Vorkosigan

Yes, she says that in her final report. That's why I think she sees deeper; her position is consistent with what both the Toronto and the IAA analyses said.

Yes, but that does not mean she doesn't think it is a mix. That is, she sees that mix in a way that Cross does not: meaningfully.

That is my belief. Is it still slanderous to state it as a belief? If so, I withdraw it.

Lemaire is involved in each one of these forgeries as the man who presented it to the world. There are several other things from "private collections" that Lemaire has introduced that are also questionable. It is hard to believe that someone could do as you have explained so many times. Further, Lemaire's statement in his intro to the Ossuary book that Golan showed him a pic of the Rahmani catalog inscription copied onto the Ossuary before Lemaire saw the Ossuary is...highly suggestive.

Here is a website on the ostraca owned by Moussaieff, the private collector to whom Golan has regularly sold "artifacts." The original translator is....you guessed it. This triangle Golan-Lemaire-Moussaieff shows up again and again. For example:

• ....temple receipt that reads, "Pursuant to the order of you of Ashyahu the king to give by the hand of Zecharyahu silver of Tarshish to the House (Temple) of Yahweh three shekels." The receipt is owned by London Collector Schlomo Moussaief unfortunately, know one knows where it was discovered, but Shanks believes that someone may know but they are not talking. The ostraca measures 4 inches wide by 3.5 inches tall and has the name Tarshish on it. This may be the Tarshish of 1 Kings 10:22 where gold, silver, apes and ivory were acquired by Solomon and Hiram.

That ostracon was brought to light by --- you guessed it -- Andre Lemaire. He was also involved with the "puzzling" Widow's Plea ostracon that Golan sold to Moussaieff.

Now read this:

• The ivory pomegranate scepter head was discovered by French Scholar Andre LeMaire in an antiquities shop in Jerusalem in 1979. The artifact, was dated to the 8th century B.C., was eventually purchased by the Israel Museum in 1988. The inscription reads "For the house of Yahweh, holy to the priests," The house of Yahweh is more than likely referring to the Temple or the "House of the Lord." An additional scepter head was discovered that probably also belonged to the Temple or was used for a horses bridle (Assyrian relief depictions) but there was no inscription on it when it was discovered (Price, 1997, 185 - 186). From here

I'll bet greenbacks to euros that this, the only "artifact" of the First Temple, is a fake (I had no idea Lemaire was involved until I read that website). Lemaire has discovered all these famous artifacts that provide direct archaeological links to Israel's history. In the end every one will prove to be a fake. Based on the timing, and the involvement of Lemaire, and several other things, I would bet that the Tel Dan stele someday turns out to be fake as well.

I agree, but I think if you look into Lemaire's behavior, it raises numerous red flags. Yuval Goren has criticized academics for their involvement in frauds, and the Israeli police have also suggested they believe a prominent academic is involved. You make the call.

Vorkosigan

Steven Carr

Does anybody know why Lemaire is a former priest and why he gave up the priesting business?

spin

I guess that there's no real dispute over Altman's position on the separate parts of the James inscription.

As to Lemaire, I agree that there is a long connection between him and works that have been through the hands of Golan. I am still not convinced over your allegations as to his actions and motives. I'm still inclined to see that he is a willing believer of anything that supports his religion. I'm sure you've been in contact with such people many times.

His relationship with the Tel Dan inscription seems only secondary. Biran, the archaeologist, and Naveh, the highly reputed epigrapher, were the people who published the first find in 1993. Lemaire didn't go to press on the inscription until May of the following year and I think that Emile Puech beat him into print as well. Both must have been rush jobs though, for usually it takes several months to get such articles through the system.

On the BYTYHWH inscription:

What was the URL? (I tried a quick Google search with "Lemaire Golan Moussaieff", but I didn't pull it.)


spin

Haran

Dr. Cross:
...and contrary to some, not evidence of two hands.

I sure wonder to whom the "Dean of Epigraphers" was referring.

spin

There is no real dispute between Vorkosigan and I over the interpretation of Altman's position. Context is important, Haran. Check it out.


spin

Vorkosigan

I love that way people who don't see deeply enough think people who see deeper than them must be unjustified in their decisions.....

Jayhawker Soule

Decisions such as "Based on the timing, and the involvement of Lemaire, and several other things, I would bet that the Tel Dan stele someday turns out to be fake as well."?

Haran

No. I just think that people who make unreasonably quick and completely wrong observations and are then too biased to ever admit that they made mistakes are unjustified and to be questioned. Some just let their ego and titles trick them into thinking they see deeper than others who really do.

Vorkosigan

What specific problem do you have with this statement?

Vorkosigan

Whatever. But at the end of the day, Altman said it was a forgery and was correct, whereas Cross simply said it fell within the acceptable range and didn't think about it after that. Really, there's nothing to be said on it after that.

Vorkosigan