Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: historiography

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Jim West <jwest AT Highland.Net>
  • To: Jonathan D Safren <yonsaf AT beitberl.beitberl.ac.il>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: historiography
  • Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2000 12:00:12 -0500


At 06:48 PM 1/1/00 +0200, you wrote:
>Isn't it odd that, even for those parts of the existence of the Kingdoms
>of Israel and Judah that are confirmed by external epigraphy, we don't
>possess even one Israelite or Judahite royal inscription?
>Notice I'm not talking about administrative documents or letters, which
>would have been written on perishable materials (only ostraca have
>survived, and those not from high-ranking officials), but about the kind
>of inscriptions that woulod have been written on stone or plaster, such
>as the Mesha Inscription, the Tell Dan Inscription or the Deir Alla
>Plaster Inscription (not royal).
>If it weren't for chance mention of Israelite and Jodahite kings by
>Assyrian. Moabite and Aramean epigraphy, then one could claim that the
>Kingdoms of Israel and Judah never existed.
>So I ask these questions.
>1) Perhaps royal inscriptions were not part of the Israelite and
>Judahite scribal/royal tradition? And/or

This would be extremely unique wouldn't it? We have precisely this kind of
material for all of the surrounding cultures, but none for Israel- which
reached great expanse during the "Solomonic" era.... (according to the DH).
That is just so odd that it requires some significant consideration, it
seems to me.

>2) Perhaps too much is being claimed on the basis of chance findings or
>non-findings?

That is possibly true. Chance plays far too great a role in such matters.
But again, what are the chances that the surrounding civilizations left some
trace and Israel alone did not? Let me hasten to say- I think there was an
"Israel" in the pre-babylonian era. But I dont think it was what the DH
says it was.

>3) Perhaps the blanket rejection of Biblical historiography is
>unwarranted?

Any blanket rejection of anything is unwarranted. But when evidence is
lacking for something we must wonder why that is and what really was there.

Best, as always,

Jim

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Jim West, ThD
jwest AT highland.net
http://web.infoave.net/~jwest






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page