Researchers have determined that the Chi-Rho Amulet, found in Shepton Mallet in 1990, is a fake. When it was first discovered in a Roman grave eighteen years ago, it was thought to be the earliest Christian artifact ever found in Britain. Local residents were so excited by the discovery that they named an entertainment center and a street after it. But tests indicate that the silver in the amulet is of nineteenth-century origin.
Suspicion is focusing on protesters who were opposed to local development. Peter Leach of Birmingham University is quoted as saying: "A local group might have had an agenda to place an object there in the hope that an archaeological find would stop the development.” Link:
Times Online.
Britain, of course, has quite a history of producing fake medieval artifacts. Back in the nineteenth century two hoaxers, William Smith and Charles Eaton, churned out thousands of fake "medieval" metal objects. Once exposed, the faux artifacts came to be known as "Billies and Charlies." Now they're collector's items in their own right.
Comments
a hoax is something done to deceive or mock.
how are we deceived by a late C4th Ad Christian amulet found in a late C4th AD Christian grave?
How are we deceived by a Romano British artifact(???) found on a Romano British site?
I was told back in 1990 that the establishment did not want the amulet to be genuine.
So is the real hoax in telling the nation it is a fake and not proving it? Because someone then is deceiving the nation, we know who, we know why.
The faith of the deceased is mocked, the importance of the find is mocked.
the archbishop of Cantebury is mocked for wearing a copy. The locals are mocked and blamed for a crime that was never committed.
These experts have no idea who did it or why and have no intention of ever finding out, which is very convenient if there is no culprit. Britiush archaeology - you are a complete and utter disgrace.