Haran

I don't think so, but since there are not too many letters in the El Kerak inscription, it wouldn't be too hard to compare them with their counterparts in the Mesha stele. Comparing the wording would take a little longer, at least for me.

By the way, since you suspect the Mesha stele, did you note the following in the Jewish Encyclopedia: "Recent discussions give results based on reexamination and closer criticism of the text. It may be noted that an attempt to disprove the authenticity of the stone was recently made by A. Löwy (Berlin, 1903)." It would be interesting to know what his arguments were. Does anyone have access?

However, I think it would have to be weighed against the others listed in the bibliography on the Moabite Stone page.

I wonder if forgers ever once give thought to the fact that they are destroying what remains of the history of the world? This greatly disturbs me.

S.C.Carlson

I hope so, too, but we can only wait and see.

I have to wonder whether part of the reason why the Golan et al. enterprise blew up is that he attempted to do a Christian forgery and it backfired.

Stephen Carlson

Toto

Find or Forgery, Burial Box Is Open to Debate

Shanks is pathetic.

spin

I think that it is a species of necromancy. Where with Akkadian or Hittite there are hundreds of datable exemplars for their relevant periods and with Greek there are thousands, there are fewer than you can count with your pinkies. You have to go and raise the scribe to know when he wrote it. How many texts for example are in Moabite? One or two? These lay some claim to the notion of a monumental text tradition that simply hasn't manifested itself in reality. But a willingness to believe that despite the paucity of epigraphic remains there was such a tradition leads to palaeographic gurus unwittingly supporting the means with which the forger attracts customers.


spin

Haran

Curious...why on a Christian forgery?

Haran

A problem I see with this line of thought is that the similarity of Moabite to paleo-Hebrew and other ancient semitic scripts, of which there are plenty of examples, can at least help in dating Moabite (despite the paucity of Moabite inscriptions). Of course, this is provided that forgeries haven't hopelessly corrupted semitic palaeography.

Vorkosigan

That's one of the things that struck me about the Mesha Stele. The strong resemblence of "moabite" to Hebrew, as though a forger was working from a known example....

S.C.Carlson

Not exactly because the forgery involved Christianity, but because Golan's previous forgeries were basically first-temple period forgeries and the James Ossuary represented a foray into a new field he did not know well at all. The constellation of forces that allowed him to get away with his previous fakes wasn't in place for the Ossuary.

The long-term success of any serial forgery, confidence game, or other scam operation depends, to a large extent, on the willingness of its pool of victims to believe in what is being sold. When the subject matter pertains to something that has strong ideological resonance to potential victim, it reinforces the willingness to believe and suspends the otherwise normal skepticism in that victim. (No one is immune, even "skeptics"; everyone has an ideological Achilles' heel; it's just that there don't seem to be enough wealthy hard-core skeptics to make this kind of forgery profitable.)

Golan's string of previous forgeries involved mainly first-temple period artifacts that, if believe, confirm the historical claims in the Hebrew Bible. While having archaeological confirmation of the truth of the Old Testament is always appreciated, for example, among U.S. evangelicals, no one's faith is really threatened if nothing either way should be found. The Bible describes lots of events for which the prospect of archaeological proof or disproof is unlikely and few believers are bothered by the fact that the archaeological record is silent.

That is in the U.S. In Israel, however, the country's right to exist is still a paramount, an impossible-to-ignore issue, and the archaeological program happens to also serve a national purpose in confirming--not merely the content of factual propositions made in the Old Testament--but also the historical political claims of the Hebrew Bible. To many in Israel and, to certain extent, their enemies (Muslims hold the Hebrew Bible to be corrupt), the nation's legitimacy unavoidably depends on whether archaeology confirms or denies the political accounts of the Hebrew Bible. That is why, as explained in the latest issue of BAR we see some important members of the Israeli army (e.g. Moshe Dayan) also ordering soldiers to start archaeological digs.

Thus, the archaeological program into the period in which Israel and Judea were at their height, the first temple period, is absolutely vital within the ideological matrix present in the Middle East today. This can be seen in the traditional mission of the Israeli Antiquities Authority, which has been to stop looters--not to stop forgers. Looters represent a more serious threat because they could potentially steal the critical evidence that underscores Israel's right to exist as many perceive it. Forgers are less worrisome because they might actually reduce the pressure on looting by increasing the supply of ancient artifacts and, if they are not caught, they might increase the level of evidence for the Hebrew Bible. Forgery could become a big problem if it is perceived as undermining the credibility in the entire archaeological program. Otherwise, it was most threatening if it increased the demand for ancient artifacts so much that looting was encouraged.

(I'm not suggesting that the IAA does not care about historical truth; they do. It is just that catching forgers is very expensive and which of the two problems, looting or forgery, is a better allocation of scarse resources.)

Thus, as long as Golan et al. are not significantly involved in looting archaeological sites, they would have hardly come to the attention to the IAA.

The James Ossuary does not have the same array of ideological forces behind it. It is a second-temple artifact, not a first-temple artifact and does nothing to bolster some people's perceptions of the historical legitimacy of the Jewish state. It is an uncomfortable fit for the ideological interests of Roman Catholics because the inscription tends to contradict (though not explicitly) the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary. It is not even a great fit for Protestants because it is on the wrong side of the Grace (Paul) vs. Law (James) debate that defines the Reformation. Oded Golan is not a Christian and doesn't understand what really makes Christians tick, otherwise he would not have produced an artifact that Christians can so easily live without as if it never existed. Even if he did, the IAA is not controlled by Christians.

The key to a successful forgery is that it has to appear so good to the victim that the victim is afraid of finding out it is not true and refuses to check. The James Ossuary wasn't that good. Golan's actions, such as not remembering when he bought it and his shipping it to Canada, worried the IAA as a looting case and they started looking into it and everything else he did more seriously. No forger, no matter how good, can withstand serious scientific and forensic scrutiny. The key is to avoid scrutiny, and the James Ossuary wasn't so ideologically positioned to prevent serious scrutiny as Golan's other fakes were.

spin

Oh, you are such a skeptic! :thumbs:


spin

PhilosopherJay

Hi S.C. Carlson,

NIce analysis. It sounds quite right to me.

I remember seeing a lecture by a noted Israeli archaeologists a few years ago. He spent about an hour telling the enthralled young college audience how archaeology had proved the Bible to be amazingly historically accurate. The audience treated him like a holy man, practically singing hallelujah, with every miraculous find he described.

When I pointed out that no evidence had been found for a united kingdom of Israel and Judea and that no evidence for the exodus had been found, he treated me as an ignorant and blasphemous unbeliever. He did concede that perhaps the exodus did not involve 500,000 people but only a few thousand, but this too could be explained without doubting the basic truthfulness of the biblical texts.

The session taught me that the archaeologist with the bible in one hand and a spade in the other is still very much alive and thriving.

Warmly.

Philosopher Jay