next »

[Please Support Us!]

Please Support Us!

November Goal: $40.00
Due Date: Nov 30
Gross Amount: $5.00
PayPal Fees: $0.50
Net Balance: $4.50
Below Goal: $35.50
©

 11%

November Donations

5th Anonymous $5.00

TRAILBLAZERS
for students

ArchaeoFind
Archaeology News
Articles
Browse Attachments
Calendar
Downloads
Forum
Gallery
Links
Member Map
Our News Feeds
Submit Article
Tag Cloud
Video Channel

Odyssey Marine in the media
Trailblazers
Play Phaos
Chat
Trailblazers: Virtual Tours

[Solomon]

You're welcome, Doc. My first conclusion, that the NT Jesus was not an historical figure, was reached after maybe two decades of study; understanding how the mythic figure was assembled, the next decade; and now I endeavour to understand how the Christian church came about.

The achievement of Eisenman in freeing the scrolls was herculean. His grasp of the subject is second to none and his elucidations, brilliant.

I keep on my desk: The Dead Sea Scrolls and the First Christians. Essays and Translations. Robert Eisenman (1996).

I also recommend:
James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls, by Robert Eisenman (ISBN: 0670869325)

His most recent is The New Testament Code: The Cup of The Lord, the Damascus Covenant and the Blood of Christ (ISBN-10: 1842931164). I have yet to read this.

Synopsis
In this long-awaited sequel to "James the Brother of Jesus", Robert Eisenman's extraordinary revelations about the leadership of the early Christian Church cast a revealing light over New Testament documents, with far-reaching implications. Eisenman presents a full examination of James's relationship to the "Dead Sea Scrolls", and in revealing the true historical James, he demonstrates how he has also discovered the true historical Jesus. This is the real history of Palestine in the first century. The author exposes the deliberate falsifications of New Testament documents, showing the almost absurd and certainly triviliazing way in which Jesus was presented in the Gospels. He describes how Peter, a prototypical Essene, was used - for example, in the Gospels and the "Book of Acts" - as a mouthpiece for anti-Semitism. He decodes many of the esoteric references in the "Scrolls" which found their way into the Gospels, and draws some dramatic conclusions from them. He also explains why the recent, almost miraculously discovered James Ossuary is a fraud. This groundbreaking work of historical detection, with its challenging revelations, will not disappoint Eisenman's many followers.

I also have copies of his early papers, published by Leiden University and later made unavailable by that institution.

Solomon

[Diving Doc]

Solomon,
The next time I am over to the UK I want to borrow some books.
Again thanks for the posting.
Cheers,
Doc

[Bart]

Virtual Qumran sheds new light on Dead Sea scrolls discovery site

18-Jun-2007

   The mysterious archaeological ruins located paces from where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered 60 years ago served first as a fortress before being adopted by Jewish religious sect, two UCLA researchers contend.

   �Qumran was established originally as a fortress, just as the archaeological evidence shows, and then it was abandoned,� said Robert R. Cargill, a UCLA graduate student in Near Eastern Culture and Languages. �It was later resettled by the Essenes, an early Jewish religious community that came from Jerusalem, bringing with them the scrolls and continuing to copy and compose new scrolls.�

   Cargill and collaborator William M. Schniedewind, chair of the UCLA Department of Near Eastern Cultures and Languages, arrived at the conclusion while building the world�s first three-dimensional computer model of the site, which has been the subject of debate since a Bedouin shepherd discovered the first scrolls in a cave above Qumran in 1947.

   �Once you put all the archaeological evidence into three dimensions, the solution literally jumps out at you,� said Schniedewind, the project�s principle investigator.

   The scholars hope their Qumran Visualization Project, slated to go on view June 29 at the San Diego Natural History Museum as part of the largest public exhibition of the scrolls ever mounted, will resolve the conflict surrounding the history and evolution of the West Bank site.

   Generations of scholars have clashed over whether Qumran served exclusively as a monastery for the scholarly and pacifist Essenes; a fortress for the mighty Hasmoneans, whose victory against ancient Greek occupiers is celebrated during Hanukkah; or a rich Jerusalem family�s villa that was later adapted by the Essenes as a Jewish communal compound.

   With the judiciousness of Solomon, Cargill and Schniedewind cut the three competing theories down the middle, contending that none of them hold together without elements from the others.

   �We felt it was of the utmost important to allow the archaeological remains to speak for themselves,� said Schniedewind. �So we decided to follow the evidence in modeling the site, no matter where it would lead. In attempting to reconstruct many of the suggestions made by scholars over the years, we found that many were simply not possible architecturally. But when half of the elements were taken from each of the competing theories and added to each other, the most plausible � and buildable � explanation emerged.�

   Cargill and Schniedewind contend that the original 20,150-square-foot, two-story structure, which has a four-story tower and surrounds a 3,229-square-foot courtyard, could not have been built originally as the home of a sectarian religious community, as Roland de Vaux, a French Dominican priest who led the original excavation of the site, held. De Vaux maintained that the original occupants, who refer to themselves in the scrolls as the �Yahad,� were the Essenes.

   Central to de Vaux�s theory is the existence of a communal dining hall, which was vividly described in the scrolls. While early excavations indeed discovered enough pottery to feed a religious community, the dining room was not part of the original structure, the UCLA researchers contend.

   �Once we put the dining hall into the model, we realized it had to be an addition,� Cargill said. �It only fits to the south of the original structure.�

   When the site served as a fortress, housing fewer people than the Jewish religious settlement, residents would have eaten elsewhere, possibly in a central courtyard where ovens have been excavated, the UCLA team contends.

   Similarly, 1,120-square-foot, two-story scriptorium � or large work room for producing scrolls � has long been thought to be central to the religious community, but the position of the room and thickness of the walls are more consistent with an addition than an original feature of the structure, the UCLA team found.

   But if Qumran does not appear to have been originally designed for communal life, its evolution is not consistent with use exclusively as a fortress either, say the UCLA researchers. In an influential 1996 article about Qumran, University of Chicago professor Norman Golb argued that the site, occupied from about 163 B.C. to A.D. 73, was always a fortress.

   While original features of the structure, such as a defensive four-story tower on one side and protective precipices on two opposing sides, would be expected of a fortress, the array of outbuildings and additions reflect a more pastoral, contemplative life, the UCLA team found. For instance, the researchers have been able to bring to life a vast water system that flowed through the site, filling 10 ritual baths, separating clay for pottery production, and sustaining residents, livestock and crops. Moreover, only a low wall appears to have protected agricultural portions of the compound�s northwest side �not the heavy fortification that would be expected of a fortress.

   �The Qumran model shows that the nature of the expanded areas, specifically those in the northwest annex and within an inner courtyard, was of a communal, non-military nature,� said Schniedewind, who participated in an archaeological dig at Qumran over a decade ago.

   Cargill and Schniedewind credit French archaeologist Jean-Baptiste Humbert with first suggesting the hybrid approach that inspires their own �synthetic� theory. Humbert contended in a 2002 book that Qumran was first built as a home, possibly a vacation home, for a wealthy Jerusalem family before being abandoned and reoccupied in the late first century B.C. Like Cargill and Schniedewind, Humbert has contended that the site�s eventual occupants were the Essenes.

   �This interpretation was a crucial step in the right direction,� Cargill said. �But the shared rooms � the dining room, the scriptorium, the pottery works � appear to have been built for a community of people. This isn�t just for one wealthy family out in the desert. This is an entire community center [whose residents] sustained themselves making pottery and may have even fed themselves from their own crops.�

   Like many scholars before them, Cargill and Schniedewind believe the Essenes, who practiced communal ownership, brought all of their possessions to the site, including about 70 percent of the scrolls discovered in the area. They believe that the Essenes are the Yahad group described in the remaining 30 percent of the recovered scrolls, and that they are the authors of those texts, composed at Qumran, which describe communal life in the Judean desert. The UCLA team theorizes that the Essenes may have anticipated an attack from Roman soldiers when they packed the scrolls in earthenware jars and hid them in caves in the hills above Qumran.

###
The Qumran Visualization Project will be on view at the San Diego Natural History Museum through January 2008 as part of �Dead Sea Scrolls,� the largest, longest and most comprehensive exhibit of its kind in any country. In all, 27 scrolls will be on view, 10 of which have never been publicly displayed. To this day, the Dead Sea Scrolls contain the oldest known manuscript of the Old Testament ever found.

   The computer model was built over the course of 15 months using MultiGen Creator, a powerful modeling tool known for producing fully interactive real-time models. Photographs of wood grains, plasters and soil at Qumran and other similar sites throughout the Middle East provide the model�s texture. The model includes virtual recreations of oil lights, ink wells, pottery and other actual artifacts discovered throughout Qumran.

   A series of high-resolution panoramic photographs of the sky, the cliffs to the west of the site, the Dead Sea and the plains of Jordan to the east were grafted together in Photoshop to illustrate Qumran�s surroundings. The project�s architects eventually plan to replace the panoramic photography with satellite imagery, which will allow them to virtually simulate the surrounding topography and terrain. Plans also call for virtual models of the caves where the scrolls were found.

Contact: Meg Sullivan


University of California - Los Angeles

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-06/uoc--vqs061807.php

[Solomon]

Quman mikvah (ritual bath). The steps show earthquake damage.
Josephus describes how the Essenes purified themselves through immersion before participating in their communal meals:
    "Then, after working without interruption until the fifth hour, they reassemble in the same place and, girded with linen loin cloths, bathe themselves thus in cold water. After this purification they assemble in a special building to which no one is admitted who is not of the same faith; they themselves only enter the refectory if they are pure, as though into a holy precinct" (War 2:129).

For instance, the researchers have been able to bring to life a vast water system that flowed through the site, filling 10 ritual baths, separating clay for pottery production, and sustaining residents, livestock and crops.

This is archaeological evidence that is difficult to deny. It lends much weight to Essene occupation. It convinces me.

Solomon

[Bart]

Warriors Once Occupied Dead Sea Scrolls Site

By Heather Whipps, Special to LiveScience

posted: 12 July 2007 10:18 am ET

   Fierce warriors once occupied the famous complex where the Dead Sea Scrolls were written, new research suggests.

   Ruins of the Qumran site�in the present-day West Bank�resemble a monastery, but scholars have argued over its uses before the religious sect who penned the scrolls moved in somewhere between 130 and 100 B.C.

   Using the world's first virtual 3-D reconstruction of the site, historians recently found evidence of a fortress that was later converted into its more peaceful, pious function.

   �Once you put all the archaeological evidence into three dimensions, the solution literally jumps out at you,� said William Schniedewind, chair of Ancient Eastern Mediterranean Studies at UCLA and the project�s principle investigator.

Clarification in virtual reality

   The Qumran gained legendary status in the archaeological world when a shepherd boy discovered the Dead Sea Scrolls in nearby caves in 1947.

   After many investigations of the 20,000-square-foot residential complex where most of the scrolls are believed to have been written, archaeologists have debated the structural mish-mash of its buildings and spaces. Many, such as a defensive four-story tower, don't seem to belong to a setting used exclusively as a monastery. Other areas appeared as add-ons or renovations, such as a communal dining hall.

   With the 3-D model, the UCLA researchers deconstructed the complex piece by piece. That allowed them to "see" architectural elements invisible to the naked eye, said Schniedewind.

   "The various sizes of the walls and their ability to support weight (e.g., necessary for multi-story construction/fortification) was not immediately clear in the archaeological plan," he said.

   �Once we put the dining hall into the model, we realized it had to be an addition,� noted UCLA graduate student and project co-author Bob Cargill. �It only fits to the south of the original structure.�

   Add-ons like the dining hall were all rooms meant for communal living, while the underbelly of the structure�-built first and revealed in the virtual model�-had more militaristic functions, the researchers found.

   During its period as a fort, the first extended occupation of Qumran was probably by a band of mighty warriors called the Hasmoneans, whose victory over Greek occupiers is celebrated during Hanukkah, the UCLA historians contend.

Monks sought peace in the desert

   It is widely believed that the Dead Sea Scrolls, the only surviving texts of the Hebrew Bible (or Old Testament) written before 100 A.D., were rushed from the Qumran compound and hidden in the caves during an encroachment of Roman troops in 66 A.D.

   Before the attack, the Qumran was a peaceful place of worship where the Essenes, a strict religious group who moved there from Jerusalem, painstakingly copied and scribed the scrolls.

   "The site was chosen because the wilderness was a place that people went to seek God--indeed, this was the reason that the Dead Sea Scrolls give for choosing a desert site for this settlement," Schniedewind told LiveScience. Essene monks observed a regimented life of ritual while they lived at the Qumran.

   The new findings support the theory that the building had at least a few occupants prior to the Essenes, among them�some historians have suggested�an aristocratic family from Jerusalem who used the building as a vacation home. It makes sense, said Schniedewind, given the limit of practical places to live in that part of the world.

   "There are very few possible places that could be settled in the Judean desert. So, everyone who settles there tends to choose the same places," Schniedewind said. "Specifically, there are very few viable water sources. The site of Qumran ... allowed the collection of runoff using dams, aqueducts and pools."

http://www.livescience.com/history/070712_scrolls_site.html

[Diving Doc]

Excellent Post Bart.

I thoroughly enjoyed that and learned something as well.

Cheers,
Doc

[Charles Gadda]

I have just now read your various posts and I would like to submit a few comments:

(1) "Ten" ritual baths: the problem with this, is that there is no concrete evidence that more than one or two of the water cisterns were in fact used as mikvot rather than for pottery manufacture and simply for saving water.  There were of course many mikvot in Jerusalem as well, but no one has concluded that the people using them were Essenes--although there were no doubt Essenes living there (as one of the gates of the city was called the Gate of the Essenes).  The key point here is that if you want to think Essenes were living at Qumran, then you will interpret the cisterns as baths, but if you are unconvinced by the Essene hypothesis, you will probably see most of them as something else.  Always be suspicious of the news items, the journalists are simply repeating what they have been told by scholars who are putting a spin on the facts.

The DNA, the "toilet" scam and other claims are dealt with by Norman Golb in his "Recent Strategies" article at www.oi.uchicago.edu/research/projects/scr/Recent_Strategies_2007.pdf

See also Golb's article "Fact and Fiction in Current Exhibitions of the Dead Sea Scrolls," at www.oi.uchicago.edu/pdf/dss_fact_fiction_2007.pdf

(2) The "virtual reality" film: Schniedewind and his UCLA grad student Robert Cargill have simply lifted this fortress evidence from work by a series of scholars and presented it as their own "finding."

Thus, Dr. Yizhar Hirschfeld's book Qumran in Context (2004) explains at length that the site was originally a fortress (see especially Chapter 3, pp. 49-182). The book provides two technically correct, original drawings of the tower and rectangular building attached to it, first as they existed during the Hasmonean period (p. 86) and then with a new extension of the Herodian period (p. 113). Hirschfeld, a professional archaeologist, did not need to use "virtual 3-D reconstruction" to do his work and reveal that Qumran was built as a fortress.

Furthermore, the leaders of the official Israel Antiquities Authority Qumran team, Dr. Yitzhak Magen and Dr. Yuval Peleg, also clearly state that Qumran was a Hasmonean fortress "responsible for the security of the Dead Sea shore" (See their report in The Site of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Archaeological Interpretations and Debates [2006], pp. 102 ff.).

And as everyone knows, Norman Golb has been arguing that Qumran was a fortress since at least 1980.

What Schniedewind cannot bring himself to frankly acknowledge, is that after ten years of reexamining Qumran, none of the archaeologists have been able to find any evidence that the site was ever inhabited by a sect, or that scribal activity ever took place there.  In particular, they now believe there was never a so-called "scriptorium" there.  Inkwells have in fact been found in many ancient sites in Israel and Jordan, without copying of literary scrolls being deduced therefrom.  Yet, Schniedewind continues to refer to the Qumran "scriptorium."  Are we supposed to assume that his 3-D computer program enabled him to reveal that the archaeologists are wrong?

So I ask: why is Dr. Schniedewind stepping in now and trying to steal the credit due to these scholars, who have refuted fifty years of research, but who, unlike him, have been excluded from participating in the lecture series accompanying the San Diego exhibit of the scrolls where his film is being shown? Apparently this specialist in biblical exegesis (who is by no means a "historian") has decided to rehash the findings of several prominent Israeli archaeologists and present it, through a sensationalist press campaign, as his own discovery, without explaining that his true aim is to reconcile those findings with the Qumran-Essene theory that these same Israeli archaeologists, following Golb, have rejected.

For further details, see my pieces http://www.nowpublic.com/warriors_occupied_qumran_scrolls_battle_continues
and
http://www.nowpublic.com/dead_sea_scrolls_qumran_fortress_team_responds_criticism
and the references provided in them.

On the controversy surrounding the current San Diego exhibit, see also my pieces
http://www.nowpublic.com/dead_sea_scrolls_exhibit_misleads_public
and
http://www.nowpublic.com/dead_sea_scrolls_san_diego_natural_history_museum_update

[Bart]

Thank you Charles for expanding the discussion with those links. It seems to me that the display was designed to appeal to the mass audience of the current culture and not the serious student and follower of the Scrolls saga. Is it wrong?, is it misleading? Yes it is that and many more things. Like society, which has its different levels and layers of scholarly depth, museums apparently believe they must appeal to the greatest mass es in order to attract the greatest number of viewers and make the greatest number of dollars/yen/shekel/ruble, you get the idea. Is that wrong? Probably, but again it depends upon the perspective of whatever level of the culture you wish to view it from. Is that wrong? Maybe, or perhaps it is a reflection of society in general and the current cultural norm. All levels will never be satisfied with scrolls presentation is made, just as all Scrolls interpreters will never agree with each other on every point.

But to intentionally present disproven, outdated, and misleading information is unequivocally wrong. But it is seemingly a current cultural norm to accept anything, whether it be right, wrong, or indifferent within the dictates of any societal level. Societal ills can be very permeating, that is never going to change.

There is one aspect of the story which i do not understand at all, and you could perhaps shed some light upon it. what was the $6,000,000 to 'bring the exhibit' to San Diego? for? Was that the cost only for San Diego, or the entire US tour? That seems to be an extreme amount just to fly a few tiny pieces of artifacts across the sea.

Bart

[Charles Gadda]

Bart--interesting comments, thanks. 

I tend to agree with what you say (at least in an ironical sense), although I think one can (or must) still demand more in light of the recognized educational role of museums.  Since controversy sells, who's to say more people wouldn't be attracted if there were a real debate between the two groups of scholars? The curator's role should be to help make that debate interesting, exciting and intelligible, rather than cover it up.  My own hunch is that she had personal motives--namely, to curry favor with her colleagues in the Society of Biblical Literature, the directors of which happen to be violently opposed to the newer theory of the scroll origins.  "You don't want to confuse people" is undoubtedly just an excuse she came up with--what's really going on here is a lot of seedy academic politics.

As for the $6,000,000 figure, it is for the San Diego exhibit alone.  I vaguely recall having read one or another interview with the curator where she describes what they needed the money for: security, construction, etc.  But I am dubious about the whole thing.  Hava Katz, the chief curator of the Israel Antiquities Authority, has in the past been accused of accepting bribes to allow national treasures leave the country permanently (i.e. to be sold to some art dealer in New York).  This was a direct violation of Israeli law but was never prosecuted or even investigated to the best of my knowledge.  So I would not be surprised if there were illegal wheelings and dealings going on here behind the scenes.

[Bart]

Thanks Charles, I meant it in an ironic sense. The incident cannot be undone, but steps can be taken to attempt to see that it won't happen again, if one must do something. A detailed letter to the museum board of directors is the only avenue I can think of along those lines. And if the exhibit is to land elsewhere, some advance letter writing, etc., along those same lines may help prevent it from happening again.

As for the six million, something still seems way out of the norm to me. Is there any way to get a detailed account on it?

Bart

[Charles Gadda]

Bart, you are clearly right, although I fear letter-writing will have no effect either (my own letters of January to the museum, both public and private, earned me Dr. Kohn's published response in which she avoided the questions I had raised, mendaciously asserted that the exhibit's content was neutral, and falsely claimed to be a "Dead Sea Scrolls scholar").  However, I have heard that the Israeli scholars in question are furious about the matter and are taking it up with the Antiquities Authority.  Who knows if this will lead to a change in policy, it is a matter of the internal politics of that organism (whose director is a retired general and not a scholar).  But if the policy does change, I will at least have the personal satisfaction of knowning that I spoke out on the matter when dozens of newspapers were just pretending it was business as usual.

Of the $6,000,000, $100,000 were apparently handed out to graduate student Robert Cargill for his work on the virtual reality film project (he recently announced this in his wikipedia bio, saying that the money came from the museum and Steven Spielberg).  I suspect that the museum will not provide an accounting, they will be extremely secretive about the matter and only a tax audit will reveal exactly how it was spent.  When the sum of $100,000 is given to a graduate student and an entire group of major scholars are excluded from participating, something is clearly wrong.  But these are just judgment calls like any others, not so?

At any rate, the best guess I can make, is that part of the answer might lie in the involvement of an entity called The Dead Sea Scrolls Foundation.  Bear in mind how the exhibit came into being:

(1) The curator, Risa Levitt Kohn, did some of her graduate work in biblical studies under the guidance of David Noel Freedman, a traditional scrolls scholar who co-write his Ph.D. dissertation with another well-known defender of the Qumran-sectarian theory, Frank Cross (I leave aside the question of whether that in itself is ethically proper; the dissertation, which the two of them claimed to have authored together, was accepted by Johns Hopkins and they were both awarded Ph.D. degrees--I am aware of no other example of this ever having been done in any humanities department).

(2) Kohn and Freedman met with Weston Field, an archaeology fan who is apparently not a serious scholar [although he does have a Ph.D., see below] but directs this foundation I mentioned, the sole (known) aim of which is to defend and popularize the Qumran-sectarian theory of scroll origins.  Field has close contacts with Hava Katz of the IAA and uses these exhibits to make money in various ways.  The Foundation is billed as a major institution in all of the scrolls exhibits, but it appears to be simply a ramshod outfit.

(3) Kohn approached the Natural History Museum, and they agreed to host the exhibit. There is no reason to believe that the museum had the slightest understanding of the current state of scholarship, or any knowledge of where Kohn, Freeman and Field stand on this issue.

Naturally, the donors themselves (Joan and Irwin Jacobs, et al.) have had nothing to say about any of this.  The public is in a state of "awe," and that's enough for them.

Those are the basic facts and I doubt if we will ever know more.

[Bart]

Charles;

" (my own letters of January to the museum, both public and private" Just to clarify what I meant, there is a big difference between writing to the museum itself, and writing to each member of the Board of Directors. They may not be aware of anything regarding the controversy.

" something is clearly wrong.  But these are just judgment calls like any others, not so?" Something clearly seems to be wrong. Judgement calls ought not to fall into a 'clearly wrong' category. What is the mission statement of the museum itself? What is the corporate mandate, and have any laws been violated by the museum director? Those are the questions that need to be pursued, as I see it. You seem to have a very good handle on the matter so far, I hope you will continue to pursue it until you are satisfied that it was either perfectly legal or it won't happen again.

Bart

[Charles Gadda]

Bart,

First, I must correct a mistake I made above. It appears that Weston Fields does have a PhD (although I have not been able to ascertain from what institution he received it). He is said to have taught at Grace College and Theological Seminary for ten years and at the Institute of Holy Land Studies--the same Christian fundamentalist outfit where Dr. William Schniedewind (of San Diego exhibit fame) got his M.A.  What I said about the "Dead Sea Scrolls Foundation" remains true.

As for the other points you raise:

To the best of my knowledge, a complete dossier was sent to each of the members of the museum's Board of Directors a few months ago, they have simply decided to ignore the matter since the museum's media campaign is going so well.  I think they would be sensitive to a solid quantity of negative mainstream press coverage, but that simply hasn't happened yet, they are obviously very well connected with the local papers.

The museum's primary stated mission is to "educate the public," but when dealing with fine questions involving the disbursement of money, who is to say what constitutes a violation of that mandate? And so much questionable conduct doesn't violate any laws...

On the other hand, the American Association of Museums has long promulgated an "ethical transparency" standard, which certainly seems to have been violated by the actions in question--is "not wanting to confuse people" an ethically transparent explanation for giving $100,000 to a graduate student and carefully excluding the scholars whose work he is alleged to have lifted and/or distorted?--but the Association has no mechanism for enforcing the standard and such a violation wouldn't even appear to be illegal, particularly since the museum is a private institution.

Thanks for your encouragement--I do plan to pursue the matter, my main hope being that in some small measure I can contribute to a change of policy in the future.  If enough people get interested, who knows.  Compare the Scrolls monopoly in the early 1990's: it only took one person--William Moffett of the Huntington Library--to bring about its collapse, which he was led to do after reading a few letters published in a couple of newspapers, albeit by people much more important than myself.

Charles

[Bart]

Very good Charles, you are obviously very well versed in this matter. I believe that in more than a small measure you have already made a difference, regardless of the outcome of this incident. People do take notice and make reference for future conduct. I commend your tack of keeping on the high road in speaking out. Your conduct itself is a good example, you have done your best, and can rest knowing that. In the end, this may well come back and bite a few people where it really hurts, so perhaps all is not lost.

Bart

[Charles Gadda]

Thanks again for your comment.  I now have a new piece up on the Nowpublic site, I believe this time I have gone to the heart of the matter.  The link is

http://www.nowpublic.com/christian_fundamentalism_and_dead_sea_scrolls_san_diego

Best,

Charles