Seems to be a mix of Old Aramaic, Palmyrene, and Nabatean forms, not a single known and well-established script. There may even be a bit of Samaritan influence.Such a mixture of script forms could not come from antiquity; it must be a modern fake.
Steve does not accept that that script is the same as that from the bilingual Greek-Nabataean (Aramaic) inscription from which the Greek phrase came, but his analysis still confirms that the codices are fakes.
Via James McGrath.
Background here (immediately preceding post).
Still waiting for those media updates and corrections ...
UPDATE: The Finnish press has discovered the story — and to their credit the correct story. The Google translation seems to be pretty bad, but it gives the general idea.
UPDATE: Steve Caruso's paleographic analysis is featured in LiveScience (taken from Life's Little Mysteries): Exclusive: Early Christian Lead Codices Now Called Fakes. The piece also refers to Thonemann's debunking, but does not make full use of it. And Elkington's credentials are finally examined and found wanting. This sort of thing should have appeared in the BBC etc. over a week ago. But this, at least, is progress. Well done, Steve!
(Via David Meadows.)
