Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Ian Hutchesson <mc2499 AT mclink.it>]

>Ian, I never said a word about Rameses II.  You're the one who 
>keeps bringing him up.  If you had bothered to read my original 
>post on this topic, you would have seen that I specifically said I 
>wasn't sure about some of his treatments of individual persons, but 
>that I thought he made his case for the need to restructure the 
>Third Intermediate Period.  

Dave,

I'm now quite at a loss to understand what it is exactly about Rohl's work
on the restructuring of the Third Intermediate Period that remains for you
to give as noteworthy. You seem to have discarded more than anyone I've
come across who is willing to speak about the stuff, so much so that it is
totally unclear what you actually do support and your further posts have
not clarified the situation at all, merely saying what it is you don't like
or don't support or didn't say, what made you laugh, what made you tired,
but absolutely nothing of any substance.

>That's all I said, and I had really hoped 
>that intellectual honesty would prevail so that the discussion would 
>be narrowed to that topic.  Obviously, you don't want to do that.  

Now this is an ad hominem, Dave. It is not directed at a position, but at a
person. If I need to spell it out to you, let me know. Otherwise, you might
think more carefully about what you say.

>It's clear that, not only are you unwilling to read Rohl before you 
>start sniping at him, but you aren't even willing to read what I 
>actually wrote before you start sniping at me.  

You simply fall back on the "read-da-book" syndrome. (This is like all
those people convinced by the Thiering books. Ever read any? Why not? I
spent a lot of time corresponding with her before she finished her C14
article.) Having read a lot of books on the basic subject, I hoped you
would come up with something that would take this one out of the rubbish
bin, but you were not forthcoming.

>I have better things to do.

You might have saved us the trouble in the first place, by not dangling
your feelings about some unspecified part of Rohl's work in his dealings
with the Third Intermediate Period.


Cheers,


Ian