S/D: Dodgy Biblical Archaeology

Israeli archaeology I know very little about, unfortunately; my mentor in ancient history is an Egyptologist (which is why, when it comes to this stuff, it's the Exodus I know most about). Archaeology of all sorts is politicized and fractious, but geez, it's not hard to think of reasons why that'd be even more true in Israel.

it has acetate overlays that sit on top of photographs...RECREATING PLACES IN BIBLICAL TIMES.

like, babylon and shit.

Oh geez, the von Daniken type stuff, that's ... the superset in which this stuff lives, I think. (Assuming I used superset correctly.)

If you read (and accepted as true) Dante, then there'd be a very good reason to desist from bothering to find Eden. Look at what happened to Odysseus.

*resists the urge to go spout off on 14th century behavior by slightly educated peasants*

Let's just say that there were cases documented where people believed it to be true.

i. 16th century: renaissance scholars look back at the classical era to free themselves somewhat from moribund church ubiquity — digging around starts
ii. 17th/18th century: scholars start digging around in non-classical ruins (the gothic) and/or struggling to fit what they dig up to confirm the bible (fossils = animals lost in noah's flood)
iii. late 18th/early 19th century: scholars begin to use better textual/archeological information to CHALLENGE the truth of the bible
iv: late 19th century, Schliemann decides to dig for Troy on the assumption that ancient lit has truth in it, and FINDS it/radical New Age dissent in the UK declares an unbroken anti-establishment link with the DRUIDS etc
v. 1921, reopening of Tut's tomb sets off world-wide amateur egypto-mania, from Art Deco to The Mummy to the Stonecutters etc

For the Holy Grail/Jesus went to France and had kids story, read _Holy_Blood,_Holy_Grail_ of which there are about a million used copies floating about. Its a very entertaining book.

Not mentioned yet is the whole Mormon thing. Amerinds Indians = Lost tribe of Israel is a whole nother barrel of fun.

(both books are about the Rennes-le-Chateau mythos. Andrews and Schellenberger claim that the body of Jesus is buried nearby, and that you can prove this by studying sacred geometry in the paintings of Poussin.)

http://www.duran.freeserve.co.uk/arcadia7.jpg

http://www.mountaincharlie1850.org/images/ecv_evolution.gif

(... do they?)

so, eh, back to the basic question... yeah it's funny how politicised the past is. there was a piece in the paper the other day where some archaeological remains were accidentally discovered on some Palestinian's land. "I hope it's Roman stuff," he said. "If it's ancient Jewish stuff I'll have a settlement on top of me quicker than you can say 'Transfer Time, T-Head!'".

This one has a cover story on the "James, Brother of Jesus" deal, though, which looks interesting (it's about the hoax bit, but -- again, just based on skimming -- seems to talk about why there isn't a consensus about it being a hoax.)

(it mostly seems to be a blog in the original here's-a-load-of-links-to-stuff-I've-read meaning.)

There's a very good article I need to reread about archaeological evidence of Israelites in Egypt, which is misleadingly -- glaringly and annoyingly misleadingly (hello captain adverb!) -- referred to in the rest of the magazine; the references imply that the article substantiates claims of a historical Exodus, and not only does it not do so, but it provides material well-suited to an argument against a hist. Ex., or at least one very unlike that of the Old Testament.

They're anti-Albright, as far as I can tell, and are accused in the letters section of "not believing in the Bible" (this in reference to the James ossuary, so phoo on the letter-writer), but seem sympathetic to Albright-type apologists. I don't know what to make of them.