Dear Ms. Simons, Pulitzer Lied To You About The Italian eBay Sword

1/17/2016

In one of the first posts I wrote about the "fringe," I mentioned the legal maxim "Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus," which translates as "He who speaks falsely on one point will speak falsely upon all." It means that if you can catch a witness in one lie, you can reasonably reduce the weight of all of the rest of his testimony. Lies hurt credibility.

To that point, I'd like to document a recent suite of falsehoods from "Roman sword" advocate J. Hutton Pulitzer that is directly related to his ongoing struggle to preserve the credibility of his sword campaign. As Jason Colavito wrote the other day:

"Pulitzer has made himself the story by asking us to accept his word for his claims and offering no evidence to support them."

How good is his word?

Not so good.

In one of a series of bizarre audio responses to questions put to him by a member of one of his Facebook groups, Pulitzer told a number of lies about the sword purchased from Italian eBay. Here is what he said (I've put the lies in bold to make them easier to spot):

"We have attempted to contact [the seller's of the sword on eBay] over ten different times . . . I think they're worried about contact because they're posting pictures from the Naples Museum but sending a different cast iron sword in response. So what actually happened is when this story broke, people started looking at the sword and we all started asking questions of the sword and the people in Italy that were selling it . . . actually eBay shut them down because eBay realized that they were taking pictures of the museum sword which [unintelligible] supplied to eBay and they were actually supplying a different sword that was fake, cast iron, and whatever. So, I'm not sure they're going to want to answer a lot of questions when they were using authentic photos to ship a fraudulent piece of merchandise."

He says that the eBay photo is of the actual sword in the Naples Museum. Here is the photo from eBay (link still active as of this writing):

Image of sword for sale on Italian eBay.

As I wrote in this post from January 4, Trevor Furlotte purchased the Italian eBay sword. Here's a picture of the sword sitting on top of a New Brunswick newspaper from January 4:

The Italian eBay sword sitting on a table in New Brunswick.

You would have to be in complete denial to try to argue that these two images are not of the same sword.

So, wait, does Trevor Furlotte now own the original Roman sword from the Naples Museum? Because that's what Pulitzer said was in the photos on eBay. Congratulations, Trevor!

Oh no, wait, sorry.

It should be obvious that just about everything that Pulitzer said about the eBay sword is a lie:

The image on eBay was not of the "original" sword in the Naples Museum (no-one has produced an image of that yet, suggesting it does not actually exist);

The seller was not "shut down by eBay" because of fraudulent behavior. They were selling a reproduction sword that has been hawked as a tourist souvenir in Italy since at least the mid-1970's;

The seller did not ship Furlotte a "cast iron, or whatever" sword. They shipped him the same sword that was shown in the photos. It is a copper alloy sword, probably of the same vintage as Pulitzer's "Roman sword."

These are not trivial errors in the Roman sword story. They are intentional falsehoods meant to duck and dodge the issue of why there are so many "Roman swords" floating around out there. These lies speak directly to his credibility on other aspects of his claim.

I feel bad for the person who he decided to chastise publicly for asking him questions he couldn't answer truthfully, but his answers demonstrate something important about his ability to tell the truth. If his credibility is part of the story (and I think it is), this is a good data point.

Thanks for taking one for the team, Ms. Simons.

Pablo

1/17/2016 05:47:26 pm

Well, this post does not look like it has been shut down:

http://www.ebay.it/itm/PARTICOLARE-SCULTURA-COMMEMORATIVA-SPADA-BRONZEA-ROMANA-CON-IMPUGNATURA-STATUA-/301746768453

ghettohillbilly1

1/17/2016 06:04:36 pm

Today he blog a call to arms so to speak in the "fight for truth" citing everyones number and emails from the chronicle herald, the dept of culture and even history/prometheus entertainment so his followers can write and "fight for the truth" aka harass them for him hes something else, he also blocked me from a few of his pages but multiple accounts are a given these days so I can still see, and why is he always saying we? does he have multiple personalities?

Andy White

1/17/2016 06:20:11 pm

Yeah, he also got my title (Assistant Research Professor) and field of expertise (archaeology) wrong. Basically, the only thing he got right in the paragraph that included me was the state that I live in. There's not much precedent for getting the facts right, so it didn't surprise me.

ghettohillbilly1

1/17/2016 06:27:07 pm

Yeah seem to be the one small part of science that poor man does not understand is the those little things called facts

CALLAVINNA

1/17/2016 06:44:16 pm

Hutton asked for his group to join in on conversation and to come up with theories so he may look at them (thats what the facebook group is for) every theory I gave him he discredited with the fact I am not a historian or an archeologist. Thank you for setting the record straight! I appreciate those who actually come up with verifiable proof on the account of facts! Hutton gives bashing statements to those who may harbor his image. He himself, had nothing to offer the boys of oak island by providing no new evidence to help aid in the search, hence he is only on one episode. I simply asked him to be accountable and give me the information so I may track down this original sword in Naples or Pompeii... He can't quite agree on which museum its located. All my questions to him go unanswered, he may respond to every comment I make but its not the info I asked for. Nor does he have his white paper finished so he must be in the editing process.. We will see.

I appreciate Andy's blog!
Thanks again!

~CV AKA Ms. CALLAVINNA SIMONS

Peter Geuzen

1/17/2016 06:55:18 pm

While we're on the topic of matchy matchy, not to distract from the Italian eBay sword, but did anybody notice that the Spanish Sword has a cousin, and they both look like they have matchy matchy patina - looking very brushed on, straight down the blade:

https://www.facebook.com/sevillaescarabajo/photos/pb.1425606994399955.-2207520000.1453084887./1506186366342017/?type=3&theater

Andy White

1/17/2016 07:09:01 pm

Yeah - that bothers me. That's why I speculated that that one might not even be copper alloy. It could be just painted green.

Pablo

1/18/2016 01:59:22 am

Re: I contacted the store (Escarabajo) and they told me it is a reproduction; they even told me which company reproduced it. I contacted that company (Atenea Coleccion) but they didn't reply. I asked them about the original they used to cast the swords, since they also mention the famous "Naples Museum".

Trevor Furlotte

1/18/2016 02:17:07 am

That's interesting. I contacted the seller through eBay and they never replied. I sent my message in Italian. Would you forward your dialog with them to me?

Pablo

1/18/2016 02:49:52 am

@Trevor, check your fb pm

Sergio Congedo

1/17/2016 07:53:47 pm

Dear Andy - I've been following this story about the sword since it broke. Initially what you claimed about it sounded believable, but the more that comes out its becoming clearer that you don't really have any idea what you are talking about. You're not a Roman expert or a real archeologist, or even a titled professor, just a blogger with theories. I hope for your credibility that no real ancient Roman sword exists (which seems unlikely because there are replicas which means there is an original somewhere). Conversely, the more I read about Hutton the more believable it sounds if there is in fact original swords. You better hope for your credibility and your night job as a pseudo-archeologist that he is wrong and you are right. It appears very premature you jumped out and made such claims, before the show has aired or the white paper has been released. I think you are just a publicity hound.

Andy White

1/17/2016 07:58:45 pm

That's funny. The University of Michigan may be surprised to learn that I'm not a "real archaeologist," as well as the University of South Carolina and the various other universities that I've worked for in the past.

https://sc.academia.edu/AndrewWhite

Nice try.

Killbuck

1/17/2016 08:21:29 pm

Hmmm. Let me see if I have this right. Andy White who is an archeologist is not an archeologist, and Pulitzer who is not an archeologist is an archeologist.

Pulitzer who spends every waking minute self promoting and running umpteen websites and podcasts and more is not a publicity hound, while White who has this blog and is not chumming to be a reality tv star is a shameless publicity hound.

Its all so obvious now.

Sergio Congedo

1/17/2016 11:38:24 pm

Andy, you are a disgrace to our field of archeology. As an "assistant research professor", you are still only assisting the research, not leading it. My colleague from UC Berkeley who I know is involved gives more credibility to the study than all your blog posts. The fact that you have made premature conclusions and focused your efforts solely on the spokesperson of the group, not the dozen or so PHD level current and former academics involved is shameful. Since you are not a tenured professor you feel its easy to question claims with EBay pictures. I highly doubt the people involved would come forward if there was any question about the authenticity of the sword and material in the report. I also suspect there this is just the tip of ice berg. Please if you have any consideration for teaching our students about science please allow them to think critically and present all their findings in full, hen through the peer-review process will it all be throughly reviewed. Since you boxed yourself "all in" in the con corner, what if its all true?

Mike Morgan

1/18/2016 12:33:17 am

Re: Sergio Congedo

Oh my, shades of Jim Stela? Or comments made by Pulitzer himself under "Philyaw Follies"? Of course, only my opinion.

Cleo

1/18/2016 11:54:51 am

@ Sergio Congedo

I will eat my shirt if this ever goes through any peer reviewed process. It will die with the likely claims that it is being suppressed by the establishment. It is trying to gain an exploitable life through the court of public opinion/perception.

The entire sword story (aside from the COOI appearance) so far has been about bypassing any of that and bombing the media with fantastical claims suggesting existing connections between objects with false attributions. How could anyone rescue the story now? It would take a very powerful science indeed to make this come out clean in the wash. The propaganda sciences is the only one that comes to mind.

The damage that has occurred by having it appear unchecked in the traditional media is something that is very troubling. No matter what ensues now there will have been this injection of unverified "information" into the public consciousness. it opens the door to more of it when editors see the interest it generates.

When one sees that current children's books are being written that contain supposed "facts" like the existence of the fabled teenagers of 1795, the never verified or seen flood tunnels, oak platforms and marker stones and all manner of such folkloric conjecture we should appreciate that, unfortunately, some of the unverifiable does gain credibility when it repeated for long enough by enough people.

Cleo

1/17/2016 08:49:56 pm

Excuse me for piping in, but who has determined that these are replicas of an original all of a sudden?

Killbuck

1/17/2016 09:52:38 pm

We, so far no Italian museum has chimed in to say they have one, and so far, several have contacted authorities to see if an original exists. Nothing so far.

The Design Toscano website that offers these swords for sale (on sale too to boot) says this:

"Paying homage to the craftsmanship and technique of metalsmiths in the Roman Empire, our exclusive museum replica is a rough iron foundry casting like those found in Pompeii. This remarkably heavyweight replica boasts characteristic details, and makes a handsome gift for yourself or anyone who enjoys Roman history or artifacts."

I believe that JHP asserted earlier that the original is in a museum in Naples (not found there yet). In a recent interview he said he cannot recall if the original in in Naples or Pompeii. Yet he claimed he had analyzed the O.I. sword with an, or the original... but I'm not sure he made that clear. It's not clear even if JHP actually saw the sword first hand. The producer of the show apparently said he saw a photo of it. So.... It's as murky as the waters in 10x.

Perhaps other here have tracked this better than I.

Anyway, Andy is offering the Emperor-ly Sum of 50 dollars reward for anyone who can find if such an original exists and it's location.

Javier Muniz

1/18/2016 12:04:37 am

Hello Cleo from Spain! Yes my friend used did graduate research at the Naples National Archeological Museum for Roman classical studies. He was always very interested in this sword as its quite special and very rare, and he last heard it was moved to the British Museum for testing with others as part of an upcoming documentary series. He also said some Italian criminal group - probably the mafia? - tried to steal it at one point so they had to move to a secure location. He said it used to be very famous (I forgot why) and some casting was commissioned 50-60 years ago and that is probably what the Italian design firms base their casts off which are then in turn molded for Ebays, amazon, and others such as the California one. I'm sure you are all aware of this stuff. Hopefully I'll get more details soon. It's really interesting learning about the history of this sword. I found this interesting article in english on the original set of swords. Lodestones are very rare and that alone would make this item basically priceless as an antiquity artifact: http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-history-archaeology/unraveling-origins-roman-sword-discovered-oak-island-005112

Mike Morgan

1/18/2016 12:23:42 am

Killbuck,

I believe that I am responsible for bringing up the question of whether Pulitzer had a "hands on" experience with the sword or if he was only working from pictures when I made the following comment under Andy's "Wednesday Morning Swordgate Roundup" on 1/13 and a similar comment on Jason's blog under

""Curse of Oak Island" Teases "Roman" Sword Find While Hutton Pulitzer Says He's Right Due to Volume Written ":
"In this new Halifax Chronicle Herald article, it is stated "And in showing Pulitzer the pictures of a tarnished Roman sword ...", THE PICTURES. In the original Boston Standard article, he is quoted as stating “I began my forensic work into it using an XRF analyser ...", I AND MY.

Did he actually ever have the "100% confirmed" Roman Sword in his possession to be able to run his "I AND MY" tests? Or did he run his tests on the PICTURES he was shown? Or is he once again claiming as his own, the work someone else did that he was privy to while still in the good graces of the show?"

We on this side strive for accuracy and fairness. It is in this sense of fair play that I should point out that the reporter writing the HCH article was the one stating Pulitzer was shown pictures, he did not add quotation to the statement.

Even though I am now on the downhill side of life and have only a finite number of 1 hour and 20 minute blocks of time left, on 1/14 I steeled myself and watched Pulitzers webcast, "Oak Island Roman Sword History Heretic and Curse Of Oak Island Series Review" at https://katch.me/HuttonPulitzer/v/c181c2a6-b7f4-3610-bf05-08b083e569e9 In it, he said he "held" the sword. He even held out his finger and mimiced placing the sword on it commenting on how perfectly balanced it was. He also stated that he looked at it through a scope. He did not state that he ran an "XRF analyser" test though.

I most certainly am not saying I believe Pulitzer, I believe he fully embodies Andy's statement of "Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus,"., but as for now, we only have the HCH reporters statement that he was just shown pictures, we have no other corroborating evidence. So for me, I'll allow that it is possible he did have "hands on" the MOAFHS.

With all that being said, I can not imagine that the Lagina's, with Marty being a lawyer and successful business man, or the company of Oak Island Tours, all the reported owners of the MOAFHS, would allow Pulitzer to have access to the MOAFHS in order to run tests and not be the ones to maintain control of that information and it's dissemination. And certainly not rely on just his tests but have other testing done and opinions gathered which they apparently have already had done (since they finished filming over a year ago) according to the trailer/promo for tomorrows show. I know I would want to maintain control of all aspects if I were in their shoes. Pulitzer was not/is not privy to those hence his speculation that they will not be up to his "truth" and his calling on his minions to make demands on the production company, History Channel, Oak Island Tours, news outlets, and various governmental entities to get the "truth" out.

Pablo

1/18/2016 02:21:02 am

@Javier Muniz. The fact that the information is on the Ancient origins website, is a reason to not believe it; they are experts in Pseudo Science; you just have to read the titles of their posts.
To which "Brittish Museum" was the sword sent? It will be great if your friend can contact us and bring some information; if he worked there and saw the original sword, he should have documents and maybe even photos to show.

Andy White

1/18/2016 06:18:55 am

Hi Javier,

You guys should do a better job of coordinating your falsehoods if possible. As shown in the post, Pulitzer said the "Naples Museum" sword was the one shown on eBay. A guy in New Brunswick now owns that sword. So how could it be in the British Museum? And how could Pulitzer have gone to "test" it in Naples if it was no longer even in Italy?

I give you a D- for effort. I know you can do better.

Cleo

1/18/2016 11:14:59 am

The Design Toscano claim of it being an exclusive to their company is not something that I would say is standing up to scrutiny.

Similar companies are hawking trade goods of the quality and quantity that can be found on the pages of alibaba.com (thousands of swords there, some patinated) for anyone who wants get into that game.

I strongly doubt this items even has a production license. It appears to have been produced over a long period for different markets. I assume no one is suing another for stealing their property rights either. Would a museum not have a license agreement for the use of its property if it ever allowed mass production of copies, especially in recent times? Did someone borrow a museum sword and cast copies without telling anyone? Doubtful.

I wouldn't mind if someone asked DT what their claim of exclusivity is based on. They could also be asked what "museum replica" means. It might come back explained as some sort of "freedom of expression" that is simply used to create a general perception about the quality of the appearance of the object. Who ever uses trade catalog blurbs as proof of anything, anyway? I am reminded of the creative J. Peterman co.'s write ups on the show Seinfeld.

Trevor Furlotte

1/18/2016 02:19:13 am

Hi Jovan!

Pablo

1/18/2016 02:42:25 am

I have 4 boxes of Popcorn ready for the day when Mr. Pulitzer show the White Paper related to the sword to the world. It was supposed to come out early in 2016, now it has been moved to the Spring of 2016. I'm sure everyone on this blog is looking forward to see all that information!

Jonathan Feinstein

1/18/2016 10:48:41 am

That popcorn may get very stale by then...

Steve Lane

1/18/2016 05:02:11 am

Jeff Phlilyaw, Hutton Pulizer, Jim Stela, and now Sergio Congedo?

I really feel bad for this fat liar.

Mike Jones

1/18/2016 05:49:55 am

Up is down. Black is white. Jovan is an archeologist and a history changing maverick. Got it.

Peter Geuzen

1/17/2016 09:20:22 pm

Swordgate: the Poster

http://imgur.com/BXJ7kKF

Killbuck

1/17/2016 09:38:10 pm

Wonderful. Now.... Trading cards!!

Jonathan Feinstein

1/18/2016 02:52:59 pm

Oooh! I'll trade you two Oak Islands and a Design Toscano for a California!

Pablo

1/18/2016 02:07:28 am

Nice Peter!

Pablo

1/18/2016 02:05:46 am

I'm glad there is a call for critical thinking! Do not just accept what others propose! Don't be close minded, take a look and analyze other people's hypothesis! Sounds exactly like what Andy is doing with the supposedly Roman sword!!! :D

Mike Jones

1/18/2016 06:00:06 am

There WAS an original Roman sword. It was in a museum. My friend saw it. But then the Mafia stole it. Then, while being chased by Jovan Phillyaw, they threw it overboard but this all happened back in Roman times because Obama. We must get THE TRUTH out there! The UN is coming for your swords. WAKE UP SHEEPLE! [vote Trump]

skathes

1/18/2016 03:30:16 pm

I post rarely.... But this must be recognized with uncontrolled laughter. Brilliant. Reminds me of some health food bars...every nut rolled up in one. Hahahaha......

killbuck

1/18/2016 07:07:34 am

Interesting observation- on the official C.O.O.I. fb page, dozens of visitor posts etc simply saying "ship" or "word of the day is ship" over and over. Comes on the heels of JHP's video cast last night, which btw I did not watch, but did notice a tsunami of JHP tweets promoting the videocast. So might be the source.

Terry J. Deveau link

1/18/2016 07:50:29 am

Ha, ha. No. It isn't a conspiracy. The COOI has a contest running that you have to know the "word of the day" that was shown on the TV show to enter the contest. The show aired in Canada last night, and the word was SHIP. People are just sharing that titbit of fan info. :-)

Killbuck

1/18/2016 08:19:14 am

Learn something new every day!!! Thanks. Just wondering.

Peter Geuzen

1/18/2016 08:25:23 am

http://www.archaeologypodcastnetwork.com/archyfantasies/28

Killbuck

1/18/2016 10:20:52 am

tHANKS. Listened to it, worth the time. I liked the part towards the end about journalistic responsibility in spreading the story...

...an old newspaper man was once to have said: "I don't care if it's your own MOTHER sayin' she loves ya... CHECK IN OUT."

brian merrill

1/18/2016 12:57:05 pm

Finkle is Einhorn.
Einhorn is Finkle.

Brother Bob

2/1/2016 05:45:37 pm

Hi Andy,

Firstly can I thank you for being that light in the mist to help us see the true path of truth! And also the time you must spend taking Ol' BS Jeffrey to account.
I hate bullshitters and the so called commander is at the top of that steaming pile and find it hard to believe anyone can respect that man.
I see he has threatened several times to take you and others to court for various reasons, can no one take him to court for the lies he has told?
I am seriously looking into what action (non volient - I should add (just encase!)) can be taken against this sad excuse for a man.
I read he claims he had the sword tested and the alloys are from cica 1400's, along with so many other claims including his accedemic background - why is no one calling him out on this - legally?
Are there no historical / archiological bodies in the USA that can take him to point on these issues and force him to issue a statement of admission he lied?
If its Europe you could do that..... maybe we could do something over here in the UK?
PS - that roman sword - just go to Rome, visit some of the little souvenir shops and you will have a hand full of these swords. They also do the same figurine on many other products eg paperweights, large cutlery, pots and pans etc... I go to Rome several times a years and will def buy one so we can send to him for next Christmas!
Anyways,
Good work fella.

Comments are closed.

Dear Ms. Simons, Pulitzer Lied To You About The Italian eBay Sword

Archives

Categories