Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim West" <jwest AT highland.net>
> 
> 
> Peter Kirk wrote:
> 
> >>
> > Maybe the articles are unreliable, but are you disputing "Ugarit 
> > was at its height about 1450 BC to 1200 BC", or the dating of 
> > most of the surviving texts to the last part of that period? I 
> > know that some e.g. David Rohl prefer a later date, with the 
> > final collapse around 1000 BC, but surely Wikipedia here reflects 
> > the scholarly consensus.
> 
> 
> My warning was more general in nature and concerned the use of 
> Wikipedia as a source for accurate information.  It is the "DaVinci 
> Code of online Encyclopedia" with all manner of malcontents and 
> dilettantes free to write and post whatever they imagine.  Readers 
> should simply be careful using it.  There are, to be sure, useful 
> and accurate articles on it.  But one should definitely not cite it 
> as the same level of authority one would cite Britannica, for 
> instance.
> 
> -- Jim West
> 
I referrenced the wikipedia article for two reasons:
1) it is a quick and easy one to find and referrence
2) it conformed to the consensus as I had read it previously from other 
sources. Had it not, I would not have provided the URL.

There are wikipedia articles that are terrible, and others which are OK. The 
wikipedia method predetermines that there will be no excellent articles 
included (I've dealt with them). While the method tends to weed out the 
malcontents and dilettantes, it also weeds out excellance, leaving a result 
little above a high school term paper.

I'm not an expert on Ugarit, so I defer to those who know more. While there 
may be a quibble on the dates, even the early date given is centuries after 
Moses.

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