The Vendetta Continues

As I’ve mentioned before here, archaeology isn’t a science it’s a vendetta and nowhere is that truer than in the Middle East where so many people base their claims for statehood and ownership of the land to old stories, some true, some not so much. Obviously, there’s an enormous desire to back up these stories with empirical evidence.

Recently, a story made the popular press announcing that evidence for the Bible and the Kingdom of Israel had been found that pushed back their earliest dates by four hundred years:

Until now, many scholars have held that the Hebrew Bible originated in the 6th century B.C., because Hebrew writing was thought to stretch back no further. But the newly deciphered Hebrew text is about four centuries older, scientists announced this month.

“It indicates that the Kingdom of Israel already existed in the 10th century BCE and that at least some of the biblical texts were written hundreds of years before the dates presented in current research,” said Gershon Galil, a professor of Biblical Studies at the University of Haifa in Israel, who deciphered the ancient text.

Dr. Galil’s work found that for alphabetic, linguistic, and social reasons the text on the ostracon described in the article was definitely Hebrew.

Or maybe not:

Building on the sterling work of the authors of the editio princeps, I will be presenting papers on this ostracon at the 2010 Annual Meetings of ASOR and SBL. I will also be publishing an article in a refereed journal on it. At this time, I want to provide a basic summary of this ostracon and its significance, especially in light of the grandiose claims (i.e., in blogs) that have been made regarding it. This material is copyrighted. All rights retained. However, it may be cited in print (with attribution) and bloggers may link to it (or cite from it and then provide a link). From the outset, I should like to note that I consider this to be an important inscription and the rapid publication of it is absolutely commendable.

writes Dr. Christopher Rollston, formerly of Johns Hopkins and currently teaching at Emmanuel School of Religion. Dr. Rollston contradicts nearly all of the findings, noting that the script is not Old Hebrew but proto-Phoenician, the writing orientation is unclear (it may be right to left, left to write, or boustrophedon, i.e. alternating), and that all of the words being pointed to as definitely Hebrew have attestations in other Semitic languages.

The process of re-discovering the true history of the ancient Middle East continues to be one filled with literal as well as figurative landmines. Everybody has a lot riding on their versions of ancient history.

1 comment… add one
  • Michael Reynolds Link

    For God’s sake don’t anyone tell the Indians about this. I have a feeling they might be able to state a prior claim to all of North America. And South, too.

Leave a Comment