More on the Fake Christian Amulet

From the Timesonline.uk My suspicion is that the real problem is that the amulet is unique. Because it doesn’t fit their understanding of the period, they are determined to believe that it cannot be genuine. Here's the original post. Christian amulet that ruined my life is not a hoax Andrew Norfolk September 22, 2008 The archaeologist who discovered a silver cross exposed by scientists last week as a Roman “hoax” says he is convinced that the find is genuine. Quentin Hutchinson has remained silent since he found the early Christian Chi-Rho amulet while excavating a 4th-century grave near the Somerset town of Shepton Mallet in 1990. It was initially regarded as the earliest evidence of a Christian burial in Britain and was hailed as one of the archaeological finds of the century. But after tests by experts at Liverpool University, which concluded that the silver was of 19th-century origin, it has now emerged that doubts about its authenticity were voiced almost from the moment it was found. Mr Hutchinson, 46, has never before spoken publicly about his discovery of the tiny cross on Sunday, July 15, 1990. But now he says that it has ruined his life and he wishes that he had never found it. His integrity was called into question soon after the find, and the suspicion that he had planted the cross himself ended his professional career. He denies playing any part in a hoax and maintains that it would have been impossible for anyone to plant the amulet without disturbing the soil. In the absence of such evidence, he is convinced that the cross could only have come to be underneath the right femur of the skeleton of a middle-aged man, possibly a priest, if it had been buried with its owner more than 1,600 years ago. He believes that the experts must reconsider because the find may yet prove to be of great importance. In the summer of 1990, Mr Hutchinson, then 28, had been an archaeologist for four years and was a member of Birmingham University’s Field Archeology Unit. It had been asked to conduct a dig at the site of a proposed £6 million warehouse development. What they uncovered, beside the Fosse Way was evidence of a large Romano-British settlement, with roadside buildings, workshops, agricultural enclosures and industrial workings. There were also three 4th-century cemeteries, one of which – where the graves lay east to west – was thought to be Christian. Mr Hutchinson was asked to complete the excavation of one grave, which had been left by a colleague with the upper half of the skeleton uncovered but the lower half still hidden beneath compacted soil. “I began lowering the grave fill. You can always tell, from subtle differences in colour and texture, if there has been a disturbance. In this case, the soil was very clean, very compact. It did not look to have been disturbed in any way. The site director [Peter Leach] had already looked at it with me. There was absolutely nothing to suggest that it had been tampered with.” When Mr Hutchinson reached the upper right leg bone, he noticed a fleck of black and a bead, embedded in the soil next to the bone. He gently removed a fist-sized clod of earth surrounding the object and lifted it out. He found himself holding a small silver cross, 45mm long, and 39mm wide. The bead had been the tip of one of its four points. Heart racing, he hurried to Mr Leach, who wiped the remaining soil from the small disc at its centre. This revealed the Chi-Rho marking, an early Christian symbol formed by superimposing the first two letters, X and P, of the Greek word Christos, “the anointed one”. He said: “I thought, ‘Oh my God, what have I found?’ It was a once-in-a-lifetime moment. Peter Leach said that nothing like it had ever been found in Britain. It was incredibly exciting.” Within days, word spread of the amazing find and Shepton Mallet seemed destined for fame as one of Britain’s earliest centres of Christian belief. Mr Hutchinson left Britain on a short holiday two months later. When he came back, his world fell apart. “My director called me into his office and told me that he had been asked by the British Museum to question my professional conduct because they were convinced that the amulet was a modern hoax.” Mr Hutchinson was asked if he had planted it. He angrily denied the accusation. The find remained, officially, genuine until last week’s tests but passion for archaeology – and trust in Britain’s archaeological establishment – left its finder many years ago. Shattered by the suspicions surrounding him, he resigned from the Birmingham team in 1991 and left the profession in 2000. He has subsequently worked as a teacher, in a post office and in a supermarket. He now wants a gathering of experts to thrash out the controversy. “I’m not an expert on Roman silver, so in that sense I can’t say whether the amulet is genuine, but what I do know is that it came out of an untouched grave. My suspicion is that the real problem is that the amulet is unique. Because it doesn’t fit their understanding of the period, they are determined to believe that it cannot be genuine. The truth is I wish I’d never found it, because it ruined my life.”

I Have a Problem with This Story...

From The Times Online.UK September 19, 2008 ‘Ancient’ Christian amulet exposed as modern hoax Simon de Bruxelles A silver cross regarded as one of the most important early Christian artefacts found in Britain is a modern fake, scientists confirmed yesterday. The Chi-Rho Amulet, which bears an early Christian symbol incorporating the first two letters of Christ’s name in Greek, was found in a 4th-century Roman grave near the Somerset town of Shepton Mallet in 1990. Tests carried out by Dr Matthew Ponting, from the University of Liver-pool, revealed that the silver used to make the cross is of 19th-century origin. The test, using inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES), examined impurities in the metal. It also established that silver used to make the cross and the pierced disc that bears the Chi-Rho inscription comes from two sources. Suspicion is focusing on protesters who opposed construction of a vast drinks warehouse on the site beside the Fosse Way, an Ancient Roman road. The discovery of the amulet 18 years ago caused a sensation in Shepton Mallet. An entertainment complex and a street were named after it and a replica was presented to George Carey (now Lord Carey of Clifton), who wore it at his enthronement as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1991. Marsh, deputy leader of the town council, said: “It’s like the magic has been removed from Shepton Mallet. I’m not sure there’ll be any need to change any names in the town but it’s a shame the myth of the amulet has now burst. “It was part of the town’s claim to fame, though the revelation that it’s a fake won’t come as a surprise to many people. When the amulet was first discovered it was felt it may have been placed there as a joke. But we’re still proud of Shepton and its Roman heritage.” Stephen Minnitt, acting head of the Somerset museum service, said: “Following detailed analysis of the Shepton Mallet amulet Somerset County Council can confirm that the artefact is almost certainly not the rare Christian artefact it was first believed to be. Experts are now 99 per cent certain the amulet is not genuine.” He appealed for the faker to come forward to solve the mystery. “It was deliberately planted. It didn’t get there by accident. There was a lot of local concern over the fact that the site was being destroyed and there was quite a lot of local opposition.” He said the hoaxer would not be punished. “There is no threat to them. They haven’t committed a crime or anything. It would be good to bring the story to a conclusion. We would be delighted if someone came forward and told us why and what happened.” The amulet is believed to have been copied from a genuine but little-known Roman brooch presented to the British Museum in 1954, implying a degree of specialist knowledge. The amulet was found in the grave of a man in one of 16 burial plots in the Roman cemetery. Peter Leach, who led the Birmingham University Field Archaeology Unit that carried out the excavation, said that he did not suspect any of his 40-strong team of planting the amulet. “There is absolutely no question it was anybody to do with the archaeological team,” he said. “I was there when it was found. There was never any doubt about its provenance as it was in a genuine Roman burial.“A local group might have had an agenda to place an object there in the hope that an archaeological find would stop the development.”

*******************************************

This cross was found at a bonafide archaeological dig in 1990. How the heck did it get there? Was it just left behind on the surface one night by a prankster and the next day the diggers showed up and said oh lo and behold, a new artifact? Hmmm..... So perhaps it was buried underground in - as it turns out - a 4th century Roman grave. Coincidence? And why did the people working on excavating this particular grave NOT NOTICE that the dirt had been disturbed? I mean, darlings, don't you think the dirt would have been disturbed if you were intent on burying an object in a grave that wasn't there originally??? How else could it have been done - was it shot into the ground with a gun? (That's a joke). So, you're brushing away on this grave for weeks and weeks (because that's what the "diggers" often use - brushes) and you don't notice any disturbance in the dirt at your dig that suddenly shows up overnight? Hmmm....