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

Re: orion Hirschfeld's Excavations

> Dave Washburn is, of course, correct that we discussed "infra" and related
> topic many months ago and that the best argument for "south of", as used in
> context by Pliny, was that there was no site physically above Ein-Gedi.  That
> is why I am wondering how Roitman can (apparently) be so sure that "infra"
> sourth of the Essenes rather than "below" the Essenes given the Hirschfeld
> Excavations.

Agreed.  Based on what little I know of Latin I never did really buy 
the "south of" argument in the first place, but this seems to put the 
final nail in its coffin.

> But the other issue is that in the January 1998 BAR article two of the three
> persons being interviewed take the position that there was no land passage
> from Qumran to Ein-Gedi in about 100 BCE to 70 CE.  If true, then only the
> Hirschfeld site qualifies as being removed from the coast and the noxious
> odors of the Dead Sea.  It is only the bey low level of the Dead Sea in the

> more recent century that moves Qumran off of and away from the Dead Sea's
> noxious odors.  

Either I'm a little slow in my vocabulary or there's a possible typo 
here :-)  Am I correct in speculating that this should have been 
Dave Washburn
If you don't know where you're going, don't lead.