Sample Bequests & Pledge Form - Maine Rural Partners: Fill & Download for Free

A sample of contract between an employer and employee:“ If the employee accepts this job offer, he must continue the job for 4 months in any circumstances. The employer himself will not terminate the employment within one year from the beginning of the acceptance of the job. The employee will receive an annual salary equivalent of X dollar, and will be paid in monthly basis”.Do you see any contradiction here? If the employee leaves the job after 4 months, it is common sense that the employer will not still pay him salary for the rest of the years. Will the employee then say that the employer has broken the contract??? No! Because this is not violation of agreement but the premises has been changed. BUT if the employer says that I will keep paying the employee even after he leaves the job, who is going to prevent him? It’s his money and he can be generous to anyone he wishes.Now, coming back to your question.2:234: Woman should not remarry within 4 month 10 days after the husband has passed away or until the delivery of the child (if she is pregnant, 65:4)2:240: The husband should bequest one year of provision for his wife, that she will be entitled after his death.Note that, it is talking about making will, not an automatic division following the standard rule (the standard ruling should be carried out after distributing the bequested amount as 4:11–12 say). Husband can easily put any condition within the will that, “this provision will be continued if she doesn’t remarry” OR “this provision will be continued even she marries (because I love her so much)”, it’s up to him (similarly the above employer). I really do not find to associate it with straightforward words, such as abrogation. Following is the screenshot from the Tafseer Book named “Study Quran”:As for abrogation, Quran 2:106 talks about abrogation of the rulings of previous scriptures, for the followers of Quran [1][1][1][1] . Prophet himself has never given any list of abrogation and Quran repeatedly tells us to consider all the verses.. “..Do you believe part of the scripture and deny other…”(Quran 2:85)”“..we believe in it. The whole (divine writ) is from our sustainer…(Quran 3:7)“..IS IT, then, conceivable [O Prophet] that thou couldst omit any part of what is being revealed unto thee..” (Quran 11:12)“Abrogation” is a term coined by scholars and was never agreed upon. If you read the informative wikipedia article about this topic [2][2][2][2] , you will find that how it varies. Where some scholars said there are 200 verses that have been abrogated, some scholars said single digit number and some scholars completely denied any abrogation. If you want to learn more, you can consider reading the book “Abrogation in the Quran and Isamic Law” by Louay Fatoohi [3][3][3][3]that gives a logical analysis against the term “abrogation” that has made Quran a subject of mockery (they say: “a book written by a confused God”) and has become the reason for many Muslims to doubt the faith.Footnotes[1] http://Maha Rizma's answer to Why did Allah require his followers to forget verses of the Quran (Q, S2, A106)? Isn't this horrible from the point of the narrator of the Quran? In the first place why did he utter those verses if he wanted them be forgotten? Are such actions godly? (https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Allah-require-his-followers-to-forget-verses-of-the-Quran-Q-S2-A106-Isnt-this-horrible-from-the-point-of-the-narrator-of-the-Quran-In-the-first-place-why-did-he-utter-those-verses-if-he-wanted-them-be/answer/Maha-Rizma)[1] http://Maha Rizma's answer to Why did Allah require his followers to forget verses of the Quran (Q, S2, A106)? Isn't this horrible from the point of the narrator of the Quran? In the first place why did he utter those verses if he wanted them be forgotten? Are such actions godly? (https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Allah-require-his-followers-to-forget-verses-of-the-Quran-Q-S2-A106-Isnt-this-horrible-from-the-point-of-the-narrator-of-the-Quran-In-the-first-place-why-did-he-utter-those-verses-if-he-wanted-them-be/answer/Maha-Rizma)[1] http://Maha Rizma's answer to Why did Allah require his followers to forget verses of the Quran (Q, S2, A106)? Isn't this horrible from the point of the narrator of the Quran? In the first place why did he utter those verses if he wanted them be forgotten? Are such actions godly? (https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Allah-require-his-followers-to-forget-verses-of-the-Quran-Q-S2-A106-Isnt-this-horrible-from-the-point-of-the-narrator-of-the-Quran-In-the-first-place-why-did-he-utter-those-verses-if-he-wanted-them-be/answer/Maha-Rizma)[1] http://Maha Rizma's answer to Why did Allah require his followers to forget verses of the Quran (Q, S2, A106)? Isn't this horrible from the point of the narrator of the Quran? In the first place why did he utter those verses if he wanted them be forgotten? Are such actions godly? (https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Allah-require-his-followers-to-forget-verses-of-the-Quran-Q-S2-A106-Isnt-this-horrible-from-the-point-of-the-narrator-of-the-Quran-In-the-first-place-why-did-he-utter-those-verses-if-he-wanted-them-be/answer/Maha-Rizma)[2] Naskh (tafsir) - Wikipedia[2] Naskh (tafsir) - Wikipedia[2] Naskh (tafsir) - Wikipedia[2] Naskh (tafsir) - Wikipedia[3] Abrogation in the Qur’an and Islamic Law: Louay Fatoohi: 9789670526027: Amazon.com: Books[3] Abrogation in the Qur’an and Islamic Law: Louay Fatoohi: 9789670526027: Amazon.com: Books[3] Abrogation in the Qur’an and Islamic Law: Louay Fatoohi: 9789670526027: Amazon.com: Books[3] Abrogation in the Qur’an and Islamic Law: Louay Fatoohi: 9789670526027: Amazon.com: Books

How and why did the rumor begin that the Smithsonian has a secret archive open only to a chosen few?There’s a fair bit to cover in this.First of all, “The Smithsonian” is not a monolithic institution. It’s an administrative body which includes 19 museums along with the National Zoo. These were not all originally part of the Smithsonian, and the most recently added museum was only brought in a few years ago. Each of these organizations, while operating under the aegis of the Smithsonian, maintain their own archives and storage. They each have their own unique preservation and maintenance requirements: you, um, can’t keep a live zebra in the same conditions as a 16th century Japanese wall scroll. Moreover, many of the museums pre-date the Smithsonian, and some of the collections are made up of bequests which have special legal requirements, some could not be merged into a single collection even if it were otherwise reasonable to do so.Also, like every museum, the materials on display at the Smithsonian represent only a portion of the complete collection. While the curators generally rotate what is on display some items tend to remain on view while others languish in the archives. And our knowledge has marched on - some items were added to their collection without a full understanding of their provenance, meaning that item 1972.p57, “fabric sample, linen” could turn out to be an important historical artifact… if only someone had time and money to investigate it more thoroughly.What this comes to is, yes, within the Smithsonian there are many archives which are not on display. And the contents therein are delicate in their unique way, such that only qualified people are allowed to handle them, and even then only if they can articulate a reason the item should be pulled from storage.To someone who is unfamiliar with museums, and someone who is conspiracy-minded, this all can sound like the exciting notion of “secret archive open to only a select few”. It’s certainly cooler-sounding than “No, we don’t let just anyone handle Old Kingdom pottery, are you insane?”

The so-called Rospigliosi Cup, a "masterpiece of the Renaissance jeweler's art" attributed to Benvenuto Cellini and kept at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York. It was actually created by German goldsmith Reinhold Vasters sometime between 1853 and 1890 (11 Masterful Art Forgeries That Completely Duped the Art World).Some analysts believe that 90% of all artifacts and coins sold on internet auctions as genuine are nothing but fakes.[1][1][1][1] A recent report found that only 83 of 2,000—or just over four percent—of the San Franscisco museum's pre-Columbian artifacts could be authenticated and certified as “museum-quality” by an independent team of museum curators who came from Mexico City to conduct the test.[2][2][2][2] The remaining 1,917 items are considered “decorative,” and will likely be given to schools or smaller museums ahead of the museum’s 2019 move from a temporary site in Fort Mason to a permanent home in a tower under construction near SFMOMA.Forgery is far from a modern phenomenon; examples of objects deliberately created to be passed off as a much earlier, and often very valuable, original can be traced back to antiquity. The Apollo of Piombino is a Roman forgery of a much earlier Greek work, complete with a fake inscription. An inscribed cruciform stone from the temple of Shamash, in Sippar, claims to be from somewhere between 2276 to 2261 BCE. Its context, however, dates it from the 7th to 6th century BCE.[3][3][3][3]While fakes and looted artifacts have been a problem on the internet for a long time, two recent factors have combined to increase the problem. First, the proliferation of social media and retail platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, eBay, Amazon, WhatsApp and many others has made it simple for looters to solicit potential buyers directly, often sending messages to members of antiquities groups on Facebook and other sites.Second, ISIS has systematically looted the archaeological sites it has taken over in the last half decade, producing an almost unlimited stream of antiquities that it sells directly over social media.[4][4][4][4] The combination has flooded the internet with questionable antiquities.Neil Brodie, senior research fellow in Endangered Archaeology at the University of Oxford, states there are at least 100,000 antiquities valued at $10 million or more for sale on the internet. Up to 80 percent of those items are estimated to be either looted or fake.[5][5][5][5]Typically, one often thinks of forgeries as paintings, but anything that is collectible and expensive is an attractive item to forge. For example, in recent years researchers at the MFA have tested numerous pieces of simple Neolithic Chinese pottery from the 3rd millennium BC, which have become popular with collectors and have been forged with some success.[6][6][6][6] Often forgers go to great lengths to reproduce the materials and processes, or the appearance, of the appropriate historical period.A Dead Sea Scrolls Forgery Casts Doubt on the Museum of the BibleNot all incorrectly attributed items are intentional forgeries. In the same way that a museum shop might sell a print of a painting or a replica of a vase, copies of statues, paintings and other precious artifacts have been popular through the ages. Some may be easy to spot, but others, perhaps even made in the same studio as the original, are much more difficult.The reasons for perpetrating hoaxes and forgeries range as widely as the kinds of fakes. Common motives for making bogus artifacts include publicity and self-promotion, monetary gain, practical jokes and revenge, but some fakers have had the goal of supporting their own theories about the human past.[7][7][7][7] Fakes have often been inspired by nationalism, with patriotic perpetrators boosting their country through spurious links to past civilizations.[8][8][8][8]People are taken in by hoaxes and fakes for many reasons. Successful bogus artifacts often match expectations or preconceived ideas of antiquities. Spectacular fakes have worked because those who buy them are blinded by their own pride of ownership--and the higher the price tag, the harder it is to make an embarrassing admission that it's a fake.Problematic artifacts are possible only when the importance of regulated, documented excavation is ignored. Acquiring artifacts lacking a reliably documented find spot not only fuels the looting of archaeological sites, but also opens the door wide for the introduction of fakes. Archaeology depends on controlled excavation and meticulous study. By ignoring the due process of research, individuals and institutions have exposed themselves to deceit and, at times, ridicule.The artifact you’re looking at might have been the subject of an intensive scientific study, employing half a dozen different characterization and analysis techniques to determine the date, composition, and method of manufacture. Large databases may have been trawled to find results from similar studies of comparable artifacts from around the world. The combined expertise of art historians, conservators, materials scientists, and museum curators might have been pooled to come to the conclusion that the information on the label is overwhelmingly convincing. Or it might just be that this artifact has evaded attention and is a forgery waiting to be discovered.Small figure from Texcoco, central Mexico, catalogued as the head of a hippopotamus, green serpentine, National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh (Genuine or fake?)There are three kinds of objects in the world of archaeological artefacts.Relics: This is the true original object that has survived in whole or in part from some time in the ancient past. It is an item of interest because it is an object made by or altered by ancient humans in the context of their daily lives.[9][9][9][9]Replicas: This is a reproduction of the original relic in order to duplicate it for open and honest purposes. It is always named as a reproduction, replica, or duplicate. Such duplicates are made where the original is very rare and replacement is impossible. Reproductions of an ancient relic permit it to be displayed at more than one location or to be handled by the public.[10][10][10][10]Fakes: Often referred to as an artefake, it is a replica of an original artefact made with the sole purpose of deceiving others into believing it to be an original relic.[11][11][11][11] Fake artefacts usually have elaborate aging techniques performed on them to make them very difficult to detect.Owning and collecting the artefacts of history has been a strong yearning for many people. The relative rarity of genuine relics makes the temptation of owning one even greater. Authentic items are scarce and very expensive. Forgers have taken advantage of the worldwide hunger for genuine artefacts by recreating them in every way as much like the original as possible so as to dupe buyers and make grand profits.When a museum acquires a large collection of donated antiquities it is not unusual for curators to find that at least a few of them are fake. While the forgery of artifacts is commonplace there are some forgeries that have become extremely famous, often because their authenticity would have had history-changing results. What follows is a brief discussion of several forgeries and frauds that turned archaeology, fine arts and antiquitiy commnities upside down.The mask in its current location (Mask of Agamemnon - Wikipedia).Heinrick Schliemann is charged with manufacturing the famed golden Mask of Agamemnon.[12][12][12][12] This mask is superior in quality to others found and has a peculiar nineteenth century looking moustache on what should be a four thousand year old relic.[13][13][13][13]Getty Kouros (Getty kouros - Wikipedia).In early 1990s, curators and archaeologists from the Getty Museum, began to acknowledge that something was not quite right about several highly publisized and costly statues, artifacts and painting. The authenticity of the kouros (a freestanding Greek sculpture of a naked youth) has been debated since the Getty acquired the object in the mid-1980s for around $9 million. Despite the controversy, the work remained on view at the Los Angeles museum, next to a plaque reading “Greek, about 530 B.C. or modern forgery,”.[14][14][14][14]Following a renovation of the Getty Villa, the sculpture was moved to storage where it will be on view by appointment only. “It’s fake, so it’s not helpful to show it along with authentic material,” said Getty director Timothy Pott. [15][15][15][15] The removal is the final chapter in a decades-long saga that began when the Getty museum performed a battery of scientific tests on the piece to confirm its authenticity prior to purchase, only to buy the work and watch the faith in its authenticity slowly erode over time, the Times reported in 1991.[16][16][16][16] A chemical process that occured on the exterior of the sculpture led scientists to believe the work must have been centuries old, but such a reaction was actually shown to be replicable in a lab. The additional investigation came after an indisputably fake torso similar to that of the Getty Kouros was discovered, causing some experts to reverse their position on the authenticity of the piece. Further investigation revealed that the curator who presented the kouros to the Getty for purchase forged the accompanying provenance documents.[17][17][17][17]A sophisticated forgery ring out of Israel, included respected collectors and registered antiques dealers, made and sold hundreds of ‘ancient’ artefacts over the last twenty years that were not antiquities at all.[18][18][18][18]The bone box, or ossuary, allegedly bearing the Aramaic inscription "Yaakov bar Yosef akhui di Yeshua" ("James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus") (Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.comThey used refined methods to age items and convinced scholars, museums, and scientists across the world that their discoveries were genuine. Some of the forgeries included an ivory pomegranate said to be the only relic of the Solomonic era, a burial ossuary believed to have held the bones of James the brother of Jesus,[19][19][19][19] and stone tablets that describe how the temple was to be maintained.Believers and scientists alike were shocked by the accusations that not only was the James ossuary a fake but so were two other rare objects of biblical significance: an inscribed pomegranate and the gold-flecked Jehoash tablet, which both supposedly came from Solomon's Temple, destroyed by the Babylonians in the 6th century B.C..[20][20][20][20] Those two relics are linked to Golan's workshop, say police. The debate over the authenticity of these sacred items pitted scientists against believers. She writes, "The faithful — those who believe in a higher, supernatural power that leaves a material record of itself for man to literally hold and behold — must also confront and grapple with the painful presence of doubt."[21][21][21][21]This 1915 painting by John Cooke depicts scientists comparing Piltdown Man's remains to other species. Charles Dawson and Sir Arthur Smith Woodward stand next to each other toward the upper right.(Study reveals culprit behind Piltdown Man, one of science’s most famous hoaxes).In 1912 Arthur Smith Woodward, a paleontologist at the Natural History Museum in London, and Charles Dawson, an amateur antiquarian, reported the discovery of a new species of early human at Piltdown in England. They believed the early human, which was named Eoanthropus dawsoni, could date back 1 million years. It was believed to be the missing link that would support the then-current theories about the origin of humanity.At the time it was uncertain if early humans lived in Britain 1 million years ago and this discovery would have provided proof of it. The scientific establishment welcomed Piltdown Man into the family tree of our species, and it took forty years to uncover the hoax and to start correcting the textbooks. The responsible party never confessed and remains unknown, although everyone seems to have a pet theory.The findings drew skepticism, and in time, Eoanthropus dawsoni was revealed to be nothing more than a mix of orangutan and modern human bones. The discovery drew a great amount of publicity. The question of who did it and why is still uncertain; a new investigation by Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum and colleagues is now underway to try to find answers.Ironically modern-day archaeologists have found evidence of early humans in Britain. When it was that the first humans walked the British Isles is still uncertain, but it could well have been more than 1 million years ago.Kensington Rune Stone - Case ClosedIn 1898, a farmer named Olof Ohman uncovered a stone engraved with runes near the town of Kensington in Minnesota. Over the past century a number of scholars and amateurs have analyzed the stone, some believing the Kensington Runestone (shown here) was carved by a band of 14th-century Vikings on a journey into Minnesota.[22][22][22][22] Although the Vikings did establish colonies in Greenland and a short-lived 11th-century settlement at L'Anse Aux Meadows in Newfoundland, this stone would be the only evidence that the Vikings ever traveled to Minnesota.Today, most scholars believe the stone was created in the 19th century, noting that the runes on the stone do not match runes from the 14th century or other medieval time periods[23][23][23][23] In fact, they seem to resemble a type of runic code used by travelers in 19th-century Sweden, wrote Henrik Williams, a professor at Uppsala University, in an article published in 2012 in the Swedish-AmericanHistorical Quarterly.[24][24][24][24] Williams cautions that care should be taken in determining who wrote it and what their motivations were. The intention of the stone's inscribers may not have been to deceive people into believing that the Vikings reached Minnesota.Eberhard Zangger, a geoarchaeologist from Switzerland, and colleague of James Mellaart (a lecturer at Istanbul University and the University of London who made incredible, often reputable, discoveries in Near Eastern Archaeology), has been investigating Mellaart’s archaeological career.Çatalhöyük - WikipediaZangger found that Mellaart had drafts of writings, murals and carvings in his apartment when he died, indicating that Mellaart was actually the creator of the “discoveries” he had attributed to ancient peoples.[25][25][25][25] Mellaart had asked colleagues to publish his work after his death; instead, one colleague found more evidence of Mellaart’s hoaxes.His first public brush with controversy, known as 'The Dorak Affair,” involved his discovery of treasure in Turkey.[26][26][26][26] In 1964, he was accused of inadvertently aiding smugglers trying to sell stolen artifacts and was barred from excavating in Turkey.[27][27][27][27] Some accused him of having illegally dug up the treasure elsewhere and smuggling it out of the country.La misteriosa civilización de Çatal HüyükThat incident would turn out to be only one debacle in a career studded with possible fabrications. Mellaart also claimed to have discovered murals at Çatalhöyük, an ancient settlement in Turkey from approximately 9,000 years ago. He claimed that they crumbled to dust before he could photograph or remove them. Mellaart painted pictures of the murals that he claimed existed, but there’s no other evidence that they were there. To this day, Mellaart and his supposed discoveries remain controversial in the archaeology world.Zangger suspects that, after the first controversy, Mellaart decided he could execute more and more archaeological deceptions. The multitude of fakes indicated that Mellaart dedicated much of his career to tearing down archaeological knowledge rather than improving it, despite the fact that he was a well-connected and intelligent archaeologist.This is only a sampling of the thousands of artifacts, documents and paintings that have come under intense scrutiny in the past few decades. In addition to millions upon millions of dollars lost acquiring these fakes, reputations have been cast under suspicion and many museums and private collectors are at a loss as to what happens after an item has been conclusively deemed a forgery.The Kelsey Museum of Archeology in Michigan has put together a nice collection of fake phæronic antiquities in an on-line exhibit called The Art of the Fake [28][28][28][28] and The Fakebusters[29][29][29][29] to show you how it’s done.Take the Waddesdon Bequest at the British Museum, a collection of almost 300 objects which, like the Friedsam collection at Brooklyn, were left to the Museum upon the death of the collection’s owner – in this case, by Baron Ferdinand Rothschild.[30][30][30][30] The collection was donated in 1898 and consists of important medieval and Renaissance pieces, as well as a number of 19th century fakes.Circumcision knifeOne such forgery is a gold- and agate-handled circumcision knife, right, originally attributed to a ‘Dutch workshop, early 17th century’. It was more probably made in the mid-19th century and has been associated with the workshop of Reinhold Vasters, a notorious forger.In the British Museum’s Waddesdon Bequest Gallery, designed to display this important collection, these fakes are included alongside genuine artifacts. They’re kept on display because, although not genuine, they are still educational. The purpose of museums is to teach us about the past, about ways of living, dying and interacting with the world around us back through history. These fakes are a window into the fascinations and demands of the 19th century, when this collection was originally being curated. There was a significant demand for ‘Judaica’ – objects associated with the Jewish faith – for collectors; forgeries such as the circumcision knife were created and sold to this collector’s market. It’s in this way that the value of the Waddesdon bequest—and other collections like it—is above the mere beauty, value and insight of the individual pieces, whether genuine or fake.Footnotes[1] Don't Buy Ancient Artifacts You See Online—Most Are Looted or Fake[1] Don't Buy Ancient Artifacts You See Online—Most Are Looted or Fake[1] Don't Buy Ancient Artifacts You See Online—Most Are Looted or Fake[1] Don't Buy Ancient Artifacts You See Online—Most Are Looted or Fake[2] 11 Masterful Art Forgeries That Completely Duped the Art World[2] 11 Masterful Art Forgeries That Completely Duped the Art World[2] 11 Masterful Art Forgeries That Completely Duped the Art World[2] 11 Masterful Art Forgeries That Completely Duped the Art World[3] Faking It: What do Museums do with Forged Artifacts? - Oxbow Books[3] Faking It: What do Museums do with Forged Artifacts? - Oxbow Books[3] Faking It: What do Museums do with Forged Artifacts? - Oxbow Books[3] Faking It: What do Museums do with Forged Artifacts? - Oxbow Books[4] Suspected Traders of Ancient Art Linked to Islamic State Are Detained[4] Suspected Traders of Ancient Art Linked to Islamic State Are Detained[4] Suspected Traders of Ancient Art Linked to Islamic State Are Detained[4] Suspected Traders of Ancient Art Linked to Islamic State Are Detained[5] Most Antiquities Sold Online Are Fake or Illegal[5] Most Antiquities Sold Online Are Fake or Illegal[5] Most Antiquities Sold Online Are Fake or Illegal[5] Most Antiquities Sold Online Are Fake or Illegal[6] How to spot a fake[6] How to spot a fake[6] How to spot a fake[6] How to spot a fake[7] Why do archaeological fraudsters work so hard to deceive us? – Ted Scheinman | Aeon Essays[7] Why do archaeological fraudsters work so hard to deceive us? – Ted Scheinman | Aeon Essays[7] Why do archaeological fraudsters work so hard to deceive us? – Ted Scheinman | Aeon Essays[7] Why do archaeological fraudsters work so hard to deceive us? – Ted Scheinman | Aeon Essays[8] Archaeology Magazine - Hoaxes, Fakes, and Strange Sites - Bogus! An Introduction to Dubious Discoveries - Archaeology Magazine Archive[8] Archaeology Magazine - Hoaxes, Fakes, and Strange Sites - Bogus! An Introduction to Dubious Discoveries - Archaeology Magazine Archive[8] Archaeology Magazine - Hoaxes, Fakes, and Strange Sites - Bogus! An Introduction to Dubious Discoveries - Archaeology Magazine Archive[8] Archaeology Magazine - Hoaxes, Fakes, and Strange Sites - Bogus! An Introduction to Dubious Discoveries - Archaeology Magazine Archive[9] Archaeology: Theories, Methods, and Practice[9] Archaeology: Theories, Methods, and Practice[9] Archaeology: Theories, Methods, and Practice[9] Archaeology: Theories, Methods, and Practice[10] Archaeology: Theories, Methods, and Practice[10] Archaeology: Theories, Methods, and Practice[10] Archaeology: Theories, Methods, and Practice[10] Archaeology: Theories, Methods, and Practice[11] The Factory of Fakes[11] The Factory of Fakes[11] The Factory of Fakes[11] The Factory of Fakes[12] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/4352102&ved=2ahUKEwjDq9OXx_HiAhVHIqwKHRmBAPoQFjAFegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw06BL8XbjVPaYdEYfxWU2Hc[12] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/4352102&ved=2ahUKEwjDq9OXx_HiAhVHIqwKHRmBAPoQFjAFegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw06BL8XbjVPaYdEYfxWU2Hc[12] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/4352102&ved=2ahUKEwjDq9OXx_HiAhVHIqwKHRmBAPoQFjAFegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw06BL8XbjVPaYdEYfxWU2Hc[12] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/4352102&ved=2ahUKEwjDq9OXx_HiAhVHIqwKHRmBAPoQFjAFegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw06BL8XbjVPaYdEYfxWU2Hc[13] Is the Mask a Hoax?[13] Is the Mask a Hoax?[13] Is the Mask a Hoax?[13] Is the Mask a Hoax?[14] PROOF?: THE CASE OF THE GETTY KOUROS[14] PROOF?: THE CASE OF THE GETTY KOUROS[14] PROOF?: THE CASE OF THE GETTY KOUROS[14] PROOF?: THE CASE OF THE GETTY KOUROS[15] The “Getty Kouros” Was Officially Deemed a Forgery[15] The “Getty Kouros” Was Officially Deemed a Forgery[15] The “Getty Kouros” Was Officially Deemed a Forgery[15] The “Getty Kouros” Was Officially Deemed a Forgery[16] ART; Absolutely Real? Absolutely Fake?[16] ART; Absolutely Real? Absolutely Fake?[16] ART; Absolutely Real? Absolutely Fake?[16] ART; Absolutely Real? Absolutely Fake?[17] A Crisis of Fakes: The Getty Forgeries[17] A Crisis of Fakes: The Getty Forgeries[17] A Crisis of Fakes: The Getty Forgeries[17] A Crisis of Fakes: The Getty Forgeries[18] Being Aware of Fake Archaeological Artefacts[18] Being Aware of Fake Archaeological Artefacts[18] Being Aware of Fake Archaeological Artefacts[18] Being Aware of Fake Archaeological Artefacts[19] What’s What Regarding the Controversial James Ossuary?[19] What’s What Regarding the Controversial James Ossuary?[19] What’s What Regarding the Controversial James Ossuary?[19] What’s What Regarding the Controversial James Ossuary?[20] Oded Golan is not guilty of forgery. So is the ‘James ossuary’ for real?[20] Oded Golan is not guilty of forgery. So is the ‘James ossuary’ for real?[20] Oded Golan is not guilty of forgery. So is the ‘James ossuary’ for real?[20] Oded Golan is not guilty of forgery. So is the ‘James ossuary’ for real?[21] Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com[21] Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com[21] Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com[21] Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com[22] Fierce Fighters: 7 Secrets of Viking Seamen[22] Fierce Fighters: 7 Secrets of Viking Seamen[22] Fierce Fighters: 7 Secrets of Viking Seamen[22] Fierce Fighters: 7 Secrets of Viking Seamen[23] Kensington Rune Stone - Case Closed[23] Kensington Rune Stone - Case Closed[23] Kensington Rune Stone - Case Closed[23] Kensington Rune Stone - Case Closed[24] The Kensington Runestone: Fact and Fiction :: Swedish-American Historical Quarterly (North Park University)[24] The Kensington Runestone: Fact and Fiction :: Swedish-American Historical Quarterly (North Park University)[24] The Kensington Runestone: Fact and Fiction :: Swedish-American Historical Quarterly (North Park University)[24] The Kensington Runestone: Fact and Fiction :: Swedish-American Historical Quarterly (North Park University)[25] Controversial archaeologist faked discoveries, colleague claims[25] Controversial archaeologist faked discoveries, colleague claims[25] Controversial archaeologist faked discoveries, colleague claims[25] Controversial archaeologist faked discoveries, colleague claims[26] James Mellaart[26] James Mellaart[26] James Mellaart[26] James Mellaart[27] Famed Archaeologist 'Discovered' His Own Fakes at 9,000-Year-Old Settlement[27] Famed Archaeologist 'Discovered' His Own Fakes at 9,000-Year-Old Settlement[27] Famed Archaeologist 'Discovered' His Own Fakes at 9,000-Year-Old Settlement[27] Famed Archaeologist 'Discovered' His Own Fakes at 9,000-Year-Old Settlement[28] Page on ipl.org[28] Page on ipl.org[28] Page on ipl.org[28] Page on ipl.org[29] The FakeBusters -forgeries and fakes of Egyptian antiquities-[29] The FakeBusters -forgeries and fakes of Egyptian antiquities-[29] The FakeBusters -forgeries and fakes of Egyptian antiquities-[29] The FakeBusters -forgeries and fakes of Egyptian antiquities-[30] Faking It: What do Museums do with Forged Artifacts? - Oxbow Books[30] Faking It: What do Museums do with Forged Artifacts? - Oxbow Books[30] Faking It: What do Museums do with Forged Artifacts? - Oxbow Books[30] Faking It: What do Museums do with Forged Artifacts? - Oxbow Books