THE GLOZEL FINDS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20338, 21 February 1928, Page 13

THE GLOZEL FINDS.

REMARKABLE CONTROVERSY IN FRANCE. COMMISSION’S REPORT. vehemence of eminent savants (From Our Own Correspondent.) LONDON, January 10. Even though the commission appointed by the Jnternational Institute of Anthropology on September 24 last to inquire into the much-disputed authenticity of the alleged prehistoric finds at Glozel, near Vicliy, France, has reported that the ; affair is a joke, eminent savants continue the controversy with great vehemence. Humourists and cartoonists are making much of it; it is creeping into revue allusions and cabaret songs, and a section of tl'.e press is treating it rather like a “ silly season ” subject. Actors, actresses, music hall stars, prominent figures in the sporting world, and even a policeman on point duty have been canvassed for their opinions—the answers being in most cases of course, either a guess or a piece of irony. Meanwhile, new theories and suggestions are springing up like mushrooms round the problem. The objects found at Glozel returned, according to those who faithfully accepted them, very definite and startling answers to many 'fundamental questions. They were pronounced to be of the Neolithic age—that is, not less than 5000, perhaps 12,000, years old. There were engraved upon some of them signs very remarkably like the letters of the alphabet. The deduction was that th e alphabet arose out of Western Europe and not out of Asia. Some savants declared that nothing had bean found more ancient than the Roman ‘ age in France, and suggested that the i inscriptions were of that period. Yet i others suggested not obscurely that the i whole affair was a delusion. The weight | of authority was against the authenticity lof the discoveries. Some of the soundest judgments to he found in archaeology, such as that of the Abbe Breuil, always declined to accept them. From the first they were ardently defended by another archaeologist of high rank, M. Salomon Reinach. To decide in this disagreement of doctors an international commission of competent experts was appointed by the Institute of Anthropology. COMMITTEE’S INVESTIGATIONS. Before going into details, the commission in its report desires to pay homage “ to the great faith and absolute integrity of Dr Morlet.” The first curious thing that struck the commission was the condition of the supposed “ historic field,” which appeared to them “ as if it had been turned up by shells.” Although th e finds made by Fradin and Dr Morlet were unearthed at a small depth of between Ift and 2ft, many had been found in 1918, when the whole field was ploughed up by Fradin. The experts found the field at the spot where the discoveries had been made in quite a soft condition. In one place, for instance, a small portion of the ground was at a different level from the surrounding soil. They made a cut in thg ground at a depth of some Bin, and, to their surprise, discovered that a clod of earth had the appearance of having been removed carefully in one piece—probably with a spade. “ Relics ” were found there, and it appeared evident that this clod of earth had been replaced on top of the deposits made. The place taken by the “ relics ” at the bottom of the cavity thus caused the inequality which had been noticed on th e surface. QUITE RECENT DATE. This operation, says the report, was certainly of quite recent date, as the sides of the cavity plainly showed. The commission was sufficiently impressed by these two discoveries, says the report, ami the experts decided to end their researches. The experts were under the impression that the supposed relics had been placed in the ground promiscuously and quite recently. in spite of their fragility and softness these objects showed no signs whatever of the destructive actions of Nature, which would have affected them if they had been in the ground for a long period. There were on them only recent fernrooting marks. As for the supposed “ancient tombs” which were found by young Emile Fradin, the expects believe that “ their construction could only be of few years old ; and not a work of thousands of years ago.” Pieces of bone discovered in the tombs were found to have been freshly cut with a clear incision. Out of nearly 5000 “ relics ” unearthed at Glozel by Dr Morlet and young Fradin, only two—a brick and a portion of a vase—have been pierced by roots and these were done by ferns of evidently recent growth, as the roots showed the first signs of decomposition. PROFESSOR LOTH CHAMPIONS THE CAUSE. In spite of this report the controversy continues. Holding the chair of ‘‘ prehistoric times ” at the College de France, Professor Loth has turned his course to students into one of ardent propaganda for the “ Glozel cause.” That a- chair in the austere college (which is under the control of the Minister of Public Instruction) is being used to glorify Glozel has caused considerable surprise in the world of French savants. ' Professor Loth announced that he will bring forward proof that the report of the International Commission and its conclusion that “ Glozel is a fake” are of no value. His relatively small lecture room was packed, not with students, but with a crowd of old savants. There were many ladies, too. M. Loth’s lecture was devoted to the Aerification of Dr Morlet and young Emil Fradin, of Glozel. “No one,” he said,. “ will have, during the century, rendered greater service than these two men to tne i elucidation of prehistoric times.” I 'He described Dr Morlet. ” who has courageously fought against his detrac- | tors,” as “ a hero,” and paid an enj thusiastic tribute to his great competence |in archteology. Many great savants, he said, went to Glozel, made researches in ■ Fradin’s field, and were at once satisfied i that the finds were genuine. ' POTTERY AND TILE WORKS. M. Claude Fradin', a cousin of the' ■ Fradius, on whose farm the deposits were ■ found, has stated in an interview pub- 1 lished in the Petit Parisien that in the 1 eleventh century there were at Glozel ' pottery and tile works wnch continued ] operations until the eighteenth century. ■ The inscribed tablets found in the deposit 1 are probably, he thinks, relics of the old works, for at a time when workmen were 1 illiterate a foreman might note orders 1 and other details bv simple signs of his ! own invention which to anyone else would 1 appear meaningless. | Professor Salomnn Reinach, the leader : ' of the “believers.” who is satisfied that 1 the “ relics ” of Glozel are at least £>ooo 1 years old, states in a letter that the find < ing of the members of the commission is i “ stupid enough to make one weep.” 1 Dr -Morlet in the course of a sensational < interview published in the Matin, finds s cause of offence in the alleged behaviour i of Miss Garrod, the only British member , of the commission (and the only woman member). Dr Morlet says that to one of the es- 1 pevte who noticed that Miss Garrod dis- c played “ but hit e energy in making ex- 1 cavations,” she replied, “ I am rather up- 4 set. If you only knew how afraid I am 1 of earthworms.” fl The doctor adds that he could not re- f frain from remarking to Miss Garrod. c " Thi s fear is. indeed, very unfortunate c for professional cxcavatore! ” 1 A “ SEMI-GLOZELIST’S ” VIEW. ‘ While the Glozclists and anti-Gloezlists r prepare for the next engagement it is the j turn of one who may be described as a f “ semi-Glozelist,” M. Camille Jullian, of | the institute, to reaffirm his view of the j matter i

I M. Jullian does not deny the authenticity of the Glozel “ finds ” he is disposed to accept most of them as genuine, but ascribes them to a period severaJ thousand years later than that which is accepted by the Glozelists. Mr Jullian declares that he has not moved from his original view that the Glozel site formed an annex to a Gallo-Roman sanctuary such as existed where the great Roman rods crossed the boundry between adjacent cities. The Roman road in this case was that which ran from Bourges and Tours via Vichy, Ferrieres-sur-Sichon, Glozel, Feurs, and Vienne to Lyons. It was at Glozel that it crossed the territory of the Arvehi to that of the Segusiavi, of which Fears was the centre. This road was for long known as the Route de Montoncel, and its modern successor is still sometimes referred to by that name. M. Jullian declares that the bull; of the “ finds,” or at least of those whoso authen-, ticity he recognises, are instruments which were the normal stock-in-trade of the sorcerers of classical and even oriental antiquity—clay figures, reels for winding wool, pots for unguenfa and drugs, fantastic masks, beads for necklaces, and the stones and tablets which form the most interesting part of tire collection. Gretna Green, the village famed for its runaway marriages, became a hive of industry during the war. A Government cordite factory, with scientific installation, and model townships run on a communal basis, were built. Since the war disappointment has followed disappointment for this new town. Its factories have been dismantled, its institutions have been I closed, and now, the War Disposals Board ! having sold the electricity plant, Greta is plunged into darkness. As th© district never had a ga s supply, the residents are reverting to oil lamps and candles in homes, while the streets are in unrelieved gloom. Gretna has almost stepped back to the days when stage cqaches rattled through its village street with eloping lovers.