Status
Available
Call number
Genres
Collection
Publication
Free Press (2001), 400 pages
Description
In this groundbreaking work that sets apart fact and legend, authors Finkelstein and Silberman use significant archeological discoveries to provide historical information about biblical Israel and its neighbors. In this iconoclastic and provocative work, leading scholars Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman draw on recent archaeological research to present a dramatically revised portrait of ancient Israel and its neighbors. They argue that crucial evidence (or a telling lack of evidence) at digs in Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon suggests that many of the most famous stories in the Bible--the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, Joshua's conquest of Canaan, and David and Solomon's vast empire--reflect the world of the later authors rather than actual historical facts. Challenging the fundamentalist readings of the scriptures and marshaling the latest archaeological evidence to support its new vision of ancient Israel, The Bible Unearthed offers a fascinating and controversial perspective on when and why the Bible was written and why it possesses such great spiritual and emotional power today.… (more)
User reviews
LibraryThing member Devil_llama
The authors discuss the archaeological explorations in the Holy Land, and what has (and hasn't) been discovered. This book is not going to be popular with those who are convinced that archaeology has confirmed the Biblical stories, as the authors, free from the usual censorship which surrounds most
Show More
books about Holy Land digs, demonstrate that the very best you can say is that there is no evidence for many, if not most, of the familiar Biblical stories. Show Less
LibraryThing member jpsnow
This book's thesis is that the Old Testament, though shaped by true events and traditions, was constructed in its current form as a common bond and political instrument in support of the short-lived resurgence of the kingdom Judiah and the subsequent Yahedic society that appeared after its collapse
The authors also show where archaelogy supports what we do know. For example, the highlands settlements thought to have been Isaelite indeed are the only in the are lacking pig bones. David and Solomon are portrayed as tribal chieftains sans the great empires and wealth but still of note. A slab from c. 853 mentions the destruction of the "House of David" Perhaps most notably in support of the political argument, Josiah, who lived in the current era, was prophesied by name as being someone to be followed. The archaeology aside, this book provides a great political history of the relationships between the northern Israelite and southern highland Judahite peoples -- their differences, Israel's rise and fall, and Judah's fortunate timing to emerge as Israel's Assyrian conquerers fell. Judah was less developed and attracted less attention. Following it's emergence, kings were deemed good or bad based on their enforcement of strict laws, particularly around a monotheistic, YWHE-est worship. With the strong and continuous saga of historical reminders, one can see how Israel today maintains such unity and success. As for the history of the texts, the authors show that how references to the "Book of the Law" were later modified by new found scripts and formed into Deutoronomy, and then later a final redaction was made (perhaps by Ezra). The final text has elements of Greek epic, Assyrian vassal contract, and Egyptian style. It also coincided with the first spread of literacy.
Show More
in the 7th century b.c. More hopeful archaeology from the previous 30 years was driven significantly by those who accepted the historic date range of 2100-2500 B.C. as fact and looked for supporting evidence. The authors use archaelogic evidence to refute this and form a different theory. Some of their supporting evidence is very basic. For example, while the progenitors were camel traders, camels were not found in the region until 1000 years later. It also shows how some of the oldest stories both explained the various peoples in the region and established the superiority of the Israelites (e.g. Lot's daughters as the roots to Moam and Ammon; Jacob and Esau establishing the legitimization of Israel as having bestowed the birthright). The Exodus story is explained as an explanation of how the people reached their current lands, but the actual events are judged as not fitting against the time, Egyptian span of control, or place names. The authors later argue that the Exodue story's numerous parallels to the later resurgence of Egypt demonstrate that it was the basis for people seeing what they should and can do at present. The authors also show where archaelogy supports what we do know. For example, the highlands settlements thought to have been Isaelite indeed are the only in the are lacking pig bones. David and Solomon are portrayed as tribal chieftains sans the great empires and wealth but still of note. A slab from c. 853 mentions the destruction of the "House of David" Perhaps most notably in support of the political argument, Josiah, who lived in the current era, was prophesied by name as being someone to be followed. The archaeology aside, this book provides a great political history of the relationships between the northern Israelite and southern highland Judahite peoples -- their differences, Israel's rise and fall, and Judah's fortunate timing to emerge as Israel's Assyrian conquerers fell. Judah was less developed and attracted less attention. Following it's emergence, kings were deemed good or bad based on their enforcement of strict laws, particularly around a monotheistic, YWHE-est worship. With the strong and continuous saga of historical reminders, one can see how Israel today maintains such unity and success. As for the history of the texts, the authors show that how references to the "Book of the Law" were later modified by new found scripts and formed into Deutoronomy, and then later a final redaction was made (perhaps by Ezra). The final text has elements of Greek epic, Assyrian vassal contract, and Egyptian style. It also coincided with the first spread of literacy.
Show Less
LibraryThing member zenitsky
This is a fascinating non-scholarly overview of the current state of biblical archaeology. The author's main issue revolves around when the Deuteronomistic books (Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Kings 1 and 2) were written. They show these narratives, describing the early history of the Hebrews, were
Because of this, the reliability of the Hebrew Bible (as a historical document) is brought into question especially in light of current archeological evidence. Finkelstein and Siberman pick apart some key portions of the Hebrew narrative including the Patriarchs, the Exodus story, the conquest of Canaan, the unified kingdom of David and Solomon and more.
Show More
written centuries later than traditional beliefs, during the reign of Judahian King Josiah, who initiated a reform movement just before the Babylonian invasion. Because of this, the reliability of the Hebrew Bible (as a historical document) is brought into question especially in light of current archeological evidence. Finkelstein and Siberman pick apart some key portions of the Hebrew narrative including the Patriarchs, the Exodus story, the conquest of Canaan, the unified kingdom of David and Solomon and more.
Show Less
LibraryThing member hlselz
Non-fiction about the arhaeology of the bible. Amazing compilation of recent discoveries and excavations in middle east.
LibraryThing member aliciamalia
The subject matter of this book is fascinating: modern archaeological finds, and how they support / don't support stories in the Bible. The treatment is too scholarly - in the hands of a different set of writers, I really think this could be a real eye-opener. Instead, it's dense and extremely hard
Show More
to digest. It also really should have included pictures to bring the finds to life. Show Less
LibraryThing member antiquary
I found this book less radical than I expected from reading some of the debate about it. It does deny the historicity of Abrham and of Joshua's conquest of Canaan, but it accepts the House of DWD inscription proves the historicity of David. Conservative scholars
can find legitimate grounds to
can find legitimate grounds to
Show More
criticize it , but it is a more moderate and credible state,ent of a liberal position than I anticipated, though I do not entirely accept it. Show Less
LibraryThing member Ricardus
It's a fascinating book, and for all its iconoclasm it's evident that the authors really do have a passionate regard for the Tenakh, they just don't see it as history. What slightly disappointed me, though, was that it didn't really live up to its title - it doesn't discuss the whole Bible, just
Show More
the Torah and the Deuteronomic history. There are occasional references to Chronicles and to the Prophets, but these turn out quite frustrating in their brevity. Show Less
LibraryThing member jsburbidge
A nice survey of the current state of archaeology associated with the Tanakh, avoiding both extremes of the current debates.
None of the findings would be all that surprising to readers who approach it with the continental biblical criticism (most notably, that associated with Von Rat and Noth and
The major area which would be new is the relative weakness (but not absence) of evidence for the Davidic line and the evidence that many of the achievements were, at best, exaggerated by the later writers (either in enhancing earlier sources or in creating stories based on "current" conditions).
This is supplemented by the positive findings regarding the likely origins of the Isarelite identity in hill country culture, much of which seems to be reasonably recent work.
None of the findings would be all that surprising to readers who approach it with the continental biblical criticism (most notably, that associated with Von Rat and Noth and
Show More
their successors) in mind. Like the internal documentary criticism, the external evidence points to composition by one or more Deuteronomistic authors, with embedded material of varying degrees of historical value. Nothing exciting or new, but a good deal of internal evidence being confirmed by external evidence.The major area which would be new is the relative weakness (but not absence) of evidence for the Davidic line and the evidence that many of the achievements were, at best, exaggerated by the later writers (either in enhancing earlier sources or in creating stories based on "current" conditions).
This is supplemented by the positive findings regarding the likely origins of the Isarelite identity in hill country culture, much of which seems to be reasonably recent work.
Show Less
LibraryThing member TonyMilner
This is an excellent and well presented overview of the relationship between the archaeology of Israel/Palestine and the Bible. The conclusions are challenging for those who desire to take the OT at 'face value' but not particularly surprising for those already familiar with the current state of
The book is targeted at a non-technical audience, and even goes so far as to summarise the relevant biblical narratives (those familiar with the story can skim over these bits!). That being said, it could do with more extensive referencing to enable those who wish to go deeper into particular questions.
The Kindle edition unfortunately lack the page numbers, which makes it difficult to correlate references with the print version.
Show More
historical-critical Biblical studies. The book is targeted at a non-technical audience, and even goes so far as to summarise the relevant biblical narratives (those familiar with the story can skim over these bits!). That being said, it could do with more extensive referencing to enable those who wish to go deeper into particular questions.
The Kindle edition unfortunately lack the page numbers, which makes it difficult to correlate references with the print version.
Show Less
LibraryThing member DinadansFriend
A controversial Book, dedicated to the present stage of archaeological investigations in Israel. This book will probably not be on the reading lists at Oral Roberts University. The main theme is that there is little or no evidence of a great deal of the historical account of the origin of the
Show More
Hebrew kingdom in Palestine, prior to Ahab, the Northern king in the 880's BCE. If the account in the historical books of the old testament is somewhat true, it must relate to events a great deal more modest in scope than the biblical account. Finkelstein and Silberman appear to have a lot of evidence for their reconstruction. A very careful book. Show Less
LibraryThing member dylkit
The authors of The Bible Unearthed successfully collate new findings and information that has been known for awhile to present clear and concise rethinking of The Old Testament at the time of kings and Biblical archaeology in general. Once the confirmation bias of the Bible in one hand and a trowel
The authors themselves characterise the book as :
"our attempt to formulate a new archaeological vision of ancient Israel in which the Bible is one of the most important artifacts and cultural achievements [but] not the unquestioned narrative framework into which every archaeological find must be fit."
Well worth reading.
Show More
in the other has been removed,and modern scientific techniques applied, the Old Testament can be set in the context of politics and nation building rather than a history in the traditional sense.The authors themselves characterise the book as :
"our attempt to formulate a new archaeological vision of ancient Israel in which the Bible is one of the most important artifacts and cultural achievements [but] not the unquestioned narrative framework into which every archaeological find must be fit."
Well worth reading.
Show Less
LibraryThing member librisissimo
Much of the archeological speculation is out of date (published 2001), having been superseded by new discoveries that fill in the lacunae the authors attempt to patch with speculation and imagination.
Since their over-arching purpose appears to be denial that David and Solomon had anything to do
The book has bibliographies for each chapter, but no footnotes or direct citations that allow a reader to actually follow the scholarly arguments or evidences.
Maps and tables are only moderately useful. There is no listing of figures, maps, and tables in the Contents, and they are seldom directly referenced in the text, sometime appearing after all of the narrative they pertain to is concluded, thus requiring readers to page back or forward several chapters to find them.
Since their over-arching purpose appears to be denial that David and Solomon had anything to do
Show More
with the "real" empire of northern Israel during the Omride dynasty, they consistently dismiss anything that doesn't match their preconceived ideas of what the unified monarchy MUST have been like.The book has bibliographies for each chapter, but no footnotes or direct citations that allow a reader to actually follow the scholarly arguments or evidences.
Maps and tables are only moderately useful. There is no listing of figures, maps, and tables in the Contents, and they are seldom directly referenced in the text, sometime appearing after all of the narrative they pertain to is concluded, thus requiring readers to page back or forward several chapters to find them.
Show Less
LibraryThing member multiplexer
I found this book through a referral on, of all places, /r/AskHistorians on reddit, and, more to the point, the "How Much of the Bible is Historical" question linked to in the subreddit's FAQ where it was referred to as a decent reference. Having not read much Biblical Archeology in a while and
The Bible Unearthed is a dry, fairly technical text dealing with matching Archeology with books of the Old Testament, mainly Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings and pieces of Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and lesser Prophets. Working from the beginning with Abraham and concluding at the Exile into Babylon, the authors methodically dissect the Old Testament chapter by chapter and, in some places, verse by verse and compare it to the known archeological evidence to prove their core supposition: the Old Testament and the Torah were compiled, and in no small part written, in the mid-to-late 7th Century BC in Judah for a combination of political and religious aims by likely two Kings: Hezekiah and, later, Josiah. These are not historical recordings of mid-Bronze Age wanders but of Iron Age Kings under the Assyrian yoke who were trying to forge a national identity through myths, tales, stories of various tribal peoples, and political propaganda, stamp out the local religions and create a theocratic state.
Although the book is a little out of date, as it was written in 2000, the evidence presented is pretty plausible stuff if one can slog through chapters based on the settlement patterns of Iron Age bedouins and their village layouts or read 100 pages on pottery sherds at different strata.
The authors present:
* No historical record of the patriarchs in any form;
* Moses's Pharaoh is far more the Pharaoh of Late Period 26th Dynasty and not a New Kingdom Monarch;
* Joshua conquers cities that do not exist in the 12th century BCE but certainly do in the 7th, and those that did exist likely collapsed in the Bronze Age Collapse at different times over a hundred years;
* No sign exists of David's Kingdom and all that remains is that of a small hill fort and David's name in secondary sources;
* No sign exists of Solomon or his works;
* The Omrides, who kindly left heaps of archeological evidence and secondary sources, were likely quite good Kings;
* Israel was likely a victim of its enduring financial success making it a tempting target for a sack;
* Deuteronomy written in the format of an Assyrian legal document to a vassal describing the rules and rights therein;
* Etc... it goes on like this for ~400 pages.
All signs point to a 7th century BC compilation of books, tales and sources into one unified whole, smoothing over the lumps and presenting the people -- many suddenly pouring into Judah from the sack of Samaria -- a new complete identity with their One God. One shouldn't besmirch the power of an enduring document that managed to forge a people, see them through the Babylonian Exile, and then become the root of three major world religions. But no archeological evidence points to the Old Testament being a reliable historical document, either.
For me, it's fascinating book showing the pressures and the prejudices of a people who were living in uncertain times with two crazed superpowers (the Assyrians and the Late Egyptians) on their borders and smaller enemies all around them and just before the Phoenicians would become "a thing." These were Kings who wanted to reconquer Israel back from Assyria and return it to its once financial glory, and they saw the way forward was to unite all these people pouring into their tiny kingdom filled with bedouins under One God and One Temple. The plan didn't work out because sticking a finger into the side of a crazed kingdom loaded with mercenaries and a religion that tells them to kill and bathe in blood _never_ works out well but the legacy of that time endures.
It's doubly fascinating to think this: in the 7th Century BCE, the great Egyptian Kingdom of Ramesses II, the Hittites, the fall of Sumeria and founding of Assyria, were as far away from them as the /Fall of Rome is from Modern Day/. The time of great civilizations and great kings was destroyed by the Bronze Age Collapse and left huge mounds where cities once stood -- and no one of Iron Age II knew why. No one read those languages. No one did satellite-based archeology. This is something to think about -- the time of Moses and Joshua and Judges were all distant myth at a time when real 7th century enemies were on the doorstep. Why _wouldn't_ there be stories about how those ancient dimly remembered cities? Why _weren't_ there be ancient kings and great heroes and an explanation of how those civilizations of the great antiquity fell? Why wouldn't those stories be forged in one narrative of one God who destroyed them in the past and will destroy them now?
Not for the highly religious, obviously. Interesting if one wants to read the constant debates on reddit, though.
ALSO: if you have no time to read the book, the BBC did a 4 part series with the authors which is available on Youtube some years ago.
Show More
finding the book in Amazon's Kindle Store, I downloaded it to my Kindle.The Bible Unearthed is a dry, fairly technical text dealing with matching Archeology with books of the Old Testament, mainly Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings and pieces of Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and lesser Prophets. Working from the beginning with Abraham and concluding at the Exile into Babylon, the authors methodically dissect the Old Testament chapter by chapter and, in some places, verse by verse and compare it to the known archeological evidence to prove their core supposition: the Old Testament and the Torah were compiled, and in no small part written, in the mid-to-late 7th Century BC in Judah for a combination of political and religious aims by likely two Kings: Hezekiah and, later, Josiah. These are not historical recordings of mid-Bronze Age wanders but of Iron Age Kings under the Assyrian yoke who were trying to forge a national identity through myths, tales, stories of various tribal peoples, and political propaganda, stamp out the local religions and create a theocratic state.
Although the book is a little out of date, as it was written in 2000, the evidence presented is pretty plausible stuff if one can slog through chapters based on the settlement patterns of Iron Age bedouins and their village layouts or read 100 pages on pottery sherds at different strata.
The authors present:
* No historical record of the patriarchs in any form;
* Moses's Pharaoh is far more the Pharaoh of Late Period 26th Dynasty and not a New Kingdom Monarch;
* Joshua conquers cities that do not exist in the 12th century BCE but certainly do in the 7th, and those that did exist likely collapsed in the Bronze Age Collapse at different times over a hundred years;
* No sign exists of David's Kingdom and all that remains is that of a small hill fort and David's name in secondary sources;
* No sign exists of Solomon or his works;
* The Omrides, who kindly left heaps of archeological evidence and secondary sources, were likely quite good Kings;
* Israel was likely a victim of its enduring financial success making it a tempting target for a sack;
* Deuteronomy written in the format of an Assyrian legal document to a vassal describing the rules and rights therein;
* Etc... it goes on like this for ~400 pages.
All signs point to a 7th century BC compilation of books, tales and sources into one unified whole, smoothing over the lumps and presenting the people -- many suddenly pouring into Judah from the sack of Samaria -- a new complete identity with their One God. One shouldn't besmirch the power of an enduring document that managed to forge a people, see them through the Babylonian Exile, and then become the root of three major world religions. But no archeological evidence points to the Old Testament being a reliable historical document, either.
For me, it's fascinating book showing the pressures and the prejudices of a people who were living in uncertain times with two crazed superpowers (the Assyrians and the Late Egyptians) on their borders and smaller enemies all around them and just before the Phoenicians would become "a thing." These were Kings who wanted to reconquer Israel back from Assyria and return it to its once financial glory, and they saw the way forward was to unite all these people pouring into their tiny kingdom filled with bedouins under One God and One Temple. The plan didn't work out because sticking a finger into the side of a crazed kingdom loaded with mercenaries and a religion that tells them to kill and bathe in blood _never_ works out well but the legacy of that time endures.
It's doubly fascinating to think this: in the 7th Century BCE, the great Egyptian Kingdom of Ramesses II, the Hittites, the fall of Sumeria and founding of Assyria, were as far away from them as the /Fall of Rome is from Modern Day/. The time of great civilizations and great kings was destroyed by the Bronze Age Collapse and left huge mounds where cities once stood -- and no one of Iron Age II knew why. No one read those languages. No one did satellite-based archeology. This is something to think about -- the time of Moses and Joshua and Judges were all distant myth at a time when real 7th century enemies were on the doorstep. Why _wouldn't_ there be stories about how those ancient dimly remembered cities? Why _weren't_ there be ancient kings and great heroes and an explanation of how those civilizations of the great antiquity fell? Why wouldn't those stories be forged in one narrative of one God who destroyed them in the past and will destroy them now?
Not for the highly religious, obviously. Interesting if one wants to read the constant debates on reddit, though.
ALSO: if you have no time to read the book, the BBC did a 4 part series with the authors which is available on Youtube some years ago.
Show Less
Language
Original language
English
Original publication date
2001
Physical description
9.5 inches
ISBN
9780684869124
Local notes
SS