[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

orion Re: AMS dating

1) There are, I think, very few Qumran mss which are clearly 
internally-datable. Or, to try to be more precise, for few of these 
texts do we have textual evidence that they must have been written 
after a given date. But then, those few could have been written anytime 
after that date. And copies can be made anytime after that. Given that 
there are few of these texts, and given that they are not really dated 
to any narrow range, the method of dating deposit in caves (which, 
necessarily, is later still than the copying) immediately after the 
last of these few dated events appears to be inadvisable.
2) I accept Greg Doudna's word that a recalibration may alter the date 
estimates by a few years. I also assume that various recalibrations 
of these dates could move them in either direction.
3) Since Greg is well-informed on AMS matters, I hope he will keep us 
"up-to-date" on any future tests. Admittedly, 19 is a rather small 
sample, as several writers have noted. And it is certainly possible 
(and I, for one, would not be surprised) that future tests could 
produce, for example, additional estimates in the second century BCE as 
well as additional estimates in the first century CE.
Stephen Goranson 

stephen goranson