What do you think?
Rate this book
باستانشناسی کتاب مقدس: نگاهی نو به تاریخ قوم یهود و منشا کتابهای مقدس آن
باستان شناسی کتاب مقدس، تألیف بسیار مهم پروفسور ایسرائل فینکلشتاین استاد باستان شناسی دانشگاه تل آویو است. این کتاب که جنجالیترین و پر سروصداترین کتاب قرن گذشته در حوزه باستان شناسی خوانده شده، حاصل بیش از هشت سال تحقیق مؤلف با همکاری پروفسور نیل آشر سیلبرمن استاد مرکز مطالعات تاریخی بروکسل است و مجموعه مهمترین یافتههای باستان شناسی در طول یک قرن گذشته در سرزمین فلسطین و در ارتباط با تاریخ باستانی قوم یهود را در اختیار خوانندگان قرار میدهد و ضمن افشای حقایق مکتوم فراوانی از تاریخ قوم یهود، اشتباه بودن بسیاری از مطالب تورات و دیگر بخشهای عهد عتیق را با دلایل مستدل و بر اساس اسناد باستان شناسی به خوانندگان نشان میدهد. این دو دانشمند، پروفسور فینکلشتاین و همکارش پروفسور سیلبرمن، برای نخستین بار ادعایی بزرگ و شگفت انگیز را در این کتاب مطرح کردهاند، و آن، این است که امروز دانستههای ما در حوزه علم باستان شناسی از تاریخ قوم یهود و سرزمین فلسطین، در حدی هست که بتوانیم تمام مراحل تاریخ این قوم را بر همین اساس، یعنی با تکیه بر یافتههای باستان شناسی و نه هیچ چیز دیگر، بازسازی کنیم. به این ترتیب، برخلاف باور مرسوم که همگان معمولاً برای مطالعه تاریخ قوم یهود به کتاب تورات و دیگر بخشهای کتاب مقدس مراجعه میکنند، ما میتوانیم بدون مراجعه به کتاب مقدس، تاریخ کامل دیگری از سرگذشت قوم یهود در اختیار داشته باشیم: یک تاریخ کاملاً متفاوت. این تاریخ کاملاً متفاوت، که در مواردی درستی ادعاهای کتاب مقدس را به کلی زیر سوال میبرد، وقتی معیار سنجش صحت و سقم مطالب کتاب مقدس قرار گیرد نتیجهای بس شگفت دارد: کتاب مقدس یهودیان (عهد عتیق) در شکل کلی و قالب فعلی آن هرگز کتابی وحیانی نیست، بلکه تلفیقی از چند متن قدیمی عبری با بسیاری از افسانهها، باورها، اساطیر، و حکایات عامیانه ملل باستان است که در حدود قرن هشتم پیش از میلاد در دربار یوشیّا پادشاه یهودا در اورشلیم نوشته شده و دو قرن بعد، در قرن ششم پیش از میلاد به دست کاهنی به نام عزرا به شکل نهایی خود درآمده است. این کتاب را انتشارات سبزان در سال ۱۳۹۴ چاپ و منتشر کرده است. این کتاب (در واقع، همین ترجمهای که حقیر از آن انجام داده ام) از سوی مرکز انتشارات جهاد دانشگاهی در بیست و دومین جشنواره انتخاب کتاب سال دانشجویی (سال ۱۳۹۴) به عنوان کتاب برگزیده در حوزه تاریخ انتخاب شده است.
536 pages, Paperback
First published January 10, 2001
579 people are currently reading
6334 people want to read
About the author
Israel Finkelstein
50 books107 followersIsrael Finkelstein is a professor of archaeology at Tel Aviv University. He is a leading figure in the archaeology of the Levant and the laureate of the 2005 Dan David Prize in the Past Dimension -- Archaeology. Finkelstein served for many years as the Director of the Institute of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University and is the co-Director of the Megiddo Expedition. He is the co-author, with Neil Silberman, of The Bible Unearthed (Free Press, 2001) and the author of many field reports and scholarly articles.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 286 reviews
May 26, 2021
از روی کتاب یه مستند چهار قسمتی ساختن که لینکش رو میذارم:
https://youtu.be/cW-LV84c_O8
https://youtu.be/jyJVPevLiLo
۱- تاریخ به روایت تورات
بعد از خروج بنی اسرائیل از مصر و بازگشتشون به کنعان، طی جنگ هایی که با کنعانی ها کردن، دوازده قبیلۀ بنی اسرائیل در قسمت های مختلف کنعان ساکن شدن. این قبایل اول توسط ریش سفیدها اداره می شدن، اما وقتی اقوام خارجی بهشون فشار آوردن، فهمیدن که برای مقابله با اون اقوام نیاز دارن که تحت یک پادشاه واحد باشن. پس اول شائول و بعد داود به عنوان پادشاه انتخاب شدن و در اورشلیم به تخت نشستن، و کل بنی اسرائیل تحت پادشاهی واحدی قرار گرفتن. داود از این جهت برای یهودی ها خیلی مهم، و الگوی مقدّس تمام پادشاهان بعدی بود، چون اولین پادشاه و نمایندۀ دوران اتحاد و شکوه اسرائیل بود. خدا با داود عهدی بست که پادشاهی خاندانش تا ابد ادامه خواهد یافت.
اما اتفاقی افتاد: فرزندان داود مرتکب گناهانی شدن (از جمله پرستش خدایانی غیر از یهوه) و همین باعث شد خدا نظرش از خاندان داود برگرده. پادشاهی متحد دو تکه شد و به بخش «اسرائیل» در شمال و «یهودا» در جنوب تجزیه شد. اسرائیل شمالی ده قبیله از دوازده قبیلۀ بنی اسرائیل رو در خودش جا داده بود، سرزمین بزرگتری بود و از لحاظ ثروت پیشرفته تر. یهودای جنوبی، همچنان تحت حکومت خاندان داود بود که پایتختشون اورشلیم بود.
خدا خواست با دادن فرصت تازه ای به اسرائیل شمالی، تحت حکومت کسی غیر از خاندان داود، بنی اسرائیل رو نجات بده، اما اسرائیل هم بعد از چند نسل به همون گناهان مبتلا شد، در نتیجه خدا امپراتور آشور رو فرستاد تا اسرائیل شمالی رو نابود کنه و ده قبیله از بنی اسرائیل رو به سرزمین های دیگه کوچ بده تا برای همیشه گم بشن. حالا بنی اسرائیل در دو قبیلۀ باقی مونده در یهودای جنوبی خلاصه می شد.
قرن هفتم قبل از میلاد، اتفاق مهمی در یهودا افتاد: پادشاهی به نام «یوشیا» از خاندان داود به تخت نشست و در دورۀ پادشاهیش، موقع بازسازی معبد، یکی از کاهن ها ادعا کرد کتاب شریعت موسی رو توی معبد کشف کرده، شریعتی که فراموش شده بود و تا اون زمان کسی بهش عمل نکرده بود، و به خاطر همین تمام پادشاهان قبلی مورد غضب خدا قرار گرفته بودن. یوشیا و همۀ بزرگان جمع شدن و عهد بستن که به مقررات شریعت تازه کشف شده مو به مو عمل کنن تا خدا هم پادشاهیشون رو حفظ کنه. همه معتقد بودن که یوشیا داود جدید و مسیح زمانه که قراره دوباره پادشاهی شمالی و جنوبی رو متحد کنه و اسرائیل رو به دوران شکوهش برگردونه. اما همۀ این امیدها برباد رفت: یوشیا در جنگ بی اهمیتی کشته شد، و خیلی زود قلمروی جنوبی یهودا به دست امپراتوری بابل به کلی نابود شد.
۲- تورات به روایت تاریخ
تا قبل از این از تورات به عنوان منبع تاریخی استفاده می شد، همون طور که مثلاً تاریخ طبری به عنوان منبع تاریخی برای دورۀ ساسانی استفاده می شد. مورخ ها هرچند بخش هایی از روایات رو اغراق و تخیلی می دونستن، اما عموماً معتقد بودن خروج از مصر واقعاً رخ داده، جنگ با کنعانی ها و سکونت در کنعان واقعاً رخ داده، پادشاهی متحد شمال و جنوب تحت حکومت داود واقعاً رخ داده، تجزیۀ دو حکومت از هم واقعاً رخ داده، و در نهایت پادشاهان گناهکار شمالی و جنوبی که مسبّب نابودی نهایی اسرائیل و یهودا شدن، واقعاً به همین ترتیب وجود داشتن.
اما صد سال حفاری ها و تحقیقات باستانشناسی گسترده در سرتاسر فلسطین و مصر و جاهای دیگه، شواهد کمتر و کمتری به نفع روایت تورات ارائه کردن. از قلعه های محکمی که در مسیر خروجی مصر قرار داشتن و نمی ذاشتن کسی بدون اجازه وارد و خارج بشه، تا نبودن هیچ اثری از سکونت چهل سالۀ ششصد هزار اسرائیلی در صحرای سینا، تا تغییر جمعیت بدون خشونت کنعان، تا شواهد فراوانی بر این که پادشاهی شمالی و جنوبی هیچ وقت متحد نبودن تا بخوان از هم تجزیه بشن. اما مهم تر از همه، چیزی که کلید اصلی این کتاب شده، اینه که خیلی از شهرهایی که در روایت تورات نام برده شده، چه در مصر، چه در فلسطین، در زمانی که داستان اتفاق می افته یا وجود نداشتن یا روستای کوچیکی بودن در حالی که روایت تورات ادعا می کنه شهر بودن، یا شهرهای بزرگی بودن در حالی که روایت تورات ادعا می کنه روستای کوچیکی بودن. مهم ترین کلید کتاب همینه: اطلاعاتی که تورات از شهرهای مختلف میده، همگی درست منطبقن با وضعیت اون شهرها در «قرن هفتم قبل از میلاد». دوران پادشاهی یوشیا، همون پادشاه قلمروی جنوبی یهودا، که همه گفتن داود ثانیه، همون پادشاهی که زمان حکومتش ادعا کردن کتاب شریعت موسی رو در بازسازی معبد کشف کردن.
نظریۀ اصلی کتاب همینه. که تورات برای اولین بار زمان پادشاهی «یوشیا» تدوین شد، البته از بعضی روایات قدیمی تر. و در حقیقت کار تورات این بود که از لحاظ ایدئولوژیکی جایگاه و اقدامات یوشیا رو تأیید کنه، از جمله نیت بلندپروازانه ش برای فتح قلمروی شمالی اسرائیل (که نیروهای امپراتوری رو به انحطاط آشوری تازه از اونجا عقب نشینی کرده بودن) و منضم کردنش به یهودا. یوشیا برای این اقدام نیاز به پشتوانۀ ایدئولوژیکی داشت که تورات براش مهیا کرد: داود، سر سلسلۀ خاندان یوشیا هم در دورانی پرشکوه بر شمال و جنوب فرمانروایی می کرد. بر خلاف یافته های باستانشناسی، که نشون میدن پادشاهی داود به هیچ وجه پرشکوه نبوده و یه حکومت محلی کوچیک بوده بر اورشلیمی روستایی.
این کمابیش همون کارکردیه که شاهنامه برای ساسانی ها داشت، و می خواست نشون بده که پادشاهی ساسانی به کیانیان متصله و از این طریق به حکومتشون مشروعیت بده، و همینطور تعیین کنه که فلان و بهمان پادشاه گناهکار بودن و فلان و بهمان پادشاه درستکار.
کتاب هر فصل اول بخشی از تورات رو به طور خلاصه نقل می کنه، بعد شواهد باستانشناسی مربوط به اون بخش رو بررسی می کنه و نشون میده با توجه به این شواهد، اتفاقاتی که تورات روایت کرده در واقع چطور رخ دادن و ترتیب امور چطور بوده.
November 20, 2022
When I was in my 20’s, I attended a conservative seminary where I got an MA in Biblical Studies. My research in this area has continued all these years. A notable absence when I was in seminary was any real discussion of archaeology
.
One of the first things I learned from “The Bible Unearthed” is that archeological study of the Holy Land had been largely an exercise in confirmation bias, i.e., an effort to look for evidence that the stories of the Old Testament were true. This effort was unsuccessful.
Authors and archaeologists, Israel Finkelstein and Neil Silberman, took a different, more scientific approach. They would let the discoveries tell the story without any preconceived notions. They were not skeptics, but honest researchers.
Finkelstein himself was a firsthand witness to the dramatic changes in archeology that followed the Six-Day War in 1967.
“A young generation of Israeli archeologists,” the authors explain, “took to the field with a new method of investigation: Their goal was to explore, map and analyze the ancient landscape of the hill country--rather than only dig.” As a result of their energy and enterprise, the new generation “revolutionized the study of early Israel.”
So, Finkelstein and Silberman embrace, above all, the spirit of modern archaeology, which insists on approaching the Bible as an artifact to be studied and evaluated rather than a work of divine inspiration that must be embraced as a matter of faith.
In recent years, I had been referring to the Old Testament as a book of fairy tales. This book showed me that I was even more accurate than I realized.
There is no actual historical evidence for the existence of Abraham, or any of the Patriarchs; or Moses and the Exodus; the invasion of Canaan led by Joshua; the same goes for the whole period of Judges and the united monarchy of David and Solomon.
There was a King David, but there is no evidence of a vast empire as ascribed to him in the Bible. Instead, Jerusalem was a simple mountain village covering only 3 or 4 hectares. Solomon fares no better.
In fact, the scientists argue that it is impossible to say much of anything about ancient Israel until the seventh century B.C., around the time of the reign of King Josiah, when these stories were created and written down to help legitimize Josiah’s reign.
‘In that period,” Finkelstein says, “the narrative of the Bible was uniquely suited to further the religious reform and territorial ambitions of Judah.”
Understanding the role of the tribe and kingdom called Judah, as it turns out, is the key to decoding the origins and meanings of the Bible. Judah appears to have been sparsely settled, and Jerusalem, supposedly the royal capital of the united monarchy, was only “a typical highland village.” So, the biblical account can be understood as an effort by the chroniclers of Judah to invent a history worthy of their own king named Josiah. At this time, the development of literacy enabled these stories to be inscribed in a book that was treated as authoritative.
The irony is that it was the kingdom to the north, Israel, that was richer and more powerful than Judah. But it was wiped out by the Assyrians, leaving Judah to create the mythical history, including those of Joshua and David as models for conquest. But Josiah was killed by the Egyptians.
Only a few years later, the Babylonians attacked and conquered Judah. The temple of YAHWEH was burned down and Jerusalem left in ruins. Judah became a vassal state. Some of the inhabitants, including King Zedekiah, were exiled in what came to be known as The Babylonian Captivity. After that, the Messiah was no longer an earthly King, but a future hope. The exiled scribes expanded the mythology of the people and created a bridge to modern Judaism and the Torah.
I can’t say the authors would necessarily agree with me, but I liken the mythology of the Hebrew Bible to Homer’s Odyssey; the stories are famous, but we know they are not real. Another analogy might be The Tales of the Arabian Nights. One of the problems I see with taking traditional Biblical accounts too literally is when they are politicized and used to justify violence.
===========
The book was a lot to absorb, very detailed. I recommend the documentary instead....
https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detai...
.
One of the first things I learned from “The Bible Unearthed” is that archeological study of the Holy Land had been largely an exercise in confirmation bias, i.e., an effort to look for evidence that the stories of the Old Testament were true. This effort was unsuccessful.
Authors and archaeologists, Israel Finkelstein and Neil Silberman, took a different, more scientific approach. They would let the discoveries tell the story without any preconceived notions. They were not skeptics, but honest researchers.
Finkelstein himself was a firsthand witness to the dramatic changes in archeology that followed the Six-Day War in 1967.
“A young generation of Israeli archeologists,” the authors explain, “took to the field with a new method of investigation: Their goal was to explore, map and analyze the ancient landscape of the hill country--rather than only dig.” As a result of their energy and enterprise, the new generation “revolutionized the study of early Israel.”
So, Finkelstein and Silberman embrace, above all, the spirit of modern archaeology, which insists on approaching the Bible as an artifact to be studied and evaluated rather than a work of divine inspiration that must be embraced as a matter of faith.
In recent years, I had been referring to the Old Testament as a book of fairy tales. This book showed me that I was even more accurate than I realized.
There is no actual historical evidence for the existence of Abraham, or any of the Patriarchs; or Moses and the Exodus; the invasion of Canaan led by Joshua; the same goes for the whole period of Judges and the united monarchy of David and Solomon.
There was a King David, but there is no evidence of a vast empire as ascribed to him in the Bible. Instead, Jerusalem was a simple mountain village covering only 3 or 4 hectares. Solomon fares no better.
In fact, the scientists argue that it is impossible to say much of anything about ancient Israel until the seventh century B.C., around the time of the reign of King Josiah, when these stories were created and written down to help legitimize Josiah’s reign.
‘In that period,” Finkelstein says, “the narrative of the Bible was uniquely suited to further the religious reform and territorial ambitions of Judah.”
Understanding the role of the tribe and kingdom called Judah, as it turns out, is the key to decoding the origins and meanings of the Bible. Judah appears to have been sparsely settled, and Jerusalem, supposedly the royal capital of the united monarchy, was only “a typical highland village.” So, the biblical account can be understood as an effort by the chroniclers of Judah to invent a history worthy of their own king named Josiah. At this time, the development of literacy enabled these stories to be inscribed in a book that was treated as authoritative.
The irony is that it was the kingdom to the north, Israel, that was richer and more powerful than Judah. But it was wiped out by the Assyrians, leaving Judah to create the mythical history, including those of Joshua and David as models for conquest. But Josiah was killed by the Egyptians.
Only a few years later, the Babylonians attacked and conquered Judah. The temple of YAHWEH was burned down and Jerusalem left in ruins. Judah became a vassal state. Some of the inhabitants, including King Zedekiah, were exiled in what came to be known as The Babylonian Captivity. After that, the Messiah was no longer an earthly King, but a future hope. The exiled scribes expanded the mythology of the people and created a bridge to modern Judaism and the Torah.
I can’t say the authors would necessarily agree with me, but I liken the mythology of the Hebrew Bible to Homer’s Odyssey; the stories are famous, but we know they are not real. Another analogy might be The Tales of the Arabian Nights. One of the problems I see with taking traditional Biblical accounts too literally is when they are politicized and used to justify violence.
===========
The book was a lot to absorb, very detailed. I recommend the documentary instead....
https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detai...
September 13, 2011
The Bible Unearthed is a rich informative book that manages to deliver a large amount of detail in a highly readable prose that entertains without overwhelming the reader.
The book focuses on the archaeology of the Bronze Age and Iron Age Levant and traces the story that this archaeology unfolds as compared with the accounts given in the Hebrew Bible. Despite the subject matter, however, the authors do not appear to have any particular axe to grind and would seem to be more interested in discussing what the current evidence tells us (or, in many cases, merely suggests to us) rather than trying to make it fit any particular pet theory about the history of the Levant.
While the authors do (convincingly) argue that the archaeological record reveals a history of the Biblical kingdoms of Israel and Judah that often departs from the accounts given in the Deuteronomistic history, they do not present this information as part of any agenda to debunk or rebut the Bible - at least, not beyond the acknowledgment that there is really no evidence to support a strictly literal interpretation of the "historical" information provided in the Bible. As the authors note in closing: "the Bible's integrity and, in fact, its historicity, do not depend on dutiful historical 'proof' of any of its particular events or personalities.... The power of the biblical saga stems from its being a compelling and coherent narrative expression of the timeless themes of a people's liberation, continuing resistance to oppression, and quest for social equality. It eloquently expresses the deeply rooted sense of shared origins, experiences, and destiny that every human community needs in order to survive."
This broad-minded willingness to distinguish between tasks of logos and mythos permeates this book, as does a commitment not just to the objective presentation of the archaeological evidence, but also to a rigorous effort to distinguish between evidence which compels us toward one theory or another versus that which merely suggests.
In short, this is a book which should appeal to anyone with any interest in the history of the Biblical Levant who is not already thoroughly invested in the belief that the Bible can only be viewed through the prism of a strictly literal and inerrant historicity.
The book focuses on the archaeology of the Bronze Age and Iron Age Levant and traces the story that this archaeology unfolds as compared with the accounts given in the Hebrew Bible. Despite the subject matter, however, the authors do not appear to have any particular axe to grind and would seem to be more interested in discussing what the current evidence tells us (or, in many cases, merely suggests to us) rather than trying to make it fit any particular pet theory about the history of the Levant.
While the authors do (convincingly) argue that the archaeological record reveals a history of the Biblical kingdoms of Israel and Judah that often departs from the accounts given in the Deuteronomistic history, they do not present this information as part of any agenda to debunk or rebut the Bible - at least, not beyond the acknowledgment that there is really no evidence to support a strictly literal interpretation of the "historical" information provided in the Bible. As the authors note in closing: "the Bible's integrity and, in fact, its historicity, do not depend on dutiful historical 'proof' of any of its particular events or personalities.... The power of the biblical saga stems from its being a compelling and coherent narrative expression of the timeless themes of a people's liberation, continuing resistance to oppression, and quest for social equality. It eloquently expresses the deeply rooted sense of shared origins, experiences, and destiny that every human community needs in order to survive."
This broad-minded willingness to distinguish between tasks of logos and mythos permeates this book, as does a commitment not just to the objective presentation of the archaeological evidence, but also to a rigorous effort to distinguish between evidence which compels us toward one theory or another versus that which merely suggests.
In short, this is a book which should appeal to anyone with any interest in the history of the Biblical Levant who is not already thoroughly invested in the belief that the Bible can only be viewed through the prism of a strictly literal and inerrant historicity.
October 9, 2025
This well-documented book puts the sacred text of the Bible into perspective.
Indeed, the archaeological discoveries do not confirm the sacred text. However, humanity has always needed spirituality, and even if the authors of the text ultimately write a mythology, the emptiness of the recommendations that the clergy have too often forgotten remains a beacon for everyone.
Indeed, the archaeological discoveries do not confirm the sacred text. However, humanity has always needed spirituality, and even if the authors of the text ultimately write a mythology, the emptiness of the recommendations that the clergy have too often forgotten remains a beacon for everyone.
October 28, 2008
This book would be better known and more controversial if it was not so dry in its presentation. Basically it says that there is no archaeological evidence to support the Biblical story of the birth of the Jewish faith--which, of course, knocks the pins out from under Christianity and Islam as well, since all three great world religions essentially look to the Old Testament and believe in the same God. Whether one believes or disbelieves the premise, this is fascinating stuff for anyone interested in the history of religion.
February 23, 2011
When reading the Bible, you're not engaging in an activity 'normal people' do with their 'normal books.' The Bible isn't normal. It's an enigma. It's something out of place in our time, out of context. Produced in a literary world unlike our own, it's not strictly history and not strictly fiction. The challenge of understanding which is which, or when and why it was written is pretty well insurmountable with the helping hand of modern archaeology, but a damned nightmare without it.
Archaeologists Israel Finkelstein and Neil Silberman have put their heads together to provide the common man a survey of recent findings on the historicity of the Old Testament. What they have to offer is probably not a shock to scholars in the field, but it will be a fundamentalist nut shot. The picture of ancient Israel is different today than it was to us even a hundred years ago, and vastly different than the world the Bible portrays. Having dispensed with the fantastic legends of wandering wilderness hordes fleeing Egypt and lighting military campaigns through Canaan, the actual history of Israel unfolds very differently when looked at through the ruins.
Finkelstein and Silberman present firm challenges to more generally accepted popular notions. There is no evidence to suggest that a mass exodus of Hebrew slaves two million strong piled into Canaan one day (as it would have come as quite a surprise to the string of Egyptian army fortifications already in the country at the time). In fact, it seems now that what became Israel emerged naturally out of the existing population. Further on, if David ruled from Jerusalem, he did so from what amounted to little more than a hilltop village, later transformed in the minds of Judahite authors into the seat of a United Monarchy. And the monotheism it represented was more likely a later development around the time the Torah was being composed.
These and other iconoclastic revelations weave together 'Archaeology's new vision of ancient Israel and the origin of its sacred texts.' There still debate to be had on various topics, and those debates are happening, but in order to appreciate the biblical narrative, knowing its historical context––its real historical context––is invaluable.
The Bible Unearthed is not an overly challenging read. Written for an audience not already versed in biblical history or scholarship, it presents the biblical version of events and then attempts to address the level of accuracy––which differs throughout––with the help of archaeological findings. Finkelstein and Silberman draw on a wealth of sources from the ancient Near East, illuminating their theories with the best evidence available. The whole truth may never be known about any ancient civilization, but through science we can glimpse that world, and hopefully then come to a better understanding of it.
Archaeologists Israel Finkelstein and Neil Silberman have put their heads together to provide the common man a survey of recent findings on the historicity of the Old Testament. What they have to offer is probably not a shock to scholars in the field, but it will be a fundamentalist nut shot. The picture of ancient Israel is different today than it was to us even a hundred years ago, and vastly different than the world the Bible portrays. Having dispensed with the fantastic legends of wandering wilderness hordes fleeing Egypt and lighting military campaigns through Canaan, the actual history of Israel unfolds very differently when looked at through the ruins.
Finkelstein and Silberman present firm challenges to more generally accepted popular notions. There is no evidence to suggest that a mass exodus of Hebrew slaves two million strong piled into Canaan one day (as it would have come as quite a surprise to the string of Egyptian army fortifications already in the country at the time). In fact, it seems now that what became Israel emerged naturally out of the existing population. Further on, if David ruled from Jerusalem, he did so from what amounted to little more than a hilltop village, later transformed in the minds of Judahite authors into the seat of a United Monarchy. And the monotheism it represented was more likely a later development around the time the Torah was being composed.
These and other iconoclastic revelations weave together 'Archaeology's new vision of ancient Israel and the origin of its sacred texts.' There still debate to be had on various topics, and those debates are happening, but in order to appreciate the biblical narrative, knowing its historical context––its real historical context––is invaluable.
The Bible Unearthed is not an overly challenging read. Written for an audience not already versed in biblical history or scholarship, it presents the biblical version of events and then attempts to address the level of accuracy––which differs throughout––with the help of archaeological findings. Finkelstein and Silberman draw on a wealth of sources from the ancient Near East, illuminating their theories with the best evidence available. The whole truth may never be known about any ancient civilization, but through science we can glimpse that world, and hopefully then come to a better understanding of it.
January 19, 2019
یکی از موجبات بی ایمانی مردم آمریکا در روزهای نخستین پس از استقلال آمریکا، عدم اعتقاد اکثر مردم به صحّت مندرجات و مضامین کتاب مقدس بود. بسیاری از مردم تحصیل کرده، تحت تاثیر افکار نویسندگان فرانسه، کتاب مقدس را مجموعه ای از اساطیر و افسانه های فاقد مبنای تاریخی به حساب می آورده و گمان می کردند روزگاری که این کتاب بر افکار مردم حکومت می کرد سپری گشته است.
تاریخ دانان و دانشمندان از تمدّن باستانی بابل و نینوا و صور آگاه نبودند و لذا روایات کتاب مقدس را از شکوه و عظمت تمدّنهای آن سرزمین ها افسانه می پنداشتند. امّا ناگهان کشف کاوشهای باستانشنایی در عراق اوضاع را دگرگون کرد و...
تاریخ دانان و دانشمندان از تمدّن باستانی بابل و نینوا و صور آگاه نبودند و لذا روایات کتاب مقدس را از شکوه و عظمت تمدّنهای آن سرزمین ها افسانه می پنداشتند. امّا ناگهان کشف کاوشهای باستانشنایی در عراق اوضاع را دگرگون کرد و...
December 14, 2024
This fascinating, highly readable book challenges the historicity of many of the Hebrew Bible’s most familiar and powerful stories. The Patriarchs and their wanderings in Canaan, Moses and the Exodus, Joshua’s conquests of Canaan, the great, united Empire under David and Solomon — none of these survived the verdict of the archeological evidence. None are historical.
But this isn’t a negative book just attempting to strip away cherished beliefs. In following the evidence, the authors reveal fascinating facts not well known. We learn of the power and significance of the Northern Kingdom of Israel under the powerful Omri dynasty, which appears to be the actual model for the fabled glories of Solomon’s kingdom. We discover that there is historical evidence that King David existed (a monument references the House of David). Most importantly, we learn about when and how and why the Deuteronomistic history (the books of Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) was written, and what purpose these stories were meant to serve, and why they are still powerful and important.
While both of the books authors are archeologists and scholars, this is not a scholarly book. It is written for a popular, not a scholarly audience. At this it succeeds admirably, as it is a fast and fascinating read, delivering complex information while never becoming boring.
But this isn’t a negative book just attempting to strip away cherished beliefs. In following the evidence, the authors reveal fascinating facts not well known. We learn of the power and significance of the Northern Kingdom of Israel under the powerful Omri dynasty, which appears to be the actual model for the fabled glories of Solomon’s kingdom. We discover that there is historical evidence that King David existed (a monument references the House of David). Most importantly, we learn about when and how and why the Deuteronomistic history (the books of Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) was written, and what purpose these stories were meant to serve, and why they are still powerful and important.
While both of the books authors are archeologists and scholars, this is not a scholarly book. It is written for a popular, not a scholarly audience. At this it succeeds admirably, as it is a fast and fascinating read, delivering complex information while never becoming boring.
November 2, 2020
Authors Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman examine archaeological evidence in an effort to shine further light on the writing and creation of the first five books of the old testament of the Bible or the Pentateuch.
From a historical perspective, this book was fascinating to me.
"Recent developments in archaeology have finally allowed us to bridge the gap between the study of biblical texts and the archaeological finds. We can now see that the Bible is - along with distinctive pottery forms, architectural styles, and Hebrew inscriptions - a characteristic artifact that tells a great deal about the society in which it was produced. pg 22, ebook
This was the first time I had read a non-fiction book about the actual history of events and leaders from the Bible rather than a theological interpretation. This may have been one of the reasons why I enjoyed it so much, but, despite my inexperience with books on such topics, I still believe it is very well done.
The Bible Unearthed could be a challenging read for some. For example, it doesn't hesitate to look at potential political reasons for why the Bible was written and constructed in the manner that it was.
The authors also don't shy away from discussing when there is a lack of historical evidence for long-held assumptions or ideas.
"As far as we can see on the basis of the archaeological surveys, Judah remained relatively empty of permanent population, quite isolated, and very marginal right up to and past the presumed time of David and Solomon, with no major urban centers and with no pronounced hierarchy of hamlets, villages, and towns." pg 132
Religion doesn't seem to be a topic that invites inspection or examination. This book does, in my opinion, a brilliant job of looking at only the evidence.
From a historical perspective, this book was fascinating to me.
"Recent developments in archaeology have finally allowed us to bridge the gap between the study of biblical texts and the archaeological finds. We can now see that the Bible is - along with distinctive pottery forms, architectural styles, and Hebrew inscriptions - a characteristic artifact that tells a great deal about the society in which it was produced. pg 22, ebook
This was the first time I had read a non-fiction book about the actual history of events and leaders from the Bible rather than a theological interpretation. This may have been one of the reasons why I enjoyed it so much, but, despite my inexperience with books on such topics, I still believe it is very well done.
The Bible Unearthed could be a challenging read for some. For example, it doesn't hesitate to look at potential political reasons for why the Bible was written and constructed in the manner that it was.
The authors also don't shy away from discussing when there is a lack of historical evidence for long-held assumptions or ideas.
"As far as we can see on the basis of the archaeological surveys, Judah remained relatively empty of permanent population, quite isolated, and very marginal right up to and past the presumed time of David and Solomon, with no major urban centers and with no pronounced hierarchy of hamlets, villages, and towns." pg 132
Religion doesn't seem to be a topic that invites inspection or examination. This book does, in my opinion, a brilliant job of looking at only the evidence.
September 5, 2014
This has been a fascinating excursion into the ancient history of Israel, Judah and the emergence of the Jewish people as an identifiable group who emerged from all the peoples of Canaan.
Matching the archaeological record with the historical narratives of the bible, the authors show that much of what the so-called Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Islam and Judaism itself) hold as central stories of creation, settlement, exile and Exodus from Egypt were written in about the 7th century BC and wove together myth, oral history and doctrine to support the Jewish state of Judah.
The great buildings of David and Solomon referred to in the Bible do not date from the eras at which those kings probably lived, but from periods of Assyrian occupation. There is no evidence of early enslavement in Egypt at the time it was supposed to happen, and no evidence of the conquest of Canaan by the Jews after Moses, And so on.
Finkelstein and Silberman are deeply interested in the emergence of an identifiable Jewish culture in something like its modern form - and this dates to the written codification of the Pentateuch and in particular the Deuteronomic histories of the 7th century BC.
They end the main part of the book (there are extensive appendices) by saying that 'the Bible's integrity and, in fact, its historicity, not not depend on any particular "proof" of any of its particular events or personalities. ... the power of the biblical saga stems from its being a compelling and coherent narrative expression of the timeless theme of a people's liberation, continuing resistance to oppression, and quest for social equality.
...In specific historical terms, we now know that the Bible's epic saga first emerged as a response to the pressures, difficulties, challenges and hopes faced by the tiny kingdom of Judah in the decades before its destruction and the even tinier Temple community in Jerusalem' in the period after the exile in Babylon.
One of the most interesting things for me was to see how the history of rise and fall of kings was linked retrospectively to their adherence to the single-god doctrine that finally came to be the dominant form of Jewish worship. Good king (believer in one God and destroyer of idols) and the country prospers; bad king (worships other gods and allows others to do so) and the land is invaded and suffers.
Highly recommended for anyone interested in the ancient or modern history of the Middle East, and the history of religion.
Matching the archaeological record with the historical narratives of the bible, the authors show that much of what the so-called Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Islam and Judaism itself) hold as central stories of creation, settlement, exile and Exodus from Egypt were written in about the 7th century BC and wove together myth, oral history and doctrine to support the Jewish state of Judah.
The great buildings of David and Solomon referred to in the Bible do not date from the eras at which those kings probably lived, but from periods of Assyrian occupation. There is no evidence of early enslavement in Egypt at the time it was supposed to happen, and no evidence of the conquest of Canaan by the Jews after Moses, And so on.
Finkelstein and Silberman are deeply interested in the emergence of an identifiable Jewish culture in something like its modern form - and this dates to the written codification of the Pentateuch and in particular the Deuteronomic histories of the 7th century BC.
They end the main part of the book (there are extensive appendices) by saying that 'the Bible's integrity and, in fact, its historicity, not not depend on any particular "proof" of any of its particular events or personalities. ... the power of the biblical saga stems from its being a compelling and coherent narrative expression of the timeless theme of a people's liberation, continuing resistance to oppression, and quest for social equality.
...In specific historical terms, we now know that the Bible's epic saga first emerged as a response to the pressures, difficulties, challenges and hopes faced by the tiny kingdom of Judah in the decades before its destruction and the even tinier Temple community in Jerusalem' in the period after the exile in Babylon.
One of the most interesting things for me was to see how the history of rise and fall of kings was linked retrospectively to their adherence to the single-god doctrine that finally came to be the dominant form of Jewish worship. Good king (believer in one God and destroyer of idols) and the country prospers; bad king (worships other gods and allows others to do so) and the land is invaded and suffers.
Highly recommended for anyone interested in the ancient or modern history of the Middle East, and the history of religion.
January 18, 2008
Convincing presentation by two Israeli scholars of the lack of archeological evidence supporting the Bible as an historical account, and the large amount of evidence contradicting the Biblical account of history. The authors' hypothesis of the Biblical account's origins and motives is separate from this overwhelming amount of data pointing to the Bible as largely historical fiction.
April 24, 2016
Bible plus archaeology equals a rip-snortin' romp through centuries of dogma, tradition, and guesstimations writ in stone. No axes to grind to be found here, but if you're a Literalist, this probably isn't for you. Most others will learn a lot.
March 16, 2009
A good read! I really enjoyed this book. It is well written and moves along nicely. Using the scientific facts of archaeology in Isreal, it pulls the rug right out from Kings David and Solomon, and replaces it with an understanding of what really happened, where the Isrealis really came from, and why was the Old Testament written the way it was if it isnt the truth.
August 28, 2021
This book was quite interesting. It compared the history of Israel from the Scriptures to archaeological evidence and known writings of the time. It theorizes that some of the stories in the Bible are actually metaphors and compares the stories to what was actually happening at around the estimated time of the writing of the Books of Moses. It also theorizes that since some of what the Bible states regarding Israel/Judah does not match up with archaeological evidence, that it was more of an idealized version of what they wanted based on local legends and kingly ambitions.
If you are interested in history and archaeology, I recommend that you read this book.
If you are interested in history and archaeology, I recommend that you read this book.
April 10, 2008
For a born again Atheist, this was priceless... great read and certainly puts things into perspective
November 4, 2012
This was a really smooth read – beautifully and concisely written. I've been a fan for some years of Werner Keller's The Bible as History, and it still has a lot of good material on the archaeology of the Bible. But Finkelstein and Silberman take the scholarship into the 21st century. A tremendous amount of archaeology has been done in Israel since Keller's book was written (1960s) and last revised (early 1980s). This allows Finkelstein and Silberman to overturn many of Keller's conclusions, and provide definitive answers to many of the core mysteries about the Old Testament. Did the Patriarchs exist? Who were the first Israelites and where did they come from? Did the Exodus really happen? Did Joshua actually invade and conquer Canaan? Were Solomon and David great kings who ruled a powerful and united Kingdom of Israel? And most important: Why was the Bible written? And when? Whose interests was it meant to further? All these topics are addressed, and settled in a very convincing way. Apparently, there has been some controversy about the conclusions of this book, and I'd like to read some of those criticisms to get a more rounded view. But if you are interested in the Old Testament, this book will transform your view of it, and take your insight to a much deeper level.
Read
April 1, 2016Among the most popular introductory level books on any biblical subject ever written. Just be a little bit careful, Finkelstein works in his "low chronology" without preface, which is good for his inteded audience, but bad for a broader view, as it remains contentious. It's worth picking up Ancient Israel: What Do We Know and How Do We Know It? to help spot where he does so.
February 10, 2024
This book is a careful analysis of the archaeological evidence for events in what the authors call the Bible, by which they mean what the Christian tradition refers to as the Old Testament. Their conclusion is that there was no Abraham, no Moses, and no violent conquest of Canaan. There was indeed a collapse of Canaanite culture, but -
“The emergence of early Israel was an outcome of the collapse of Canaanite culture, not its cause. And most of the Israelites did not come from outside Canaan – they emerged from within it.”
Camels were not widely used in the ancient Near East till after 1000 BC. There were no Philistines before 1200 BC. There are a great many anachronisms in the patriarchal narratives which are clues that it was really composed in, and reflects, a much later period:
“The most evocative and consistent details in the Exodus story come from the seventh century BC - six hundred years after the events were supposed to have taken place.”
The Exodus from Egypt, in other words, is a myth, along with so much else. The historical kernel of the Old Testament lies in the Kingdom of Judah: the poorer, weaker, more rural, and less influential southern neighbour of the Kingdom of Israel – which rose to (brief) prominence after the destruction of the Northern Kingdom by the Assyrians in 722 BC. The biblical narratives are therefore an exaltation of the religious and political reforms of King Josiah of Judah (640- 609 BC) and a projection into the past of the particular ideological concerns of his circle. David and Solomon existed: but they were not the mighty rulers depicted in the Bible, more like hill chieftains. The House of Omri in the northern Kingdom was the real focus of power and splendour, till it was overthrown.
This is all fascinating stuff and it is pretty convincingly argued. At one point the great biblical archaeologist (and Catholic priest) Ronald de Vaux is quoted:
“If the historical faith of Israel is not founded in history, such faith is erroneous….and our faith is also.”
This book does not necessarily demolish religious faith (if that is what you have). For there clearly was a historical Israel – and the authors point out that despite all the cultural continuities and discontinuities of communities in the ancient Holy Land, there is one very old and intriguing difference: some places had pig bones in their rubbish heaps, and some places did not. You can still be persuaded by this book and be persuaded by some form of religious faith which traces its roots to the Bible. It’s just that you will need to adjust or reject many of the things the traditional understanding has thought to be true.
I liked this book but I am not giving it more than three stars. This is partly because it is not as revolutionary as it claims to be: it is really only an analysis of what most biblical scholars have known since long before it was written. And a lot of it is already out of date (there is no consideration of the latest DNA evidence, for example). Also, it could do with some proper illustrations and end notes. And most of all, any book which confines itself to mere archaeology can never do full justice to the subject. I am persuaded by the book’s central thesis – that the Old Testament is essentially seventh century BC Kingdom of Judah propaganda – but where does that leave a fragment like the Song of Miriam in Exodus 15: 18-20 -
“Sing ye to the Lord, for he hath triumphed gloriously:
The horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea.”
Most scholars agree this is possibly the oldest fragment in the entire Bible, certainly much older than the seventh century BC – maybe six hundred years older. Certainly, the Josianic reformers incorporated it in their much later narrative – but where did it first arise, and to what does it refer? My own money is that it is not about Moses parting the Red Sea – as the book of Exodus claims – but an echo of an ancient Canaanite cultic song with a fertility context, to do with the conflict between the storm god Baal and Yam the chaos god of the sea. But this kind of literary evidence is not considered by a study focussed on the material evidence.
“The emergence of early Israel was an outcome of the collapse of Canaanite culture, not its cause. And most of the Israelites did not come from outside Canaan – they emerged from within it.”
Camels were not widely used in the ancient Near East till after 1000 BC. There were no Philistines before 1200 BC. There are a great many anachronisms in the patriarchal narratives which are clues that it was really composed in, and reflects, a much later period:
“The most evocative and consistent details in the Exodus story come from the seventh century BC - six hundred years after the events were supposed to have taken place.”
The Exodus from Egypt, in other words, is a myth, along with so much else. The historical kernel of the Old Testament lies in the Kingdom of Judah: the poorer, weaker, more rural, and less influential southern neighbour of the Kingdom of Israel – which rose to (brief) prominence after the destruction of the Northern Kingdom by the Assyrians in 722 BC. The biblical narratives are therefore an exaltation of the religious and political reforms of King Josiah of Judah (640- 609 BC) and a projection into the past of the particular ideological concerns of his circle. David and Solomon existed: but they were not the mighty rulers depicted in the Bible, more like hill chieftains. The House of Omri in the northern Kingdom was the real focus of power and splendour, till it was overthrown.
This is all fascinating stuff and it is pretty convincingly argued. At one point the great biblical archaeologist (and Catholic priest) Ronald de Vaux is quoted:
“If the historical faith of Israel is not founded in history, such faith is erroneous….and our faith is also.”
This book does not necessarily demolish religious faith (if that is what you have). For there clearly was a historical Israel – and the authors point out that despite all the cultural continuities and discontinuities of communities in the ancient Holy Land, there is one very old and intriguing difference: some places had pig bones in their rubbish heaps, and some places did not. You can still be persuaded by this book and be persuaded by some form of religious faith which traces its roots to the Bible. It’s just that you will need to adjust or reject many of the things the traditional understanding has thought to be true.
I liked this book but I am not giving it more than three stars. This is partly because it is not as revolutionary as it claims to be: it is really only an analysis of what most biblical scholars have known since long before it was written. And a lot of it is already out of date (there is no consideration of the latest DNA evidence, for example). Also, it could do with some proper illustrations and end notes. And most of all, any book which confines itself to mere archaeology can never do full justice to the subject. I am persuaded by the book’s central thesis – that the Old Testament is essentially seventh century BC Kingdom of Judah propaganda – but where does that leave a fragment like the Song of Miriam in Exodus 15: 18-20 -
“Sing ye to the Lord, for he hath triumphed gloriously:
The horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea.”
Most scholars agree this is possibly the oldest fragment in the entire Bible, certainly much older than the seventh century BC – maybe six hundred years older. Certainly, the Josianic reformers incorporated it in their much later narrative – but where did it first arise, and to what does it refer? My own money is that it is not about Moses parting the Red Sea – as the book of Exodus claims – but an echo of an ancient Canaanite cultic song with a fertility context, to do with the conflict between the storm god Baal and Yam the chaos god of the sea. But this kind of literary evidence is not considered by a study focussed on the material evidence.
October 12, 2013
First published in 2001, Archaeologists Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman's fine book will challenge people with an orthodox view of the Bible because, as the archaeological record shows, many of the events recorded in it,did not take place quite as the narrative says.
As Finkelstein and Silberman – both archaeologists – show, the archaeological record tells a very different story from the traditionally accepted one. Their story is more believable and, as it turns out, more accurate than the orthodox view of the Bible is historically pretty accurate, and events like Joshua’s battle against Jericho, the Exodus, and the great kingdoms of David and Solomon were true. Archaeology shows that they could not be, because there is no record of them where and when there should be.
“The power of the biblical saga,” they write “eloquently expresses the deeply rooted sense of shared origins, experiences, and destiny that every human community needs in order to survive” (page 318). The biblical saga is woven together from myth, folktale, origin and hero stories, songs and poetry from different times creating a story that met the political needs of specific times. “The authors and editors of the Deuteronomistic History and parts of the Pentateuch gathered and reworked the most precious traditions of the people of Israel to gird the nation for the great national struggle that lay ahead” (page 283). What was needed was “a great national epic of liberation for all the tribes of Israel, against a great and domineering pharaoh, whose realm was uncannily similar to its geographical details to that of” pharaoh Pammetichus, who reigned during the 7th century BCE.
The archaeological record shows conclusively that the great events of Hebrew history (the Exodus, the origins of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob/Yaakov, the great kingdoms of David and Solomon) did not happen as written, and that there was no place in geography called “Eden” where God once wandered in the forest. Biblical history “was not history writing in the modern sense. It was a composition simultaneously ideological and theological” (page 284). In other words, the Deuteronomistic History and the Bible itself are compilations woven together over time to tell the religious and cultural story of a people, much in the way that the Popul Vuh (Book of the People) – a collection of mythistorical narratives of the Post Classic Quiché kingdom in Guatemala's western highlands – were collected.
This is not a point of view that will go down well with fundamentalists who insist on making science conform to their literalistic reading of the Bible as accurate history. But it makes the Bible – these ancient stories – more acceptable to people like me because it makes the narrative more real and “true” as myths are “true”. And in ancient times, myth and factual events were more often interwoven than not. George Washington, for instance, didn’t have to actually chopped down a cherry tree for me to understand the “truth” of the story – that George Washington could be trusted because, when asked about the tree, he told the truth.
Reading the Bible this way, it is easy to place various parts of the narrative within their historic context (such as specific dress and dietary rules) rather than having to see them as truths-for-all-time-and-all-people, as the literalists see them. I found the book both fascinating and a joy to read.
As Finkelstein and Silberman – both archaeologists – show, the archaeological record tells a very different story from the traditionally accepted one. Their story is more believable and, as it turns out, more accurate than the orthodox view of the Bible is historically pretty accurate, and events like Joshua’s battle against Jericho, the Exodus, and the great kingdoms of David and Solomon were true. Archaeology shows that they could not be, because there is no record of them where and when there should be.
“The power of the biblical saga,” they write “eloquently expresses the deeply rooted sense of shared origins, experiences, and destiny that every human community needs in order to survive” (page 318). The biblical saga is woven together from myth, folktale, origin and hero stories, songs and poetry from different times creating a story that met the political needs of specific times. “The authors and editors of the Deuteronomistic History and parts of the Pentateuch gathered and reworked the most precious traditions of the people of Israel to gird the nation for the great national struggle that lay ahead” (page 283). What was needed was “a great national epic of liberation for all the tribes of Israel, against a great and domineering pharaoh, whose realm was uncannily similar to its geographical details to that of” pharaoh Pammetichus, who reigned during the 7th century BCE.
The archaeological record shows conclusively that the great events of Hebrew history (the Exodus, the origins of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob/Yaakov, the great kingdoms of David and Solomon) did not happen as written, and that there was no place in geography called “Eden” where God once wandered in the forest. Biblical history “was not history writing in the modern sense. It was a composition simultaneously ideological and theological” (page 284). In other words, the Deuteronomistic History and the Bible itself are compilations woven together over time to tell the religious and cultural story of a people, much in the way that the Popul Vuh (Book of the People) – a collection of mythistorical narratives of the Post Classic Quiché kingdom in Guatemala's western highlands – were collected.
This is not a point of view that will go down well with fundamentalists who insist on making science conform to their literalistic reading of the Bible as accurate history. But it makes the Bible – these ancient stories – more acceptable to people like me because it makes the narrative more real and “true” as myths are “true”. And in ancient times, myth and factual events were more often interwoven than not. George Washington, for instance, didn’t have to actually chopped down a cherry tree for me to understand the “truth” of the story – that George Washington could be trusted because, when asked about the tree, he told the truth.
Reading the Bible this way, it is easy to place various parts of the narrative within their historic context (such as specific dress and dietary rules) rather than having to see them as truths-for-all-time-and-all-people, as the literalists see them. I found the book both fascinating and a joy to read.
December 3, 2021
Good book, but with a suicidal flaw.
Of course, he is right: no archeological evidence of the exodus and many other stories. An of course he is right too that the small evidence that we have indicates a different history, maybe happened an exodus but not as indicated in the bible.
But he is too incautious to write that: new genetics maps, new archeological evidence from other lands, new methods could change the picture, so you can't jump too easy to draw any conclusion.
That also affects my lecture on the book: he has evidence that David and Solomon legends are mostly flawed, and written by the survivors. Only that may be new evidence could contradict these findings.
So is an excellent book, but way too ambitious in their conclusions.
Of course, he is right: no archeological evidence of the exodus and many other stories. An of course he is right too that the small evidence that we have indicates a different history, maybe happened an exodus but not as indicated in the bible.
But he is too incautious to write that: new genetics maps, new archeological evidence from other lands, new methods could change the picture, so you can't jump too easy to draw any conclusion.
That also affects my lecture on the book: he has evidence that David and Solomon legends are mostly flawed, and written by the survivors. Only that may be new evidence could contradict these findings.
So is an excellent book, but way too ambitious in their conclusions.
February 12, 2013
I don't understand how a subject so fascinating could be so boring! There were lots of new historical facts I had never considered and discrepancies between the Bible and archeological research that I didn't know about presented in this book. Despite this, most of the book passed in a blur of kings, dates, wars and disinterest.
May 7, 2023
archeology shows no evidence for the exodus, joshua battles, the glorious kingdom of solomon, or lots of other hebrew myths. judean tribes were backward peasants whose priests created the myths to validate king josiah in unifying israel. very interesting, but not as good as who wrote the bible.
December 17, 2014
كتاب أكاديمي يستحق القراءة المتأنية، يتناول القصص التوراتية من باب علم الآثار والتاريخ اللذان يختص بهما مؤلفا الكتاب: إسرائيل فنكلشتاين ونيل سيلبرمان.
يحاول الكتاب معالجة القصة التوراتية من باب الموجودات الأثرية، فينسف ما لا يمكن قبوله ويؤكد ما يمكن أن يتطابق مع الآثار الموجودة (ولو فرضيا)، وينتقد الكتاب النظريات السابقة حول الدخول الإسرائيلي لأرض كنعان ونمط هذا الدخول، ويؤكد الكتاب على فكرة أساسية مفادها أن التوراة كُتِبت في القرن السابع ق.م وتمت صياغة القصص التي يحتويها بثقافة ولغة وضمن ظروف القرن السابع السياسية والاقتصادية والاجتماعية.
أهم النقاط التي يشكك بها الكتاب هي:
- خروج إبراهيم من أور ودخوله إلى فلسطين وقصة الآباء، بالطريقة التي وضعت في سفر الخروج لأن ذلك يتعارض مع الموجودات الأثرية ومع التاريخ، ويعتبر أن سبب اختيار أور هو من وضع العائدين من السبي وبسبب تأثرهم بالحضارة البابلية السائدة حينها.
- الخروج من مصر بالطريقة التي وردت في التوراة لعدم امكانية مطابقتها مع الجغرافيا والتاريخ والآثار.
- أنه لا أثر لمملكة داود وسليمان العظيمة في الفترة التي وردت في التوراة وأن القدس في تلك الفترة لم تكن إلا قرية صغيرة.
- يناقش بشكل مستفيض الآثار التي وجدت في منطقة الجليل (والتي تعتبر مملكة إسرائيل في التوراة) وما يسمى بمنطقة مجدو وينتقد العديد من الفرضيات التي بنيت على القصص االتوراتية حول النظام السياسي والاقتصادي والديني وطريقة تأسيسه ونموه وصولا لانهياره ويحاول بناء سيناريوهات جديدة أكثر انسجاما من وجهة نظر المؤلفين مع الموجودات الأثرية.
- يتناول فترة ما بعد سقوط المملكة الشمالية وصعوبة مطابقة القصة التوراتية واتساع مملكة يهوذا مثلا كما جاء في التوراة مع الموجودات الأثرية.
قطع الكاتبان شوطا كبيرا، وأظهرا شجاعة لا يمكن انكارها في نقد محتويات التوراة واعتبارها مؤلفات وضعت في وقت متأخر عن تاريخ حدوثها (إن كانت حدثت) ..
أنصح بقراءة الكتاب، والتفكير مليا في الأفكار التي يطرحها، ووضعها ضمن اطار أكبر بقراءة كتب أخرى في نفس المجال سواء لعلماء توراتيين آخرين أو لكتاب عرب اجتهدوا في هذا المجال مثل كمال الصليبي وفرج ديب وخاصة فاضل الربيعي الذي تمكن من ايجاد المسرح البديل والأكثر اقناعا لأحداث التوراة.
يحاول الكتاب معالجة القصة التوراتية من باب الموجودات الأثرية، فينسف ما لا يمكن قبوله ويؤكد ما يمكن أن يتطابق مع الآثار الموجودة (ولو فرضيا)، وينتقد الكتاب النظريات السابقة حول الدخول الإسرائيلي لأرض كنعان ونمط هذا الدخول، ويؤكد الكتاب على فكرة أساسية مفادها أن التوراة كُتِبت في القرن السابع ق.م وتمت صياغة القصص التي يحتويها بثقافة ولغة وضمن ظروف القرن السابع السياسية والاقتصادية والاجتماعية.
أهم النقاط التي يشكك بها الكتاب هي:
- خروج إبراهيم من أور ودخوله إلى فلسطين وقصة الآباء، بالطريقة التي وضعت في سفر الخروج لأن ذلك يتعارض مع الموجودات الأثرية ومع التاريخ، ويعتبر أن سبب اختيار أور هو من وضع العائدين من السبي وبسبب تأثرهم بالحضارة البابلية السائدة حينها.
- الخروج من مصر بالطريقة التي وردت في التوراة لعدم امكانية مطابقتها مع الجغرافيا والتاريخ والآثار.
- أنه لا أثر لمملكة داود وسليمان العظيمة في الفترة التي وردت في التوراة وأن القدس في تلك الفترة لم تكن إلا قرية صغيرة.
- يناقش بشكل مستفيض الآثار التي وجدت في منطقة الجليل (والتي تعتبر مملكة إسرائيل في التوراة) وما يسمى بمنطقة مجدو وينتقد العديد من الفرضيات التي بنيت على القصص االتوراتية حول النظام السياسي والاقتصادي والديني وطريقة تأسيسه ونموه وصولا لانهياره ويحاول بناء سيناريوهات جديدة أكثر انسجاما من وجهة نظر المؤلفين مع الموجودات الأثرية.
- يتناول فترة ما بعد سقوط المملكة الشمالية وصعوبة مطابقة القصة التوراتية واتساع مملكة يهوذا مثلا كما جاء في التوراة مع الموجودات الأثرية.
قطع الكاتبان شوطا كبيرا، وأظهرا شجاعة لا يمكن انكارها في نقد محتويات التوراة واعتبارها مؤلفات وضعت في وقت متأخر عن تاريخ حدوثها (إن كانت حدثت) ..
أنصح بقراءة الكتاب، والتفكير مليا في الأفكار التي يطرحها، ووضعها ضمن اطار أكبر بقراءة كتب أخرى في نفس المجال سواء لعلماء توراتيين آخرين أو لكتاب عرب اجتهدوا في هذا المجال مثل كمال الصليبي وفرج ديب وخاصة فاضل الربيعي الذي تمكن من ايجاد المسرح البديل والأكثر اقناعا لأحداث التوراة.
February 24, 2016
Dr. Finkelstein sure whipped up some controvery with this book - but you gotta give the guy credit for looking at something so ancient under a new lens.
October 15, 2024
Un libro excelente que describe los descubrimientos arqueológicos realizados en oriente medio desde los años '70 y la forma en que éstos han cambiado la interpretación de los anteriores para desmontar historias bíblicas.
No se trata de que desmienta aquellos sucesos claramente mitológicos por violar las leyes de la física, sino aquellos como el éxodo o la monarquía davídica que tradicionalmente se han considerado ecos de una historia real (y que por ello han servido para interpretar y datar hallazgos arqueológicos).
Así, el libro describe un oriente medio en el que los judíos son de origen cananeo, en el que David no es más que un caudillo de tribus que no llega a construir un reino (en el sentido de una entidad política unificada con una administración) y en el que todas estas historias son reescritas (o inventadas) en el s. VII a.e.c. por Josías para justificar su reinado.
El libro va más allá, interpretando los escritos postexiliares, la imposición del monoteísmo o el cambio en la forma en que el pueblo judío interpreta la voluntad de su dios para adecuarla a los sucesos que tienen lugar después del s. VII. a.e.c.
Una lectura imprescindible para todo el que quiera realizar una aproximación crítica al judeocristianismo.
No se trata de que desmienta aquellos sucesos claramente mitológicos por violar las leyes de la física, sino aquellos como el éxodo o la monarquía davídica que tradicionalmente se han considerado ecos de una historia real (y que por ello han servido para interpretar y datar hallazgos arqueológicos).
Así, el libro describe un oriente medio en el que los judíos son de origen cananeo, en el que David no es más que un caudillo de tribus que no llega a construir un reino (en el sentido de una entidad política unificada con una administración) y en el que todas estas historias son reescritas (o inventadas) en el s. VII a.e.c. por Josías para justificar su reinado.
El libro va más allá, interpretando los escritos postexiliares, la imposición del monoteísmo o el cambio en la forma en que el pueblo judío interpreta la voluntad de su dios para adecuarla a los sucesos que tienen lugar después del s. VII. a.e.c.
Una lectura imprescindible para todo el que quiera realizar una aproximación crítica al judeocristianismo.
March 9, 2011
A brilliant book that demonstrates the essentially mythical nature of much of biblical history. Finkelstein and Silberman convincingly make use of archaeological evidence and biblical scholarship to illuminate the origins of the core of the Hebrew Bible. The conclusions may prove provocative to some but, as an atheist, this book is a wonderful introduction to an awesome literary tradition that can frighten away those without faith unless it is properly understood how, where and why these stories first emerged.
February 4, 2023
A cynical but persuasively argued account of the history of the Old Testament.
It begins by analyzing the stories of Genesis, Exodus and the conquest of Canaan, determining whether any accounts therein can be verified in the archeological record. The answer is essentially no, but rather a preponderance of evidence points to these stories being written in the 8th century BC around the time of King Josiah of Judah. This was a deliberate act in which history was not so much as recorded as it was manufactured, with political goals in mind. By incorporating distant memories and shared folktales, a narrative is woven which presents a common identity for the people of Judah and the neighboring people of Israel. Not only does this stake Judah's claim on the once prosperous neighboring region of Israel, but also furthered the ends of the monotheistic religious reform movement centered around YHWH. With the invasion of Babylon shortly thereafter and the exile of a large portion of Judah, this newly crafted chronicle becomes the pillar around which the displaced community centers their identity. Modifications and additions are made to make sense of this catastrophe both during the exiled period as well as during the period of return.
Constant references are made to the archeological record to justify the above claims as well as to disprove the more literal interpretations of the Bible. I found particularly interesting the revisionist take on David's kingdom of Judah in comparison to the Kingdom of Israel. What we see is that Judah was a provincial backwater during the time of David and the successive generations. Instead of a United monarchy under David, the only semblance of a kingdom can be found in the north, in Israel. Contrary to the biblical account Ahab and Jezebel appear to have been among the most successful leaders of a joint kingdom. Thus the story of Kings is in some sense nothing more than a jealous daydream of a less prosperous neighbor.
It begins by analyzing the stories of Genesis, Exodus and the conquest of Canaan, determining whether any accounts therein can be verified in the archeological record. The answer is essentially no, but rather a preponderance of evidence points to these stories being written in the 8th century BC around the time of King Josiah of Judah. This was a deliberate act in which history was not so much as recorded as it was manufactured, with political goals in mind. By incorporating distant memories and shared folktales, a narrative is woven which presents a common identity for the people of Judah and the neighboring people of Israel. Not only does this stake Judah's claim on the once prosperous neighboring region of Israel, but also furthered the ends of the monotheistic religious reform movement centered around YHWH. With the invasion of Babylon shortly thereafter and the exile of a large portion of Judah, this newly crafted chronicle becomes the pillar around which the displaced community centers their identity. Modifications and additions are made to make sense of this catastrophe both during the exiled period as well as during the period of return.
Constant references are made to the archeological record to justify the above claims as well as to disprove the more literal interpretations of the Bible. I found particularly interesting the revisionist take on David's kingdom of Judah in comparison to the Kingdom of Israel. What we see is that Judah was a provincial backwater during the time of David and the successive generations. Instead of a United monarchy under David, the only semblance of a kingdom can be found in the north, in Israel. Contrary to the biblical account Ahab and Jezebel appear to have been among the most successful leaders of a joint kingdom. Thus the story of Kings is in some sense nothing more than a jealous daydream of a less prosperous neighbor.
April 23, 2013
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 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.
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.
June 17, 2015
Me cuesta entender o creer, que haya tanta discusión respecto de si las cosas sucedieron realmente como lo dice la Biblia o no. Desde que tengo memoria siempre me enseñaron que la Biblia no era un libro de historia.
Seamos honestos, aveces me encuentro con argumentos que cuestionan mi fe, pero si la deportación Babilónica del pueblo de Judá fue total o parcial, o si fueron 10mil o 70mil deportados... me trae muy sin cuidado.
En ese sentido el trabajo en este libro planteado me parece excelente. Es muy respetuoso, consistente, elaborado, y detallado. Es un tema muy interesante. Aprendí muchísimo sobre la historia del pueblo de Israel, y creo que me va a venir bien para entender otras cosas.
No sé si ponerle cinco estrellas porque no me entretuvo tanto por momentos, y porque la arqueología siempre me deja ese sabor amargo de encontrarme con lo poco que sabemos sobre el pasado... digo, increíble todo lo que se puede descifrar de un par de piedras, pero tanto queda en el imaginario que es casi un relato de ficción.
Creo que a partir de este libro por primera vez tengo una idea más armadita desde Abraham hasta Jesús:
- Abram sale de Ur hacia la tierra que Dios le prometió.
- Tiene dos hijos, el de la promesa (Isaac) y el otro (Ismael).
- Isaac pasa a la historia por ser hijo de Abraham y padre de Jacob.
- Jacob lucha con el ángel que lo hiere y pasa a llamarse Israel.
- Tiene doce hijos, uno de los cuales (José) termina en Egipto vendido por sus hermanos.
- José se hace un administrador muy querido e importante para los Egipcios.
- Los hermanos de José se lo encuentran un día y no lo reconocen, pero el sí a ellos.
- Se reencuentran y José los recibe. (? Todo esto es muy difícil de probar, algunos detalles claramente no coinciden)
- Poco a poco (unos 300 años) se van convirtiendo en esclavos (? se sospecha que tal vez no eran tan "esclavos").
- Moisés es un Israelita que lo crían los Egipcios, pero por pedido de Dios rescata al pueblo de la esclavitud.
- Josué conquista la tierra prometida. (? se sospecha que la fueron ocupando de a poco)
- Se establecen, y después de un tiempo piden tener reyes
- Entonces vienen Saúl, David y Salomón, el primero de un reinado muy corto, y los otros dos grandes reyes. (? se sospecha que en realidad el pueblo de Israel era muy chico todavía y David y Salomón no hicieron ni grandes construcciones ni mucho de lo que se les atribuye).
- Después de Salomón el reino se divide en dos, Israel al norte y Judá al Sur.
- Israel son los malos, y Judá los buenos, hablando mal y pronto (esto tendría que ver con quien y porque se escribió la Biblia).
- Israel cae en manos de Asiria, en buena medida por culpa de la dinastía Omrita.
- Judá quiere restaurar el reino unido, pero termina cayendo en manos de Egipcios, Babilonios (deportación), Persas, Griegos y finalmente Romanos.
- Hasta Jesús.
Puede tener errores, pero para haber sido de memoria, creo que me quedo conforme con lo aprendido en el libro. Obviamente de cada cosa podría hablar un poco más. Obviamente conocía bastante la historia, pero me faltaban algunas partes, creo que ahora tengo más el mapa completo.
Por otro lado creo que me queda más claro como la Biblia fue esrcita y reescrita, las intenciones de cada momento, las pujas teológicas y políticas. Me renueva de ganas de seguir leyendo la Biblia, ahora con nuevos ojos.
Seamos honestos, aveces me encuentro con argumentos que cuestionan mi fe, pero si la deportación Babilónica del pueblo de Judá fue total o parcial, o si fueron 10mil o 70mil deportados... me trae muy sin cuidado.
En ese sentido el trabajo en este libro planteado me parece excelente. Es muy respetuoso, consistente, elaborado, y detallado. Es un tema muy interesante. Aprendí muchísimo sobre la historia del pueblo de Israel, y creo que me va a venir bien para entender otras cosas.
No sé si ponerle cinco estrellas porque no me entretuvo tanto por momentos, y porque la arqueología siempre me deja ese sabor amargo de encontrarme con lo poco que sabemos sobre el pasado... digo, increíble todo lo que se puede descifrar de un par de piedras, pero tanto queda en el imaginario que es casi un relato de ficción.
Creo que a partir de este libro por primera vez tengo una idea más armadita desde Abraham hasta Jesús:
- Abram sale de Ur hacia la tierra que Dios le prometió.
- Tiene dos hijos, el de la promesa (Isaac) y el otro (Ismael).
- Isaac pasa a la historia por ser hijo de Abraham y padre de Jacob.
- Jacob lucha con el ángel que lo hiere y pasa a llamarse Israel.
- Tiene doce hijos, uno de los cuales (José) termina en Egipto vendido por sus hermanos.
- José se hace un administrador muy querido e importante para los Egipcios.
- Los hermanos de José se lo encuentran un día y no lo reconocen, pero el sí a ellos.
- Se reencuentran y José los recibe. (? Todo esto es muy difícil de probar, algunos detalles claramente no coinciden)
- Poco a poco (unos 300 años) se van convirtiendo en esclavos (? se sospecha que tal vez no eran tan "esclavos").
- Moisés es un Israelita que lo crían los Egipcios, pero por pedido de Dios rescata al pueblo de la esclavitud.
- Josué conquista la tierra prometida. (? se sospecha que la fueron ocupando de a poco)
- Se establecen, y después de un tiempo piden tener reyes
- Entonces vienen Saúl, David y Salomón, el primero de un reinado muy corto, y los otros dos grandes reyes. (? se sospecha que en realidad el pueblo de Israel era muy chico todavía y David y Salomón no hicieron ni grandes construcciones ni mucho de lo que se les atribuye).
- Después de Salomón el reino se divide en dos, Israel al norte y Judá al Sur.
- Israel son los malos, y Judá los buenos, hablando mal y pronto (esto tendría que ver con quien y porque se escribió la Biblia).
- Israel cae en manos de Asiria, en buena medida por culpa de la dinastía Omrita.
- Judá quiere restaurar el reino unido, pero termina cayendo en manos de Egipcios, Babilonios (deportación), Persas, Griegos y finalmente Romanos.
- Hasta Jesús.
Puede tener errores, pero para haber sido de memoria, creo que me quedo conforme con lo aprendido en el libro. Obviamente de cada cosa podría hablar un poco más. Obviamente conocía bastante la historia, pero me faltaban algunas partes, creo que ahora tengo más el mapa completo.
Por otro lado creo que me queda más claro como la Biblia fue esrcita y reescrita, las intenciones de cada momento, las pujas teológicas y políticas. Me renueva de ganas de seguir leyendo la Biblia, ahora con nuevos ojos.
December 27, 2010
Thanks to the archaeological findings of recent decades, we now know a lot more about the historicity of the Bible than we did 50 years ago. The Patriarchs seem to have never existed, and the Exodus and the conquest of Canaan never to have taken place; the stories about them are full of anachronisms that make sense only around the 7th century BCE: domesticated camels, Egypt fearing an invasion from the east, Edom being a kingdom, Joseph being sold to traders in Arabian goods. Imagine a ballad set in Kievan Rus where Ilya Muromets smokes tobacco and battles Crimean Tatars! The original Hebrews seem to have been hilltop pastoralists who were not ethnically distinct from lowlander Canaanites; their garbage pits contain no pig bones, which means that they did not eat pork; modern Jews who do not eat pork follow a very ancient archeologically attested tradition. There has in fact been a kingdom of Judah ruled by the dynasty of David, and a much richer kingdom of Israel ruled by the dynasty of Omri, which engaged in building projects rivaled only by the building projects of Herod the Great almost a thousand years later; there is no evidence that the two were ever politically unified. In the late 8th century BCE, the Assyrian Empire conquered Israel and deported a minority of its residents elsewhere; it conquered most of Judah, besieged Jerusalem but did not take it. Around 100 years later the Assyrian Empire collapsed, King Josiah of Judah decided to expand into the former kingdom of Israel, and needed an ideological-theological justification for this; it was at his court that the Deuteronomist decided to prevent the falsification of history to the detriment of Judah's interests, and assembled old stories about patriarchs, chiefs and kings into the more-or-less coherent narrative that we now know as the Hebrew Bible.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 286 reviews