GGG Ping.
The only monument that should stand in Jericho is a 50-foot statue of Joshua, the greatest military commander of all time.
Perhaps the UN does not wish to be responsible for the deaths of tourists who were encouraged to visit due to their listing of it.
After all, the UN values human life and well-being above all else./sar
Who was that wall around the city to defend them from? Who was on the attack back then?
Thank you for yet another interesting read.
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
I read an article in Biblical Archaeological Review which pretty conclusively argued that Kenyon—one time in her long distinguished career, made serious mistakes in setting the date of Jericho’s biblical-era destruction.
Archaeologists traditionally rely on pottery shards to determine dates of a site, and Kenyon used a minority of shards to date Jericho’s destruction hundreds of years before Joshua... When other archaeologists examined the thousands of shards Kenyon’s team carefully cataloged and stored, there seemed to be plenty of shards that date exactly to the biblical account... Dame Kenyon apparently relied on just a few older shards found at the destroyed layer, to conclude what she already assumed—namely that the Joshua account was myth, and Jericho had long been destroyed before Joshua showed up. (It’s quite possible the author’s speculated that the Jericho residents had some older “antique” potter they had saved—just as wealthy people today might have a Ming vase or two in their houses...hence the few odd out of date shards).
So when one takes the vast majority of shards found at the relevant layer, one gets a date that corresponds to the bible...but that didn’t correspond to Kenyon’s own theories—so naturally was dumped. This in spite of an impeccable perfectionistic career up to this point.
It always seems fascinating to me that whatever the biblical point—the evidence always is just short of overwhelming, always asking for faith of some degree—allowing always for people to, in their own minds...rationally dismiss the divine.
I read an article in Biblical Archaeological Review which pretty conclusively argued that Kenyon—one time in her long distinguished career, made serious mistakes in setting the date of Jericho’s biblical-era destruction.
Archaeologists traditionally rely on pottery shards to determine dates of a site, and Kenyon used a minority of shards to date Jericho’s destruction hundreds of years before Joshua... When other archaeologists examined the thousands of shards Kenyon’s team carefully cataloged and stored, there seemed to be plenty of shards that date exactly to the biblical account... Dame Kenyon apparently relied on just a few older shards found at the destroyed layer, to conclude what she already assumed—namely that the Joshua account was myth, and Jericho had long been destroyed before Joshua showed up. (It’s quite possible the author’s speculated that the Jericho residents had some older “antique” potter they had saved—just as wealthy people today might have a Ming vase or two in their houses...hence the few odd out of date shards).
So when one takes the vast majority of shards found at the relevant layer, one gets a date that corresponds to the bible...but that didn’t correspond to Kenyon’s own theories—so naturally was dumped. This in spite of an impeccable perfectionistic career up to this point.
It always seems fascinating to me that whatever the biblical point—the evidence always is just short of overwhelming, always asking for faith of some degree—allowing always for people to, in their own minds...rationally dismiss the divine.