What archaeology and ancient texts can and cannot show

Program / Course 6: Old Testament Theology and History / Lesson 1.2

What you will learn

• Describe how archaeologists date and interpret a site and why their conclusions are often provisional.
• Name several inscriptions that touch the Old Testament and say what each does and does not establish.
• Explain the difference between evidence, interpretation and argument from silence.
• Describe the main positions in the debate over how far the biblical accounts match the historical record.

The big idea

Archaeology digs up objects, buildings and writing. Ancient texts supply names, events and ideas. Together they can confirm that a king existed, that a city fell or that a custom was practiced. They cannot by themselves confirm a miracle, a promise or a theological claim. A careful student asks of every claim: what was actually found, how was it dated, who interpreted it, and how much does the argument rest on what was not found?

Key terms

Archaeology

The study of the human past through physical remains such as buildings, pottery, tools and inscriptions.

Tell

A mound formed by layers of a city built, destroyed and rebuilt on the same spot over many centuries.

Stratigraphy

The study of layers. Lower layers are generally older, and the order of layers helps date what is found.

Inscription

Writing cut or painted on stone, clay or other material, such as a royal monument.

Ostracon (plural ostraca)

A piece of broken pottery used as a writing surface for letters, lists and receipts.

Argument from silence

Reasoning that something did not happen because no evidence of it survives. It is weak when the evidence would rarely survive in any case.

Primary and secondary source

A primary source comes from the time studied. A secondary source is a later account or interpretation.

Background

Most of what was written in the ancient world is lost, and most of what was built has been buried or reused. What survives is a small, uneven sample. Stone and fired clay last, while papyrus, leather and wood mostly perish. A king who built in stone appears in the record far more than a village that built in mud and left no names. This should make a reader careful about both proof and disproof.

Archaeology also does not speak for itself. A destroyed layer in a city can be dated by pottery styles, by coins in later periods, and sometimes by radiocarbon testing of organic material. Yet the cause of destruction, whether war, earthquake or fire, often has to be argued. Two experts can look at the same layer and differ on its date or meaning. For that reason this course marks conclusions as well supported, probable or debated.

The Bible is itself an ancient text, and historians treat it as a source alongside others. Some historians give it considerable trust where it can be checked. Others treat it as largely later reflection on the past. Believers and nonbelievers appear on both sides of that division, and the lesson describes the positions without choosing between them.

Step-by-step explanation

Step 1: How a site is read

A dig opens a tell layer by layer. Pottery is the most common tool for dating, because styles changed over time and can be matched across sites. Radiocarbon testing of seeds, charcoal and wood gives ranges of years, not exact years. Archaeologists record where each find lay, because its location in the layers is part of its evidence.

Interpretation follows. A layer of ash might come from an enemy attack, an accident or a deliberate rebuilding. Linking it to a biblical event takes a further step. That step can be reasonable, but it is an argument, not a photograph.

Step 2: Inscriptions that touch the Bible

Some written finds mention people and events known from the Bible. The Tel Dan inscription, from the ninth century BC, is an Aramaic monument that most scholars read as naming the house of David. The Mesha inscription, a Moabite king’s monument from the same century, mentions Omri of Israel and the name of Israel’s God. Assyrian records of Sennacherib describe his campaign against Judah in 701 BC and his siege of Jerusalem under King Hezekiah, which is also told in 2 Kings 18 and 19. The Cyrus Cylinder, a Persian text, describes Cyrus allowing deported peoples to return to their homelands and rebuild their shrines.

These finds show that biblical figures and events sit in real history. They also show the differences in telling. The Assyrian account and the biblical account describe the same siege from opposite sides, and scholars debate how to reconcile their details.

Step 3: Where evidence is thin or disputed

For the patriarchs, the exodus and the conquest, there is little direct evidence outside the Bible. Some scholars say that is what is to be expected from small, mobile groups and a short passage through the desert. Others take the lack of evidence as a reason to treat the stories as later memory shaped by theology. Excavations at Jericho and Ai have been interpreted in opposite directions for decades, and no summary here should be treated as final.

For the monarchy, evidence is better. There are royal inscriptions, seals, a water tunnel in Jerusalem with a Hebrew inscription from the time of Hezekiah, and letters from Lachish. Even so, scholars argue about the size and power of David’s and Solomon’s kingdom, and the debate turns on dating rather than on whether the kings existed.

Step 4: Three habits for reading claims

First, separate the find from the interpretation. A newspaper headline may say that a discovery proves something, while the report says only that a jar handle bears a name. Second, ask whether the missing evidence would have survived. Third, notice who stands to gain. A claim that suits a religious or political view deserves the same scrutiny whether it supports or attacks the Bible.

1. What exactly was found, and where was it found?
2. How was it dated, and how precise is the date?
3. Who interpreted it, and could other interpretations fit the same facts?
4. Is the claim an argument from silence, and would the evidence have survived if it had existed?
5. Does the claim concern a historical fact or a theological conclusion?
6. Who might gain from the conclusion, and does that change how carefully I check it?

Examples

Different perspectives

Maximalist historians

These scholars, many but not all religious, hold that the biblical narratives often preserve reliable memory and should be given the benefit of the doubt where nothing contradicts them. They point to inscriptions that confirm kings and events named in the Bible.

Minimalist historians

These scholars hold that biblical narratives were written much later and shaped by the concerns of their authors, so they should be trusted only where independent evidence supports them. They point to the lack of direct evidence for early events.

Most scholars, in between

Most historians accept that the books contain real memory and real invention, and they judge each case on its evidence. They accept the kingdoms of Israel and Judah as historical and debate the earlier periods.

Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant teaching

These churches hold that Scripture is inspired and truthful in what God intended to teach for salvation. Their scholars differ on how that truthfulness relates to historical detail, and many welcome archaeology as help and not as threat.

Jewish scholarship

Jewish scholars take part in all the positions above. Many treat the Scriptures as the foundational record of the Jewish people while using archaeology to study the world in which the texts took shape.

Why it matters

Claims about archaeology are often used in arguments, for or against faith, with more certainty than the evidence allows. A student who learns what a find can and cannot show is less likely to be misled by an exciting headline or a confident dismissal, and is better prepared to read the biblical text with attention to what it claims.

Common misunderstandings

Knowledge check

Think it through

1. Have you seen a news story that claimed archaeology proved or disproved a religious claim? What would you now ask about it?
2. Why might a faith not depend on every historical detail, and why might some believers think it does?
3. Which of the three reading habits do you most often skip?
4. What would count as strong evidence for you in a historical dispute, and why?

Independent assignment

Evaluate one claim

Choose one claim from a book, article or video about archaeology and the Bible. In your own notebook, write 300 to 450 words. State the claim, what was actually found, how it was dated, and who interpreted it. Apply the six questions. Then state what the evidence supports, what it does not support, and what you would need to see to be more certain. Do not send it anywhere.

Further study

• Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth Read the chapters on reading narratives to see how historical setting is used responsibly.
• Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Philosophy of History Read for the problems of evidence and interpretation in any history.
• Jewish Publication Society, The Hebrew Bible in English (JPS translation) Read 2 Kings 18 and 19 and compare them with what this lesson says about Sennacherib.
• 2 Kings 18 Hezekiah and the Assyrian invasion.
• Ezra 1 Cyrus allows the return.
• 2 Chronicles 32 A parallel account of Hezekiah’s reign.