 |
Update 2002.12.03 – Time Magazine (2002.11.04, p60-62) reports, "Survey scientists determined that it was made of a limestone quarried intensively from the Mount Scopus ridge (which includes the Bible's Mount of Olives) in the 1st and 2nd centuries [C.E.] and that the cauliflower-shaped structure of its patina – a mineral sheen that develops with age – indicated that it had spent centuries in a cave. Citing the absence of any modern chemicals or telltale disruptions in the patina and any marks in the stone by modern tools, they confirmed its antiquity and ruled out forgery. Independent scholars have almost unanimously accepted their judgment."
The ossuary is also dated by "most epigraphers" to within four decades of 62 C.E., the accepted year for Ya•aqōv's martyrdom at the Beit ha-Miqdâsh (reported by Josephus). Lemaire points out that "Jews in [Yᵊrushâlayim], primarily [Pᵊrushim], used ossuaries only from roughly [B.C.E. 20] to [70 C.E.]. The style of the inscription conforms to the same period."
Lemaire also calculated the probable number of Yōseiphs, Yᵊshuas (the Aramaic form) and Ya•aqōvs living in Yᵊrushâlayim at that time, when the total population of Yᵊrushâlayim is estimated to have been 80,000. Combining this with the relative popularity of these names (14%, 9% and 2%, respectively), Lemaire conservatively estimated that "there were probably about 20" Ya•aqōvs during that time period who were the son of a Yōseiph and had a brother named Yᵊshua. A more accurate calculation by the head of the statistics dept. at Tel Aviv Univ., Camil Fuchs, "claims that there would have been only five possible" candidates.
Combine this with the additional data that, of the 80,000 population in Yᵊrushâlayim at that time, only one other ossuary has been found engraved with the name of a brother. Of the thousands found, relatively few were engraved with any name at all. This implies that both this Ya•aqōv and his brother Yᵊshua were each enormously distinguished and well known. Josephus describes only one such pair of brothers by this name of such stature: Ya•aqōv ha-Tzadiq Bar-Yōseiph, the first Pâqid of the Nᵊtzârim... and brother of Ribi Yᵊhōshua.
"Which makes the bone fragments at the bottom of the box all the more enigmatic. They were there, says the owner, when he bought it... The largest is half an inch wide and three inches long, its inner surface an intricate honeycomb." The questions both of radiocarbon dating the bone fragments and DNA analysis immediately arise.
I accept the scholarly consensus with the heartiest "Bârukh ha-Sheim!"
Update 2002.11.08 – The owner is an engineer in Tel Aviv. "[A]ntiquities inspectors are checking suspicions that Golan bought the ossuary only a few months ago... The Antiquities Law, making such purchases illegal, was passed in 1978. The ossuary is to go on display, starting November 16, at the Royal Ontario Museum in Canada... the antiquities inspector said that if it turned out the ossuary was traded recently, it could be seized by the authorities (Jeruasalem Post, 2002.11.08, p. A5).
Update 2002.11.05 – IBA radio reported this morning the name of the owner and that the Israeli government has noted that the ossuary was obtained on the black market and intends to take ownership of the ossuary.
2002.10.21 – I hope the ossuary is authentic, but the question of whether this is a hoax must be addressed. One must be even more careful of potential evidence that agrees with one's beliefs. That's when it's easiest to be sucked into a hoax, and later embarrassed, by careless thinking. If it proves out I'll be elated. In the meantime, I remain unpersuaded by what I've seen so far, and highly skeptical.
On the other hand, one criticism forwarded by an Israeli archeologist is ludicrous: that this ossuary – NOT found in situ – probably isn't the ossuary of the brother of Ribi Yᵊhōshua because it was found (bought on the black market, not found!) in Silwan (just east of the Old City of David)!
Richard N. Ostling's Associated Press story, datelined Washington 2002.10.21 and carried, inter alia, by ABC News and The Tucson Citizen, was forwarded to us by (among others) our talmid in Albuquerque, NM, Rodolfo & Desiree Proenza.
According to this report, to be published more fully in Biblical Archeology Review magazine, an inscription on a burial artifact that was recently discovered in Israel may provide the oldest archaeological evidence, not only of Ribi Yᵊhōshua, but attesting to the first Nᵊtzârim Pâqid, Ya•aqōv Bar Yōseiph, as well. An expert dates it to three decades after his execution on the stake by the Romans based on linguistic style, that Jews used ossuaries only between B.C.E. 20 and 70 C.E., and microscopic examination, by two scientists from Israel's Geological Survey, of the surface patina.
Because these were popular names in the first century Jewish community, Catholic University's Prof. Rev. Joseph Fitzmyer sees the big problem as the impossibility of knowing whether the engraving on the ossuary referred to the first Nᵊtzârim Pâqid, Ya•aqōv "ha-tzadiq" Bên-Dâvid and Ribi Yᵊhōshua or some other Ya•aqōv Bar Yōseiph and his brother Yᵊhōshua.
However, it seems to me an even more serious problem that this ossuary apparently didn't surface through any archeological dig under the supervision of a reputable archeologist, raising the specter of fraud. If this ossuary wasn't recently excavated by archeologists then this requires a detailed and conclusive answer to where the ossuary has been for 19 centuries and why wasn't it "discovered" long ago? The claim that the anonymous owner – later identified as Tel Aviv engineer Oded Golan – didn't realize its significance rings untrue. It strains credulity to accept that the owner of the ossuary, who must be interested in ossuaries, is an Israeli who couldn't read Hebrew letters or who has been living on some other planet where these names are unknown.
If someone has learned how to age and fake the patina well enough to persuade scientists of Israel's Geological Survey, then obtaining a first century ossuary and engraving it would seem fairly easy. It would also provide one explanation of why it has suddenly appeared with no archeological or other history.
Perhaps the report in Biblical Archeology Review magazine will be more informative. Certainly, extensive scientific examination and an answer to where it's been for 19 centuries are required. The Shroud of Turin deception has persisted for decades despite conclusive scientific evidence invalidating its claims.
Update 2003.06.18 – On 2003.03.10, Israel Antiquities Authority confiscated the ossuary to determine whether it is authentic. Two teams were set up to determine its authenticity. The results are now in and our skepticism and caution were well founded. It's a fake. The inscription was forged. (Fox News crawl-ticker, 2003.06.18). As a Jerusalem Post book reviewer hinted, both the ossuary and the "Beit ha-Miqdash" tablet (see article below) were both "discovered" by the same Israeli engineer and publicized by the same magazine publisher: BAR's Hershel Shanks, as an irresponsible publicity stunt to hype his equally irresponsible and unscholarly book. It's highly likely that the "Beit ha-Miqdash" tablet will soon be proven as fraudulent as the ossuary.
 |
|
 |