[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: orion papyrus joins?; ostracon locus?; 4Q448 bibl.?
[The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set]
[Your display is set for the "ISO-8859-8" character set]
[Some characters may be displayed incorrectly]
Well, not to put too fine a point on it, but: Strange is such an
"experienced" scholar that he used that most discriminating of tools of
Palestinian archaeology, a bulldozer. Then, the find was not made by him,
but by a volunteer, who *moved* the find by his and Strange´s own admission.
He *thinks* he knows where he found it, and Prof. Strange *thinks* that the
site has the characteristics Gorenson has mentioned ad nauseam. But it is
very difficult to put toothpaste back into a tube, and neither Strange nor
Gorenson can do it.
> From: stephen goranson[SMTP:email@example.com]
> Reply To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Sent: 7, december 1998 23.43
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: RE: orion papyrus joins?; ostracon locus?; 4Q448 bibl.?
> Those interested in the "yahad" ostracon and its date who wish to follow
> Prof. Cryer's suggestion to "disregard" the factual information provided
> Prof. Strange are of course free to do so.
> On the other hand, those who may wish to know what the experienced
> and respected excavation director kindly relayed to orion list in e-mail
> form and at the request of some list members can check the orion archives,
> especially the posts of 26 August 1997 at
> and of 2 September 1997 at
> Unlike some publications which have misunderstood the
> archaeological context of this ostracon find, Prof. Strange graciously
> provided a reliable account. I, for one, thank him.
> best wishes,
> Stephen Goranson
> >The "correct" find context of an archaeological find is not sent on
> >or third thought by e-mail to the scholarly community, but recorded in
> >site record on the spot and made available at once. Having failed to do
> >this, Strange's remarks are just that--remarks made after the fact,
> >relevant, perhaps not. So scholars are perfectly justified in
> >such "information".
> >Fred Cryer
> >University of Copenhagen
> >> [S. Goranson wrote:]
> >> Three brief items, in case any are worth notice:
> >> Unfortunately, in the same Qumran Chronicle issue (p. 36) it
> >> appears that Callaway again misunderstood the archaeological context of
> >> the
> >> find locus of the much-discussed "Yachad" ostracon, a matter of
> >> significance for, e.g., dating. The correct information was given in
> >> forwarded posts by Prof. James Strange, searchable in the orion list
> >> archives. [snip]
> >> cheers,
> >> Stephen Goranson