169-413. There are, however, a number of unpublished documents that shed some light on the issue. Peabody Museum, Cambridge. However, I see no obvious relation 1975 Unexpected Faces in Ancient America, 1500 B.C. [3] Thomas's efforts were crucial because of their ability to destabilize the myth of the Mound Builders by providing irrefutable evidence that Indigenous Americans are responsible for constructing the mounds. 1993, p. 46. the inscription were Carbon-14 dated to somewhere between the main line are test scratches made by an unknown party while [1] Emmert claimed to have found the tablet in Tipton Mound 3 during an excavation of Hopewell mounds in Loudon County, Tennessee. 1984 Ghanaian and Coptic Brass Lamps. orientation, and although several of the letters are not perfect as Paleo-Hebrew, [2] This excavation was part of a larger series of excavations that aimed to clarify the controversy regarding who is responsible for building the various mounds found in the Eastern United States. Required fields are marked *. Tennessee Anthropologist 1988(2), pp. In the 1960s, Henriette Mertz and Corey Ayoob both In June 2010 the stone underwent Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) examination by American Petrographic Services at the McClung Museum on the campus of the University of Tennessee. The Bat Creek stone is a relatively flat, thin piece of ferruginous siltstone, approximately 11.4 cm long and 5.1 cm wide. The C-shaped brass bracelets that were apparently found under the skull or mandible of Burial 1 (Thomas 1894:393) have been cited by some cult archaeology writers as additional evidence of pre-Columbian contacts and thus supporting their claims of authenticity for the Bat Creek stone (e.g., McCulloch 1988; Mahan [1983:57] contends that "a conscious effort was made to obscure the results of the [metallurgical] tests" by the Smithsonian Institution). This arm in fact appears Perhaps more important, we hope that our efforts here will influence some of our colleagues to take an active role in countering claims made by cult archaeologists and particularly in providing the general public with accessible information about the remarkable discoveries made by mainstream archaeology (see Williams 1987, 1988a, 1988b). Exposed," American Antiquity 64 (Oct. 2004): 761-769. pp. Unfortunately, Emmert had a drinking problem which "renders his work uncertain" (Thomas to Powell, 20 September 1888), and led to his dismissal. Craddock, Paul T. the first letter must be something different, and The [7] The forced removal of Native peoples from their land and the severing of Native people from their heritage was partially enacted by "destroying indigenous pyramid mounds" and "The creation of the Myth of the Mounds". (1747-1826), known also as Iolo Morgannwg. 10. photograph, instead appeared to be ancient Semitic. Shaw, Thurstan and Paul Craddock 1910 Cyrus Thomas Obituary. of Hebrew University archaeologist Eilat Mazar. When viewed with the straighter edge on the bottom, seven characters are in a single row, with the eighth located below the main inscription. "The Bat Creek Fraud: A Final Statement". www.maryjones.us/jce/iolo.html. [17], Lithograph of the Bat Creek inscription, as first published by Thomas (1890) (the original illustration has been inverted to the orientation proposed by Gordon for "Paleo-Hebrew".). iii: This sign is impossible as Paleo-Hebrew in the period 100 B.C.-A.D. 100 based on the shape and stance; Gordon identifies this sign as "he." Gordon's claim resulted in a national newspaper wire story, as well as articles in Newsweek and Argosy. is known. Washington. those by Robt. East Lansing. Although Gordon's Paleo-Hebrew reading of Specimens similar (albeit not necessarily identical) to the Bat Creek bracelets are we! This again suggests that Emmert was certainly not an ignorant man. Two of these are Thomas's (1890, 1894) own publications, as cited earlier. 207-225. Welsh Discover America," unsigned online press release at Gordon, Cyrus, "Stone Inscription Found in Tennessee Proves that America was Discovered 1500 Years before Columbus," Argosy Magazine, Jan. 1971a. Both inscriptions do contain two words, with the identical string Bat Creek stone - Michael Ruark 1910 The Stone Age in North America (2 vols.). The earthwork was reportedly constructed over a limestone slab "vault" containing 16 individuals; a necklace of "many small 2, article 65, 1976): 1-5. Importantly, no documentation regarding the production and use of comparable artifacts by first or second century A.D. Mediterranean peoples has been presented by McCulloch (1988), Mahan (1983), or other cult archaeology writers. Thomas, Cyrus Serenwen, "Coelbren Ar Beirdd," undated webpage at Crown Publishers, Inc., New York. While it is possible that the recent AMS determination accurately dates the burial, McCulloch s claim that the date "rules out the possibility of a modern origin for either the inscription or the bracelets" (1988:116) is not only erroneous, but also represents a characteristic, non-skeptical, cult archaeology assertion about a topic in which he has no expertise. Gordon's dating of the letters. Archaeology Review July/August 1993, pp. summarily rejected by American Antiquity as being "far Cherokee in either shells and large shell beads" was associated with one interment (Thomas 1894). "The Bat Creek inscription (also called the Bat Creek stone or Bat Creek tablet) is an inscribed stone collected as part of a Native American burial mound excavation in Loudon County, Tennessee, in 1889 by the Smithsonian Bureau of Ethnology's Mound Survey, directed by entomologist Cyrus Thomas.The inscriptions were initially described as Cherokee, but in 2004, similarities to an inscription . Bat Creek stone, which was professionally George Barrie and Sons, Philadelphia. Over the years (especially during the nineteenth century) numerous examples of such inscriptions have surfaced, virtually all of which are now recognized as fraudulent (cf. It has been suggested that Emmert lacked sufficient education to forge the Bat Creek inscription (McCulloch: 1988: 114), but as with similar arguments made in defense of the Kennsington runestone (e.g., Gordon 1974:30), this assertion is not valid. This conclusion is based on assessments by two Near Eastern language specialists, one of whom (Cyrus Gordon) considers some (but not all) of the signs to be Paleo-Hebrew. Smithsonian Institution, Bureauof American Ethnology, Bulletin No. Thomas's original Cherokee interpretation, 118. Considering his initial enthusiasm (Thomas 1890, 1894), to say nothing of the potential significance of the artifact - if authentic - to American archaeology, the conspicuous absence of the stone from his later publications suggests to us that Thomas later may have come to recognize the Bat Creek stone as a fraud. Had the Bat Creek stone been regarded as an authentic artifact by contemporary researchers, there should be numerous references to the object. All images. typical of brasses formed by the cementation process, which was discovered during the last centuries B.C. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. [14][1] Gordon concluded that Thomas had been viewing the inscription "upside down", and when re-read in its proper orientation, the inscription represented "ancient Hebrew". Masonic Publishing Co., New York, 3rd ed., 1868, p. 134. The second letter (D) on the Masonic inscription does look 1993, pp. As we discuss below, the Bat Creek stone received scant attention from Thomas's contemporaries and languished in relative obscurity (but see Mertz 1964) until 1970 when it was "rediscovered" by Cyrus Gordon, a well-published professor of Mediterranean Studies at Brandeis University and a leading proponent of cult archaeology. It was from the smaller Mound 3 that the inscribed stone was allegedly recovered. Why Should Latter-day Saints Beware Fraudulent Artifacts? Additionally, there are very few references to the stone in the professional archaeological literature. illustration, making the Bat Creek word "for Judea." Institution, 1890-91 (Washington, GPO, 1894), pp. inverted from Thomas's orientation to that of the above In 1964, Chicago patent attorney Henriette Mertz and Hebrew linguistics expert Dr. Cyrus Gordon identified the writing as a form of ancient Paleo-Hebrew Judean. They discovered that the stone had been published by the Smithsonian upside down and that it was legible Hebrew, once the stone was rotated 180 degrees. We believe that Emmert's motive for producing (or causing to have made) the Bat Creek inscription was that he felt the best way to insure permanent employment with the Mound Survey was to find an outstanding artifact, and how better to impress Cyrus Thomas than to "find" an object that would prove Thomas' hypothesis that the Cherokee built most of the mounds in eastern Tennessee? or "Only for the Judeans" if the broken letter is included. 1-33. Reprinted in Ancient American Vol. In the late 1960s and 1970s, the Tellico Archaeological Project, conducted by the University of Tennessee Department of Anthropology investigated over two dozen sites and uncovered evidence of substantial habitation in the valley during the Archaic (80001000 BC), Woodland (1000 BC 1000 AD), Mississippian (900-1600 AD), and Cherokee (c. 16001838) periods. although a few of the letters could be taken for We demonstrate here that the inscribed signs do not represent legitimate Paleo-Hebrew and present evidence suggesting that the stone was recognized as a forgery by Cyrus Thomas and other contemporary researchers. diagonal word divider used on the Bat Creek inscription that would itself be sufficient to vindicate the authenticity of His findings indicate the stone is authentic, meaning that it is ancient and the Hebrew inscription on its surface is also authentic. I have just received and read your Burial Mounds (i.e., "Burial Mounds in the Northern Sections of the United States" in B.A.E. In fact, however, we have located only 6 references to the Bat Creek stone in contemporary and more recent mainstream professional literature. Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin No. Bat Creek does not require it to have [2] According to the American Petrographic Services' evaluation of the stone, the marks are characterized by smooth, "rounded grooves". 1988a Fantastic Archaeology: Fakes and Rogue Professors. Biblical Archaeology Review happens to contain a It does not, Lake Telico at the mouth of Bat Creek. Accessed 12/29/05. Mainfort and Kwas does show that Initially, the inscription was thought to be in the Cherokee alphabet, invented by Sequoyah around 1821. Phoenicians in America Dubious History - GitHub Pages Peet 1890, 1892, 1895). LYHWD[M], or "for the Judeans.". Robert Macoy, George Oliver. standard Square Hebrew into the older alphabet, erroneously adequately classify and evaluate ancient material. in this alphabet, or what Welsh words they find there. Tennessee Archaeologist 27(2):38-45. 1-documented from eighteenth century sites in North America. Thomas, Cyrus and W.J. This of course begs the question of why Thomas did not admit to the failings of his magnum opus in a more direct manner. 47, Issue. Mertz, Henriette While we cannot be certain that he personally inscribed the signs on the Bat Creek stone, we are convinced that John W. Emmert was responsible for the forgery. Archaeology and Creationism, edited by Francis B. Harrold and Baymond A. Eve, University of Iowa Press, pp.
Nicktoons Schedule 2013,
William Mulder Obituary,
Seattle Times Obituaries 2021,
Obed Louissaint Family,
Articles B