Alashiya Rejoinder

If there is one benefit to be derived from the ongoing dispute over the location of ancient Alashiya, it is the production of new data, such as the previously unknown letter, in alphabetical English, from a well-reputed scribe, which Archaeology Odyssey has now published for the first time. From internal evidence, however, it is unclear which country it originated in, nor can it be easily dated. The spelling suggests a source in the United States, which would account for the lacunae, and the mention of horses and carts indicates composition in the 19th century A.D., where it belongs academically. At least it does not seem to be a forgery, like the inscription on the James ossuary, though it is thoroughly unconvincing.

Despite its protestations of filial piety, the missive attempts to bribe me with gold rather than copper, and asks me to believe that because Syria does not have copper deposits to rival those of Cyprus, Alashiya cannot be placed in the northern Levant. This argument makes as much sense as asserting that the only extant mold for making ox-hide ingots, which was found at Ras Ibn Hani in Syria, could not have been used for making ox-hide ingots because Syria does not have copper deposits to rival those of Cyprus. Of course the copper could have come from elsewhere. Alashiya does not need to have been the quarry where the copper ore was mined, unless my son Eric Cline has more surprises in store for his father.