Well, every dome is also a circle, is it not?
How about this text, one of the 3 that use the Hebrew word “chug”:
Isa 40:22 “It is he that sitteth upon the circle H2329 of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in…”
How many tents do you know that have a flat roof? Virtually all tents are vaulted in the center.
As for Dr. Horowitz’s statement: “Although the clear sky seems to us to be shaped like a dome, rather than a flat circle, there is no direct evidence that ancient Mesopotamians thought the visible heavens to be a dome. Akkadian kippatu are always flat, circular objects such as geometric circles or hoops, rather than three dimensional domes.”
I would say that Isaiah 40:22 is such evidence.
When you wrote this, Reggie: “but according to Wayne Horowitz they considered the sky to be a flat disc as well. Three flat discs to be precise.”
… it conjurs up a very different assertion than what we actually find about geometric circles or hoops.
Perhaps the word “dome” is just too aggressive. Remember, I did counter-propose “saucer”. The stacking of three kippatu is what provides for the flooring of the reality above! But this doesn’t mean there is to be no concavity on the bottom of the bottom layer - - where the stars get attached to control the rain windows below the celestial waters - - much like the gentle concavity of a saucer.
@Jon_Garvey seems to be a better researcher than Horowitz, but maybe his logic is not as strong (the 3 points are quoted from his linked article):
http://potiphar.jongarvey.co.uk/2017/06/02/ancient-cosmic-geography-the-actual-modern-view-2/
"Nonetheless, evidence for dome-shaped, or curved, heavens may be found in
- the ZK/ptt-star text BM 38693+,
- the blessing formula STT 340:12, and
- AO 6478, where the Path of Enlil is 364° long."
"All three imply that the Path of Enlil, at least, is a curved band that encircles the earths surface. However, this does not prove that the surface of heaven is curved, since stars need not have necessarily traveled along the surface of the sky. "
[Note: I found these exact same references in Horowitz… so it would seem Jon is better at describing the value of the texts than Horowitz - - though they both ultimately dismiss it.]
I think the whole point of this discussion was based on the seamless way that stars traverse the sky … from zenith to the very lowest horizon… without any weird jumps or jerks that would happen if the roof was flat, while the horizon is a circle…