ican, Professor McCulloch has an article

(J)

LU

Cr)

LU

CC
1--
LU

LU

50

about an oddly shaped structure once lo-
cated near Milford, Ohio, just outside
Cincinnati, and described in Ancient Mon-
uments of the Mississippi Valley (1848) by
Ephraim Squier and Edwin Davis. Seen
from above, the series of walls comprised
eight branches that appear to reach up
from a single, long line. It doesn't take
much of an imagination to see the simi-
larity between this structure and a meno-
rah.
Some would claim no such construct
ever existed, but Professor McCulloch
points out that Squier and Davis were not
the only ones to record its existence. Oth-
er maps, including one by a major with
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, also
note the menorah-shaped walls.
The "Hannukiah Mound," as Professor
McCulloch labels it, has obvious similar-
ities to a Jewish symbol. The Decalogue
Stone and Keystone prove much more
challenging.
There is no precedent in Jewish
history for relics shaped like either
of Wyrick's finds — nothing that re-
sembled them in the Holy Temple
which is the place, one would think,
from which Jews might have drawn
inspiration for creating these arti-
facts. Nor is there mention made
either in the Torah or the Talmud
of any such items.
A writer suggested in a recent is-
sue of Ancient American that the
Decalogue Stone might have served
as tefillin (because of a slot at the
bottom, through which a strap
could have been fit). Yet it in no way
resembles tefillin today or any il-
lustration of tefillin from through-
out history, nor does Jewish history
record tefillin which contain an ab-
breviated form of the Ten Com-
mandments.
The Keystone is even more ob-
scure, though it clearly was not
what its name suggests. Smooth
and rounded, "it wouldn't have
worked as a keystone, in any case,"
Professor McCulloch says. He the-
orizes it may have been a kind of
prayer wheel, which one held in his
hand and turned from side to side.
Especially curious is a profile, under-
neath the name "Moses," on the Decalogue
Stone. Jews always have been hesitant to
reproduce biblical images, especially of
such distinguished figures as Moses. But
it is not unprecedented. Professor Mc-
Culloch points to Jewish Bibles whose cov-
ers bear pictures of Moses. Furthermore,
he says that a fortress, the Dura-Europos,
from the third century C.E. and located
along the Euphrates (today, Syria) con-
tained a synagogue with walls showing
Moses and Aaron. Yet these are all draw-
ings or paintings and not sculpted human
acsares, which some believe Jews are pro-
hibited from creating (in the command-
ment not to make "graven images").

Perhaps the most puzzling aspect of the
Holy Stones is the notion that someone
would take so much time — there is no
denying the impressive and extensive
carving both on the Decalogue Stone and
its container — to design a fake. And this
may be the most convincing argument in
favor of its legitimacy.
Why would anyone spend hours upon
hours just to play a trick — and then nev-
er even step forward to claim responsibil-
ity and gloat?
"It is clear that whoever made the
stones thought of them as a religious la-
bor of love," Professor McCulloch says.
He is not the kind of man who denies
the existence of archaeological hoaxes. In
fact, it was he who figured out a grand
trick played by Dr. Nicol, the dentist who
accompanied David Wyrick on the hunt
for the Decalogue Stone, decades after it
had been perpetrated and years after it
had fooled other scholars.

vinced it was further proof of an early Jew-
ish presence in America.
Then Professor McCulloch noticed an
unusual coincidence. Read left to right, in-
stead of right to left as one does with He-
brew, the letters appear to spell J.H.
NCHL. Add the vowels "I" and "0" and
it becomes clear the good dentist must
have had more than his share of laughs
over this heralded discovery. And he had
even been bold enough to sign his work.
In creating this, and even more "historic
relics" since discovered to be forgeries, Dr.
Nicol was "trying to discredit Wyrick," Pro-
fessor McCulloch says. "And unfortu-
nately, a lot of people were persuaded that
nothing from Newark could be trusted."

An Innocent Man

It's hard to find much on which Huston
McCulloch and Bradley Lepper agree
when it comes to the Holy Stones. But
there is this one point: David Wyrick
did not forge either of the relics.
In fact, Dr. Lepper goes so far as
to denounce as lies some of the sto-
ries that surfaced following Wyrick's
death — stories that supposedly point
to his guilt. Among these: that a He-
brew Bible was found in Wyrick's
home, along with attempts at
scratching Hebrew letters into stone
and sculpted images of Moses re-
markably similar to the picture found
on the Decalogue Stone.
Nor does Dr. Lepper disagree with
Professor McCulloch about the
tremendous time and effort that
someone — or group of someones —
put into creating the Decalogue
Stone.
But he is not mystified by the fact
that someone did produce the stone
— because he believes he knows ex-
actly who manufactured it and why.
The whole affair, Dr. Lepper says,
was anything but a prank. In fact, it
was an elaborately orchestrated
scheme, a kind of religious mission
headed by a group of devoted Chris-
tians who wanted to prove the legit-
imacy of a very different historical
treasure: the Bible.
The stones were elaborate "be-
cause they were specifically crafted
Among the other trea- One side of the
Keystone reads,
sures discovered in Ohio was "King of the Earth." as scientific forgeries," Dr. Lepper
says. "They were created to discount
a mask onto which had been
carved the Hebrew letters lamed, kat; nun, the idea that there was 'scientific support'
chet, yud. It appeared something like this: for slavery and defend the Holy Scriptures,
and in that way they really were 'Holy
Stones."
Dr. Lepper's research into the stones
began around 1988, when he started work-
ing with the Ohio Historical Society. While
studying archaeology in college, he had
heard about the Holy Stones; everybody
For years this mask, which has since knew they were fakes.
But as a curator with the Historical So-
disappeared, was believed to be yet an-
other in the remarkable finds in the ciety, Dr. Lepper always was being asked
mounds. Scholars offered various trans- about Wyrick's discovery. So with the as-
lations for the Hebrew; many were con- sistance of his friend and colleague, the

J. Huston McCulloch believes the stones are too
intricate, too elaborate to be forgeries.

Rev. Jeffrey Gill of the Disciples of Christ
in Fairmont, Va., he began to look into the
history of the players. Their first stop was
Wyrick's friend and leading defender, John
W. McCarty.
At first glance, the minister was an un-
remarkable figure. A native of Ireland, he
had attended Kenyon College where he
received excellent grades. During the Civ-
il War, he served as a, chaplain for the in-
fantry. He later settled in Newark, Ohio.
But as Dr. Lepper and the Rev. Gill dug
further, they found that McCarty was,
in fact, a curious man.
He did well in school, all right, but pro-
fessors also remarked that he "had some
problems" and was "marked by much way-
wardness." And while he did serve as an
army chaplain, he left under odd circum-
stances. One letter said he "has lost his in-
fluence among the troops." Though he said
he resigned, McCarty likely was booted
out.
McCarty worked closely with the Rev.
Robert Mcilvaine, the Episcopal Church's
bishop in Ohio and a prominent religious
figure of the time. Bishop Mcilvaine count-
ed among his friends presidential candi-
date Abraham Lincoln. They shared a
vision of a United States free of that most
shameful of institutions: slavery.
If there was anyone in the world Bish-
op McIlvaine despised, it was Josiah Nott.
Dr. Lepper says that Nott, a physician
from Mobile, Ala., was "a rabid proponent"
of a movement, the Unity of Man, which
continues to inspire numerous hate groups
today.
The Unity of Man is anything but what
its name implies. Nott was both a racist
and an anti-Semite (Jews, he constantly
reminded followers, were not only idiots
but evil, the very people who had "cruci-
fied and rejected Jesus").
Nott was certain the Bible had it all
wrong. He insisted that humans had ex-
isted ages ago, and mankind started with
groups of individuals, not just Adam and
Eve. The finest of all men were white. And

