived generation after generation among ordinary human populations. Intermarriage, migration, changing environmental conditions and the passage of centuries could reasonably have resulted in descendants of progressively lesser stature. Under this interpretation, we should not necessarily expect an Anakite, Rephaite or later descendant of a giant population to stand twelve, fifteen or twenty feet tall simply because earlier traditions describe beings of tremendous size.
The biblical narrative itself follows giant peoples across generations. By the days of Moses, Joshua and David, individuals and populations associated with these traditions remained formidable, yet they were increasingly confronted, displaced and destroyed. Og of Bashan is remembered in connection with an enormous bedstead. Goliath of Gath is described with extraordinary stature in the traditional Hebrew text preserved by the King James Bible. The Anakim were driven from much of their territory, while remnants survived in Gaza, Gath and Ashdod.
Beyond the biblical lands, traditions from numerous cultures tell of unusually large peoples, warriors or earlier inhabitants. Some Native American traditions likewise contain accounts of powerful peoples associated with an earlier age and conflicts with later populations. Such traditions vary greatly and must be examined individually rather than treated as a single historical record.
Rather than expecting every credible discovery to reveal a twelve or twenty foot skeleton, we may need to look for something subtler: individuals significantly taller and more robust than the populations surrounding them, ancient reports of seven and eight foot people, unusual skeletal proportions, exceptionally large burial accommodations, and documented remains whose provenance can still be followed.
For this reason, this exhibit uses 6 feet 5 inches as a research threshold, not as a definition of a biblical giant. It is simply a practical point at which an individual becomes relevant to this investigation. The greater the reported stature, the greater the need for documentation.
A historical newspaper saying that a ten foot skeleton was discovered proves that the report existed. It does not, by itself, prove that a ten foot human existed. An archaeological report describing a seven foot skeleton deserves closer consideration. A measured skeleton preserved in a collection is stronger evidence still.
This room does not begin with the assumption that every old account is true. Neither does it begin with the assumption that every extraordinary account must be false. We will follow the evidence. Where remains survive, we will identify them. Where they were transferred, we will follow the documented transfer. Where they were reburied or repatriated, we will say so. Where a supposed giant bone was later identified as an animal fossil, we will say that too. And where the documentation ends, we will mark the trail honestly: Present location unknown.
If the stature of these peoples diminished across generations, what evidence should we expect their descendants to have left behind, and can any of that evidence still be traced today - via DNA?
One investigation at a time.
Each record below is its own file. Opening one closes the previous file. Every case separates the discovery story, named investigators, measurements, surviving documentation, and the last point in the provenance chain that can presently be verified.
01Iran · Remains DocumentedSiah Khan · The Shiraz Giant259 cm / approximately 8 ft 6 in · Medical skeleton · Published 1966 and revisited 2015
The man behind the skeleton
Siah Khan was not an anonymous archaeological rumor. He was a known Iranian man whose exceptional growth became the subject of medical study. The modern historical review by Mohsen Najjari identifies him as a case of combined acromegaly and gigantism and revisits a 1966 paper by Professor Zabiholah Gorban titled Observations on a Giant Skeleton. Gorban was the founder of the Shiraz medical school.
The later article describes a skeleton approximately 259 cm tall and 245 kg and reproduces the historical record of the skeleton displayed in a glass showcase at the old Shiraz School of Medicine. This gives the case an unusually strong chain: a named individual, named physician, medical institution, published anatomical study, surviving skeletal display, and later scholarly review.
What still needs to be traced
The next provenance question is not whether the skeleton existed in the medical collection. The published record establishes that. The open question is its present repository and current catalog status within Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. That is the record we should seek next.
Najjari, Mohsen. “The Oldest Recorded Case of Acromegaly and Gigantism in Iran.” Archives of Iranian Medicine 18(10), 2015, pp. 734–736. PubMed PMID 26443258. The article explicitly reviews Gorban's 1966 Observations on a Giant Skeleton.
PubMed record ↗02Poland · Excavated RemainsOstrów Lednicki · The Giant WomanEstimated 215.5 cm / about 7 ft 1 in · Osteology · X-ray · CT examination
A grave, a skeleton, and modern imaging
Individual OL-23/77 came from the medieval cemetery at Ostrów Lednicki, an island stronghold associated with the early Piast state. Researchers identify the individual as a woman approximately 25 to 30 years old. Her skeleton measured 208 cm in situ, while stature reconstruction produced an estimate of 215.5 cm.
This case is especially valuable because the diagnosis did not depend on height alone. Osteological examination, radiography and CT imaging documented an excessively long and massive but proportionate skeleton, an elongated and prognathic mandible, enlarged vertebrae, thickened bones and a pituitary lesion. Researchers interpreted the pattern as gigantism during growth followed by acromegalic changes in adulthood.
The provenance complication
Published bioarchaeological literature notes that the skeleton is not complete because portions were used for many years in osteological teaching at Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań. That is exactly the sort of collection history this room is designed to preserve: the remains did not simply “vanish,” but their later academic use affected what survives.
Frontiers in Endocrinology, 2022, “The Internal Cranial Anatomy of a Female With Endocrine Disorders From a Mediaeval Population.” The paper summarizes the excavation, measurements, CT findings and earlier osteological literature.
Peer-reviewed study ↗03Italy · Roman Imperial AgeFidenae · “The Roman Giant”202 cm / about 6 ft 7½ in · Young male · Torre Serpentana necropolis
Found seven kilometers north of Rome
During archaeological excavation of the Imperial Age necropolis of Torre Serpentana at Fidenae, researchers recovered skeleton T.30, a young male approximately 16 to 20 years old. His stature was estimated at about 202 cm. The contemporary Roman male average cited by the researchers was about 167 cm, making him roughly 35 cm taller than the population average.
The investigators included Simona Minozzi, Walter Pantano, Paola Catalano, Francesco di Gennaro and Gino Fornaciari. The long bones were more than five standard deviations above the comparative Roman population. Some long bones and vertebral bodies had not completed epiphyseal fusion, meaning the young man may have grown taller had he lived longer. The pituitary area of the skull was enlarged and depressed, supporting the diagnosis of pituitary gigantism.
Minozzi et al., “The Roman Giant: Overgrowth Syndrome in Skeletal Remains from the Imperial Age,” International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. The case was also published in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism.
Published osteoarchaeology study ↗04United States · Smithsonian Bureau of EthnologyKanawha Valley · The 7 ft 6 in BurialWest Virginia · Bark wrapping · Copper ornaments · Flint spear points
The report contains far more than a height
Cyrus Thomas's Bureau of Ethnology report describes extensive mound exploration in the Kanawha Valley. In one vault, the skeleton lying in the middle of the floor was recorded as unusually large, “measuring 7 feet 6 inches in length and 19 inches between the shoulder sockets.” The report states that the body had been enclosed in a bark wrapping or coffin and lay on its back with the head to the east.
The burial context was detailed. The wrists reportedly carried six heavy bracelets each. Four additional bracelets were beneath the head. A black flint spear point and other material were encased in a mortar-like mass that appeared to have been wrapped in textile. A copper gorget lay on the breast. Three black-flint spearheads were recorded in each hand, with additional points around the head, knees and feet. Two hematite celts were near the right hand, and three thick plates were reported at the shoulder.
This is precisely why the original source matters. The entry is not merely “a giant was found.” It records position, orientation, grave construction and associated artifacts. Those details provide identifiers that may help match field notes, correspondence or catalog records.
The professionals behind the archive
The Smithsonian's National Anthropological Archives preserves the Division of Mound Exploration Records, MS 2400, covering 1881–1889. The collection includes reports, field notes, drawings and correspondence from Cyrus Thomas and collaborators including F. S. Earle, J. W. Emmert, Gerard Fowke, Charles C. Jones, J. P. MacLean, J. D. Middleton, Warren K. Moorehead, P. W. Norris, Edward Palmer, H. L. Reynolds, J. P. Rogan and L. H. Thing. The archive itself warns that the printed report frequently differs from the original notes and is less detailed. That makes the manuscript files our next research target.
Cyrus Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology, 1894; and Smithsonian National Anthropological Archives, MS 2400 Division of Mound Exploration Records.
Smithsonian report ↗Original field-record collection ↗05United States · Smithsonian RecordEast Dubuque · A Skeleton That Could Not Be RemovedReported over seven feet · Original excavation account gives a disposition
Sometimes the original report answers the question
In the East Dubuque material, Thomas records an unusually large skeleton, somewhat over seven feet, but the significance for this room is what happened next. The remains were sufficiently decayed that, although the skeleton could be followed in the earth, it crumbled during removal.
That distinction matters. A later reader could encounter the published measurement, fail to find a museum specimen and ask why it disappeared. Here the excavation narrative itself provides the answer. The physical remains were not successfully recovered as an intact museum skeleton.
Cyrus Thomas, Bureau of Ethnology mound reports. This case should be cross-checked against the corresponding Illinois field notes in NAA MS 2400 before the archive treats every detail as final.
Smithsonian report ↗06Sardinia · Megalithic InvestigationThe Tombs of the GiantsHundreds of Nuragic collective tombs · Real human burials · Giant stature not established by the name
The monuments are real. The name is not a measurement.
Sardinia's tombe dei giganti are genuine Nuragic collective funerary monuments beginning in the Middle Bronze Age. Regional archaeological documentation states that roughly 800 had been catalogued by 2003, concentrated especially in central and western Sardinia. In the Dorgali territory alone, research has surveyed more than forty such graves.
The burial chambers can be monumental. The San Cosimo-Gonnosfanadiga chamber reaches about 16.5 meters in length. S'Ena e Thomes, Li Lolghi, Coddu Vecchiu, Iloi and numerous other sites preserve the characteristic long chamber and curved ceremonial exedra. Some are explicitly described archaeologically as dolmen-type tombs built from large upright slabs.
But the official Sardinian archaeological material is equally clear about the name: popular tradition called them “Tombs of the Giants” because their imposing scale led people to believe gigantic men had been buried inside. They were actually collective tombs used for members of a social group, including both sexes and different ages.
Why Sardinia remains an active file
That does not make the later giant stories worthless. It tells us exactly what must be located: excavation diaries, osteological reports, long-bone measurements, museum inventories and named specimens from specific tombs. A claim about a 7, 8 or 10 foot Sardinian skeleton should not be attached to the monuments in general. It must be attached to a particular burial and a particular set of bones.
Sardegna Cultura Virtual Archaeology, official regional archaeological documentation for S'Ena e Thomes and other Giants' Tombs.
Burial chamber documentation ↗Distribution and monument record ↗07Spain · Dolmen FileCa n'Orèn I · Prullans, CataloniaReal dolmen · Human burials reported · Extraordinary femur claims require primary verification
A promising case with a documentation gap
The Ca n'Orèn I dolmen near Prullans is a real archaeological monument with human remains associated with it. Later giant literature attributes extraordinarily long femora to the burial, sometimes giving measurements between roughly 70 and 92 cm. Those numbers, if verified in an original excavation or museum record, would be highly significant.
At present, however, the extraordinary measurements are the weak link. The responsible approach is to separate what is secure from what remains to be proven: the dolmen and burials are archaeological facts; the extreme femur measurements still require the original excavation documentation, specimen record, or museum catalog.
What we need next
The file should target the 1915 discovery history, early Catalan archaeological publications, the Institut d'Estudis Catalans record, museum transfers, and any surviving osteological inventory. Names of excavators, exact specimen numbers and the repository are more important than repeating the later claim.
This file remains deliberately provisional. No 6'5"+ stature will be assigned by the museum until the claimed long-bone measurements can be tied to an early archaeological or institutional source.
08Corsica · Open FileMegaliths, Caves and Human RemainsReal prehistoric burials · No qualifying 6'5"+ specimen verified yet
Corsica contains genuine prehistoric burials, megalithic monuments and excavated human remains, but our present search has not produced a securely measured individual meeting the museum's 6'5" threshold. This section remains open so that later cave, dolmen or cemetery material can be added without lowering the evidence standard.
The next search should prioritize French and Corsican archaeological reports rather than English-language giant compilations, especially osteological appendices where stature estimates and long-bone measurements are normally buried.
09Turkey · Threshold ReviewTaşmasor · Gigantism Without Secure Giant StaturePublished pathology · Estimated range 182–200 cm · Mean below our threshold
The Taşmasor skeleton is a legitimate paleopathological case showing characteristics of pituitary gigantism and acromegaly. However, the stature estimates range from about 182 to 200 cm and the mean estimate is around 189 cm. Because our room is investigating unusually tall remains rather than every medical case of gigantism, this individual does not presently qualify for the main giant-remains ledger.
It remains here as a methodological control: a diagnosis of gigantism does not automatically mean an individual stood seven or eight feet tall.
10Ukraine · Open FileKurgans and Steppe BurialsMany claims · No qualifying specimen securely documented yet
Ukraine and the wider Pontic steppe contain an enormous archaeological record of Scythian, Sarmatian and earlier kurgan burials. Giant claims circulate around some of these discoveries, but our current standard requires a named excavation, measured skeleton or long bones, professional report and repository trail. Until those elements are located, Ukraine remains an open research file rather than a confirmed entry.
11Afghanistan · Open FileCave and Giant-Skeleton ClaimsSpectacular stories · No archaeological specimen verified to our standard
Afghanistan has accumulated dramatic modern stories about giant bodies and cave discoveries, but the versions encountered so far lack the documentation required for this room: named archaeological teams, excavation permits, osteological measurements, specimen numbers, repository records and peer-reviewed analysis. Some widely circulated giant-skeleton photographs in the broader internet genre are demonstrable digital fabrications, making provenance especially important.
This file remains open, but no claim will be elevated merely because the story is spectacular.