I agree that more multidisciplinary approaches have been helpful, and will hopefully continue to be. But I also know from past interpretations of the whole Indo-European question that archaeology can leave a lot of room for interpretation, especially where we have very little to go on (readoldthings made this point well in his recent post on the same topic). I tend to think that the argument that archaeology is a slam dunk that "Ancient Israel" was a pure fiction is a bit overstated - but I think it very likely that the scope, grandeur, and unity of "Ancient Israel" was back-projected pretty strongly.
Secondly, what leads you to find the Babylonian Exile theory so implausible? I'm not totally following what you mean by "scribal logistics" (not enough Jewish scribes in Babylon?) and when you say anachronisms, do you mean things from after the exile, or things that are too old, or what? I've always found it plausible that the Old Testament came about (whenever and wherever) in a process similar to how the Iliad and Odyssey came into the form we know in Athens - long, long oral tradition written down at one or more particular point(s), with some amount of "massaging" by the writers during that process.
I'll admit, though, this has never been my primary area of interest or expertise, and digging into it is likely rather far down on my list of nerdy ancient stuff to get into, so I'm largely speaking from impressions that were formed a ways back, by I don't remember what, and a large amount of "eh, seems reasonable" to get things to fit together. All of which is to say, any objections I raise are mostly along the lines of "isn't this interesting," and not much more.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
(no subject)
Date: 2023-10-13 07:36 pm (UTC)Secondly, what leads you to find the Babylonian Exile theory so implausible? I'm not totally following what you mean by "scribal logistics" (not enough Jewish scribes in Babylon?) and when you say anachronisms, do you mean things from after the exile, or things that are too old, or what? I've always found it plausible that the Old Testament came about (whenever and wherever) in a process similar to how the Iliad and Odyssey came into the form we know in Athens - long, long oral tradition written down at one or more particular point(s), with some amount of "massaging" by the writers during that process.
I'll admit, though, this has never been my primary area of interest or expertise, and digging into it is likely rather far down on my list of nerdy ancient stuff to get into, so I'm largely speaking from impressions that were formed a ways back, by I don't remember what, and a large amount of "eh, seems reasonable" to get things to fit together. All of which is to say, any objections I raise are mostly along the lines of "isn't this interesting," and not much more.