What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It?: What Archaeology Can Tell Us about the Reality of Ancient Israel

On page x (in the foreword), Dever says that the book is "...certainly polemical." So a reader ought to expect polemic, not everybody holding hands around the campfire and singing "Kum Bah Yah." Also, when you consider the fact that he has been personally accused of falsifying evidence, it is understandable that he would want to expose not only the absurdity of the claims of his adversaries, but to also try to put their motives into their larger context. Put yourself in his place. Would you like it if others accused you of falsifying archaeological finds? Would you want the truth to come out? Would you keep your cool? On a final note, this book is worth it's price if only for the numerous palaeo-Hebrew inscriptions which are wonderfully reproduced in the middle chapters of the book. Those (seems to me) are not too easy to find. Many books refer to inscriptions, but this one shows the actual inscriptions. That is awesome. Not only does it lend gravitas to his argument, it is wonderful for those who know Hebrew and would like to translate them. It really adds so much when they include the reproductions of the inscriptions.

While the polemic against the minimalists gets a little excessive at times, I have to say that it is necessary, as they are very vocal these days. There is no need to debate fundamentalists because they've made up their mind already (as Michael Freeman's review shows). The book gives a fascinating overview of the archaeological evidence. Dever pretty much represents "the mainstream" in his assessment of the historical background of the Bible; that the Patriarchs, Exodus, and Conquest are basically unhistorical or only quasi-historical is the most parsimonious explanation given the evidence, and has become the mainstream view. Likewise, the native Canaanite origins of the Israelites is the theory that most adequately explains the ceramic and cultural similarities of the two peoples. His assessment of the monarchic period from 1025-587 BC is the focal point of the book and does an excellent job of reviewing the archaeology. There were many fascinating artifacts I was unaware of. One of the best serious books about biblical archaeology out there, and reads very well to the uninitiated.

Dever deserves a blue ribbon for the most cumbersome title in many years. He should also garner an award for his blistering assessment of "postmodern" historians. While he has contested "minimalist" academics elsewhere, this book is an excellent compendium of the issues and evidence regarding the historical validity of the Hebrew Bible. Although the arena of biblical history is small, the issues dealt with are important. His conclusions will have lasting impact not only in biblical history, but archaeology and other disciplines. Although a serious subject, Dever's piercing wit keeps this book a lively and captivating read. For generations, Dever tells us, the history and archaeology of Palestine have been restrained by biblical texts. Instead of scholars seeking for what is "there", they spent energy trying to verify what the Hebrew Bible related. A shift in attitude brought more detachment in reporting finds. In parallel with new textual analyses, field reseachers uncovered evidence that places and people named in the Hebrew Bible likely existed, but within a different context than related in "The Book". Regrettably, the "different context" attracted the attention of yet another academic element - the "postmodernist, deconstructionist nihilists" who simply abandoned any notion of historical veracity of biblical accounts. Dever turns his scholarly attention and biting prose to counter this group of "critics". Apart from refuting slanderous charges of fabricating and destroying evidence, Dever shows how the postmodernists have little or no foundation for their judgements. They fail to recognise archaeological data. They dismiss or ignore history, and they make pronouncements based on misconceived notions. They even manage to fabricate some historical events of their own. All these faults lead Dever to categorise them as "nihilists" - a term borrowed from Nietzschian disillusionment. More than using selected evidence, Dever charges, this group works under an ideology affecting today's international politics. Dever's book isn't just an academic search and destroy mission, however. He presents a profusion of recent work in excavation, social structure and imperial politics in the region. As part of his analysis, he wants due regard given to the "popular religions" prevalent in the time when the present Hebrew Bible was assembled. The biblical writers, he asserts, were The Establishment - male priests and scribes with their own elite agenda. Their purpose was the extinction of widespread "cults" adhered to by the majority population, particularly the elimination of the Ashereh cult likely prevelant among women. Ashereh, considered by some scholars to be Yahweh's consort, certainly commanded more adherents than the monotheist propogandists. However, this is the closest he comes to dealing with theology. Dever's claim that the biblical assemblers "knew a lot and knew it early" in answer to the title's query may be contested.

Even the title of this book, `What Did the Biblical Writers Know & When Did They Know It?' shows some of the key controversies that modern archaeologists deal with in their reconstructions and analyses of discoveries in relation to the Biblical texts. Among many archaeologists there is a love-hate relationship with the Bible -- it is not a history text in the modern sense, and requires varying degrees of translation and interpretation, as well as understanding that the texts have undergone considerable changes and development since first being committed to print, and that not all of these developments have been in favour of historical truth as it is defined by the moderns. Enter the fact that in many instances, the Bible is the sole witness to many ancient practices, people, places, etc., and one can understand how it becomes a problematic document with which to deal in terms of modern historical reconstruction. Dever's subtitle: `What Archaeology Can Tell Us about the Reality of Ancient Israel' shows the direction of this volume -- what are the discoveries, and how do they relate to the realities? `For centuries the Hebrew Bible has been the fountainhead of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Today, however, the entire biblical tradition, including its historical veracity, is being challenged. Leading this assault is a group of scholars described as the 'minimalist' or 'revisionist' school of biblical studies, which charges that the Hebrew Bible is largely pious fiction and that its writers and editors invented 'ancient Israel' as a piece of late Jewish propaganda in the Hellenistic era.' Dever is concerned that revisionist scholars do not so much intend to 'revise' ancient history as to abolish it altogether. They seek, Dever contends, to reduce the historical stories to nothing more than fables and legends that are incorporated at a later date into the historical core of the Hebrew Bible as fact to bolster later dynasties. These are a 'pious fiction' rather than historical fact. Figures such as Abraham, Moses and David, under this kind of reconstruction, never actually existed. They are figures with more in common with Hercules than with Rameses; they are invented to serve the purpose of building a cultural and national consciousness. Dever deals with these issues, and the dangers associated with such revisionism, in great detail. Asking the question 'Is there any real history in the Hebrew Bible?' Dever proceeds to examine archaeological evidence and Biblical narratives to see what the core of truth may be. While fully acknowledging the differences between different kinds of history, Dever contends that there is a reliable core of actual events, people, and places that underpin the biblical narratives. English has only one useful word for what we think of as history. The German language (in which much of modern historical method and philosophy has been formulated) has a more explicit division of types of history: Geschicte, or academic history;

Two books in one, this awkwardly titled volume contains (i) the best introduction to the archaeology of Iron Age Palestine (biblical Israel) yet written, and (ii) a devastatingly trenchant critique of the scholarship and methodology of the "biblical minimalist" school.William Dever is perhaps the preeminent American Syro-Palestinian archaeologist of his generation. He has extensive field experience (Shechem, Khirbet el-Qom, Tell el-Hayyat, Beth Shean, and especially Gezer), has served on the editorial board of several major journals, has received several prestigious awards and grants, has a remarkable publication record, and is an accomplished teacher. He also has written many articles for nonspecialists in journals such as "Biblical Archaeology Review". He writes with great force and clarity.In "What did the Biblical Writers know and When did they know it?", Dever skewers biblical minimalists who insist that the Hebrew Bible is essentially a postexilic fabrication devoid of historical validity. At times Dever's polemic is so bitter it is difficult to reconcile with his reputation as a first magnitude scholar. To those who are unfamiliar with the challenges posed by the minimalist camp (e.g. Thompson, Lemche, Davies, Whitelam, Vikander-Edelman, et al.), Dever's acidity may seem bewildering and even off-putting. The cognoscenti who are familiar with the current debate no doubt will expect a wild ride, and those who are not embarrassed by Dever's diatribe will likely be delighted by his pyrotechnics.Ensconced in the central chapters of this book, however, is an outstanding introduction to the archaeology of the "land of the Bible" during the Iron Age (1200 - 586 BCE). The Late Bronze (ca. 1550 BCE - 1200 BCE) and Iron I (1200 BCE - 1000 BCE) periods in particular were formative ones for early Israel. Dever's general thesis is that the so-called "Deuteronomistic History" - Joshua, Judges, I-II Samuel, and I-II Kings - has its "sitz im leben" rooted in the Iron Age, even if much of the DH ultimately was redacted during the postexilic period. Dever argues this point most persuasively, and brings to bear an overwhelming array of archaeological data. The book contains many fine pictures and illustrations of important artifacts which vivify Dever's analyses.Dever is a self-identified "neopragmatist". Theologically, he is atheist/agnostic. He would vigorously agree that Genesis 1-11 is aetiological myth, that the patriarchal tales are of dubious historicity, that there is hardly a shred of evidence for the exodus, that Moses is as historical a figure as Odysseus, etc. Yet, equally vigorously, he asserts that the Deuteronomistic History (DH) contains many real historical data which are clearly supported by elements of the material record. Thus, he has as much contempt for the naive, theologically tendentious methodology of fundamentalist "scholars" as he does for their politically tendentious polar opposites, the minimalists. Indeed, in the i