Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

GLOZEL “RELICS”

LESS THAN 10 YEARS OLD ARCHAEOLOGICAL BATTLE (Australian and N.Z. Press Association.) PARIS, May 19. An official report on the Glozel find, after years of investigation of the inscriptions on the fossil finds which have divided the world of archaeology into two camps, declares it a fake. Though the report is not disclosed to the press its stated conclusion is that the tablets were manufactured during the past 10 years. A second report will be drawn up dealing with the pottery and engraved pebbles.

Several objects were found in September, 1927, at Glozel, a small hamlet near Vichy, France, which gave rise to the controversy referred to in the cablegram. The site was sequestered and scheduled by the French Government as an ancient monument of national importance. The views of eminent archaeologists on the matter have differed widely. Glozel lies hidden away in the mountains and is not an easy place to get to. It consists of four houses only, forming a farm occupied by a peasant family named Fradin. In March, 1624, young Fradin, then apparently a boy in his teens, was ploughing in a field there, when he struck some big stones with his plough. He set to work and soon revealed the debris of a glass-furnace. This was declared by one expert to be genuine. Other articles found were denounced as frauds by some archaeologists and acclaimed as genuine by others. - A Buckinghamshire farm laborer, Hunter Charles Rogers, subsequently asserted that he had placed the supposed relics at Glozel. A commission of experts set up by the French Government condemned the finds as fraudulent. Early last year an investigation was carried out by Sir Arthur Evans, an English archaeologist. He corroborated the verdict of the commission. He said: “That the Glozel ‘relics’ are one and all the work of same industrious hand I have no -shadow of doubt, and it is difficult to understand how they can deceive any expert eye. The finds themselves present the most startling incongruities. The culture which is here supposed to have revealed itself is of all ages. In its repeated engravings of reindeer it is still Magdalenian. Its implements are misshapen copies of Neolithic. Other objects, including a crude schist imitation of an advanced type of arrowhead, '•effect the Age of Metals, while the script itself contains selections from historic alphabets.” Filially the French police seized six tablets, a mould, two files and other tools found in the house of tile farmer, Fradin. The members of Fradin’s family were arrested. They had been charging an entrance fee for inspecting the finds. The, action of the police was the outcome of a formal charge of fraud made by the Prehistoric Society. The latter characterised Glozel as a vast hoax, which tended to discredit French scientific work.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PBH19290513.2.73

Bibliographic details

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 16949, 13 May 1929, Page 7

Word Count
466

GLOZEL “RELICS” Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 16949, 13 May 1929, Page 7

GLOZEL “RELICS” Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 16949, 13 May 1929, Page 7

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert