• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

PREVIEW: INTRODUCTION • The Task of Introductions • Types of Introductions: Organized around • Archaeological Calendar • The Canon of the Bible • Daily Life • Archaeological Sites • Travel • History of Archaeology • Popular Interest • Organization of This Introduction • Popular Archaeology • Cultural History • Annales Archaeology • Processual Archaeology • Post-Processual Archaeology Introduction THE TASK OF INTRODUCTIONS TO the world of the Bible—and about the Bible itself. ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE Together archaeology and the Bible unlock the most profound responses to the challenges that Th e three Rs of archaeology are to recover, to confront humans who want not only to make a read, and to reconstruct the cultural property living but also to make a diff erence in the world of now-extinct cultures (Magness 2002, 4–13; that is their home. Darvill 2002). Archaeologists listen to the sto- ries that stones—like architecture, art, pottery, Archaeology is the recovery, jewelry, weapons, and tools—have to tell. Stones interpretation, and reconstruction of and Stories: An Introduction to Archaeology and the cultural property of now-extinct the Bible describes how archaeologists listen, what cultures. they are hearing, and what a diff erence it makes for understanding the Bible. Archaeology is not the plunder of the trea- Archaeology in the world of the Bible does sures of ancient cultures, nor proving that the not prove the Bible wrong, any more than biblical Bible’s descriptions of people and events are his- archaeology proves the Bible right. Archaeology torically accurate, nor a legal remedy for deter- off ers new ways of defi ning the Bible in relation mining which people today have a legal right to to its own world, and of using it more eff ectively the land. in the world today. Archaeology provides diff er- Until the eighteenth century, the Bible ent perspectives on the way the people of ancient was the primary source for understanding the Israel responded to their experiences, and conse- worlds—and the worldviews—of ancient Israel. quently archaeology provides models for respond- Both archaeologists and biblical scholars treated ing diff erently to experience today. the Bible as history and worked to demonstrate Culture is the tool that humans use to under- that the history in the stories was reliable. Th en stand and respond to their experiences—good and the stones began to tell stories that were diff erent bad. Every stone tells a story about how a now- from the Bible. Th ere were stories in the stones gone people looked at their world and responded that were not in the Bible; and there were stories in to their experiences. Archaeologists are the cura- the Bible that were not in the stones (Finkelstein tors of this amazing legacy. and Silberman 2001, 2006; Dave Davies 2006). Archaeologists today have recovered more Despite the perception of confl ict between artifacts from the world of the Bible than were archaeology and the Bible that so oft en captures available since the great cultures that produced public attention, archaeologists and biblical them vanished. Yet, although there are intro- scholars have learned a great deal together about ductions to Bible, and there are introductions to 1 Introduction Biblical archaeology is a subdis- community of Jews who were trying to prevent cipline of cultural history. William the assimilation of Judaism into the dominant Foxwell Albright launched the biblical Greco-Roman culture aft er 333 b.c.e. archaeology movement to demon- strate that the Bible was histori- cally accurate. For example, in 1922 WAYS TO ORGANIZE INTRODUCTIONS Leonard Woolley was directing an TO ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE excavation of the royal tombs at Ur (Arabic: Tell al Muqayyar) north of Th e need for a good book is clear; how to write Basra (Iraq), when he uncovered an that book is not (Dessel 2003, 67–98). Th ere are eight-foot-thick layer of clean clay. He introductions to archaeology organized around considered this layer unmistakable the archaeological calendar, the canon of the evidence that the flood stories in the Bible, daily life in the world of the Bible, archaeo- book of Genesis (Gen 6:1—11:26) are logical sites, travel, the history of archaeology, and historically accurate. popular interest. Introductions organized around the archaeo- logical calendar include Archaeology of the Land archaeology, there is still a need for a readable, of the Bible, 10,000–586 b.c.e. (1992) by Amihay aff ordable, and portable introduction to archaeol- Mazar and Archaeology of the Land of the Bible: Th e ogy and the Bible. Assyrian, Babylonian, and Persian Periods, 732–332 Th ere is also a need for an introduction to b.c.e. (2001) by Ephraim Stern. Mazar’s work is archaeology and the Bible that celebrates what part of the Anchor Bible Reference Library and is a biblical archaeologists have accomplished and commonly used textbook for introductory courses continue to accomplish. Popular controversies in archaeology and the Bible. Mazar chooses one or like the minimalist-maximalist debate oft en more sites to describe the cultures of each archae- make it seem as if archaeologists working in the ological period. Th e Carmel caves and the city of world of the Bible have learned nothing of value Jericho, for example, are exhibits for the Neolithic for understanding the Bible. period (10,000–4,000 b.c.e.). Chapter outlines, Admittedly, biblical archaeologists have not however, are thematic. Mazar summarizes what defi nitively demonstrated that the biblical tra- material remains reveal about settlement planning, ditions about Israel’s ancestors—the patriarchs domestic and monumental architecture, farming and matriarchs in Genesis—and the biblical tra- ditions about the appearance of the Hebrews in The “maximalist” approach to Syria-Palestine—are history. Nonetheless, archae- the Bible accepts much of the basic ologists have learned a great deal. outline of history and culture as Maximalist scholars—such as William G. presented in the biblical books. The Dever—regard the Bible as the heritage of a “minimalist” approach is skeptical Hebrew culture that fi rst appeared in the hills of the historical value of the biblical north of Jerusalem aft er 1200 b.c.e. Minimalist material and relies on other written scholars—such as Niels Peter Lemche—regard sources and archaeology to recon- the Bible as the ingenious strategy of an elite struct the history of Israel. 2 Introduction and herding, trade, pottery, ARCHAEOLOGICAL CALENDAR tools and weapons, liturgical art, and burials. Paleolithic 25,000–10,000 b.c.e. Th e Archaeology of Mesolithic 10,000–8000 b.c.e. Ancient Israel (1992), edited Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA) 8000–7000 b.c.e. by Amnon Ben-Tor, also uses Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) 7000–6000 b.c.e. the archaeological calendar Pottery Neolithic A (PNA) 6000–5000 b.c.e. as an overall outline for the Pottery Neolithic B (PNB or Early Chalcolithic) 5000–3800 b.c.e. book, which covers the Neo- Chalcolithic (or Late Chalcolithic) 3800–3400 b.c.e. lithic period to Iron Age III. Early Bronze I 3400–3100 b.c.e. Some chapters also follow Early Bronze II 3100–2650 b.c.e. Early Bronze III 2650–2350 b.c.e. the archaeological calendar. Early Bronze IV 2350–2000 b.c.e. Other chapters, however, are Middle Bronze I 2000–1800 b.c.e. outlined thematically. Middle Bronze II 1800–1650 b.c.e. Th e Archaeology of Society Middle Bronze III 1650–1550/1500 b.c.e. in the Holy Land (1995–1998), Late Bronze IA 1500–1450 b.c.e. edited by Th omas E. Levy, Late Bronze IB 1450–1400 b.c.e. combines themes with the Late Bronze IIA 1400–1300 b.c.e. archaeological calendar as Late Bronze IIB 1300–1200 b.c.e. an outline for this anthology Iron Age IA 1200–1100 b.c.e. from thirty contributors, all Iron Age IB 1100–1000 b.c.e. of whom follow some form Iron Age IC 1000–900 b.c.e. of the Annales School of Iron Age IIA 900–800 b.c.e. Iron Age IIB 800–722 b.c.e. Archaeology. Iron Age IIC 722–586 b.c.e. A History of Ancient Iron Age III 586–539/500 b.c.e. Israel and Judah (2006), Persian Period 539/500–323 b.c.e. by J. Maxwell Miller and Hellenistic Period 323–37 b.c.e. John H. Hayes, also uses the Roman Period 37 b.c.e.–324 c.e. archaeological calendar as an Byzantine Period 324–640 c.e. outline. Hayes and Miller make careful use of archae- before her death. P. Roger Moorey (1937–2004), ology to assess and revise the history that Wil- director of the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford, liam Foxwell Albright (1891–1971) proposed and issued a revised edition of these short essays in which is refl ected in works such as A History of 1987. Th e book follows the archaeological cal- Israel (1959–2000) by John Bright (1908–1995). endar from the Bronze Age (3500 b.c.e.) to the Albright’s and Bright’s histories of Israel used Roman period. archaeology to demonstrate the historical reli- Other introductions are organized around ability of the Bible. Hayes and Miller, in contrast, the canon of the Bible. Th e Anchor Bible Com- use archaeology to evaluate and to interpret the mentary Series, launched in 1956 by William biblical traditions. Foxwell Albright and David Noel Freedman Kathleen M. Kenyon (1906–1978) published (1922–2008), promised to make available all the Th e Bible and Recent Archaeology (1978) shortly signifi cant advances in languages, literatures, and 3 Introduction archaeology that bear on the interpretation of the worship.

Load more

  11

Copy Link