Nexus - 1503 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

Controversy over Fabrication Claims that the skulls are not genuine artefacts but instead were The British Museum Skull is part of the exhibit at the Museum manufactured between 1867 and 1886 in Germany, as German of Mankind in London, where it is one of the most popular items craftsmen were deemed to be the only people with the skills to be on display. The label on its case reads "originally thought to have able to carve these skulls. been Aztec, but recent research proves it to be European", of late Though Boban was indeed a controversial figure, he was, of 19th-century fabrication. The museum obtained the skull for course, no different from all the other operators on the antiquities £120 in 1897 from Tiffany & Co., the New York-based jewellers. markets in those days—some of whom made deals for treasures As to how Tiffany's had acquired it, speculation was that it such as the Rosetta Stone or the Elgin Marbles that continue to originated from a soldier of fortune in Mexico. upset entire nations from which they were "exported". In 2004, Professor Ian Freestone, of the University of Wales at However, there is no evidence—not even circumstantial—that Cardiff, examined the skull and concluded that it was cut ani Boban sourced these skulls from Germany. It is logical to polished with a wheeled instrument, which he said was not use conclude that, as Boban operated in Mexico, he may have by the Aztecs (see http://hnn.us/roundup/comments/9582.html). acquired the skulls in Mexico. It would be completely logical to Freestone argued that the sculpture was therefore of modern, post- assume that, if they are Aztec in origin, they were offered on the Columbian origin, further noting that the crystal used was Mexico City antiques market where Boban picked them up. It is common in Brazil but not Mexico—the Aztec homeland—an the most logical scenario, yet academics seem to prefer the that "the surface of the skull, which contains tiny bubbles that modern German fabrication theory for which there is no evidence. glint in the light, is more sharply defined than softer-looking Why? Perhaps they prefer to label them as fakes so as to evade Aztec crystal relics with which it has been compared". However, potential claims from Mexican authorities? Freestone said that even though there was strong circumstantial As to the fact that the skulls were polished with a wheeled evidence suggesting the artefact was 19th-century European in instrument, Professor Freestone himself argued that this in itself origin, this did not amount to cast-iron proof. does not mean they are modern fabrications (he examined the In recent years, the story of how the British Museum acquire Paris as well as the London skull in 2004). Though Freestone, the crystal was investigated by Dr Jane MacLaren Walsh of the Walsh and others suggested this overturns the likelihood that the US Smithsonian Institution. She concluded that the British skulls are pre-Columbian, other experts like Professor Michael D. Museum Skull and the one at Musée de l'Homme (Museum of Coe of Yale University stated that evidence of wheel markings in Man) in Paris were both sold by Eugéne Boban. Boban was a no way proves that the skulls are modern. He actually said that controversial collector of pre-Columbian artefacts and an antiques although it has long been accepted that no pre-Columbian dealer who ran his business in Mexico City between around 1860 civilisation used the rotary wheel, new evidence contradicts this and 1880-81. Though it is indeed likely that Boban placed the scientific dogma. Wafer-thin obsidian ear-spools are now known skull at Tiffany's for auction, there is no hard evidence. However, to have been made using some rotary carving equipment and to be such evidence does exist for the Musée de l'Homme Crystal Skull, dated to the Aztec/Mixtec period. According to Chris Morton and which in 1878 was donated by collector Alphonse Pinart who had Ceri Louise Thomas in The Mystery of the Crystal Skulls, Coe bought it from Boban. Boban's 1881 catalogue does list another concluded (p. 226): "People who sit in scientific laboratories crystal skull, "in rock crystal of natural human size", selling for don't know the full range of the culture they're dealing with. We 3,500 French francs—the most expensive item in the catalogue. It really don't know half as much about these early cultures as we is possible it was never sold, and hence was offered to Tiffany's to think we do. People need to re-examine their beliefs." sell at auction. Walsh and some of her colleagues have largely presented Having established these facts, however, Walsh then argued Boban as a charlatan, but they've failed to report that Boban was nown to have owned genuinely ancient artefacts as well as a collection of rare ooks and early Mexican manuscripts. He ad even written a scientific study, "Documents pour server a l'histoire du Mexique" ("Documents to serve the history of Mexico") (1891). Furthermore, he ersonally crusaded against frauds and fakes, such as in 1881 when he spoke out against forgeries that were being made in the suburbs of Mexico City. Would he shoot himself in the foot that same year by isting a fraudulent crystal skull in his catalogue? Mentions of the German connection and claims of Boban's dishonesty come from a single letter from one of Boban's competitors, Wilson Wilberforce Blake. He wrote how they should buy from him, not Boban who was "not honest", and he made accusations that the skull Boban had sold was a forgery, insinuating that the skull had been made in Germany instead. However, The British Museum Crystal Skull. no evidence was ever produced for any of 52 = NEXUS APRIL — MAY 2008 The British Museum Crystal Skull. www.nexusmagazine.com