Selected category ◊ 2-Local Government of Araba ◊

• Saturday, January 17th, 2009
1.-Archaeological assessment of the “Report on the Iruña-Veleia archaeological site. Report on the findings of exceptional graffiti” and on the documentation relating to enclosure 59, section 5. (Language: ES) –>01-Nuñez eta beste batzuk ES


Authors: Dr. Agustin Azkarate, Belen Bengoetxea, Dr. Julio Nuñez, Dr. Jose Antonio Quiros, professors at the EHU/UPV, in collaboration with professors Dr Dominic Perring, of University College, London and Dr Marco Milanese of the University of Sassari, Sardinia.

Summary: Assessment of the archaeological work carried out by Lurmen.

Topic: In this report, professors at the UPV judged that the archaeological work carried out by Lurmen has been inadequate. On the other hand, Mr Perring considers that the work does appear to be correct and proposes to conduct controlled sampling, a request that has been disallowed by the Commission.

This assessment was done with none of the authors of the report having attended  the excavation, without personally interviewing the group of archaeologists and without requesting any clarification or information complementary to the original report presented by Eliseo Gil’s team.

Pages: 62.


2.- Report on the iconographic motifs present in the “exceptional graffiti” of the Iruña-Veleia archaeological site. (Language: ES) –> 02-Nuñez_Volpe ES


Authors: Dr Giuliano Volpe of the University of Foggia and Julio Nuñez, professor at the EHU/UPV.

Summary: Iconography

Topic: Professor G. Volpe determines in his pronouncement that the Christian motifs found cannot be dated to the 5th and 6th centuries. Professor Julio Nuñez dismisses the possibility that they may be authentic graffiti, because of the appearance of words such as “cuore”, “familiae” instead of “familias” etc.

Pages: 28.


3.-Historical-epigraphic report on the graffiti found in Iruña-Veleia in 2005 and 2006. (Language: ES) –> 03-Cipres-Santos ES


Author: Dr Pilar Cipres and Dr Juan Santos Yanguas, professors at the EHU/UPV.

Summary: Epigraphy and History

Topic: Both professors, who a year and a half earlier had supported the veracity of the same material, now suggest in their current report that the material is fake, based on various arguments: the many grammatical errors appearing (fortunate instead of fortunatae…), the grammatical inconsistencies, the confusion between the nominative, dative and ablative modes…

Pages: 57.


4. Pronouncement of Dr Joaquin Gorrochategui to the Advisory Commission of the Provincial Government of Alava regarding the epigraphic findings of Iruña-Veleia. 2005 and 2006 campaigns. (Language: ES) –>04-Gorrochategui ES


Author: Dr Joaquin Gorrochategui, professor at the EHU/UPV.

Summary: Basque and Latin.

Topic: This academic, who together with Yanguas and Santos Cipres, also supported a year and a half ago the veracity of the same material, in his current report now claims it is fake, based on a large number of reasons: the presence of inverted commas, the absence of ergative, the presence of certain verb forms, the words “polita” or “zutan”, the presence of the initial “R”…

It must be pointed out that this is the only report officially produced before the pronouncement was issued on 19 November. The remaining reports were delivered after the expulsion of Lurmen.

Pages: 72.


5.-VReport on the alleged Veleia ancient inscriptions written in Basque. (Language: ES)–> 05-Lakarra ES


Author: Dr Joseba Lakarra, professor at the EHU/UPV

Summary: Basque.

Topic: In Lakarra’s view, the graffiti are fake for various phonetic (aspired, “nere”…), morphological (articles, possessives…), syntactic (ergative, concordance marks…) and lexical (Descartes…) reasons.

Pages: 57.


6.- Report of the Iruña-Veleia graffiti written in Latin –> 06-Velazquez ES


Author: Dr Isabel Velazquez, professor at the University Complutense of Madrid. (Language: ES)

Summary: Latin.

Topic: Dr Velazquez believes that the graffiti do not belong to the Roman period, as stated by the Lurmen archaeologists, based, among others, on the following reasons: there are fragments of sherds where there is incomplete writing on one side but not on the other where the expected text should appear, the greater use of capital letters than would be expected at that time, the presence of the letter “J” instead of “I”, the use of modern punctuation signs, “Descartes”, etc.

Pages: 50.


7.- Study and research of the Iruña-Veleia site. Chemical analyses. (Language: ES) –> 07-Madariaga ES


Author: Dr Juan Manuel Madariaga, professor at the EHU/UPV

Summary: Chemical analyses, study of the report by Dr Ruben Cerdan.

Topic: Madariaga considers that the fact that the graffiti were produced in Roman times cannot be scientifically proven, although he also states that they cannot be proven to be fakes either by using physical tests. For this purpose he has analysed the cation rate, the continuity of the patina coating and the soil piece-stratum correlation.

This report contradicts his earlier statement dated 18 November 2008, when he declared that the sherds were false due to the presence of remnants of a modern element. Later, Eliseo Gil explained that those remnants were from the glue used to join the ceramic fragments.

Pages: 64.



Summary: Informe de los análisis espectroscópitos realizado a aglunas piezas del yacimiento de Iruña-Veleia con posterioridad a noviembre de 2008


8.- List and analysis of the graffiti containing alleged hieroglyphic signs and Egyptian names found in Iruña-Veleia (Vitoria). (Language: ES).–> 08-Jose_Manuel_Galan ES


Author: Dr Jose Manuel Galan, Centro de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales of the Consejo Superior of Investigaciones Cientificas.

Summary: Hieroglyphics and Egyptian names.

Topic: Although some of the graffiti have the appearance of Egyptian writing, it cannot be confirmed that they are Egyptian hieroglyphics or texts written in either ancient or proto-Sinaic Egyptian.

Pages: 3.


9.- Report by Julio Trebolle –> 09_Julio_Trebolle ES


Author: Dr Julio Trebolle, professor at the Universidad Complutense de Madrid. (Language: ES)

Summary: Hebrew words.

Topic: Some of the words are not what would be expected. The transcription “Y” in words such as Yavhe has not been demonstrated in antiquity; also the variances “Yahv”,” Yavhe” are also strange. The use of Miriam to refer to Mary is also anachronic since she tends to appear as Mary or Mariam.

Pages: 4.


10.- Summary of the actions taken by Fernando Legarda regarding the work assigned to the Iruña-Veleia Advisory Scientific Commission. (Language: ES) -> 10_Fernando_Legarda ES


Author: Dr Fernando Legarda, professor at the EHU/UPV.Summary: View on the Carbon 14 analyses.

Topic: Legarda confirms that the Carbon 14 analyses have been correctly carried out and, therefore, the ceramic supports do belong to the Roman period.

Pages: 2 orrialde


11.- Conclusions –> 10-Conclusiones ES


Author: Felix Lopez de Ullibarri, Head of the Service for Historical-Artistic and Archaeological Heritage of the DFA.

Summary: Conclusions in view of the reports and proposal to close the site.

Topic: This official, responsible for the Heritage Service, has made a summary of the reports, including only those that support the forgery, and proposes the closure of the site.

VN:F [1.8.8_1072]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)