Archaeology and the Bible Revisited: A Review Article

David and Solomon, a new book by Israel Finkelstein and Niels Asher Silberman, through their discussion of Palestinian archaeology's current understanding, proposes to provide evidence to prove the accuracy of Frank Cross's more than 30 year old revision of Martin Noth's theory of a “Deuteronomistic History.” The authors attempt to confirm the history of the redaction of the biblical narratives about Saul, David and Solomon, involving seven distinct oral and four written strata of tradition. Their argument moreover claims the warrant to assert the historicity of each of these legendary kings of Israel. The present article argues to the contrary that the “archaeological evidence” proposed does not support such a redaction history nor establish the historicity of either the biblical figures or their stories, but that the harmony of biblical and archaeological issues is circular and illegitimate by the standards of historical research. It argues, moreover, that the claim of an oral tradition, reflecting original memories of an historical David or Saul is an entirely unnecessary and unlikely explanation for the origins of both the figures and their tales in the stories of 1-2 Samuel and 1 Kings. It moreover argues that the hypothesis of a redaction history in a succession of four cumulative revisions, beginning in the eighth century and completed in the sixth to fourth century, BCE—lacking as it does reference to a readable text—is neither critical nor falsifiable. Finally, Finkelstein and Silberman's book is judged as an unsuccessful attempt to return to the methods of “biblical archaeology” that were legitimately impeached in the mid-1970s.     

DAVID AS A BIBLICAL ‘GOOD-FELLA’ AND ‘THE GODFATHER’

Abstract

Scholars search for analogies with which to better understand biblical texts. David has been compared to the “outlaw”, “refugee”, “vassal”, “renegade”, “guerrilla”, “bandit chief”, “fugitive” and “fugitive hero”. This article suggest that there are better cultural-social analogies, i.e., David as a “goodfellan”while in exile from Saul and in the land of the Philistines, and upon accession to the throne, “The Godfather”.

This article also has, as a part of its purpose, the intent to unmask some of the behavior of David and of monarchy for what they are: essentially organized crime maintained in large part by the use of indiscriminate violence-supported by nonsensical myths and obvious hypocrisy.

Cross-cultural comparisons are made throughout between the David stories, gangster movies and systems of monarchy—especially the ad hoc feudal type. Historical questions aside: The David stories can be “cross-culturally” compared with gangster films as “art”.     

The Aramaic Levi—Comparing the Qumran fragments with the Genizah text

ABSTRACT

Among the extra-biblical texts from Qumran we find the so-called Aramaic Levi, which can be described as a somewhat different variant of the “Testament of Levi,” a part of the larger Greek text “The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs.”

Aramaic Levi, however, was already known from the Cairo Genizah. The following article is a linguistic comparison between the Qumran text and the version from the Cairo Genizah.

As Klaus Beyer has noticed, there are a lot of non-Hasmonean spellings and words in the Genizah text, but most of Beyer’s examples are from parts of the text that are not preserved in the Qumran fragments. Comparing the two versions, we now note that the deviations are of two kinds. As expected, the Genizah text often follows a later language than Qumran. This applies in particular to orthographic features and the use of status emphaticuswithout the definite sense. But in other places the Genizah text represents a language older than Hasmonean Aramaic, which we interpret as an adaptation to Bibli-cal Aramaic and sometimes to Hebrew.     

Dealing with Tribes and States in Ancient Palestine

This paper offers a critique on state formation theories used in the explanation of the rise of the biblical United Monarchy. The last three decades of archaeological and biblical research have shown that there is no firm evidence for speaking of a kingdom or empire of David and Solomon in ancient Palestine. Thus what is proposed here is to evaluate the archaeological record through the data provided by the ethnological record of the Middle East, keeping the biblical stories apart from this interpretation. The analysis of the dynamics and structure of Middle Eastern “tribal states” and “chiefdom societies”, including here the practice of patronage bonds, gives us important keys for understanding Palestine's societies. The historical perspective that appears then is one different from the Bible's stories and from modern ideas such as “states” and “nations”, offering us instead a better methodology for reconstructing ancient Palestine's historical past.     

Abducted Wives: A Hellenistic Narrative in Judges 21?

the author suggests the possibility that Judges 13-16, 17-21, and 2 Samuel 21-23 may have been added to the Deuteronomistic History in the late Persian or Hellenistic period, for this literature shows continuity with Greek literature. In particular, the author traces the similarities between the biblical account of the “Abduction at Shiloh” in Judges 21 with the account of the “Rape of the Sabine Women” found in Livy and Plutarch. Though the biblical author lived before these classical authors, the biblical author may have known an earlier version of the tale, as demonstrated by at least twelve plot similarities between the narratives.     

MEASURE FOR MEASURE IN THE DAVID STORIES*

Abstract

This article briefly surveys the direct and indirect ways in which the principal of measure for measure is manifested in biblical narrative. It proceeds to examine how it is applied in the David cycle, where it is particularly prominent. David, more than any other human character in the Bible, refers to this principle both in his words and his deeds. His motives are both theological and political. He rewards and punishes measure for measure, but is himself punished according to the same principle. The article examines the different levels on which “measure for measure” works in the David stories: the human plane (David and the human characters around him), the divine plane (between David and the Lord), and the interaction between these two.     

The Location of Medieval/Pre-Modern and Biblical Ziklag

Abstract

Most modern attempts to identify biblical Ziklag build on the pioneering work of Edward Robinson. Analysis of the medieval and pre-modern observations made by Father Felix Fabri, in Evagatorium in Terræ Sanctæ, Arabiæ et Egypti Peregrinationem and Sionpilger, and Eugène Roger, in La Terre Sainte, provide support for the identification of biblical Ziklag with Tell esh-Shari'ah (Tel Sera') during these periods. Such a medieval and pre-modern identification provides support for this same modern identification of biblical Ziklag and militates against competing identifications with Tell el-Hesi (Tel Hasi), Khirbet Meshash (Tel Masos), Tell es-Seba' (Tel Beer-Sheva), and Tell Khuweilifeh (Tel Halif).     

David and Hazael: War,Peace, Stones and Memory

Abstract

This paper reexamines the rise and fall of two regional empires: the Israelite kingdom of David and Solomon, and the Aramaic kingdom of Hazael and his son Bar-Hadad III. The author presents a comparison between these two regional empires, discussing the following main points: the rise to power of the founders: David and Hazael and their charismatic character; their wars and peace treaties; the boundaries and the administrative organization of these two empires, and the decline and fall of the kingdoms in the days of the founder's sons: Solomon and Bar-Hadad III. The author is of the opinion that the existence of a regional empire in the days of Hazael and his son is of great significance for the reality of the empire of David and Solomon, since the former clearly proves that in certain geopolitical circumstances the making of a regional empire that controlled most of the area between the Euphrates and Philistia was entirely possible. The phenomenon of the Aramaean regional empire of Hazael and his son does not prove the existence of an Israelite regional empire, but it indicates that the biblical account of the rise and fall of an Israelite empire in the days of David and Solomon was possible, and even reasonable.     

Letters to the exiles

ABSTRACT

A slightly different separation of the text in Qoh 3,18 results in the reading ??? ??????? instead of ???? ??????, in which ??? is “apart of” based on the Aramaic, or ??? = ??? “alone” assuming a ?/? confusion. In each case an eminently reasonable text is obtained regarding man apart of God, or man without God. Qohelet seems to believe that without God man would be egocentric, just as a beast.     

FORGOTTEN MEANING

ABSTRACT

In a recent article Steven McKenzie argues for the priority of the account of David sparing Saul's life in 1 Sam 26 over that of the parallel account 1 Sam 24. To do this he uses one of the categories of evaluating interdependence of biblical texts, namely, that of “ungrammaticality” as set forth by Cynthia Edenburg in SJOT, 1998. Thus McKenzie opposes my own view for the priority of chap 24, as argued most recently in The Biblical Saga of King David (2009). In this article I critically evaluate the use of his examples of “ungrammaticality” as well as the possible application of the other four Edenburg categories of evaluating evidence for interdependence and priority, as they apply to these parallel texts. Contrary to McKenzie, I conclude that these principles of comparison confirm the priority of 1 Sam 24 over that of 1 Sam 26, and I argue that chap 26 was a later supplementation of the David story for the purposes of polemic and a parody of the earlier account.     

Refraining the Meaning of “Political” in Research with Adolescents

Abstract

The Gettysburg Address contains no direct quotations from the Bible; nevertheless, it is replete with biblical phrases and themes. Lincoln, who had an intimate and thorough knowledge of the King James Bible, used the Bible in ways essential to the mission and message of his brief address delivered on November 19, 1863, at the dedication of a national cemetery at Gettysburg. The unifying theme of his speech was the conception, birth, and death of the nation, which parallels the life of Jesus as recounted in the New Testament. This theme climaxes with the nation's “new birth of freedom,” secured through the sacrifice of the Civil War, especially through the shed blood and death of the “brave men” on Gettysburg's battlefield. Lincoln invoked biblical cadences, phrases, and themes to solemnify the occasion for his speech and to infuse the great sacrifice of the dead and wounded with profound meaning.     

Natural Law,Poetic Justice and the Talionic Formulation

Abstract

Significant elements of natural law are reflected in the statements of corporal punishment presented in biblical law. In relation to the “eye for eye” clause from the talionic formulation, it is suggested that acts of blinding were perceived also as a form of punishment of an offending organ and can, therefore, be classified as examples of “instrumental talion.” This is distinct from measures which focus on the character of the sinner, or the nature of his crime, which are differentiated as “reflective talion.” Both processes convey an underlying desire for poetic justice, evidenced in biblical and ancient Near Eastern sources, where aetiological explanations clarify accounts of serious injuries to the eyes.