Replies

“Now in those days there where Giants upon the Earth....”

"There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown." (Genesis 6:4)

No doubt here, but as regards archeological evidence, there are so many hoaxes or undocumented claims of discoveries of fossils that it is hard for any documented finds to have credibility.

You have such bogus claims as that Russian scientists found 6 giant human skeletons while excavating a site in western Iran, etc.

This site - which i doubt would come up in Google searches - has many (claimed) newspaper images of reports of finds of giants: http://chronologiesbookofgiants.blogspot.ca/ But takes sifting.

Then there is the WP article on the Giant of Castelnau, which was a fossil bone discovery which may represent one of the largest humans known to have existed. The bones, found in a Bronze Age burial tumulus, date back to the Neolithic period and consisted of a humerus, tibia, and femoral mid-shaft. The scientist who made the discovery in 1890 estimated from the bone size that the human may have been over three meters [ 9+'] tall.

The bones were discovered by the anthropologist Georges Vacher de Lapouge at the Bronze Age cemetery of Castelnau-le-Lez, France in the winter of 1890. His findings were published in the journal La Nature, Vol. 18, 1890 Issue 888.^[1]^[2] The height of the individual was estimated at about 3.5 m (11 ft 6 in) according to de Lapouge, and the bones were dated to the Neolithic period, since they were found at the very bottom of the Bronze Age burial tumulus. The journal includes a photo engraving of what was identified as the humerus, tibia, and femoral mid-shaft of the giant compared to a normal size humerus in the center.

Writing in the journal La Nature, de Lapouge describes the bones in detail: "I think it unnecessary to note that these bones are undeniably human, despite their enormous size.... The first is the middle part of the shaft of a femur, 14 cm length, almost cylindrical in shape, and the circumference of the bone is 16 cm.... The second piece is the middle and upper part of the shaft of a tibia.... The circumference is 13 cm at the nutrient foramen.... the length of fragment is 26 cm.... The third, very singular, was regarded by good anatomists as the lower part of a humerus.... The volumes of the bones were more than double the normal pieces to which they correspond. Judging by the usual intervals of anatomical points, they also involve lengths almost double.... The subject would have been a likely size of 3m, 50."^[1]

The bones of the Castelnau giant were studied at the University of Montpellier and examined by M. Sabatier, professor of Zoology, at the University of Montpellier, and M. Delage, professor of paleontology at the University of Montpellier, in addition to other anatomists. In 1892 the bones were carefully studied by Dr. Paul Louis André Kiener, professor of pathological anatomy at Montpellier School of Medicine, for which he admitted they represented a "very tall race", but nevertheless found them abnormal in dimensions and apparently of "morbid growth."^[3]^[4]

It is of some interest that in 1894, press accounts mentioned a further discovery of bones of human giants unearthed at a prehistoric cemetery at Montpellier, France (5 km Southwest of Castelnau) while workers were excavating a water works reservoir. Skulls "28, 31, and 32 inches in circumference" were reported alongside other bones of gigantic proportions which indicated they belonged to a race of men "between 10 and 15 feet in height." The bones were reportedly sent to the Paris Academy for further study.^[5]^{[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_of_Castelnau}