Misplaced Pages

Early Israelite campaigns: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:46, 12 January 2015 editEditor2020 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers155,688 edits link← Previous edit Revision as of 23:05, 12 January 2015 edit undoEditor2020 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers155,688 edits cleanupNext edit →
Line 4: Line 4:
<!-- End of AfD message, feel free to edit beyond this point --> <!-- End of AfD message, feel free to edit beyond this point -->
{{Campaignbox Early Israelite Campaigns}} {{Campaignbox Early Israelite Campaigns}}
Biblical narratives of an ] have long been a subject of religious inquiry and, in the 20th century, a debate over the archaeological evidence and historicity of the putative conquest. According to the Bible, after the ] from ] (thought by some scholars to have been c. 1450 BCE and by many other scholars to have never taken place), the ] wandered into ], seeking a home that they could make their own. After two fierce battles (Jericho and Ai) and campaigns against 5 southern and a coalition of northern kings, the Israelites gained control. Biblical narratives of an ] have long been a subject of religious inquiry and, in the 20th century, a debate over the archaeological evidence and historicity of the putative conquest. According to the Bible, after the ] (thought by some scholars to have been c. 1450 BCE and by many other scholars to have never taken place), the ] wandered into ], seeking a home that they could make their own. After two fierce battles (Jericho and Ai) and campaigns against 5 southern and a coalition of northern kings, the Israelites gained control.


== Biblical narrative == == Biblical narrative ==
According to the Biblical narrative, the Israelites successfully attack the ] at such locations as Jericho (ch.6) and Ai (ch.8). In the south, Joshua honors the treaty with Gibeon and defeats kings of five cities -- Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon (ch.10). Soon, a coalition of Canaanites and other northern city-states of Canaan send a force to halt the Israelite invasions of their country. However, an Israelite counterattack ] and routs them (ch.11). In chapter 12, ''Joshua ''list 32 cities reportedly conquered by the Israelite army. Afterwards, the Israelites become established in their "]". According to the Biblical narrative, the Israelites successfully attack the ] at such locations as ] and ]. In the south, Joshua honors the treaty with ] and defeats the kings of five cities — Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon (ch.10). Soon, a coalition of Canaanites and other northern city-states of Canaan send a force to halt the Israelite invasions of their country. However, an Israelite counterattack ] and routs them (ch.11). In chapter 12, Joshua lists 32 cities reportedly conquered by the Israelite army. Afterwards, the Israelites become established in their "]".


However, scholars have also raised concerns about inconsistencies in the Biblical representation of how the Israelites emerged in Canaan, especially between the books of ''Joshua'' and ''Judges''<ref>For example, see Kennedy's discussion and attempted resolution, p.3., and Japhet p.206ff.</ref>. However, scholars have also raised concerns about inconsistencies in the Biblical representation of how the Israelites emerged in Canaan, especially between the books of Joshua and ].<ref>See Kennedy's discussion and attempted resolution, p.3., and Japhet p.206ff.</ref>


== Scholarship == == Scholarship ==
In early 20th century academic scholarship, the historicity of the early Israelite campaigns were taken for granted (e.g., Paton). However, by the 1930s Martin Noth issued what Albricht termed "a sweeping criticism of the legitimacy of using biblical data in Joshua as material for history."<ref><span>Albricht, April 1939, p.12</span></ref> Noth was a student of Alt, who emphasized ] and the importance of ].<ref><span>Abricht, ibid. Kennedy (p.2) cites later scholarship behind this model, e.g., </span>Noort 1998: 127-28. </ref> Alt and Noth posited a peaceful movement of Israelites into various areas of Canaan, ''contra'' the Biblical account.<ref>Rendburg, p.510</ref> In early 20th century academic scholarship, the historicity of the early Israelite campaigns was taken for granted (e.g., Paton). However, by the 1930s Martin Noth issued what Albricht termed "a sweeping criticism of the legitimacy of using biblical data in Joshua as material for history."<ref><span>Albricht, April 1939, p.12</span></ref> Noth was a student of Alt, who emphasized ] and the importance of ].<ref><span>Abricht, ibid. Kennedy (p.2) cites later scholarship behind this model, e.g., </span>Noort 1998: 127-28. </ref> Alt and Noth posited a peaceful movement of the Israelites into various areas of Canaan, ''contra'' the Biblical account.<ref>Rendburg, p.510</ref>


<nowiki> </nowiki>Albricht himself questioned the "tenacity" of etiologies, which were key to Noth's analysis of the campaigns in Joshua. Archaeological evidence in the 1930s showed that the city of Ai, an early battled in the putative ''Joshua'' account, had existed and been destroyed, but in 22nd century BCE<ref><span>Albricht, p.16</span></ref>. Dame ] showed that Jericho was from the Middle not Late Bronze age (see Kennedy, p.11). Hence, it was argued that the early Israelite campaign could not be historically corroborated, but rather explained as an etiology of the location and a representation of the Israelite settlement. Albricht himself questioned the "tenacity" of etiologies, which were key to Noth's analysis of the campaigns in Joshua. Archaeological evidence in the 1930s showed that the city of Ai, an early battled in the putative Joshua account, had existed and been destroyed, but in 22nd century BCE.<ref>Albricht, p.16</ref> ] showed that Jericho was from the ] not the ]<ref>see Kennedy, p.11</ref> Hence, it was argued that the early Israelite campaign could not be historically corroborated, but rather explained as an etiology of the location and a representation of the Israelite settlement.


In 1955, Wright discusses the correlation of archaeological data to the early Israelite campaigns, which he divides into three phases per the ''Book of Joshua''. He points to two sets of archaeological findings that "seem to suggest that the biblical account is in general correct regarding the nature of the late thirteenth and twelfth-eleventh centuries in the country" (i.e., "a period of tremendous violence").<ref>Wright, p.107</ref> He gives particular weight to what were recent digs at Hazor by ].<ref>ibid.</ref> In 1955, Wright discusses the correlation of archaeological data to the early Israelite campaigns, which he divides into three phases per the Book of Joshua. He points to two sets of archaeological findings that "seem to suggest that the biblical account is in general correct regarding the nature of the late thirteenth and twelfth-eleventh centuries in the country" (i.e., "a period of tremendous violence").<ref>Wright, p.107</ref> He gives particular weight to what were recent digs at Hazor by ].<ref>Wright, p.107</ref>


As an alternative to both the military conquest and uncontested infiltration hypotheses, Mendenhall and Gottwald suggested that the Israelites emerged through a kind of peasant revolt against their Canaanite lords. However, as explained by Rendsburg (p.510f.), archaeological findings (presented by Israel Finkelstein in 1986) undermined this idea because Israelites first settled areas not held by Canaanites, whose cities were sustained alongside Israelite areas. As an alternative to both the military conquest and uncontested infiltration hypotheses, Mendenhall and Gottwald suggested that the Israelites emerged through a kind of peasant revolt against their Canaanite lords. However, as explained by Rendsburg (p.510f.), archaeological findings (presented by Israel Finkelstein in 1986) undermined this idea because the Israelites first settled areas not held by Canaanites, whose cities were sustained alongside Israelite areas.


In later years of the 20th century, academic analysis tended to be increasingly skeptical of the historicity of the early Israelite military campaigns as described in Joshua. To be sure, scholarship remained somewhat divided with some more deferential to the Biblical account. For example, Kennedy argues that "a vast amount of archaeological evidence indicates that the sites of Jericho, Hazor, Shechem, and Dan were occupied, destroyed, and resettled at the specific times and in the manner consistent with the records from the books of Joshua and Judges." In later years of the 20th century, academic analysis tended to be increasingly skeptical of the historicity of the early Israelite military campaigns as described in Joshua. To be sure, scholarship remained somewhat divided with some more deferential to the Biblical account. For example, Kennedy argues that "a vast amount of archaeological evidence indicates that the sites of Jericho, Hazor, Shechem, and Dan were occupied, destroyed, and resettled at the specific times and in the manner consistent with the records from the books of Joshua and Judges."
Line 24: Line 24:
On the other hand, the work of Dever and Van Seters, among others, pulls back considerably from the presuppositions of early scholars. On the other hand, the work of Dever and Van Seters, among others, pulls back considerably from the presuppositions of early scholars.


Whether through pastoral migration or military conquest, the Israelite settlement cannot easily be pegged to a specific time period. Scholars have argued the 14th, 13th, and 12th centuries BCE. (For a review, see Kennedy, among others.) Whether through pastoral migration or military conquest, the Israelite settlement cannot easily be pegged to a specific time period. Scholars have argued the 14th, 13th, and 12th centuries BCE.<ref>For a review, see Kennedy, among others.</ref>


== References == == References ==
Line 33: Line 33:
=== Archaeological views === === Archaeological views ===
* Albright, William F. "The Israelite conquest of Canaan in the light of archaeology." ''Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research'' (1939): 11-23. * Albright, William F. "The Israelite conquest of Canaan in the light of archaeology." ''Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research'' (1939): 11-23.

* Briggs, Peter. "Testing the Factuality of the Conquest of Ai Narrative in the Book of Joshua." ''Beyond the Jordan: Studies in Honor of W. Harold Mare ''(2005): 157-96. * Briggs, Peter. "Testing the Factuality of the Conquest of Ai Narrative in the Book of Joshua." ''Beyond the Jordan: Studies in Honor of W. Harold Mare ''(2005): 157-96.

* Dever, William G. ''Who were the early Israelites, and where did they come from?''. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2003. * Dever, William G. ''Who were the early Israelites, and where did they come from?''. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2003.

* Hess, Richard S. "The Jericho and Ai of the Book of Joshua." ''Critical Issues in Early Israelite History'' (2008): 29-30. * Hess, Richard S. "The Jericho and Ai of the Book of Joshua." ''Critical Issues in Early Israelite History'' (2008): 29-30.

* Kennedy, Titus Michael. "The Israelite conquest: history or myth?: an achaeological evaluation of the Israelite conquest during the periods of Joshua and the Judges." (2011). http://uir.unisa.ac.za/handle/10500/5727 * Kennedy, Titus Michael. "The Israelite conquest: history or myth?: an achaeological evaluation of the Israelite conquest during the periods of Joshua and the Judges." (2011). http://uir.unisa.ac.za/handle/10500/5727
* Kenyon, Kathleen. “Some Notes on the History of Jericho in the Second Millennium. B.C.,” ''Palestine Exploration Quarterly'' 83 (1951) * Kenyon, Kathleen. “Some Notes on the History of Jericho in the Second Millennium. B.C.,” ''Palestine Exploration Quarterly'' 83 (1951)

Revision as of 23:05, 12 January 2015

An editor has nominated this article for deletion.
You are welcome to participate in the deletion discussion, which will decide whether or not to retain it.Feel free to improve the article, but do not remove this notice before the discussion is closed. For more information, see the guide to deletion.
Find sources: "Early Israelite campaigns" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR%5B%5BWikipedia%3AArticles+for+deletion%2FEarly+Israelite+Campaigns%5D%5DAFD
The Bible and warfare
Hebrew
Bible
battles
Torah / Pentateuch battles
Joshua and Judges battles
United monarchy period
Israel and Judah period
Exilic periodPurim war (Book of Esther)
Bible Portal

Biblical narratives of an Israelite conquest of Canaan have long been a subject of religious inquiry and, in the 20th century, a debate over the archaeological evidence and historicity of the putative conquest. According to the Bible, after the Exodus from Egypt (thought by some scholars to have been c. 1450 BCE and by many other scholars to have never taken place), the Israelites wandered into Canaan, seeking a home that they could make their own. After two fierce battles (Jericho and Ai) and campaigns against 5 southern and a coalition of northern kings, the Israelites gained control.

Biblical narrative

According to the Biblical narrative, the Israelites successfully attack the Canaanites at such locations as Jericho and Ai. In the south, Joshua honors the treaty with Gibeon and defeats the kings of five cities — Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon (ch.10). Soon, a coalition of Canaanites and other northern city-states of Canaan send a force to halt the Israelite invasions of their country. However, an Israelite counterattack catches their enemies by surprise at the Waters of Merom and routs them (ch.11). In chapter 12, Joshua lists 32 cities reportedly conquered by the Israelite army. Afterwards, the Israelites become established in their "Promised Land".

However, scholars have also raised concerns about inconsistencies in the Biblical representation of how the Israelites emerged in Canaan, especially between the books of Joshua and Judges.

Scholarship

In early 20th century academic scholarship, the historicity of the early Israelite campaigns was taken for granted (e.g., Paton). However, by the 1930s Martin Noth issued what Albricht termed "a sweeping criticism of the legitimacy of using biblical data in Joshua as material for history." Noth was a student of Alt, who emphasized form criticism and the importance of etiology. Alt and Noth posited a peaceful movement of the Israelites into various areas of Canaan, contra the Biblical account.

Albricht himself questioned the "tenacity" of etiologies, which were key to Noth's analysis of the campaigns in Joshua. Archaeological evidence in the 1930s showed that the city of Ai, an early battled in the putative Joshua account, had existed and been destroyed, but in 22nd century BCE. Kathleen Kenyon showed that Jericho was from the Middle not the Late Bronze Age Hence, it was argued that the early Israelite campaign could not be historically corroborated, but rather explained as an etiology of the location and a representation of the Israelite settlement.

In 1955, Wright discusses the correlation of archaeological data to the early Israelite campaigns, which he divides into three phases per the Book of Joshua. He points to two sets of archaeological findings that "seem to suggest that the biblical account is in general correct regarding the nature of the late thirteenth and twelfth-eleventh centuries in the country" (i.e., "a period of tremendous violence"). He gives particular weight to what were recent digs at Hazor by Yigael Yadin.

As an alternative to both the military conquest and uncontested infiltration hypotheses, Mendenhall and Gottwald suggested that the Israelites emerged through a kind of peasant revolt against their Canaanite lords. However, as explained by Rendsburg (p.510f.), archaeological findings (presented by Israel Finkelstein in 1986) undermined this idea because the Israelites first settled areas not held by Canaanites, whose cities were sustained alongside Israelite areas.

In later years of the 20th century, academic analysis tended to be increasingly skeptical of the historicity of the early Israelite military campaigns as described in Joshua. To be sure, scholarship remained somewhat divided with some more deferential to the Biblical account. For example, Kennedy argues that "a vast amount of archaeological evidence indicates that the sites of Jericho, Hazor, Shechem, and Dan were occupied, destroyed, and resettled at the specific times and in the manner consistent with the records from the books of Joshua and Judges."

On the other hand, the work of Dever and Van Seters, among others, pulls back considerably from the presuppositions of early scholars.

Whether through pastoral migration or military conquest, the Israelite settlement cannot easily be pegged to a specific time period. Scholars have argued the 14th, 13th, and 12th centuries BCE.

References

  1. See Kennedy's discussion and attempted resolution, p.3., and Japhet p.206ff.
  2. Albricht, April 1939, p.12
  3. Abricht, ibid. Kennedy (p.2) cites later scholarship behind this model, e.g., Noort 1998: 127-28.
  4. Rendburg, p.510
  5. Albricht, p.16
  6. see Kennedy, p.11
  7. Wright, p.107
  8. Wright, p.107
  9. For a review, see Kennedy, among others.

Further reading

Archaeological views

  • Albright, William F. "The Israelite conquest of Canaan in the light of archaeology." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research (1939): 11-23.
  • Briggs, Peter. "Testing the Factuality of the Conquest of Ai Narrative in the Book of Joshua." Beyond the Jordan: Studies in Honor of W. Harold Mare (2005): 157-96.
  • Dever, William G. Who were the early Israelites, and where did they come from?. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2003.
  • Hess, Richard S. "The Jericho and Ai of the Book of Joshua." Critical Issues in Early Israelite History (2008): 29-30.
  • Kennedy, Titus Michael. "The Israelite conquest: history or myth?: an achaeological evaluation of the Israelite conquest during the periods of Joshua and the Judges." (2011). http://uir.unisa.ac.za/handle/10500/5727
  • Kenyon, Kathleen. “Some Notes on the History of Jericho in the Second Millennium. B.C.,” Palestine Exploration Quarterly 83 (1951)
  • Mendenhall, George E. 1962. “The Hebrew Conquest of Palestine,” The Biblical Archaeologist, 25:3 (1962): 66-87
  • Noort, Ed. 1998. "4QJOSH and the History of Tradition in the Book of Joshua," Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages, 24:2 (1998): 127-44
  • Rendsburg, Gary A. "The Date of the Exodus and the Conquest/Settlement: The Case for the 1100s." Vetus Testamentum (1992): 510-527.
  • Van Seters, John. "Joshua's campaign of Canaan and near eastern historiography." Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 4.2 (1990): 1-12.
  • Wenham, Gordon J. "The Deuteronomic Theology of the Book of Joshua." Journal of Biblical Literature (1971): 140-148.
  • Wright, G. Ernest. "Archaeological News and Views: Hazor and the Conquest of Canaan." The Biblical Archaeologist 18.4 (1955): 106-108.
  • Zevit, Ziony. "Archaeological and Literary Stratigraphy in Joshua 7-8." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research (1983): 23-35.

Other academic writings

  • Bayles Paton, Lewis. Israel's Conquest of Canaan: Presidential Address at the Annual Meeting, Dec. 27, 1912. Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 32, No. 1 (Apr., 1913), pp. 1–53
  • Billauer, Barbara P. "Joshua's Battle of Jericho: Scientific Statecraft in Warfare-Lessons in Military Innovation and Scientific Tactical Initiative."Available at SSRN 2219488 (2013).
  • den Braber, Marieke, and Jan-Wim Wesselius. "The Unity of Joshua 1-8, its Relation to the Story of King Keret, and the Literary Background to the Exodus and Conquest Stories." Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 22.2 (2008): 253-274.
  • Hawk, L. Daniel. "The Truth about Conquest: Joshua as History, Narrative, and Scripture." Interpretation 66.2 (2012): 129-140.
  • Gyémánt, Ladislau. "Historiographic Views on the Settlement of the Jewish Tribes in Canaan." Sacra Scripta 1 (2003): 26-30.
  • Japhet, Sara. "Conquest and Settlement in Chronicles." Journal of Biblical Literature (1979): 205-218.
  • Pienaar, Daan. "Some observations on conquest reports in the Book of Joshua." Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 30.1 (2004): 151-164.
  • Prior, Michael. "Ethnic Cleansing and the Bible: A Moral Critique." Holy Land Studies 1.1 (2002): 37-59.
  • Thompson, Leonard L. "The Jordan Crossing: Ṣidqot Yahweh and World Building." Journal of Biblical Literature (1981): 343-358.
  • Wazana, Nili. "Everything Was Fulfilled” versus “The Land That Yet Remains."The Gift of the Land and the Fate of the Canaanites in Jewish Thought (2014): 13.
  • Wood, W. Carleton. "The Religion of Canaan: From the Earliest Times to the Hebrew Conquest (Concluded)." Journal of Biblical literature (1916): 163-279.
Category: