Andy White Anthropology
  • Home
  • Research Interests
    • Complexity Science
    • Prehistoric Social Networks
    • Eastern Woodlands Prehistory
    • Ancient Giants
  • Blog
  • Work in Progress
    • The Kirk Project >
      • Kirk 3D Models list
      • Kirk 3D Models embedded
      • Kirk 2D images >
        • Indiana
        • Kentucky
        • Michigan
        • Ontario
      • Kirk Project Datasets
    • Computational Modeling >
      • FN3D_V3
    • Radiocarbon Compilation
    • Fake Hercules Swords
    • Wild Carolina >
      • Plants >
        • Mosses
        • Ferns
        • Conifers
        • Flowering Plants >
          • Grasses
          • Trees
          • Other Flowering Plants
      • Animals >
        • Birds
        • Mammals
        • Crustaceans
        • Insects
        • Arachnids
        • Millipedes and Centipedes
        • Reptiles and Amphibians
      • Fungi
  • Annotated Publications
    • Journal Articles
    • Technical Reports
    • Doctoral Dissertation
  • Bibliography
  • Data

Wednesday Morning Swordgate Roundup

1/13/2016

24 Comments

 
Picture
I've just got a few quick things to say about the ongoing drama of #Swordgate, then it's off to other things. This is a busy time of the semester: I'm prepping a class I've never taught before (South Carolina Archaeology), grant proposals will be coming due soon, and I've got several different threads of my research agenda to get and/or keep moving. But "the sword" story isn't over. Here are a few things that have happened in the last 24 hours or so.


Last Night's Episode of The Curse of Oak Island

We finally got to see the sword on television.  As I mentioned yesterday, I haven't watched The Curse of Oak Island at all this season. The first part of the show reminded me why I tuned out midway through season 2: the pacing is so slow it's painful. I've spent much of my career as a professional archaeologist digging in the ground, supervising other people digging in the ground, and talking to people about digging in the ground. Archaeological excavation done in real time, as painstaking a process as it can be, moves along at a faster clip than this program. And there are fewer commercials. It's just flat out boring.

Anyway, they finally unsheathed the sword from its protective towel in the last few minutes of the program. Following the oohs and aahs, Charles Barkhouse proclaims it to be "Roman sword" and regurgitates the main points about gladiators, Hercules, and Commodus that can be found on the website of the owner of the Florida sword. So there's nothing new there, except it might provide further evidence as to the origin of the interpretive narrative that seems to be attached to the sword among its proponents. If you haven't read this post about Hercules, Commodus, and the Florida sword, I encourage you to do so. It is worth noting that Dr. Steven Tuck, who included the Florida sword in the Experiencing Rome lecture series, does not consider his discussion of that sword to constitute an endorsement of its authenticity as a Roman artifact. Further, he told me that he thinks the Nova Scotia sword is probably "a tourist piece made to sell to tourists from the past few centuries." 

One thing we did learn from the program (and the live show Drilling Down that followed) is that we'll see the sword again next week. It's going to be examined by Dr. Myles McCallum at Saint Mary's University.  I don't know Dr. McCallum.  I look forward to seeing what he has to say about the sword.

It also appears that we will possibly get some metallurgical analysis on next week's show. There was a shot of someone in a lab coat holding the sword, and I think she said something about the metal (I don't have a DVR, so I'm just going by memory -- correct me if I'm wrong).

We also learned that the blade of the sword apparently is formed by two pieces joined together, suggesting maybe it was broken and then repaired. That made sense to me, as I thought I detected a color/texture difference in that part of the blade in some earlier photos that I saw. I'm not sure exactly what the significance of a repair would be, but I will note that the blade of the California sword (which I now have in my office) also appears to me as if it might be two separate pieces joined together.

Finally, I think the language (both body and verbal) of the cast during Drilling Down is giving us a clue as to the content of next week's show.  I think at least twice someone said something like "We just don't know if it's 2000 years old or 200 years old." The way they were passing the sword back and forth and waving it around seemed much more consistent to me with how one would treat a 200-year-old souvenir sword rather than a priceless, gold-gilded, "smoking gun" artifact that would forever changed history as we know it. I'm not a great poker player, but I read "bluff" on that one. We'll see if I'm right.
​

Finally: A Reporter Doing What a Reporter Should Do

I have noted previously that the media "reporting" on this story has really been poor. Much of the coverage has been cut-and-paste stories that ask few questions and provide little if any reason for actually writing a new story.

So I'd like to call your attention to a story titled "Oak Island's Roman Sword Saga Unsheathed" in this morning's Halifax Chronicle Herald. I talked to a reporter briefly for the story last week, and I'm quoted in it a few times.  It's not what I have to say that makes the story notable (I'm mostly quoted as saying fairly ineloquent things, but that's why I prefer writing to speaking off the cuff), but that the reporter(s) took the time to ask some questions, sniff around, and try to understand the context of the story and add something to the narrative.  Holy cow - we've got journalism!  Thank you, Chronicle Herald! 

Here's a taste (but you should really read the whole thing):


"“You have to decide whether you may or may not want to participate in a hatchet job?” Pulitzer said Friday when asked critical questions about his research.

When questioned, Pulitzer would not say whether he has a degree in history.

“Is it enough that I have written 300 history books,” responded Pulitzer.

“Is it enough that I’ve published over seven million words on ancient and lost history? Is that enough?

“Is it enough that I am a professional researcher with a specialty in forensic investigation? That I have patents in 189 countries. Is it enough that 11.9 billion cellphone devices use my patents?"

None of Pulitzer's claims have been verified by The Chronicle Herald."


For some reason he left out "Smithsonian laureate." It will be interesting to see the reaction to the article.
​
Oh You Fickle Fickle Fans of Forbidden Truth . . .

Finally, it's increasingly unclear to me whether the "forbidden truth" fans out there really want the attention of academics or not. They love to play the "nobody is paying attention to our important ideas" card when it suits them, but are very quick to switch to the "being attacked by the establishment" card when their ideas come under actual scrutiny. Which is it? Should I stay or should I go?

My attention to the "Roman sword" has made that discomfort more visible to me than ever before. I've seen many misrepresentations and mischaracterizations of the questions I've asked, the arguments I've made, and the data that are available. It's discouraging, but not totally unexpected. I've seen people online say that I'm on a "paid campaign" to discredit the sword no matter what. I've even seen people say that I should be fired from my job for . . . what now? Being a scientist interested in a purportedly important claim about the past? That's actually part of my job.

Let me tell you something about how good science works. Scientists question things. Scientists are naturally skeptical. It is our job to ask questions like "is that a credible explanation?" and "can I prove that wrong?" Asking a skeptical question is part of the process. If you're not doing that, chances are you're not doing science.

The skeptical questions get asked in a lot of different ways as scientists do science and interact with one another. Sometimes it happens over lunch. Sometimes in the lab. Sometimes at a conference. Sometimes in print. It happens continually, all over the place. The "battlefield" of arguments, evidence, and ideas is everywhere.

Pulitzer chose the internet as the battlefield where he would make his case. He did that as a deliberate part of his strategy.  As reported in the Chronicle Herald
 story,

"His
strategy is to communicate directly with the public rather than through academic intermediaries he considers to be perpetrators of a myth about how Europeans settled the Americas."

I shouldn't have to say it, but I will: if you pick the internet as the battlefield, then that's where the battle is going to take place.  It's simple. He picked it, not me.  And I'm fighting fairly. I'm not fighting with an a priori assumption that the sword is a fraud/hoax/whatever.  What I'm doing is fighting to have the conversation that we should be having about such a bold claim.  Don't mistake asking a tough question about evidence for outright rejection of an idea  - they're not the same thing at all.

Given where the battle is taking place, I'm doing the best I can to ask the questions that should be asked in a timely manner. They are the same questions that I would ask if I was handed a published paper (wouldn't that have been nice!). I have not misrepresented what Pulitzer has said (he has not returned the favor), but have tried to factually address both the evidence he has put forward as well as the glaring omissions in his case. I have not threatened legal action against him (as he has done to me) for making untrue statements about me. I don't intend to prevent him from making use of the images that I have produced as part of this story (as he has done to me). I'm not in the second grade anymore, and I don't intend to act like it. I wish that were true of everyone involved in this story.


Good science is based on skepticism and healthy flow of information. It seems to me that many fans of "forbidden history" would like to pretend that they're doing science but without all the hassle and discomfort of actually following the rules and practices that are fundamental to the scientific process. I'm sorry to tell you, but you don't have a very good chance of arriving at plausible explanations that way. If you guys are going to play in the big kid sandbox, you'll need to put your big kid pants on at some point and make an effort to understand how science works (hint: it's not via legal threats and misrepresentations).

You have to decide if you want academic attention or not. You can't have it both ways.
24 Comments
Jan
1/13/2016 08:30:10 am

One possible reason for joining the sword from two pieces is casting them separately. The mold could be only of the hilt, or it's just easier to do it that way reliably. (swords aren't the easiest thing to cast whole, making sure you get rid of bubbles in the metal etc.)
This could also explain why the swords have different blade lengths.

Reply
Jay Kahlil
1/13/2016 08:54:53 am

I really believe that J. Hutton Pulitzer's most vested interests — the interests driving his unwavering faith in the sword's authenticity, among other claims — is a desire for a production company to sign him to a reality TV show of his own. The sizzle reels, the whole "Treasure Force" package with its seemingly high-tech bells and whistles, his brute-force approach to social media (and consequently, SEO)... As primarily an entertainment journalist, that's what it looks like from my perspective, anyway.

I'd also hazard a guess that's also the reason he was cozying up to the History Channel and putting himself out there as a source for "The Curse of Oak Island." That's how a lot of subjects end up getting their own show; after appearing as a guest or as a recurring role on a similar program.

And hey, who knows, right? Watching Pulitzer and Co. tooling around in the bush looking for buried treasure might be entertaining. But I'd just hate to see it passed off as genuine science or history, based on what I've come to learn about the guy throughout the past few months as #Swordgate unfolds... I don't think the PhD necessarily makes the scientist 100 percent of the time — although a scientist should, necessarily, be receptive to things like peer review and critical inquiry, right?

Reply
Joe Scales
1/13/2016 10:18:34 am

Fortunately for us, as they would say in the business, he has a face for radio...

Reply
Bobby B.
1/13/2016 11:22:42 am

I don't think the show wants anything to do with him. Sure he appeared last season, but last night, his name wasn't dropped as being the finder of the "Roman" sword. That honor was given to Craig Tester.

Reply
Pablo
1/13/2016 09:03:20 am

I have watched other History Channel shows and it is very painful how slow they are. There's a lot of suspense music, something's about to happen and then they go to commercials. When they return from commercials, they do a recap of the last segment and back to suspense. In the end, no mystery is solved; but viewers are left with the doubt of the veracity of the claim, eventhough there's no evidence shown; no photos on the cameras left in the wild for days.

Reply
Scott Hamilton
1/13/2016 09:03:47 am

I wonder what Pulitzer thinks having a patent used in cell phones (which, let's face it, is probably not true) has to do with being a good historian.

Ego, ego, ego.

Reply
Traveller
1/13/2016 09:16:01 am

I'll leave this comedy excerpt here for those not in the know :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKn04HHr4II

Reply
Andy White
1/13/2016 09:21:22 am

"A somewhat reclusive genius . . ."

Reply
Traveller
1/13/2016 09:42:07 am

His meaning of reclusive is only spreading his drivel 3/4 across the internet

Bob Jase
1/13/2016 09:36:47 am

So why is Dr. Myles MCallum, whose degree and specialty is classical literature, considered to be an expert in ancient metalurgy?

I see that he participates in field work at actual archeological sites (which already puts him above JHP) but not to evaluate artifacts.

According to his own write up his purpose is to understand the role played by imperial properties in the cultural development of Apulia and Lucania during the early Roman period, and the nature of imperial landholdings generally in these two regions - not test or evaluate material objects.

I predict heavy editing in the next episode.

Reply
James Lawrence
1/13/2016 09:49:32 am

I just wanted to point something else out if I could. Being a proud Canadian with family from Nova Scotia, I dug a bit deeper into the claim the Nova Scotia fisherman who originally found this "decades ago" was afraid to come forward for fear of repercussions due to strict maritime laws on treasure.

I posted a number of questions on Pulitzer's Facebook page here https://www.facebook.com/notes/hutton-pulitzer/what-it-takes-to-verify-artifacts-and-history-and-how-it-can-kick-a-mans-butt-wh/443055059231156?comment_id=449648475238481&reply_comment_id=449720011897994¬if_t=note_reply

You can read my comments (and associated links) on the page, but there are a number of things to realize. I first questioned the likelihood of this tale from the vantage point that 'decades' ago Nova Scotia treasure laws were quite lax. They did not become particularly burdensome until 2010. Until 2010, the Treasure Trove Act (while requiring you to register/report treasure) actually let people keep most of what they found. In fact - as my post/link points out - there were no laws (none) governing treasure found on Nova Scotia wrecks AT ALL until 1953.

Hutton responded that there were also concerns the fisherman was illegally scalloping and didn't come forward because of concerns this sword was also found while illegally scalloping in Nova Scotia waters - but (again) as I pointed out to him, scalloping laws/licensing did not come into affect until 1968/69.

He actually posted a link to US/Federal regulations around scallop fishing (size limits) and I had to remind him that Nova Scotia was a Canadian province and not regulated by US law. LOL

I see the Halifax article mentions the sword was found "some 70 years earlier". If this is indeed so, then I maintain that, with no laws whatsoever governing either treasure found nor scalloping, that there is very little likelihood anyone would be concerned with either of these in the 1940's and therefore conceal their find for fear of having broken "strict laws" on either.

Reply
Traveller
1/13/2016 10:04:22 am

I've posted much the same James. I myself am from the Valley, but grew up in Riverport and went to the island many times as a kid, even as a teen I went there a few times.

Hutton is confused as to where 1 country ends and the other begins. Not only does he apply his laws to Canada, but he also uses his lawyers to threaten Canadian citizens.

He's not a researcher, or a historian. He's a conniving piece of garbage, willing to take what others have and put in his own pockets for cash or publicity.

He's been wanting his own show for a long time now (Treasure Force). By pushing this sword, calling everyone a fake, saying that the truth is hidden, blah blah blah, he is trying to set himself in a position to make himself look primed for prime time.

He doesn't give 2 shits about history, or the truth. He wants to be a fat old Miley Cyrus singing to his own music on TV.

Reply
Bob Jase
1/13/2016 11:11:30 am

I just hope JHP doesn't twerk on camera.

Peter Geuzen
1/13/2016 10:23:15 am

In the episode last night the exact words from Charles Barkhouse "This is something found in the 1940s". Unfortunately the current episodes air earlier in the States than Canada (Tuesday versus the following Sunday) but you can usually find them posted on the net by Wed morning, sometimes Youtube but they get caught pretty fast but otherwise on dailymotion.

So basically, JHP has known the supposed date of the supposed find since the summer of 2014.

Reply
Pablo
1/13/2016 10:19:29 am

Not to anybody's surprise, even though the authenticity of the sword has been "confirmed 100%", the white paper that was going to be released "early in 2016", is now going to be released in the Spring of 2016. Why the delay if it's 100% confirmed? Doesn't that mean that they have done all the tests necessary? My bet is that the white paper will never be released!

Reply
Curiosity
1/13/2016 10:53:12 am

Hutton Pulitzer has no expertise, no credibility, no shame.

You have a better chance to see Captain Kidd alive at the bottom of the Money Pit than to see this fake Pulitzer's released white (toilet) paper.

Reply
Patricia Ungerer Whtie
1/13/2016 11:28:24 am

The line in comments that thru a bright ray of sunshine into my frozen ice of a day : "He wants to be a fat old Miley Cyrus singing to his own music on TV." Warmed my frozen toes.

Reply
Mike Morga
1/13/2016 01:41:37 pm

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?


Reply
Killbuck
1/14/2016 07:46:33 pm

A point well taken, as it would appear that those on the show and those on OI do not suggest at any point that Mr. P ever possessed or even handled the sword at any point. Rather, he's run this whole time off photos.

After making himself such a constant annoyance to the brothers and the production crew, and being told to essentially knock it off, why would they give the sword or anything of perceived importance to him?

Reply
Jim Stella
1/13/2016 03:21:30 pm

Andy, what would it take for you to conclusively prove or disprove the sword and the associated evidence being presented? I think you should do a post on what you would expect such an academic process to look like and the standard you are applying here for scientific inquiry. Keep in mind the report is not published yet and we don't know what, how, or who is participating in it. Until then you are just wasting people's time on evidence you don't have access to. What if this actually manifests into the next great discovery. Remember Troy was initially rejected and more of these stories are coming out with new technology at faster pace. We should all really keep an open mind and not be premature.

Reply
Pablo
1/13/2016 04:32:12 pm

I don't think it's Andy who is wasting people's time; if Pulitzer has confirmed 100% that the sword is authentic, that means that tests have been performed and reports exist. So why do we need to wait until the Spring now? At first he was going to show the White Paper early on 2016.

Reply
Fat Cheeky Fraud
1/13/2016 04:40:24 pm

Nice try douchebag Pulitzer. You think people are too stupid to realize it's you?

Reply
David Stembel
1/13/2016 03:46:32 pm

Jim

Remember that Andy is simply reacting to somebody who stated that this sword "is 100% proven to be Roman." Keep in mind that the person that stated this has not published their report and we don't know what, how or who is participating in it. Until then, that person is wasting people's time on evidence that no one has access to. And Andy is simply pointing that out. What if there isn't any evidence? Remember, the idea that Hisarlik is Troy is still debated and the level that Schliemann identified as Priam's is not considered to be the correct level by the majority of later investigators. Just because these stories are coming out "with new technology at a faster pace" is no reason to not let science and the scientific process take its sweet time and proper pace.

Reply
Graham
1/14/2016 09:42:37 am

Even well known UFO peddler Kevin Randle was not impressed by the episode. See:

http://kevinrandle.blogspot.com.au/2016/01/oak-island-and-roman-sword.html

Reply



Leave a Reply.


    All views expressed in my blog posts are my own. The views of those that comment are their own. That's how it works.

    I reserve the right to take down comments that I deem to be defamatory or harassing. 

    Andy White

    Follow me on Twitter: @Andrew_A_White

    Email me: andy.white.zpm@gmail.com

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner


    Picture

    Sick of the woo?  Want to help keep honest and open dialogue about pseudo-archaeology on the internet? Please consider contributing to Woo War Two.
    Picture

    Follow updates on posts related to giants on the Modern Mythology of Giants page on Facebook.

    Archives

    January 2023
    January 2022
    November 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    March 2021
    June 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014

    Categories

    All
    3D Models
    AAA
    Adena
    Afrocentrism
    Agent Based Modeling
    Agent-based Modeling
    Aircraft
    Alabama
    Aliens
    Ancient Artifact Preservation Society
    Androgynous Fish Gods
    ANTH 227
    ANTH 291
    ANTH 322
    Anthropology History
    Anunnaki
    Appalachia
    Archaeology
    Ardipithecus
    Art
    Atlantis
    Australia
    Australopithecines
    Aviation History
    Bigfoot
    Birds
    Boas
    Book Of Mormon
    Broad River Archaeological Field School
    Bronze Age
    Caribou
    Carolina Bays
    Ceramics
    China
    Clovis
    Complexity
    Copper Culture
    Cotton Mather
    COVID-19
    Creationism
    Croatia
    Crow
    Demography
    Denisovans
    Diffusionism
    DINAA
    Dinosaurs
    Dirt Dance Floor
    Double Rows Of Teeth
    Dragonflies
    Early Archaic
    Early Woodland
    Earthworks
    Eastern Woodlands
    Eastern Woodlands Household Archaeology Data Project
    Education
    Egypt
    Europe
    Evolution
    Ewhadp
    Fake Hercules Swords
    Fetal Head Molding
    Field School
    Film
    Florida
    Forbidden Archaeology
    Forbidden History
    Four Field Anthropology
    Four-field Anthropology
    France
    Genetics
    Genus Homo
    Geology
    Geometry
    Geophysics
    Georgia
    Giants
    Giants Of Olden Times
    Gigantism
    Gigantopithecus
    Graham Hancock
    Grand Valley State
    Great Lakes
    Hollow Earth
    Homo Erectus
    Hunter Gatherers
    Hunter-gatherers
    Illinois
    India
    Indiana
    Indonesia
    Iowa
    Iraq
    Israel
    Jim Vieira
    Jobs
    Kensington Rune Stone
    Kentucky
    Kirk Project
    Late Archaic
    Lemuria
    Lithic Raw Materials
    Lithics
    Lizard Man
    Lomekwi
    Lost Continents
    Mack
    Mammoths
    Mastodons
    Maya
    Megafauna
    Megaliths
    Mesolithic
    Michigan
    Middle Archaic
    Middle Pleistocene
    Middle Woodland
    Midwest
    Minnesota
    Mississippi
    Mississippian
    Missouri
    Modeling
    Morphometric
    Mound Builder Myth
    Mu
    Music
    Nazis
    Neandertals
    Near East
    Nephilim
    Nevada
    New Mexico
    Newspapers
    New York
    North Carolina
    Oahspe
    Oak Island
    Obstetrics
    Ohio
    Ohio Valley
    Oldowan
    Olmec
    Open Data
    Paleoindian
    Paleolithic
    Pilumgate
    Pleistocene
    Pliocene
    Pre Clovis
    Pre-Clovis
    Prehistoric Families
    Pseudo Science
    Pseudo-science
    Radiocarbon
    Reality Check
    Rome
    Russia
    SAA
    Sardinia
    SCIAA
    Science
    Scientific Racism
    Sculpture
    SEAC
    Search For The Lost Giants
    Sexual Dimorphism
    Sitchin
    Social Complexity
    Social Networks
    Solutrean Hypothesis
    South Africa
    South America
    South Carolina
    Southeast
    Stone Holes
    Subsistence
    Swordgate
    Teaching
    Technology
    Teeth
    Television
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Topper
    Travel
    Travel Diaries
    Vaccines
    Washington
    Whatzit
    White Supremacists
    Wisconsin
    Woo War Two
    World War I
    World War II
    Writing
    Younger Dryas

    RSS Feed

    Picture
Proudly powered by Weebly