Resetting the Discipline of Biblical Archaeology

The amount of top-notch research now being done in the field of biblical archaeology, most of it published in modern Hebrew, is unprecedented. Three authors whose research, methodology, and conclusions are must-reading are Avraham Faust, Israel Finkelstein, and Amihai Mazar. They differ in detail, but they agree on a point of fundamental importance: the need to stake out a middle ground between maximalism and minimalism. Maximalists and minimalists alike raise a ruckus, attract camp followers, and otherwise make a spectacle. It is usually people who are neither who are engaged in groundbreaking primary research.

The more “liberal” of the three, Finkelstein, is a scathing critic of the minimalism of Davies and Thompson (“The Rise and Fall of the Minimalist School”: Finkelstein in Finkelstein and Mazar 2007: 12-14). The more “conservative” of the three, Faust, has no truck with the maximalism of those who, for the purposes of reconstructing the society of ancient Israel, use the Bible rather than the archaeological record as the primary database (2006: 5-8, in explicit agreement with Finkelstein).

In the latest issue of RBL, Ralph Hawkins – a fine young scholar I have enjoyed conversing with in the past - provides a lengthy and careful review of a volume that showcases the views of Finkelstein and Mazar. Hawkins takes aim at a number of Finkelstein’s more unguarded statements though not always, it seems to me, with even-handedness. It is worth pointing out that no one has shown better than Finkelstein what happens when the history of Israel is reconstructed with insufficient attention to the archaeological record. His recent article on the settlement history of Jerusalem in the eight and seventh centuries bce (see bibliography below), a response to Nadav Na’aman’s text-based reconstruction of the same period, is a tour de force.

An excellent summary of Faust’s argument is now available in English – and in paperback at a reasonable price: Israel’s Ethnogenesis (see bibliography below for full reference). This is a work of anthropological archaeology. In a way, to read Faust is to read Norman Gottwald, but this time, in place of endless theory, Faust offers hard evidence and a brilliant thesis. The future, I think, belongs to those who approach the archaeological record from an anthropological point of view.

Are you tired of the fluff to be found in BAR? Are you sick of the sordid exploitation of archaeology for the purpose of “proving” or “disproving” the Bible (a dialogue of the deaf with confessional and anti-confessional agendas)? Are you interested in understanding the inner workings of the society of ancient Israel? Faust, Finkelstein, and Mazar are authors you will want to read. For students of the Hebrew Bible, their work opens up new vistas fully in line with the work of scholars this side of the pond such as Lawrence E. Stager and Thomas E. Levy.

For a discussion of Finkelstein's hypotheses about the United Monarchy and the corresponding archaeological record, theses that have not held up well over the course of time, see John Anderson here, and comments thereto by Todd Bolen; further discussion here.

Bibliography

Avraham Faust, Israel’s Ethnogenesis: Settlement, Interaction, Expansion and Resistance (Approaches to Anthropological Archaeology; London: Equinox, 2006); Israel Finkelstein, “The Settlement History of Jerusalem in the Eighth and Seventh Centuries bc,” RB 115 (2008) 499-515; Israel Finkelstein and Amihai Mazar; Brian B. Schmidt, ed., The Quest for the Historical Israel: Debating Archaeology and the History of Early Israel (SBLABS 17; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2007); Ralph K. Hawkins, review of Finkelstein, Mazar, and Schmidt (2007), RBL 05/2009); Nadav Na’aman, “When and How Did Jerusalem Become a Great City? The Rise of Jerusalem as Judah’s Premier City in the Eighth-Seventh Centuries B.C.E.,” BASOR 347 (2007) 21-56.

Comments

[Jonathan Laden]

Faust, Finkelstein, and Mazar have appeared in the pages of Biblical Archaeology Review as authors no less than 18 times between them.

I wonder if they also think it's "fluff"? :-)

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org

[Ranger]

Jonathan,
That's actually what I thought as well...isn't Mazar a somewhat frequent contributor to BAR? I'm no fan of exploiting archaeology to "prove" the Bible, but I'm not as anti-BAR on the whole as some.

[JohnFH]

Jonathan and Ranger,

You're right. I was being snooty. BAR is, after all, designed to popularize. It was unfair on my part to describe "Finkelstein-lite" as fluff. The presentation is lite in BAR because it's supposed to be.

Still, I prefer to read the peer-to-peer stuff Faust, Finkelstein, and Mazar publish, because I have enough training in archaeology, anthropology, and biblical studies to follow it.

BAR is fun to read, but I encourage people with any training at all in the requisite fields - and biblical scholars do well to acquire that training - to dig deeper.

[Mike Koke]

Hey John, interesting post. I wonder where you would place William G. Dever, "Who Were the Early Israelites, and Where Did They Come From"? Do you see him as also trying to stake a middle ground between maximalism and minimalism?

[shane]

Thanks, John; keep up the helpful posts. I've linked this one on archaeology over by us.
Blessings,
Shane

[JohnFH]

Mike,

Dever is in the middle, too. True, he takes such evident delight in smacking up the minimalists that a maximalist might be forgiven for thinking he is one of them. But he isn't.

Shane,

Thanks to you and Andrew for your excellent blogging.

[Brooke]

John, thanks for writing on this. I got well immersed in the discussion during my coursework, then set it aside during my dissertation time. This year, I have had a hard time finding some time-efficient re-entry points. Thanks for your comments and bibliography!
Best,
Brooke

[John Anderson]

Brooke:

The best entry point is the recent SBL volume Quest for the Historical Israel, including essays by Finkelstein and Mazar, and edited by Schmidt. It is a great volume.

[JohnFH]

John,

Have you read Faust's Ethnogenesis? It is better yet, if for no other reason than that he reflects on a far greater range of evidence within a more thoroughly anthropological perspective.

[Alice]

Hi John,
I like your post.I am working on a thesis. I find your posts quite helpful. This is Alice from Israeli Uncensored News.

[John Anderson]

John (does it ever get confusing to those reading the comments when we address one another?):

I have not read Faust, yet I am familiar with the anthropological/sociological understandings of Israelite archaeology and origins . . . specifically in the work of Ann Killebrew and Liz Bloch-Smith, but others also.

I find Quest for the Historical Israel to be a fine volume in that it offers perspectives from two seminal archaeologists in the field on the entire sweep of the Hebrew Bible. It is a great place to begin.