[b-hebrew] Wellhausen

K Randolph kwrandolph at gmail.com
Wed Jan 9 18:27:32 EST 2008


On Jan 9, 2008 6:02 AM, Yitzhak Sapir <yitzhaksapir at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jan 9, 2008 3:48 PM, Brian Roberts wrote:
> No one owns a position or view.  A discussion by Mazar of the MCC is
> available
> here: http://www.rehov.org/Iron%20Age%20Chronology%20Debate.pdf
> >From the final paragraph: "The suggested MCC appears to be the most
> reasonable and acceptable chronology for the 10th-9th centuries BCEin the
> Southern Levant. It indicates a long duration of the same material culture
> throughout most of these centuries, and also results in an even and
> logical
> subdivision of the period from ca. 1130 to ca. 732/700 BCE into three more
> or
> less even time units, each with its own material culture traits. This
> view appears
> to have become the dominant among many archaeologists currently working in
> Israel."

The author admitted on p. 10 of the .pdf (page 26 of the original) "A major
difficulty in dealing with our subject is [sic] the biases relating to
biblical and extra-biblical texts." He fleshes out the problem on this and
the next two pages. Yet it is clear from his discussion that the "biases"
are no more, no less than ideological (religious) beliefs.

> > >Furthermore, if the majority of scholars have been convinced, as
> evidently
> > >had already happened by 1890 for the Documentary Hypothesis, then the
> > >burden of proof lies with those who remain "skeptical," as you call
> them (a
> > >really odd term in this situation).
> >
> > To be fair, you're referring to what was, initially, a small group of
> > scholars of a particular clique and associated with certain professors
> and
> > universities. I'd say it's arguable that DH was spread therefore in the
> > teacher-student process as much as (if not more than) the peer-review
> > process.
> To be fair, you should provide evidence for your assertion.  If an
> American
> professor says in 1889 that the great majority of Old Testament scholars
> accept the Documentary Hypothesis, calling it the prevailing hypothesis,
> it seems to me that the view won widespread acceptance already at the
> very beginning, not by virtue of a teacher-student process, but by virtue
> of
> being published and being read by others, thus convincing others.

By 1889 there was already more than 80 years of teacher-student process,
affecting even in the U.S. At that time, many Americans got their training
in Europe, especially their graduate school training. Furthermore, who did
that American professor count as "Old Testament scholars"? Did he have a
broad, or restricted view, and if restricted, how restricted?

> Yitzhak Sapir

Karl W. Randolph.

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list