Sunday, December 9, 2018

A Qualified Geologist’s Peer Review of Scott Wolter’s Geological Investigation into the Kensington Rune Stone.


Yesterday, I received an email from my recently retired acquaintance, John Parks, who lives in Texas and spends the summers with his wife and family in Wisconsin.  After reading his email I called, and we visited for a good while.  He relayed how he had read, yet again, in my most recent blog post a common theme of critics falsely claiming my geological investigation into the Kensington Rune Stone had not been academically peer reviewed.  John said he would be happy to be a guest blogger to address his own peer review of my work performed roughly a year ago.  John had long ago established himself as a more than competent geologist who would be fair, thorough, and impartial in his review.  I’ll let John talk about the peer review in his own words and I’m sure he’ll be happy to answer any reasonable and thoughtful questions:


First, let me introduce myself, my name is John Parks. Back at the end of January, 2016 I was reading through one of Scott’s blogs when the subject of his work not coming under the peer review process was the subject of much discussion and some criticism. At that point I volunteered my services to Scott to be part of the independent peer review process for his work. At least as part of the work that involved geology was concerned.


 After exchanging several emails and phone conversations we concluded that I might be of some assistance to the vetting process. Several months passed, but eventually, I had the opportunity to travel to Minneapolis and meet Scott and his wife Janet. We discussed several subjects of mutual interest including the possibility of me reviewing some of his research. At that time, I inquired if it could be possible to obtain the peer edited copies of the papers/research documents that were reviewed. Scott agreed, but indicated that the documents were in storage and could not retrieve them at that time. He said when he had the chance to pull them from storage, he would email them to me.


 Scott did just as he had indicated and sent me copies of his original research papers as well as copies of the peer reviewed copies with the comments by the various reviewers on them. There was a total of nine peer reviews that Scott sent. Prior to reviewing the comments by the reviewers, I read and reviewed the two papers that Scott asked me to evaluate. It was only after I had completed my review of the papers that I then read the other reviewers’ comments. 


The five paragraphs in quotes were included in the summary of the review that I sent to Scott. It is not the detailed review that I did. That was sent as a separate attachment to Scott.


 1. “Generally, the description of your analysis of the KRS covered the major points that needed to be addressed as to the physical characteristics of the KRS. Very good review. Your methodology of beginning with a macro description of the KRS and progressing through medium-scale elements of the stone, finally ending with finer-scale details at the mineral- and elemental-levels gives the reader a through summary of the details of the KRS and how you came to your conclusions.   

 2. “I thought that the analysis of the diagenesis of the minerology (micas) in the KRS was the strongest portion of your analysis of the KRS. It was based on well-documented, technical support, such as the numerous SEM photomicrographs that were utilized. The comparison of the weathering characteristics of the KRS and the tombstones added support to your hypothesis that the KRS carving was likely not a modern (1898) hoax.  


 3. “The figures in the copy of the report that I received were sometimes fuzzy and difficult to view the items being discussed in the captions. This may have been a poor copy of the original, not sure. As noted in my review of the paper, if you add more arrows (larger and/or more obvious) pointing to the objects being discussed in the text or captions, it would add to the reader's understanding what the text is describing.


 4. “In the text, on a couple of points relating to the runes themselves, you mention the possible intent of the KRS carver. While the statements may, in fact, describe the intent of the carver, they are conjecture and there does not appear to be enough physical evidence to support the interpretation (e.g. p4, point 5 – the tapering of the KRS for that end to be put into the ground and p28 referring to the same idea).    


5. “This is a good paper and gives the reader a balanced view of the physical description of the KRS. As well as support for the conclusions concerning the age of the carving of the runes.”


 

 I hope that this addition of at least one reviewer’s general evaluation of Scott’s analysis of the geologic aspects of the KRS to the exchange of views contained within this blog might lead to some possible clarification of the peer review process that has been carried out on Scott’s analysis of the geology of the KRS.


 For those that are not aware of my academic and professional background I include below. This is an update to a portion of a reply on this blog from January 2016.


I shall begin with a little background about myself which would be in order, then, as well as at this time. I, like Scott, am a geologist and scientist. I received a MS Degree in Geology from the University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill, where I worked at the McCarthy Seismology Lab as a Research Assistant. Additionally, much of my graduate work was also spent in structural geology and igneous & metamorphic petrography. I studied at the Duke University Marine Geophysical Lab where I did my research for my MS thesis. Additionally, I taught for 3 years at Austin Peay State University as an Instructor of Geology. I did field research on aspects of geomorphology (co-authored several publications). My undergraduate degree was in Art with majors in Art History & Painting. I have retired after spending over 35 years at ExxonMobil in exploration and production geology and geophysics. While at ExxonMobil, in addition to my duties as Technical Team Lead and Supervisor, I taught classes in advanced stratigraphic concepts, as well as regional and field development geology.


While this is not a double-blind review (meaning that both the reviewer and the author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa throughout the review process), as some readers had mentioned should have occurred, my analysis of the papers were still an unbiased review. Both positive and negative comments were given. I did not agree with all that Scott indicated in the papers, but the science behind the geology, especially the analysis of the diagenesis of the minerology (micas) in the KRS, I considered to be the strongest portion of his analysis of the KRS (from a geology standpoint). I made no evaluations on the runes themselves from a linguistic standpoint (of which I am not qualified to comment on, other than in regard to weathering processes).

Friday, November 9, 2018

Cremona Document Provides Independent Corroboration of Sinclair Journals


Foreword by Scott F. Wolter

Imagine for a minute, that you played an integral part of investigating, and eventually solving, one of the most controversial historical mysteries the world has ever known.  Then imagine, after fifty years finally figuring out that you had been intentionally kept in the dark about the truth of what you had been intimately involved in.  Now imagine, that person who kept you in the dark was a childhood friend you knew your entire life.  Then, nearly a decade after the death of that close friend, they finally reveal the entirety of the mystery you had helped them solve.  To this day, Donald Ruh will tell you he still doesn’t understand everything involved with this story and there could be more pieces yet to be revealed.  Even the lifelong friend who brought Don along on this incredible journey is shrouded in mystery as I found out first-hand upon being pulled into this story in 2006.

Donald Ruh points to the carving of a goose carved into a large block of sandstone on Hunter Mountain. 


I first became involved after being asked to perform laboratory work on an inscribed stone discovered in the Catskill Mountains.  Early on in my own research, it was clear Dr. William Jackson was the key person involved in the story.  Don warned me not to dig into his deceased friend’s past and not long after an Internet search, I received and ominous note telling me to stop the searches that warned could harm Dr. Jackson’s still living family members.  Despite this warning, my search found nothing about Dr. Jackson.  Regardless, I still wanted to know more about this man and the details about how he came to possess these explosive documents, so I reached out to Don.  Don was very protective of his friend and eventually, after earning his trust, all my questions about this shadowy figure in Don’s past would be answered and shared in a highly personal and moving way, in this book.

At the time of the writing of this book, several aspects of the Cremona Document had not yet been investigated.  However, the veracity of the contents of the two-centuries-old copy of a twelfth century document had been established decades earlier by Dr. Jackson, with the assistance of Don and other colleagues.  The Cremona Document tells the story of the Templar knights who entered the extensive cave system under the walled city of Jerusalem shortly after they had captured the Holy Land.  The story tells what the six Templars found beneath the ancient city and the subsequent mission decades later to a temple in “Onteora.”  The stories are told first-person by the Templar knights who made the discoveries, and in the deposition of a historically known Templar knight, Sir Ralph De Sudeley, who led a flotilla decades later to recover ancient first century scrolls hidden in what is now the Catskills of New York.

Ironically, it was Don Ruh’s discovery of a brass device on the shores of the Hudson River, while fishing with Dr. Jackson and other friends in 1968 that started this amazing adventure.  Hidden inside a garden ornament that originated on Bannerman Island, the devise contained inserts and artifacts, inscribed with Theban script that eventually led Dr. Jackson to purchase the Cremona Document in Italy, before it could be donated to the Vatican and disappear forever.  Dr. Jackson invited Don to join him on a diving expedition off the coast of Newfoundland that led to the discovery of an ancient shipwreck. Unbeknownst to Don, it was from the twelfth century.  Convinced the stories in the document were true, Dr. Jackson asked Don and other colleagues to help search the Catskill Mountains for stone structures mentioned the document. They were all on one mountain where ancient artifacts were hidden.  Don recounts these numerous expeditions on Hunter Mountain, and elsewhere, which are as memorable as they are historic.


The brass seal etched with Theban symbols onto the surface, was discovered hidden inside a decorative lawn ornament on the shores of Bannerman Island, on the Hudson River, by Donald Ruh, in 1968.  This artifact, and the artifacts found inside it, started the incredible journal that has lasted half a century. 


Dr. Jackson died in 2000 and before his death he planned to pass on his research, his artifacts, and the remaining documents to his lifelong friend who never questioned his intentions or motives.  Don had always been a loyal friend and was the only one who took a genuine interest in his archaeological hobby and the only one who was deserving of receiving this knowledge.  In 1994, fate would play a curious hand when Dr. Jackson sold the Cremona Document to an agent directly connected to the Vatican.  However, this was far from the end of the story.  In fact, it was simply the end of an important chapter in a very long book. 


This photograph of the Cremona Document is the List of Subjects page written in Theban text that includes two Hooked X's on line seven. 


It took twenty-three years before Don assembled the many pieces of the story left by his friend that can only be told by the person who lived it.  The final and most important pieces didn’t arrive until 2017. It arrived in a package from Europe, only days before I arrived at Don’s home to review the material he had received.  We examined the pages that Dr. Jackson had retained that were key to understanding the rest of the document - likely now in Vatican hands.  If so, Dr. Jackson pulled the ultimate prank on the institution he so despised by leaving his trusted friend Don with the “Keys to the Cadillac,” in the form of numerous potential Templar treasure sites.

Arguably, one of the greatest adventures I have ever experienced all happened in one day during our climb up Hunter Mountain on July 1, 2009.  In the hotel room the night before, I was amazed by Don’s photographic memory as he recalled details of the discoveries he, Dr. Jackson, and others made in the 1970s and 1980s during numerous expeditions into the Catskills which ultimately led to Hunter Mountain.  Our hike up the mountain the next day, and to another site a few miles away, led to the incredible discovery of not one, but two inscribed stones directly connected to this amazing story.  These stones led to other adventures that resulted in many important revelations, as well as many unanswered questions.  Rarely do answers like these ever come but incredibly in 2017, another envelope from Europe arrived unexpectedly at Don’s door that held the answers to our nearly decade old questions.

There have been many times as I have spent time with Don, the artifacts, and the documents, that I sat back and marveled in amazement at what has been revealed to me that relates to my previous research and discoveries.  So much of it provides powerful evidence supporting my thesis of multiple pre-Columbian expeditions by the medieval Knights Templar order to North America, both before and after the putdown by Pope Clement V and the King of France in 1307.  Not only does the Cremona Document support that research, but it also introduces twelve new examples of the Hooked X™ symbol that connects directly to the Knights Templar and later traditions that embraced Templar ideology and philosophy.


Don Ruh and I during a visit in October of 2018. 


It has been almost a decade for me, but for Don a half a century passed before all the pieces to this immensely complicated jigsaw puzzle finally fit together.  You will be amazed by the stories told both by Donald Ruh and his lifelong friend whose life was shrouded in mystery both in life, and in death.  I am proud to call Don my friend, and honored to write the forward for this history-changing book that will leave an important and proud legacy for both of these men.

For those interested in purchasing Don's fascinating book that corroborates many aspects of Diana Muir's book about the Earl Henry Sinclair's first journal, and those to come, please follow the attached link:  https://www.lulu.com/shop/search.ep?keyWords=The+Scrolls+of+Onteora&type=

Tuesday, October 30, 2018

The Lost Templar Journals of Prince Henry Sinclair – Vol. 1


The following is the foreword I wrote for the first of multiple volumes of the journals of Earl Henry Sinclair and the journals of the next fourteen generations of Sinclair's (5) and Wemyss/Weems (10) clans.  The story that unfolds is nothing short of incredible: 

"The personal journal entries you are about to read are the first of several installments that are either the greatest story ever told, or the greatest hoax ever sold. Very strong words indeed, but in this particular case they are more than appropriate. When first contacted about the journals of Earl Henry Sinclair and his descendants, I scoffed and deleted the emails. The third attempt included photos of one of the journal pages, and one of a lambskin map - they got my attention. The email included Diana Muir’s phone number and I gave her a call. We quickly hit it off and after hearing about what she claimed to have, I invited her to Minnesota so I could introduce her to several friends; including several Freemasons to try and vet her story.

After the meeting, Diana shared the journal entries with me and after reading them I was convinced of one thing; if there was even one chance in a hundred that they were authentic, they had to be vetted thoroughly and carefully, for they were potentially far too historically important not to. Over the course of the next two-plus years, Masonic scholar and past Grand Master of Masons of Minnesota, Terry Tilton, and I dove into vetting the journals with a vengeance.  It quickly became apparent that if this were a hoax, it was a masterstroke of deviant genius that had to have involved several individuals with a vast array of knowledge in various disciplines to pull off.

If authentic, the history these documents contain is explosive and sheds important new light on many different aspects of history, as well as the individuals named in them over the course of just over four centuries (1353 to 1770). This first of three personal journal books - reportedly written by Earl Henry Sinclair - reveals many previously unknown details about his life and activities from the time he was eight years old until he was fifty-one in 1395. Some of the most interesting and important aspects of the entries in this volume include the following:
The Scottish Templars led by the Sinclair’s traveled to the “Western Lands” numerous times including Earl Henry’s father, William Sinclair II, who made the trip a total of seven times himself. Impossible to comprehend at first glance, the idea of frequent trips to North America becomes all the more plausible given the “Cremona Document” tells of Templar voyages coming to North America as early as 1179.  It seems a hoaxer would be more conservative in the number of trips knowing the context of currently accepted beliefs of historians that the Templars no longer existed in the mid to late Fourteenth Century, let alone ever made it to America.  The fallacy here was the idea of no pre-Columbian European contact has no factual supporting evidence and numerous documents, artifacts, and sites found in North America directly refute this erroneous narrative.

The young Earl Henry made numerous mentions of both old and new religious holidays and made numerous mentions of the ‘Great Goddess” who was central to his clan’s spiritual beliefs. These entries are also consistent with my own research into the true ideology of the Templars. The importance of the Goddess to Templars is also supported by numerous mentions within the Cremona Document. Their veneration of the Goddess lies at the heart of the success of the Templars secret medieval activities in North America - because they shared a similar ideology as the indigenous people they constantly interacted with and eventually assimilated with. Only a deeply knowledgeable person on a team of hoaxers could insert these aspects into the entries in such convincing fashion. Beyond myself and very few others, we know of no others who understand the complicated Goddess ideology of the Templar leadership.

Here is where one the most important realizations of this journal begins to emerge.  In multiple entries between 1373 and 1388, Earl Henry refers to what can only be a fugitive faction of medieval Knights Templar.  The “Templari” being sheltered in the Wemyss Caves are clearly supported by Earl Henry, the “Brethren”, and other important Scottish families most likely for their similar ideological beliefs and their service to King Robert the Bruce at Bannockburn in 1314.  These entries suggest, along with Earl Henry’s mention of Hiram Abiff, the apparent evolution of the strict asceticism and celibacy of medieval Templarism into an early version of speculative Freemasonic ideals.  The surviving Templars who had escaped to Scotland after 1307 were protected by the ruling families were no longer celibate after being outlawed by the Roman Catholic Church and monarchies in England and France.  Earl Henry and the Craft’s steadfast support of the “Templari” begs the question was this when and where the rites and rituals of medieval Templarism merged into speculative Freemasonry actively present in Scotland in the Fourteenth Century.  If so, this is a huge revelation and deserves to be researched in much greater depth for its potential impact on modern day Freemasonry is profound.        

The revelations of Earl Henry’s initiation into Freemasonry are detailed to the point that only someone who had experienced initiation into Templar rituals themselves could have written them, if this was a hoax. While not impossible, the likelihood a Freemason was involved in such a hoax is extremely remote given this type of nefarious activity goes against Masonic teachings. If authentic, these entries have enormous historical ramifications for Freemasonry that will be studied for many years to come.
Arguably one of the most important aspects of the later journal entries involves Earl Henry meeting the Italian navigators Nicolo and Antonio Zeno. One of the most controversial documents known from this period is called the “Zeno Narrative.” A descendant in the family reportedly restored letters that were alleged to have been written by Antonio Zeno in the Fourteenth Century after having been torn up by the family member as a child. The document reports numerous factual events, most of which are consistent with the information provided by Earl Henry upon meeting them. One important fact in the journals that differs from restored Zeno documents (which state that Nicolo and Antonio were brothers) is that according to Earl Henry, they were father and son.
For me personally, the most important entries by far deal with the “thirty men” that we learn came to the Western Lands to “…establish a settlement” in the spring of 1358.  It can only be referring to the party that carved the Kensington Rune Stone in 1362. The implications of the Kensington party entries are huge and appear to confirm nearly all the claims about the artifact I have made over the past eighteen years. While admittingly hopeful that the journals are authentic, due in no small part to these specific entries, it is also these entries that give me the most pause. They almost feel like they were written as a trap. On the other hand, would a hoaxer so blatantly pander to a known proponent like me by suggesting the Kensington inscription carver’s name? My collective research has proven the artifact authentic which means somebody connected to the Templars created it and the story that unfolds in these journals fits perfectly with what we already know.

I would remiss if I didn’t talk about my experiences with Diana over the past two and half years. While I am immensely frustrated with her decision to throw the original journals away, which were most likely copies of the originals, along with the lambskin map at a point of personal crisis, there is no mistaking she has done a phenomenal job of translating the Latin (and Old English in later journals) into modern English. She admits to likely making a few errors which would be suspicious if she hadn’t, but it appears she has done a masterful job of putting the entries of multiple individuals into readable modern text. Exactly how good of a job might never be fully known. However, three pages do survive from the years 1354, 1663, and 1731. Future testing of those pages should yield more information about Diana’s work and what these surviving pages really are.

I have also traveled to Tennessee to vet Diana’s story about where and how she came into possession of the journals. The archival building where she said she got them does exist and contains valuable information about the people who lived in that area at the time of, and after, the Revolutionary War and about the individuals who wrote the last six journals to be published in the future. So far, everything Terry Tilton, Diana Muir, and I have been able to vet has proven to be true and correct. However, many of the over 300 individuals mentioned by name in the journals, whether they were Templar knights, crew members, or Freemasons, have been impossible to determine. In fact, our inability to find any record of many of the individuals is exactly what should have happened. Even for Freemasons like Terry and I, who are allowed access to certain Masonic records non-Masons cannot, we were still not able to find confirming documents for many of the names listed. This begs the question of how and why a forger would make up so many names of people known to exist and others we can find no record of. That we still have many questions about these individuals actually supports authenticity of the documents. If all the names could be readily found by us, they could also be found by a forger. Details about this own research into our investigation of the journals will be presented in the future.

I invite the reader to decide for themselves if these captivating entries represent what amounts to the first installment of one of the greatest stories in the history of the world, or the most complex and secretive work of deception ever assembled. Whatever the eventual outcome, these works are nothing less than sheer brilliance."



For those people interested in a signed copy at half the publisher's price you can order directly from the author at http://dianamuir.blogspot.com/ 

Sunday, August 12, 2018

Will Francis Be The Last Pope?

Dear Readers: I have to apologize for not posting comments or responding to those comments for the past week.  It was 100% my fault.  The comments received have been posted and I will respond to each comment shortly.  Again my apologies... 

History Channel aired an interesting two-hour documentary tonight that I participated in as a commentator about Saint Malachy O'Morgair (1094-1143).  Born in Armagh, Northern Ireland, he became the Archbishop in Armagh, and first met Bernard de Clairvaux at Clairvaux Abbey, where he stayed while in France during his pilgrimage from Ireland to the Holy Land.  So impressed with the asceticism and "perfection of the religious life" of the monks at Clairvaux under Bernard, they became close friends where Malachy expressed a desire to join the abbey as a monk.  Bernard advised him to return to Ireland to establish a monastery there. (Konemann, Page 256, 2006) In 1142, he established the abbey of Mellifont in the Boyne Valley roughly a 45-minute drive north from Belfast.

What most people don't know is on the granges, or lands, of the Cistercian monks at Mellifont were three megalithic ritual temples archaeologists today call "passage tombs" for the dead.  The most famous of these is a UNESCO World Heritage Site called Newgrange.  In fact, these incredible structures believed to be over 5,000 years old, were ancient observatories the monks actually excavated in the twelfth century.  Having visited the site in 2012, it is quite clear Newgrange, which has a long stone-lined tunnel with three niches at the center, captures the light of the rising sun to the southeast on the Winter Solstice.  What few people know is the alignment of the tunnel and the deepest most niche are most accurately aligned to the planet Venus at sunrise on the shortest day of the year.  This fact is further evidenced by the eight "X's" carved in base relief into the slab of stone directly above the entrance that allows the light of Venus, and the sun, to enter the tunnel on the solstice.  Eight is the number of Earth years it takes for the planet Venus to make the five-pointed star when viewed from Earth astronomically.  It is a deeply sacred number to the Cistercians and many other cultures who embrace the "Hooked X" ideology of Monotheistic Dualism.

You might be asking what does all this have to do with the Malachy Prophecy?  The simple answer is the Cistercians, and Saint Malachy, were deeply versed in astronomy/astrology and understood the concepts associated with Precession of the Equinoxes.  Essentially astronomer priests, they received ancient knowledge passed on through initiation and ritual about the 26,000 year long cycle of the twelve primary constellations of the zodiac when viewed from Earth.  Possessing this knowledge was how Malachy knew something profound was to occur in 2012, the same year cultures like the Mayans, who also understood and venerated astronomical precession, knew the old "Great Year" would end and the new "Great Year" would begin.  It's quite possible, if Malachy in fact made the 2012 predictions, the presence of the ancient megalithic observatories on the granges at Mellifont may have had something to do with that knowledge and the prophecies.


Stained glass image of Saint Malachy at the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception on Temple Street in Sligo, Ireland. Photo by Andreas F. Borchert, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=45864216  


The octagonal shaped lavatorium that sits on eight columns with Romanesque arches survives somewhat intact at the Cistercian monastery of Mellifont that was founded by Saint Malachy in 1142.  



Author Alan Butler and I stand in front of the over 5,000 year-old megalithic structure called Newgrange in the Boyne Valley of Ireland.  This structure has a diameter of over 300 feet and is one of three such ancient observatories that capture the light of the setting sun, and the planet Venus, on the winter solstice. 



Outside the entrance to the stone-lined tunnel that leads to three chambers at the center of the  structure are large curbstones with ornate carvings of spirals and other symbols.



Above the opening that is the entrance into the tunnel is a large slab of stone with eight "Xs" carved in base relief.  The primary winter solstice alignment is for the planet Venus which the eight carved "Xs" appear to be consistent with.

Sunday, March 18, 2018

Does a 1939 aerial photograph prove the Newport Tower is a Templar Church?


This 1939 aerial photograph of Touro Park shows the clearly visible, round nave of the Newport  Tower, and what appears to be the rectangular shape of a chancel running east-west on the east side.  More info about this photos can be found at the following link: https://www.facebook.com/pg/Phippsburg-History-Center-114338978642314/photos/?tab=album&album_id=1600659460010251  


Researcher Patrick Shekleton, noticed what appears to be a rectangular imprint in the grass on the east side of the Newport Tower.


This schematic of the Temple Church, in London, England, shows the round nave and rectangular chancel facing east that is eerily similar to what appears in the 1939 aerial photograph.



In a Gothic cathedral, such as this schematic of Reims Cathedral in France, the nave of the church is rectangular in shape and faces to the west.


This schematic of Cambridge Round Church in Cambridge, England, show an identical layout the Newport Tower likely had when first constructed in the early 1400's, minus the north and south aisles.  Image can be found at the following link: http://www.victorianweb.org/victorian/art/architecture/salvin/1d.jpg


Cambridge Round Church was built by the Knights Templar, circa 1130, and exhibits the exact same design and architecture as the Newport Tower.  Several factual pieces of evidence are consistent with the Newport Tower having a one-story ambulatory like the ones at both Cambridge and Temple Churches in England, in addition to several others such as the Charola in the round nave in the Templar church in Tomar, Portugal.  


Inside the church at the Convent of Christ Castle in Tomor, Portugal, is the beautifully illuminated, two-story octagonal tower that sits on eight heavy columns called the Charola.  It was built by the Knights Templar in 1161, and its design also mirrors the Newport Tower. 


The areas in red were built by the Templars in the 1160's and include the two-story octagonal Charola that served as an architectural archetype for the Newport Tower in Newport, Rhode Island.    


All eight stone columns in the Newport Tower have a slate slabs at the base, and at the top that serves a structural function as a capstone ledge to support the wooden trusses of the roof for the first-story ambulatory.


Clear evidence of what was a wooden, first-story ambulatory can seen with the capstone ledges atop all eight columns, at approximately eight feet above grade (yellow arrows), and the where the roof met the exterior tower wall roughly four feet above the ledges (red arrows).


This test pit was dug during the salvage archaeological dig at the Newport Tower, reportedly in the area of the rectangular shape seen in the 1939 aerial photo.  Could the layer of stones, which do not appear to be a natural glacial geological feature, be remnants of the foundation for the rectangular structure?

Recently, friend and fellow researcher, Patrick Shekleton, forwarded a 1939 aerial photograph of Touro Park and wrote that he noticed what looked like a rectangular shape image running east-west on the east side.  I didn't have to look too hard and sure enough, there did appear to be a rectangular shape in the grass apparently reflecting the imprint of the footings of structure that was once attached to the round tower.  Pat and I discussed the image and the his posting of the discovery on the Phippsburg, website.  While it is certainly possible the rectangle could be from a structure built long after the Tower was constructed, its close proximity suggests it's connected.

The image of the test pit dug during the salvage archaeological dig conducted by Chronognostic Research Foundation shows a soil horizon profile within excavation unit located to the east of the tower.  The man-made glacial stone layer was identified as a portion of a potential structure foundation: "Under these dumped layers is a layer of native stones.  The stones tell us that there may have been a structure east of the tower.  This is important because our research has shown that there were no structures around the Tower since the town's founding in 1639.  (http://www.chronognostic.org/over_touro_park.html)

Let's assume for a minute there was a structure on the east side of the tower.  If so, the layout of the rectangular structure follows the exact footprint of a church constructed ONLY by the medieval Knights Templar.  The diagrams and photos above of Temple Church and Cambridge Round Church in England, and the Church at the Convent of Christ Castle in Tomar, Portugal, are the same as what is gradually unfolding at the Newport Tower.  Based on the evidence already present at the Newport Tower, such as the capstone ledges at the top of the eight columns as published in my book, "The Hooked X: Key to the Secret History of North America" (see page 185), and the remnants of two wooden posts that supported the roof that was discovered by archaeologists in a 2008 salvage excavation, each sixteen feet from from stone columns (see page 186), there was indeed an ambulatory, most likely constructed of wood, that encircled the still standing, two-story structure.  Based on the 1939 aerial photograph discovered by Patrick Shekleton, there appears to have also been a rectangular shaped chancel that connected perfectly with the long ago disintegrated wooden ambulatory that encircled the enigmatic circular stone and mortar structure.  More work certainly needs to be done, but when this new evidence is combined with the architectural design, the Masonic notched keystone symbolism, the long-range alignment to the Kensington Rune Stone (see pages 211-228), and the solar illumination of the egg-shaped keystone on the winter solstice, there can no longer be any doubt the Newport Tower was constructed by the Knights Templar sometime around the year 1400.     


      



Friday, February 9, 2018

A New Medieval Runic Inscription in North America?

Just this week, I had the privilege to examine yet another, previously unknown runic inscription here in North America.  It is a very short inscription and only had a short time to spend with it, but what I saw during my visit was very interesting indeed!  The short, three-rune inscription was carved into a large glacial erratic boulder of granite gneiss that had a very flat top surface providing a perfect substrate to carve on.  These runes are the largest I've ever seen at approximately six inches in height.  The three runes are well carved and easily read as a bilateral "n" (Meaning the angled bar in the center appears equally on both sides of the vertical line called a "stave."), an open looped "r" (Meaning the lower line of the upper loop angling back to the middle does not touch the vertical stave), and a so-called "thorn" rune.  One other interesting aspect of the "r" rune is the line angling to the lower right forming the top loop does extend and meet the top of the vertical stave.  This is the first time I have ever seen an "r" rune like this after reviewing hundreds of Scandinavian and North American runic inscriptions. 

Putting all the runes together, the inscription appears to spell "Nrth."  However, I will let the runological experts make the call on this one as it is not appropriate for me to portray myself as an expert in this field.  I know enough about runes to be dangerous, but I want to make it clear I am not a qualified expert.  What I am an expert on is commenting on how the runes were carved into rock as hard as granite, which was clearly using metal tools, as I have carved and painted my own rune stone into a granite gneiss boulder myself.

As I carefully examined the carvings, I was shocked to see something I never expected.  At the end of the lower right leg of the "r" rune was an intentionally made, large hole or dot, exactly like the one on line one, in the word "göter", on the Kensington Rune Stone!  This particular anomaly in the KRS inscription was interpreted by Richard Nielsen and myself, to be part of what we called a "Grail Code."  This was because the first four runes that were singled out by the carver on the KRS, with either dots or short strokes, in sequence, spelled, "GRAL" or "Grail."  Whether there is any connection to the KRS, or the Templars/Cistercians who created it, is unknown.

Lastly, I have to say that the carvings did look weathered, but it was a very brief look and it could, in fact, be recently made.  I am reticent to offer any age for the inscription until I am able to spend more time studying it to see if there is a scientific way to determine a relative age.  This is also the reason I am not going to reveal its location to ensure the inscription is not altered in any way by potential vandalism.  Having said that, I would entertain inquires from legitimate scholars that might be interested in seeing the inscription as more work definitely needs to be done.


On February 6, 2018, I had the opportunity to examine a brand new, three-character, runic inscription carved into a large glacial boulder of granite gneiss. 


The three runes that make up the inscription are a bilateral "n", an open looped "r", and a very well carved "thorn" rune, which typically when found at the end of a word typically represents the "th" sound.



This picture was taken at an angle to the inscription that highlights a deep hole the carver made at the end of the lower right leg of the "r" rune.  This feature is exactly the same as the dot the carver made in the same location in the first "r" rune in the word "göter", on line one, in the Kensington Rune Stone inscription. 


There is a clear and distinct intentionally made dot at the end of the lower right leg of the "r" rune in the word "göter", on line one of the Kensington Rune Stone inscription.


A closer view of the man-made dot at the end of the lower right leg of the "r" rune, in the word "göter", on line one of the Kensington Rune Stone inscription.


In May of 2005, it took 40 hours to carve this rune stone commemorating the book I co-authored with Richard Nielsen entitled, "The Kensington Rune Stone: Compelling New Evidence."  

The following photos of the most recent renditions of the ever-evolving translation of the Kensington Rune Stone are posted here in response to a troll's attempt to undermine the legitimacy of numerous intentional punch marks and short strokes added to numerous runes AFTER the inscription was carved.  The troll attempted to post a hastily written, angry rebuttal letter by a scholar who tried to use his perceived authority to play fast and loose with man-made features added by the carver.  This letter came on the heels of a paper I wrote on my microscopic 3D imaging work that documented these features whose impact on the authenticity of the KRS was vitally important.  You can read my paper at the following link:  http://kensingtonrunestone.us/html/rune_stone_3-d_study.html 

What is important to notice here is both Henrik Williams and Richard Nielsen peer-reviewed and endorsed the Dotted R and several of the other dots and short lines as intentional and meaningful aspects of the inscription Nielsen and I published in our 2006 book, The Kensington Rune Stone: Compelling New Evidence.  In some cases they served linguistic purposes, in others they were part of various codes, all reviewed and accepted by both scholars.  However, in 2007, the pair suddenly reversed course and decided the modifications were not the important features we had already published.  The new interpretation was they were "guide marks", "decorations", or in the case of the vitally important Dotted R on line 6, was the result of a "dropped tool mark."  I'm still amazed at how the clumsy carver was skilled enough to accidentally drop his chisel so the point just magically hit the perfect spot to create a dot that proves the authenticity of the KRS all by itself.  What are the odds...?    

The point of posting the two translations is to show how the two scholars played fast and loose with the physical features on the inscription.  In 2010, in the word "death" on line 8, they published two dots in the "thorn" runes and I'm convinced the second dotted "thorn" was going to be the big discovery they planned to make.  Unfortunately, Nielsen was denied access and Williams, reportedly, threw a fit.  Later that evening during his lecture at the Alexandria Community College, we all heard a clearly agitated Williams complain about their treatment at the museum.  I suspect because their plans to discover the Dotted "thorn" together were foiled by the museum, they apparently decided to make the dots in both the Dotted R, and the Dotted "thorn", go away.   This is evidenced by the 2014 translation as seen below.  

The problem with all of this is here we have two scholars, apparently, trying to play with physical aspects of the inscription to serve an agenda.  They certainly have the right to change their mind about interpretations of what these man-made features represent, as long as they provide proper evidence to justify and support the new opinions.  However, they cannot decide what are man-made physical features on the stone and what are not.  It is inappropriate and unethical.  

Sadly, Richard Nielsen passed away in July of 2016, and can no longer comment on the information I have presented.  However, I invite Professor Williams to defend his and Nielsen's actions by responding to my comments on this blog with facts I may not aware of, but I would not hold my breath he will do.  In the end, this type of behavior by scholars hurts not just the Kensington Rune Stone, but all of us who simply want to know the truth.     


This translation of the Kensington Rune Stone inscription was published by Henrik Williams and Richard Nielsen in 2010.


A close-up view of line eight shows a two dotted "thorn" runes in the word "death."


This translation of the Kensington Rune Stone inscription was published by Henrik Williams and Richard Nielsen in 2014.


A close-up view of line eight shows the once present dotted "thorn" runes in the word "death" have been removed.