The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts,   ISBN:9780684869131

Customer Rating: 

The Bible Unearthed is not as scholarly as other books (notably anything by Egyptologist Donald Redford), but it's illuminating and thought-provoking for non-experts like myself. Finkelstein and Silberman present very convincing archaeological evidence for their claims, and their arguments are backed up by a thorough bibliography (but which could have been more scholarly). The book's only distraction, in my opinion, is that the authors try to have it both ways. After each chapter, in which they pretty much destroy the cherished ideas that the patriarchs, the Israelite sojourn in Egypt, the Exodus, the conquest of Canaan, and the Davidic/Solomonic glory eras are all mostly mythological traditions, they feel compelled to offer solace to those readers who might be offended by these revelations. Consequently, each chapter tends to be burdened by patronizing statements regarding the soaring prose of the Old Testament and its stirring accounts of great heroes and legends. If I had wanted that, I would have stuck with King Arthur and Sir Lancelot.

Nevertheless, this is an honest book that will open your eyes, make you think long and hard on the differences between Bible legend and historicity, and force you to confront what may be very uncomfortable truths. And in that regard, it succeeds wonderfully.

Customer Rating: 

I was very impressed with this book but....

was this book intended for laymen or scholars? The reason I ponder this very question is due to the lack of footnotes and exact locations within cited documents that the information was found. I have read many reviews from what appear to be from inexperienced readers resorting to the equilvalent of ad hominem attacks on the book and authors themselves. I will admit this book sufficiently lacks footnotes, however, there is such a thing called a "bibliography" which is located in the back of the book that references where all the material was obtained from. Most of the time though, specific pages are not given by the authors. This is a very frustrating aspect to the book itself.

We also need to remember that Mr. Finkelstein himself is currently a professor at Tel-Aviv University, one of the most prestigious positions an individual of credentials could have. So while many will attack the information and the author, rest assured, the author isn't just "making" stuff up as he goes along.

All of the citations are factual (as I have checked them), but like I said, a lack of specific locations only produces frustration upon the reader of the book. Personally, this can only hurt the ultimate goal put forth by the book. To introduce the real story behind the OT and its origins by using up to date data gathering and archeological methods.

I would give this book a five based on valuable information alone and appreciate the authors dedication into making this material available for all to read. However, believe it should have been more directed towards a laymen's audience and education, therefore, I give it a four out of a possible five.

Best Regards.

Customer Rating: 

For over 150 years, archaeologists working in the Mideast assumed the history described in the Old Testament was a reliable description of events in that region. Place names might have changed in the intervening centuries, but the basic narrative was taken as, well, gospel. That is, the descendants of Abraham journeyed to Egypt, where they were enslaved for a time, and then some time later, around 1200 BCE, they left Egypt and settled in Canaan, where they defeated various idol-worshiping tribes, and established two great kingdoms: Israel in the North, and Judah in the South. Israel was eventually destroyed, and stronger tribe of Judah remained until it, too, was driven into exile.

Based on this telling of the history, archaeologists concentrated most of their effort on the great Southern biblical cities, like Jerusalem, Hebron, Gezer, Bethel and so forth. The North was, for the most part, ignored, as it was assumed that most of the important settlements would have been in the South. Archeology proceeded in this matter for over a century, even as problems with the narrative slowly accumulated.

For one thing, the Old Testament has a number of narratives that conflict with each other. Some stories appeared in multiple versions with very different perspectives. And the great palaces of David and Solomon, long the primary aim of many biblical researchers, resisted discovery, even as archaeologists dug in the places spelled out in the OT as the location of these palaces. In fact, many of the places named in the OT didn't even exist during thime of the narrative. Many researchers became convinced that the early biblical narratives were not written around 1200BCE, but hundreds of years later, around 800-700 BCE, after the destruction of the NOrthern Kingdom.

Then, beginning around the 1970s, a new generation of Israeli archaeologists began focusing their efforts in the North of Israel, and from their research cam ea number of startling new discoveries that led to the conclusions discussed in this book. Many were not easily accepted, particularly by those whose research was motivated by a literal belief in the bible, or those who had invested a life's work in verifying the literal history of the OT. But as the evidence accumulated, the generally accepted history of the region began to shift to a new paradigm.

Based on findings not just in Israel, but in Egypt and elsewhere, a very different picture began to emerge. For one thing, no one has ever found any historical record or archaeological evidence of the Exodus. Certainly, an event in which several tens of thousands of foreign slaves left Egypt would have merited at least some mention in Egyptian records- but it's simply not there. Add to that the fact that Canaan was a province very much under the control of the Egyptian empire at the time of the Exodus, and the story of Israelites fleeing Egypt for Canaan becomes even more questionable.

The archaeological story that eventually emerges is one of refugees leaving a crumbling coastal Canaanite empire, and establishing small villages of perhaps 50-100 people in the central mountainous regions. And not just once, but several times. Even more surprisingly, for those looking for literal history, it was the Northern tribes who were the wealthier and more successful, with the Southern tribes of Judah writing the history after the destruction of the Northern empire.

All of this is still very contentious in many circles, but the narrative in this book is quite compelling and convincing. Definitely a must-read for anyone interested in Biblical archeology- perhaps especially for those who accept the literal historical truth as outlined in the OT.

Customer Rating: 

DrEwgog (Croton NY)
I have no expertise in this area; my only qualification to reviewing this book is my long-time involvement in treating with the demands of argument. I cannot speak to the accuracy of most of the data, but I can say that the writing is extremely lucid, the points are made logically, the support is provided in a convincing and very readable fashion, and the other side is handled in an effective and respectful manner. I thoroughly enjoyed this book and look forward to a rereading after I read Dever and some others on this very exciting subject matter.

Customer Rating: 

'The Bible Unearthed' is a breezy read with minimal technicalities (it's written for laity). Every chapter opens with synopses of the biblical stories, basically the rudiments of the players and plots. The visual aids are generally uninteresting, but the chronological tables were useful. The book follows a simple outline. 12 chapters are divided into 3 sections. Their stated aim (p. 3) is not to topple the bible but to use its texts in conjunction with archaeology to form a proper history of ancient Israel and its historical literature.

Nevertheless the 1st section (5 chapters) commences with a little necessary deconstruction. The patriarchal epics, the exodus, the conquest, and the united monarchy, they argue, are not historical realities but literary reflections of circa 9th-6th centuries BC Israelite monarchical existence; that is, after the pre-state Iron I life in the hill country zones of Canaan, when native pastoral-nomads sedentarized to become early Israel. The following 2 sections begin the reconstruction with the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, the former developing to a power to be reckoned with before and overshadowing the latter prior to its destruction and depopulation, only after which Judah realized full statehood and produced the grand narrative which is the Deuteronomistic History. This is largely late southern monarchical propaganda and was edited after the exile to accommodate the historically and theologically disastrous dissolution of the Davidic monarchy. A finishing 7 succinct appendices elaborate specific issues throughout the book, followed by bibliography for each chapter.

There are a few easter eggs here, considering the audience, as well as controversy. Points of controversy (such as what I find as an implausible argument for a fraudulent united monarchy, or the pastoral-nomadic theory; there is also a failure to discuss the Solomonic Temple in any depth) I'll let the reader decide on their own. More important for a review are a few admonishments: Beware of judgments stated as incontestable fact. This can easily mislead the non-specialist. Spanning 355 pages are only 18 footnotes, none of them citing sources. Authors are quoted in the main text without references, and ancient texts are sometimes left anonymous (e.g., the marriage contract mentioned on p. 323.) From the beginning the authors state: 'Readers must judge for themselves if our reconstruction fits the evidence.' But there's little opportunity for that in this book. As it's obviously for a popular audience, readers should not be expected to scour through the bibliography to be able to do it.

Finally, there are several '1-starrers' making naive claims in their reviews. For one, lack of evidence carries weight in many instances, and an argument based off of a lack of evidence is not necessarily ad silencium. It can be stated in modus tollens: 1) If p, then q. 2) ~q. 3) Therefore, ~p. This is a logically validating argument. In other words, where 'p' should leave recognizable evidence 'q' and it doesn't, one can reasonably infer the former's negation. While I think the authors should have been more conservative in applying this principle, their appealing to a lack of evidence where they do is not per se fallacious. Some one else had said Silberman was not an archaeologist. Please get a clue. As for those who think these authors are mere deconstructionalists out to disprove the bible (a typical fundamentalist knee-jerk response), they would do well to learn that most of the biblical events they dismiss is nothing 'revisionist' at all. It's standard knowledge in the field.