McGinnis Cross - Relic or Fraud?

[Armchair detective]

One of the McGinnis descendents showed Rock and Marty a small gold cross that according to family lore was a remnant of 3 treasure chests the original three found on Oak Island.

It was stated it was shown to a jeweler who said it could be up to 500 years old.
Another expert? said the cross originally had jewels in it which could have been easily knocked out as gold is a soft metal.

Cross is shown in the palm of a hand.

Picture quality related to phone picture snapped from analog TV.

Jurors?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[Armchair detective]

Methinks its real.

 

[n2mini]

What I find more suspect then them having the cross whether or not their story is true or not, is that that there were 3 guys searching and they found 3 treasure boxes. I'm hoping that their original story has gotten changed over the years and they originally claimed to have found 1 chest that they were able to split evenly.. They each got "some treasure" and the story got changed along the way... If they were going to make the whole story up I would hope they would know that finding 3 chests would be unrealistic..

 

[pepperj]

What I find more suspect then them having the cross whether or not their story is true or not, is that that there were 3 guys searching and they found 3 treasure boxes. I'm hoping that their original story has gotten changed over the years and they originally claimed to have found 1 chest that they were able to split evenly.. They each got "some treasure" and the story got changed along the way... If they were going to make the whole story up I would hope they would know that finding 3 chests would be unrealistic..

It was like a little game we played in the small one room classroom.
35 kids, 2 different grades.

The teacher whispered something in the first child's ear.

That kid passed the message to the other.

By the time it got to the end of the 35 different versions.

Let's say it kind of resembled the original message but had many twists and turns, including subject matter.

This is how fables/stories are created.
It grows, gets a little more exciting to hold the interest of the ear.

By the end it is nothing more than a cow floppy.

 

[Armchair detective]

What I find more suspect then them having the cross whether or not their story is true or not, is that that there were 3 guys searching and they found 3 treasure boxes. I'm hoping that their original story has gotten changed over the years and they originally claimed to have found 1 chest that they were able to split evenly.. They each got "some treasure" and the story got changed along the way... If they were going to make the whole story up I would hope they would know that finding 3 chests would be unrealistic..

Do you recall the OI episode when the OI team visited Captain Anderson's descendant? He made a big show of showing a keyring with 4 keys on it, one of which opened Captain Anderson's sea chest.
So...3 leftover keys.
A connection?

 

[freeman]

The cross was identified as being a common retail piece of jewellery from the 1970s.

 

[n2mini]

The cross was identified as being a common retail piece of jewellery from the 1970s.

Not doubting your info, but I don't recall hearing that. Do you know where we can find that story? I remember the episode the family was on and remember a lot of vague info being talked about and wondering way not just get it tested..

 

[freeman]

Not doubting your info, but I don't recall hearing that. Do you know where we can find that story? I remember the episode the family was on and remember a lot of vague info being talked about and wondering way not just get it tested..

?? They don't go and correct themselves on the show next episode. There is a whole internet of follower fact checkers that look into the claims made on the show. Do your own research instead of taking what is said on the show as being factual. You'll find 99% of what you get handed is just made up.

 

[n2mini]

I know the show doesn't want to show anything that goes against their narrative. Granted it would go a long ways with some of the viewers if they would be honest about some stuff and make the show look more like a believable treasure hunt and not just to make their money back from their initial investment on the island before the show came along. That being said, we all know how people are on the internet , you can't believe them all the time either, so unless someone has the same cross they can show a pic of, how does any of them know the age of it. Surely they aren't basing their "findings/thoughts" just on that attached ring at the top that even if it is 300 years old someone could of had that added on to actually be able to wear it or hang it as a display...

 

[Armchair detective]

Dang it - Crow is is modern manufacture.

What gives it away in the picture below is the lower leg of the cross.

Note the regular pattern - over, under, over, under, etc, and the regularity of the spacings.

But what really gives it away is the gold soldering of the attachment points. You have to have pinpoint control of the heat to accomplish this, like a soldering iron (with electricity showing up around 1920).

I was going to have fun with this - set up a free software jewelry design program to substitute different types of jewels in and out and maybe (a long shot) determine who owned it in the first place.

And now it's a pile of crap, AND ITS ALL YOUR FAULT CROW!!!

(Sniffle)

 

[Armchair detective]

The picture is much clearer on a TV screen (the last episode of season 3).

 

[TruthbeTold]

Yet more proof of the long running oak island scam.

 

[Armchair detective]

Been some time.
Found another picture of the cross.
Page 2, SEASON 9, #163, out the link.

This looks like the real deal, which means the one on the show was a prop.

 

[SSR]

If you walk in to a museum with a relic that you provide them a cool story for they will not accept your story as fact, and that is not because they are calling you a fraudster. Out of context, an object is just an object. Anything removed from the ground may a well have belonged to Adam and Eve. In the case of the OI story it is a lot worse, because we know we are dealing with at least one scoundrel (Vaughn) who pushed an origin account that we know does not compute on many levels after John Smith died. It is often hard to suspend disbelief when one wants to accept something, but disbelief should be the starting point when looking to build reliably.

 

[kudo623]

The McGinnis gold cross is authenticated appraised as made in Germany hand hammered in the 16th century. The 3 boxes of treasure or 1 box divided 3 ways is what Joanne McGinnis said in an interview. She said that the treasure was quite considerable. Danny Henninger wrote an article on it and saw the gold cross himself.

 

[Red-Coat]

The cross was identified as being a common retail piece of jewellery from the 1970s.

The McGinnis gold cross is authenticated appraised as made in Germany hand hammered in the 16th century. The 3 boxes of treasure or 1 box divided 3 ways is what Joanne McGinnis said in an interview. She said that the treasure was quite considerable. Danny Henninger wrote an article on it and saw the gold cross himself.

While I think the whole Oak Island Treasure story is complete bunkum, and any connection to the Knights Templar even more so, I’m interested in who has said what about the cross and the degree of proof offered.

When the antiques appraiser Dr. Lori Verderame examined it in hand (visual examination only), she concluded it was composed of high quality (22-24 carat) rose gold, and was likely cast [not hammered] in the Spanish West Indies sometime between 1550 and 1700. She also said that the purpose of the cross’s many holes was to house emeralds.

[Addition: The McGinnis family openly admit that there is no tangible evidence for who actually found the cross, where or when it was found, or even whether it was obtained rather than found, apart from the provenance and provenience stories verbally handed down through generations of the family.]

 

[BennyV]

While I think the whole Oak Island Treasure story is complete bunkum, and any connection to the Knights Templar even more so, I’m interested in who has said what about the cross and the degree of proof offered.

When the antiques appraiser Dr. Lori Verderame examined it in hand (visual examination only), she concluded it was composed of high quality (22-24 carat) rose gold, and was likely cast [not hammered] in the Spanish West Indies sometime between 1550 and 1700. She also said that the purpose of the cross’s many holes was to house emeralds.

I remember this as well.

 

[SSR]

While I think the whole Oak Island Treasure story is complete bunkum, and any connection to the Knights Templar even more so, I’m interested in who has said what about the cross and the degree of proof offered.

When the antiques appraiser Dr. Lori Verderame examined it in hand (visual examination only), she concluded it was composed of high quality (22-24 carat) rose gold, and was likely cast [not hammered] in the Spanish West Indies sometime between 1550 and 1700. She also said that the purpose of the cross’s many holes was to house emeralds.

[Addition: The McGinnis family openly admit that there is no tangible evidence for who actually found the cross, where or when it was found, or even whether it was obtained rather than found, apart from the provenance and provenience stories verbally handed down through generations of the fa

Expert means nothing. Provenance is not a story given by people who seem "nice". Being an antique's appraiser is something you can claim without credentials. It's even worse than getting a diploma from a diploma mill from an ad on a pack of matches. You can become a certified appraiser by essentially paying membership dues to some unregulated outfit. The training is a guide to where to go to look up realized values. My now deceased father had such a license. It was useful to have for his auction business to present to lawyers as evidence of competency .

As an anecdotal example, I remember him being asked to sell a piece of furniture for an estate where the family produced pages upon pages of "evidence" that the chest was a colonial piece from the late 1700s (most of it was genealogical work). Words to the effect that some dealers had offered them "big money" for the piece were also given. Upon rudimentary examination, it was noticed that the entire carcass had been poorly made up of fruit boxes from the early 20th century. Excuse me for saying it, but some people are nuts and dangerous. My father ended up selling that piece with their paperwork with a caveat, but someone saw fit to not bother looking for themselves. If the expert is not you then be VERY careful. The horseshit attributions we have seen on the COOI are testament to how wild some people's ideas can be.

 

[BennyV]

Then bail looked modern on the cross

 

[Spanish Spinach]

I'm taking the liberty of adding a little more to the story about the cross and the statements made by the descendants of the three discoverers of the well.


1/ These poor ladies are simply repeating what they were told... and it's quite interesting to note that, privately (unofficially), the story they heard was one of success — the discovery of a treasure — rather than failure — finding nothing.


2/ It's actually pretty clever to publicly (officially) claim that no treasure was found, in order to sell the island at the best possible price. After all, the buyer would be purchasing the potential of a treasure rather than just some land, trees, and a swamp.


3/ It's very likely that the treasure was divided up by the original discoverers, and the McGinnis family kept the cross as a kind of concrete proof of the unofficial family legend of their success. This seems fairly plausible if you're willing to believe that a treasure was actually buried on Oak Island.


4/ The key piece of information shared by the McGinnis descendants is actually disastrous for the Laginas, because it completely destroys the core appeal of the TV show. They’re basically saying there’s nothing left to find — the treasure was already found — and they have in their possession something the Laginas haven’t been able to find in 15 years: a gold artifact.


5/ If there were any real doubts about the authenticity of the cross, I believe the Laginas would have every reason to make it known, because it would cast doubt on the old ladies' revelation. Interestingly, aside from two or three episodes, the show never mentions the cross or the claim that the treasure was already found ever again.


6/ As for the possible origin of the treasure... a few episodes briefly reference the expedition of the Duke of Anville and his logbook, which is kept in a museum and seems to be authentic. It mentions French soldiers' pay being buried on an island full of oak trees in Mahone Bay... Yet again, a highly specific and apparently credible piece of information that's brushed aside to keep spinning endless theories about Freemasons, Portuguese explorers, the Templars, and so on.


7/ The TV show's goal is to keep going, not to reveal the truth. But I think the truth has already been given: if there really was a treasure, it was French, and McGinnis and his friends found it. Afterward, they spun a whole story to sell their island for the best price. The tragedies that followed prevented the truth from ever coming out, out of fear of lawsuits or revenge. I believe the McGinnis descendants are fully aware of those risks, which is why they prefer to keep some doubt alive about their story and the origin of the cross.