Italian archaeologist Luigi Pernier discovered the Phaistos Disc in 1908. Since then, the disc has sparked scholarly discussions. Jerome Eisenberg, an art historian, is among those who think the disc is a fake. Shocking artifact or contemporary forgery?
The mysteries of the ancient world have long sparked the curiosity of historians and archaeologists, but alongside the quest for understanding lies the risk of deception. Among these potentially confounding pieces are the Phaistos Disc and the Disc of Magliano, both of which have stirred significant debate about their authenticity. Some, like Jerome M. Eisenberg, Ph.D., assert that these artifacts may not be as ancient as we believe. This article delves into the intriguing world of these enigmatic discs and the ongoing debates about their authenticity.
The Phaistos Disc: A Cretan Mystery
Phaistos Disc in now on display in the Archaeological Museum of Heraklion, Crete. Photo by Dimosthenis Vasiloudis
Unearthed in 1908 in the Minoan palace of Phaistos, located on the Greek island of Crete, the Phaistos Disc is an artifact that has mystified experts for over a century. It's a round clay disc about 15 centimeters in diameter, covered on both sides with a spiral of strange, stamped symbols. The symbols, 241 in total, represent 45 distinct signs, with everything from human figures and animals to abstract symbols, none of which match any known written language.
The disc is believed to date back to the second millennium BC, around 1700–1600 BC, during the middle or late Minoan Bronze Age. However, this dating has been a matter of speculation as it was inferred from the archaeological context rather than from the disc itself.
Controversially, Jerome M. Eisenberg, an expert in the detection of forgeries in ancient art, has suggested that the Phaistos Disc is a modern creation. He proposed that the disc was created by its finder, Italian archaeologist Luigi Pernier. According to Eisenberg, Pernier might have been motivated by a desire for fame, or the rivalry between Italian and French archaeologists to discover significant Minoan artifacts.
The Disc of Magliano: An Etruscan Enigma
The Disc of Magliano, on the other hand, was discovered in Magliano, Tuscany, in 1882. It is a bronze artifact, around 10 cm in diameter, bearing inscriptions in Etruscan language arranged in two concentric spirals. The artifact, dated back to the late 6th or early 5th century BC, represents one of the longest known Etruscan inscriptions.
Unlike the Phaistos Disc, the language on the Disc of Magliano is known, but the text remains enigmatic due to the lack of an extensive understanding of Etruscan grammar and vocabulary. The authenticity of the Magliano disc is generally accepted, providing a fascinating contrast to the controversies surrounding the Phaistos disc.
Inscriptions are displayed in a spiral pattern toward the disc's center. It is one of the longest surviving manuscripts in the Etruscan language because it has over 70 words. According to one interpretation of the writing, it is the guidelines for presenting sacrifices to the deities Tnia, Maris, Calu, and Canthas.
The shape of the object is reminiscent of the famous Phaistos disk.
Comparisons and Controversies
Despite some similarities in form, the Phaistos disc and the disc of Magliano are fundamentally different. They were discovered in different regions, made of different materials, inscribed in different languages, and are from different periods. However, the enigmatic nature of both artifacts has made them subjects of fascination and controversy.
A significant reason why some argue that the Phaistos Disc is a forgery while the Magliano Disc is not lies in the circumstances of their discoveries. The Phaistos Disc was discovered during an official excavation by a known archaeologist, Luigi Pernier, who, according to Eisenberg, had the motive and opportunity to forge such an artifact. The Magliano Disc, meanwhile, was found by a farmer, and its inscriptions are in a known language, lending it more credibility.
Modern forgery or sensational artifact?
Jerome M. Eisenberg declares that the Phaistos disc is created by its “finder” Louis Pernier!
Archaeologists largely agree that the Phaistos Disc is genuine. The excavation records kept by Luigi Pernier are the foundation for the assumption of legitimacy. The later discovery of the Arkalochori Axe, which had glyphs that were similar but not identical, lends credence to this notion.
Two academics have suggested that the disc could be a 1908 fabrication or hoax. The Times said that thermoluminescence dating has never been used to determine the date of manufacturing. Robinson says that in his 2008 analysis, he does not support the forgery accusations but instead claims, "It is essential to perform a thermoluminescence test on the Phaistos Disc. It will either prove that new discoveries are worthwhile to look for or it will discourage academics from wasting their time."
The Mavro Spilio ring, a gold signet ring from Knossos discovered in 1926, has a linear A inscription that was created in a spiral-delimited field, much like the Phaistos Disc. The sole known counterpart to sign 21 (the "comb") of the Phaistos disc can be seen on a sealing discovered in 1955. This is taken into account as proof that the Phaistos Disc is an authentic Minoan artifact.
According to Jerome M. Eisenberg, Ph.D., who studies the issue of counterfeiting in ancient art, the disc was made by its discoverer, Louis Pernier!
Yet, why would Pernier pull off such a prank? Federico Halbherr, an Italian archaeologist who worked with him, conducted excavations in Gortyna in 1884. The earliest European Law Code, "The Big Inscription," was discovered by Halbherr on the city walls. He also discovered numerous other artifacts with ancient Greek writing from the early 5th century BC. This discovery made Halbherr very well known.
SIR ARTHUR EVANS
Painted by William Blake Richmond (1842–1921)
Along with other archaeologists from Italy, Pernier was conducting excavations on the Messara plain. He was employed by Phaistos at the start of the 20th century, in the year 1900. This was at the same time that Arthur Evans began excavating at Knossos, where he soon found a large number of clay tablets containing Linear A and B inscriptions. There were high hopes that Pernier would come to a similar conclusion. It is highly likely that he had not discovered any inscribed material by 1908.
Luigi Pernier
What could he possibly do to gain sufficient fame and glory to compete with Evans and Halbherr?
What could he possibly do to become famous and successful enough to rival Evans and Halbherr? What might he possibly find? The fabrication of the Phaistos Disc, a relic with unintelligible pictographic writing, was his quick solution. Italian archaeologist Pernier He must have been well acquainted with the Magliano Disc throughout his studies in Italy, as it was the most frequently discussed scientific topic in the 1890s. The disc discovered by Italian archaeologists in the late 1880s resembles the Phaistos Disc in many ways. With the writing spiraling inward in Etruscan, the entire design is virtually round. At the time, the Etruscan language was still untranslated. Only two discs of this "model" have ever been discovered in the entire world: the Phaistos and the Magliano!
Why not test the Phaistos disc?
It's a fair question to ask why, with all the controversies surrounding the Phaistos Disc, no definitive tests have been conducted to confirm its age. To begin with, thermoluminescence dating, a common method for dating ancient ceramic objects, could potentially provide an answer.
However, this method is not without complications. Firstly, it involves heating a small sample of the material, which could cause irreversible damage to such a unique artifact. Secondly, thermoluminescence dating has its limits; it can indicate whether an object was fired in antiquity or recently, but it can't pinpoint a specific century within the ancient period. Therefore, even if the test confirms the disc was fired in antiquity, it would not settle the debate about whether it belongs to the Minoan period.
Furthermore, since the disc was allegedly found in a pit along with other artifacts (pottery, clay sealings, etc.), even proving that it was created in antiquity wouldn't necessarily prove it was ’t a forgery. An unscrupulous forger could have inserted a newly-created disc into an ancient archaeological context, thereby making it seem as if the disc and the other objects in the pit were all from the same period.
Why not dispel rumors that the famous Phaistos disc is a fake by finding out how old it is? The guardian of the disc, the Herakleion Archaeological Museum in Crete, won't permit it. This is the brief response to this query. Because of its singularity, it is regarded as immovable.
It is true that thermoluminescent batting would result in the least amount of harm to the disc since it only calls for drilling a small hole or two on the edge that could afterwards be filled in to make it nearly undetectable.
The story of the Phaistos Disc and the Disc of Magliano illustrates the challenges faced by historians and archaeologists when it comes to establishing the authenticity of ancient artifacts. The former, embroiled in a century-long controversy, represents the complications of authenticating an artifact when its discovery circumstances and characteristics arouse suspicion. In contrast, the latter, accepted as a genuine artifact, still poses linguistic riddles for the scientific community.
Both discs, whether authentic or not, contribute to our understanding of the past and how we approach the study of history. The controversies surrounding them underscore the necessity of rigorous scientific investigation in archaeology and highlight the delicate interplay between fact, interpretation, and sometimes, deception, in our quest to unravel the secrets of the past.
