Grave Creek Tablet

From West Virginia (WV) Cyclopedia

Most archaeologists consider the tablet to be fraudulent, because similar examples have never been found, and because reports of its discovery were inconsistent.

From: "Inscribed stone of Grave Creek Mound." American Antiquarian, 1 (January 1879): 139-49

"There were two claimants, who said that they had originally found the inscribed stone, being: A.B. Tomlinson, who said he had found it under a rock inside one of the mound's vaults; and, P.B. Catlett, who said he found it in the dirt dumped outside of the mound during the excavations. Schoolcraft may also lay some claim, as he "found this curious relic lying unprotected among broken implements of stone, pieces of antique pottery, and other like articles," after it had been put on exhibition for tourists; thus, no special attention would appear to have been given to the inscribed stone, until Schoolcraft sought to have its inscriptions translated."

Quoting Reverend Stephen D. Peet, from 1892:

"One of the greatest among many annoyances to archaeologists is that so many fraudulent relics are found in mounds. It seems difficult to fasten the frauds on any one, for they are planted probably in the night and are adroitly covered up. Some of them are wrought with reference to the special sensation that may be made, and are very starting in their resemblance to foreign articles. These are very easily detected and are rejected at once; others, however, bear a resemblance to the relics of the Mound-builders, and are very deceiving. The most of these have some ancient alphabet, Hebrew, Phoenician, Hittite, and are recognized as frauds by these means. Among these are the Grave Creek Tablet, the Newark Holy stone, the Pemberton Ax, the Stone from Grand Traverse Bay, and a great many others. Not one of these has been accepted by the skilled archaeologists, but they have been discussed and defended by others until they have grown wearisome."

Grave Creek Tablet (http://www.resologist.net/damn11.htm)