fbpx

The cover story of the current issue (December 2010) of National Geographic is entitled “Kings of Controversy,” and it considers the archaeological debate over the kingdom of David and Solomon. 

The story is interesting and well-written, and it gives a good presentation of the debate from a mainstream perspective.  image

On one side is Israel Finkelstein, somehow considered the “establishment, a Goliath fending off upstart assaults on his chronological order.”  On the other side, those launching the “upstart assaults” are such novice scholars as Amihai Mazar, Thomas Levy, Eilat Mazar, and Yosef Garfinkel.  The writer got his Davids and Goliaths mixed up, for it is actually Finkelstein’s theory which is the late-comer and the minority position among scholars today. 

If you’re at all interested in what archaeologists are saying today about this contested issue, the article is worth your time.  The photo gallery is viewable at a separate link.

Share:

From Adnkronos Culture and Media:

Archaeologists in the southern temple city of Luxor have unearthed twelve new sphinx statues and a road from the reign of ancient Egyptian pharaoh Nectanebo I (380-362 BC), Egypt’s culture minister Farouk Hosny announced on Monday.
The sphinx statues are inscribed with Nectanebo I’s name and were found in the last sector of the Avenue of the Sphinxes, one of the most important archaeological and religious paths in Luxor, the site of the Ancient Egyptian city of Thebes.
The mythological creatures with human faces and reclining feline bodies were typically used to decorate the tombs of ancient Egyptian rulers.
The Avenue of the Sphinxes, built by Nectanebo I, runs from Luxor to nearby Karnak, where it connects to the temple of the goddess Mut. Karnak and contains a vast conglomeration of ruined temples, chapels, monumental gateways to temples, and other buildings.
The archaeologists discovered the new sphinxes at the end of the newly unearthed road of Nectanebo I, said Zahi Hawass, head of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities.

The story continues here.  A better photo is posted in this article.

HT: ANE-2

Luxor Temple avenue of sphinxes, tb011005744ddd

Avenue of Sphinxes, Luxor
Share:

From Earth Times:

This week, Berlin scientists are to brief scholars on 21st century methods of sorting the fragments, which contain Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic writing and are kept at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem.
The new methods, which include shining X-rays through the parchment and papyrus, are guaranteed not to damage them.
Re-analysis would not only help to resolve some fierce academic and religious disputes that have been based on differing readings of the texts, but also help reconstruct several more documents which had seemed lost for ever in the muddle of fragments.
The new methods were evolved by BAM, Germany’s material-science laboratory in Berlin.
“We’ll be able to say if any two fragments have identical material properties,” explained BAM spokeswoman Ulrike Rockland. “If they do, they come from the same piece. No one could say that with certainty before.”
[…]
These include examination with light, electron and environmental scanning electron microscopes and advanced technologies known as X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy and Raman spectroscopy.
The experts devised standard ways to trace how each piece of parchment was made and how it aged.
“Goatskin is an organic material. If two fragments have the same X-ray, Raman and infrared signature, they must belong together,” said Rockland.
The procedures can also identify different batches of handmade ink. The scientists manufactured their own iron-gall ink using ancient recipes to test what happens as it dries and eats its way into the parchment.
The sole disadvantage of the new tests is the high cost.

The full story is here.

HT: Joe Lauer

Share:

An inscription with the name of Ramses III has been found in Saudi Arabia, suggesting Egyptian interest in the trade routes to what is today Yemen.  A related article is “Solomon & Sheba, Inc.,” by André Lemaire, published earlier this year in Biblical Archaeology Review.

A Logos collection that may interest readers here is the William Mitchell Ramsay Collection.  The 16 volumes may sell for $30 if enough people bid on it.

Prof. Gershon Galil of the University of Haifa will be visiting Yeshiva University, giving a talk on
Tuesday evening, November 16.  His topic is “A Word is Better than a Million Potsherds: David and Solomon Between Text & Material Culture.” The talk will take place in Furst Hall (500 West 185th St, at the corner of Amsterdam Avenue), on the 5th floor, in room 535, at 8:30 p.m. 

Yoav Farhi will be lecturing on Tuesday, November 16, at 7:00 p.m. at Southern Adventist University in Collegedale, Tennessee.  His topic is “Ancient Coins of Khirbet Qeiyafa: A Stronghold on the Road to Jerusalem.”

Aren Maeir will be speaking at Central Bible College in Springfield, Missouri on November 17, at 5:30 p.m.  The college’s participation in the excavations at Gath this season are the subject of an article in the local press.
I wonder if anyone knows whatever happened to this anticipated biblical archaeology book by Stager and Cross.

HT: Eric Welch and Joe Lauer

Share:

Benj Foreman, professor at the Israel Bible Extension of The Master’s College, has responded to my post about Rachel’s Tomb with observations worthy of more attention than they’ll get in a comment. 

He writes:

Thanks for your synthesis. I’ve heard you teach this before, but here are a few points to consider:

1) 1 Sam 10:2 does not need to be translated “in the territory of Benjamin at Zelzah,” as you do in your post. The Hebrew “gevul” can mean border, and often does. Though it can mean “territory,” it often emphasizes the limit of a territory. It’s possible, therefore, that Samuel is saying something like this: you will meet two men on the border of Benjamin at Zelzah, near Rachel’s tomb (I rearranged the word order, i.e. “Rachels’ tomb” for clarity).

2) Rachel clearly dies “on the way” to Ephrathah in Gen 35:19–20. This means that she wasn’t buried in Bethlehem, but on the way there. So the fact that Bethlehem is 5 miles from the border need not be troublesome.

3) It’s not “certain” that there was a Bethlehem in Benjamin. I’m not convinced that the Bethlehem in Neh 7:26 is a different from Bethlehem in Judah. You’re right that it seems to be listed in an odd place (amidst Benjamite cities), but considering the fact that Bethlehem of Judah––the city of King David––is not listed anywhere else in the list, makes it unlikely to me that “Bethlehem” here refers to a city previously unknown to us. Wouldn’t we expect there to be at least a few returnees from David’s hometown?

4) It seems unlikely to me that the Ephrathah and Bethlehem which are linked in Gen 35:19 are different from the Ephrathah and Bethlehem which are linked in Micah 5:2.

5) What about Jer 31:15? The fact that Rachel is associated with Ramah is initially striking. However, perhaps we should note first of all that the text makes no connection to Rachel’s death. Rather, she is weeping for her children. Why? Because they are no more. But why single out Rachel? The answer may be because Jeremiah is using “Ephraim” as an object lesson for Judah (cf. v. 18, 20). She, one of the matriarch’s of Israel, was the “mother” of Ephraim: she bore Joseph, to whom were born Manasseh and Ephraim.

6) Migdal Ha Eder in Gen 35:21 and Micah 4:8 is not problematic. It’s near Jerusalem: between Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Why does it have to be NORTH of Jerusalem? (I just read your response to Leen and there you say that it could be in any direction from Jerusalem….)

7) Summary: if we translate “gevul” in 1 Sam 10:2 as border, then having Rachel’s tomb somewhere south of Jerusalem ceases to be problematic. Rachel died “on the way” to Bethlehem (i.e. Ephrathah) and was buried somewhere on the border between Judah and Benjamin near an unknown site called Zelzah. The traditional location is probably unlikely since this is nearly 5 miles from the border of Judah/Benjamin.

8) Maybe I left out one vital piece of evidence and all of this will crumble. 🙂

Rachel's Tomb, pp1126

Rachel’s Tomb, c. 1881.  Source: Picturesque Palestine.
Share: