Until this preliminary question is resolved to the satisfaction of all
competent scholars, no further questions need be raised. In any case
the _prima facie_ presumption must be held to be enormously against
the genuineness of the fragments. Such a presumption rests on the
improbability of finding manuscripts older by at least sixteen centuries
than any extant manuscripts of the same text, on the comparative ease
with which such fragments can be forged, and on the powerful motives
to such forgery attested by the price placed by Mr. Shapira on his
property.
All that we know of the _provenance_ of the fragments is that Mr.
Shapira obtained them from an Arab of doubtful character; and that
Arabs of doubtful character have driven a splendid trade in Moabite
antiquities ever since the discovery of the Moabite stone. On the other
hand, the forger, if forgery there be, is assuredly no clumsy and
ignorant bungler, as the makers of the Moabite pottery were confidently
alleged to be by those who disputed its genuineness. It is, of course,
part of his craft, and not, perhaps, much more than the 'prentice part,
to give to the sheepskins on which the text is inscribed an appearance
of immemorial antiquity.
Pages:
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184