Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: gfsomsel AT juno.com
> 
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 08:41:43 -0600 "Stoney Breyer"
> <stoneyb AT touchwood.net> writes:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > [mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Walter R.
> > Mattfeld
> > 
> > ** but how does one _cook_ in a "wooden" bowl ?
> > 
> > Ask any Boy Scout: food can be seethed over fire in a leather bag. 
> > No
> > pottery required.
> > _______________________________________________
> 
> If I recall correctly, they used to drop heated stones into pots / bowls
> to cook the food.
> 
> george
> gfsomsel

Now that you remind me, the Indians of northern California had neither wooden 
bowls nor pottery, but developed a way of weaving grass baskets so tightly 
that they were waterproof. To cook, they did as George mentioned, heated 
stones in a fire, then dropped them in the soup.

Can you imagine the archeological record left by baskets that rot in a few 
months?

What are the linguistic clues in Torah concerning the cooking utensiles?

When they left Egypt they had kneading troughs, most likely made of wood. 
During the wanderings, there is mentioned grinding and boiling of food, which 
presuppose some sort of utensiles. Roasting of birds could be done with a 
handy stick. Are there any other linguistic clues?

If they had carried pottery, would it have been different from that in 
Canaan? If they left during the Hyksos reign as I believe, would they not 
have used pottery identical to the Hyksos ware, therefore almost identical to 
that used in Canaan, therefore the invasion would not show up in the 
archeological record if based on pottery?

Karl W. Randolph.
-- 
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm