Steve Caruso Beats Me to the Punch and More

Check out Steve’s new analysis of the texts of the Jordan Codices. I’ve been working on the same patterns, but Steve was quicker on the draw (this isn’t over, Steve). The use of a number of stamps has been suggested in the past based on the frequent repetition of the menorah, the two different styles of trees, etc. See also the two different versions of the “Christ” face:

You can see the mold was manipulated somewhat after the stamp impression was made and before the casting was done. The images are not identical, but come from the same stamp. I cannot agree that this impression comes from a Mona Lisa image, though. This would require the forger created a three dimensional copy of the Mona Lisa image for the stamp. It would have been much easier to us an existing stamp image, and the helios coins are obviously the closest match (although I have not found an exact match). In the copper codex that was falsified by Peter Thonemann the stamps were just fake ancient coins. Earlier Robert Deutsch felt he identified the exact fake for the chariot scene:

But on the codex the head of the second horse from the right is longer and actually has a more vertical orientation compared to the other horse heads to its left and right. The horses’ knees are also not in line on the codex:

This is the fake used in the impression. The difference is pretty minute, but it is there:

The fake coin used to produce the profile of Alexander the Great with the lion’s skin has also been identified. Here’s an overlay of the copper codex image and the fake coin:

For those who want to go digging for a source, a page shared in Prof. Davies’ editorial reproduces a photo given him by David Elkington of a codex with the impression of a clearly modern coin/plaque of some kind. I know I have seen this face before before, but I cannot place it at the moment (it is presumably supposed to be Jesus). If anyone reading recognizes the man in the codex, please let us know:

Long ago I pointed to the very clear iconographic relationships shared by the copper codices and the lead codices. The exact tree image found on the copper codex is found on about a dozen different lead codices being promoted as genuine by Elkington, as well as the same lettering and ornamentation. More evidence for this has come forward, such as the Herodian symbol found on the codex Elkington himself is flaunting as a forgery. As Steve very perceptively notes in his new post, we have yet to see a photo of a codex that does not bear clear indications of forgery. If Elkington has genuine codices, he’s hiding them. Note also Steve’s comment about the hammering out of the images on the one codex from the Facebook page. This is especially important because Elkington claims on that page that there is no iconography on that side of the plate because it is the “back page.” This is rather transparent deception on the part of Mr. Elkington. There is more deception in his attribution of several texts on that page to “experts,” “third party journalists,” and “professors,” when the texts are very clearly written by Elkington himself (note phrases he uses repeatedly in his own writing, like “at the highest level,” “of ancient provenance,” and “meaning and/or interpretation”). He’s trying to build up some authority around his fraud, but it’s painfully transparent that he alone is responsible for all of it.

Finally, just today Elkington put a link on the Facebook page to a blog called Heavenly Ascents, by a friend of mine named David Larsen (PhD candidate at St. Andrews). I don’t think Elkington has read all David’s posts on the codices (he cites me and Peter Thonemann, for instance), but for now he recommends it as fair and balanced. That’s a step forward from deleting and barring all posters who challenge Elkington’s claims.

An Indication of Forgery on the Jordan Codices

Steve Caruso has identified the source of a sequence of letters on one of the codices. It is the phrase “council (of) the” found on a couple of coins minted around the second century BCE. There is no sign the broken phrase is properly contextualized on the codex, and the scripts around it are of varying provenances. As has been stated before, the forger is simply lifting examples of texts from multiple different sources. There is little reason to conclude an ancient author would conflate so many different scripts drawn from multiple sources and combine them nonsensically on such complicated productions as these. Fame and fortune are certainly significant enough motivations for a modern forger, though. Keep in mind that Elkington suggested Caruso was incompetent enough to be confused about whether or not the script (which Elkington confused with a language) was Aramaic or paleo-Hebrew. Here is Steve’s description of the relationship:

More Dishonesty from Jordan Codices

The admin in charge of the Jordan Codices Facebook group has posted four pictures from what it claims are forensic tests of the codices. He states:

This set of photographs are some examples we took during our forensic work on the codices.

It’s my contention that the photos show no such thing. These are publicity photos taken by Elkington himself (or associates) and passed off as scientific. He claims each codex was “numbered and measured for record,” but look at how the numbering takes place in the following two photos:

In the first photo, the vast majority of the codex has been obscured by the portion of torn-off loose leaf notebook paper. What value does this photo have for a researcher? Absolutely none. In the lower picture a smaller piece of loose leaf notebook paper has been torn off to allow for the visibility of the tree image (and the numbering system is different). This is simply not how artifacts are photographed by professionals. Elkington is obscuring those parts of the codices that have text on them so that people who have the ability to analyze the texts for themselves cannot do so. He wants you to see the tree, though, since it’s pretty and it cannot be shown to be unintelligible.

On that Facebook page you can also find an email exchange between Elkington (posing as one of the professors involved, in my opinion) and the BBC complaints department as well as the following comment, which misrepresents and marginalizes the work of Steve Caruso:

 

 

EDIT: It should also be noted that one of the photos the Jordan Codices page suggests was taken during “forensic work” is not new to this story (it is the only one without a crudely made number plate):

It also happens to have been a photo David Elkington has been offering for license since this whole story began back in March:

Note how the rings used to bind the plates were cropped out of the Facebook photo, perhaps to avoid showing that this “forensic work” included destroying the original binding of the codex. Including the bowl of pistachio shells (ubiquitous in forensic laboratories the world over, you know) was a bit of a boneheaded move, but it helped bring what appear to be Q-tips partially into the photo. How scientific! In addition to throwing even more doubt on the claims being made, I think this also leaves little doubt that David Elkington himself is behind the Facebook group.

 

 

 

Steve Caruso’s Analysis of the Codices at LiveScience

David Meadows has let me know that there is an article up at livescience.com (here) which describes the growing consensus among scholars that the lead codices are forgeries. Steve Caruso’s great analysis of the production of the script on the codices features heavily in the article.

Steve Caruso on the Script of the Lead Plates

Steve Caruso over at Aramaic Designs has a great chart up laying out comparisons of all the characters he can identify on the plates. He notes Palmyrene, Old Aramaic, and Nabataean forms and points out there are indicators it is not the work of a professional scribe.  Take a look.

Elkington Fires Back at Thonemann

This short article at Express.co.uk was brought to my attention by David Meadows. We finally have a response from Elkington regarding Thonemann’s judgment of the codices:

He’s not a biblical scholar, he’s a Greek classicist. Dismissing the provenance of the books on the basis of two low resolution photographs by e-mail is out of order. We welcome healthy debate but it is not very helpful for anybody to dismiss it on such little evidence.

First, whether Thonemann is a biblical scholar or a Classicist is of absolutely no import whatsoever. Next, you’ll notice the article calls Elkington an archaeologist and a biblical scholar, but he has no training in either field. The text is Greek and Thonemann happened to identify the text’s undeniable source. Elkington does not even address the criticism. He simply takes a shot at Thonemann’s credentials (!) and then states that there is too little evidence for a firm conclusion.

Besides Elkington’s bad form, I am quite disappointed in the lack of journalistic integrity that is displayed in this article. First, the author simply took Elkington at his word regarding his credentials. Second, Elkington’s two criticisms of Thonemann’s analysis are, for lack of a better word, utterly asinine. It simply does not matter what the resolution of a photograph is if that photograph can conclusively show the dependence of the inscription on the plate in the photo to another inscription. I am disappointed that a journalist felt this kind of retort merited the forum it was given. Lastly, the article ignores several other actual scholars who have chimed in on this based on more than just two photographs.  It seems to me the article is meant more to keep a controversy alive than to report the news.

Sunday Times Article on the Codices by Peter Thonemann

Peter Thonemann has published an article in the Sunday Times discussing his relationship to the lead codices and the response of the media. Have a look!

Thoughts on the Jordan Lead Codices

There’s still a lot of confusion and misinformation circulating about the Jordan lead codices, and I thought I would summarize some of the main issues and some considerations that should be taken into account. I’m not going to describe the background of the plates’ putative discovery and early life, but you can find much of that background, and commentary, at the following links:

The Jewish Chronicle Online
Daily Mail, 2
PaleoJudaica, 2, 3
Jerusalem Post
Christian Science Monitor
Rogue Classicism, 2
The Telegraph
Elkington Press Release
The Forbidden Gospels
Zwinglius Redivivus
Christianity Today
Larry Hurtado
Patheos
Exploring Our Matrix
postost
The Washington Post
Thomas Verenna

Now, as many of the scholars above point out, several aspects of these codices beg skepticism. The  stories regarding their discovery differ in critical areas. The descriptions of the hoard differ. The codices are written in “secret code.” The codices’ main protagonist is shortly publishing a book about them and doesn’t seem to have any real credentials in the fields in which he claims specialization (and he calls the last book of the New Testament “the book of Revelations”). The most significant issue with the codices is described in an email exchange circulated recently by a young Oxford scholar named Peter Thonemann (available here). In that email, Thonemann explains that late last year Elkington sent photos of a copper codex with Greek writing on it to him for analysis. Thonemann quickly discovered a link between the codex’s inscription and a Greek/Aramaic tombstone inscription on display in a museum in Jordan (and published in two places). The copper codex, however, conflates the lambda and the alpha in the majuscule script, indicating the person writing it didn’t recognize the small difference between the two. The second and fourth letters on the third line of the following text (from left to right) are majuscule lambdas and alphas, respectively. While the difference is pretty clear, in some hands it’s barely perceptible, especially in inscriptions on stone:

Now on to the copper codex:

This reads ΛΛΥΠΕΧΛΙΡΕΛΒΓΛΡΟΚΛΙΕΙΣΙΩΝ and then ΛΛΥΠΕ written backwards. Another plate has the following at the bottom:

This contains the following portion of the other inscription: ΛΥΠΕΧΛΙΡΕΛΒΓ. The inscription Thonemann points to reads thus, with the words written in minuscule script and separated by spaces:

1 Σελαμαν χρηστὲ καὶ
2 ἄλυπε χαῖρε, Ἀβγαρ ὁ καὶ Εἰσίων
3 Μονοαθου υἱὸς υἱῷ τειμίῳ τὸ μνῆμα
4 ἐποίησεν ἔτους τρίτου ἐπαρχείας

1 For Selaman, excellent and
2 harmless man, farewell! Abgar, also known as Eision,
3 son of Monoathos, for his excellent son, this tomb,
4 he constructed, in the third year of the province

Now here is the same inscription with portions from the first and then second inscriptions above bracketed:

1 Σελαμαν χρηστὲ καὶ
2 [ἄλυπε χαῖρε, Ἀβγαρ ὁ καὶ Εἰσίων]
3 Μονοαθου υἱὸς υἱῷ τειμίῳ τὸ μνῆμα
4 ἐποίησεν ἔτους τρίτου ἐπαρχείας

1 Σελαμαν χρηστὲ καὶ
2 ἄ[λυπε χαῖρε, Ἀβγ]αρ ὁ καὶ Εἰσίων
3 Μονοαθου υἱὸς υἱῷ τειμίῳ τὸ μνῆμα
4 ἐποίησεν ἔτους τρίτου ἐπαρχείας

The bracketed portions make no sense out of the context of the rest of the inscription. It seems the person responsible for the copper plate copied the entire second line off the inscription and then used portions of it on other plates. This indicates the copper codices are modern forgeries.

There are aspects of the copper plates which show they share the same provenance as the copper plate. Elkington seems to have overlooked this in sharing select photos of the lead codices. As I show in this post, the stylized palm tree near the bottom of the copper codex is exactly identical to a stylized tree that appears in at least one of the lead codices currently being publicized. This leads unquestionably to the conclusion that at least some of the lead codices come from the same forger who produced the copper codex. Other iconographic qualities are shared by other plates. Consider, for instance, this rectangular patterning from the copper codices:

Now take a look at some of the photos from the BBC set:

Now look at the star patterns under the palm tree in the copper codex:

Now look at the stars around the Menorah on some of the first photos released:

You can see both phenomena, as well as the stylized paleo-Hebrew on the forged copper plate and on the bigger plate:

The above also shows the codices were cast. The two-and-a-half registers on this plate are identical in every detail. The same set of images was pressed into clay three different times for a mold. The bottom half of the top register has been smoothed out to allow for the register below, showing it wasn’t stamped.

The dotted borders and their teardrop shaped adornments on this forged plate are also remarkably similar to the same phenomena on the “Jesus portrait” codex:

Notice also the same cryptic script, which looks like stylized, and sometimes reversed, paleo-Hebrew (see here for a brief judgment by an expert). The casting looks identical too. Bill Hamblin has also shown the Jesus portrait on this plate is strikingly similar to the image on ancient Helios coins. The copper plate also seems to have an impression of an old Alexander the Great coin with the lion headdress, which Hamblin discusses. These plates are all the work of the same hand, and the copper plate shows that that hand is the hand of a forger.

Some have posited that it’s still possible that some plates are authentic. Perhaps the copper plate was simply copied from authentic ones. While it’s certainly not totally outside the realm of possibility, a number of considerations mitigate the plausibility. First, it strains credulity to think that someone with authentic ancient codices would decide to go through the time and effort of producing fake ones to supplement the hoard, and then only publicize the fake codices. Second, we’ve seen no indication any plates have different origins. The notion that any are original is nothing more than wishful thinking. David Elkington’s credibility has been severely undermined by the fact that he hasn’t come froward on his own about Thonemann’s find, and is sharing photos of other codices that are clearly related to the copper ones. His story also changes with each new article.

Additionally, he is omitting from the publicity photos those qualities which pointed to forgery for Thonemann. No Greek writing is being shown. In fact, few of the photos show any kind of writing at all, unlike the earlier photos, and those that do show a much, much more cryptic script, perhaps intended to avoid the kind of embarrassing incident that happened with Thonemann? The changes in the collection also seem to indicate someone altered the plates after Thonemann’s analysis. Is Elkington in on the forgery? He doesn’t appear to be an innocent middleman who believes the codices to be authentic. He didn’t raise a stink when Thonemann told him his copper codex was bogus. Does Elkington stand to profit from the plates? Elkington doesn’t want to sell them, and is playing up that point. If he tried to sell them they could very easily be discovered as fake. However, he does have a book that may soon come out. He’s apparently been trying unsuccessfully to find a publisher. What better publicity could he produce by throwing the media a bone like this? if he’s just trying to sell books, the codices never have to see the light of day. In fact, the more intrigue and mystery he can produce, the more books he can sell. Is it a coincidence that we’re suddenly being told by the Telegraph that he’s been shot at by some Indiana Jones-like brotherhood trying to protect the codices from the world.

In light of these considerations, the burden of proof must lie exclusively with those who wish to assert any of these plates are authentic, and until some scientific analysis can show anything ancient is connected with these plates, I see no reason to give the question of their authenticity a second glance.

UPDATE: A gallery of all the photos released of the lead codices can be found here.

On the Lead vs. Copper Codices

I’ve seen come comments here and there wondering if we can draw conclusions about the new lead codices with their paleo-Hebrew script based on the judgments passed on the old copper plate analyzed by Thonemann (with its Greek script). I discussed this in the comment section of my previous post on the topic, but thought I would highlight the question in its own post. Besides the numerous reasons Elkington’s credibility has been eradicated, at least one portion of the copper plate analyzed by Thonemann was pressed or cast from the exact same die or mold as one of the lead plates currently making the rounds. Below you can see the tree from the old copper plate and the tree from one of the newer lead plates. They are absolutely identical. They came from the exact same die or mold. The lead plates are forgeries just like the copper plate.

Another photo of the current hoard of lead plates appears to have the same image on it, although I can’t find a large enough photo to tell for sure:

UPDATE: Here’s a photo provided by the Daily Mail of one of the guys involved with the codices. The codex standing up and in the middle appears to be the same as the lead one pictured above with the same tree on it as the old copper codex.

Peter Thonemann on the Lead Codices

(HT Daniel Peterson and Bill Hamblin) Peter Thonemann at Oxford has staked his career on the conclusion that the lead codices being discussed recently are forgeries executed within the last 50 years. The following is an exchange that took place between him and David Elkington late last year (Dr. Thonemann has confirmed to me that this exchange is authentic):

Lead Codices, or: One Born Every Minute

Over the past few days, you may have seen a spot of press attention about a cache of lead codices ‘from a remote cave in the north of Jordan’, which allegedly have some connection with early Christianity etc.:

http://www.thejc.com…a-mid-east-cave
http://www.dailymail…ears-Jesus.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk…e-east-12888421

…and so forth.

On 15 September 2010, I received the following email out of the blue from a certain David Elkington (whose name you will find in all these various news reports) – I’ve edited out only those bits which would reveal the mutual acquaintance:

“Dear Dr. Thonemann,

In relation to a discovery that I have been investigating in the Middle East I was given your email address by a friend […]. I am a biblical historian and specialist in the field of Christian and Hebrew origins. I’m working with Prof. Philip Davies of Sheffield University and Dr. Margaret Barker on a discovery that I made a few years back of a cache of ancient metal codices. They are comprised of lead and of copper – it is one of the copper codices that brings me to you. We think that it has a possible origin in Alexandria at the beginning of the 1st millennium AD – (the Bedouin who brought them to me said that his father found them in northern Egypt). It has an inscription in Greek along the top. A putative investigation has failed to find the meaning, dialect or type of Greek used and we are seeking to find an expert who might help in determining what it says.
Would you have the time and the knowledge to be able to help?

If you can I would be terribly grateful – I could email you a photograph of the codex as soon as you would like, however I would very much like to discuss it in person if at all possible […].

I look forward to your reply

Best Wishes

David Elkington”

I replied that I would be delighted to have a look. (Possibly worth noting in passing that in this email, the codices are said to come from “northern Egypt”; in the current press coverage, they are said to come from “a remote arid valley in northern Jordan”.) I received on the 13 October the following three photographs of this ‘copper codex’ from Mr Elkington:

As you will see, the ‘codex’ concerned is identical in fabric and design to the ones being touted on the BBC and elsewhere; the Greek lettering is very similar in style to the ‘Hebrew’ on the codices depicted on the BBC news website. There can be no reasonable doubt that it forms part of the same ‘cache’ from the Jordanian desert (or Egypt) – note especially the metal ‘ties’ at the left of the last photograph.

After having a close look at the photos, I replied later that same day:

“Dear David,

A surprisingly easy task, as it turns out!

The Greek text at the top of your photo no. 0556 reads: ΛΛΥΠΕΧΛΙΡΕΛΒΓΛΡΟΚΛΙΕΙΣΙΩΝ, followed by ΛΛΥΠΕ in mirror-writing.

This text corresponds to ΛΛΥΠΕ ΧΛΙΡΕ ΛΒΓΛΡ Ο ΚΛΙ ΕΙΣΙΩΝ, i.e. ἄλυπε χαῖρε, Ἀβγαρ ὁ καὶ Εἰσίων, followed by the word ἄλυπε again, in mirror writing. The text at the bottom of your photo no. 0532 is the first part of the same text again: ΛΥΠΕΧΛΙΡΕΛΒΓ, i.e. [ἄ]λυπε χαῖρε, Ἀβγ…

The text was incised by someone who did not know the Greek language, since he does not distinguish between the letters lambda and alpha: both are simply represented, in each of the texts, by the shape Λ.

The text literally means ‘without grief, farewell! Abgar also known as Eision’. This text, in isolation, is meaningless.

However, this text corresponds precisely to line 2 of the Greek text of a bilingual Aramaic/Greek inscription published by J.T. Milik, Syria 35 (1958) 243-6 no.6 (SEG 20, 494), and republished in P.-L. Gatier, Inscriptions grecques et latines de Syrie XXI: Inscriptions de la Jordanie, 2: Region centrale (Paris 1986), no.118. That inscription reads, in its entirety, as follows,

1 Σελαμαν χρηστὲ καὶ
2 ἄλυπε χαῖρε, Ἀβγαρ ὁ καὶ Εἰσίων
3 Μονοαθου υἱὸς υἱῷ τειμίῳ τὸ μνῆμα
4 ἐποίησεν ἔτους τρίτου ἐπαρχείας

’For Selaman, excellent and harmless man, farewell! Abgar, also known as Eision, son of Monoathos, constructed this tomb for his excellent son (i.e. Selaman), in the third year of the province’.

This is a stone tombstone from Madaba in Jordan, precisely dated to AD 108/9, on display in the Archaeological Museum in Amman.

The text on your bronze tablet, therefore, makes no sense in its own right, but has been extracted unintelligently from another longer text (as if it were inscribed with the words: ‘t to be that is the question wheth’). The longer text from which it derives is a perfectly ordinary tombstone from Madaba in Jordan which happens to have been on display in the Amman museum for the past fifty years or so. The text on your bronze tablet is repeated, in part, in three different places, meaningless in each case.

The only possible explanation is that the text on the bronze tablet was copied directly from the inscription in the museum at Amman by someone who did not understand the meaning of the text of the inscription, but was simply looking for a plausible-looking sequence of Greek letters to copy. He copied that sequence three times, in each case mixing up the letters alpha and lambda.

This particular bronze tablet is, therefore, a modern forgery, produced in Jordan within the last fifty years. I would stake my career on it.

All good wishes,

Peter Thonemann”

Well, he can’t say I didn’t warn him

UPDATE: Between April 2 and 5 I updated the introduction to the email exchange and added the entirety of it. The original post on March 31 quoted only Thonemann’s response to Elkington’s email and stated that I could not verify the authenticity of the exchange.