The discovery of a Roman artifact in the Americas has sparked a debate about who truly discovered the New World.
While Christopher Columbus is hailed as the first in 1492, archaeologists uncovered a small terracotta head of a bearded man carved with distinctive European features tucked inside a Mexican tomb.
The artifact, known as the Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca Head, was discovered in 1933 inside a sealed pre-Hispanic burial beneath multiple intact layers, indicating it had not been disturbed after its placement.
Experts say its facial features, beard style and craftsmanship bear a striking resemblance to objects from the ancient Mediterranean rather than indigenous Mesoamerican traditions.
German archaeologist Bernard Andreae later concluded in the 1960s that the piece was ‘without any doubt Roman,’ linking it stylistically to the Severian period of the Roman Empire around 200 AD.
Scientific testing using thermoluminescence dating, a method that determines the age of ceramics and pottery by measuring the light emitted when heated, further supported its antiquity, suggesting the artifact predates European contact with the Americas.
The burial itself has been dated to the late 15th century, just years before Hernán Cortés arrived, creating a timeline that does not easily explain how a Roman object could have been placed there.
All of this has led to a controversial idea that the Romans may have discovered the Americas more than a thousand years before Columbus.
Experts say its facial features, beard style and craftsmanship bear a striking resemblance to objects from the ancient Mediterranean rather than indigenous Mesoamerican traditions
Andreae shared in a study: ‘The stylistic examination tells us more precisely that it is a Roman work from around the 2nd century AD, and the hairstyle and the shape of the beard present the typical traits of the Severian emperors’ period [193-235 AD], exactly in the ‘fashion’ of the epoch.’
Although the most recent research on the artifact dates back to 2001, the discovery was brought back into focus this week in a report by Arkeonews.
Despite the excitement surrounding the artifact, many archaeologists have remained cautious, warning that extraordinary claims require equally strong evidence.
They pointed out that no Roman ships, settlements or other objects have ever been found in the Americas to support such a journey.
One of the most frequently cited explanations is that the head may have been introduced to the burial site long after its creation.
Some researchers have suggested that it could have arrived during the early years of European exploration, when objects were sometimes traded, transported or even lost far from their source.
Others have raised the possibility of an archaeological hoax, noting gaps in excavation records from the 1933 dig led by José García Payón.
According to later accounts, Payón was not always present during the excavation, leaving open the chance that the artifact could have been planted.
German archaeologist Bernard Andreae later concluded in the 1960s that the piece was ‘without any doubt Roman,’ linking it stylistically to the Severan period of the Roman Empire around 200 AD
However, supporters of the artifact’s authenticity argued that the context of the discovery makes such explanations difficult to accept.
The head was reportedly found in a sealed burial beneath multiple intact floor layers, a detail that suggests the site had remained undisturbed for centuries.
If accurate, that context significantly limits the likelihood that the object was introduced at a later date.
It would also mean the artifact was placed in the grave before the arrival of Europeans in the early 16th century, deepening the mystery of how it got there.
Another theory gaining attention involves the possibility of accidental transatlantic contact.
Some researchers believe that ancient ships from the Mediterranean, whether Roman, Phoenician or Berber, could have been carried across the Atlantic by powerful ocean currents.
Under this scenario, a vessel may have drifted off course and reached the shores of the Americas, where its cargo could have been recovered and eventually traded inland.
The artifact, known as the Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca Head, was discovered in 1933 inside a sealed pre-Hispanic burial beneath multiple intact layers, indicating it had not been disturbed after its placement (STOCK)
Over time, the object may have been incorporated into local cultural or burial practices, losing any trace of its original journey.
While this idea may sound impossible, oceanographers have noted that currents such as the Canary Current and the North Equatorial Current can, under the right conditions, carry debris across vast distances.
However, critics emphasize that there is no concrete archaeological evidence to support a Roman presence in the Americas beyond this single artifact.
Without additional discoveries, they argue, the theory remains speculative.
The debate also highlights a broader challenge within archaeology: how to interpret anomalies that do not fit neatly into established historical narratives.
For decades, the idea that Europeans reached the Americas before Columbus was widely dismissed.
That changed with the confirmation of Norse settlements at L’Anse aux Meadows in Newfoundland, proving that transatlantic contact occurred centuries earlier than once believed.
To some researchers, the Tecaxic-Calixtlahuaca head represents a similar anomaly, one that may eventually be explained through new evidence or more advanced scientific analysis.
