We need the interviews, the eyewitness accounts, the thoughts of the participants.
It relies on an accurate account of the event either from the patient or an eyewitness.
As both declared to write as eyewitnesses, the texts are mutually exclusive.
Here the eyewitness and interview material is very full and rich.
So he was not an eyewitness and is therefore merely reporting what he had been told.
In respect to regions beyond the purview of eyewitnesses it is simply impossible to calculate mortality.
How is one to pass judgment on someone accused of fornication without having four male eyewitnesses?
In the legal accounting of truth the eyewitness is allimportant.
