On June 18, 2003, the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) held a news conference at which it announced its conclusion that two inscriptions that have recently surfaced on the antiquities market are forgeries—the ossuary inscribed “James, the son of Joseph, the brother of Jesus” and the so-called Jehoash (also spelled Yehoash) inscription describing repairs to the Temple by the Judahite king Jehoash in the ninth century B.C.E., as described in 2 Kings 12 and 2 Chronicles 24.
Both inscriptions had been previously discussed in BAR.
The James ossuary inscription received its first publication in the November/December 2002 issue of BAR in an article by world-renowned Sorbonne paleographer André Lemaire, who believed the inscription to be authentic. (“Burial Box of James the Brother of Jesus,”BAR 28:06.) Other prominent paleographers agreed. So did a leading Aramaicist, Father Joseph Fitzmyer of the Catholic University of America. The ossuary and its inscription were also studied by the Israel Geological Survey, whose report was also published in BAR, in the same issue with Lemaire’s article; the geological team found no reason to question the authenticity of the ossuary or its inscription. Subsequently, the ossuary was exhibited at the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto, which also studied the inscription. Its report, published by Edward J. Keall in the July/August 2003 BAR, (“Brother of Jesus Ossuary,”BAR 29:04), also concluded that the ossuary and its inscription were authentic.
The Jehoash inscription was first described in an article in the March/April 2003 BAR. ( “Is It or Isn’t It?”BAR 29:02) That article reported that several paleographers believed that the inscription was a forgery, that others were not so sure and that the same Israel Geological Survey team that had authenticated the James ossuary inscription had determined the Jehoash inscription to be authentic as well. The May/June BAR summarized Harvard paleographer Frank Cross’s conclusion that the inscription was a “demonstrable forgery.” (“The Paleographer: Demonstrably a Forgery,”BAR 29:03) In that same issue, Tel Aviv University Bible professor Edward Greenstein analyzed the Jehoash inscription from a linguistic viewpoint, and he too 027concluded that it was a clear forgery.
Because both inscriptions came from an unprovenanced source and because of “the emotions raised by the finds and extensive public interest amongst Jews and Christians,” as the IAA put it, two committees of experts were appointed to study the inscriptions and report on their authenticity.
In June the IAA announced the committees’ conclusion: Both the inscriptions were forgeries.
However, the IAA did not release its report at that time. Indeed, the full report (including the critical appendices) has still not been released in English. On July 16, however, the IAA released a summary, dated June 20, of the final report. We print it here.
On June 18, 2003, the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) held a news conference at which it announced its conclusion that two inscriptions that have recently surfaced on the antiquities market are forgeries—the ossuary inscribed “James, the son of Joseph, the brother of Jesus” and the so-called Jehoash (also spelled Yehoash) inscription describing repairs to the Temple by the Judahite king Jehoash in the ninth century B.C.E., as described in 2 Kings 12 and 2 Chronicles 24. Both inscriptions had been previously discussed in BAR. The James ossuary inscription received its first publication in the November/December 2002 issue of BAR […]
You have already read your free article for this month. Please join the BAS Library or become an All Access member of BAS to gain full access to this article and so much more.
