From: owner-ane@ (ANE Digest) To: ane-digest Subject: ANE Digest V1999 #366 Reply-To: Sender: owner-ane@ Errors-To: owner-ane@ Precedence: bulk ANE Digest Monday, December 27 1999 Volume 1999 : Number 366 RE: ane Greek Philistines? Re: ane Temple Mount atrocity Re: ane Temple Mount atrocity Re: ane horses in North Syria (spread of IE) Re: ane Temple Mount atrocity Re: ane horses in North Syria (spread of IE) ane Temple Mount Survey: The Story Behind the Archaeological Atrocity Re: ane Temple Mount atrocity ane Look! More atrocities! Re: ane Temple Mount atrocity Re: ane Look! More atrocities! Re: ane Look! More atrocities! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 04:34:34 -0500 From: "Christopher Robbins" Subject: RE: ane Greek Philistines? It is time we recognize the limits of certain interpretations of a generation or more past and reject once and for all the notion that the Philistines were Mycenaean Greeks. With our more clear vision, let us look at the Medinet Habu recordings and the events of Year Eight (1179). Egyptian had neither a word nor a concept that corresponded directly with the English word "islands", and the two words that are sometimes used for islands are also frequently used to refer to continental coasts. So the opening line's mention of the place where the foreign conspiracy for the invasion was hatched could just as easily and indeed more probably be translated as "coastal lands" or "sea lands". This invasion from the Levant consisted principally of a force of Philistines and Tjekker, supported by ships from Sicily and elsewhere. The Tjekker are known only as inhabitants of the coastline south of Mt. Carmel, so it is clear that the place from which they came and the conspiracy launched was not islands. Directly to the south was Philistia, and even apart from the common sense notion that the Philistines came from the place which bore their name, it is eminently sensible that the 1179 invasion of Egypt came from the same coastal area of the Levant where the Tjekker and the Philistines were contiguously located. Burg's _A Literary and Archaeological Study of the Philistines_ (Oxford, 1985) notes that in Egyptian documents which refer to the Philistines the phraseology is that used for nearby adversaries instead of that used for enemies coming from a distance. In regard to Medinet Habu itself, Edgarton and Wilson (_Historical Records of Ramses III) note that the term used to frequently describe the Philistines and Tjekker of the 1179 invasion (St ty) is a term that is often used to describe Egypt's Levantine neighbors. Another inscription praises Ramesses III for having successfully intimidated both the Philistines and the people of eastern Libya (the Temeh), leaving them hiding in fear in their towns. The inscription suggests that the Philistine towns are no farther away than the towns of eastern Libya. In the interests of brevity, it can simply stated that there is no small amount of additional data and analysis which contradict certain early interpretations of the archaeological evidence, and as such this evidence alone is definitively not adequate to support the earlier notion that somewhere around 1200 Philistia was overrun by an immigrant nation. The destruction of palaces and cities that occurred throughout the eastern Mediterranean in and around BC 1200 collectively represented an unparalleled catastrophe which, inter alia, brought an end to the Greek Bronze Age, collapsed Mycenaean civilization, and led to a Greek dark age that lasted almost 300 years. To say that Mycenaean Greeks were active agents in this catastrophe is something akin to suggesting the ridiculous notion that Mycenae committed suicide. It is time that we abandon once and for all some of the early notions of Gaston Maspero and others which are no longer supportable, and foremost among those propositions which should be jettisoned to the trash bin is the notion that the Philistines were Mycenaean Greeks. Christopher Robbins New York City crisica@idt.net ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 07:14:17 -0400 From: "Peter T. Daniels" Subject: Re: ane Temple Mount atrocity No one has posted a single alleged fact regarding whatever the initial editorial remarks (taken out of context) were about. If you-all want to fight Israeli/Palestinian politics, please take it somewhere else. If you want to talk about what may or may not have happened regarding alleged excavations or plundering, then begin with facts to the extent that they can be known. Talk about arguing history -- even history of a week ago! -- on the basis of no evidence!! avigdor horovitz wrote: > > JUst another thought on this matter. > The major methodological contribution to historical r esearchof the last > several years has been the growing awareness of how the historian > interferes with the history s/he is writing to the extent that some think > htat we can no longer talk of objectively writing history. > It seems to me that there is > no greater interference with history and no greater way to cause > aberrations in our perception of history than the elimination of evidence, > and especially artifacts, for artifacts are for many on this list the ONLY > acceptable evidence. So if evidence for history writing is > removed/distroyed/ secluded/ hidden or in any way intentionally or > accidentally eliminated, and especially if the act of eliminating it is a > blatant exercise of political or religious bias and desire to reshape > the past, we find ourselves full square in a problem which should be of > accute interest and concern to all of us. > When Israeli archaeologists are truly/falsely > accused of digging through and ignoring, levels of interest "only" to > Moslems, that is considered unbiased scholarship and worthy of ANE > discussion. Or when western powers remove to their own countries > artifacts acquired in legal or illegal ways from oriental countries, > that is considered a problem worthy of ANE attention. But When the Wakf is > caught/ suspected doing the same thing, that is called politics and > not worthy of ANE interest. THere seems to be an imbalance here. > Victor > > On Sun, 26 Dec 1999, avigdor horovitz wrote: > > > To the best of my knowledge, this list has discussed things such as > > trading in illegal antiquities and disposal of antiquities removed from > > their native habitats to colonial home states, so I don't see that the > > present event of modern vandalism of antiquities is much different. > > Victor > > > > On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bharani wrote: > > > > > Do keep modern politics off this list. It has to be ANCIENT enough :-) > > > Bharani > > > >A recent JERUSALEM POST editorial about surreptitious Temple Mount > > > >excavations and the unceremonious midnight removal and dumping of 100 > > > >dump truck loads of fill observed.... > > > > > > > > The Christian and Moslem worlds, which would justifiably > > > > be up in arms if Israeli authorities had deliberately used > > > > bulldozers in such an area, are oddly silent when history is > > > > trampled upon in a power struggle between the Wakf and Israel. > > > > > > > >Indeed, the silence is odd. - -- Peter T. Daniels grammatim@worldnet.att.net ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 14:40:03 +0200 (IST) From: avigdor horovitz Subject: Re: ane Temple Mount atrocity I agree with you. I didn't fire the first shot here but reacted to a reaction. I had read the Jerusalem Post article on friday, but I guess not everyone on the list gets the paper. read down in your inbox and you will find Zachi Zweig with some information Victor On Sun, 26 Dec 1999, Peter T. Daniels wrote: > No one has posted a single alleged fact regarding whatever the initial > editorial remarks (taken out of context) were about. > > If you-all want to fight Israeli/Palestinian politics, please take it > somewhere else. If you want to talk about what may or may not have > happened regarding alleged excavations or plundering, then begin with > facts to the extent that they can be known. > > Talk about arguing history -- even history of a week ago! -- on the > basis of no evidence!! > > avigdor horovitz wrote: > > > > JUst another thought on this matter. > > The major methodological contribution to historical r esearchof the last > > several years has been the growing awareness of how the historian > > interferes with the history s/he is writing to the extent that some think > > htat we can no longer talk of objectively writing history. > > It seems to me that there is > > no greater interference with history and no greater way to cause > > aberrations in our perception of history than the elimination of evidence, > > and especially artifacts, for artifacts are for many on this list the ONLY > > acceptable evidence. So if evidence for history writing is > > removed/distroyed/ secluded/ hidden or in any way intentionally or > > accidentally eliminated, and especially if the act of eliminating it is a > > blatant exercise of political or religious bias and desire to reshape > > the past, we find ourselves full square in a problem which should be of > > accute interest and concern to all of us. > > When Israeli archaeologists are truly/falsely > > accused of digging through and ignoring, levels of interest "only" to > > Moslems, that is considered unbiased scholarship and worthy of ANE > > discussion. Or when western powers remove to their own countries > > artifacts acquired in legal or illegal ways from oriental countries, > > that is considered a problem worthy of ANE attention. But When the Wakf is > > caught/ suspected doing the same thing, that is called politics and > > not worthy of ANE interest. THere seems to be an imbalance here. > > Victor > > > > On Sun, 26 Dec 1999, avigdor horovitz wrote: > > > > > To the best of my knowledge, this list has discussed things such as > > > trading in illegal antiquities and disposal of antiquities removed from > > > their native habitats to colonial home states, so I don't see that the > > > present event of modern vandalism of antiquities is much different. > > > Victor > > > > > > On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bharani wrote: > > > > > > > Do keep modern politics off this list. It has to be ANCIENT enough :-) > > > > Bharani > > > > > >A recent JERUSALEM POST editorial about surreptitious Temple Mount > > > > >excavations and the unceremonious midnight removal and dumping of 100 > > > > >dump truck loads of fill observed.... > > > > > > > > > > The Christian and Moslem worlds, which would justifiably > > > > > be up in arms if Israeli authorities had deliberately used > > > > > bulldozers in such an area, are oddly silent when history is > > > > > trampled upon in a power struggle between the Wakf and Israel. > > > > > > > > > >Indeed, the silence is odd. > -- > Peter T. Daniels grammatim@worldnet.att.net > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 14:50:43 +0200 (EET) From: Robert Whiting Subject: Re: ane horses in North Syria (spread of IE) On Sun, 19 Dec 1999, Naccache wrote: >On Sat, 18 Dec 1999, Giuseppe Del Monte wrote: > >>Dear Albert, >>your etymology for an$e-kur-ra is really nice (napahu "shining", >>as the sun or the moon, or "flaring", as a raging fire), but in >>my (traditional) opinion the reference is rather to the >>provenience of horses, "from the mountain(s)", kur-ra. Citations >>and bibliographical references in CAD S pp. 328-334 s.v. sisu. > >Dear Giuseppe, >Of course you are right. >The main point I was trying to make was that the horse was known >in Old Akkadian times, i.e., second half of the IIIrd MBC. Can you provide a textual citation for this? I don't know of textual references to horses in Mesopotamia before the Ur III period (i.e., last century of the 3rd millennium rather than second half (this is why the Tell es-Sweyhat horse is so unexpected). >I was not trying to propose a new etymology for AN^ÊE.KUR.RA, >though I have had problem with the traditional one for a long >time, since in my admittedly meagre knowledge of animal >husbandry, the "mountain donkey" would be the onager rather than >the horse, but what do I know. I took my hint from the fact that >AN^ÊE.KUR.RA= horse is abbreviated to KUR (ok, only in the >Neo-Assyrian period, and "shadum" is also sometimes abbreviated >to KUR, but still :). Now that you have sorted out the difference between KUG "pure, shining, holy" and KUR "mountain, (foreign) country," you are confusing the Sumerian word for horse (_zizi_) with the way the word was written (AN$E.KUR.RA). Not distinguishing between writing and language just leads to confusion. AN$E.KUR.RA is what I call a "word picture" type of writing where the signs that make up the logogram describe the object or process that the word represents. Thus AN$E.KUR.RA literally means "equid of the mountains" but idiomatically means "foreign equid" since _kur_ was the word for both "mountain" and "foreign land" (the word for home land was _kalam_). The use of this formation to write the word _zizi_ "horse" shows that the word came into the language after the Sumerian signary was closed (i.e., no new signs could be added). Words that were in the language before this event that used this particular "word picture" for their writing incorporated the KUR sign into the logogram. Thus U$ ("man") x KUR ("mountain") --> IR3 or ARAD2 "slave (foreign man)"; MI2 ("woman") + KUR ("mountain") --> GEME2 "slave (foreign) woman"; GUD ("ox, bull") x KUR ("mountain") --> AM "wild bull." Had these words come into the language after the signary was closed, _ir_ would have been written U$.KUR.RA, _geme_ would have been written MI2.KUR.RA, and _am_ would have been written GUD.KUR.RA. There are quite a number of these "word picture" type writings in Sumerian as, along with straightforward syllabic writings, it was a way of getting representing new words (either borrowings or new coinings). But in most instances, syllabic writings (e.g., A$.TE or A$.TI for the word for "seat" [probably from Indo-European]; A.GAR for the word "field" [actually corresponds to German "Fleur" -- there is no English word that corrrectly translates A.GAR; also probably from Indo-European]; GI$.GU.ZA for the word for "throne, chair"; etc.) or "word picture" writings (e.g., SILA2.$U.DU8 for _$agi_ "cupbearer"; KI.KU$.LU.UB.GAR [or KU$.LU.UB.GAR.KI] 'place where the waterskin is put' for _ugnim_ "camp") are an indication that the word is foreign or a coining dating after the cuneiform signary was closed. So the KUR in AN$E.KUR.RA doesn't have anything to do with the etymology of the Sumerian word for "horse" which is _zizi_ (Civil wrote on this quite some time ago, but I don't have the reference at hand since I am at home; perhaps someone else can provide it). The writing of KUR alone for horse is simply an abbreviation for AN$E.KUR.RA and has no more bearing on the meaning than any other abbreviation. And AN$E.KUR.RA should certainly not be taken literally as "mountain donkey". What it does mean is that both the horse and the word for it were imported into Mesopotamia. Bob Whiting whiting@cc.helsinki.fi ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 09:49:17 EST From: FucciXXV@aol.com Subject: Re: ane Temple Mount atrocity In a message dated 12/26/99 6:42:24 AM Central Standard Time, victor@bgumail.bgu.ac.il writes: > I had read the Jerusalem Post article on friday, but I guess not > everyone on the list gets the paper. The paper is available on-line at www.jpost.com. There's an article about this controversy in today's edition (Dec. 26). Jim Thorn Chicago, IL ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 14:26:27 -0600 (CST) From: Giuseppe Del Monte Subject: Re: ane horses in North Syria (spread of IE) At 14.50 26/12/99 +0200, Robert Whiting wrote: >Now that you have sorted out the difference between KUG "pure, >shining, holy" and KUR "mountain, (foreign) country," you are >confusing the Sumerian word for horse (_zizi_) with the way the >word was written (AN$E.KUR.RA). Not distinguishing between >writing and language just leads to confusion. AN$E.KUR.RA is >what I call a "word picture" type of writing where the signs that >make up the logogram describe the object or process that the word >represents. Thus AN$E.KUR.RA literally means "equid of the >mountains" but idiomatically means "foreign equid" since _kur_ >was the word for both "mountain" and "foreign land" (the word for >home land was _kalam_). In general, and in particular for AN$E.KUR.RA, you are right, of course. In my opinion, however, Albert Naccache was not confusing KUG mit KUR: KUR, in fact, with the meaning "mountain = east" is a _late_ writing for napahu said of the rising sun and then of rising stars. It's a matter of chronology, not of confused signs. May I point to the intriguing writing AN$E.NITA.KUR = ag-lum "Reitesel" or "mountain ass" from an Eblaite lexical list (M. Krebernick, ZA 73, 1983, p. 45; TIE A/1 p. 36f., A/2 p. 157b)? Happy New Year, Giuseppe Del Monte - -------------- Prof. Dr. Giuseppe del Monte Cattedra di Storia del Vicino Oriente antico Dpt. Scienze storiche del mondo antico Università di Pisa via Galvani 1 - I-56100 Pisa Fax 39-050-500668 - E-mail delmonte@lunet.it ------------------------------ Date: Mon Dec 27 00:56:10 1999 From: Zachi Zweig Subject: ane Temple Mount Survey: The Story Behind the Archaeological Atrocity For those of you who haven't read the Jerusalem Post, here are the links to the articles. http://www.jpost.com/Editions/1999/12/24/News/News.660.html http://www.jpost.com/Editions/1999/12/24/Opinion/Opinion.670.html there's another article in Haaretz but it's in hebrew. http://www.haaretz.co.il/daily/txt/n71503.asp As I wrote earlier I will soon publish on the web all the finds we collected. Here is the basic story behind our survey: Half a year ago I heard rumors that some truck were seen taking out dirt from the temple mount. I wanted to locate the site where the dirt is dumped. So I contacted Yehuda Etzion, which knows every thing that is going on there. Yehuda was surprised he didn't think of the idea before but couldn't locate the site. 3 weeks ago the Wakf began to remove the dirt that was piled up during the latest construction in the underground structure named, Solomon Stables. They also dug and a hole that will be used as an entrance to the new mosque. They dug a hole which is approximately 30m wide, 7m long and 12m deep!!! Yehuda and his friends have counted more than 200 trucks exiting the temple mount and reaching the municipal garbage site of Jerusalem, next to El- Azaria village. In the garbage site, as a regular procedure of the site, the content of the truck is mixed with the garbage and flattened on the garbage piles. Yehuda asked the site management to direct the truck to a clean place and not to mix the garbage with the dirt. The next morning 4 trucks came to the garbage site and were directed to a clean area. Since then trucks stopped coming to the site. The next day, beginning at midnight till dawn, at least 100 trucks were seen dumping dirt to the north part of the kidron valley. We presume that the Wakf did that because there was no point in trying to continue conceal archaeological evidence, so he decided to dump all the dirt near by, making it easier for the trucks to finish the job quickly. According to the Antiquities authority the wakf filtered the piles of dirt before evacuating it. Masonry stones and columns where kept in the mount. The Antiquities authority didn't really care about the dumps, and said there is no archaeological value that can be drawn from it, because nothing is in- situ. But I decided there is an archaeological value. Those piles of dirt can be researched just like any other survey we do in archaeological sites that are not excavated. We have to remember that WE HAVE NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA FROM THE TEMPLE MOUNT , IT HAS NEVER BEEN EXCAVATED!!!!! So me and Yehuda gathered up some volunteers to do a survey in both sites. I talked Gideon Avni, who was the district archaeologist of Jerusalem about it, but he didn't really care. He said there is no archaeological value surveying there. He's been there already and almost every thing he saw is from the Middle-Ages period. Even Avni was right, doesn't Middle-Ages relics have archaeological value? We began our survey at the El-Azaria site. We collected many pottery rims, glasses and nails. When we got to the Kidron site and began collecting pottery, a few Antiquities authority inspectors showed up and forbidden us from touching any shard. As much as absurd the situation that the Wakf is permitted to ruin and rob an archaeological site, while we are not even allowed just to search through the dumps. I gave up and let them confiscate all the material collected in El-Azaria garbage site. Yehuda didn't give up, and eventually they let him leave with all the shards collected from the kidron after they checked that he doesn't have any significant artifact. They didn't want a police incident to happen, so they could keep things quite. I asked Yehuda to deliver me the material, and that was what I published on Thursday at Bar-Ilan University. This publication really embarrasses the Antiquities authority because it was there duty to do this survey. They didn't even bother to check where the dirt is being dumped, without Yehuda initiative no worth excavating dirt would have been left. Another reason they are embarrassed is that we actually have findings from the first and second temple era. This may suggest that the Wakf really caused a major archaeological crime to early layers in the temple mount. The Antiquities Authority did try to prevent it, and there was some kind of protest, but the real protest they were obligated to was against the prime minister of Israel which actually gave permission to the wakf to do this work, as a gesture for the peace talks. Without entering a political argument if Barak was right or wrong , the Antiquities authority is obligated to act according to it's professional ethics which obliging it to protest against the authority who permits this crime to occur. Regards, Zachi Zweig Student at Bar-Ilan University. TEL:972-54-802655 FAX:972-9-9566555 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 23:11:07 -0500 From: "Bharani" Subject: Re: ane Temple Mount atrocity And Afghanistan. And Cambodia. And carpet-bombed areas in Iraq. And any number of Native American sacred sites right here at home. Not ANE subjects either :-) Anyone willing to convert his/her self-righteousness into money for excavations and studying what has been taken out from the Temple Mount and all those other places I've mentioned is always welcome! Otherwise keep it off the list. Bharani - ---------- >From: scribe@msn.fullfeed.com >To: "Bharani" >Subject: Re: ane Temple Mount atrocity >Date: Sat, Dec 25, 1999, 15:59 > > >> Do keep modern politics off this list. It has to be ANCIENT enough :-) >> Bharani >> >> ---------- > Is the poorly executed salvage archaeology of Beirut not a good >parallel? > > >Gordon Govier >News Director scribe@broadcast.net >WNWC Radio p608/271-1025 >5606 Medical Circle f608/271-1150 >Madison WI 53719 > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 00:16:40 -0500 From: "Bharani" Subject: ane Look! More atrocities! > THIS MESSAGE IS IN MIME FORMAT. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. - --MS_Mac_OE_3029098601_165260_MIME_Part Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Since I was all alone in my desire to keep our list academically oriented, I decided to fall in with everyone else. Here is this utterly horrible atrocity! Gasp! Horror! Bharani Israeli archeologists accuse drainage authority of destroying ancient site By Associated Press, 12/26/1999 10:06 JERUSALEM (AP) An archeological site that dates back 750,000 years has been deliberately destroyed in work carried out by a government drainage authority, Israeli archeologists said Sunday. The Israeli Antiquities Authority said, despite repeated warnings, the Sea of Galilee Drainage Authority used heavy earth-moving equipment at the site near the Banot Yaacov Bridge on the upper Jordan River in northern Israel. The remains of two prehistoric elephants, tusks, hippopotamus bones and flint tools were scattered and botanical remains suffered irreparable damage, it said. The director of the Drainage Authority said the work was done to prevent a recurrence of flooding, which has caused millions of dollars' worth of damage to roads, bridges and agricultural land in the vicinity and endangered human life. ''If we hadn't done it, life would have been endangered in the future,'' the director, Eitan Sat, said. He said his workers, careful to cause as little damage as possible, had laid the bones and artifacts aside. The Drainage Authority carried out the work only after all possibilities of dialogue with the archeologists had been exhausted, he said. If the Antiquities Authority had made an effort to cooperate there would have been less damage, Sat said, but they acted as though it were the only authority on the ground. - --MS_Mac_OE_3029098601_165260_MIME_Part Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Look! More atrocities!
Since I was all alone in my desire to keep our list academically oriented, = I decided to fall in with everyone else. Here is this utterly horrible atroc= ity! Gasp! Horror!
Bharani

Israeli archeologists accuse drainage authority of destroying ancient si= te

By Associated Press, 12/26/1999 10:06
JERUSALEM (AP) An archeological site that dates back 750,000 years has been= deliberately destroyed in work carried out by a government drainage authori= ty, Israeli archeologists said Sunday.
The Israeli Antiquities Authority said, despite repeated warnings, the Sea = of Galilee Drainage Authority used heavy earth-moving equipment at the site = near the Banot Yaacov Bridge on the upper Jordan River in northern Israel. <= BR> The remains of two prehistoric elephants, tusks, hippopotamus bones and fli= nt tools were scattered and botanical remains suffered irreparable damage, i= t said.
The director of the Drainage Authority said the work was done to prevent a = recurrence of flooding, which has caused millions of dollars' worth of damag= e to roads, bridges and agricultural land in the vicinity and endangered hum= an life.
''If we hadn't done it, life would have been endangered in the future,'' th= e director, Eitan Sat, said. He said his workers, careful to cause as little= damage as possible, had laid the bones and artifacts aside.
The Drainage Authority carried out the work only after all possibilities of= dialogue with the archeologists had been exhausted, he said.
If the Antiquities Authority had made an effort to cooperate there would ha= ve been less damage, Sat said, but they acted as though it were the only aut= hority on the ground.


- --MS_Mac_OE_3029098601_165260_MIME_Part-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 07:29:26 +0200 (IST) From: avigdor horovitz Subject: Re: ane Temple Mount atrocity You seem to be quite adamant about your protest. Last I checked cambodia and AMerica are out of the geographical range of ANE although we did have discussions about certain topics which seemed more relevant to study of north american languages than ANE. As for Afghanistan, it's peripheral, but people will argue on that point. But this is not the issue. YOur equation between war ravaged sites and a site whose artifacts have been intentionally concealed is no equation, and that is the point. The wakf has, according to the report being discussed, intentionally removed and secluded or disposed of artifacts not supportive or even detrimental to its own religious and historical claims to the site from which it has removed to them. This is not only an act of vandalism or an illegal act but "1984". It goes simply- you dont' like history so change it, but if there is evidence that your history is not quite accurate, destroy the evidence against it, and especially if that evidence might support an alternative history. DIscussing these matters may lead to acrimony on ANE (an area not known for long periods of peace at any time, so why should scholars studying it be any different?), and for this reason it may be prudent to avoid the topic. But discussing the topic is no less relevant and is precisely equivalent to previous discussions on ANE. So if you have objections, you should have voiced them previously. Victor On Sun, 26 Dec 1999, Bharani wrote: > And Afghanistan. And Cambodia. And carpet-bombed areas in Iraq. And any > number of Native American sacred sites right here at home. > Not ANE subjects either :-) > Anyone willing to convert his/her self-righteousness into money for > excavations and studying what has been taken out from the Temple Mount and > all those other places I've mentioned is always welcome! > Otherwise keep it off the list. > Bharani > > ---------- > >From: scribe@msn.fullfeed.com > >To: "Bharani" > >Subject: Re: ane Temple Mount atrocity > >Date: Sat, Dec 25, 1999, 15:59 > > > > > > >> Do keep modern politics off this list. It has to be ANCIENT enough :-) > >> Bharani > >> > >> ---------- > > Is the poorly executed salvage archaeology of Beirut not a good > >parallel? > > > > > >Gordon Govier > >News Director scribe@broadcast.net > >WNWC Radio p608/271-1025 > >5606 Medical Circle f608/271-1150 > >Madison WI 53719 > > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 07:31:01 +0200 (IST) From: avigdor horovitz Subject: Re: ane Look! More atrocities! I agree! Victor On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, Bharani wrote: > > Since I was all alone in my desire to keep our list academically oriented, I > decided to fall in with everyone else. Here is this utterly horrible > atrocity! Gasp! Horror! > Bharani > > Israeli archeologists accuse drainage authority of destroying ancient site > > By Associated Press, 12/26/1999 10:06 > JERUSALEM (AP) An archeological site that dates back 750,000 years has been > deliberately destroyed in work carried out by a government drainage > authority, Israeli archeologists said Sunday. > The Israeli Antiquities Authority said, despite repeated warnings, the Sea > of Galilee Drainage Authority used heavy earth-moving equipment at the site > near the Banot Yaacov Bridge on the upper Jordan River in northern Israel. > The remains of two prehistoric elephants, tusks, hippopotamus bones and > flint tools were scattered and botanical remains suffered irreparable > damage, it said. > The director of the Drainage Authority said the work was done to prevent a > recurrence of flooding, which has caused millions of dollars' worth of > damage to roads, bridges and agricultural land in the vicinity and > endangered human life. > ''If we hadn't done it, life would have been endangered in the future,'' the > director, Eitan Sat, said. He said his workers, careful to cause as little > damage as possible, had laid the bones and artifacts aside. > The Drainage Authority carried out the work only after all possibilities of > dialogue with the archeologists had been exhausted, he said. > If the Antiquities Authority had made an effort to cooperate there would > have been less damage, Sat said, but they acted as though it were the only > authority on the ground. > > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 09:56:51 +0200 (IST) From: avigdor horovitz Subject: Re: ane Look! More atrocities! on second thought, although the new item you report is shocking and deplorable for its own reasons and should be condemned by all those interest in antiquities (that means US), it is not analagous to the temple mount incident. It is not an attempt to alter the past by eliminating the evidence and reflects modernity's disregards of the past in the name of progress and convenience, Also the statement of the "developer"(?) that they removed the material to a near by site where it could be examined by the archaeologists and that thereby there was not real damage or loss is socking and its ignorance shouts to the heavens, but what can one expect? Victor On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, avigdor horovitz wrote: > I agree! > Victor > > On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, Bharani wrote: > > > > > Since I was all alone in my desire to keep our list academically oriented, I > > decided to fall in with everyone else. Here is this utterly horrible > > atrocity! Gasp! Horror! > > Bharani > > > > Israeli archeologists accuse drainage authority of destroying ancient site > > > > By Associated Press, 12/26/1999 10:06 > > JERUSALEM (AP) An archeological site that dates back 750,000 years has been > > deliberately destroyed in work carried out by a government drainage > > authority, Israeli archeologists said Sunday. > > The Israeli Antiquities Authority said, despite repeated warnings, the Sea > > of Galilee Drainage Authority used heavy earth-moving equipment at the site > > near the Banot Yaacov Bridge on the upper Jordan River in northern Israel. > > The remains of two prehistoric elephants, tusks, hippopotamus bones and > > flint tools were scattered and botanical remains suffered irreparable > > damage, it said. > > The director of the Drainage Authority said the work was done to prevent a > > recurrence of flooding, which has caused millions of dollars' worth of > > damage to roads, bridges and agricultural land in the vicinity and > > endangered human life. > > ''If we hadn't done it, life would have been endangered in the future,'' the > > director, Eitan Sat, said. He said his workers, careful to cause as little > > damage as possible, had laid the bones and artifacts aside. > > The Drainage Authority carried out the work only after all possibilities of > > dialogue with the archeologists had been exhausted, he said. > > If the Antiquities Authority had made an effort to cooperate there would > > have been less damage, Sat said, but they acted as though it were the only > > authority on the ground. > > > > > > > ------------------------------ End of ANE Digest V1999 #366 **************************** Back issues are available on the Oriental Institute World-Wide Web (WWW) site at: http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/ANE/OI_ANE.html