Features
Haskel Greenfield peers into the mouths of donkeys (and other critters) for new information concerning Bronze Age civilization in Middle East
By MYRON LOVE There is a Biblical story doubtless known to regular shul goers in which an ass talks. For those readers who are not familiar with it, the story can be found in Numbers 23-35 in the Torah.
In short, Balak, the King of Moab, is terrified of the Israelites who are growing in power. He calls upon the prophet Balaam to put a curse on the Israelites. The Lord appears to the prophet in a dream and warns him not to go. Nonetheless, Balaam, persuaded by Balak’s promise of riches, sets out on his trusty donkey. En route, an angel of the Lord armed with a sword, blocks the way. The donkey sees the angel and refuses to go on. Three times, the donkey refuses to move and three times Balaam whips the beast.
Finally, the Lord opens the donkey’s mouth to speak and the animal asks Balaam why he keeps beating his trusty servant. At that moment, Balaam’s eyes are also open and he see the angel who instructs him to deliver the words of praise from the Lord to the Israelites for Balak.
Well, in a similar vein, internationally-known archaeologist Haskel Greenfield is also looking to the stories that donkeys have to tell as to the development of the evolution of Middle Eastern society during the early Bronze Age circa 2500-2600 BCE.
Greenfield is a long time University of Manitoba professor. He has the rank of Distinguished Professor, of which there are only 25 at the university. He is also Coordinator of the Judaic Studies Program at the U of M and Co-Director of the Near Eastern and Biblical Archaeology Lab at St. Paul’s College.
This past April, Greenfield, along with colleague Dr. Tina Greenfield (his wife and collaborator, at U. of Saskatchewan), and Professors John Wilkins (U. of M.) and Elizabeth Arnold (Grand Valley State University), and Gideon Hartman (University of Connecticut) – received a $393,960 Insight Grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada to study how early complex societies were provisioned during the Early Bronze Age (3600-2000 BCE) in the southern Levant. This was the time of the first cities developing in the region.
The scholars are using a unique approach by focusing on the movement of biological goods and transport, particularly through the major forms of transportation in those days, i.e., donkeys. By the analysis of the teeth of donkeys, sheep, goats, and other livestock, they will be able to understand where the animals were born, and how they were raised, fed, and cared.
Since 2008, the Greenfields and their students have been working on the site known as Tell es-Safi, about 30 (45 km) miles southwest of Jerusalem, known in ancient times as Gath, the hometown of Goliath of David-and-Goliath fame. “We finished our excavations in 2017,”Haskel Greenfield says. “For the past four years, we have been working in our lab, analysing and cataloguing our findings. While we have published dozens of articles already on the project, we will have our first volume out by the end of the year – with hopefully two or three more to follow. The site was so rich that we recovered more information from it than ever expected. It is taking years to process and write up the data”.
One of the unexpected finds from the Tell es-Safi work that the Greenfields encountered was the discovery of several complete donkey burials. “The burials weren’t random,” Greenfield notes. “They were buried in shallow graves beneath the floors of houses, but close to the periphery of the site.” The locations of these burials, he surmises, may be an indication of merchant quarters that were common to cities already in ancient times.
“Our analysis of the isotopes on animal teeth have shown that while there is evidence that sheep and goats were raised locally, the over half the donkeys (and one goat) came from elsewhere, specifically Egypt,” he observes. They were born and raised in Egypt, and slaughtered soon after arriving at the site of Tell es-Safi.
“As the era we are studying is still considered prehistoric in that neither cuneiform, hieroglyphics, nor evidence of any other form of writing for this period throughout the region. Based on our discoveries at Tell es-Safi, we are trying to extend our research across the region – by looking at the animal remains from many sites across the length and breadth of ancient Canaan. We will be able to learn quite a bit from the donkeys and other animals about such things as trade, migration, food, and even climate.”
“We are trying to identify their ages and sex and learn how they were raised, what they ate, how they were managed, and where they came from. At different sites, some animals may have come from Egypt, while others may have a Mesopotamian connection. The region alternated between being within the spheres of influence of the two major early civilizations, depending which was stronger at any given time.”
Greenfield reports that his research team is expanding its investigation into the lives of donkeys and other animals beyond Tell Es-Safi/Gath to other urban centres in the region. He notes that at around 2500 BCE, all the large cities in the region collapsed and were abandoned. “We (archaeologists) aren’t sure why this happened,” he says. “We have found no evidence of destruction. We only know that around 2200 BCE, there was a major drought in the region. But, this is too late to be the cause of the urban collapse 300 years before. Hence we are trying a new approach by examining the isotopes in animal teeth to see if they record shifts in water and vegetation that might signal a change in climate.”
While the popular image of the working archaeologist is someone on his hands and knees sifting dirt at a potential site, Greenfield notes that, as he is almost 68 now, his days of working on digs are likely behind him. “Two years ago, I was invited to work at the famous archaeological site of Tell Beth Shemesh,” he says, “but, regrettably, the director of the dig recently passed.”
He adds that he still has a lot of lab work ahead of him, and years of writing. That includes analysing material from excavations, not only in Israel, but also in Jordan. “I was hoping to be in Israel this summer, but family affairs (the passing of his younger brother, Avi) and the pandemic made it impossible. I am hopeful that I will be able to visit Israel in the fall, and the sites in Jordan next spring,” he says hopefully. When doing this kind of work, one must always be hopeful”.
Features
Hair straightening at Sets on Corydon
Features
Ontario Online Casinos Let Players Set Daily, Weekly and Monthly Deposit Limits
A deposit limit sets a ceiling on how much money someone can add to an online gambling account. In Ontario’s regulated market, players can choose limits covering 24 hours, seven days and one month, with the website’s system enforcing the amounts they select.
The settings are straightforward, but the timing deserves attention. A daily allowance may sit within weekly and monthly caps, while an increase can involve a waiting period. For adults using Chrome on a Chromebook, understanding these account rules starts with knowing where to find them.
Finding the Settings and Choosing a Period
Deposit controls sit within the gambling website’s account menus. The Tooniebet Ontario responsible gaming page is an operator-specific resource readers can consult alongside their account settings. ToonieBet is operated by Canadix Limited and regulated by the AGCO under an agreement with iGaming Ontario.
Ontario’s standards require an easy and obvious way to set financial and time limits during registration and afterward. Players must be offered deposit and loss limits when signing up, and the controls must remain easy to reach and change once an account is open.
Menu names differ between sites. Published examples place deposit limits under account settings or responsible-gaming tools, where players can select an amount and a period.
Each type of limit measures something different. Deposit limits cap money added to the account. Loss limits restrict net losses after winnings are taken into account, while time limits govern playing time. iGaming Ontario’s player guidance explains all three.
For Chromebook users, these settings are managed through the website’s account interface. Chrome’s own permissions handle separate browser functions, such as access to location information.
How Several Limits Apply to One Deposit
Players can have daily, weekly and monthly limits running together. A deposit must fit within every active cap.
Take a hypothetical account with limits of CAD $40 daily, CAD $100 weekly and CAD $250 monthly. These figures illustrate the process.
If someone has already deposited CAD $90 during the weekly period, the remaining weekly allowance is CAD $10. That becomes the most they can add, even when the daily limit has more room. Reaching the monthly cap would likewise block another deposit until some monthly allowance becomes available.
This is why checking all active limits matters. A new day may bring fresh daily capacity while the weekly or monthly total remains close to its ceiling. The longer periods continue to apply as the shorter one refreshes.
When Money Drops Out of a Rolling Window
The next question is when previous deposits stop counting toward a cap. Some sites use rolling periods, which track elapsed time from individual deposits.
Published Ontario policies include daily windows of 24 hours, weekly windows of 168 hours and monthly windows of 720 hours, equivalent to 30 days. Under that approach, each deposit frees up its corresponding allowance once it falls outside the window.
Suppose someone has a CAD $100 rolling weekly limit and deposits CAD $25 on Friday, followed by CAD $75 on Saturday. Seven days after Friday’s deposit, CAD $25 becomes available again. The other CAD $75 returns seven days after Saturday’s deposit.
Leaving the restored Friday allowance unused means it combines with Saturday’s restored amount. At that point, the full CAD $100 is available. Reviewing deposit dates and times helps explain how much room remains within a rolling period.
Changing a Cap Takes a Separate Step
A limit refreshing follows the schedule already attached to the account. Raising that limit requires a request and a wait.
Ontario’s standards require at least 24 hours before a player’s request to relax or remove an established limit can take effect. The existing limit remains enforceable during the cooling-off period.
Operators publish their own timings. Documented examples include a seven-day wait for deposit-limit increases or removals. Another published schedule allows increases after one day for a daily cap, seven days for a weekly cap and 30 days for a monthly cap.
Lower limits take effect immediately under these published policies. Some policies also restart the waiting period when a player requests another increase while an earlier change is pending. The effective date shows which amount currently applies.
Other Controls and Support
Deposit limits work alongside loss limits, time limits, short breaks and self-exclusion. Together, these give players ways to restrict account funding, gambling activity or access.
Ontario-regulated online casino play is restricted to adults aged 19 and older who are physically in Ontario. Gambling involves financial risk.
For concerns about your gambling or someone else’s, ConnexOntario offers free, confidential information and referral support around the clock. Call 1-866-531-2600 or text CONNEX to 247247. Standard message and data rates may apply.
Features
What “Best Odds” Really Means When Comparing Gambling Review Websites
The phrase best odds appears frequently in gambling discussions, but it is surprisingly easy to use imprecisely. MonsterBetList is primarily a casino review and rankings website, not a dedicated live sportsbook odds comparison terminal. That difference is central to evaluating what its reviews can and cannot establish. A casino rating may explain payout conditions, licence information and bonus restrictions, while a claim about the best available price on a sporting outcome requires a different kind of evidence altogether.
Odds and ratings answer different questions
Sports betting odds represent a price offered on a specified outcome. A review rating is an editorial judgement built from multiple criteria. These two numerical systems cannot be substituted for one another. A bookmaker rated highly for service may offer a less competitive price on a particular match, while a service with a more attractive price may impose different limits or verification rules.
Similarly, a casino review can discuss return-to-player statistics, but RTP is not the same as sportsbook odds. RTP describes a theoretical long-run percentage built into a game model. It does not tell a reader what will happen in one session and it is not an individually negotiable market quotation.
What makes sports odds comparable?
A fair odds comparison starts with identical selections: the same event, outcome, market rules and settlement conditions. Comparing a three-way football result with a draw-no-bet price is invalid because the products pay under different circumstances. The observation time also matters; displayed prices can change quickly as market information or trading decisions evolve.
The numerical format should be standardised. Decimal odds provide one convenient representation, but American and fractional formats express the same underlying idea differently. Converting these formats is straightforward. What matters is the net price, the operator’s rules and whether the quoted offer remains available when reviewed.
Overround explains the hidden cost of many markets
In a simplified two-outcome market, dividing one by each decimal price produces an implied probability. If the implied probabilities add to more than 100%, the excess is commonly described as the bookmaker’s overround. It is one way of understanding the margin embedded in prices, although individual market structure and adjustments can complicate the interpretation.
This concept explains why the word best should not be attached to a price without context. A strong headline may look appealing yet represent an ordinary margin after calculation. More importantly, any single quote is time-dependent. Genuine comparison requires a dated observation and equivalent market rules; broad editorial praise is not enough.
What casino rankings can establish instead
MonsterBetList publishes casino reviews and guides addressing licences, bonuses, payout experiences and responsible gambling. Those topics are relevant to evaluating consumer risk and service quality. A report about the length of a withdrawal process, for example, can be useful if its methodology is transparent. A bonus review can help identify restrictive wagering requirements that marketing headlines omit.
However, a casino ranking should not be presented as evidence that its highest-rated operator consistently offers the best sports prices. Unless a site publishes repeated market-by-market comparisons, that conclusion is not supported. Readers benefit when publishers clearly distinguish what was measured from what readers might assume was measured.
Bonuses can complicate comparisons
A sportsbook may offer free-bet tokens, cashback or other promotions. Their effective value depends on conditions rather than the largest number printed in a banner. Some credits are not withdrawable as cash; others require qualifying selections, minimum odds or a deadline. Casino welcome bonuses often introduce wagering requirements, game-contribution rules and limits on withdrawals. Combining these products under one generic promotional score can hide important differences.
For instance, a large matched deposit might require extensive play before bonus-related funds become eligible for withdrawal. The required betting volume is not a promise of profit. The presence of a promotion may therefore make comparisons more complex instead of simpler. Clear disclosures should precede any judgement about value.
Editorial independence and methods
Review sites sometimes state that rankings are editorially independent. Such a statement is relevant but does not replace evidence of consistent testing. Readers should look for the criteria used, the date of each review, whether real transactions were examined and how negative findings are treated. If one platform receives detailed testing while another is scored on marketing copy, the ranking loses comparability.
Commercial incentives should also be visible. Referral relationships or sponsorships do not automatically make every observation inaccurate, but they create reasons to ask how rankings are insulated from revenue. A publication that explains its methodology and corrections process gives readers a stronger basis for trust than one that simply declares its winners.
Licensing and dispute rights before price claims
A marginally attractive price is of limited value when the operator is not legally available to the reader or does not provide meaningful avenues for redress. Regulations vary by jurisdiction, and a licence in one country may not authorise service in another. It is prudent to verify the legal entity behind a brand and the current status of any licence through official records.
Consumers should also review identity verification, account restrictions and dispute resolution procedures. These operational conditions influence the actual experience of using a gambling service. A sensible evaluation includes them before discussing promotions or theoretical market advantages.
Why guaranteed-profit language is a warning sign
No ordinary review or odds list can guarantee that an individual will win money from gambling. Claims of certain returns often omit the fact that results are uncertain, prices move and transactions are subject to restrictions. Casino games generally incorporate a house advantage, and sports outcomes remain uncertain regardless of a persuasive analysis. The safest response to absolute promises is scepticism.
Readers should also avoid treating gambling as a means of addressing financial problems. Chasing previous losses and increasing stakes to recover money can deepen harm. Consumer-oriented coverage is more valuable when it explains risk and offers realistic options for stepping away.
Conclusion: define the claim before ranking the service
“Best odds” is a specific comparative proposition, not a synonym for a high casino rating. MonsterBetList can be examined for its published casino research, review structure and risk disclosures, but those materials should not be stretched into claims they have not tested. Clear definitions, dated evidence and honest limitations are the foundations of trustworthy comparison journalism.
