[CPProt.net] Why the recent rash of biblical fakery is about so much more than money

[Museum Security Network / Cultural Property Protection Net (Ton Cremers)]

Conversations: Forgery Fallout  Volume 58 Number 2, March/April 2005  

Why the recent rash of biblical fakery is about so much more than money

In late December, Israeli authorities filed criminal indictments against
five suspects--four of them antiquities dealers--who allegedly belong to a
forgery ring that crafted such notorious objects as the Jehoash Inscription,
the James Ossuary, and an ivory pomegranate that had once been a heralded
item of the Israel Museum (see "The Trial of the Century"). Archaeologist
Eric Meyers, a professor of Judaic studies at Duke University and noted
skeptic of the James Ossuary, spoke to ARCHAEOLOGY about how the recent
spate of high-profile forgeries should force archaeologists, museums, and
even governments to rethink the way they approach ancient objects that lack
archaeological provenance.

Do you think that from now on when Israelis visit their museums, they'll be
casting a wary eye on what's in the display cases? 
I think absolutely yes, because the Israeli public has been awakened to some
very unpleasant realities. The Israel Museum is one of the great museums of
the world, not just for archaeology but also for art and Jewish ceremonial
objects. And museum officials have been given a wake-up call regarding the
whole process by which they purchase unprovenanced artifacts. Just the way
that the ivory pomegranate was purchased in 1988: It was deposited in a
numbered Swiss safe deposit box and the Israel Museum deposited the money in
another box and no one ever saw who actually sold it--it's ridiculous. I
mean, this reads like a novel, not like the business major museums deal
with.

>From your experience, what's the markup on a common artifact once a forger
gives it a biblical association? 
Probably six figures or more.

So it's a pretty lucrative business. 
The outlay to make forged clay bullae--clay lumps used to seal papyri and
packages--and add a biblical name to them is virtually nothing, and these
things go for anywhere from $100,000 on up depending on what is on the
bulla. One of the real ironies of the situation is that some of these
dealers and collectors indicted on forgery charges were taking advantage of
the very, very rich collectors who purchased many of these artifacts after
so-called authentication. These collectors who got swindled must be furious
right now. Of course, but on the other hand, archaeologists are furious,
too. And remember, these big collectors did all right, because they donated
objects to museums and got huge tax write-offs. This worthless piece of clay
gets authenticated, goes to six figures, the collector gets a huge
write-off, and so it just encourages more illegal dealing. The authenticator
can just get paid under the table. The whole scheme is pretty darn good. And
then this stuff winds up in museum collections and the public is cheated.

>From what we know now, how do you think this will most severely impact Near
Eastern scholarship? 
This may affect a huge percentage of inscribed materials. Take Nahman
Avigad's seminal work, Corpus of West Semitic Stamps and Seals, revised by
Bennie Sass in 1997. Bennie has been quoted as saying that he has to redo
this whole book and have every one of these inscriptions reexamined. And who
is it published by? The Israel Academy of Sciences. This is major stuff. On
the other hand, the basic framework of biblical history has been known for
many years, and despite recent controversies about chronology, it remains
well established.

Do you think this whole mess will compel Israel to revamp its antiquities
laws? Aren't Lebanon and Israel the only countries in the Middle East that
permit the sale of antiquities? 
That's correct. It's really time for the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA)
and the Ministry of Education and Culture, in which the IAA operates, to
rethink the sections of the 1978 antiquities law that deal with the
licensing of antiquities dealers and collectors. My understanding is that
the IAA is hesitant to press the ministry and the government to change the
law banning legal trades in the collection of antiquities because it could
open up a broader discussion of what to do with human remains. The IAA now
works on a handshake agreement with the government on handing over human
remains believed to be of Jewish origin to religious authorities, but it's
not in law. So the IAA feels that if they open up the antiquities law for
discussion, they ultimately might win in regard to dealers and collectors
but end up allowing the religious authorities to have an enormous influence
on the scientific examination of all human remains in the archaeology of
Israel. So it's very tricky. 

  For more on the ossuary and the indictments, visit
www.archaeology.org/ossuary.