A Firestorm!

The Mt Ebal Curse Tablet

History VIII

[Post fourteen of thirty]

Why the intense scorn about Stripling’s pronouncement about the Curse Tablet?

The archaeological community acknowledged a procedure. It discouraged reporting a find until after it has completed peer review. This Stripling admitted to violating.

Note

This is the fourteenth post of my memorandum on the Mt. Ebal Curse Tablet. It is also the eighth of ten detailing the history of the tablet and the proposed Joshua’s Altar.

If you have accessed this post from other than captivatingtwists.com and wish to start the journey from the beginning, click here.

Otherwise, proceed below.

About this infraction, Stripling explained that he had feared losing his intellectual stake. He thus felt compelled, despite protocol, to release what he had.

Unfortunately, this happened in the wake of another archaeology embarrassment. This had heightened sensitivity about procedures.1

The Israel Antiquities Authority had publicized its analysis of a Tel Lachish sherd. Their news release heralded it as a first. No written reference in Israel before had mentioned Darius the Great. This Persian King lived about 2500 years ago.2

Shortly afterwards, however, a researcher specializing in ancient Aramaic confessed. She had written the inscription.

While visiting the site with her students, she had demonstrated the ancient script on a sherd. On finishing her lesson, she had tossed it aside, not intending any malice.1

What she had demonstrated turned out to be accurate. So much so that it fools many renowned scholars.

Mortification ensued across prestigious academic communities.

Into that setting, Stripling’s dilemma landed.2

This outraged many scholars. He had declared a history-challenging find underpinned by photos. Not only had he not navigated peer review. He had not released his photos for academic scrutiny. This handicapped their vetting of the allied fantastic claims.

A firestorm had been lit!

Now here are some questions. Is the protocol of not releasing information about a find until after peer review a good policy? Why or why not?

Let me know in the comments.

Thank you for engaging with this topic thus far!

The next post, the ninth of our review of the Curse Tablet’s history, I entitle “Peer Review”.

I look forward to continuing with you there.

If you appreciate this type of analysis, please “subscribe”, “like”, and “share”.

To support this work, you can donate below. If so, thank you for the encouragement.

Next post: “Peer Review“