Did God Have a Wife?: Archaeology and Folk Religion in Ancient Israel

by William G. Dever

Following up on his two recent, widely acclaimed studies of ancient Israelite history and society, William Dever here reconstructs the practice of religion in ancient Israel from the bottom up. Archaeological excavations reveal numerous local and family shrines where sacrifices and other rituals were carried out. Intrigued by this "folk religion" in all its variety and vitality, Dever writes about ordinary people in ancient Israel and their everyday religious lives.Did God Have a Wife? shines new light on the presence and influence of women's cults in early Israel and their implications for our understanding of Israel's official "Book religion." Dever pays particular attention to the goddess Asherah, reviled by the authors of the Hebrew Bible as a foreign deity but, in the view of many modern scholars, popularly envisioned in early Israel as the consort of biblical Yahweh. His work also gives new prominence to women as the custodians of Israel's folk religion.The first book by an archaeologist on ancient Israelite religion, this fascinating study critically reviews virtually all of the archaeological literature of the past generation, while also bringing fresh evidence to the table. Though Dever digs deep into the past, his discussion is extensively illustrated, unencumbered by footnotes, and vivid with colorful insights. Meant for professional and general audiences alike, Did God Have a Wife? is sure to spur wide and passionate debate.

Genres: History, Religion, Archaeology, Nonfiction, Judaism, Spirituality, Anthropology

361 pages, Kindle Edition

First published May 31, 2005

About the author

William Gwinn Dever is an American archaeologist, scholar, historian, semiticist, and theologian. He is an active scholar of the Old Testament, and historian, specialized in the history of the Ancient Near East and the ancient kingdoms of Israel and Judah in biblical times. He was Professor of Near Eastern Archaeology and Anthropology at the University of Arizona in Tucson from 1975 to 2002. He is a Distinguished Professor of Near Eastern Archaeology at Lycoming College in Pennsylvania.

abridged from Wikipedia

Reviews

[J · Rating 4 out of 5]

What a terrible title for such a great book.

Dever gives the non-specialist a thorough review of the archaeology of Israel. He lines up the bible story and knocks it around with extrinsic evidence. He contrasts the "book" religion of the priests with the "folk" religion practiced on the ground. Not everything is enthralling: Chapter 2 is a review of academic literature on Israel folk religion. He wants you to know he figured this stuff out first and where everybody else lines up. The balance of the book ranges from daily life in Israel, a chronology of power structures, and the influence of Canaanite/Phonetician/Syrian/Egyptian influences on Israelites. Most important, the cosmology of Israelite worship.

Historians (although some disagree for religious-preservation reasons, apparently) largely concur that the Bible is a collection of religious myths written between the 8th and 6th centuries b.c. These myths (while possibly based in fact, but probably not) have been spun, re-told and packaged-up by priests/kings/leaders with an agenda.

This book reminds me of Ehrman's books on the New Testament in that well-meaning priests, and misguided rulers seeking power, modify the texts to support their positions and policies. This goes for Josiah and his reforms based upon the miraculous recovery of hidden, historic scrolls emphasizing Moses, found in temple wall (fakes)...up to a modern example of Joseph Smith's "inspired translation" of the Bible, where he, not joking, inserts himself as the future prophet of the gospel restoration. People use divine texts to justify their role as prophet, priest, and king.

For the uninitiated, there is zero archaeological evidence for Noah. That comes straight out of the Epic of Gilgamesh. Same goes for Moses, nothing outside of the Bible justifies his existence. Same goes for the decimation of native populations by the Israelites claiming their promised land (Jericho was destroyed much earlier, there is no on-the-ground showing that wholesale massacre occurred). I could go on. These events likely never happened. So why make it up?

All people want an origin myth. Those seeking to consolidate power under one divine king (Saul, David, Solomon, etc.) needed one God for the vestment of power. Same for those Southern Tribes (Judah) seeking to re-unite Israel after Babylonian captivity. They want the polytheistic Israelites under the tent of Yahweh. And so they mix various Canaanite myths of El, Yahweh, Asherah and Ba'al into a single narrative, forcing the belief that Yahweh, the one true God, is the reason for the season. Had the Northern Tribes mustered the necessary political and economic strength, we would instead be worshiping El, the bull god. (the golden calfs at Sinai, the bulls at the southern boundary of the northern kingdom, etc.)

In my religious days, I taught Gospel Doctrine at the local Mormon ward house. This means that I, as a lay member of the local congregation or "ward," would have about an hour each Sunday to walk through a correlation-committee-produced manual focusing on several chapters of whichever religious text was emphasized for that year. Mormons are told to stick to the manual. As we have no specific training in theology or history, anybody from the neighborhood baker, to elementary-school mom, to accountant will teach these classes. I realized quickly, during the Old Testament year, that most lessons pluck a few "feel-good" verses for class discussion, emphasizing the ways in which Mormonism is God's one truth. These classes are heavily focused on personal religion (the theme of a Chapter in Dever's book).

In my preparations, I made the mistake of consulting outside sources to understand the larger historical context (basically, those materials available at the University library). The lessons in the Mormon Old Testament Manual did not jive with academic scholarship on the Bible, even though at the time, I was positive they would. That year, and subsequent year of teaching on other scripture, created a storm of confusion for me. I started to realize how religions and power structures create narratives to serve their own needs, without much regard for the truth. I only single out Mormons because I was one and can speak from experience. I have no doubt that every single religious tradition does the exact same thing. And the reason I bring this up, is because this is exactly what the Biblical authors were doing! They systematically use/modify biblical texts to justify their positions and their power.

Archaeological evidence shows that during the Yahweh-alone movement, there was a sustained worship of the Goddess Asherah. Her figurines, dating from the time period, are littered all over the holy land. Her name appears in the OT over 40 times. In Jeremiah 44, the prophet is frustrated with the women of Israel for their worship of Asherah. He tells them to knock it off. They tell him, hey buddy, this stuff works, we pray to her and we get crops. He basically walks away rolling his eyes. But he can't fight that feeling (cue the music); the Asherah movement is too strong. Later, in the demonstration of heavenly powers between the priests of Yahweh, Ba'al and Asherah to light wet wood with magic, Yahweh wins (the victor writes history) and the priests of Ba'al are executed. But what about the priests of Asherah...why weren't they killed?!? Again, you can't fight that feeling.

One fascinating aspect of Asherah worship is the instinctual need for worship of a female deity. For the Israelites, it was Asherah. For the Canaanites it was Asherah and Anat. In Europe, the White Goddess. In modern-day Catholicism, the Virgin Mary. One consequence of monotheism is restraining the worship of female deity (probably because religious leaders are men, they emphasize a male God). There is some fascinating discussion about the role of women and the need for female deity.

Understanding this fight between the priests of the "book" religion and the everyday "folk" religion of the Israelites clarifies the muddy mess of the Bible (for me, anyway). My confusion about how the Old Testament is constructed, why certain themes are emphasized (child sacrifice, idol worship, high places, temples, I could go on and on) were resolved by this book.

My hat is off to Dever, Ehrman, and others who utilize extrinsic evidence to enlighten our understanding of religious texts.

[Koen Crolla · Rating 1 out of 5]

There was a pan-Semitic goddess Asherah, consort of El in Ugaritic and Baʽal in Canaanite traditions, and the question being considered is whether the ʾăšērā that appears in the "Hebrew Bible" is in any way related and if asherim might be wooden pole totems rather than groves, which is how the KJV mostly rendered the word (and the Septuagint (ἄλσος) and the Vulgate (lucus, nemus)). Less exciting when it's put like that, but straightforwardly answerable or at least examinable, right? Well, not by Dever.
As it turns out, almost none of the book is concerned with that, instead preferring to waste space on tedious claim-staking by giving faux-nuanced definitions of religion and folk religion and infantile discussions of methodologies, on attacks on various people and groups Dever sees as doing Bible scholarship wrong ("revisionists", who start off getting a lot of pussy-footing but are soon just equated to "leftists"; "conservatives", who are actually not scholars by any meaningful measure but are included so Dever can define himself and the people who proofread this book, and especially the two who provided favourable quotes to put on the back cover, as the centrist mainstream; "doctrinaire feminists", who distinguish themselves from scholarly feminists by actually believing in that women's lib crap; "prove-the-Bible" Biblical archaeologists, from whom Dever repeatedly distances but never distinguishes himself), and on attempts to bolster his credibility in general, never convincingly.
There's archaeological background, which sounds legitimate; Dever is certainly attached to a university as an archaeologist. Unfortunately, he's not a good one: his illustration of life in early Iron Age Palestine owes as much to stereotypes of Medieval serfs as it does to archaeological evidence, and his overview of various artefacts is a dubious Gish gallop in which he reveals himself to be that caricature archaeologist who interprets everything he sees as being "for religious purposes" and who thinks all preliterate societies were unsophisticated savages.

Fundamentally, the problem is that Dever is a Biblical literalist Evangelical—he can call himself a converted Jew or a secular humanist (I'm sure he really feels that way!), but his basic mindset and approach to the Bible hasn't changed. He's obviously far from alone in that regard when it comes to Biblical archaeologists—a problem Dever makes motions towards acknowledging, but hasn't internalised. As the broader and legitimate field of ANE studies keeps progressing, Biblical archaeology occasionally shows signs of beginning to catch up, but it's not going to get there unless and until a genuine academic philology of the Bible develops—one that does not take input from Biblical hermeneuticists and theologians—and American Biblical literalists, Protestant or Jewish, get out of the field altogether.
I'm not holding my breath.

[Laura · Rating 4 out of 5]

First, this is not quite as good as Dever's book on daily life in ancient Israel, but it is still very interesting. Much debate surrounds this topic, and Dever acknowledges the contributions and criticisms of the various sides. Because of this, however, the book is a little more confusing and contradictory than the other I read, partially due to the way he does not always make certain things clear, at least at first. For example, in one place he mentions a biblical passage in which Asherah is paired with Baal to discredit her, but in the very next paragraph he talks about how the Baal priests were slaughtered. If the passage was really about hiding how Asherah was the consort of Yahweh, the story is illogical; it would make no sense to slaughter priests of Yahweh in order to venerate Yahweh. Perhaps I misunderstood and this is not what he meant, but another explanation was not made clear.

For another example illustrating what I mean about confusion, he talks about El at length during the book, but does not discuss who El is until about 75% of the way through it. For anyone who knows anything about El/Yahweh/etc, this is confusing. I thought I was receiving contradictory information until he explained later. I think this is in large part due to the volume of information presented, but I think I would have organized it a little differently.

There were also some parts I did not agree with until I realized what he was trying to say when I discussed my criticisms with a friend. That said, none of my criticism comes from a place of personal theology. I find the ideas exceedingly fascinating.

Whoever did the index on this book did not do a good job. I have never criticized an index before, but this one bears noting. I looked in the back for a couple of things that weren't listed at all, only to run across them later (specific topics such as Elijah; nothing generic).

Despite my occasional objections, I would still highly recommend this to anyone interested in the roots of modern religion, ancient history, or the practice of ancient religion. It's a great addition to my research, full of enlightening facts that made me ponder a few assumptions I had about our own culture. It's interesting to see remnants of Asherah in practiced religion today. It's a terrific overview for non-academics on the literature available for further research, and enough information within to satisfy the curiosity of those who don't wish to read any further.

[Molly · Rating 3 out of 5]

I picked up this book originally because I am very interested in the contrasts between doctrine and folk religion (i.e. what people actually practice). As with Dever's other book I read (What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It?), I could have skipped the first 90 pages, as they were filled with his usual rant against revisionists, which I found true, yet ridiculously repetitive and not necessarily contributing to the main thesis of the book.
Anyway, the meat of the book, was a very nice review of the archaeological evidence indicating how the majority of ancient Israelites actually practiced religion. Many scholars overlook the evidences of religious practice supplied by archaeological finds and rely heavily on texts. But when the archaeological evidence is examined it is clear that the typical Israelite (living in rural locations with very little contact with the state) practiced a form of polytheism, adhering to the worship of Yahweh as well as his female consort Asherah (in the form of a goddess, figurine, tree, grove, pole, etc.). With this physical evidence, the textual evidence can then be revisited and it becomes clear that the constant preaching in the Biblical text against "Canaanite" forms of worship were not just warnings not to adopt such practices, but condemnations of the prevalent practice.

[AskHistorians]

Dever has a decidedly more conservative flair, but trumps other more conservative scholars by being an archaeologist, and--for the most part--giving the archaeology priority.

[Rachael · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dever forcefully argues that the key to reconstructing Israelite folk religion lies with archaeology. Through archaeology he reconstructs a case about how the Israelites came to know Asherah via a compilation of other goddesses, and how they worshiped her. Asherah as the consort to El, Anat to Baal, and even influence from Astarte influenced Asherah as Yahweh's consort. He mentions as some of his main evidences the proliferation of high places (bamot), standing stones (missebot), clay figurines, smaller incense altars, etc, and particularly the inscriptions at Khirbet al Qom and Kuntillet Arjut which mention Asherah show strong evidence of a polytheism involving goddess worship until the post exilic era. After that, other folk elements came into play including magic against Lillith a night demon, the introduction of Shekinah and Hokhma to God. I think his overall case is strong though I think he is overconfident in his reading of the inscriptions which many scholars argue could refer simply to a cult object (asherot) rather than necessary to a goddess. While Dever does mention the linguistic difficulty, since proper names do not take a pronominal suffix, but briefly mentions there are some exceptions, but does not take into consideration that in Near Eastern contexts there are examples of using a god's name as a synonym for a cultic object related to him (or her). The case as to why book religion, the religion of a tiny minority of men in Jerusalem, should have won over folk religion in the exile is notably lacking in evidence. But, there doesn't seem to be much material to work with except the changing nature of religious objects discovered. And, one last critique, while it is interesting to learn about the infighting between different academics placing an entire chapter detailing the infighting between biblical scholars and archaeologists before getting into the meat of the matter became exasperating.

Overall, informative, enjoyable and accessible. The case Dever presents is strong and fascinating.

[Krista · Rating 2 out of 5]

An interesting but repetitive read.

Dever seems to make the same point over and over, in almost every chapter. I mean that as more than just tying supporting evidence back to his main point; I mean that it feels like he wrote the chapters in isolation and stuck them together.

I'm going to reveal my ignorance here when I say that he alternates between being too pedantic and failing to explain the technical terms he uses. He supports his case, though, and it's interesting to consider the day-to-day religious practices of ancient Israel from the angle he takes.

It's a well-researched book, and it presents interesting, supportive information. The author's style and lack of real flow to the text make it tough to read, but he clearly has a good basis for his assertions.

[Mike · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really like Dever as a speaker and I liked this book, however it was repetitive throughout. He was somewhat condescending to many Bible scholars as well... I understand his attempt to solidify archaeology above the textual scholars, and see what he is working towards, it just wasn't my favorite approach.

[Ushan · Rating 3 out of 5]

The authors of the Bible were dead white upper-class males; the prophet Amos, who was a cowboy, is an exception. They wanted Israelites to worship one God, Jehovah, through a cult centered on the Temple in Jerusalem. However, the actual Israelite religion was as far from this ideal as the actual Soviet economy from the ideal set by the Soviet Union's state religion of Marxism. Excavations show that the Israelites worshipped at local shrines (bamot), near pillars (maÅŸÅŸebot), and not just Jehovah but also the Goddess Asherah, associated with trees and groves in the Bible. The prophet Jeremiah condemned "making cakes for the Queen of Heaven"; we have a mold for such cakes (though not from Israel but from Mesopotamia). Many female figurines were found at Israelite houses; they seem to have been household gods (the evidence is unclear, whether or not the Biblical word teraphim refers to them); so were sheep and goat knucklebones, which may have been used for divination. All this disappears after the Babylonian captivity: the captive Israelite elites formulated a monotheistic Judaism, and after they returned during the Persian period, forced it upon the population.

[Laura · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting information but didn't much of an answer to the title question.

[Jan Petrozzi · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dever, William G. Did God Have a Wife? Archeology and Folk Religion in Ancient Egypt. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005. William Dever is employed with the University of Arizona at Tucson. He is a professor emeritus of Near Eastern archaeology and anthropology. Devers has authored several additional books including Beyond the Texts: An Archaeological Portrait of Ancient Israel and Judah (2020), Has Archaeology Buried the Bible (2020), My Nine Lives: Sixty Years in Israeli and Biblical Archaeology (2020), The Rise of Ancient Israel (2013), The Lives of Ordinary People in Ancient Israel: When Archaeology and the Bible Intersect (2012), Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From? (2003) and What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It: What Archaeology Can Tell Us About the Reality of Ancient Israel (2001).
In 1911 William B. Eerdmans Sr., an immigrant from the Netherlands and Brant Sevensma established the Eerdmans-Sevensma Company, a theological textbook dealership in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Eerdmans became sole owner in 1922 renaming the company The William B. Eerdmans Company. Although not affiliated with any specific religion or ideology, Eerdmans publishes academic books not only about the Christian tradition of its roots, but also books of other denominations and faiths. The webpage states “Eerdmans is committed to the life of the religious academy, to the church, and to the role of religion in culture, while continually diversifying its body of work, so as to reach an even wide audience of academics, faith leaders and general readers.” The company also has a division for the publication of children’s books. Still located in Grand Rapids Michigan, Eerdmans web address is
https://www.eerdmans.com.
There are nine chapters in the book Did God Have a Wife: “Defining and Contextualizing Religion,” “The History of the History: In Search of Ancient Israel’s Religions,” “Sources and Methods for the Study of Ancient Israel’s Religions,” “The Hebrew Bible,” “Religions Reality or Theological Ideal,” “Archaeological Evidence for Folk Religions in Ancient Israel,” “The Goddess Asherah and Her Cult,” “Asherah, Women’s Cults and Official Yahwism,” “From Polytheism to Monotheism,” and “What Does the Goddess do to Help.”
This book contains numerous drawings and photographs of ancient artifacts and archaeological sites along with maps to support the authors findings and opinions. In addition, it includes several pages of recommended sources for further study, an index on subjects and places, along with indexes of authors and scripture.
Dever contends that polytheism was the dominant form of religion in ancient Israel, referring to it as folk religion. He bases his belief on physical archaeological evidence uncovered in his years of study. Because of this he also contends that monotheism was not the popular form of religion as written in the Old Testament, but was edited into the Old Testament by people who were interested in pushing their agenda to enforce monotheism. The author brings to light the large amount of people in rural areas, who worshipped Asherah, a goddess and was purported to be the consort of Yahweh. Dever believes Asherah was purposely omitted from texts even though she was quite popular. This is pertinent to the study of Prophetic Literature in that if Dever is correct, more information should be included about Asherah in this literature. The people of the ancient near-East, especially in rural areas saw Asherah as a caring advocate and were devoted to her. Her lack of inclusion in the story of the monotheistic God was a loss to people who felt protected by her.

[Christian Proano · Rating 3 out of 5]

The content of the book goes beyond what the title indicates, the writer tries to put a foundation for the reader and then proceed with his topic of interest. This means as indicated in other reviews that the title of the book does not make justice to the book. He tries to comment about history parting from the archaeological data, but of course some of his presuppositions are thrown in it.

Chapter 1 the author put his own preposition indicating from which angle he is writing. At least no one can cry foul game in case of disagreements. Chapter 2 questions the reason most or at least conservative Old Testament "biblical theology" writers ignore the archaeological data. This chapter is burdensome to read he goes on in judging other peoples academic endeavors. Chapter 3 presents some biblical limitations as far as historical data and then the author tries to establish the fact that archaeological finding, data and evidence should be treated as a primary source. The rest of the chapter he goes into developing the topic. Setting definitions found in Scripture supported in archaeology and explaining its usage and possible interpretation.

He makes a differentiation between "book religion" and "folk religion". He argues that folk religion was always polytheist. It seen that his point of whether God had wife is based on a particular finding that contains a text whose interpretation has not a consensus; then his point is basically that if the cultures immediate to the biblical people had a consort for their gods, then why not a consort for the Yawhistic tradition? he seen to be arguing also not just for this as a fact of the past, but also giving the impression that such belief should have a legitimate continuation.

For much of what he says, he does have a bibliography that both support or to a lesser degree counter-argue his views. His feminist approach does become a proverbial fly messing up the perfume bringing section of his text if not the whole thing at times under suspicion. Granted, based on archaeological data he does criticize the postmodernist and the revisionist as well. So the benefit of the book is not whether God had a wife or not in ancient folk Israelite religion, or the author's interpretation itself, but rather the exposure to the archaeological data he cites.

[Joseph Millo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Did God Have a Wife: Archeology and Folk Religion in Ancient Israel
William G. Dever

The subtitle “Archeology and Folk Religion in Ancient Israel” is a better description of the scope of this book.

Dever, an American archaeologist who specializes in the history of Israel and the Near East in Biblical times, posits that the Old Testament is an “androcentric revisionist history” written by Jewish priests after they had (finally) triumphed over Jewish cult religion in the 5th and 6th centuries BC.

Dever makes a distinction between Jewish book religion and Jewish folk religion. In "book religion": (1) belief is primarily intellectual (theology); (2) piety consists mostly of liturgy; and (3) morality focuses largely on overarching principles. This is the characteristic religion of elites, the few who can appreciate great literature and its lofty ideals. On the other hand, in folk religion: (1) belief is mostly intuitive; (2) piety consists of private and family rituals to insure well-being ("magic"); and (3) morality is defined by right relations and charitable acts within the immediate circle. Dever argues that folk religion was the religion of the majority of women and men in ancient Israel – until the final triumph of book religion in the post-Babylon reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah.

While none of these revisionist ideas are new, Dever focuses on what archeology can say about the polytheistic religious practices of the common Jew in the period from 1300 to 400 BC. And apparently archeology has a lot to say about the religious practice in this period.

I found Denver’s discussions and archeological interpretations fascinating – and generally convincing. However, the reader should be prepared to slog through several chapters that go into great detail about how Denver’s interpretations differ from many other archeologists and Bible historians. I was glad I did not skip over these chapters because they gave me a better understanding of the philosophical differences in ancient Hebrew archeology and what light it can shed on interpretation of the Old Testament literature.

I highly recommend this book.

[Peter Henne · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent book, and not as sensationalist as the title implies. Dever (a renowned archeologist) discusses the archeological evidence for "folk" religion in ancient Israel-the ways that people themselves worshiped, much of which predates the written Bible. He finds some things to verify the Bible, and others that suggest there was a broader array of worship in ancient Israel than we are taught in Sunday School--particularly, worship of the Mother Goddess Asherah was widespread.

Dever is not a believer, but he takes seriously the Bible as a written record, which is refreshing after reading so many religious studies and archeological texts that just assume the Bible is completely made up. As a believer myself (a progressive Christian) this book actually enriched my faith, learning more about the ways my faith developed.

I am hesitant to criticize this book as a non-expert (I'm a professor, but in modern Middle East politics). But I did find the evidence connecting Asherah to Yahweh as a consort as a bit thin. It seems like it's really just one or a few inscriptions that are vague. So I completely believe that there was worship of a Mother Goddess in ancient Israel, and that this urge continued throughout Judaism and Christianity. I can even believe that the lack of a feminine aspect in orthodox Christianity causes many problems for our faith. But I am not completely on board with the idea that Yahweh initially had a wife, who was later repressed.

That aside, this book was a joy to read. Please read it if you're interested in this topic.

[John E Mack · Rating 5 out of 5]

The title of this book is a bit of a misnomer. Whether or not God exists, no one believes that Asherah exists, so of course they couldn't be married. The more accurate question is "Did the ancient Israelites believe that God had a wife?" With some qualifications, the answer is still "No." There is no doubt but that many Israelites, from the 11th through the 7th centuries B.C. worshipped Asherah in addition to Yaweh, and there were undoubtedly people out in the sticks who put two and two together and concluded that they were married. And, as Dever points out, there are several references to Yahweh and his Asherah. But his what? Wife? Daughter? Sister? Concubine? Slave? Priestess? Furthermore, Biblical writers, who are wont to condemn virtually every non-Yahwist practice under the sun, never condemn the blasphemous claim that Yahweh was married to Asherah -- or anyone else, for that matter. That was probably because no one of substance was making such a claim. Dever himself never definitively makes this claim, though he certainly entertains it. But his broader point is that Ancient Israelites took over much of the Phonecian/Cananite pantheon, and only partially weaned themselves from it. This book concentrates largely on Israelite folk religion, but because the evidence is so spotty, not much more than broad outlines of belief and practice can be claimed with confidence. A very fine book, though, as far as it goes. I suspect that in twenty years we will be able to go a lot farther.

[J]

Thanks be to Dever for reminding me why a left academia. What an absolute nightmare that guy must be in person, my god.

Overall there is actually some great stuff here, specifically the archeological data and some interesting reads of passages from the prophetic books. And I think Dever's larger point is more or less correct: "folk" religion, if that is a useful term, was more varied in its practice, more polytheistic, and more female than the religion of the centralized cult. His claims specifically about Asherah are far more speculative, but still seem plausible.

Nevertheless the book was larded with academic in-fighting, pointless name dropping, intra-and inter disciplinary squabbling, obsessive methodological quivering, and ideological asides meant to establish Dever's as the sole sane perspective. It's rare that you dislike the author of a non-fiction book, but this was one of those rare cases.

[Michelle · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is about Asherah, who was the consort of El in the West Semitic pantheon. Dever shows that Asherah worship was fairly common (probably mostly among women) in Israelite folk religion, and that there are clues to Asherah worship existing both textually in the Hebrew Bible and archaeologically in actual artifacts.

But it takes a long time for us to get to Asherah. I guess this was supposed to be more of a trade than popular book because we go into quite academic discussions especially about who thinks what among scholars, which I must admit I skimmed. Also, it's from 2005 so I wonder if there's been a lot of change in evidence and arguments since then. Nevertheless, this seems like a pretty fair take that doesn't stray too far beyond the evidence, and my guess is it probably would hold up pretty well.

Dever has a few other such books and I may dip into them...but after I've had a while to recover from this one, which was a bit of a slog!

[David Tee · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dr. Dever is an excellent writer when it comes to archaeology. His experience is well documented and he has been a leading force in this field for more than 40 years. I usually enjoy his works because they provide an insight into different aspects of archaeology and the Bible.

Sadly, Dr. Dever is one of those archaeologists that lost his faith over the years he did archaeology. This work is a result of that lack of belief and you will find evidence inside of the double standard that exists in this field of research.

While well written, informative, and insightful, those positive attributes are overshadowed by the double standard the author practices making what he says, suspect. Dr. Dever is a strong voice in the move to change Biblical Archaeology to Palestinean Archaeology and that would be amistake

[Micah Hall · Rating 3 out of 5]

Lots of cool info in this book, but the author spends way too much time trying to prove to my that his theories are good.

I do not need this proof. I am reading the book because I think it sounds interesting.

I found myself skimming through large sections of the book where he went through all of the counterarguments and other theories. I did not care about these things. Other people have already written books about them and I could just read those books instead.

Once it got down to the part about God having a wife, I was into it. Pretty cool stuff there but the book was too long. He should have written two books. One would be called "Did God Have a Wife? I Think He Did." The second would be called "Some People Think God Did Not Have a Wife and Here is Why I Think They Are Wrong."

Then I could have skipped the second book, a book I have no interest in.

[Courtney Hatch · Rating 3 out of 5]

The title is clickbait and doesn’t really represent what this book really talks about. Dever’s focus is on using archeological evidence in studying ancient Israelite religion, not just textual evidence. The man is petty! He calls out scholars left and right with a fair amount of sarcasm and sass which surprised me in an academic text (albeit written for non-scholar consumption). While I guess that could make this text more accessible, it didn’t do anything for his ethos.

I read it to better understand the place that the Israelite goddess Asherah had in the every day practice of religion by the common people (what Dever calls folk religion here), and that is really only the focus of 2-3 chapters. The others are largely focused on archeology which isn’t what I really came for. The text is repetitive and hey, maybe this is 2 stars now that I’ve heard myself talk through it hahah

[Lucia Zalar · Rating 3 out of 5]

Its a pretty well done book.

My main problems are how much he draws a line between "israelite folk religion" yahwism, and "canaanite religion", when it is clear there wasnt all that much seperating them. Maybe if they were around today in the same way, we would call them sects of one another.

Also how he tries to paint Asherah as the only goddess and that all the other ones, even Astarte, were only other names for her. This has been heavily disputed for an extremely long time. It seems in some areas it was like that, and in others they were entirely different. Theres much evidence to the contrary too. Especially because in the Ugarit texts, and egyptian ones, the two are both their own goddesses who even interact.

So I feel he was looking for a way to mold the evidence to fit his narrative, there.

[M. Apple · Rating 5 out of 5]

Provacative, erudite, and entertaining as usual, Devers has penned a masterpiece. He skewers both the ultra left as well as the ultra right and demands that history rely on actual evidence and not “sacred” texts edited by the masculine elite. It took me two months and several tries to get a copy of this book into Japan from overseas, which makes me suspicious that its existence is offensive to people in charge of shipping…which makes me all the more keen to extend its message that women have been deliberately written out of “book religion,” not just in the so-called Judeo-Christian (and by extension Muslim) records but by all religions (even Buddhism insists that women must be reborn as men before they can become “enlightened”).

“God” had a wife. Folk religion prevails.

[Deborah Goldsmith · Rating 5 out of 5]

The summary appears to be about another book.

William S. Dever is one of the path-breaking archeologists in Israel-Palestine who focuses on the physical evidence and the story it tells, rather than trying to make it support either a Jewish or Christian story.

He carefully reviews the evidence and finds support for the persistence of female goddess beliefs and worship throughout the first millennium BCE, during the Hebrew kingships. He traces these images back to earlier Canaanite and other local belief systems.

The book is very detailed but quite readable, and some of the images and explanations are startling as they show the continuing presence of Ashtara among people worshipping the Hebrew One God.

[Brannon · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is a very academic work. From cover to cover it's a wearying review of other books and papers. As for the question posed in the title, that topic was hardly discussed. The author recommends his other papers on the topic for more detail. The origin of the Asherah (and all other Canaanite viewpoints) was absent in the book, and there was no attempt at correlating Canaanite views with Israelite views other than an implicit and faulty assumption that their sources were unrelated. The authors' views and purposes can be summed up in this singular statement in his conclusion: "... triumphant monotheism tends to foster cultural imperialism."

[Michael Norwitz · Rating 3 out of 5]

Dever is an astute archeologist and certainly well-researched in regards to life in Bronze Age Israel. However, half the book is about feuds in the Biblical archeology community, which makes me wary, or the remainder, most of that is about detailing the archeology itself. While a worthy subject of exposition, I would have hoped for a characterisation or at least some plausible inferences about the character of the goddess Asherah, her worship, and her place in the lives of the Israelis of the time, but that information must be parsed out from a lot of other erroneous information. A fascinating but also frustrating book.

[Steven Douglas · Rating 3 out of 5]

I agree with many of the other reviews. The portions of the book directly related to early Israel/Judean folk religion, and the archaeological evidence, are compelling, but the other half of the book is difficult to get through. Much of it seemed off topic, some downright petty, and the sections on feminism in the community are interesting, but seems better suited to conference proceedings, an editorial in a journal, or it's own book, not this book.

Overall I liked it, but wouldn't read it again and I don't know if I would recommend it.

[Mark Piechowiak · Rating 4 out of 5]

Stick with it through the first 1/3 or so. Heavy on archeology & a lot of compare contrast w other commenters on old testiment religion.
A flexible mind will then enjoy the latter portions expanding on Ashera (Aphrodite/Venus) & how OT writers downplayed feminine traits & behaviors.
I was raised Catholic but have long since believed in a unisex deity w both masculine & feminine traits. The end of this tome explores that theme well

[Brady Turpin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Though I disagreed with the author on several fronts, his overall argument was intriguing and informative. I did feel as though the first half of the book could have been condensed or left out completely, as it was mostly his attacking of other scholars.

I also found the title a little misleading, as the book was mostly about ancient Israel's polytheistic majority and how monotheism developed over time. Dever's arguments concerning the construction of the Hebrew Bible were much appreciated.

[Kinan Arous · Rating 3 out of 5]

ويليام ديفر عالم الاثار الامريكي الموضوعي جعل مهمته الاكاديمية على ما يبدو اثبات ان عشيرة كانت تعبد رفقة يهوه في التاريخ الاسرائيلي القديم. هذا يترتب عليه عدة نتائج منها نفي وحدانية الديانة اليهودية و ايضا التركيز اكثر على الدين الشعبي في يهوذا و اسرائيل بدلا من الدين الكتابي , كما انه ساهم في اعادة الاعتبار لدور المرأة في الدين في ظل النظام الابوي للاديان السماوية

[AttackGirl · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you desire an in-depth well researched well annotated, cited discussion of “God”’s” potential existences of a Wife this book is for you. I think the only area not discussed which is understandable based on the title and well known knowledge but I would also enjoyed talk of “Antu”, you know Anu’s wife.

Perhaps a PhD could be awarded based on the level of research in this book alone.