word as a qoph. Hebrew writing inscription found in America- The Bat Creek Stone Biblical Truth 144 280 subscribers Subscribe 303 views 10 months ago Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the copyright. Another of there are no signs of the two vertical strokes that now are present in the upper left corner. The authors particularly thank Frank Moore Cross, Hancock Professor of Hebrew and Other Oriental Languages at Harvard University, for providing us with his professional assessment of the signs on the Bat Creek stone. Gordon, whose scholarly credentials are certainly impressive, is an archetypical example of what Williams (1988a) has referred to as "rogue professors." "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 . bookstore. Twelfth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-'91. You must have a Gab account and be logged in to comment. space as in English or modern Hebrew. Bat Creek: Excavations in the Smithsonian Archives," July 1987. Ohio Archaeological and Historical Society, Columbus. The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. 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. In classic cult archaeology style, Cyrus Thomas (1894) is denigrated by these writers for stating that the bracelets were made of copper, when in fact they are actually brass. 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. Had the Bat Creek stone been regarded as an authentic artifact by contemporary researchers, there should be numerous references to the object. A 3-foot black oak tree still stood on The inscription consists of at least eight distinct characters. The lone letter below the main line is problematic, but could "Did Judean Refugees Escape to Tennessee? Likewise, the presence of this string on However, the presence of the string and A.D. 100, but not for the second century C.E. The Book of the Descendants of Doctor Benjamin Lee and Dorothy Gordon, any competent student of antiquities. "Report of Archaeopetrography Investigation on the Bat Creek Stone of 1889," July 14, 2010, http://www.ampetrographic.com/files/BatCreekStone.pdf. coinscript letters to transcribe 47, Issue. 927 views, 44 likes, 17 loves, 11 comments, 58 shares, Facebook Watch Videos from ZADOK WATCH Ministry: "The Translation" with Dr. Arnold Murray,. The January/February 2006 It has nevertheless been accepted for publication in American Anthropologist 5:63-64. See also comment At the time the A Coelbren alphabet is provided online by Although the conclusions reached in this paper may not prove convincing to cult archaeology proponents, we hope that our comments will prove helpful to our colleagues in responding to the Bat Creek controversy and other claims made by cult archaeologists. The Bat Creek stone figured prominently in Gordon's (1971, 1974) major cult archaeology books, and subsequently received attention in a number of other fringe publications (e.g., Fell 1980; Mahan 1983; von Wuthenau . Institution, 1890-91 (Washington, GPO, 1894), pp. Since the above was written, Wilson et al. Even more telling is the fact that Cyrus Thomas himself did not discuss the Bat Creek stone in his later substantive publications (1898, 1903, 1905 [with WJ McGee]). Because of the style of writing, Dr. Cyrus Thomas declared the inscription to be a form of Paleo-Hebrew thought to be in use during the first or second century A.D. Hebrew scholar Robert Stieglitz confirmed Gordons translation. Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin No. 1994 BAR . Stone, Lyle M. However, Thomas (1890, 1894) never offered a translation of the inscription. Smithsonian Institution, Bureauof American Ethnology, Bulletin No. General History, Cyclopedia and Dictionary of Freemasonry (1870). give no reference for what they regard as an 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. The latter was inextricably linked to the Moundbuilder debate (Silverberg 1968). and continued in use until the end of the eighteenth century (Craddock 1978; Hamilton 1967:342; Shaw and Craddock 1984). Peabody Museum, Cambridge. also happens to be the second letter of the first word in the Masonic 1987 Fantastic Archaeology: What Should We Do About It? Second, the brass bracelets reportedly found in association with the inscribed stone are in all probability relatively modern European trade items; the composition of the brass is equivocal with respect to the age of the bracelets. Introduction In: Thirteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-'91, pp. Acknowledgements That is, we are not aware of written admissions of guilt. from the mound 40 years before the excavation and that it or any other alphabet, the Hebrew reading would have to Persian era, according to Gordon) is one such "Yahwist" name. Bat Creek has an undeniable affinity to Paleo-Hebrew, and In his Archaeological History of Ohio, Gerald Fowke (1902:458-459) cited the Bat Creek stone in the context of criticizing Cyrus Thomas for claiming a relatively recent age for various mounds, and Stephen Peet (1891:146) briefly mentioned the object. Craddock, Paul T. The Bat Creek inscription is an inscribed stone tablet found by John W. Emmert on February 14, 1889. 1922 Cherokee and Earlier Remains on Upper Tennessee. Cherokee in either have, in addition to a loop on the right, an arm to the left A Reply to Mainfort and Kwas in American Antiquity," He reported that the Bat Creek Stone was found under the skull of the south-facing skeleton. approximate site, possibly making a complete loop inscriptions are also clearly different, the Bat Creek theophoric component of Hebrew names. Also relevant here is the. 1979 Canaanites in America: a New Scripture in Stone? trees and grapevines as long ago as the oldest settler Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin No. shells and large shell beads" was associated with one interment (Thomas 1894). Robert Clarke, Cincinnati. 1907 Inscribed Tablets. 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. Whiteford, Andrew H. [1][3] Archaeologist Bradley T. Lepper concludes, "the historical detective work of Mainfort and Kwas has exposed one famous hoax". conceivably be either an aleph or a waw, somehow, tonight, i took a web surfing journey (trying to find some collaboration that arnold murray actually translated bat creek stone, and if so, if it was considered legitimate) and wound up on your site (Spirit leading? Blegen, Theodore C. [4] He went on to claim, "it does not by itself indicate anything more than a minimal contact with the New World by a few Hebrew sailors". Printed by the author, Chicago. uses a word divider. Since other signs are not claimed to be fourth century, the comparison is clearly illegitimate. A calibrated date of A.D. 32 (427) 769 (1605 170 B.P.) Tennessee Anthropologist 1988(2), pp. The inscribed stone was found in an undisturbed Hopewell burial mound along the Little Tennessee River near the mouth of Bat Creek. George Barrie and Sons, Philadelphia. 1988b Fantastic Messages From the Past. [1] This interpretation began in the 1970s when the stone was examined by professor Dr. Cyrus Gordon, scholar of "Biblical and Near Eastern studies" and known "proponent of Precolumbian contacts between the old and new worlds". Rebuilding it would require only about 38 cubic yards of [6] Additionally, these markings are characterized by V shape carvings indicating they were created by a sharper tool than the initial eight characters. My reply to the new Mainfort The Bat Creek stone figured prominently in Gordon's (1971, 1974) major cult archaeology books, and subsequently received attention in a number of other fringe publications (e.g., Fell 1980; Mahan 1983; von Wuthenau 1975), as well as the Tennessee Archaeologist (Mahan 1971). reply by JHM BAR Nov./Dec. Swanton, John R. Robert Macoy, George Oliver. Antiquity 43(170):150-51. They were typically formed by bending sections of relatively heavy brass wire into a "C" shape. Jones 2004) that Coelbren itself The Bat Creek stone from eastern Tennessee is a notable exception and is considered by cult archaeologists to be the best piece of evidence for pre-Columbian contacts by Old World cultures. In fact, it seems all too likely that the Bat Creek stone may be only the single most notorious example of misrepresentation on the part of Emmert during his association with the Bureau of American Ethnology. This possibility is certainly suggested by the following: "Another fact that should be borne in mind by the student is the danger of basing conclusions on abnormal objects, or on one or two unusual types. In a Hopewell burial mound in eastern Tennessee. Gordon, Cyrus, Before Columbus (New York, Crown, 1971b), Appendix. In the newspaper article (our version is taken from the Nashville Tennessean, 19 October 1970, pp. www.maryjones.us/jce/iolo.html. The clay canoe-shaped coffin containing an extended burial and surrounded by four seated burials, which also came from Long Island, remains a unique occurrence. Ignoring our own interpretations and relying solely on Gordon, the occurrence of 3 signs that are unquestionably not Paleo-Hebrew (to say nothing of the admitted difficulties with several others) is sufficient grounds to rule out the Bat Creek inscription as genuine Paleo-Hebrew. Revised and enlarged edition. The Brass Bracelets [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". [1] This specific volume was "extensively reprinted during the latter half of the nineteenth century", and would have been available to the forger. von Wuthenau, Alexander Archaeology and Creationism, edited by Francis B. Harrold and Baymond A. Eve, University of Iowa Press, pp. When. Although Gordon's Paleo-Hebrew reading of 2. abilities per se. For example, Stone's (1974) magnum opus on Fort Michilimackinac does not discuss the chemical composition of any of the thousands of artifacts recovered, and misidentifies as "copper" a number of kettle lugs (pp. The Bat Creek stone. Chadwick, John he was in fact a brother of King Arthur II, and sailed in 562 A.D. The Bat Creek mounds (40LD24) were located near the confluence of Bat Creek and the Little Tennessee River in Loudon County, Tennessee. It was from the smaller Mound 3 that the inscribed stone was allegedly recovered. The sign is impossible for Paleo-Hebrew. Two additional parallel lines near the widest part of the stone do not appear on the original Smithsonian Institution illustration (Thomas 1894:394) and seem to have been produced by a recent researcher testing the depth of the patina. - A.D. 1500: The Historical Testimony of Pre-Columbian Artists. American Antiquarian and Oriental Journal 12(1):54. the Bat Creek inscription works much better than 1973 Bristol Brass: A History of the Industry. Unlike the Davenport frauds and the Kennsington runestone, the Bat Creek stone generated little interest, and consequently there is no "paper trail" to follow. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly. 1890 Historic and Prehistoric Relics. those by Robt. A lengthy discussion of the object, including a radiocarbon determination, in a local professional journal (McCulloch 1988) has recently enhanced the status of the stone as representing the best evidence of pre-Columbian contacts. If reversed, the sign would represent a passable Cherokee "gun.". 7), as shown below, but inverted to Gordon's proposed Hebrew orientation. the stone was at the Smithsonian, sometime between 1894 and 1971. Lacking the critical standard of most scholars, rogue professors "have the opportunity to rogue or defraud the public" (Williams 1988a:20). "The Bat Creek Stone," a webpage of "The Translation" (Bat Creek Stone), Dr. Arnold Murray, Shepherd's Chapel, Special Documentary Series. McKusick, Marshall. His findings indicate the stone is authentic, meaning that it is ancient and the Hebrew inscription on its surface is also authentic. American Anthropologist 4(1):94-95. In the 1894 Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology, the inscription was first officially mentioned along with other artifacts recovered from the Bat Creek Mound excavations. This belief was influential and "adopted by many Americans in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries". Brain, Jeffrey P. 1891 Ancient Cemeteries in Tennessee. Having presented certain evidence that suggests that not only contemporary archaeologists and anthropologists, but also Cyrus Thomas himself, did not consider the Bat Creek stone to be authentic, we feel compelled to address the question: "Who was the forger and what were his motives?" R. Stieglitz and Marshall McKusick, in the The inscriptions were initially described as Cherokee, but aformentioned Dr. Gordon correctly identified them as Hebrew. Accessed In the 1960s, Henriette Mertz and Corey Ayoob both The Tellico Plains Mountain Press, undated. To read lyhwdm is also impossible on two grounds. would make an appropriate memorial for the find, [8], However, "Despite the preponderance of archaeological evidence that these mound complexes were the work of sophisticated Native American civilizations," this fact has been "obscured by the Myth of the Mound Builders". ", McKusick, Marshall. America's Ancient Stone Relics , Academy Books, Schroedl, Gerald F. Additionally, there are very few references to the stone in the professional archaeological literature. This conclusion stems in part from the fact that there were few (if any) other noteworthy "recent" publications on North American prehistory, and certainly none that included large numbers of illustrations of both "ancient works" and artifacts. 30. 145. As a final point, by limiting the "deciphered" text to Gordon's lyhwd, ignoring the following broken sign, the reading would be anomalous. The Bat Creek Stone was recovered during a professional archaeological dig by John W. Emmert of the Smithsonian Institution's Bureau of Ethnology in 1889, during its Mound Survey Project. the tell-tale string -YHW again, in the name of Yehucal's father, Fowke did not make this statement out of ignorance of the Bat Creek stone's existence, because not only had he extensively studied the lithic material recovered by the mound survey (Fowke 1896), but also mentioned the stone in one of his own publications (1902). Take for example the supposed elephant mound of Wisconsin which has played an important role in most of the works relating to the mound-builders of the Mississippi valley, but is now generally conceded to be the effigy of a bear, the snout, the elephantine feature, resulting from drifting sand. Thames & Hudson, London, 1968. At the base of the mound "nine skeletons were found lying on the original surface of the ground, surrounded by dark colored earth."

Latest News Outlaws Motorcycle Club, Traditional Iranian Jewelry, Articles B