Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [ANE-2] Reply to Qumran under water -- correction

Expand Messages
  • Ariel L. Szczupak
    ... I checked my notes and found two URLs to topographical maps that are still active: A map of the southern Jordan valley and the northern part of the Dead
    Message 1 of 2 , Aug 24 4:16 PM
      At 07:13 23/08/2006, David Hall wrote:
      >I cited the wrong author of the C14 study in the prevous
      >message. This one is corrected.
      >
      > <<Neev & Emery claim that during most of the 2nd mbc the DS level was
      ><<between 350 and 300 mbsl. For anyone who visited the area, and I
      ><<gather many here did, that's quite an amazing claim. It implies that
      ><<the Dead Sea extended much farther north and south. At 300 mbsl the
      ><<western shore of that lake would have been at the eastern parts of
      ><<today's Jericho. It would have been quite a sight."
      >
      > Jericho was supposed to be some 260 meters below sea level, and
      > about 10 miles north of the Dead Sea. The south-eastern parts of
      > the town were close to the 300 mbsl contour.

      I checked my notes and found two URLs to topographical maps that are
      still active:


      A map of the southern Jordan valley and the northern part of the Dead
      Sea, in Russian, 50 meter intervals in the contour lines:

      http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/amman_1985.jpg


      A map of modern Jericho (without the southern part) and the eastern
      and northern surroundings, mostly Hebrew, 25 meter intervals:

      http://www.bibarch.com/Images/JericoD.jpg


      >
      > The ruins of Teleilat Ghassul from the Chalcolithic/EB era was
      > supposed to be about 4-5 kms from the NE shore of the Dead Sea in
      > Jordan. There were some wall paintings preserved from a controlled
      > dig, including one in a collection in Amman that showed someone
      > observing a bright star interpreted by some as a supernova. I
      > presumed wall paintings would not be well preserved underwater. I
      > could not locate the elevation of Ghassul exactly, but according to
      > one map it is likely close to 300 meters b.s.l.

      Dear David - I have the very bad feeling of someone just about to
      shatter a child's innocent dream and inform him there's no Santa :(
      You have no idea what you're getting yourself into ...

      5 minutes of checking:

      In the 1970 heb. enc. of arch. digs I have Teleilat Ghassul at 280
      mbsl. In the negev/gibson arc. enc. of the holy land it's 850 feet
      bsl (~260 meters). The Jordan antiquities database has -290 meters in
      the maximum elevation of its record for the site (no value in the
      minimum elevation field).

      Someone said "exact science"? ROFL ...

      [Maybe like miles we have ANE land meters and nautical meters - land
      metrics to be used when the site is dry, nautical metrics when it's
      underwater ...]



      Ariel.

      [100% bona fide dilettante ... delecto ergo sum!]

      ---
      Ariel L. Szczupak
      AMIS-JLM (Ricercar Ltd.)
      POB 4707, Jerusalem, Israel 91401
      Phone: +972-2-5619660 Fax: +972-2-5634203
      ane.als@...
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.