[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: orion scroll jars again
F. Cryer observed, correctly, that J. Magness made a simple, inadvertant,
copyiest error in typing his quotation (who among us has not made copying
errors?); however, that was obvious (homoeoteleuton apparently), and did
nothing whatever to change the issues under discussion. Fred's statement,
read correctly, is false. The jars are not common/widespread nor made over
long periods, despite his declaration.
F. Cryer and G. Doudna appear to apply a sliding scale of evidence
requirements. Two examples: the locus 2 jar was certainly there in period
II; it is speculation that it was there in period I, yet they insist on a
period I date--though Greg uses modifiers. ("appears" etc.)
After deriding de Vaux's datings, Doudna and Cryer make much of the fact
that de Vaux redated the pottery shop beginning from II to Ib. The second
dating they take as secure, now, from de Vaux.(!) And, in any case,
whatever date the pottery shop began does not automatically mean that all
products ever made there were produced from day one.
Stephen Goranson goranson@duke.edu