The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts by Israel Finkelstein

The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts Reviews

• 
  فؤاد

  
  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.
• 
  Michael Perkins

  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...
• 
  Simcha York

  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.
• 
  Mahdi Lotfi

  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...
  
• 
  Robert

  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.
• 
  A.J.

  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.
• 
  Heidi The Reader

  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.
• 
  Lyn Elliott

  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.
• 
  Sally

  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.
• 
  Sean

  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.
• 
  Caslon

  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.
• 
  Billy

  For a born again Atheist, this was priceless... great read and certainly puts things into perspective
• 
  Enrique

  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.
• 
  Kevin K

  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.
• 
  Christian Nikitas

  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.
• 
  George Polley

  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.
• 
  AskHistorians

  Among 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.
• 
  Tanja Berg

  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.
• 
  Safwat Safi

  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.
• 
  Lauren

  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.
• 
  Jrobertus

  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.
• 
  Peter Faul

  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.
  
  
• 
  Ushan

  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.
• 
  Duntay

  The authors of The Bible Unearthed successfully collate new findings and information that has been known for awhile to present clear and concise rethinking of The Old Testament at the time of kings and Biblical archaeology in general. Once the confirmation bias of the Bible in one hand and a trowel in the other has been removed,and modern scientific techniques applied, the Old Testament can be set in the context of politics and nation building rather than a history in the traditional sense.
  
  The authors themselves characterise the book as :
  "our attempt to formulate a new archaeological vision of ancient Israel in which the Bible is one of the most important artifacts and cultural achievements [but] not the unquestioned narrative framework into which every archaeological find must be fit."
  
  Well worth reading.
  
  
  
• 
  Jonathan

  I picked this up because of my tour guides course and very much enjoyed reading this book. A thorough and painstaking yet readable and even entertaining review of Biblical archaeology and Bible scholarship of the last 20 years whose purpose is to teach us what really happened in the Land of Israel when the events in the Tanakh were supposedly taking place. Yes, there's a lot to relearn but the bottom line is that, even if the Patriarchs, the Exodus, and the vast Davidic empire didn't happen, and the huge city gates at Megiddo, Hazor and Gezer were built by Omri and not by Solomon,we Jews are still here. If you're interested in the early history of the Jews and their faith, this book is a must-read
• 
  Paul Brandel

  Only 14 reviews? Well let's make it 15.This book was a real eye opener to me.So much of the old testament is a myth!He presents the hard earned evidence most convincently. There was no patriarchs,
  no Israelite bondage in Egypt,nor a mass exodus out of Egypt either. Also the Jews came from the
  Canaanites! Most were pagan worshippers because they were a tribe of the Canaanites that later
  separated themselves.
  
  I wonder how many fundamentalists dare to read this great?! I double-dare them to read.lol!
  
• 
  Emily

  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.
  
  
  
  
• 
  Jordan Tomeš

  Archeologie je fajn, ale tady Indiana Jonese nenajdete. Zneklidňující čtení, které otřásá historicitou hebrejské Bible a vyzývavě kope míč na stranu starozákonní teologie.