 |
| CLICK HERE FOR KINDLE EDITION |
From The Jerusalem Report, issue dated July 2, 2012, Wednesday, 13 June 2012 >>>Nearly 10 years have passed since the world learned of the discovery of a 1st century burial box bearing the words “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus,” and a black stone tablet with an inscription that brought to life a passage from the Second Book of Kings describing repairs to Solomon’s Temple by King Jehoash around 800 BCE. >> Both items, if authentic, would be the first physical artifacts ever found from the family of Jesus and the First Temple. It’s no wonder they caused a worldwide sensation, and that their subsequent exposure as fakes and the arrest of Oded Golan, a Tel Aviv antiquities collector accused of forging them, sparked international interest, even outrage. >> The Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA), with the Israel Police, gathered testimony around the world and seized hundreds of suspect artifacts. The treasure trove included ancient stone lamps, engraved jugs, pottery shards inscribed in ink, seals and seal impressions known as bulae. Golan, we were told when he was indicted with four others in December 2004 and accused of masterminding an international forgery ring, was falsifying history for personal gain.
 |
| UNDER SUSPICION: Oded Golan at home with his treasures |
But it wasn’t true. No one else was arrested. The zealotry of the IAA came unstuck when the case against Golan and his remaining co-defendant, antiquities dealer Robert Deutsch, collapsed in spectacular fashion at the Jerusalem District Court in March. Judge Aharon Farkash cleared them of all forgery charges and had some harsh words for the police, prosecution and the IAA.
Supreme Court says Israel cannot hold Jehoash Tablet but challenges antiquities trade
http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/2013/10/kal378016.shtml
Return of disputed
Temple treasure ordered over objections of Israel Antiquities Authority -
confirms total collapse of decade-long prosecution
By Matthew Kalman
Foreign Correspondent In Jerusalem
http://jamesossuarytrial.blogspot.com
October 2013
Foreign Correspondent In Jerusalem
http://jamesossuarytrial.blogspot.com
October 2013
The Israel Antiquities Authority has failed in its
last-gasp attempt to confiscate the controversial Jehoash Tablet from
Israeli collector Oded Golan. In a verdict handed down on Wednesday, the
three-judge appeal panel of Supreme Court justices decided by 2-1 that
the inscribed tablet must be returned to Golan, who was acquitted last
year of forging after a ten-year prosecution and trial.
The Supreme Court ruling caps a crushing defeat
for the Israel Antiquities Authority following the sweeping 2012
acquittal of Golan and dealer Robert Deutsch on multiple charges of
archaeological forgery. Israeli prosecutors advised by the Israel
Antiquities Authority had argued that even though they continue to
believe the inscription is a modern forgery, the reverse of the stone
had been “dressed” in ancient times and was therefore classified as an
antiquity that should belong to the state. But those arguments were
rejected by the majority decision of the court. Oded Golan is now poised
to reclaim both the tablet and the more famous item, the James ossuary,
along with dozens of pieces confiscated by the Israel Antiquities
Authority and the Israeli police at the time of his arrest in 2003.
Golan greeted the decision as “good news.” He says he plans to put both
the ossuary and the tablet on public display.
The latest about-turn could be the final twist in a
nail-biting finale to the decade-long pursuit of Golan. However, a
sternly-worded ruling by the same court in September suggests that the
battle over the future of the antiquities trade is just beginning.
In an 8,000-word ruling handed down on September
29, a panel of three Supreme Court Justices rejected Golan’s appeal
against his conviction and sentence on three minor charges and used the
opportunity to declare war on the antiquities market. Branding the trade
in antiquities “damaging” and motivated by “avarice,” the ruling
authored by Supreme Court Justice Daphne Barak-Erez depicts “a world of
collectors exchanging treasures teeming with trembling hands and heart -
often within the law, and sometimes without,” and notes with approval
that “in most countries of the world there is a general ban on the trade
in antiquities, because of their recognition as a national resource.”
She further observed, that this "conception also serves as the basis for
the antiquities law” in Israel.
The ruling places the Supreme Court on a potential
collision course with the Israel Museum and other major archaeological
collections in the country, which all display items purchased from the
market. Israel Museum curators and experts have described a complex and
well-oiled procedure of verification and testing carried out in the
museum laboratories to determine the significance and authenticity of
items offered by dealers. Many of the Israel Museum’s most notable
archaeological exhibits, including the Dead Sea Scrolls, royal seal
impressions and coins were purchased on behalf of the museum from the
antiquities market and not discovered in authorized archaeological
excavations.
Barak-Erez excoriates the “loopholes” in the
existing Antiquities Law, using the bully pulpit of Israel’s highest
court, citing material not in evidence during the original trial, to
propose a dramatic tightening of Israel’s antiquities trade. Her ruling
should not be dismissed as the star-struck enthusiasm of an amateur
touched by the magic of a rare antique treasure. Appointed to the
Supreme Court in 2012 at the extraordinarily young age of 47, Barak-Erez
is widely regarded as a legal genius, the leading Israeli juror of her
generation and a future president of the court. If she has marked the
antiquities trade as the target of a personal legal crusade, she has the
authority and the stature to inspire extensive legal reform.
But in the end her controversial opinion did not affect the court’s
decision on the ownership of the Jehoash tablet, a black stone with a
15-line inscription attributed to the Judean king that may have adorned
the First Temple. After a decade-long campaign to brand the inscription a
fake, the Israeli authorities have now reversed their stance and
demanded that the court grant them ownership of the item on the grounds
that the stone on which it is inscribed is “ancient” – despite the fact
that the 1978 Antiquities Law specifies that an antiquity is “any
object, which was made by man before 1700 CE, or any zoological or
botanical remains from before the year 1300 CE.” That would seem to rule
out a geological item like a stone but, as I reported after the appeal hearing in July,
Barak-Erez and her two fellow justices appeared keen to claim the
Jehoash tablet for the state, despite the logical and legal contortions
required.
At the original trial, all the geologists and
experts testified that the stone tablet was prepared and inscribed at
the same time, either in ancient times or, at the very latest, at least a
century ago. However, at the Supreme Court hearing, the prosecution
continued to argue that the inscription is modern while the underneath
of the stone tablet was prepared in ancient times – that would allow the
state to confiscate it under the Israeli Antiquities Law if Golan
acquired it illegally. But all the experts agreed that the underside of
the stone remains in its natural state.
In his verdict on the original case, Judge Aharon
Farkash explicitly warned the prosecution not to dabble in this double
jeopardy. “The state insisted on its view that this was not an
antiquity, but a forged antiquity. Since, according to the state, it is
not an antiquity, it cannot now contend that it owns the tablet
according to the Antiquities Law, and therefore by law it should be
returned to Golan,” Farkash ruled.
While Golan has won the battle over his own items,
the war over the market trade in antiquities may be just beginning.
“Archaeological finds are important public property and should remain as
such - for the enjoyment of the general public, the advancement of
knowledge, and for their preservation for the benefit of future
generations. Furthermore, uncontrolled excavations and the trade that
ensues causes not only the theft of resources and their disappearance
from the public sphere, but also damage to the study of history and
culture,” Judge Barak-Erez observes in her ruling.
Citing a raft of papers on the worldwide trade in
antiquities and its effect on cultural heritage, Barak-Erez compares the
unauthorized collection of archaeological artifacts to the picking of
rare wild flowers – a much-deplored and formerly widespread habit in
Israel that was successfully stamped out by means of a public education
campaign. She calls for a similar process of public awareness to end the
fashion of collecting antiquities.
“Beyond the purely legal aspect, preserving
archaeological cultural treasures requires a change of mind in the
public sphere,” she concludes. “Archaeology requires a process of
winning hearts and fostering the understanding that ‘picking’ the
treasures of the ancient homeland is not collecting that indicates love
of our country and its history, but harmful avarice, which must be
fought.”
Throughout the decade-long investigation and trial
of Golan and Deutsch, Israel Antiquities Officials repeatedly expressed
their disapproval even of the licensed trade in artifacts regulated
under the 1978 Antiquities Law, but claimed that the trial was not an
attempt to shut it down. Despite their appeals over the years to
committees of Israel’s Knesset parliament that repeatedly discussed
restrictions on antiquities trading in Israel, legislators consistently
opposed all-out prohibition after concluding that the resulting harm
would be immeasurably greater than any potential benefit.
Even so, the proceedings at the District Court in
Jerusalem were viewed with dismay by the small community of dealers and
collectors in Israel, many of whom predicted that the trial would result
in a wave of potentially significant items being smuggled abroad,
mostly by the finders or local dealers in the West Bank, where the
Israeli authorities have limited influence on local behavior. The latest
appeal ruling has sent shock waves through the community, triggering
fears that the Antiquities Authority, with the backing of the Supreme
Court, will once again push for a complete ban.
The ruling is also a dramatic departure from the
basic assumptions on which the original trial was launched amid great
fanfare back in 2002 with the high-profile arrest of Oded Golan and his
subsequent indictment in December 2004. Golan had been accused of
masterminding an international forgery ring that had planted fake
artifacts in museums and collections across the globe, garnering
millions for their creators.
The most notable artifact he was accused of
faking was a stone burial box or ossuary with the inscription “James,
son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.” Other items included the Jeohoash
tablet; seal impressions with the names of Israelite kings; a decanter
that may have been used in the Temple service; inscribed pottery sherds
from biblical times; an ancient stone lamp with Jewish symbols; and a
stone bowl bearing the name of the Egyptian King Shishak.
Golan was arrested, imprisoned for a month, held
under house arrest for nearly two years and put on trial from September
2005 to October 2010. In March 2012, Golan and Deutsch were acquitted on
all 15 charges of fraud, forgery and obtaining money by deception.
Golan was convicted on three minor charges, unrelated to either the
James ossuary or the Jehoash tablet – two counts of brokering the sale
of an antiquity to fabled antiquities collector Shlomo Moussaieff and
handling goods he should have realized were likely stolen from
archaeological sites in the West Bank.
Golan appealed the verdict on several grounds,
including the fact that since the artifacts originated in the West Bank,
they fall outside the jurisdiction of Israeli law. In a legal sleight
of hand, Justice Barak-Erez concedes this point, but then claims to be
applying the Jordanian law in force since the Israeli occupation that
began in 1967. Barak-Erez is a former military lawyer who specialized in
the West Bank and international law, so she knows that the law in force
in that area is the previous Jordanian law under which the state has
first refusal to purchase any antiquities found in its territory. She
also knows that Israel has never implemented this law, and has never
paid any compensation for any items found in the West Bank. The most
notorious example of Israel’s disregard for this law was the arrest in
2005 of Dr Hanan Eshel of Bar-Ilan University on the urging of the
Israel Antiquities Authority after he reported and then handed over
fragments of scrolls he had purchased from Bedouin who found them in a
West Bank cave.
Yet in choosing to appeal his conviction, Golan
has inadvertently handed the Supreme Court an opportunity to elevate the
proceedings to a major, precedent-setting case on the antiquities trade
in general.
“If you are not aware of the whole picture, it is
very natural to adopt the view of the court, but if you know the
reality, it’s completely different,” says Golan. “From the outside, it
seems obvious that every natural resource of the country, including
antiquities, should belong to the public.”
According to Golan, in contrast to the Court’s
position and what most people believe, most of the antiquities found in
Israel, the West Bank, and Jordan are discovered randomly and not in
official excavations or by grave robbers. He argues that most
archaeological objects are not pilfered with the “avarice” described by
Justice Barak-Erez in organized or criminal gangs but are discovered by
chance.
“In modern construction sites, burial caves that
can contain hundreds of antiquities are routinely discovered when
foundations are excavated for new buildings,” Golan says.
“Road-building, excavations for water and sewage infrastructure, plating
orchards or plowing fields all create circumstances ripe for the random
discovery of antiquities. Ancient items are also found by shepherds as
in the case of the Dead Sea Scrolls or even in open fields where land is
affected by erosion especially after rain.
"Therefore, a sweeping prohibition on the
possession, sale, or collection of antiquities might lead to an outcome
that would be the opposite of the Court’s intentions, and might cause
the disappearance and concealment of those discoveries. The most
important items would be removed from Israel before scholars and museums
have an opportunity to study them, which is what happened in countries
that banned antiquities trading and collecting, including Egypt,” he
says.
When trading is legal, as it is in Israel,
antiquities collectors say they abide by the law and frequently exhibit,
loan, and donate items for the purpose of research and to museums.
According to Golan, he and other collectors vehemently object to illegal
excavations designed to find antiquities.
“Here in Israel, the enormous contribution of
antiquities collectors is that they can purchase important items before
they are swallowed up by the international market, and as a result, the
items remain in Israel. These efforts should be encouraged, not opposed.
This is even more significant since the government, for various
political and legal considerations, is unable to purchase these items
directly from the finders by itself,” he says.
Significant items purchased from the antiquities
market through dealers and collectors include many of the Dead Sea
Scrolls, Gabriel’s Revelation – an 80-line inscription engraved in
stone, discovered in 2000 and currently on display at the Israel Museum,
some of Bar Kochba’s letters, King Uziah’s gravestone, the bullas of
King Hezkiyahu and of Baruch Ben Neria the scribe, stamp seals with the
names of Jeremiah and Jezebel, and the Heliodorus Stele inscription.
Golan thinks that all finds should be reported to
the authorities so that valuable or significant objects can be kept for
the nation but says a complete ban will simply trigger the permanent
removal of items from access by the scientific community and the general
public, and will drive trade underground with the resulting loss of
many important items that will find their way into foreign collections.
He says that contrary to the picture portrayed by the Supreme Court,
regulated antiquities trading is legal in the United States and many
European countries, with the result that responsible collectors preserve
the items and make them available to researchers and to the public.
“I think the government should have a first
refusal option to buy it at full price,” says Golan. “You can’t have a
situation where items can be seized just because someone in the Ministry
of Education thinks it’s important. Such actions will produce an
outcome that is contrary to the interests of the state of Israel and the
preservation of the history of the Jewish people.”
James Snyder, director of the Israel Museum, says
that only “an infinitesimally small number” of the more than 120,000
pieces in the museum’s archaeological collection were purchased on the
open market. He believes the acquisition of key items under strict
regulation is in harmony with the museum’s effort to preserve the
country’s cultural heritage.
“In the rare instances where we benefit from the
generosity of donors who buy in the market, it enables items that should
be in a museum setting to be in that setting. In our experience it’s
always happened with an appropriate kind of control from the state – the
items have to stay in the state and that the items are acquired so they
can be with us,” says Snyder.
He says he is not convinced that a blanket ban
would end the trade in antiquities. “It’s interesting that other
countries have taken a strong view in the matter but you still see
archaeology in the marketplace in those countries,” he says. “There’s
really a distinction between how museums, us and others, follow an
appropriate practice, and what happens in a marketplace which may or may
not be following guidelines or legal requirements. The more important
point there is for museums to be appropriate watchdogs and custodians,
which is a role we hope we’re playing all the time.”
Lenny Wolfe, a Jerusalem antiquities dealer who
appeared as a prosecution witness against Golan, says the Supreme Court
ruling is deeply flawed. “In virtually all countries of the Middle East
the trade in antiquities has been outlawed and that has been a
contributing factor to the development of a thriving black market,” says
Wolfe.
“Many important items in the Israel Museum come
from the marketplace and not from controlled excavations, including two
very important Semitic inscriptions that passed through my hands. The
most prominent example is the Dead Sea Scrolls. If museums were not
allowed to acquire items that came from the marketplace, they would have
very poor displays,” he says.
“For the sake of the public it’s good to have an
efficient enforcement apparatus but it requires a flexible approach so
the public is not deprived of important objects. If the law in Israel
were different, it would take the trade out of the hands of criminals.
If the law in Israel was the same as the UK, where finders are paid the
full market value for anything the government wishes to acquire, then
everyone would benefit.”
A major international collector who has
contributed numerous archaeological items bought on the market for
display at museums in Israel and worldwide, says the Supreme Court has
raised some important questions “but the answers can’t be as simple as
they are putting it.”
“Today if you look at serious collectors then in
the end things land where they should land. Serious collectors are sort
of NGOs for antiquities. They are supporting the endeavours which the
judges want,” he says, asking to remain anonymous. “I look at my
collection, there are so many items on display in the Israel Museum, in
other museums, going around the world, being made available to the
public at no cost. I look at it as rescuing and protecting important
cultural heritage.”
“Without the antiquities market we wouldn’t have
the Dead Sea Scrolls, we wouldn’t have the Elgin marbles, or many other
things,” he says. He also points out that leaving each country to
protect its own heritage can be a risky business.
“We see what happened with the Taliban in
Afghanistan. We see what happened with the library in Mali. We see what
happened in Egypt with the museums, what happened with Iraq. It’s easy
to say leave it to the state and they will look after it,” he says.
“Even the Silwan inscription if it had been kept in place might have
been lost or destroyed between 1948-67. I’m glad it’s in Istanbul. At
least it’s protected.”
“On the other hand, one should not encourage illegal digging and destroying of evidence. But there must be a way in between.”
But Professor Aren Maeir of Bar-Ilan University,
Director of the Tell es-Safi/Gath Archaeological Project, says the
benefits of a general ban far outweigh the risks. “Illicit digs destroy
archaeological sites,” he says, adding that the existence even of the
regulated market fuels the robbery that is stripping antiquities from
their context and greatly reducing their scientific value.
“One of the main reasons you have to deal with
many of the inscriptions that are found on the antiquities market with
suspicion is because we’ve been excavating non-stop for the last 150
years. In controlled excavations, very few inscriptions have been found.
All these astounding inscriptions always appear on the market. That’s
what rings the warning bells,” says Maeir. “Also we know that when
something is found in excavations, very soon after, all kind of things
like it start appearing.”
But Golan says the Israeli market is not the
problem – it’s simply not large enough to make a difference. The demand
for Middle Eastern antiquities comes from abroad. Banning the trade in
Israel will merely ensure the immediate exodus of any important items.
Nor will an Israeli public awareness campaign about “picking” treasures
resonate with Palestinians in the West Bank, where the vast majority of
antiquities are found. Golan says the best way forward is for the
authorities to work alongside the collectors in a joint effort to
preserve the natural heritage and ensure the most important discoveries
remain in Israel.
Golan says his entire collection of some 4,000
items is in Israel and will remain here. He makes his collection
available to scholars and much of it has been published. One day he will
give those famous items to a museum on long-term loan for public
display. After the government returns them to him.
Comments (4)
Look at all the major
antiquities museums of the World. Over 90% of their most important
material came from private collections. They have made these items
available for the World community for posterity. The small minded
bureaucrats of the Antiquities Authority want to have all these
artefacts for themselves for their own satisfaction and they are in fact
the new selfish and greedy collectors. They don't really care about the
public and are hapy to have these objects in store rooms just for them
to look at ocassionally for their own titillation. Their real belief is
that these artifacts are really meant only for us academics as we are
the only ones who can properly understand them. Their concept of
context.
#1 - David Giles - 10/17/2013 - 06:52
This 'Bolshevik'
attitude by the judge is offensive. I personally think that private cars
and computers should be limited in their use, by government decree, and
that public SERVANTS like judges, bureaucrats, govt ministers and
others, should be banned from using them, because they should have to
live at the lowest level of the those they claim to serve.
Why can she decide to deny me my private property, and I can not deny her hers?
If many objects have come from formerly Jordanian territory not annexed by Israel, Israel can't play it both ways.
What the judge and the Antiquities Authority conveniently leave
out of the story, is the simplest way to DESTROY the illegal trade in
antiquities in one day:
Open up the storerooms of the IAA itself, which hold over 1.5 million
ancient pottery oil lamps, at least that number of pottery vessels, tens
of thousands of stone antiquities, glass vessels, etc.,
ALL of it from documented digs.
Let a blue ribbon panel decide on the twenty or thirty percent which are National Treasures which may NEVER be traded;
And let the other 70 % or 80 % be offered for sale via the legal, licenced, regulated dealers.
If you think I or any other collector wouldn't prefer a piece found
in Masada or Megiddo or Sha'arayim, or any other legal dig, which is
fully documented, over something which I believe is genuine but has no
provenance, you are wrong.
The problem is the 'Bolshevik' attitudes of members of the IAA, who
themselves have control of vast storerooms full of 'toys' they
personally don't 'own' but can 'play' with. They are simply jealous of
those of us with the ability to buy and 'own' these objects.
I personally have given major funding to the excavation of Khirbet
Qeiyefa/Sha'arayim from 2008 to 2013, getting nothing but thanks in
return; I, and my parents before me, have given major pieces of ancient
glass to the Israel Museum, the Islamic museum and others, without any
quid pro quo.
Would we have done this because of 'avarice'?
The honourable judge should try to emulate countries like the UK,
USA, and Canada, rather than Egypt, Romania under communism, and North
Korea.
#2 - Joseph B. Silver - 10/17/2013 - 09:28
Hi Mr. Kalman, Thank
you for covering this story from beginning to end. Do you know if the
IAA is planning on paying Dr. Robert Deutsch and Mr. Oded Golan
million$$$ for taking a decade out of their lives and defaming them?
Also, towards the beginning of the trial process there was some
intelligent scholar(I believe it was an Israeli professor, but I cannot
find the comment), who said that the IAA had overstepped their mandate
because they were trying to figure out if antiquities were authentic or
not. Of course, he was correct because if you buy an antiquity from
Israel and get an export license today on the bottom it reads: "This
Approval does Not Imply Authenticity of Objects." Authenticity should be
left up to the scholars and their publications. There is actually a
very low rate of about 1 percent of probable forgeries in our
inscriptions corpus. Hopefully, the Chicken Little Philosophy espoused
by various scholars over the past decade or so will be put to rest since
the IAA was obviously wrong about the "tip of the iceberg." With All My
Best Wishes, Michael
#3 - Michael Welch - 10/17/2013 - 10:07
If Golan puts the
James ossuary on display, he ought to include the mtDNA test results
from the specimen he obtained from inside of it, especially if it
matches the one from the Jesus ossuary of the JFT.
#4 - Theodora - 10/19/2013 - 11:35
Supreme Court to Israel: "Stop Robbing" http://www.roitov.com/articles/jehoash.htm
Look at all the major
antiquities museums of the World. Over 90% of their most important
material came from private collections. They have made these items
available for the World community for posterity. The small minded
bureaucrats of the Antiquities Authority want to have all these
artefacts for themselves for their own satisfaction and they are in fact
the new selfish and greedy collectors. They don't really care about the
public and are hapy to have these objects in store rooms just for them
to look at ocassionally for their own titillation. Their real belief is
that these artifacts are really meant only for us academics as we are
the only ones who can properly understand them. Their concept of
context.
#1 - David Giles - 10/17/2013 - 06:52
This 'Bolshevik'
attitude by the judge is offensive. I personally think that private cars
and computers should be limited in their use, by government decree, and
that public SERVANTS like judges, bureaucrats, govt ministers and
others, should be banned from using them, because they should have to
live at the lowest level of the those they claim to serve.
Why can she decide to deny me my private property, and I can not deny her hers?
If many objects have come from formerly Jordanian territory not annexed by Israel, Israel can't play it both ways.
What the judge and the Antiquities Authority conveniently leave out of the story, is the simplest way to DESTROY the illegal trade in antiquities in one day:
Open up the storerooms of the IAA itself, which hold over 1.5 million ancient pottery oil lamps, at least that number of pottery vessels, tens of thousands of stone antiquities, glass vessels, etc.,
ALL of it from documented digs.
Let a blue ribbon panel decide on the twenty or thirty percent which are National Treasures which may NEVER be traded;
And let the other 70 % or 80 % be offered for sale via the legal, licenced, regulated dealers.
If you think I or any other collector wouldn't prefer a piece found in Masada or Megiddo or Sha'arayim, or any other legal dig, which is fully documented, over something which I believe is genuine but has no provenance, you are wrong.
The problem is the 'Bolshevik' attitudes of members of the IAA, who themselves have control of vast storerooms full of 'toys' they personally don't 'own' but can 'play' with. They are simply jealous of those of us with the ability to buy and 'own' these objects.
I personally have given major funding to the excavation of Khirbet Qeiyefa/Sha'arayim from 2008 to 2013, getting nothing but thanks in return; I, and my parents before me, have given major pieces of ancient glass to the Israel Museum, the Islamic museum and others, without any quid pro quo.
Would we have done this because of 'avarice'?
The honourable judge should try to emulate countries like the UK, USA, and Canada, rather than Egypt, Romania under communism, and North Korea.
Why can she decide to deny me my private property, and I can not deny her hers?
If many objects have come from formerly Jordanian territory not annexed by Israel, Israel can't play it both ways.
What the judge and the Antiquities Authority conveniently leave out of the story, is the simplest way to DESTROY the illegal trade in antiquities in one day:
Open up the storerooms of the IAA itself, which hold over 1.5 million ancient pottery oil lamps, at least that number of pottery vessels, tens of thousands of stone antiquities, glass vessels, etc.,
ALL of it from documented digs.
Let a blue ribbon panel decide on the twenty or thirty percent which are National Treasures which may NEVER be traded;
And let the other 70 % or 80 % be offered for sale via the legal, licenced, regulated dealers.
If you think I or any other collector wouldn't prefer a piece found in Masada or Megiddo or Sha'arayim, or any other legal dig, which is fully documented, over something which I believe is genuine but has no provenance, you are wrong.
The problem is the 'Bolshevik' attitudes of members of the IAA, who themselves have control of vast storerooms full of 'toys' they personally don't 'own' but can 'play' with. They are simply jealous of those of us with the ability to buy and 'own' these objects.
I personally have given major funding to the excavation of Khirbet Qeiyefa/Sha'arayim from 2008 to 2013, getting nothing but thanks in return; I, and my parents before me, have given major pieces of ancient glass to the Israel Museum, the Islamic museum and others, without any quid pro quo.
Would we have done this because of 'avarice'?
The honourable judge should try to emulate countries like the UK, USA, and Canada, rather than Egypt, Romania under communism, and North Korea.
#2 - Joseph B. Silver - 10/17/2013 - 09:28
Hi Mr. Kalman, Thank
you for covering this story from beginning to end. Do you know if the
IAA is planning on paying Dr. Robert Deutsch and Mr. Oded Golan
million$$$ for taking a decade out of their lives and defaming them?
Also, towards the beginning of the trial process there was some
intelligent scholar(I believe it was an Israeli professor, but I cannot
find the comment), who said that the IAA had overstepped their mandate
because they were trying to figure out if antiquities were authentic or
not. Of course, he was correct because if you buy an antiquity from
Israel and get an export license today on the bottom it reads: "This
Approval does Not Imply Authenticity of Objects." Authenticity should be
left up to the scholars and their publications. There is actually a
very low rate of about 1 percent of probable forgeries in our
inscriptions corpus. Hopefully, the Chicken Little Philosophy espoused
by various scholars over the past decade or so will be put to rest since
the IAA was obviously wrong about the "tip of the iceberg." With All My
Best Wishes, Michael
#3 - Michael Welch - 10/17/2013 - 10:07
If Golan puts the
James ossuary on display, he ought to include the mtDNA test results
from the specimen he obtained from inside of it, especially if it
matches the one from the Jesus ossuary of the JFT.
#4 - Theodora - 10/19/2013 - 11:35
Supreme Court to Israel: "Stop Robbing" http://www.roitov.com/articles/jehoash.htm
Global Mafioso Digital Bandits, Pirates, Criminally Insane Paedophiles Practicing Metzitzah b'peh And Rewriting History To Cover Up The Mutilation - Our Own Species - Falsify Nature As Historically Pure Evil!
ReplyDelete