To: "Jonathan D. Safren" <yonsaf AT beitberl.beitberl.ac.il>
Cc: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Subject: Re: historiography (Ken, again)
Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2000 13:43:55 -0800
I agree. So much has already been discovered by archaeologists that might
not have
been found at all, except that it was written in the Bible. And I think
that, in the
main, Biblical historiography is at least as well-attested as much of the
ancient
history that we take for granted. Who knows what corroborating bits and
pieces of
history a new century, with improved means and methods of discovery, might
produce?
>
>
> So I ask these questions.
> 1) Perhaps royal inscriptions were not part of the Israelite and
> Judahite scribal/royal tradition? And/or
> 2) Perhaps too much is being claimed on the basis of chance findings or
> non-findings?
> 3) Perhaps the blanket rejection of Biblical historiography is
> unwarranted?
>
> --
> Jonathan D. Safren
> Dept. of Biblical Studies
> Beit Berl College
> 44905 Beit Berl Post Office
> Israel
>