Editing Phaistos Disc (section)

== Hoax hypothesis ==
The uniqueness of the script, of the spiral arrangement, and of the method of writing (individual glyph stamps) have led some scholars to raise the possibility that the Phaistos disc is a 1908 [[archaeological forgery|forgery]] or hoax.<ref name=eisen2008a>{{Cite journal | last = Eisenberg | first = Jerome M. | title = The Phaistos Disk: one hundred year old hoax? | journal = Minerva | issue = July/August | year = 2008 | pages = 9–24}}</ref><ref name=eisen2008b>{{Cite journal | last = Eisenberg | first = Jerome M. | title = Phaistos Disk: A 100-Year-Old Hoax? Addenda, Corrigenda, and Comments | journal = Minerva | issue = September/October | year = 2008 | pages = 15–16 | url = http://www.utexas.edu/research/pasp/publications/pdf/disk1.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121019150713/http://www.utexas.edu/research/pasp/publications/pdf/disk1.pdf|archive-date=19 October 2012}}</ref>  It was pointed out that the date of manufacture has never been established by [[thermoluminescence dating]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/visual_arts/article4318911.ece|title=Dalya Alberge, "Phaistos Disc declared as fake by scholar", ''The Times'', 12 July 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090317114941/http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/visual_arts/article4318911.ece |archive-date=17 March 2009 }}</ref> Andrew Robinson concurs that thermoluminescence dating would be highly desirable, but does not endorse the forgery arguments.<ref name=robi2008/>