Gad Barnea

Because this is the primary material that we have. It's more than Herodotus, which is not a primary source. Herodotus, of course, wrote his books, but he did not... First of all, we don't have his original document, his original manuscript. But that was not something that – it's not the daily life. It's not something that people are just – you don't have this visceral experience.

The epigraphic material is the most – um basic the most um original the most raw material that you can have and you build and on top of that you can start you should start building uh historical uh um analysis of the of the of the data so epigraphy is really the heart and soul and really the blood of of historical science our mathematics in history

The epigraphic material is the most – um basic the most um original the most raw material that you can have and you build and on top of that you can start you should start building uh historical uh um analysis of the of the of the data so epigraphy is really the heart and soul and really the blood of of historical science our mathematics in history

The epigraphic material is the most – um basic the most um original the most raw material that you can have and you build and on top of that you can start you should start building uh historical uh um analysis of the of the of the data so epigraphy is really the heart and soul and really the blood of of historical science our mathematics in history

um is grammar okay so if you look at these texts and you want to to really identify what they actually say right it has to correspond to the rules of grammar and syntax right and if it does not then you are probably missing something so the way for us to to check whether we are reading it correctly or not is is through the rules of philology so we are looking we are starting to look at history more scientifically more

um is grammar okay so if you look at these texts and you want to to really identify what they actually say right it has to correspond to the rules of grammar and syntax right and if it does not then you are probably missing something so the way for us to to check whether we are reading it correctly or not is is through the rules of philology so we are looking we are starting to look at history more scientifically more

um is grammar okay so if you look at these texts and you want to to really identify what they actually say right it has to correspond to the rules of grammar and syntax right and if it does not then you are probably missing something so the way for us to to check whether we are reading it correctly or not is is through the rules of philology so we are looking we are starting to look at history more scientifically more

precisely and and and more and trying to be more objective in order to do that we also have to be as transparent and i think is the is really the main innovation now is to shoot for maximum transparency now in my work i try to be as transparent as possible that is the most important thing for me More than accuracy. Now, I try to be as accurate as possible in my restorations of texts.

precisely and and and more and trying to be more objective in order to do that we also have to be as transparent and i think is the is really the main innovation now is to shoot for maximum transparency now in my work i try to be as transparent as possible that is the most important thing for me More than accuracy. Now, I try to be as accurate as possible in my restorations of texts.

precisely and and and more and trying to be more objective in order to do that we also have to be as transparent and i think is the is really the main innovation now is to shoot for maximum transparency now in my work i try to be as transparent as possible that is the most important thing for me More than accuracy. Now, I try to be as accurate as possible in my restorations of texts.

But I'm human. I'll make mistakes. What is more important than me being accurate is me being transparent and explaining with as many photos as I can. And I always offer microscopic photos of different aspects of the text and of the object that I'm restoring. But as many photos as I can and always explaining why I reached these conclusions, what were the other options that I had in front of me.

But I'm human. I'll make mistakes. What is more important than me being accurate is me being transparent and explaining with as many photos as I can. And I always offer microscopic photos of different aspects of the text and of the object that I'm restoring. But as many photos as I can and always explaining why I reached these conclusions, what were the other options that I had in front of me.

But I'm human. I'll make mistakes. What is more important than me being accurate is me being transparent and explaining with as many photos as I can. And I always offer microscopic photos of different aspects of the text and of the object that I'm restoring. But as many photos as I can and always explaining why I reached these conclusions, what were the other options that I had in front of me.

And being as transparent as possible because transparency is the key for the study of history.

And being as transparent as possible because transparency is the key for the study of history.

And being as transparent as possible because transparency is the key for the study of history.

Because we are always working together, all scholars. And I want them to look at my work and find the mistakes. If it's transparent, they can find where I was wrong, right? Much more easily. And I want them to be able to correct because we are working together for the progress of science ultimately.

Because we are always working together, all scholars. And I want them to look at my work and find the mistakes. If it's transparent, they can find where I was wrong, right? Much more easily. And I want them to be able to correct because we are working together for the progress of science ultimately.

Because we are always working together, all scholars. And I want them to look at my work and find the mistakes. If it's transparent, they can find where I was wrong, right? Much more easily. And I want them to be able to correct because we are working together for the progress of science ultimately.

And so we are really shooting in this generation now of historians, shooting for the maximum transparency. That's new. That is new. maximum transparency, maximum methodological rigor. And I think we're already starting to see the first fruits of that really starting to lead us into a more stable vision of history.