[Red Badger]

The cleaned up crucifix, found by an amateur metal detector The Viking Museum Ladby

[Red Badger]

PinGGG!.......................

[dp0622]

looks a little like a ginger bread cookie.

great artwork though.

[Vigilanteman]

Maybe. Or maybe it is just something that Viking raiders found attractive when they were pillaging Christian lands circa 900 ad.

[Tennessee Nana]

WOW

Look at the detail...

[TexasFreeper2009]

um...

I just see a primitive man with his arms out stretched.

I dont see how this can be considered a crucifix at all.

[Bubba Gump Shrimp]

[Hostage]

> “...BCE...”

Uh-huh ...

[Jedidah]

The dates are all messed up. 1,100 years ago, or 10th century BCE?? Surely they meant AD?

[truth_seeker]

It is stated that Leif Ericsson was Christian, when he sailed to Canada, in the year 1,000 AD.

[Boogieman]

Doesn’t look much like a crucifix to me. The figure is so stylized, it is hard to even say it is meant to be human. The only resemblance I see to the typical Christian iconography is the cross shape and the posture, but it could just as well be an idol of something with outstretched arms as a depiction of a man on a crucifix.

If it is a crucifix, it must be an early one made by local craftsmen, because by that time, Christian iconography following the normal traditions would look much different than this.

[Izzy Dunne]

the first half of the 10th century BCE,

So, a 3000 year old crucifix, eh? Will wonders never cease...

[BeauBo]

Is that a chain mail vest?

[weston]

Looks like a baby in a papoose to me.
Hands tucked in the pockets. Legs in pockets with booties sticking out.

[Sans-Culotte]

I am confused. The headline says it is 1,100 years old, then the article says "This is a sensational find that dates from the first half of the 10th century BCE,” Beck told DR. So, that would make it something like 3,000 years old, and over a thousand years before Christ. And how do they know how old it is?

[csvset]

Well, it isn’t Jesus . Next guess ! I showed the picture to my wife, with no info about the claim it was a crucifix. I asked her, “What do you think? “ She replied, “ South American “ . That was my initial thought too. Looks like possible mail or other armor and I think he has feathers to represent wings. Then again, I said the bumps were a sure sign that he was reptilian.

Extra! This just in. On further review, it’s an owl man.

[Vermont Lt]

That looks more Central American than Viking.

Crosses have been in use for a lot longer than Christianity.

[GreenHornet]

“This is a sensational find that dates from the first half of the 10th century BCE,”

I prefer, and will continue to use, the term BC (Before Christ) rather than the politically correct BCE (Before Common Era), which is used in the never ending effort to secularize everything.

[Cementjungle]

[katana]

The Danes were raiding monasteries and Christian Saxon villages along the English coast in the 700's. This crucifix, if that's what it is and not a pagan figure that coincidentally is cross shaped, could have been taken (maybe with its owner as a slave) in a raid. In other words, it may or it may not change history.

[TXnMA]

Apparently, a nice example of the "Gold Granulation" art form!

FWIW, the artifacts from King Tut's tomb include many superb examples of "Granulation" -- which, I understand, depends on the fact that tiny spheres and wires of gold can be bonded (welded) together using only heat and pressure (no solder required).

FYI, the same ("thermocompression bonding") principle was, for many years, the sole means of bonding gold wires between integrated circuits and the packages that connected them to "the outside world"...