Sauron

This guy's story is unraveling faster than cheap polyester:

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pa...ID=0&listSrc=Y

"He has phenomenal knowledge in this field," Yaron Golan asserts. "He has sparks of genius. Archaeology is a sensitive and complex subject, very difficult. You don't always know how to identify things; you have to use your imagination. There are forgeries, there are all kinds of things. It's not like making omelets, and he is brilliantly talented in this field. I've always had the feeling that he could begin another career in archaeology."

Here, then, is already wide crack in the story. At the press conference in Washington, the anonymous collector was presented as someone with very limited understanding of archaeology. According to Shanks, the editor of BAR, the collector held onto the ossuary for 15 years without knowing the significance of the inscription carved on it.

[...]

(After Golan claimed that he couldn't remember details of the purchase - and why he failed to alert the authorities when requesting an export license)

He hid the ossuary and showed me 3,000 items properly organized on shelves," says Ganor. "It's not at all realistic to expect me to be familiar with all his items." A short time later, Golan asked the authority for a permit for the temporary export of two ossuaries, in order to display them at a congress for Bible scholars in Canada. In the export request, he didn't mention the fact that one of the ossuaries bore an unusual inscription that would almost certainly cause a furor in the Christian world.

"We didn't examine the artifact before giving the permit," says Dr. Uzi Dahari, deputy head of the IAA, "because he asked for a temporary permit. We examine the item only when there is a request for permanent export from the country, in order to ensure that they aren't taking out some artifact that is important to the Jewish heritage. There are thousands of ossuaries; it's nothing unusual."

"The request we received was perfectly innocent, to take the item out to a congress," says Yehoshua Dorfman, director general of the IAA. "It's a customary and accepted practice; we didn't attribute any significance to it. In a routine procedure, the director of state treasures in the authority approved the request."

Warning lights began to flash at the IAA only one day before the BAR press conference, when CNN called up, asking for their comment on the astonishing finding. "We conducted an investigation in the market, and we found the collector," says Ganor.

[...]

The truth will out

Last week, an East Jerusalem dealer who comes from a well-known family of Bethlehem antique sellers said that the ossuary circulated among dealers a few months ago. A well-known Israeli collector said that a year ago, the ossuary was offered to him by a dealer from the center of the country. "I chose not to deal with it," he says. "Why get involved, who needs this headache?"

During the interrogation of Golan, the IAA investigators tried to find out when, exactly, the sarcophagus was purchased. Golan claimed that Shanks was mistaken. "I bought the sarcophagus 35 years ago, about the time of the Six-Day War," he told his interrogators. Golan was then just 16. "He knows the law better than I do," says Ganor. "The guy gave a version that is in accordance with the law. He said he has had it for 35 years, and now I have to prove that this is not the case."

[...]
(Why is Golan doing this?)

"If the ossuary can't be sold abroad," says Robert Deutsch, "we can assume that the Israel Museum or the Bible Lands Museum will show an interest in it, but then its price will probably drop to $200,000."

Vorkosigan

Mhahahahahahaha!

Hohohohohohohohohoho!

Heeheeheeheeheehee!

I assume you thumped Holding with this? That's too rich. Has somebody posted it to XTALK?

Michael

Haran

Old news... A week after the crack...

This is obviously an old smear article.

I don't know what Golan's deal is, but even if he did acquire the ossuary illegally, then what does that prove? That he might also have forged an inscription, even though most good paleographers do not believe it is a modern forgery?

It sure seems like you guys are looking for any excuse to deny the possibility that the ossuary might be authentic, inspite of the judgement of many good scholars.

By the way, Sauron, (in relation to a point in another forum) I know and like John Lupia, but do you think he is a qualified expert in the field in which he was quoted? Check into it... What are his degrees? What are his official publications? Are they in the appropriate field of study? I don't know for sure, so enlighten me. All I know is that other experts "in the field" have contradicted him.

Vorkosigan

Of course! It must be that Evil Atheist Conspiracy, hard at work planting articles in foreign newspapers. Yes, many of us sleepers reside overseas, a network of rapid response teams, patiently waiting for that one moment in history, when a possible Christian artifact appears in our local area, to write a bogus article for the local media. I often shmooze with government officials here in Taiwan, just in case the ossuary of Mary or the diary of Jesus is discovered here. I keep a spare box of scripts in a pentacle in my upstairs office, so that the demon who gives me instructions can spellcheck them.

Haran, be serious. Nobody is going around writing smear articles. The ossuary and its owner have shot themselves in the foot so many times, they whistle when they walk.

Vorkosigan

Sauron

Uh, no. If you'll take the time to read it, it's dated 24 March, and includes information gathered in the last two weeks.

So much for Haran.

Toto

It is dated Mar 24, but it seems to have been written when the ossuary was still out of Israel. It is still a very comprehensive summary of the information by an investigative journalist, not exactly a smear.

If you search Ha'aretz' achives, you find this:

07/11/02 Bones of contention
By Sara Leibovich-Dar (Article number - 944251 , 5089 Words )

But I don't want to pay to find out if it is the same article, or if parts have been updated. (The word count is the same.)

So I think the date it was written was actually Nov 7, 2002. It's still a good article.

Sorry

Haran

Don't let the cat out of the bag! Ha! That was actually very funny, Vork.

No. I don't think there is some sort of evil atheist conspiracy. However, I do think that people write things out of their own preconceived notions.

I suppose the same could be said of me, although I am trying to be honest and objective with the information that I am presenting and have presented on the ossuary. Therefore, I'm only using the best scholars in the appropriate field and scholarly journals and books in the appropriate field as my sources.

Ted Hoffman

Sorry but I had to ask is King Arthur back?

Sauron

I don't think they are the same article. Here is the one from November. Note that it's far shorter:

http://www.iht.com/ihtsearch.php?id=75805&owner=(%20Ha'aretz)&date=20021105050150

And here is the recent one:

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pa...ID=0&listSrc=Y

I'm sure they contained shared info, but the newer article has much more detail and can reasonably be assumed to have updated (more accurate) info.

(note - edited to remove the strong statement "they aren't the same article" and moderate it to "I don't think they are")

Steven Carr

The fact that the wording on the ossuary is non-standard will tell against it as soon as there is any doubt as to the authenticity of that wording.