• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Little Mummified Dude ("Pedro"; The San Pedro Mountains Mummy)

I searched, but did not come up with a thread for Pedro the mummy here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Pedro_Mountains_Mummy

"In October 1932, while digging for gold in the San Pedro mountains, Carbon County, Wyoming, two prospectors, Cecil Mayne and Frank Carr, blasted their way through some thick rock that a large vein of gold continued into. When the dust settled, they saw they had opened up a small room, approximately 4 ft tall, 4 ft wide, and about 15 ft deep. This is where they claimed that they first saw the mummy of a tiny person."

I'm reminded on the Sirius "alien", as well as Atta Boy. In fact it bears a number of similarities to the Sirius creature, such as teeth indicating an older age. It is not claimed to be extraterrestrial, but instead taken by some as proof of American Indian tales of little people. As an added Fortean bonus, the mummy disappeared from the public eye in 1950 and it's whereabouts are unknown.
 
Here's the Wikipedia article on the Pedro Mountains Mummy. It includes photos.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Pedro_Mountains_Mummy


The_San_Pedro_Mountain_Mummy.jpg
 
Here's the Wikipedia article on the Pedro Mountains Mummy. It includes photos.
I came across a note in my archives of this photograph, which is far superior:

https://www.topfoto.co.uk/asset/342429/

Quoting Wikipedia:

"According to a July 7, 1979, article in the Casper Star-Tribune the first mummy started debates over whether it was a hoax, a baby, or one of the legendary "little people". The mummy ended up in Meeteetse, Wyoming at a local drug store where it was shown as an attraction for several years before it was bought by Ivan T. Goodman, a Casper, Wyoming businessman. The mummy was then passed on to Leonard Wadler, a New York businessman, and its present location is unknown. Seeking to prove evolution wrong, an offer of a $10,000 reward was made for the person who finds the missing mummy according to the Casper Star-Tribune".

Hang on... I know something about this...

There's a connection with Kenneth Arnold.

I posted this online some years back

"Thanks to an exceptionally helpful U.S. library service, after much searching I now have a copy of Kenneth Arnold's rare, self-published, 1950 booklet, 'The Flying Saucer as I Saw it' [the correct punctuation]".


Detailing the contents, I wrote:

(Start)
Page 11: This is an astonishing and unexpected discovery.

Arnold writes:

"YOU'VE heard stories of 'Little Men' associated with FLYING SAUCERS. The many descriptions by responsible people who have seen little men describe them differently than these photographs but...

This tiny, monkey-like man once lived and breathed... and walked on the earth as one of God's creatures. Scientists and curators are unable to positively determine his origin, but have tentatively concluded that he came to earth during the post-glacial period. It is thought the specimen might have existed previous to the little tree men, who existed about the same time as the dinosaur".

[...]

"The anthropological department of Harvard University says there is no doubt about the creature's rarity. The Curator of the Egyptian Department of the Boston Museum says the mummy has the appearance of Egyptian specimens

Dr. Henry Fairfield, noted scientist, calls the creature Hesperopithecus after a form of anthropoid, which roamed the North American continent in the middle of the Pliocene period. All of them say it is the most perfect, prehistoric mummy ever discovered.

Height in position it sits six and a half inches. Weight three quarters of one pound".

Comment: Arnold is clearly comfortable with an association between 'Little Men' - even if they're only inches tall - and flying saucers.

This would be coherent with his second 1947 sighting of enigmatic aerial objects [Arnold claimed to have had some eight seperate encounters with 'UFOs' during his flying days] as he first recalled in 'FATE' magazine, Spring 1948:

"It was July 30 at dawn I took off in my own plane, intending to reach Tacoma before dark and contact Mr Dahl.

It was at 7:00 o'clock that morning I sighted a formation of small disks going south at 4,000 feet as I was letting down at La Grande, Oregon.

I attempted to turn and catch up with them, but they were out of sight before I could complete my turn".

[...]

"I would judge them about thirty inches across, very thin, and light brown in color".

Arnold expresses no reservations about how irrational this might seem.


What is the source of Arnold's "tiny, monkey-like man"...

Incredibly, it's nothing less than little Pedro.

Arnold publishes three photographs; two are X-rays. In addition to the X-ray photograph at the above web site, there's a "Frontal X-Ray".

The other photograph shows a young boy holding up a ruler in front of 'Pedro', confirming the artefact's size.

Alas, poor Pedro is by this time seemingly mounted upright on a display plinth.

Perhaps a shocking end for such a curiosity, although it would make a unique conversational paperweight".
(End)


So, I need to find my copy of Arnold's publication, to check whether that photo of, 'Pedro on a plinth' is indeed our little enigma and shall duly have another search - it's been misplaced for a number of years now...
 
Last edited:
I also highlighted'

Arnold may be mistaken that "Dr. Henry Fairfield, noted scientist, calls the creature Hesperopithecus".

It seems this relates to another controversial artefact, 'Nebraska Man', dubbed 'Hesperopithecus haroldcookii' by Dr. Henry Fairfield Osborn.
(End)
 
Arnold may be mistaken that "Dr. Henry Fairfield, noted scientist, calls the creature Hesperopithecus".
It seems this relates to another controversial artefact, 'Nebraska Man', dubbed 'Hesperopithecus haroldcookii' by Dr. Henry Fairfield Osborn.
That's correct ... The Hesperopithecus label refers to the 'Nebraska Man' fossil (a single tooth) discovered by geologist Harold J. Cook and reported to the American Museum of Natural History by Henry Fairfield Osborn.

The full text of Osborn's report and a follow-on report (Gregory & Hellman, 1923) can be accessed as follows:

HESPEROPITHECUS, THE FIRST ANTHROPOID PRIMATE FOUND IN AMERICA
BY HENRY FAIRFIELD OSBORN
AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES
Number 37
April 25, 1922

https://digitallibrary.amnh.org/bit...dfSource/nov/N0037.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y


NOTES ON THE TYPE OF HESPEROPITHECUS HAROLD- COOKII OSBORN
BY WILLIAM K. GREGORY AND MILO HELLMAN
AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES
Number 53
January 6, 1923

https://digitallibrary.amnh.org/bit...dfSource/nov/N0053.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

As it turns out 'Nebraska Man' wasn't a hominid, Hesperopithecus didn't exist, and the hominid attribution for the tooth was formally retracted.
From its initial description, Hesperopithecus was regarded as an inconclusive find by a large portion of the scientific community. Examinations of the specimen continued, and the original describers continued to draw comparisons between Hesperopithecus and apes. Further field work on the site in the summers of 1925 and 1926 uncovered other parts of the skeleton. These discoveries revealed that the tooth was incorrectly identified. According to these discovered pieces, the tooth belonged neither to a man nor an ape, but to a fossil of an extinct species of peccary called Prosthennops serus (or basically an extinct pig). The misidentification was attributed to the fact that the original specimen was severely weathered. The earlier identification as an ape was retracted in the journal Science in 1927.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebraska_Man
 
My sister recently had a child, it still has that new baby smell. I must say the proportions of her infant daughter and those of Pedro do not look very similar.
 
Back
Top