The future of biblical archaeology : reassessing methodologies and assumptions : the proceedings of a symposium, August 12-14, 2001 at Trinity International University

485 Pages·2004·6.86 MB·English

by  Hoffmeier

Edited by
James K. Hoffineier & Alan Millard
To Harvey L. and Janice Miller in appreciation for their support
for biblical archaeology. Because of their generosity the
future of biblical archaeology looks bright.
Preface x
Abbreviations xiii
Contributors xviii
Biblical Archaeology: The Recent Debate and Future Prospects
The Biblical Archaeology versus Syro-Palestinian Archaeology Debate in Its
American Institutional and Intellectual Contexts 3
Ziony Zevit
Theory and Method in Biblical Archaeology 20
Thomas W. Davis
The Relationship between Archaeology and the Bible: Expectations and
Reality 29
David Merling
Integrating Faith, the Bible, and Archaeology: A Review of the "Andrews
University Way" of Doing Archaeology 43
Randall W. Younker
The North Sinai Archaeological Project's Excavations at Tell el-Borg (Sinai): An
Example of the "New" Biblical Archaeology? 53
James K. Hoffmeier
Archaeology: Approaches and Application
Homer and Archaeology: Minimalists and Maximalists in Classical
Context 69
Edwin Yamauchi
A New Working Hypothesis for the Identification of Migdol 91
Benjamin Edidin Scolnic
Deconstructing and Reconstructing the United Monarchy: House of David
or Tent of David (Current Trends in Iron Age Chronology) 121
Steven M. Ortiz
Amorites and Israelites: Invisible Invaders - Modern Expectation
and Ancient Reality 148
Alan Millard
Using Texts in Biblical Archaeology
Sumer and the Bible: A Matter of Proportion 163
William W. Hallo
Ancient Israel's Literary Heritage Compared with Hittite Textual
Data 176
Harry A. Hoffner, Jr.
Genesis in History and Tradition: The Syrian Background of Israel's
Ancestors, Reprise 193
Daniel E. Fleming
Multiple-Month Ritual Calendars in the West Semitic World: Emar 446 and
Leviticus 23 233
Richard S. Hess
The Repopulation of Samaria (2 Kings 17:24, 27-31) in Light of Recent
Study 254
K. Lawson Younger, Jr.
Methodological Issues in Reconstructing Language Systems from
Epigraphic Fragments 281
Cynthia L. Miller
Hermeneutics and Theology
The Role of Context and the Promise of Archaeology in Biblical Interpretation
from Early Judaism to Post Modernity 309
John M. Monson
Ancient Near Eastern Mythography as It Relates to Historiography in the
Hebrew Bible: Genesis 3 and the Cosmic Battle 328
Richard E. Averbeck
"Splendid Truths" or "Prodigious Commotion"? Ancient Near Eastern
Texts and the Study of the Bible 357
David B. Weisberg
Can We Write a History of Israel Today? 368
Andrew G. Vaughn
Biblical archaeology has gone through some turbulent times in the past several
decades. In the late 1970s and into the i98os, William Dever ignited a fruitful
and legitimate discussion about the appropriateness of the discipline of biblical
archaeology, especially as it had been practiced mainly by biblical scholars and
theologians who had a religiously-inspired agenda and were not trained as field
archaeologists. There have been many positive results from the ensuing debate,
especially the concern for greater methodological precision, and many scholars
are now less inclined to jump to unwarranted conclusions regarding the
correlation of archaeological data with the Bible. On the other hand, there have
also been many negative consequences from the debate of the past 15 years, the
main one being whether biblical archaeology should even continue as a
discipline. In 1999 the venerable American Schools of Oriental Research
jettisoned the name of its semipopular journal Biblical Archaeologist after 6o
years, replacing it with the bland title Near Eastern Archaeology. This move was
undertaken over the objection of the majority of the membership. This
expunging of the title Biblical Archaeologist was undoubtedly undertaken to
provide ASOR with an inoffensive or academically correct title. Interestingly,
Dever still is not sure what expression to use for what has traditionally been
called biblical archaeology (cf. William G. Dever, "Whatchmacallit: Why It's So
Hard to Name Our Field," BAR 29/4 [2003]: 56-61).
This name shift illustrates that the field of biblical archaeology has been
dealt a blow from within its ranks. A second line of attack against biblical
archaeology has been under way for the past two decades from outside the
discipline. Here the assault has come from biblical scholars often known as
historical minimalists, who have been inspired by postmodern literary
approaches and tend to trivialize, ignore, or misuse archaeological data. Their
extreme views, and the philosophical assumptions of these advocates, have been
addressed in a compelling manner by Dever himself (cf. What Did the Biblical
Writers Know and When Did They Know It? [Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans,
2001] ). Some of the papers in this volume will also serve as a response to the
threat minimalism poses to biblical history.
In a climate of growing skepticism towards biblical archaeology and the
historical worth of the Bible's narratives, the North Sinai Archaeological Project
organized a colloquium in August 2001, hosted by Trinity International
University (Trinity Evangelical Divinity School) in Deerfield, Illinois. It was
titled, "The Future of Biblical Archaeology: Reassessing Methods and
Assumptions." The scholars, whose papers appear in this volume, met along
with others to discuss the crisis in biblical archaeology. They believe that it is too
early to write the obituary of biblical archaeology, and that there is a bright
future ahead for integrating archaeological materials with the study of the Bible.
The participants, attenders, and presenters came from universities, such as
Chicago, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Miami (Ohio), Harvard, Johns Hopkins,
Andrews, and Liverpool; liberal arts colleges, such as Gustavus Adolphus,
Wheaton, Regent (Canada); and seminaries, including Southern Baptist
(Louisville), New Orleans Baptist, Denver, Hebrew Union, and Trinity. The
disciplines represented in this group included Syro-Palestinian archaeology,
Egyptology, Assyriology, Hittitology, Sumerology, North-West Semitic
languages, Hebrew studies, historical geography, geology, history, and biblical
studies. The unifying feature of this diverse group was an interest in biblical
archaeology.
We maintain that biblical archaeology has been misunderstood by some as
the archaeology of Palestine with a religious bias. The latter embraces every
vestige of human activity from Palaeolithic flint tools to loth-century rifles, but
biblical archaeology is not concerned with either of those. Biblical archaeology
is interdisciplinary in nature, and thus is not Syro-Palestinian archaeology, nor
Assyriology, nor a branch of such fields. Rather, its focus is on the times and
places, the physical remains and written documents from across the Near East
that relate to the biblical text either as background and context or by more direct
contact. More than a century of intensive exploration and research has produced
enough discoveries, theories, hypotheses, and speculations for another century to
consider! Yet new discoveries continue to be made, some strengthening existing
evidence, some challenging earlier conclusions, all spawning fresh ideas. The
contributors to this book believe that biblical archaeology still has much to offer,
and if these papers stimulate advances in it their authors will be gratified.
The North Sinai Archeological Project, which organized this colloquium, is
supported by the Harvey L. Miller Family Foundation. It was also the generosity
of Harvey and Janice Miller, to whom this book is dedicated, that made both the