The Newport Tower
Medieval stone tower ... in Rhode Island. Does it look like any other Colonial structure you've seen? Recent carbon dating of the mortar indicates 1400s construction date (see post below).
The Westford Knight Sword
Medieval Battle Sword ... in Westford, Massachusetts. Can anyone deny the pommel, hilt and blade punch-marked into the bedrock?
The Spirit Pond Rune Stone
Medieval Inscription ... in Maine, near Popham Beach. Long passed off as a hoax, but how many people know the Runic language? And how is it that some of the Runic characters match rare runes on inscriptions found in Minnesota and Rhode Island? Carbon-dating of floorboards at nearby long house date to 1405.
The Narragansett Rune Stone
Medieval Inscription ... in Rhode Island's Narragansett Bay. This Runic inscription is only visible for twenty minutes a day at low tide--is this also the work of a modern-day, Runic-speaking hoaxster?
The Westford Boat Stone
Medieval Ship Carving ... in Westford, MA. Found near the Westford Knight site. Weathering patterns of carving are consistent with that of 600-year-old artifact. And why would a Colonial trail-marker depict a knorr, a 14th-century ship?
The Kensington Rune Stone
Medieval Inscription... in Minnesota. Forensic geology confirms the carvings predate European settlement of Minnesota--so did Runic-speaking Native Americans carve it?
The Hooked X Rune
Medieval Runic Character ... on inscriptions found in Maine, Minnesota and Rhode Island. But this rare rune was only recently found in Europe. This conclusively disproves any hoax theory while also linking these three artifacts together.
Wednesday, June 25, 2014
Hooked X on Westford Knight Carving?
As part of the Westford Knight preservation project, Westford firefighter David Christiana, along with Shane Greenslade, recently thoroughly cleaned the Knight carving. While examining it, they noticed a small carving a few inches to the east of the blade of the sword that may be a mark commonly referred to as the Hooked X or Forked X. The carving appears to be weathered and at a depth comparable to the sword carving. On either side of the X can be found single dots (perhaps to frame it or mark it). Image attached, both with and without overlay (courtesy David Christiana). Anyone have any insights or comments?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I can't think of a scenario where some medieval visitors would carve a crude sword and a single symbol. If you are going to carve any symbols or runes, why not a full inscription? I know, the hooked X was a secret, masonic-like symbol, and the hooked X cognoscenti would know what it meant, but other, presumably hostile, others would not. OK, but a stretch. Also, it doesn't look to me like the X was carved in the same way as the sword, suggesting to me that they were not carved at the same time.
Hi Lynn. As much as I want this mark to be an authentic Hooked X, I agree we need to proceed cautiously on this. To update a bit, last week Scott Wolter was here to examine it. He concluded the mark was definitely manmade, very old, and carved using the same "punch" technique used to carve the sword and other parts of the artifact. He is going to return in the fall with more sophisticated equipment in hopes of providing a more detailed analysis. As for the "why" scenario, assuming the mark is authentic it looks to me like some kind of signature or mason's mark.
Studying the photo, the character looks more like an asterisk to me; and "x" character with another line through the middle. There seems to be a stave that comes off of the middle of the character and spans leftward. We definitely need to be careful before we start seeing hooked x's everywhere. If the hooked x is something special as suggested then it should look the same in all representations. How many extra lines can be added before a hooked x ceases to be a hooked x and becomes something else? And, frankly, trying to add more detail to a Templar Knight narrative every time two lines are discovered to intersect will lead to madness. I'm all for discovery, but as far as the Templar stuff goes....we have 2% supportable fact and 98% pattern recognition/speculation. I would prefer a more balanced ratio.
Anonymous:
I agree with your overall statement that these types of claims need to be properly and carefully vetted. But I think there are aspects to this mark that indicate a high probability of authenticity:
1. We just completed some high definition, 3D imaging of the carving that indicates the mark is probably an X with a single stave protruding from the upper right stem of the X--that is, a Hooked X. Further, this mark appears to be manmade and the weathering appears to be similar to that of the sword portion of the carving. I will update this preliminary finding when the imaging is fully studied and interpreted.
2. The orientation of the mark is perfectly consistent with the sword and the rest of the carving, as if it were some kind of signature or label at the bottom left of the carving--were it some random mark, it is likely it would not be oriented so precisely.
3. The mark is framed or set off by single dots on either side of the mark, as is often the case in other runic carvings. Again, it is unlikely these dots would be randomly occurring.
I agree we are not yet at 100% certainty on this, but I would argue we are well beyond the "98% speculation" you suggest.
Again, I will update as the data is downloaded, studied and interpreted.
Hi again, David. Same "Anonymous" here who posted the September 5 comment....
My advice....(as if I was anybody worth taking advice from)....sure, inform Scott Wolter about the discovery, but keep him away from data analysis and ask him not to give an opinion until this marking is authenticated or dismissed by another appropriate expert in the field not affiliated with the Templar stuff.
To support his Templar narrative he is in desperate need of an impartial third party to come in with some independent support for his ideas whether he's willing to admit it or not.
Hello Anonymous:
Actually, your advice is welcome and appreciated. The issue of impartiality is an important one and I can understand your concerns.
In any event, Scott Wolter was in Westford last week to examine the carving. He and another expert did a lot of 3D imaging, which will allow the carving to be examined and enhanced using various software programs. I am awaiting the results of this work.
It would be great if other "experts" were willing to spend time examining artifacts such as the Westford Knight, but my experience, unfortunately, has been that they can not be bothered. If you know of anyone, please let me know.
Dave
Post a Comment