Writing a “History” of Ancient Israel

Victor H. Matthews

In recent years the terms “history” or “historical” have become somewhat problematic when used to describe the ancient Near East and especially ancient Israel. Historians generally define their work as scientific investigation and therefore “verifiable” (Roth 1988). For instance, some claim to seek “a succession of events whose historicity is beyond doubt” (Soggin 1978: 51), and others make “demands for scientific stringency” (Lemche 1991a: 103), and set a high standard of objectivity (Lemche 1988: 52). Drawing on this perspective, some claim to seek “historicity, as the measure of the truth and reality of falsifiable historical statements” (Thompson 1996: 39-40). More simply put, at least one scholar has stated that history consists of “what is really there” (Davies 1992: 29, 35).

Among the questions that might form the basis for a study of Israelite History are:

Ø What are the most important events in Israelite history?

Ø Which characters and places should be considered the most important to learn?

Ø What is the basic chronology used by historians and archaeologists?

Ø What extra-biblical documents exist to help write a history of Israel?

Ø What can archaeology contribute to the recreation of the history of ancient Israel?

Those biblical scholars who are now dubbed “minimalists” maintain that is not possible to discuss an event in the biblical account as “history” unless its historicity is proven through scientific methods. On the other hand, those termed “maximalists” hold the position that the biblical account is basically historical in character and should be considered as such unless disproved by verifiable means (Grabbe 1997b: 192; Malamat 2001: 411). Both sides of this debate have their origins in 19^th century German scholarship and specifically the work of Leopold von Ranke (Maier 1999:195; Sasson 1981). They are dependent on conceptions of “historicity” and “verifiable proof” and the relationship between history and nation (Younger 1990: 25-28; Dever 1997b: 178). And, for them, such terms as “probability” or “plausibility” have no place within the discussion of the ancient cultures of the Near East (Smelik 1992: 3-4; Davies 1997: 119-20). However, it is subjective judgments such as these and the critical analysis of “narrative history” (Younger 1990: 25) that have become a part of the more recent conversations on what “history” is within the broader field of the discipline (R.D. Miller 2001).

As is often noted by scholars, one key to the reconstruction of the past is the ability to immerse oneself in the available, relevant data, and then make a well-reasoned argument for “meaningful interconnections” (Edelman 1991: 14-15; Elton 1967: 98). Defining what is relevant may be as simple as identifying what is at hand. While recognizing that ancient writers had a different perspective on history writing and engaged in what we would term exaggerated, propagandistic or theological reasoning, it seems illogical to disregard their stories completely and thus deprive ourselves of a potential source of information (de Moor 1996: 214). By employing the full range of materials available to us, we can reconstruct “possible pasts” (Halpern 1997: 331; Trigger 1998: 29; Grabbe 1997a: 21; Barstad 1998: 126). Taking this a step further, it then becomes possible to establish “working hypotheses that approximate accurate knowledge” (Hallo 1990: 188), which can be tested and examined (Kincheloe and McLaren 1994: 151, 153-55; Grabbe 1997a: 31). These in turn, when compared with other scenarios set forth by scholars, using a similar critical process, can be used to produce a plausible reconstruction of events (Trigger 1998: 23). Throughout this endeavor, it is important to clearly describe what data is being used and what is being excluded. With this in mind, one may more reasonably establish “what it is possible to know” (Grabbe 1997a: 36). This simple statement is crucial to the understanding of how Israelite history is to be approached as a discipline.

Bibliography

Barstad, H.M., “The Strange Fear of the Bible,” in L.L. Grabbe, ed. Leading Captivity

Captive: “The Exile” as History and Ideology. JSOT Sup 278; Sheffield:

Sheffield Academic Press, 1998: 120-27.

Davies, Philip R., “Whose History? Whose Israel? Whose Bible?” in L.L. Grabbe, ed.

Can a “History of Israel” Be Written? JSOTSup 245; Sheffield: Sheffield

Academic Press, 1997: 104-22.

_____. In Search of “Ancient Israel”. JSOTSup148; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic

Press, 1992.

De Moor, J.C., “Egypt, Ugarit, and Exodus,” in N. Wyatt, et al., eds. Ugarit, Religion,

and Culture. Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996: 213-47.

Dever, W., “Archaeology, Urbanism, and the Rise of the Israelite State,” in W.E.

Aufrecht, et al., eds. Urbanism in Antiquity. JSOTSup 244; Sheffield: Sheffield

Academic Press, 1997: 172-93.

Edelman, D.V., “Doing History in Biblical Studies,” in D.V. Edelman, ed. The Fabric

of History: Text, Artifact and Israel’s Past. JSOTSup 127; Sheffield: Sheffield

Academic Press, 1991: 13-25.

Elton, G.R. The Practice of History. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1967.

Grabbe, Lester L., “Are Historians of Ancient Palestine Fellow Creatures – Or

Different Animals?” in L.L. Grabbe, ed. Can a “History of Israel” Be Written?

JSOTSup 245; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997a: 19-36.

_____, ed. Can a “History of Israel” Be Written? JSOTSup 245; Sheffield: Sheffield

Academic Press, 1997b.

Hallo, W.W., “The Limits of Skepticism,” JAOS 110 (1990), 187-99.

Halpern, B., “Text and Artifact,” in N. Silberman and D. Small, eds. The Archaeology

of Israel. JSOTSup 237; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997: 311-41.

Kinchloe, J.L. and P.L. McLaren, “Rethinking Critical Theory and Qualitative

Research,” in N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln, eds. Handbook of Qualitative

Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1994: 138-57.

Lemche, N.P., “The Development of the Israelite Religion in the Light of Recent

Studies on the Early History of Israel,” in J.A. Emerton, ed. Congress Volume

Leuven 1989. VTSup 43; Leiden: Brill, 1991: 97-114.

_____. Ancient Israel: A New History of Israelite Society. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1988.

Malamat, A. History of Biblical Israel: Major Problems and Minor Issues. Leiden:

Brill, 2001.

Maier, G., “Truth and Reality in the Historical Understanding of the Old Testament,” in

V.P. Long, ed. Israel’s Past in Present Research. Winona Lake, IN:

Eisenbrauns, 1999: 192-206.

Miller, R.D., “Yahweh and His Clio: Critical Theory and the Historical Criticism of the

Hebrew Bible,” Presented to the Social Scientific Criticism of the Hebrew Bible

section, Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting, Denver, Colorado,

November 20, 2001.

Roth, P.A., “Narrative Explanations: the Case of History,” History and Theory 27

(1988), 1-13.

Sasson, J.M., “Models for Recreating Israelite History,” JSOT 21 (1981), 3-24.

Smelik, K.A.D. Converting the Past. Leiden: Brill, 1992.

Soggin, J.A., “The History of Ancient Israel: A Study in Some Questions of Method,”

EI 14 (1978), 44-51.

Thompson, T., “Historiography of Ancient Palestine & Early Jewish Historiography,”

in V. Fritz and P. Davies, eds. The Origins of the Ancient Israelite States.

JSOTSup 228; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996: 26-43.

Trigger, B.G., “Archaeology and Epistemology,” AJA 102 (1998), 1-34.

Younger, K.L. Ancient Conquest Accounts: A Study in Ancient Near Eastern and

Biblical History Writing. JSOTSup 98; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press,

1990.

Archaeological Periods

Middle Bronze II-A c. 2000-1800/1750	Iron Age I c. 1200-1000
Middle Bronze II-B/C c. 1800-1550	Iron Age II-A c. 1000-925
Late Bronze c. 1550-1200	Iron Age II-B/C c. 925-586