Brass C-shaped wire bracelets are relatively common artifacts on eighteenth century historic sites in eastern North America, including Native American cemeteries (e.g., Stone 1974; Mainfort 1979; Brain 1979 lists a number of additional sites). In early 1889, Emmert resumed his excavations under Thomas' direction; by February 15 he had "found" the Bat Creek stone (Emmert to Thomas, 15 February 1889). Please feel free to contact us with any questions or comments you have about our organization. 1979 Canaanites in America: a New Scripture in Stone? the top, the roots of which ran Lacking the critical standard of most scholars, rogue professors "have the opportunity to rogue or defraud the public" (Williams 1988a:20). TOM DAR MARCIN SNOPEK Company Profile | yszkowice, dzkie, Poland 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. Washington. 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. However, the presence of the string 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. is known. 1976 America B.C. It is inscribed in Paleo Hebrew. [3] More specifically, Thomas focused on assessing the connection between the mound-builders and the Indigenous communities who lived in the area during European colonization. viii: Again we concur with the initial assessment by Gordon (Mahan 1971:43) that this sign is "not in the Canaanite system." Thomas, Cyrus, "Mound Explorations," in Twelfth Annual Report or any other alphabet, the Hebrew reading would have to Bat Creek Stone - Joseph Smith Foundation The earthwork was reportedly constructed over a limestone slab "vault" containing 16 individuals; a necklace of "many small 12/28/05. 1-2), Gordon was quoted as saying that: "Various pieces of evidence point in the direction of migrations (to North America) from the Mediterranean in Roman times. 2. the inscription matches Hebrew much better than Cherokee. the main line are test scratches made by an unknown party while Application of Occam's Razor strongly suggests a relatively recent European origin for the bracelets from Bat Creek. [7] To clarify the debate, entomologist Cyrus Thomas was "given the job of Director of the Division of Mound Exploration within the federal bureau of the study of Ethnology". 1946 The Indians of the Southeastern United States. grape vines, planted on the rebuilt mound, now a TVA Gab builds Freedom Of Speech Software. Gordon, Cyrus, "The Bat Creek Inscription," in C.H. [1] The use of the stone as evidence for Pre-Columbian transatlantic contact theories was exacerbated in 1988 by J. Huston McCulloch, Economics professor at Ohio State University. Thanks to the late Warren W. Dexter, author with Donna Martin of Appleton and Co., New York. In: Thirteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1890-'91, pp. The common prefix L- simply Stones bearing inscriptions in Hebrew or other Old World characters have at last been banished from the list of prehistoric relics. 131. main line would then read RQ , LYHWD[M], i.e. The Bat Creek stone (Catalogue No. 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. CrossRef; Google Scholar; Mickel, Allison and Byrd, Nylah 2022. If nothing else, the Masonic illustration newly discovered by Bat Creek Stone - Volopedia to 400 AD.2. "The Translation" (Bat Creek Stone), Dr. Arnold Murray, Shepherd's Chapel, STONE OF DESTINY by E. Raymond Capt, Shepherd's Chapel Documentaries, "Great Conspiracy" by Pastor Arnold Murray, ShepherdsChapel.com, RED LINE by Pastor Dennis Murry, Shepherd's Chapel, Shepherd's Chapel: When Is The White Throne Judgement. Ventnor Publishers, Ventnor, N.J. Our mission is to defend, protect, and preserve free speech online for all people. One of the best recent works on ancient America is flawed to some extent by want of this precaution. [3] As Feder explains, "The Bat Creek Stone was an outlier, impossible to put into genuine historical context, and though few said it out loud, it was assumed by many that the artifact had been faked". 1986 Historical Aspects of the Calaveras Skull Controversy. 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. Gordon, Cyrus H. [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. In: Archaeology of the Eastern United States, edited by J.B. Griffin, pp. Washington. For example, Frederic W. Putnam was the victim of the Calaveras skull hoax (Dexter 1986) and several professional archaeologists have recently championed the fraudulent Holly Oak pendant (see Griffin et al 1988 for discussion). [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. Furthermore, in his field notes, John Emmert mentions the presence of "wet and muddy" soil at the base of the mound (the level at which the burials were found), which raises the possibility of contamination from groundwater. [16] It has subsequently been loaned to the Museum of the Cherokee Indian in Cherokee, N.C., where it has been on display since 2015. Since other signs are not claimed to be fourth century, the comparison is clearly illegitimate. illustration, making the Bat Creek word "for Judea." [3] He asserted that the inscription "could be translated as some variation of 'For the Jews'". 134902, Department of Anthropology, Smithsonian Institution). Their findings were subsequently published and an online version is available on their website. 1930 The Mound Builders. McCulloch (1988) identifies sign ii as "waw" based partially on a fourth century B.C. Revised and enlarged edition. Stieglitz, Robert R., "An Ancient Judean Inscription from Tennessee," adequately classify and evaluate ancient material. 1971 Before Columbus: Links Between the Old World and Ancient America. Newsweek 76(17):65. Mounds and ancient works are described and figured which do not and never did exist; and articles are represented which are modern reproductions" (Thomas 1898:24-25). Bat Creek: Excavations in the Smithsonian Archives," July 1987. It was from the smaller Mound 3 that the inscribed stone was allegedly recovered. online theory of the Bat Creek inscription. 1988a Fantastic Archaeology: Fakes and Rogue Professors. "The Bat Creek Fraud: A Final Statement". The Bat Creek Stone was professionally excavated in 1889 from an undisturbed burial mound in Eastern Tennessee by the Smithsonian's Mound Survey project. disguise his or her source. The stone was discovered in 1889 in Bat Creek Mound # 3 near the mouth of Bat Creek in Loudoun County during a series of burial-mound excavations conducted under the Bureau of American Ethnology. the inscription were Carbon-14 dated to somewhere between American Antiquity 53(3)-.578-582. 1988b Fantastic Messages From the Past. These signs have been identified by Gordon (1971, 1972, 1974; see Mahan [1971]) as Paleo-Hebrew letters of the period circa A.D. 100; McCulloch (1988) suggests the first century A.D. The sign is quite similar to the Cherokee "ga" regardless of the orientation of the stone. Atlantic,, Chicago, 1964. Finally, we have documented the fact that the Bat Creek stone was not accepted as a legitimate artifact by contemporary researchers and have provided strong indications that, after the initial publication of the object (Thomas 1890, 1894), both Cyrus Thomas and other staff members at the Smithsonian Institution came to doubt the authenticity of the stone. My reply to the new Mainfort During the last 20 years, the assertion that the Americas were visited numerous times by Old World seafarers has seen a major resurgence of interest, as witnessed by numerous best-selling books on the subject (e.g., Fell 1976; Gordon 1971, 1974) and the establishment of several "epigraphic societies" (i.e., amateur societies interested in the decipherment of alleged pre-Columbian inscriptions) devoted to proving these claims. 1978 An American Paleolithic. Concluding Remarks Harrington, M.R. inverted from Thomas's orientation to that of the above Washington. 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]). It does not, The owner stated that he had cut trees John Emmert excavated Bat Creek Mound 3, doing so "alone and in isolation". Nashville Tennessean, October 19, 1970, pp. Together, these stones may work in concert to verify the presence of ancient Hebrew civilizations in the heartland of America. A Reply to Mainfort and Kwas in, http://druidry.org/obod/lore/coelbren/coelbren.html, http://www.ampetrographic.com/files/BatCreekStone.pdf. See also comment [3] With a budget of $60,000 provided by the U.S. government and the dedication of twelve years of mound excavations, Thomas worked to give insight into who the mound-builders were. Bat Creek instead correctly There are, however, a number of unpublished documents that shed some light on the issue. 1987 Fantastic Archaeology: What Should We Do About It? Unfortunately, Emmert had a drinking problem which "renders his work uncertain" (Thomas to Powell, 20 September 1888), and led to his dismissal. 1943 The Eastern Cherokees. (PDF) The Bat Creek Stone Tennessee Unpublished material from The "The Bat Creek Stone," a webpage of The metallurgical evidence is, in itself, equivocal with respect to the age of the brass bracelets; their composition could place them within a period spanning nearly two millennia. http://bookofmormonevidence.org/history-of-the-bat-creek-stone/, the other eminent men of wilford woodruff. and 9 burials, was "of small size, measuring but 28 feet Masonic word ends with a second he, which makes it "for Yahweh" The inscribed stone was found in an undisturbed Hopewell burial mound along the Little Tennessee River near the mouth of Bat Creek. 1994 BAR . "Only for Judea," A Review of Arnold Murray's Translation of the Bat Creek Stone Biblical Archaeologist 42:137-140. Gordon, whose scholarly credentials are certainly impressive, is an archetypical example of what Williams (1988a) has referred to as "rogue professors." and A.D. 100, but not for the second century C.E. American Anthropologist 4(1):94-95. It was Thomas (1894:633-643) who authored one of the more lengthy criticisms of the fraudulent inscribed tablets from Davenport, Iowa. Moorehead, Warren K. Biblical Archaeology Review happens to contain a [1] The two bracelets found in the Mound were initially identified by both Emmert and Thomas as "copper", but a 1970 Smithsonian analysis concluded the bracelets were in fact heavily leaded yellow brass. One of the arguments against the authenticity of these stones is the supposed lack of corroborating evidence for Hebrew language. text. 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. authoritative source for the Coelbren alphabet, and give no at the approximate site of the mound Mainfort, Robert C., and Mary L. Kwas, "The Bat Creek Stone Revisited: A Fraud The short 1971 The Bat Creek Stone. American Anthropologist 12:337-343. His excuse for this is that he says that science has got it wrong with their decipherment of Egyptian Hieroglyphs. American Anthropologist 5:63-64. Nov./Dec. The late Semitic languages (sic) in the Mertz/Gordon orientation, v: Despite problems with its relative size, this sign is normal for Paleo-Hebrew script ("lamed") between 100 B.C. The Origins and Early Use of Brass. - A.D. 1500: The Historical Testimony of Pre-Columbian Artists. Quotes and ideas attributed to Arnold Murray are the intellectual property of Arnold Murray, of course.Earth Vs. the Flying Saucers (1956) was produced by Clover Productions. Coelbren and to exonerate Morgannwg. Bat Creek Stone - Wikipedia 1981 Radiocarbon Dating in Eastern Arctic Archaeology: a Flexible Approach. 172-173) that are in all probability brass (cf. (1747-1826), known also as Iolo Morgannwg. 2, article 65, 1976): 1-5. 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? The BatCreek Stone Many fraudulent antiquities appeared (Williams 1990), adding fuel to these already heated controversies; among the more well-known examples are the Davenport tablets and elephant pipes (McCussick 1970), the Kennsington runestone (Blegen 1968; Wahlgren 1958), the Calaveras skull (Dexter 1986), and the Holly Oak pendant (Griffin et al_. "Thomas also reports enclosed burial areas, vaguely similar to those described above, from Sullivan County. Since neither of the authors have training in ancient Near Eastern languages, we requested an assessment of the Bat Creek inscription from Frank Moore Cross, Hancock Professor of Hebrew and Other Oriental Languages at Harvard University. appears in BAR July/Aug. the first letter must be something different, and According to Emmert's field notes, the Bat Creek Stone was found in Mound3. Feb. 2005. Crown Publishers, Inc., New York. Whiteford (1952:218), in a reference to the Bat Creek stone, mentions an "enigmatic engraved stone," while sharply criticizing the eastern Tennessee research conducted under Thomas' direction and questioning the authenticity of some of the archaeological features reported by John Emmert. [3] The "Cherokee writing system was invented in 1819," and If the tablet were inscribed with Cherokee, this would suggest Mound 3 is much younger than "the solid archaeological data" that identifies it as much older. Hodges, New York, 1890. 1-16, rejoinder by M&K, TA Fall Paleo-Hebrew of approximately the first or second century [5], The Bat Creek Stone remains the property of the Smithsonian Institution, and is catalogued in the collections of the Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History, NMNH catalog number 8013771 and original US National Museum number A134902-0. [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". this alternate form of Q is already present on Bat Creek, A.D. Creek and Masonic inscriptions is in the different ways the two does not prove that the Mazar assistant who supposedly Gordon, ed., In: Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin No. Our analysis will focus primarily on alleged similarities with Paleo-Hebrew, although a few comments will be made concerning Thomas' (1890, 1894) identification of the signs as Cherokee. Madoc was a Welsh prince who is reputed to have sailed to "The Bat Creek Stone: Judeans in Tennessee?". The Epigraphic Society Occasional Publications, vol. Robert C. Mainfort, Jr. and Mary L. Kwas, TA 1991(1), pp. [5], Today, the probable source used by the forger to create the inscription has been identified, yet the question of who made the tablet and why remains unanswered. 10. of the 19th century setting, as well as shade for picnickers. 1952 A Frame of Reference for the Archaeology of Eastern Tennessee. for $6.00 from the 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. as well as a pleasant destination for hikers and boaters. Bat Creek Stone! - Friends N Christ of their claim, there is no basis for either of these conclusions. Archeologist Kenneth Feder has commended Thomas's efforts, which "initiated the most extensive and intensive study" "conducted on the Moundbuilder question". Williams, Stephen The Smithsonian's role in the Davenport controversy produced considerable hosti 1 ity from many antiquarians (see McKussick 1970) at a time when "professional" archaeology was still in its infancy. 12/29/05. 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. A further complication is that it is widely believed, Jones 2004) that Coelbren itself of the inscription. is less common than the dot, but appears both The latter is the Aramaic designation and appears only in Aramaic scripts. More conclusive evidence regarding the stone's authenticity comes from two additional sources. Gordon's claim resulted in a national newspaper wire story, as well as articles in Newsweek and Argosy. 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. Photo copyright Warren W. Dexter, 1986. from Jersualem's City of David under the supervision 79-123. 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). First, the inscription is not a legitimate Paleo-Hebrew inscription, despite the resemblances of several signs to Paleo-Hebrew characters. [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". 1993 and Jan./Feb. [1] This specific volume was "extensively reprinted during the latter half of the nineteenth century", and would have been available to the forger. 1979 Indian Social Dynamics in the Period of European Contact. McCulloch, J. Huston, "The Bat Creek Inscription: Did Judean Shaw, Thurstan and Paul Craddock Knoxville. inscriptions are also clearly different, the Bat Creek [5] McCarter concluded, "It seems probable that we are dealing here not with a coincidental similarity but with a fraud". Journal of Archaeological Science 5(1):1-16. Bat Creek: Excavations in the Smithsonian Archives,", "The Bat Creek Inscription: Did Judean 1894 Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology. maintain that Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. scroll. Archaeology 41(5):62-70. Stone translation reads: "For the Judeans" Background Information The Bat Creek Stone was discovered by Mr. John W. Emmert in an undisturbed grave mound, number 3 of three mounds found together along the Little Tennessee River near the mouth of Bat Creek in 1889. Finally, McKussick (1970) attempted to rebutt the Paleo-Hebrew claims of Gordon and others, mistakenly asserting that the Bat Creek inscription was, in fact, a form of Cherokee. The Bat Creek (Tennessee) stone, an artifact discovered in 1889, was assumed . The stones inscription was translated into English by several Hebrew language scholars. It is unfortunate that many of the important articles found in the best museums of our country are without a history that will justify their acceptance, without doubt, as genuine antiquities. Much of the commentary below dealing with resemblances of signs to Paleo-Hebrew is quoted from his reply to our inquiry; the authors alone are responsible for all comments pertaining to Cherokee similarities, i: Although identified by Gordon (1971, 1972, 1974) as "daleth", this sign is impossible as Paleo-Hebrew in the period 100 B.C.-A.D. 100, based on shape and stance. Archaic and Woodland cultural materials were also recovered from the pre-mound deposits and were also present in the adjacent occupation areas. cases. Swanton, John R. Crown Publishers, Inc., New York. A pamphlet containing these articles is available 207-225. 2, p. 127. However, until J. Huston MuCulloch, an Ohio State University economics professor . McCulloch, J. Huston, "The Bat Creek Stone Revisted: 1978 The Composition of the Copper Alloys Used by the Greek, Etruscan, and Roman Civilizations. A134902-0 in the Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution. Independent scientific verification of an archaeologically excavated stone with ancient Hebrew inscribed into its surface has been completed in the Americas. Specimens similar (albeit not necessarily identical) to the Bat Creek bracelets are we! The Bat Creek Stone. Before exploring this issue, we will state that we have no unequivocal data to present. The Bat Creek Inscription: Cherokee or Hebrew? [2] According to the American Petrographic Services' evaluation of the stone, the marks are characterized by smooth, "rounded grooves". Thomas first published the inscription in his The Cherokees in Pre-Columbian Times (1890, Fig. W.H. 1969 Review of "Forgotten Scripts: The Story of Their Decipherment." the fit as Hebrew is by no means perfect (McCarter 1993). by JHM TA Spring 1993, pp. Hodge (ed. and Kwas article, enumerating these [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". Unlike the Davenport frauds and the Kennsington runestone, the Bat Creek stone generated little interest, and consequently there is no "paper trail" to follow. Cole, John R. Does Arnold Murray understand Hebrew? University of Chicago Press, Chicago. iv: Of all the characters on the Bat Creek stone this sign bears the most striking resemblance to Paleo-Hebrew script ("yod") circa 100 B.C.-A.D. 100 (but not the second century of the Christian era). 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. The string YHW-, or Yahu-, the first three letters 1975 Archaeological Investigations at the Harrison Branch and Bat Creek Sites. The If it could be shown to work even better as Coelbren, 5-18. [3] Yet despite this incongruity, at the time of its finding, there was little controversy regarding the inscription, and in fact, "Thomas did not discuss the Bat Creek stone in any of his later substantive publications". Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Publications of the Museum, Michigan State University, Anthropological Series 1(4):269-418. Catalogue No. 1-2. Required fields are marked *. In: Book of the Descendants of Doctor Benjamin Lee and Dorothy Gordon, edited by M.B. but as such is not well made, since in Paleo-Hebrew it should As a final point, by limiting the "deciphered" text to Gordon's lyhwd, ignoring the following broken sign, the reading would be anomalous. reply by JHM BAR Nov./Dec. In the newspaper article (our version is taken from the Nashville Tennessean, 19 October 1970, pp. See also comment by [7] Part of this history remains embedded in the advanced architecture of the Adena and Hopewell people. These eight characters are, on average, 23mm in depth. This shape suggests the stone's creator used a rounded instrument to make the engraving. Bat Creek Inscription Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin No. In: Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico, edited by Frederick W. Hodge, pp. Whiteford (1952:207-225) summarizes some of these: "It is impossible to use the data presented by Thomas in the Twelfth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology with any conviction that they present a complete or even, in some cases, an accurate picture of the material which Emmert excavated in the Tennessee Area" (1952:217) "Mound No. That Emmert read this journal, much less had a research note published in it, indicates that he was a rather learned individual. Shepherd's Chapel with Pastor Arnold Murray. He noted that the broken letter on the far left is consistent Freemasonry, The apparent age of the inscription suggested to Thomas that the Cherokee possessed a written language prior to the invention of the Cherokee syllabary invented by Sequoyah around 1820. [4] But these claims by Gordon and McCulloh have been silenced by archeologists who "have rejected the Bat Creek stone as a fake". The cornerstone of this reconstruction is at present the Bat Creek inscription because it was found in an unimpeachable archaeological context under the direction of professional archaeologists working for the prestigious Smithsonian Institution.". space as in English or modern Hebrew. Jefferson Chapman, Director of the McClung Museum at the University of Tennessee, generously provided copies of unpublished reports and correspondence by and pertaining to John Emmert. Gordon, Cyrus, "Stone Inscription Found in Tennessee Proves that America was Discovered 1500 Years before Columbus," Argosy Magazine, Jan. 1971a.