EDWARD'S LECTURE NOTES:
More notes at http://tanguay.info/learntracker
C O U R S E 
The Bible's Prehistory, Purpose, and Political Future
Dr. Jacob L. Wright, Emory University
https://www.coursera.org/course/biblefuture
C O U R S E   L E C T U R E 
Archaeological Theories on the History of Israel
Notes taken on May 2, 2015 by Edward Tanguay
•
John Bright
•
A History of Israel (1959)
•
chapters
•
Age of the Patriarchs
•
Exodus and Conquest
•
Period of the Judges
•
United Monarchy of Saul, David and Solomon
•
Divided Monarchies of Israel and Judah
•
Exile, Return, Restoration
•
a conservative history which for the most part replicates the Biblical story
•
since the 80s and 90s most historians are skeptical about the historicity of the first two periods
•
the age of the patriarchs
•
the exodus/conquest period
•
many allow and exodus from Egypt on a small scale
•
but it is doubtful that
•
this group comprised the entire people of Israel
•
that this group descended directly from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
•
Ephraim Speiser (1902-1965)
•
a group of scholars thought they could prove the historicity of Genesis by showing how various institutions and practices described in these texts appear in documents found in a city in Northern Iraq called Nuzi
•
documents date from 1450-1350
•
long after the Biblical patriarchs (ca. 2000)
•
leading paradigm and theories with which archeologists and historians work when reconstructing the origins of ancient history
•
for many years, there were two models:
•
1. peaceful infiltration
•
Albrecht Alt
•
Martin Noth
•
Yohanan Aharoni (1919-1976)
•
Israelites entered Canaan as semi-nomads
•
coalesced gradually into a united people
•
originated somewhere in the Transjordan, today Jordan
•
2. conquest
•
conservative reaction to the peaceful infiltration model
•
William Foxwell Albright (1891-1971)
•
Yigael Yadin (1917-1984)
•
Israel was already a unified people before they entered Canaan by military force and conquest
•
takes its point of departure from the Biblical accounts
•
very few scholars would defend this view today
•
the main reason is that the various layers which Albright and Yadin all date from very different periods
•
peaceful view has persisted in modern scholarship but has been subjected to changes
•
1. social revolution model
•
Israelites were originally an under-privileged and oppressed class of Canaanites
•
rose up in rebellion
•
abandoned the urban centers
•
moved outside urban areas in hills
•
where they joined with a small group which had recently made an exodus from bondage in Egypt
•
established an egalitarian society
•
George Mendenhall
•
Norman Gottwald
•
2. sedentary / nomadic / sedentary
•
Israel Finkelstein
•
Shlomo Bunimovitz
•
the population which became Israel were local animal herders who gradually made a transition from being nomads to sedentary land owners
•
began as sedentary Canaanites, became nomads in the 16th century BC when Canaan was destroyed
•
by 1200 BC when Israel starts to emerge as a people, they begin a sedentary existence again
•
most scholars think of Israel's origins as a gradual process of identity formation
•
elicited by social, political and ecological factors
•
may have originated in Canaan proper
•
or they may have migrated from the east of the Jordan
•
1200 BCE, the Merneptah Stele attests to the existence of a people called Israel
•
doesn't contain any information about how Israel was constituted
•
no mention of how large the group was
•
or even if Merneptah's armies had encountered them firsthand
•
there is also reason that these inscriptions would be unreliable, e.g. for kings to boast of battles they never won and peoples they never conquered
•
the maintenance of a social organization does not necessarily imply any sort of cultural continuity
•
just because there is one group called Israel in one period and another group called Israel in another period, doesn't necessarily imply tight, cultural connection between the two