The Los Lunas Inscription

A clumsy hoax still promoted as evidence for Hebrews in North America

The Los Lunas inscription
The Los Lunas Inscription

At Los Lunas, 56 km (35 miles) southwest of Albuquerque, New Mexico (USA), is an inscribed rock face at what has come to be known as ‘Mystery Mountain’ but is more properly known as Hidden Mountain. It appears to have been first reported in the 1880s (interviewed in 1996, the controversial archaeologist Frank Cumming Hibben (1910-2002) said that he had been taken to the site in 1933 by a guide who claimed to have seen it some fifty years earlier). Hibben’s assessment of its age in the 1930s, based on the growth of mosses and lichens on it, was that the incised characters were at least a hundred years old.

The biblical connection

According to its supporters, it is a copy of the ‘Decalogue’ (otherwise better known as the Ten Commandments of the Old Testament of the christian Bible) written in Palaeo-Hebrew using a north Canaanite script of the early first millennium BCE (some proponents claim that it is as early as c 1000 BCE). According to the claims, the inscription is very ancient; tests conducted in the 1980s by the consultant geologist and mining engineer George E Morehouse (a geologist with the Arrowhead Uranium Company) are said to have confirmed that it is between 500 and 2000 years old. These tests consist of measuring the polish produced on the surface of rock by wind-blown sand, the so-called ‘desert varnish’. However, the technique is highly suspect and the wide range of dates suggested by it gives rise to considerable disquiet about its accuracy. Morehouse, a member of the Epigraphic Society, was also able to compare the inscription with nearby graffiti of the 1930s and was able to confirm that the inscription is older.

Problems with the inscription

If these claims about the inscription are correct, then it shows extraordinary carelessness. The Decalogue is one of the best known passages of the Bible and for anyone whose native tongue was Hebrew, it ought to have been all but impossible for the inscriber to make elementary errors. They did, though. In some places, the text is abbreviated; this is not unusual in ancient inscriptions, but in something so important as the Decalogue, it is surprising. The writer also changed the word order from the original Hebrew, something a person who believed in the inspired and unchangeable nature of the supposed words of Moses would never have done.

Equally damning is the inscriber’s use of what is known as a ‘caret’. This is the upside-down V placed under a piece of text where something has been missed out. Sometimes found in ancient Latin and Greek texts, it is not known in Hebrew until the Middle Ages. To make matters worse, it is above a dot that seems to be a full stop (or period); full stops did not exist in ancient Hebrew. Moreover, there are Greek letters of a slightly later date mixed in with Hebrew forms and some eccentric uses. For instance, Hebrew א (’aleph) is treated as a vowel – the letter shape became our letter A – but in Hebrew it was a consonant; the writer muddles כ (kaph) and ק (qoph), sounds that are distinct in Hebrew but both of which are approximately rendered by English K). The inscription uses Greek δ (delta), ζ (zeta), κ (kappa (reversed)) and τ (tau) in place of their Hebrew counterparts ד (daleth), ז (zayin), כ (kaph) and ת (taw). According to its supporters, this is evidence for a Greek influence. The greatest problem is that the inscription uses an archaic form of א ’aleph. Also, the letters י (yodh), ק (qoph) and ש (the flat-bottomed shin) are said to be Samaritan in form.

Cyrus Gordon (1909-2001) suggested that rather than being a Palaeo-Hebrew Decalogue, the inscription is instead a Samaritan mezuzah, a large stone slab placed by the gateway to a property or synagogue, bearing a shortened version of the Decalogue. He also suggested that the inscription is more likely to be Byzantine and to post-date the persecution of Samaritans by the Emperor Justinian I (527-565 CE). However, the text itself follows the Masoretic text, albeit illiterately. This text was established by Orthodox Jews in the late first millennium CE; the Samaritan text had been established centuries earlier and is quite different. The Masoretic text begins with the injunction to “remember the Sabbath day”, as does the Los Lunas inscription, whereas the Samaritan text begins “preserve the Sabbath day”. The Samaritan text also contains an addition to the tenth commandment, referring to a temple to be built on Mount Gerizim, which is not there in the Los Lunas inscription.

George E Morehouse was (or is) not a prominent geologist with a proven expertise in dating so-called ‘desert varnish’; indeed, virtually all internet searches for his publications link only to his 1985 report “The Los Lunas Inscriptions – A Geological Study” (Epigraphic Society Occasional Papers 13, 44-50). As a mining engineer, his expertise in geological matters is beyond question. However, in the very inexact art of dating inscriptions, this lack of peer-reviewed work ought to make us wary of accepting his conclusion that it was over 500 years old in the 1980s (and therefore pre-Columbian). It would be useful to know if anyone with better experience and no axe to grind (members of the Epigraphic Society can hardly be said to be dispassionate when it comes to investigations of supposedly pre-Columbian inscriptions!) has examined the stone.

Viewed dispassionately, the Los Lunas inscription is a clear, but well constructed forgery (for its day). Despite the claims of high antiquity, there are features of the text (such as the mixing of letter forms between two separate alphabets) that are much more likely to derive from the work of a modern forger than from an ancient Hebrew or Samaritan scribe. The evidence for its origin is poor, but a comparison with the Bat Creek Stone suggests that it was a Mormon forgery. The ‘Mormon Battalion’, which was part of the US Army during the Mexican War, is known to have marched from Santa Fe down the Rio Grande Valley, passing close by, and it is possible that this is the date of the inscription.

35 Replies to “The Los Lunas Inscription”

  1. I have travelled to the Los Lunas stone on several occasions, I have done an extensive amount of research on the inscription on it and ignoring the fact that some vandalism has occured on the stone, the inscription is easily explained by someone that is multi lingual in speach but not highly educated. The inscription usage of greek and paleo judean characters indicates intended pronounciation of the word. Much as we now use all caps to EMPHASISE a word when trying to make a point. One of the characters, the “aleph”, was unknown as to its meaning until the 20th century even though the stone was well known in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. No one would use a character such as the aleph to make a “hoax” only to have it properly translated years later and it be appropriate to the context. Just some thoughts that you must have overlooked.

  2. Graham writes: “One of the characters, the “aleph”, was unknown as to its meaning until the 20th century even though the stone was well known in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.” Really? According to the historical citations concerning this stone, it was not shown to Hibben until 1933. Where is proof that is was “well known” any earlier. The (unknown) guide who is said to have seen it 50 years earlier is the only ambiguous reference to it being known at all.

  3. What cracks me up about all this “science” is that it’s literally just based on assumptions. One PhD archaeologist who studied the thing for decades off and on believes it’s authentic, another says it’s almost certainly a fake. The later argues it must be a fake because the text doesn’t fit within a certain perfect linguistic model, as if all people everywhere on the face of the planet always speak the same. As Brad points out, it’s perfectly plausible that a certain person with the right background might have written it the way they did. And as Brad also points out, there is linguistic evidence that it isn’t a fake. While not as hard of evidence as one might like, there is evidence of the stone being spotted pre-20th century. Why would the guide that led Dr. Hibben to the stone lie about having seen it as a child?

    And while some argue with the dating methodologies, they can’t be completely dismissed either. Bottom line is our dating methodologies (past and present) are imperfect. It seems rather apparent that the antagonists are approaching their analysis from a position of bias rather than objectively considering all the data.

    On Wikipedia I read one archaeologist argue it must be a fake because someone back in that time would have been simply passing through as a traveler and they wouldn’t have had the tools necessary to make such a genuine inscription. That’s quite a load of b.s. The whole thing that makes the inscription interesting to begin with is that it challenges the accepted historical narrative. That being the case is it really that difficult to even consider that maybe an ancient person travelling in that region who can also speak Hebrew just might not conform with the accepted history?

    I have no dog in the hunt one way or the other, but find it interesting. Since we’re making assumptions, I have a few.

    If it were a fake, one question I have, why would they try to create the text from scratch on their own rather than simply copy it word for word from some other text?You’re telling me some modern person learned imperfect ancient Hebrew in order to make a fake stone in the middle of nowhere that nobody could see? Someone back in that time period (early 1900s) in that location wouldn’t have had the ability to learn Hebrew at all. If it was a fake all they could have done is use a copy they had from and old book or other text. And if they had done this it would then match the linguistic model the experts say that it doesn’t…. and then I suspect they’d be complaining about this instead. “Oh well it can’t be real because the only people who knew this Hebrew lived in an earlier time and we’d expect someone who knew Hebrew in the Americas to have adopted a different style of language over time because of the influx of other languages and passage of time, yada, yada.”

    And there are no historical records of this area being used as part of some grand hoax? Just as some would say there is little evidence of it being genuine, well, there is zero evidence of it being a hoax, am I right? Are there any records of someone herding people out into the middle of nowhere desert we now call New Mexico in order to charge people to visit this stone?

    We know at a minimum the stone is from the 1800s… so why in the world would someone create this thing to begin with if it was purely a hoax? “Here, let me create this stone so some people 100-200 years from now will be really confused about it”… doesn’t really make much sense. Where is the motive?

    1. Where to begin with this?

      “What cracks me up about all this ‘science’ is that it’s literally just based on assumptions. One PhD archaeologist who studied the thing for decades off and on believes it’s authentic, another says it’s almost certainly a fake.”

      They’re not based on “assumptions” as much as different interpretations of observations. They’re not just making and arguing over random claims.

      “The later argues it must be a fake because the text doesn’t fit within a certain perfect linguistic model, as if all people everywhere on the face of the planet always speak the same.”

      We know that it is not the case that “all people everywhere on the face of the planet always speak the same”; in fact, knowing about the ways people spoke in different places at different times is a major factor in determining whether or not an artifact is authentic. And this inscription is not at all consistent with how we understand people to have spoken and written Hebrew and Greek.

      “As Brad points out, it’s perfectly plausible that a certain person with the right background might have written it the way they did. And as Brad also points out, there is linguistic evidence that it isn’t a fake. While not as hard of evidence as one might like, there is evidence of the stone being spotted pre-20th century. Why would the guide that led Dr. Hibben to the stone lie about having seen it as a child?”

      Brad’s comment is incomprehensible. What does he mean that “aleph” was unknown until the 20th century? I’m not going to address an incoherent argument. Again, the inscription is inconsistent with anything we know about how people have actually written Hebrew throughout history.

      “If it were a fake, one question I have, why would they try to create the text from scratch on their own rather than simply copy it word for word from some other text?You’re telling me some modern person learned imperfect ancient Hebrew in order to make a fake stone in the middle of nowhere that nobody could see? Someone back in that time period (early 1900s) in that location wouldn’t have had the ability to learn Hebrew at all.”

      Why wouldn’t someone in the early 1900s have been able to learn bad Hebrew? It hasn’t at all been uncommon for religious, educated Christians to learn Greek and Hebrew. In fact, this inscription is exactly consistent with what we would expect someone who has learned a bit of both but isn’t very good with them to create: Poorly worded and written in a confused mixture of multiple scripts. Maybe someone was just passing through and scribbled on a rock. We don’t have any compelling reason to suggest that this isn’t the case; the claim that this inscription is genuinely ancient is the extraordinary claim that is difficult to support.

      “If it was a fake all they could have done is use a copy they had from and old book or other text. And if they had done this it would then match the linguistic model the experts say that it doesn’t…. and then I suspect they’d be complaining about this instead. ‘Oh well it can’t be real because the only people who knew this Hebrew lived in an earlier time and we’d expect someone who knew Hebrew in the Americas to have adopted a different style of language over time because of the influx of other languages and passage of time, yada, yada.'”

      Even if the inscription was worded and written perfectly, we’d still have the problem that we have no other evidence or reason to suggest that that there has been a community of ancient Hebrew speakers in the Americas, while we know very well that there have been religious Christians capable of producing such a stone.

  4. Don’t discount the presence of refugee Jews in the earliest waves of Spanish colonists and settlers in the 16th or 17th century. This was one of the farthest outposts in the empire of New Spain. It was an excellent place to avoid the horrors of the Inquisition. Hebrew has been read and written by jews since long before the 1900’s.

    1. This is very insightful and quite possible! One could imagine an inscriber who had been trained in Latin and Greek in Catholic schools and had received mostly secret home instruction in Hebrew. That could explain a mishmash of Indo-European and Semitic influences that has been observed here. This sort of linguistic interference is quite common and unremarkable and happens frequently when cultures are in conflict or even contact. Imagine, for a moment, if linguistic scholars of 8th century England were to be transported to the present day. They might walk into a library, pull down a copy of The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, and say, “This can’t possibly be authentic English literature from over a hundred years ago, it has too much Danish and French influence and there are also too many Celtic words. 21st CENTURY FORGERY!”. Obviously we know that is exactly how English had actually developed by then, but our hypothetical scholar doesn’t know that.

  5. What I find funny is why you purport the Los Lunas Stone a fake, you’ve neglected to report the U.S. government has declared “many native North American Indians genetically are from the near east”…(Middle East)

    Origin and Diffusion of mtDNA Haplogroup X

    “Finally, phylogeography of the subclades of haplogroup X suggests that the Near East is the likely geographical source for the spread of subhaplogroup X2, and the associated population dispersal occurred around, or after, the LGM when the climate ameliorated. The presence of a daughter clade in northern Native Americans testifies to the range of this population expansion”.

    Link below.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1180497/

    DNA scientists claim that Cherokees are from the Middle East
    http://www.examiner.com/article/dna-scientists-claim-that-cherokees-are-from-the-middle-east

    HAARETZ Publishes
    Israeli researchers: Group of Colorado Indians have genetic Jewish roots

    Sheba Medical Center geneticists find common genetic mutation, often called the ‘Ashkenazi mutation,’ associated with an increased risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer.

    http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/jewish-world-news/israeli-researchers-group-of-colorado-indians-have-genetic-jewish-roots.premium-1.433227

    FORBES Publishes:

    Israel in all of Us? Research finds ‘Jewish genes’ in unusual places

    “Just last week, in an article accepted for publication in the European Journal of Human Genetics, Israeli geneticists from Sheba Medical Center announced that they had found that descendants of many Spanish speaking Americans in northern Texas and parts of Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona and southern California carry a potentially deadly genetic mutation–a variation of the BRCA1 gene known to cause breast and ovarian cancer in Jews. Geneticists have determined that this variation originated in the tightly knit Jewish community centuries ago, marking a carrier as a descendant of Jews”.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2012/06/04/israel-in-all-of-us-research-find-jewish-links-in-unusual-places/2/

    With this kind of reporting, who wants to bet the Los Lunas is a fake?

    And what does your Bible say… I can make a case for Israelites in America just on that alone. No genetic evidence reporting needed…

    1. No, you’re misrepresenting the genetic evidence. The presence of subhaplogroup X2 among certain Native American populations is not evidence for a recent migration from the Middle East, as you and some others want to claim. As you quote “the Near East is the likely geographical source for the spread of subhaplogroup X2, and the associated population dispersal occurred around, or after, the LGM when the climate ameliorated”, I’m left wondering if you know what LGM actually means? It’s the Late Glacial Maximum, the period when the last cold phase of the Pleistocene Ice Age reached its coldest, when the ice sheets that extended furthest from the poles. In other words, the population carrying the subhaplogroup is hypothesised to have arisen in the Middle East around 18,000 years before present and to have spread out from there around this time. Are you seriously claiming that ancient Israelites existed this far back in time and that there descendants were able to write passable psot-medieval Hebrew 18,000 years later? The article to which you link in The Examiner is making a preposterous claim based on this evidence: it’s sloppy journalism that misunderstands (perhaps even wilfully) the scientific evidence.

      The Ashkenazi mutation occurred among diaspora Jews living in the Rhineland and Germany. I don’t see what relevance it has to your argument.

      Your final quote refers to a mutation in “descendants of many Spanish speaking Americans in northern Texas and parts of Colorade, New Mexico, Arizona and southern California”. Did you miss the bit that says “Spanish speaking”? In other words, these are descendants of Spanish people with Jewish ancestry. Again, this is not relevant to your attempted defence of the Los Lunas inscription as genuine.

      All in all, the Los Lunas inscription remains a moderately-competently executed fraud.

  6. This is the LORD’S WORD written in stone for the colonization of the Americas by the ancient Hebrews who are known today as the Native American Indians! Shame on you for spewing lies about this Holy Rock. The Lord will humble you for this blasphemy! You and the so-called archeologists are withholding tons of evidence about the Native American’s Shemite Hebrew culture. No loss, because all the evidence we will ever need is written in the Holy Bible by the Greatest Author Ever the Lord Jesus Christ Himself!

    1. No matter how much you may think I am blaspheming (by the way, how can I blaspheme a deity that I don’t believe in?), it is absolutely clear that the stone is a nineteenth-century hoax. No amount of insult or quoting your bible will change that.

    2. Donovan, I myself am a Christian. I am curious as to what evidence you see in the Bible for this inscription being true and not a hoax. Or that Indians are direct descendants of ancient Hebrews for that matter (though they would be related to a degree of course). I have no idea how you would get that from the Bible. I know many Christians are all too eager to give credence to something that might possibly be evidence for the Bible, but you seem to take it to an extreme. Truthfully, I wonder if Donovan is a troll.

    3. Those are man’s words and lies Jews are Hebrews never came to America in till post-colonialism and Native Americans are not only Gentile all aliens are super Gentile and more like the peoples of the old world to would have got to them first you’re wrong fool you don’t know anything about Native Americans

  7. It’s truely amazing how a stone can contribute to such contention. Anybody, telling truth, doesn’t have to say, I don’t have a dog in the fight, then go on to say one way or another. YaHuWaH is Master. Arguements based on all sorts of difference in opinion and ones own understandings, is to replace YaH as Master and put yourself as Head. It is a cool discovery! It is wonderful to even hear of this discovery, fake or real. Are you g-d? Do you know everything? I do know 10 tribes of YaH have been scattered all over the globe, prior to columbus! Most importantly YaH hasn’t forgotten His promise to His 12 and He Will bring us back on the Teachings of Torah and Prophets! I’m planning to visit the area soon. If there is one discovery, there is more in the area. I don’t desire to offend men/women more intelligent than myself. But just stop the contentions. YaH is One. Which means He is One with His people and they with each other.

    1. Yahweh is a fake God and there’s no Israel ever or any Jews far across the world ever until post-colonial times they barely went anywhere that’s been debunked all these people are not only Gentiles and not super Gentiles you’re a liar or just wrong and ignorant and more this has been debunked and nothing you can say can change that the true Almighty creators they are Masters and and Lords and Ladies of all Great Holy Spirit be with you or save you from evil.

  8. http://www.econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/arch/loslunas.html

    From the above I have pasted the below quote….

    George Moorehouse (1985), a professional geologist, indicates that the boulder is of the same basalt as the cap of the mesa. He estimates its weight at 80 to 100 tons, and says it has moved about 2/3 of the distance from the mesa top to the valley floor since it broke off. The inscription is tilted about 40 degrees clockwise from horizontal, indicating that the stone has settled or even moved from its position at the time it was inscribed. (The above photograph was taken with a tilted camera.)

    The above information would seem relevant as to the writing on the stone’s authenticity IF the writing was done on the stone at it’s original site. And how long it took the stone to move from that site to it’s present position would give a realistic age of the writing as far as just from the movement of the stone from the time it broke off to it’s present position. Did it take a decade, a century, five hundred years or a thousand years for this stone to move with it’s writing from point a to present point B?
    Or was the writing done on the stone after it had made it’s movement to were it sits?

  9. Not a fraud this stone!!! Are you kidding me? Have you been there? Do you have degrees in geology, paleo-archeology, archeology, etc. You make it seem like the stone is a joke and as you claim a fake. Since you seem to know so much about the stone then tell me how do you get to this place. I have been there to know it is a difficult place to get to and out of the way. So far we attempted to locate this place 2 times and on the 3rd try it was a charm. No one in their right mind would go out to this desert of a place creating a fake artifact under harsh New Mexico conditions during the winter or summer but most of all having to deal with potential deadly rattlesnakes. And it is apparent you know nothing about New Mexico. Yet, to tell you from what I have heard about the history of this place is that the reason for the location of the Hebrew script is because of this location. But if you know so much about this location then describe it. Tell me why the fake person would want to spend extra time inscribing a fake Hebrew message? I’d tell you why the location is chosen but since you are one of those know it all’s you don’t deserve to know. The only reason I know about this place is that it became more than just a hike to find it. I heard about why the location is chosen and the meaning for the location! Wish I could share more but if you were really interested to know about this mystifying artifact then take the time to go find it, report back why the location was chosen and what type of location is it, and the meaning for the location!! I’d love to hear back from you soon on what I know and you don’t know!! It seems you have made up your closed little mind with out doing any physical investigation what so ever. With that type of judgmental thinking you are a suicide to your own brain for closing down to not learning more about the mysteries of life or other people’s lives that had nothing to do with you!! What conclusion have I come to which makes me believe that you are but would be the biggest fraud of all? Who is this someone who writes an article with no supporting documentation or evidence that it is a fake stone with a Hebrew inscription!! By the way, who are you? Where do you live? Are you a troll who trolls the internet publishing your personal views as some kind of fallacy for the control of the uneducated minds who happen to visit your website where you convince them that you’re some how right!! After reading your article I can tell you that you have no experience what so ever to even talk about the Los Lunas Decalogue Stones!!

    1. The burden of proof (evidence, “documentation”, provenance re: the “artifact” none of which have been presented) surely lies with those who claim it is genuine.

  10. the desert moses wondered for forty years is around that area. the all mighty god gave me knowledge to know here spiritual Israel/California is spiritual Egypt moses crossed the gulf of California. K.J.V bible the twelve tribes. genesischapter 49 verse 8/9/10 Judah the symbol of the lion vill not change from that place which is England also where jesus was born. verse 14-15 Alaska is. shoulder next to bear. which is Russia verse 17-18 is-sa-char dan is Hawaii.

    1. Did you Dillon and Ramona cough up the $25 to the state to visit the site? I plan on visiting the site, I’ve found the GPS local.

    1. From the extensive review of countless experts I’ve studied, my conclusions include: the area was once part of a major river (the dried up remains being easily evident) during a much wetter time period with easy access to the Gulf Of Mexico.

      The lettering’s inconsistencies are not unusual for the likely inscriber being from the sea faring Phoenician Empire city-states in the eastern Mediterranean easily accessible to the ancient Greeks, Israelites, and other Mediterranean people’s. The Phoenians were closely aligned with ancient Israel at the height of the latter’s wealth, and the Hebrew is consistent with King Solomon’a time.

      There is much evidence that the Phoenians traveled vast distances by sea all over the wold and certainly South America and North America where unique evidence exists. Their later people’s included the Carthaginians of North Africa who gave Rome all it could handle many many centuries later.

      Much evidence exists of major manufacturing sites in the territories of ancient Israel including the use of copper which had to have come from elsewhere, surely the Phoenians who mined it from far away lands.

      History has been so Euro-centric that great empires are hardly known by most of us. The Parthians who were Rome’s greatest competitors for about 500 years, the Scythians, and the full story of the Phoenicians and their heirs, among others.

      So it’s no surprise there is such resistence to thousands of years of Euro-centric dominated history, and disbelif that other cultures and people’s could have accomplished things Greece, Rome, and later empires did not. For example don’t we all still marvel at Egypt’s ppyranids? Huge perfect stone formations in the high mountains of South America, and countless other seemingly impossible construction projects?…

      History and archeology will continue to bring us more evidence that the ancient wold was very different than we’ve been taught. And the Phoenicians (along with their later heirs) sent out hundreds if not thousands of large ships filled with men and tools.and came back with valuable materials from all over the world. They had several hundred to even 1,000 or more years to do it, and certainly left people to settle in various places all over the world.

      This Hebrew and other Mediterranean people’s lettered stone is just one more piece of evidence of the history just being revealed to the public.

      AJC

  11. Keith – and all the ships at sea: I note with some dismay Keith’s closing comment –

    “The ‘Mormon Battalion’, which was part of the US Army during the Mexican War, is known to have marched from Santa Fe down the Rio Grande Valley, passing close by, and it is possible that this is the date of the inscription.”

    May I gently scold for including this old supposition (by Hibben himself) without any supporting evidence? Bad Archaeology needs good proof if it intends to shut down bad claims. Don’t compound the situation by repeating garbage without analysis.

    in 1846 as the Battalion passed through on their forced march, there were more than a thousand US troops and merchants encamped in the area at the time – all of whom stayed much longer in the area. Some of those men were deeply religious and also believed the Indians were of Hebrew origin. Why not ascribe the Stone to one of them? How about the many thousands of Mexicans that lived in the area over the time period in question. They were mostly Catholic – who believed in the Bible. Perhaps it was an zealous priest who cut the stone? Why pick on the Mormons?

    We need better analysis and some really good science – please.

    Though LDS, I’m interested in the route the Battalion followed – not in defending the religion on this matter, so let’s stay off that topic and stick to whether or not the Battalion ‘could’ have carved the Stone’s inscription.

    To all: please pardon the length of that which follows, but this topic seems to attract such and you’re getting a preview of a much longer article to be submitted in January to OCTA.

    First: There are a lot of opinions about this stone, only a few transcriptions (with WIDELY variant readings!!!), but precious little actual archaeology it seems. Where is the good, hard science on this stone? Carvings leave evidence in the grooves and one would think at least a high resolution microscope would have been taken into the field by someone to have a look. Morehouse (despite his amateur status) seems to have made one of the few attempts at forensic analysis. We need more hard science.

    I’m attempting to track down a 1959 article in which apparently a group of five BYU professors examined the Stone and decided it was likely a hoax. Also, I’m looking for a 1967 article purportedly given at a BYU symposia that apparently came to the same conclusion. Will report and share if/when I find them. The Church itself makes no claim. They don’t do that having been burned too many times. Any claim or insinuation that the LDS are using the Stone to prop up the Book of Mormon is far, far off target.

    Second: Permit me to add some circumstantial evidence against Mormon Battalion involvement.

    My research is to better define routes used by the Mormon Battalion (MoBat) during their enlistment year of July 1846-47. My background is geology [BS, Earth Science, BYU, 1980) with considerable experience in photo/map interpretation. My wife and I hiked the entire Battalion main route (Iowa to San Diego) in 2008-09 conducting field research. My intent is to improve upon the 1971 “Mormon Battalion Trail Guide” by Charles S. Peterson of the Utah Historical Society. They were not able to conduct field work, so we did. For a view of my ‘beta’ interpretation (as yet incomplete and not ‘pretty’ by far), go to: http://www.mapntour.com/view/mbtfs

    Occasionally I see these articles/posts that postulate a connection between the MoBat and the Decalogue Stone. It was ‘discoverer’ Frank Hibben himself who first implied that perhaps the MoBat may have created it since they were “active in the area”. Hibben was suspected of ‘salting’ some of his archaeological finds – not a good omen for the Stone if true. [‘someone’ needs to run that story to ground]

    The Battalion’s ‘main command’ under Ltc P St George Cooke, was marching pretty fast through the area and only camped one night in the vicinity of los Chavez (New Mexico) on October 26, 1846.
    Here are the main problems with the Mormon Battalion being involved in creating the Stone:
    1. Military Discipline – the new Battalion commander, P St George Cooke (non-Mormon), wasn’t letting them get away with any tom-foolery. He even had senior Captain Jesse Hunter arrested and placed under guard for a day because he left camp without permission (Oct 20). The men had to fall into formation for roll and sick call each morning and evening, each man answering for himself or being reported as ‘absent’.
    2. Indian threats – the Navajo were stealing animals and killing shepherds in the area. The regular Army soldiers were also in danger as proven less than two weeks later when a small detail was assaulted near their camp, barely escaping with their lives. (See Cooke’s journal and report by Capt Burgwin)
    3. Distance and Time – from the camp area of the 26th out to the Stone and back is just a titch under thirty miles. Then you need time to carve the stone. My analysis shows that if afoot, it simply cannot be done. If on mules – just barely possible.
    Additional constraints exist, weather being an important one.
    Most notably – there is no evidence that any Battalion participant or their descendants ever claimed to have seen or even heard about the los Lunas Stone.

    CONCLUSIONS: Based upon this circumstantial evidence, it is my opinion that neither the Mormon Battalion nor any of its personnel subsets had anything to do with creating the Los Lunas Decalogue Stone. A series of forensic tests should be conducted to determine the method used to create the inscription and the potential time frame in which it was created.

    Send additional information or inquires to:
    kevin@battaliontrek.com

  12. ANCIENT HEBREW TRANS-ATLANTIC MATERIAL NO DOUBT! PROFFESERS TODAY CAN’T EVEN CONJURE UP ENOUGH EVIDENCE-BASED CONCLUSIONS THAT 9/11 WASN’T DONE BY ABUNCH OF SNAKE EYED JEWISH MONGOLIANS. YOU PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE ARE ABUNCH OF IDIOTS.THIS IS THE WORK OF PHOENICIAN HEBREWS- WHITE EUROPEANS FROM THE B.C ERA, COMPARED TO THE SAME COMMANDMENTS IN THE MIDDLE EAST.IT’S Connecting to Google+

    CLEARLY SEEN AND OBVIOUS THIS WORK IS OF SCHEMATIC ORIGIN.AND JEWS WE ALL KNOW ARE NOT OF SHEM, THEY ARE OF CAIN.YAHWEH LEFT THAT THERE FOR WHITE EUROPEANS TO CONJURE UP IN THE LATTER DAYS…

  13. I’m not an archeologist, geologist or expert in any field but I have researched this site extensively and visited it with my wife Christmas day 2017. There is no possibility of dating this stone by its patina as it has been cleaned and chalked over many times. The one detail of Hidden Mountain that lends credence to the validity of this inscription is the “star chart” located on the northern most side of the mountain.This chart shows the constellations and a solar eclipse. The positions of the constellations in conjunction with the eclipse show a date of Sept 15 107 BC. (you can verify this with most any astrological program) I know naysayers will discount this additional evidence as a hoax as they have the Mystery Stone so to them this chart will mean nothing. To those who embrace the evidence of Diffusionism it will bolster their conclusions.. David Deal and Panther Yates both have written books about the Mystery Stone and the star chart.I urge you to read them.
    There are many other petroglyphs on the top of Hidden Mountain the meaning of which I am ignorant.
    My wife made a youtube video about our visit to Hidden Mountain called “Los Lunas Mystery Stone and a little History Documentary”. Its pretty good and presents a lot of the info David Deal and Panther Yates wrote about.
    Just remember about that one principal which cannot help but keep a man in ignorance, that principal is condemnation before investigation.

    1. Problem with what you’re saying is there’s no arguing like or anything the date on that and only that several points in this in the summer article here you’re commenting on actually refutes that and actually shows errors in it plus there’s Greek and Hebrew mixed in their sewing authentic as well as late writing the dating is clear.

      It’s a hoax proven

  14. Very simply, it’s a fake.

    The Jews do not venerate the Decalogue. That’s a Christian thing. To the Jews, the Decalogue is an index to the 613 laws that the faithful obey. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-ten-commandments

    The Judaism 101 site says: ” Talmudic times, the rabbis consciously made a decision to exclude daily recitation of the Aseret ha-Dibrot from the liturgy because excessive emphasis on these statements might lead people to mistakenly believe that these were the only mitzvot or the most important mitzvot, and neglect the full 613 (Talmud Berakhot 12a). By posting these words prominently and referring to them as “The Ten Commandments,” (as if there weren’t any others, which is what many people think) schools and public buildings may be teaching a message that Judaism specifically and consciously rejected.”
    http://www.jewfaq.org/10.htm

    So, no Jewish group would ever use the 10 Commandments on anything.

Agree or disagree? Please comment! If you've never commented before, you may have to wait until I approve it: please be patient.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: