Comments for Statehood Dependent on Archaeological Finds? at http://juliamobrien.net , comment 1 to 1 out of 1 comments http://juliamobrien.net Thu, 09 Sep 2010 21:35:12 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://juliamobrien.net/index.php/blog/statehood-dependent-on-archaeological-finds-.html#comment-282 I think this article has some parallels to the one you authored on minor prophets and the focus on facts about the prophets instead of their meesage. I note that Binyamin Netanyahu defended in front of the US Congress his country's recent expansion of housing in Jerusalem by citing historical precedents - some dating back 3000 years. My observation is the same as with trying to undetand the prophets by uncovering "facts" abotu their lives: it's a futile approach because the facts are unascertainable and open to constant reinterpretation. I'm reminded of a lawsuit with whch I was familiar whrein a Native American tribe in Upstate NY was suing white landowners because they felt the land in question should be theirs based on the fact that they inhabited it before the whites. (A treaty transfering rights was disputed because they said the NA signers had no authority.) The suit ultimately failed not because the whites won their defense but because another tribe sued the first tribe, saying they were the original inhabitants, not the tribe that intiated the suit. The judge threw out the whole thing sayiing he coudl see no way to convincingly sort out the histories that would resolve the issues. As long as politicians rely on historical anecdote - or archeology - to set boundaries, the more unlikely a solution becomes. - John K. Leonard Mon, 29 Mar 2010 10:35:17 +0100