006
A decade and more ago, we were in a fight about the Dead Sea Scrolls with the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) and the small circle of scholars who controlled access to them. Today we are in a fight with the IAA about the James ossuary inscription, which mentions Jesus.
On the surface, there would seem to be no connection. Underneath there is. Both controversies involve access.
In the case of the Dead Sea Scrolls, what we wanted was to allow all scholars to study them. In retrospect, it seems so simple. Finally, they were opened up. The terrible things that some predicted haven’t happened. The scrolls have now all been published. Everyone has access to them. And Dead Sea Scroll scholarship is flourishing. A whole new generation of scholars is studying them—and a whole new scholarly industry has been born. (Just an aside: And we are on warm, friendly terms with almost all Dead Sea Scroll scholars, including some with whom we bitterly fought.)
Let’s look now at a recent interchange on the internet involving the Jehoash inscription. The Jehoash inscription, a 15-line inscription on a black plaque, describes repairs to the Solomonic Temple by King Jehoash. If authentic it would be the first royal Israelite inscription ever found. The IAA committee that declared the James ossuary inscription to be a forgery reached the same conclusion with respect to the Jehoash inscription.
A fine scholar and a friend, Victor (Avigdor) Hurowitz of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Beer-Sheva, posted a comment on the internet responding to someone named Richard Dees, whom we do not know; Dees had written, “I think that an unbiased group (one unconnected to Israel) should re-examine the IAA’s conclusion with regard to the [Jehoash] inscription and the [James] ossuary [inscription].
Hurowitz countered:
“Who is preventing anyone out there from continuing investigation of the inscription? The IAA has made a decision, reached a verdict, or whatever you want to call it … But that doesn’t mean they have forever banned discussion. They have no power to do so.”
Hurowitz wisely commented:
“In scholarship ‘authority’ has no weight, certainly not governmental authority.”
I, of course, agree with that. (And, indeed, discussion of the authenticity vel non of both the Jehoash inscription and the ossuary inscription continues in these pages.)
But Hurowitz also notes:
“Unlike the Bible which supposedly was chained to church pulpits to prevent heretics or uninitiates from reading the truth for themselves, the [Jehoash and ossuary] inscriptions have been and are readily accessible to anyone, anywhere, regardless of species, race, nationality, religious affiliation, gender inclination or political persuasion … If the IAA is asked to let the objects be examined, I don’t think they would object (unless there is some particular legal problem), so all the evidence is available.”
In his last remark, Hurowitz has, perhaps unwittingly, put his finger on the nub of the current controversy: access—the same issue as with the Dead Sea Scrolls. 060Hurowitz has also pointed to how easily this controversy could be settled: All the IAA has to do is announce that the ossuary with the inscription and the Jehoash plaque can be examined by competent, internationally-recognized experts.
If the IAA would only say what Professor Hurowitz has said, there would be no controversy.
Instead, the IAA has stonewalled.
About the epigraphy, paleography, philology and linguistics of these inscriptions there has been a discussion, such as Professor Hurowitz describes. But these disciplines have not provided a definitive answer to whether either of these inscriptions is authentic or a forgery. The debate has now moved to questions of science—chemistry and geology, among others. And for that there is no access, except by the two scientists on the IAA committee.
The Israeli authorities would not even allow the ossuary to be exhibited in Jerusalem so that Israelis could see the same thing that a hundred thousand visitors saw at the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto, where it was exhibited for the first and so far only time in November and December 2002.
The IAA has not deigned even to respond to any of the criticisms leveled at it. The IAA is above it all—or so it believes. Professor Hurowitz is right: In scholarship, governmental authority has no weight. Tell that to the IAA. Never before in all the years of its existence has the IAA (or its predecessors) set up a committee to determine the authenticity of an object, although many alleged forgeries have been the subject of scholarly exposures and debates.
To settle this controversy, all the IAA needs to do is announce that it will make the now-confiscated ossuary and the Jehoash inscription available for study by outside experts. That’s all we want.
A decade and more ago, we were in a fight about the Dead Sea Scrolls with the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) and the small circle of scholars who controlled access to them. Today we are in a fight with the IAA about the James ossuary inscription, which mentions Jesus. On the surface, there would seem to be no connection. Underneath there is. Both controversies involve access. In the case of the Dead Sea Scrolls, what we wanted was to allow all scholars to study them. In retrospect, it seems so simple. Finally, they were opened up. The terrible things […]
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.