Response to David Ussishkin
In this brief response, the author replies to David Ussishkin's comments, reiterating in particular that an analysis of the stratigraphy of Iron Age Megiddo and Samaria cannot be judged solely via the available published material, especially when such has been found wanting, but must also inclu...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
2007
|
| In: |
Bulletin of ASOR
Year: 2007, Volume: 348, Pages: 71-73 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | Non-electronic
|
| Summary: | In this brief response, the author replies to David Ussishkin's comments, reiterating in particular that an analysis of the stratigraphy of Iron Age Megiddo and Samaria cannot be judged solely via the available published material, especially when such has been found wanting, but must also include a consideration of previously unavailable archival material. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2161-8062 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: American Schools of Oriental Research, Bulletin of ASOR
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1086/BASOR25067038 |
