Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?

Expand Messages
  • Yitzhak Sapir
    ... And even assuming it s real, how do we know it s grandpa s seal? Maybe it s the son s seal? My immediate thought was that the answer to this question was
    Message 1 of 15 , Mar 3, 2008
      On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 9:51 AM, eliot braun wrote:
      > Is the grandpa seal real? I've no idea, but....

      And even assuming it's real, how do we know it's grandpa's seal?
      Maybe it's the son's
      seal? My immediate thought was that the answer to this question was
      decided in part
      by Deutsch's wish to date the newly found seal to the 7th century BCE.

      On a different note, and due to Joseph Lauer's question, I wondered
      where provenienced
      bone seals were found.

      Yitzhak Sapir
    • Peter van der Veen
      Dear Eliot, I do not agree with you that this is not an acceptable approach. If one starts with the known - the provenanced piece from the legal excavation in
      Message 2 of 15 , Mar 3, 2008
        Dear Eliot,

        I do not agree with you that this is not an acceptable approach. If one starts with the known - the provenanced piece from the legal excavation in Jerusalem - then one can compare unprovenanced pieces and only so we are able to establish a certain degree of probability re the authenticity of that other object (not vice versa!!!). Indeed in this case there is some evidence that both seals (the provenanced and the unprovenanced) could perhaps (!) have been produced in the same workshop. Regardless of whatever one may think of pieces acquired through the antiquity market, I for my part do believe (perhaps I am too much of an epigraphist!) that we cannot simply ignore the unprovenanced material. That is why I have decided to accept a mid-way approach. I always start from the known and only then consult what else has been found for reference only (but again I always check first what other provenanced comparable material is known, and only then I move on to the unprovenanced material, checking very carefully who own it, where and when (!) it was bought, and if accessible I tend to study the objects myself, before consulting other colleagues, etc. etc.).

        Best wishes
        Peter van der Veen, PhD

        -------- Original-Nachricht --------
        > Datum: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 23:51:09 -0800 (PST)
        > Von: eliot braun <eliotbraun@...>
        > An: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
        > Betreff: Re: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?

        > Is the grandpa seal real? I've no idea, but....
        >
        > If the seal from the collection is not provenienced, and therefore may be
        > (or is even likely to be, given prices paid for such trinkets) a fake, then
        > its relevancy is questionable in the extreme, especially on this list,
        > which purports to deal with the ANCIENT Near East.
        >
        > The agenda for introducing this object is to obtain relevancy and
        > ostensible authenticity by association. That is not a proper scientific approach to
        > the study of these particularly interesting and important objects, which
        > come from undeniably ancient contexts.
        >
        > Dr West has, of course, the right to post what he wishes on his site. We
        > may also criticize his decision to do so, given the controversial nature of
        > the objects in that collection.
        >
        > Jim West <jwest@...> wrote: Robert
        > asked me to post this on the blog (since it includes a photo)
        > which I was more than happy to do.
        >
        > http://jwest.wordpress.com/2008/03/02/deutsch-on-the-seals/
        >
        > His comments too are relevant to the present 'seal' discussion.
        >
        > --
        > ++++++
        >
        > Jim West, ThD
        >
        > http://jwest.wordpress.com -- Blog
        > http://drjewest.googlepages.com - Biblical Studies Resources
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Eliot Braun, Ph D
        > Sr. Fellow WF Albright Institute of Archaeological Research, Jerusalem
        > Associate Researcher Centre de Recherche Français de Jérusalem
        > PO Box 21, Har Adar 90836 Israel
        > Tel 972-2-5345687, Cell 972-50-2231096
        >
        > ---------------------------------
        > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • victor
        I don’t want to get into the whole topic of provenanced vs unprovenanced artifacts and antiquities markets, etc. nor do I know much about mineralogy but if
        Message 3 of 15 , Mar 3, 2008
          I don’t want to get into the whole topic of provenanced vs unprovenanced
          artifacts and antiquities markets, etc. nor do I know much about mineralogy
          but if the two seals are suspected of coming from the same workshop I would
          be a fool not to test them physically to see if they were, perhaps from the
          same piece of stone to the extent that such a thing is scientifically
          demonstrable. If such a thing were to be shown, the unprovenanced item would
          have found its provenance.



          Best,

          Victor Hurowitz

          BGU



          _____

          From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
          Peter van der Veen
          Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 11:18 AM
          To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?



          Dear Eliot,

          I do not agree with you that this is not an acceptable approach. If one
          starts with the known - the provenanced piece from the legal excavation in
          Jerusalem - then one can compare unprovenanced pieces and only so we are
          able to establish a certain degree of probability re the authenticity of
          that other object (not vice versa!!!). Indeed in this case there is some
          evidence that both seals (the provenanced and the unprovenanced) could
          perhaps (!) have been produced in the same workshop. Regardless of whatever
          one may think of pieces acquired through the antiquity market, I for my part
          do believe (perhaps I am too much of an epigraphist!) that we cannot simply
          ignore the unprovenanced material. That is why I have decided to accept a
          mid-way approach. I always start from the known and only then consult what
          else has been found for reference only (but again I always check first what
          other provenanced comparable material is known, and only then I move on to
          the unprovenanced material, checking very carefully who own it, where and
          when (!) it was bought, and if accessible I tend to study the objects
          myself, before consulting other colleagues, etc. etc.).

          Best wishes
          Peter van der Veen, PhD

          -------- Original-Nachricht --------
          > Datum: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 23:51:09 -0800 (PST)
          > Von: eliot braun <eliotbraun@yahoo. <mailto:eliotbraun%40yahoo.com> com>
          > An: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
          > Betreff: Re: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?

          > Is the grandpa seal real? I've no idea, but....
          >
          > If the seal from the collection is not provenienced, and therefore may be
          > (or is even likely to be, given prices paid for such trinkets) a fake,
          then
          > its relevancy is questionable in the extreme, especially on this list,
          > which purports to deal with the ANCIENT Near East.
          >
          > The agenda for introducing this object is to obtain relevancy and
          > ostensible authenticity by association. That is not a proper scientific
          approach to
          > the study of these particularly interesting and important objects, which
          > come from undeniably ancient contexts.
          >
          > Dr West has, of course, the right to post what he wishes on his site. We
          > may also criticize his decision to do so, given the controversial nature
          of
          > the objects in that collection.
          >
          > Jim West <jwest@highland. <mailto:jwest%40highland.net> net> wrote: Robert
          > asked me to post this on the blog (since it includes a photo)
          > which I was more than happy to do.
          >
          > http://jwest.
          <http://jwest.wordpress.com/2008/03/02/deutsch-on-the-seals/>
          wordpress.com/2008/03/02/deutsch-on-the-seals/
          >
          > His comments too are relevant to the present 'seal' discussion.
          >
          > --
          > ++++++
          >
          > Jim West, ThD
          >
          > http://jwest. <http://jwest.wordpress.com> wordpress.com -- Blog
          > http://drjewest. <http://drjewest.googlepages.com> googlepages.com -
          Biblical Studies Resources
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Eliot Braun, Ph D
          > Sr. Fellow WF Albright Institute of Archaeological Research, Jerusalem
          > Associate Researcher Centre de Recherche Français de Jérusalem
          > PO Box 21, Har Adar 90836 Israel
          > Tel 972-2-5345687, Cell 972-50-2231096
          >
          > ---------------------------------
          > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Jack Kilmon
          ... From: eliot braun To: Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 1:51 AM Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest
          Message 4 of 15 , Mar 3, 2008
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "eliot braun" <eliotbraun@...>
            To: <ANE-2@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 1:51 AM
            Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?


            > Is the grandpa seal real? I've no idea, but....
            >
            > If the seal from the collection is not provenienced, and therefore may be
            > (or is even likely to be, given prices paid for such trinkets) a fake,
            > then its relevancy is questionable in the extreme, especially on this
            > list, which purports to deal with the ANCIENT Near East.
            >
            > The agenda for introducing this object is to obtain relevancy and
            > ostensible authenticity by association. That is not a proper scientific
            > approach to the study of these particularly interesting and important
            > objects, which come from undeniably ancient contexts.
            >
            > Dr West has, of course, the right to post what he wishes on his site. We
            > may also criticize his decision to do so, given the controversial nature
            > of the objects in that collection.
            >
            > Jim West <jwest@...> wrote: Robert
            > asked me to post this on the blog (since it includes a photo)
            > which I was more than happy to do.
            >
            > http://jwest.wordpress.com/2008/03/02/deutsch-on-the-seals/
            >
            > His comments too are relevant to the present 'seal' discussion.
            >
            > --
            > ++++++
            >
            > Jim West, ThD
            >
            > http://jwest.wordpress.com -- Blog
            > http://drjewest.googlepages.com - Biblical Studies Resources
            >

            Wouldn't you say that the discovery of the Refayahu bar Shalum seal in
            context verifies the authenticity of the unprovenanced father's seal?

            Jack


            Jack Kilmon
            San Antonio, TX
          • Peter van der Veen
            Dear Victor, Yes indeed that is the right way to go about it. Only thus can we can we know for sure. Best wishes Peter van der Veen
            Message 5 of 15 , Mar 3, 2008
              Dear Victor,

              Yes indeed that is the right way to go about it. Only thus can we can we know for sure.
              Best wishes
              Peter van der Veen

              -------- Original-Nachricht --------
              > Datum: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:47:24 +0200
              > Von: "victor" <victor@...>
              > An: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
              > Betreff: RE: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?

              > I don’t want to get into the whole topic of provenanced vs unprovenanced
              > artifacts and antiquities markets, etc. nor do I know much about
              > mineralogy
              > but if the two seals are suspected of coming from the same workshop I
              > would
              > be a fool not to test them physically to see if they were, perhaps from
              > the
              > same piece of stone to the extent that such a thing is scientifically
              > demonstrable. If such a thing were to be shown, the unprovenanced item
              > would
              > have found its provenance.
              >
              >
              >
              > Best,
              >
              > Victor Hurowitz
              >
              > BGU
              >
              >
              >
              > _____
              >
              > From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
              > Peter van der Veen
              > Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 11:18 AM
              > To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
              > Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?
              >
              >
              >
              > Dear Eliot,
              >
              > I do not agree with you that this is not an acceptable approach. If one
              > starts with the known - the provenanced piece from the legal excavation in
              > Jerusalem - then one can compare unprovenanced pieces and only so we are
              > able to establish a certain degree of probability re the authenticity of
              > that other object (not vice versa!!!). Indeed in this case there is some
              > evidence that both seals (the provenanced and the unprovenanced) could
              > perhaps (!) have been produced in the same workshop. Regardless of
              > whatever
              > one may think of pieces acquired through the antiquity market, I for my
              > part
              > do believe (perhaps I am too much of an epigraphist!) that we cannot
              > simply
              > ignore the unprovenanced material. That is why I have decided to accept a
              > mid-way approach. I always start from the known and only then consult what
              > else has been found for reference only (but again I always check first
              > what
              > other provenanced comparable material is known, and only then I move on to
              > the unprovenanced material, checking very carefully who own it, where and
              > when (!) it was bought, and if accessible I tend to study the objects
              > myself, before consulting other colleagues, etc. etc.).
              >
              > Best wishes
              > Peter van der Veen, PhD
              >
              > -------- Original-Nachricht --------
              > > Datum: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 23:51:09 -0800 (PST)
              > > Von: eliot braun <eliotbraun@yahoo. <mailto:eliotbraun%40yahoo.com> com>
              > > An: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
              > > Betreff: Re: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?
              >
              > > Is the grandpa seal real? I've no idea, but....
              > >
              > > If the seal from the collection is not provenienced, and therefore may
              > be
              > > (or is even likely to be, given prices paid for such trinkets) a fake,
              > then
              > > its relevancy is questionable in the extreme, especially on this list,
              > > which purports to deal with the ANCIENT Near East.
              > >
              > > The agenda for introducing this object is to obtain relevancy and
              > > ostensible authenticity by association. That is not a proper scientific
              > approach to
              > > the study of these particularly interesting and important objects, which
              > > come from undeniably ancient contexts.
              > >
              > > Dr West has, of course, the right to post what he wishes on his site. We
              > > may also criticize his decision to do so, given the controversial nature
              > of
              > > the objects in that collection.
              > >
              > > Jim West <jwest@highland. <mailto:jwest%40highland.net> net> wrote:
              > Robert
              > > asked me to post this on the blog (since it includes a photo)
              > > which I was more than happy to do.
              > >
              > > http://jwest.
              > <http://jwest.wordpress.com/2008/03/02/deutsch-on-the-seals/>
              > wordpress.com/2008/03/02/deutsch-on-the-seals/
              > >
              > > His comments too are relevant to the present 'seal' discussion.
              > >
              > > --
              > > ++++++
              > >
              > > Jim West, ThD
              > >
              > > http://jwest. <http://jwest.wordpress.com> wordpress.com -- Blog
              > > http://drjewest. <http://drjewest.googlepages.com> googlepages.com -
              > Biblical Studies Resources
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Eliot Braun, Ph D
              > > Sr. Fellow WF Albright Institute of Archaeological Research, Jerusalem
              > > Associate Researcher Centre de Recherche Français de Jérusalem
              > > PO Box 21, Har Adar 90836 Israel
              > > Tel 972-2-5345687, Cell 972-50-2231096
              > >
              > > ---------------------------------
              > > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
              > >
              > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              > >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
            • eliot braun
              Were it possible to verify the authenticity of the seal, then that would be a good approach. However, I think no one will ever be able to do so, and so you
              Message 6 of 15 , Mar 3, 2008
                Were it possible to verify the authenticity of the seal, then that would be a good approach. However, I think no one will ever be able to do so, and so you would risk adding false information to a base of authentic data, and by doing so you would have done more damage to your field of study than should you decide to ignore it!

                I don't necessarily suggest ignoring it, but the very least you should do is question its authenticity and not rely on it for your results. Consider a curio and think what a devastating loss its unreliable provenance represents to epigraphic studies. Besides, without context just how much information does it impart, especially if the information may be false?


                victor <victor@...> wrote: I don’t want to get into the whole topic of provenanced vs unprovenanced
                artifacts and antiquities markets, etc. nor do I know much about mineralogy
                but if the two seals are suspected of coming from the same workshop I would
                be a fool not to test them physically to see if they were, perhaps from the
                same piece of stone to the extent that such a thing is scientifically
                demonstrable. If such a thing were to be shown, the unprovenanced item would
                have found its provenance.

                Best,

                Victor Hurowitz

                BGU

                _____

                From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                Peter van der Veen
                Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 11:18 AM
                To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?

                Dear Eliot,

                I do not agree with you that this is not an acceptable approach. If one
                starts with the known - the provenanced piece from the legal excavation in
                Jerusalem - then one can compare unprovenanced pieces and only so we are
                able to establish a certain degree of probability re the authenticity of
                that other object (not vice versa!!!). Indeed in this case there is some
                evidence that both seals (the provenanced and the unprovenanced) could
                perhaps (!) have been produced in the same workshop. Regardless of whatever
                one may think of pieces acquired through the antiquity market, I for my part
                do believe (perhaps I am too much of an epigraphist!) that we cannot simply
                ignore the unprovenanced material. That is why I have decided to accept a
                mid-way approach. I always start from the known and only then consult what
                else has been found for reference only (but again I always check first what
                other provenanced comparable material is known, and only then I move on to
                the unprovenanced material, checking very carefully who own it, where and
                when (!) it was bought, and if accessible I tend to study the objects
                myself, before consulting other colleagues, etc. etc.).

                Best wishes
                Peter van der Veen, PhD

                -------- Original-Nachricht --------
                > Datum: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 23:51:09 -0800 (PST)
                > Von: eliot braun <eliotbraun@yahoo. <mailto:eliotbraun%40yahoo.com> com>
                > An: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
                > Betreff: Re: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?

                > Is the grandpa seal real? I've no idea, but....
                >
                > If the seal from the collection is not provenienced, and therefore may be
                > (or is even likely to be, given prices paid for such trinkets) a fake,
                then
                > its relevancy is questionable in the extreme, especially on this list,
                > which purports to deal with the ANCIENT Near East.
                >
                > The agenda for introducing this object is to obtain relevancy and
                > ostensible authenticity by association. That is not a proper scientific
                approach to
                > the study of these particularly interesting and important objects, which
                > come from undeniably ancient contexts.
                >
                > Dr West has, of course, the right to post what he wishes on his site. We
                > may also criticize his decision to do so, given the controversial nature
                of
                > the objects in that collection.
                >
                > Jim West <jwest@highland. <mailto:jwest%40highland.net> net> wrote: Robert
                > asked me to post this on the blog (since it includes a photo)
                > which I was more than happy to do.
                >
                > http://jwest.
                <http://jwest.wordpress.com/2008/03/02/deutsch-on-the-seals/>
                wordpress.com/2008/03/02/deutsch-on-the-seals/
                >
                > His comments too are relevant to the present 'seal' discussion.
                >
                > --
                > ++++++
                >
                > Jim West, ThD
                >
                > http://jwest. <http://jwest.wordpress.com> wordpress.com -- Blog
                > http://drjewest. <http://drjewest.googlepages.com> googlepages.com -
                Biblical Studies Resources
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Eliot Braun, Ph D
                > Sr. Fellow WF Albright Institute of Archaeological Research, Jerusalem
                > Associate Researcher Centre de Recherche Français de Jérusalem
                > PO Box 21, Har Adar 90836 Israel
                > Tel 972-2-5345687, Cell 972-50-2231096
                >
                > ---------------------------------
                > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                Eliot Braun, Ph D
                Sr. Fellow WF Albright Institute of Archaeological Research, Jerusalem
                Associate Researcher Centre de Recherche Français de Jérusalem
                PO Box 21, Har Adar 90836 Israel
                Tel 972-2-5345687, Cell 972-50-2231096

                ---------------------------------
                Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • eliot braun
                No. What manner of proof is there for such an idea? ... From: eliot braun To: Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008
                Message 7 of 15 , Mar 3, 2008
                  No. What manner of proof is there for such an idea?

                  Jack Kilmon <jkilmon@...> wrote:
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "eliot braun" <eliotbraun@...>
                  To: <ANE-2@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 1:51 AM
                  Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?

                  > Is the grandpa seal real? I've no idea, but....
                  >
                  > If the seal from the collection is not provenienced, and therefore may be
                  > (or is even likely to be, given prices paid for such trinkets) a fake,
                  > then its relevancy is questionable in the extreme, especially on this
                  > list, which purports to deal with the ANCIENT Near East.
                  >
                  > The agenda for introducing this object is to obtain relevancy and
                  > ostensible authenticity by association. That is not a proper scientific
                  > approach to the study of these particularly interesting and important
                  > objects, which come from undeniably ancient contexts.
                  >
                  > Dr West has, of course, the right to post what he wishes on his site. We
                  > may also criticize his decision to do so, given the controversial nature
                  > of the objects in that collection.
                  >
                  > Jim West <jwest@...> wrote: Robert
                  > asked me to post this on the blog (since it includes a photo)
                  > which I was more than happy to do.
                  >
                  > http://jwest.wordpress.com/2008/03/02/deutsch-on-the-seals/
                  >
                  > His comments too are relevant to the present 'seal' discussion.
                  >
                  > --
                  > ++++++
                  >
                  > Jim West, ThD
                  >
                  > http://jwest.wordpress.com -- Blog
                  > http://drjewest.googlepages.com - Biblical Studies Resources
                  >

                  Wouldn't you say that the discovery of the Refayahu bar Shalum seal in
                  context verifies the authenticity of the unprovenanced father's seal?

                  Jack

                  Jack Kilmon
                  San Antonio, TX






                  Eliot Braun, Ph D
                  Sr. Fellow WF Albright Institute of Archaeological Research, Jerusalem
                  Associate Researcher Centre de Recherche Français de Jérusalem
                  PO Box 21, Har Adar 90836 Israel
                  Tel 972-2-5345687, Cell 972-50-2231096

                  ---------------------------------
                  Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Joe Zias
                  Regarding the authenticity of the seal Jack Kilmon writes Wouldn t you say that the discovery of the Refayahu bar Shalum seal in context verifies the
                  Message 8 of 15 , Mar 3, 2008
                    Regarding the authenticity of the seal Jack Kilmon writes " Wouldn't you say that the discovery of the Refayahu bar Shalum seal in context verifies the authenticity of the unprovenanced father's seal? The answer is no and Eliot Braun is 100 % correct regarding the problems associated with it. Let me give you a recent example : A few years back, colleagues in the IAA were visiting the site of Ein Gedi where the archaeologists excavating there were getting ready to call a press conference over a seal which they had found 'in-situ' with Jewish symbols. Naturally they were very excited over it until one of the more experienced archaeologists took one look at it and said it was forged. They were aghast as they had found it in the siftings however my colleague showed the professor why the the object was recently forged and was able to convince them to call off the press conference. It was clear what was happening, that this object was not one of a kind but another object similar
                    to that either was in the hands of the dealers or would soon be, and by finding a similar object 'in-situ' would automatically 'kosher' the the other, Here it almost worked until a more experienced colleague spotted the forged object immediately. So Eliot is correct, one just has to understand how the 'game' is sometimes played out. I think here that Dr. West who is one of the more astute bloggers out there was wrong in 'hustling for D. by putting it out in his blog as there may be an agenda here.

                    Joe Zias

                    Jack Kilmon <jkilmon@...> wrote:
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "eliot braun" <eliotbraun@...>
                    To: <ANE-2@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 1:51 AM
                    Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?

                    > Is the grandpa seal real? I've no idea, but....
                    >
                    > If the seal from the collection is not provenienced, and therefore may be
                    > (or is even likely to be, given prices paid for such trinkets) a fake,
                    > then its relevancy is questionable in the extreme, especially on this
                    > list, which purports to deal with the ANCIENT Near East.
                    >
                    > The agenda for introducing this object is to obtain relevancy and
                    > ostensible authenticity by association. That is not a proper scientific
                    > approach to the study of these particularly interesting and important
                    > objects, which come from undeniably ancient contexts.
                    >
                    > Dr West has, of course, the right to post what he wishes on his site. We
                    > may also criticize his decision to do so, given the controversial nature
                    > of the objects in that collection.
                    >
                    > Jim West <jwest@...> wrote: Robert
                    > asked me to post this on the blog (since it includes a photo)
                    > which I was more than happy to do.
                    >
                    > http://jwest.wordpress.com/2008/03/02/deutsch-on-the-seals/
                    >
                    > His comments too are relevant to the present 'seal' discussion.
                    >
                    > --
                    > ++++++
                    >
                    > Jim West, ThD
                    >
                    > http://jwest.wordpress.com -- Blog
                    > http://drjewest.googlepages.com - Biblical Studies Resources
                    >

                    Wouldn't you say that the discovery of the Refayahu bar Shalum seal in
                    context verifies the authenticity of the unprovenanced father's seal?

                    Jack

                    Jack Kilmon
                    San Antonio, TX






                    Joe Zias www.joezias.com
                    Anthropology/Paleopathology

                    Science and Antiquity Group - Jerusalem
                    Jerusalem, Israel



                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Jack Kilmon
                    The extreme unliklihood of a forger making up the name Shalum bar Refayahu and inscribing that on a seal with an identical design to a seal inscribed Refayahu
                    Message 9 of 15 , Mar 3, 2008
                      The extreme unliklihood of a forger making up the name Shalum bar Refayahu
                      and inscribing that on a seal with an identical design to a seal inscribed
                      Refayahu bar Shalum excavated in Jerusalem in a context?


                      Jack


                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: "eliot braun" <eliotbraun@...>
                      To: <ANE-2@yahoogroups.com>
                      Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 10:17 AM
                      Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?


                      > No. What manner of proof is there for such an idea?
                      >
                      > Jack Kilmon <jkilmon@...> wrote:
                      > ----- Original Message -----
                      > From: "eliot braun" <eliotbraun@...>
                      > To: <ANE-2@yahoogroups.com>
                      > Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 1:51 AM
                      > Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?
                      >
                      > > Is the grandpa seal real? I've no idea, but....
                      > >
                      > > If the seal from the collection is not provenienced, and therefore may
                      > > be
                      > > (or is even likely to be, given prices paid for such trinkets) a fake,
                      > > then its relevancy is questionable in the extreme, especially on this
                      > > list, which purports to deal with the ANCIENT Near East.
                      > >
                      > > The agenda for introducing this object is to obtain relevancy and
                      > > ostensible authenticity by association. That is not a proper scientific
                      > > approach to the study of these particularly interesting and important
                      > > objects, which come from undeniably ancient contexts.
                      > >
                      > > Dr West has, of course, the right to post what he wishes on his site. We
                      > > may also criticize his decision to do so, given the controversial nature
                      > > of the objects in that collection.
                      > >
                      > > Jim West <jwest@...> wrote:
                      > > Robert
                      > > asked me to post this on the blog (since it includes a photo)
                      > > which I was more than happy to do.
                      > >
                      > > http://jwest.wordpress.com/2008/03/02/deutsch-on-the-seals/
                      > >
                      > > His comments too are relevant to the present 'seal' discussion.
                      > >
                      > > --
                      > > ++++++
                      > >
                      > > Jim West, ThD
                      > >
                      > > http://jwest.wordpress.com -- Blog
                      > > http://drjewest.googlepages.com - Biblical Studies Resources
                      > >
                      >
                      > Wouldn't you say that the discovery of the Refayahu bar Shalum seal in
                      > context verifies the authenticity of the unprovenanced father's seal?
                      >
                      > Jack
                      >
                      > Jack Kilmon
                      > San Antonio, TX
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Eliot Braun, Ph D
                      > Sr. Fellow WF Albright Institute of Archaeological Research, Jerusalem
                      > Associate Researcher Centre de Recherche Français de Jérusalem
                      > PO Box 21, Har Adar 90836 Israel
                      > Tel 972-2-5345687, Cell 972-50-2231096
                      >
                      > ---------------------------------
                      > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                    • eliot braun
                      I would suggest asking a scientific expert if such a test were possible. Peter van der Veen wrote: Dear
                      Message 10 of 15 , Mar 3, 2008
                        I would suggest asking a scientific expert if such a test were possible.

                        Peter van der Veen <van_der_Veen@...> wrote: Dear Victor,

                        Yes indeed that is the right way to go about it. Only thus can we can we know for sure.
                        Best wishes
                        Peter van der Veen

                        -------- Original-Nachricht --------
                        > Datum: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:47:24 +0200
                        > Von: "victor" <victor@...>
                        > An: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                        > Betreff: RE: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut
                        > etre?

                        > I don�t want to get into the whole topic of provenanced vs
                        > unprovenanced artifacts and antiquities markets, etc. nor do I
                        > know much about mineralogy but if the two seals are suspected of
                        > coming from the same workshop I would be a fool not to test them
                        > physically to see if they were, perhaps from the same piece of
                        > stone to the extent that such a thing is scientifically
                        > demonstrable. If such a thing were to be shown, the unprovenanced
                        > item would have found its provenance.
                        >
                        > Best,
                        >
                        > Victor Hurowitz
                        >
                        > BGU

                        Eliot Braun, Ph D
                        Sr. Fellow WF Albright Institute of Archaeological Research, Jerusalem
                        Associate Researcher Centre de Recherche Fran�ais de J�rusalem
                        PO Box 21, Har Adar 90836 Israel
                        Tel 972-2-5345687, Cell 972-50-2231096
                      • eliot braun
                        Fellow list members If what I ve spent the last 3 decades doing is worth something, and I d like to feel it is, then it is only so because what I ve done is
                        Message 11 of 15 , Mar 3, 2008
                          Fellow list members
                          If what I've spent the last 3 decades doing is worth something, and I'd like to feel it is, then it is only so because what I've done is try to increase human knowledge about the past. I'd like to think that trying to reconstruct what happened in ancient times is a serious game of puzzling out the truth through the archaeological record, i.e., a very incomplete set of evidence that has survived and which we must interpret. If we are to add garbage to that record, fakes and forgeries, then certain aspects of our discipline are corrupted. I, for one, think it is better to write "I don't know" or "I think, based on available evidence" that such and such was the case way back in the 4th millennium BCE. That's presenting the evidence and its interpretation.

                          To know that someone has faked information, for whatever agenda, and added it to the archaeological-historical record is to corrupt the discipline and virtually make aspects of it worthless for understanding the past. It can be entertaining and perhaps even important for some folk (to wit certain tombs and objects), but it is not revealing what happened in the past. Its presenting fiction. Now I'm a lover of fiction and I think many of us are, but we ought not to mistake it as a true representation of the past.

                          Here's a small example of something which I've been trying to figure out since ca. 1988. In 1989 or 1990 I published an article on basalt bowls of the EB I period in PEQ. I cited differences between them and those of the preceding Chalcolithic period. One type of unusual, 4 handled bowl, known only in EB I contexts, had, uniquely for all examples I've ever seen (scores of them), triangular incisions on its rim; a style of decoration known otherwise in the southern Levant on bowls of the Late Chalcolithic period. That bowl was from a collection and of unknown provenience and published by Ruth Amiran. Another bowl of the same morphology in the same article was confiscated from an antiquities collector, only it had carved it in in relief on 2 opposite sides, a goat-like representation with long horns, similar to representations from the Chalcolithic Nahal Mishmar hoard. In a century of archaeological exploration there is no evidence of such iconography in EB I, to date.

                          These 4 handled bowls appear, so far as I understand, in developed EB I, perhaps several centuries after the beginning of EB I and so, in time, rather distant from the Chalcolithic period. How can this time lag in the appearance of these typical Chalcolithic motifs be explained? It can't, rationally, and I've always wondered whether Ruth Amiran wasn't bamboozled by someone, or someones, as to the bona fides of two non-provenienced vessels. And in turn, perhaps I was, because I cited her article, one of the only published information on these bowls.

                          I have no answer to this question, but I feel unquiet about it. I wish I were able to verify the authenticity of these objects.

                          I hope this encourages some of you to think of the consequences of using non-provenienced objects in serious studies.






                          Eliot Braun, Ph D
                          Sr. Fellow WF Albright Institute of Archaeological Research, Jerusalem
                          Associate Researcher Centre de Recherche Français de Jérusalem
                          PO Box 21, Har Adar 90836 Israel
                          Tel 972-2-5345687, Cell 972-50-2231096

                          ---------------------------------
                          Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Jack Kilmon
                          There are several non-destructive spectroscopic tests that can determine if the seals are made from same-source material. Jack Kilmon ... From: eliot braun
                          Message 12 of 15 , Mar 3, 2008
                            There are several non-destructive spectroscopic tests that can determine if
                            the seals are made from same-source material.

                            Jack Kilmon


                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: "eliot braun" <eliotbraun@...>
                            To: <ANE-2@yahoogroups.com>
                            Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 3:12 PM
                            Subject: Re: RE: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut etre?


                            >I would suggest asking a scientific expert if such a test were possible.
                            >
                            > Peter van der Veen <van_der_Veen@...> wrote:
                            > Dear Victor,
                            >
                            > Yes indeed that is the right way to go about it. Only thus can we can we
                            > know for sure.
                            > Best wishes
                            > Peter van der Veen
                            >
                            > -------- Original-Nachricht --------
                            > > Datum: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:47:24 +0200
                            > > Von: "victor" <victor@...>
                            > > An: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                            > > Betreff: RE: [ANE-2] Deutsch on the latest seals, an agenda peut
                            > > etre?
                            >
                            > > I don�t want to get into the whole topic of provenanced vs
                            > > unprovenanced artifacts and antiquities markets, etc. nor do I
                            > > know much about mineralogy but if the two seals are suspected of
                            > > coming from the same workshop I would be a fool not to test them
                            > > physically to see if they were, perhaps from the same piece of
                            > > stone to the extent that such a thing is scientifically
                            > > demonstrable. If such a thing were to be shown, the unprovenanced
                            > > item would have found its provenance.
                            > >
                            > > Best,
                            > >
                            > > Victor Hurowitz
                            > >
                            > > BGU
                            >
                            > Eliot Braun, Ph D
                            > Sr. Fellow WF Albright Institute of Archaeological Research, Jerusalem
                            > Associate Researcher Centre de Recherche Fran�ais de J�rusalem
                            > PO Box 21, Har Adar 90836 Israel
                            > Tel 972-2-5345687, Cell 972-50-2231096
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > Yahoo! Groups Links
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                          • cejo@uchicago.edu
                            And not just fakes and forgeries. For thoughts on many of these isses, see David Gill s blog _Looting Matters_: http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/ -Chuck
                            Message 13 of 15 , Mar 3, 2008
                              And not just fakes and forgeries. For thoughts on many of these isses, see David Gill's blog _Looting Matters_:
                              http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/

                              -Chuck Jones-
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.