Overview of an Article

This next post attempts to summarize an interesting article I read by Bryant G. Wood entitled From Ramesses to Shiloh: Archaeological Discoveries Bearing on the Exodus-Judges Period. This article addresses discoveries from archaeology that have to do with the many doubts people express about Israel’s history before the kingdom period. Because of a supposed lack of evidence, many people simply address the Biblical accounts as myths or legends. However, the author makes the point that many of the arguments used fall into four categories: either they misrepresent the chronology given in the Biblical text, the come to conclusion based on arguments from silence or arguments because of no supporting evidence, or a lack of in-depth study or misinterpretation about the actual archaeological evidence and lastly, “just plain bad scholarship.”

Next, the author tackles the topic of the Exodus and the unnamed Pharaoh of Exodus 1:8. He presents arguments for why this could be the first Hyksos king, Maaibre Sheshi, and explains that because he was a foreigner, he would not be familiar with Joseph’s work years beforehand and overall would be semi-handicapped in matters about Egyptian history. Supported by the Turin king list, the Hyksos took over Egypt in a forceful manner during the mid-seventh century B.C. and ruled for about one hundred and eight years. During this time it is probable that they feared the Israelites would join forces with the Egyptians against them, hence they put them into slave labor building certain cities. Archaeologists have studied one of these cities: Ramesses. The author gives the history of the city and its different names in the past such as Rowaty, Avaris, and Peru. This city is principally important because when Jacob and Joseph’s brothers first migrated to Egypt, they settled in this area. There remains evidence of nomadic pastoral settlements that possibly support the original Israelite settlement. Of particular interest is the largest building excavated containing the tomb of an Asiatic dignitary that was broken into and the bones removed. This evidence possibly points to Joseph and the passage Joshua 24:32 (NIV) which says, “And Joseph’s bones, which the Israelites had brought up from Egypt, were buried at Shechem in the tract of land that Jacob bought for a hundred pieces of silver from the sons of Hamor, the father of Shechem. This became the inheritance of Joseph’s descendants.”

The next section of the article talks about the major cities of the Israelite conquest in Canaan after the Exodus. The first city they conquered is Jericho, which I talked about in my last post. There has been a lot of controversy about this city and whether or not it was actually there for the Israelites to defeat according to the Biblical text. Wood concludes the section on Jericho by talking about wall dimensions, the presence of grain and the evidence of walls collapsing and fire. The second city conquered is Ai, which has presented a lot of difficulty in identifying its actual location. Wood ends this section by talking about the requirements the city of Ai must meet according to Joshua chapters seven and eight. Next, the city of Hazor was conquered. Hazor was one of the largest cities in Canaan and there is evidence of destruction by fire.

Before the conclusion, the author also briefly covers these topics: the Amarna Letters, Eglon’s Palace at Jericho, the destruction of King Hazor by Deborah and Barak, the migration of the Danites, Abimelech at Shechem and the fall of Shiloh. Out of all these, I found the section about Abimelech to be the most interesting. Archaeology presents evidence from this important urban center of a temple of Baal-Berith, the East Gate and the destruction level, which all coincide with the Biblical account.

Overall, scholars continue to press the issue of a lack of extra biblical literary evidence to support the Bible. However, it seems unreasonable to expect verification of every single text in the Bible and most likely that will never be achieved. Wood concludes by defending that the evidence available does shed light on events in Israel’s early history that complements the Biblical accounts well. I found this article to be very interesting and helpful. It reminds me of the importance of keeping archaeology in its place. Archaeology cannot be used to prove or disprove the Bible and our faith should not rest on it. The authority of Scripture completely trumps man’s ideas about the past. Man is looking at bits and pieces from the past and trying to make sense of it all. Honestly, I would rather trust the people who were actually there and wrote about it.