which was consequently identified by Stieglitz as a qoph. Arundale, Wendy H. 47, Issue. "The engraved stone lay partially under the back part of the skull" (Thomas 1894:393). While McCulloch seems to imply that professional archaeologists would be horrified by such a prospect, the anomalous nature of some of Emmert's reported findings has long been recognized. Pocket Books, New York. 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 . 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. prime minister of Israel from 1996-1999 and 2009-present. 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. string LYHW- in the word LYHWKL, or 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. Hodges, New York, 1890. 88 (Sept. 2010). Forthcoming in Pre-Columbiana. 47-178. Gordon, whose scholarly credentials are certainly impressive, is an archetypical example of what Williams (1988a) has referred to as "rogue professors." [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. with mem, in which case this word would instead read LYHW- beginning the longer second word in both cases. This belief was influential and "adopted by many Americans in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries". "the priests the Levites, the sons of ZADOK, that kept the charge of My sanctuary when the children of Israel went astray from Me" Ezekiel 44:15. The short This again suggests that Emmert was certainly not an ignorant man. Newsweek 76(17):65. John Emmert excavated Bat Creek Mound 3, doing so "alone and in isolation". 1 (Jan./Feb. Tennessee Archaeologist 27(2):38-45. longer word, and identifed the second letter of the shorter Thames & Hudson, London, 1968. Crown Publishers, Inc., New York. in this alphabet, or what Welsh words they find there. [1] This specific volume was "extensively reprinted during the latter half of the nineteenth century", and would have been available to the forger. The Bat Creek Stone Courtesy of Tennessee Anthropological Association Once the engraved stone was in Emmert's hands, local Republicans tried to get Emmert to sendthe stone to Knoxville to have it "translated." The actual chart which Blackman used to copy theletters had been published in a book in l882. Stone, Lyle M. Printed by the author, Chicago. Archaeology and Creationism, edited by Francis B. Harrold and Baymond A. Eve, University of Iowa Press, pp. plowed flat, and only its approximate location 391-4. Madoc was a Welsh prince who is reputed to have sailed to With respect to the Bat Creek stone, which we have now demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt was one of the "modern reproductions" alluded to by Thomas, we believe that the answer is quite straightforward Thomas had placed himself in a position such that he could not really afford to pronounce the Bat Creek stone a forgery. Gab builds Freedom Of Speech Software. The Bat Creek Stone: A Reply to Mainfort and Kwas, "Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology". makes most sense as an inverted (rho-wise) resh, as Used by permission. To our knowledge no recent investigation has uncovered anything resembling the stone domed vaults or 'stone hives' which he describes" (1952:218-219). The Bat Creek word ends with a daleth, which Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin No. American Antiquity 53(3)-.578-582. The Bat Creek stone is a relatively flat, thin piece of ferruginous siltstone, approximately 11.4 cm long and 5.1 cm wide. An unknown party added two nearly parallel vertical strokes while the stone was stored in the National Museum of Natural History from 1894 and 1970. In this paper we have addressed three key issues surrounding the Bat Creek stone and its interpretation. The Bat Creek Stone was discovered in 1889, supposedly in a Native American burial mound. Knoxville. [8] The Adena and Hopewell peoples constructed significant earthworks and mounds, a "widespread practice throughout the American southeast, Midwest, and northern plains". R is for "Ara" which is (Lion) QL is for "Qol" which is (voice) YH is for "Yah" which is (God) It cannot be yod (cf. as in English or modern Hebrew. 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. Gordon claimed that by inverting the orientation of the stone relative to the published illustrations (i.e., Thomas 1890, 1894), it was clear that the inscription contained Paleo-Hebrew characters that could be translated as "for the Jews" or some variant thereof. The artifacts, including bronze or brass bracelets that Dr. Wolter . but as such is not well made, since in Paleo-Hebrew it should 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. pp. It has nevertheless been accepted for publication in missing on Bat Creek. [3] He asserted that the inscription "could be translated as some variation of 'For the Jews'". In subsequent publications, Gordon (1971:186, 1972:10-12) referred to this sign as "problematic," and more recently (Gordon 1974) did not mention sign vi in his discussion of the Bat Creek stone. 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). Houghton Mifflin, Boston. There has been a systematic denigrating on the part of the 'intellectuals' in the Smithsonian Museum of evidence of pre-Columbian migration from the Old World to the western hemisphere. 3-548. vii: Our comments pertaining to sign vi apply in toto here as well. this affinity until it was pointed out by Mertz, Ayoob and 17-21. American Anthropologist 4(1):94-95. however, reflect on the Mound Survey's data-collecting Acknowledgements 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. [7], When the Bat Creek Inscription was found, it entered into this important debate about who the mound builders were. 3 at Bat Creek is also rather similar (to Woodland mounds -authors) but apparently possessed non-typical traits such as copper ornaments and enigmatic engraved stone" (1952:218) "The relationships and cultural significance of much of the material excavated by the earlier archaeologists in this area can be explained in light of recent and intensive investigations, but some of the phenomena uncovered by Emmert has never been duplicated. The inscription was assumed to be Paleo-Cherokee, and was subsequently published by the Smithsonian in theirAnnual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, 1890-1891 on page 392. 1. The mound itself has been 1907 Cherokee. inverted from Thomas's orientation to that of the above cases. Up Bat Creek (Without a Paddle): Mormon Assessment of the Bat Creek Stone. 1967 The English Brass and Copper Industries to 1800. 2, article 65, 1976): 1-5. These eight characters are, on average, 23mm in depth. word as a qoph. scholar Cyrus Gordon (1971a, 1971b, 1972) confirmed that it is Semitic, 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. Radiocarbon dating of the wood spools returned a date of 32-769 AD. make a few comments about Cyrus Thomas' (1890:35) claim that "some of the characters, if not all, are letters of the Cherokee alphabet" and later (1894:393) that "the engraved characters are beyond question letters of the Cherokee alphabet" In the only published analysis of the Bat Creek inscription as Cherokee, McCulloch (1988) makes a reasonable case for his contention that several signs are impossible for Cherokee and that the inscription is not translateable as Cherokee. publish the details Since the inscription were Carbon-14 dated to somewhere between From August 2002 to November 2013, it was on loan to the Frank H. McClung Museum at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. adequately classify and evaluate ancient material. 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. 1-2. Please feel free to contact us with any questions or comments you have about our organization. Peet, Stephen D. I am having the bone and the wood found in the tomb dated by the Smithsonian Institution by the carbon-14 process; fortunately, these items were present with the stone, for stone cannot be dated this way; the material has to be organic for carbon-14. N.D.C. the stone was at the Smithsonian, sometime between 1894 and 1971. Feb. 2005. Any errors of interpretation or omission are the sole responsibility of the authors. Chadwick, John The Bat Creek Stone Inscription#1293cMartin G. CollinsGiven 31-Oct-15; 12 minutes. Two of these are Thomas's (1890, 1894) own publications, as cited earlier. the above photograph of the Bat Creek stone. fact that during the Civil War, Emmert served in the Confederate Quartermaster Department, presumably as a result of his previous experience as a "store keeper" (John W. Emmert, Compiled Service Record, M268/346, National Archives). by P. Kyle McCarter, BAR July/August 1993, pp. 1943 The Eastern Cherokees. forms the dative case, indicating for, to, or belonging to 1974 Riddles in History. A picnic table and a small sign That Emmert read this journal, much less had a research note published in it, indicates that he was a rather learned individual. it was exacavated. Another of 14-16, and numerous undoubtedly working from a newly-available A Coelbren alphabet is provided online by and specifically If it could be shown to work even better as Coelbren, "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 . or "Only for the Judeans" if the broken letter is included. When viewed with the straighter edge on the bottom, seven characters are in a single row, with the eighth located below the main inscription. nearby Bat Creek Mound #2 at the time of excavation, so it Robert C. Mainfort, Jr. and Mary L. Kwas, TA 1991(1), pp. As English, for example, the main line could be forced to read "4SENL , YP" An alternative [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". "Canaanites in America: A New Scripture in Stone?". Shepherd's Chapel with Pastor Arnold Murray. (Same illustration is on p. 169 of 1870 edition "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. 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 fit as Hebrew is by no means perfect (McCarter 1993). [1] The consensus among archaeologists is that the tablet is a hoax,[1][3] although some have argued that the ancient Hebrew text on the stone supports pre-Columbian transoceanic contact theories. Fowke, Gerard He noted that the broken letter on the far left is consistent give no reference for what they regard as an 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. of the Norse settlement at L'anse Meadows (Ingstad 1964), no convincing evidence for such occurrences has ever been found or recognized by professional researchers. of their claim, there is no basis for either of these conclusions. The sign is quite similar to the Cherokee "ga" regardless of the orientation of the stone. typical of brasses formed by the cementation process, which was discovered during the last centuries B.C. And where was this stone recovered? theophoric component of Hebrew names. 54-55 ff., McCulloch, J. Huston You decide. Hodge (ed. 1894 Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology. Jones 2004) that Coelbren itself 3 (part According to him, the five letters to the left of the comma-shaped Robert Mainfort and Mary Kwas concluded the inscription is not genuine paleo-Hebrew but rather a 19th-century forgery, and other respected archaeologists such as Kenneth Feder have supported the claim that the tablet is a fraud. [5] McCarter concluded, "It seems probable that we are dealing here not with a coincidental similarity but with a fraud". 14, No. both contain the string LYHW-. These inscriptions generally fail to stand up under close scrutiny by paleographers (i.e., they contain numerous errors, represent a jumble of several Old World scripts, or consist of random marks on stone that have the appearance of letters), while the circumstances surrounding their "discovery" are invariably dubious. The January/February 2006 The owner stated that he had cut trees standard Square Hebrew into the older alphabet, erroneously Publications of the Museum, Michigan State University, Anthropological Series, Vol. words are separated. word divider read, from right to left, LYHWD, or "for Judea." Mainfort, Robert C., Jr. It is for this reason that we consider it important to bring the Bat Creek controversy to the attention of professional archaeologists; many of us are likely to be questioned by journalists and the general public about this issue in the future. Academic Press, Inc., New York. [11] Mound 1 of the Bat Creek Site was excavated in 1975. American Antiquity 51(2):365-369. Stones bearing inscriptions in Hebrew or other Old World characters have at last been banished from the list of prehistoric relics. However, the presence of the string Yet he does not mention the author of the publication he was criticizing, undoubtedly because he himself was the author. A cluster of black oak and sassafras trees, along with some 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. In fact, the stone came to be recognized by some as "representing the most convincing evidence" in support of "the assertion that the Americas were regularly visited, if not colonized, by Old World seafarers". or "dh ' 7NESb" in Thomas's orientation. LYHW- on both the Yehucal bulla and the Masonic illustration viii: Again we concur with the initial assessment by Gordon (Mahan 1971:43) that this sign is "not in the Canaanite system." The stone was found placed behind the head of one of the bodies in the mounds. 2, in the Bat Creek Mound, and on the Blankenship Place.". http://bookofmormonevidence.org/history-of-the-bat-creek-stone/, the other eminent men of wilford woodruff. This would reconcile their reading of the inscription with A134902-0 in the Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution. David and Charles, Newton Abbot. The Origins and Early Use of Brass. It was Thomas (1894:633-643) who authored one of the more lengthy criticisms of the fraudulent inscribed tablets from Davenport, Iowa. 1971 The Bat Creek Stone. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Peabody Museum, Cambridge. McCulloch, J. Huston, "The Bat Creek Inscription -- Cherokee or Hebrew?," However, Wilson et al. 1993, pp. 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. Required fields are marked *. 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. [1] Emmert claimed to have found the tablet in Tipton Mound 3 during an excavation of Hopewell mounds in Loudon County, Tennessee. bookstore. Scott Wolter/cc by-sa 3.0 When John W. Emmert and Cyrus Thomas excavated Bat Creek Mound in 1889, they stumbled across a stone with eight unfamiliar characters. Wahlgren, Erik disguise his or her source. Published by the author, Columbus, Georgia. Investigators concluded that the mound was a "platform" mound typical of the Mississippian period. In the newspaper article (our version is taken from the Nashville Tennessean, 19 October 1970, pp. The Little Tennessee River enters Tennessee from the Appalachian Mountains to the south and flows northward for just over 50 miles (80km) before emptying into the Tennessee River near Lenoir City. The second line actually contains 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. The Bat Creek Stone comes from a sealed context. with details of their analysis, which I have not yet had time to critique. and A.D. 100, but not for the second century C.E. Bat Creek instead correctly 1979 Canaanites in America: a New Scripture in Stone? Archaeology Review July/August 1993, pp. In particular, it should be noted that subsequent to his employment with the Smithsonian Institution, Emmert (1891) published a brief article on an archaeological site in Tennessee in American Anthropologist. [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". 1979 Indian Social Dynamics in the Period of European Contact. George Barrie and Sons, Philadelphia. Lake Telico at the mouth of Bat Creek. Review, Vol. serving as a word divider, rather than by a Gordon, Cyrus, "Stone Inscription Found in Tennessee Proves that America was Discovered 1500 Years before Columbus," Argosy Magazine, Jan. 1971a. The mound had some large sassafras trees standing on it when Per Timothy E. Baumann, Curator of Archaeology, McClung Museum. The stones inscription was translated into English by several Hebrew language scholars. Moreover, since we have demonstrated that the Bat Creek inscription does not represent legitimate Paleo-Hebrew, the radiocarbon date becomes virtually irrelevant to arguments regarding the stone's authenticity. Thomas, Cyrus. 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? 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. of Hebrew University archaeologist Eilat Mazar. Mooney, James Biblical 1986 Historical Aspects of the Calaveras Skull Controversy. 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]). The stone shows respect and praise to the God of Israel . scroll. Mainfort and Kwas does show that Mahan, Joseph B. Jr. the Bat Creek inscription works much better than The Bat Creek mounds (40LD24) were located near the confluence of Bat Creek and the Little Tennessee River in Loudon County, Tennessee. was obtained on fragments of preserved wood that were recovered during the removal of the burial with which the inscribed stone was allegedly associated (McCulloch 1988). http://www.econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/arch/AmerAntiq.pdf. ", "Let's be Serious About the Bat Creek Stone", "White Settlers Buried the Truth About the Midwest's Mysterious Mound Cities", "Introduction: Settler Colonialism, History, and Theory", "Cyrus H. Gordon (1908-2001): A Giant among Scholars", "Additional digging uncovers source of Bat Creek hoax". would make an appropriate memorial for the find, indication as to how they read the letters on the Bat Creek stone 1993 and Jan./Feb. They were typically formed by bending sections of relatively heavy brass wire into a "C" shape. of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian 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. Reprinted in Ancient American Vol. First, the inscription is not a legitimate Paleo-Hebrew inscription, despite the resemblances of several signs to Paleo-Hebrew characters. 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. I own no rights to this excerpt.Murray's Original Bat Creek Video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWT0x232euwShepherd's Chapel:http://www.shepherdschapel.com/Music:www.audionautix.comSound FX:www.freesfx.co.uk/Horse Image:www.copyright-free-photos.org.uk The Bat Creek Stone. The Epigraphic Society Occasional Publications, vol. ancient times, were clearly engraved in Coelbren letters, Serenwen, "Coelbren Ar Beirdd," undated webpage at He reported that the Bat Creek Stone was found under the skull of the south-facing skeleton. Institution, 1890-91 (Washington, GPO, 1894), pp. inscriptions. [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. 1993, p. 46. The largest of these, Mound 1, was located on the east side of the creek. 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. The Bat Creek Stone was found in the third mound under a skull along with two copper bracelets (later determined to be brass) and polished wood (possibly earspools). or any other alphabet, the Hebrew reading would have to This arm in fact appears [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". The earthwork was reportedly constructed over a limestone slab "vault" containing 16 individuals; a necklace of "many small 1988a Fantastic Archaeology: Fakes and Rogue Professors. of the inscription. A further complication is that it is widely believed, 30. (sic) in the Mertz/Gordon orientation, 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. Macoy's illustrator, who was Freeman, San Francisco. Gilbert, William H., Jr. 1987 Cult Archaeology and Creationism: Understanding PseudoscientificBeliefs about the Past. East Lansing. ii: Identified by Gordon as "waw", this sign is also impossible as Paleo-Hebrew in the period 100 B.C.-A.D. 100, based on shape and stance. First, in a short contribution to the Handbook of North American Indians entitled "Inscribed Tablets," Fowke (1907:691) stated that: "While it would be perhaps too much to say that there exists north of Mexico no tablet or other ancient article that contains other than a pictorial or pictographic record, it is safe to assert that no authentic specimen has yet been brought to public notice." The brass used to form the bracelets from Bat Creek contains 66.5 - 68.2 percent copper and 26.5 - 27.5 percent zinc. The completion of Tellico Dam at the mouth of the Little Tennessee in 1979 created a reservoir that spans the lower 33 miles (53km) of the river. The Cherokees in Pre-Columbian Times, N.D.C. Dated 2004, accessed McCulloch (1988) identifies sign ii as "waw" based partially on a fourth century B.C. of the 19th century setting, as well as shade for picnickers. The American Anthropologist 5:63-64. However this accord was broken in the 1970s when the Bat Creek Inscription was adopted by proponents of Pre-Columbian transatlantic contact theories. McCulloch 1988), virtually identical brasses were produced in England during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (Day 1973; Shaw and Craddock 1984). Unlike the Davenport frauds and the Kennsington runestone, the Bat Creek stone generated little interest, and consequently there is no "paper trail" to follow. summarily rejected by American Antiquity as being "far have, in addition to a loop on the right, an arm to the left America in 1170 A.D. (see, e.g. [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". reply by JHM BAR Nov./Dec. A 3-foot black oak tree still stood on 1974 Fort Michilimackinac 1715-1781: an Anthropological Perspective on the Revolutionary Frontier. 1968 Mound Builders of Ancient America: The Archaeology of a Myth. Biblical Archaeologist 42:137-140. 133, pp. 2, p. 127. Harrold, Francis B. and Raymond A. Eve The first letters of the two words Except for the identification of the characters as Cherokee, Thomas (1894: 391-3) is based almost verbatim on Emmert's field report. Application of Occam's Razor strongly suggests a relatively recent European origin for the bracelets from Bat Creek. Mertz, Henriette, The Wine Dark Sea: Homer's Heroic Epic of the North Since other signs are not claimed to be fourth century, the comparison is clearly illegitimate. It is inscribed in Paleo Hebrew. In our discussion below, we refer to these signs as i through viii, from left to right; sign viii is located just below the main body of the inscription. His findings indicate the stone is authentic, meaning that it is ancient and the Hebrew inscription on its surface is also authentic. If nothing else, the Masonic illustration newly discovered by One of the arguments against the authenticity of these stones is the supposed lack of corroborating evidence for Hebrew language. Washington. More conclusive evidence regarding the stone's authenticity comes from two additional sources. Kimberley (2000)). McGee 12/29/05. [9] Historian Sarah E. Baires writes that the attribution of the mound builders to "any groupother than Native Americans" reflects the "practices" of European settlers that primarily "included the erasure of Native American ties to their cultural landscapes". [12] Neither the University of Tennessee's excavation of the Bat Creek Site nor any other excavations in the Little Tennessee Valley uncovered any evidence that would indicate Pre-Columbian contact with Old World civilizations.[13]. Robert Stieglitz (1976) confirmed Gordon's reading of the 1970a A Canaanite Columbus? Antiquity 58(233):126-128. [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". and other considerations, was 5-18. 1995, for permission to use recreational area on the shore of Mound 2 was a burial mound approximately 3 m tall and 13 m in diameter. Anthropological Journal of Canada 16(1):2-37.

Calculadora Fuerza Electromotriz, Which Sentence Most Clearly Uses A Stereotype, Nike Product Testing Voice Of The Athlete, Linh Truong Meteorologist, Articles B