Forgery Trial, 3 Years Going (and Going)

Haaretz gives an update of the forgery trial against Oded Golan and Robert Deutsch.  Most of what is "new" here seems to be taken from the courageously honest 60 Minutes report.  I'm always reluctant to analyze a news article written by a journalist because I know how skewed facts can get between the interview and the printed page.  But I'll make a few comments on the assumption that the record is generally accurate.

1. The prosecution has been presenting its case for three years.  Israel doesn't have constitutional protections like the United States, but some judge should intervene to tell them that there's something humane about a speedy trial, and if the prosecution can't present its case in short order, it's over.

2. The "silver bullet" in the case is an Egyptian artist.  The article says that he "confessed to manufacturing many items for Golan, including the Jehoash inscription."  I need more evidence than the reporter's word (or the prosecution's statement).  Note that 60 Minutes, who interviewed him on TV, did not have a statement from him that he forged it.  Maybe he did, or maybe the prosecution wants to make you think he did.  That's why there's such a thing called cross-examination.  (For those of you new to the case, it's simply incredible that a guy with a shop in an Egyptian market has the necessary skills to make an object of this nature that has fooled many experts into thinking it is authentic.  Scholars have told me that there's not a single person alive with all of the knowledge necessary to make the Jehoash Inscription.  Maybe five scholars collaborated, each contributing their own specialized knowledge.  But one artist in Egypt?)

3. The article says:

Among the evidence presented by the prosecution in court: photos and exhibits taken from the labs in Golan's home, where, according to the indictment, the forgeries were made; various sketches and other materials that were used in the preparation of the forgeries.

Now this sounds convincing to the reader at home.  Open-and-shut case.  If so, then why all of the delay?  Why do they need to bring the Egyptian artist to testify?  Again, this is why this case cannot be decided in the media alone.

I've said it before, but I'll note it again: I don't know if any of these items are authentic or not.  And I don't care.  It doesn't change my view of the Bible or archaeology if the James Ossuary or the Jehoash Inscription are forgeries.  But there are very significant problems with the way that these matters have been handled by the Israel Antiquities Authority, the prosecution, and some scholars.  There are other agendas.

60 Minutes on the James Ossuary

The Easter story for "60 Minutes" this year is about the bonebox inscribed with "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus."  The 13-minute video segment and a written transcript is available online.  In terms of production, the video is outstanding.  They have beautiful footage, dramatic interviews, and a clear storyline.  This 13-minute story will make understandable to millions what five years of scholarly debate has not.  But I'd recommend watching this for entertainment value than for factual analysis.  There are many problems with this "reporting."

The first issue is the lack of scholarly testimony.  Only a few scholars are interviewed and only one is allowed to give his verdict about inscription's authenticity.  Witherington and the Pfanns are quoted only about the excitement and possible value of the inscription.  Silberman gets double the airtime, and his statements about authenticity (or lack thereof) seem to be carefully crafted for dramatic effect.  The story does not give the background for any of these individuals, so it's worth noting that Silberman is not an archaeologist nor a paleographer.  He is a popular writer about biblical and archaeological subjects.  He has co-written several books claiming that the Bible is a fraud, so it's not surprising that he thinks that an inscription that supports the Bible is also a fraud.  Unfortunately none of the scholars who specialize in this area were interviewed (or included), and most of them think the inscription is likely authentic.

While the story's title would have you believe that this is a story about the James Ossuary, only the first half of the story discusses the bonebox.  From that point on, the producers try to condemn the ossuary using guilt by association.  This is the only way they can make the story work, because most scholars think the inscription is authentic.  The argument against the inscription is that 1) the ossuary came from the collection of Oded Golan; 2) Golan had tools that could be used for making forgeries; 3) an Egyptian claims that he made other forgeries for Golan (but not this one).

What they insinuate and omit is more significant than what they report.  1) Did Golan forge the inscription or did the Egyptian?  It doesn't matter, as long as they can create doubt in the viewer's mind. 2) Is Golan and/or the Egyptian capable of creating such a perfect inscription?  Most scholars say they could not.  60 Minutes misleads by quoting a policeman who says that the Egyptian is a skilled craftsman. They don't quote Ada Yardeni who says that if Golan faked it, "he's a genius.  But I don't believe it."  3) There is no mention of the old photograph that Golan has of the ossuary with the inscription.  The authenticity of the photograph is disputed, but if authentic, it is compelling evidence that the inscription was not forged. 4) Did Golan pass a polygraph?  I don't know, but it seems like a simple test that would be of relevance.  5) Why is such an open-and-shut case taking the Israeli police more than three years in court?  6) Was the inscription forged or only part of the inscription?  Like several components of the story, they want to have it both ways. 

In 13 minutes, one cannot expect all of the evidence to be presented, but it is noteworthy that CBS has given us a glimpse of the prosecution's case rather than an even-handed treatment.  Even the multiple uses of an interview with Golan is intended to support their case.  I haven't read of anybody who supports or trusts Golan.  He certainly doesn't exude credibility on screen. But the issue isn't about him.  Even if he forged 1,000 pieces, that doesn't prove that the ossuary inscription is fake.  Sitting on a toilet doesn't prove that it is fake either.  Maybe it is, but it is certainly better to analyze the artifact itself rather than its circumstances.  But this they do not do.  The fact is that many scholars believe that the entire inscription is very likely authentic, including Ada Yardeni, Bezalel Porten, Gabriel Barkay, and Andre Lemaire.  The inclusion of the toilet photograph and the failure to include even one specialist of ancient inscriptions proves that this story is about entertainment and not facts.

One final note: Forgery of antiquities and looting of antiquities are major problems in Israel and around the world.  These crimes should be prosecuted aggressively.  But when a majority of the specialists believe an alleged forgery to be authentic, it is time to pursue other cases.

Shanks' Thoughts on Forgery Trial

Shanks has posted his current perspective on the forgery trial, including his reason for believing that the prosecution is doomed, and a list of reasons why he thinks the Jehoash Inscription is authentic.  Some of this is old new, but there were some things that I hadn't heard before.

Forgery Trial Update (Feb 2008)

Some years ago the Israeli government began trying a case of antiquities forgery against five individuals, including Robert Deutsch and Oded Golan.  The latter is/was the owner of the James Ossuary and was accused of creating the inscription (or part of it) in order to greatly increase the object's value.  Hershel Shanks now writes on the Biblical Archaeology Society website that the prosecution is winding its case down and may be finished in a few weeks.

Previous posts on this blog related to this include:

Forgery Conference Report (June 2007)

Forgery Trial Update (May 2006)

'Ancient' Forgeries

If you're interested in forgeries of ancient works, this article in Spiegel, "False Gods: 'Ancient' Forgeries Fool Art Markets" has some interesting facts.  Among the claims is one that the collection of Elie Borowski, founder of the Bible Lands Museum, consisted of many forgeries.

HT: Joe Lauer

Forgery Conference Report

At the beginning of this year, Hershel Shanks of the Biblical Archaeology Society sponsored a conference in Jerusalem on the matter of recent alleged forgeries. This was a private, by-invitation-only meeting for scholars to speak freely on very controversial matters. I knew about it but expected to never see anything about it, because of the subject's sensitivity. But Shanks has just released a very detailed report from the conference that is, in my opinion, absolutely fascinating. The subject is of interest to me because 1) everyone loves a good cat fight; 2) some of the challenged inscriptions have biblical relevance; 3) you learn about a lot of other things in the process; 4) the way in which the IAA handled the issue was deplorable; 5) the most vocal on this subject have been the nay-sayers. Thus some have declared that "everyone" thinks all of the questioned artifacts are fakes. I don't personally care if any or all are fakes; they don't change my view of the Bible or archaeology. But I have been disturbed by those who claim to know scholarly opinion but who do not. This record gives a more balanced perspective, showing where there is broad agreement (James Ossuary inscription is authentic) and where there is not (Jehoash Inscription).

You can get this report for free, and I consider this a nice present from BAS, which went to no small expense to hold the proceeding and then to compile the report. You have to submit your email address in order to get the link, but you can always unsubscribe to the newsletter later. There are three separate items available.

1. The Report: This 30-page document gives the background of the conference, including who came, who wanted to, and who didn't respond. Then five inscriptions are reviewed, with relevant comments from the attending scholars.

2. The Report's Appendix: At 84 pages, this work primarily consists of abstracts by conference participants (plus a few who couldn't make it). Another section looks at a photo of the alleged forger (Oded Golan) from the 1970s which shows the inscribed ossuary in his home.

3. A 30-minute talk by Gabriel Barkay on ten points scholars should agree on. This is also available in printed form at the end of the Appendix. The mp3 file does not require registration.

This isn't the final word on the subject, but it's certainly a step in the right direction. There are many good nuggets in the report, but since the report is free and time is short, I'll let you discover them for yourself. Perhaps some other bloggers will discuss the report at greater length.

Forgery Trial Update

The Boston Globe has the latest on the ongoing trial of Oded Golan, Robert Deutsch, and Rafi Brown for the forgery of ancient antiquities, including the James Ossuary and the Jehoash Inscription.

One expert I spoke with recently suggested that all three of the most well-known alleged forgeries (the above two and the Ivory Pomegranate) may well be authentic. It's more than just Hershel Shanks who doubt the committees' conclusions, but there are difficulties in voicing that opinion given today's climate.