Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

VS: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory

Expand Messages
  • Thomas L. Thompson
    ________________________________ Fra: Thomas L. Thompson Sendt: on 28-02-2007 00:22 Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com Emne: SV: [ANE-2] Finkelstein s theory Dear Liz,
    Message 1 of 4 , Feb 27, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      ________________________________

      Fra: Thomas L. Thompson
      Sendt: on 28-02-2007 00:22
      Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
      Emne: SV: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory


      Dear Liz,
      It is not very far removed from Albrecht Alt's Die Landnahme der Israeliten in Palästina (Leipzig, 1925). As that was talked about and touted very highly until about 1968, I suppose you could say that the very oldest among us seemed once to have been very enthusiastic about it.
      Thomas

      Thomas L. Thompson
      University of Copenhagen

      ________________________________

      Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com på vegne af Lisbeth S. Fried
      Sendt: ti 27-02-2007 19:06
      Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
      Emne: RE: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory



      Hi NP,

      Yes, the LBA-EI transition. He proposes that waves of pastoral nomads
      settled down, then became nomads again, then settled down again, remaining
      settled. This would have occurred over a 2500-year period, 3500-1100 (but
      that's his low chronology which I don't want to get into). He argues that
      the circular shape of the settlement indicates the nomadic origins of the
      populace. Also, the large number of bovine bones during the period of
      settlement and their small number plus the large number of sheep and goat
      bones between the periods of settlements indicates this fluctuation. He
      argues also that the final settling down and building cities was caused by
      the collapse of the large Canaanite city states.

      How has this overall theory been received?

      Liz Fried

      _____

      From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of
      Niels Peter Lemche
      Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 12:25 PM
      To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>
      Subject: SV: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory

      Dear Liz, and Jim,

      It is not that easy.
      Liz, your question is not very precise. What especially are you hinting at?
      The LBA-EI transition? The appearnce of new village settlements in the
      highlands? His low chronology for pottery? Although these subjects are
      related, they are not necessarily mutually dependant.
      And to Jim,

      Yes in Tel Aviv and in other places, but not really at the Hebrew
      University, and when it comes to dating of pottery, Avi Mazar should not be
      disregarded just because he seems more conventional.

      Niels Peter Lemche

      -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
      Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
      [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com] På vegne af
      Jim West
      Sendt: 27. februar 2007 17:59
      Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
      Emne: Re: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory

      Lisbeth S Fried wrote:
      > Dear All,
      >
      > Ignoring the dating, how has Finkelstein's theory of the early Iron Age
      Israel, as discussed for example in The Bible Unearthed, been received?
      > Thanks,
      >
      > Liz Fried
      >

      Extremely enthusiastically!

      Best,

      Jim

      --
      Jim West, ThD

      http://drjewest. <http://drjewest./> <http://drjewest.googlepages.com/ <http://drjewest.googlepages.com/> > googlepages.com/ --
      Biblical Studies Resources
      http://drjimwest. <http://drjimwest./> <http://drjimwest.wordpress.com <http://drjimwest.wordpress.com/> > wordpress.com -- Weblog

      Yahoo! Groups Links

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Lisbeth S. Fried
      His theory is not a conquest theory. The theory is that the Israelites were indigenous and went through the same process of waves of settlement, followed by
      Message 2 of 4 , Feb 27, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        His theory is not a conquest theory. The theory is that the Israelites were
        indigenous and went through the same process of waves of settlement,
        followed by waves of pastoral-nomadism, and then a return to settlement as
        did the Ammonites, Moabites, Edomites, etc., who are also indigenous.

        Liz Fried



        _____

        From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
        Thomas L. Thompson
        Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 6:40 PM
        To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: VS: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory





        ________________________________

        Fra: Thomas L. Thompson
        Sendt: on 28-02-2007 00:22
        Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
        Emne: SV: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory

        Dear Liz,
        It is not very far removed from Albrecht Alt's Die Landnahme der Israeliten
        in Palästina (Leipzig, 1925). As that was talked about and touted very
        highly until about 1968, I suppose you could say that the very oldest among
        us seemed once to have been very enthusiastic about it.
        Thomas

        Thomas L. Thompson
        University of Copenhagen

        ________________________________

        Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com på vegne af
        Lisbeth S. Fried
        Sendt: ti 27-02-2007 19:06
        Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
        Emne: RE: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory

        Hi NP,

        Yes, the LBA-EI transition. He proposes that waves of pastoral nomads
        settled down, then became nomads again, then settled down again, remaining
        settled. This would have occurred over a 2500-year period, 3500-1100 (but
        that's his low chronology which I don't want to get into). He argues that
        the circular shape of the settlement indicates the nomadic origins of the
        populace. Also, the large number of bovine bones during the period of
        settlement and their small number plus the large number of sheep and goat
        bones between the periods of settlements indicates this fluctuation. He
        argues also that the final settling down and building cities was caused by
        the collapse of the large Canaanite city states.

        How has this overall theory been received?

        Liz Fried

        _____

        From: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
        <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.
        <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
        Behalf Of
        Niels Peter Lemche
        Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 12:25 PM
        To: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
        <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>
        Subject: SV: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory

        Dear Liz, and Jim,

        It is not that easy.
        Liz, your question is not very precise. What especially are you hinting at?
        The LBA-EI transition? The appearnce of new village settlements in the
        highlands? His low chronology for pottery? Although these subjects are
        related, they are not necessarily mutually dependant.
        And to Jim,

        Yes in Tel Aviv and in other places, but not really at the Hebrew
        University, and when it comes to dating of pottery, Avi Mazar should not be
        disregarded just because he seems more conventional.

        Niels Peter Lemche

        -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
        Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
        [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com] På vegne af
        Jim West
        Sendt: 27. februar 2007 17:59
        Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
        Emne: Re: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory

        Lisbeth S Fried wrote:
        > Dear All,
        >
        > Ignoring the dating, how has Finkelstein's theory of the early Iron Age
        Israel, as discussed for example in The Bible Unearthed, been received?
        > Thanks,
        >
        > Liz Fried
        >

        Extremely enthusiastically!

        Best,

        Jim

        --
        Jim West, ThD

        http://drjewest. <http://drjewest. <http://drjewest./> /> <http://drjewest.
        <http://drjewest.googlepages.com/> googlepages.com/ <http://drjewest.
        <http://drjewest.googlepages.com/> googlepages.com/> > googlepages.com/ --
        Biblical Studies Resources
        http://drjimwest. <http://drjimwest. <http://drjimwest./> />
        <http://drjimwest. <http://drjimwest.wordpress.com> wordpress.com
        <http://drjimwest. <http://drjimwest.wordpress.com/> wordpress.com/> >
        wordpress.com -- Weblog

        Yahoo! Groups Links

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Niels Peter Lemche
        It is not that different from Alt s ideas as pointed out by Thomas Thompson. Alt envisaged two stages, a stage of migration, a peaceful infiltration of nomads,
        Message 3 of 4 , Feb 27, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          It is not that different from Alt's ideas as pointed out by Thomas Thompson. Alt envisaged two stages, a stage of migration, a peaceful infiltration of nomads, and a second stage, a conquest.

          Finkelstein, following a number of people including Mendenhall, Gottwald, and this writer, gave up the idea of a foreign origin of the changing living circumstances in the hill lands of Palestine. Many reasons for this, first and foremost the lack of cultural change.

          His ideas about nomadism, and his evidence for it are, however, not the best part of hios study. E.g. the fortified camps: Nomads don't build fortified camps, peasants do -- against the nomad raiders. Nomads rely on their mobility.

          On the other hand, in his 1988 book, Finkelstein adopted my continuum idea from Early Israel (1985), i.e., the continuum of cultural forms, that people who may once have been full nomads may at other times move along a socio-cultural line ending up as peasants, quasi-peasant who are also partly nomads, city-dwellers, whatever. Types like peasants, nomads and city dwellers are stereotypes, invented by European anthropologists and historians to better understand a foreign culture.

          Niels Peter Lemche

          -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
          Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af Lisbeth S. Fried
          Sendt: 28. februar 2007 01:22
          Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
          Emne: RE: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory

          His theory is not a conquest theory. The theory is that the Israelites were
          indigenous and went through the same process of waves of settlement,
          followed by waves of pastoral-nomadism, and then a return to settlement as
          did the Ammonites, Moabites, Edomites, etc., who are also indigenous.

          Liz Fried



          _____

          From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
          Thomas L. Thompson
          Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 6:40 PM
          To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: VS: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory





          ________________________________

          Fra: Thomas L. Thompson
          Sendt: on 28-02-2007 00:22
          Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
          Emne: SV: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory

          Dear Liz,
          It is not very far removed from Albrecht Alt's Die Landnahme der Israeliten
          in Palästina (Leipzig, 1925). As that was talked about and touted very
          highly until about 1968, I suppose you could say that the very oldest among
          us seemed once to have been very enthusiastic about it.
          Thomas

          Thomas L. Thompson
          University of Copenhagen

          ________________________________

          Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com på vegne af
          Lisbeth S. Fried
          Sendt: ti 27-02-2007 19:06
          Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
          Emne: RE: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory

          Hi NP,

          Yes, the LBA-EI transition. He proposes that waves of pastoral nomads
          settled down, then became nomads again, then settled down again, remaining
          settled. This would have occurred over a 2500-year period, 3500-1100 (but
          that's his low chronology which I don't want to get into). He argues that
          the circular shape of the settlement indicates the nomadic origins of the
          populace. Also, the large number of bovine bones during the period of
          settlement and their small number plus the large number of sheep and goat
          bones between the periods of settlements indicates this fluctuation. He
          argues also that the final settling down and building cities was caused by
          the collapse of the large Canaanite city states.

          How has this overall theory been received?

          Liz Fried

          _____

          From: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
          <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.
          <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
          Behalf Of
          Niels Peter Lemche
          Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 12:25 PM
          To: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
          <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>
          Subject: SV: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory

          Dear Liz, and Jim,

          It is not that easy.
          Liz, your question is not very precise. What especially are you hinting at?
          The LBA-EI transition? The appearnce of new village settlements in the
          highlands? His low chronology for pottery? Although these subjects are
          related, they are not necessarily mutually dependant.
          And to Jim,

          Yes in Tel Aviv and in other places, but not really at the Hebrew
          University, and when it comes to dating of pottery, Avi Mazar should not be
          disregarded just because he seems more conventional.

          Niels Peter Lemche

          -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
          Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
          [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com] På vegne af
          Jim West
          Sendt: 27. februar 2007 17:59
          Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
          Emne: Re: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory

          Lisbeth S Fried wrote:
          > Dear All,
          >
          > Ignoring the dating, how has Finkelstein's theory of the early Iron Age
          Israel, as discussed for example in The Bible Unearthed, been received?
          > Thanks,
          >
          > Liz Fried
          >

          Extremely enthusiastically!

          Best,

          Jim

          --
          Jim West, ThD

          http://drjewest. <http://drjewest. <http://drjewest./> /> <http://drjewest.
          <http://drjewest.googlepages.com/> googlepages.com/ <http://drjewest.
          <http://drjewest.googlepages.com/> googlepages.com/> > googlepages.com/ --
          Biblical Studies Resources
          http://drjimwest. <http://drjimwest. <http://drjimwest./> />
          <http://drjimwest. <http://drjimwest.wordpress.com> wordpress.com
          <http://drjimwest. <http://drjimwest.wordpress.com/> wordpress.com/> >
          wordpress.com -- Weblog

          Yahoo! Groups Links

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





          Yahoo! Groups Links
        • Samuel Jackson
          Continuing on from your criticism of ideas about nomadism, I wonder why it is that over a century later we still feel the impact of the racist associations of
          Message 4 of 4 , Feb 28, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Continuing on from your criticism of ideas about nomadism, I wonder
            why it is that over a century later we still feel the impact of the
            racist associations of the 19th century which equated Semite with
            nomadism? Though this theory has gone through enormous changes over
            this time period (e.g. being influenced by the increasing
            sophistication of sociological analyses of "nomadism") few have asked
            the question whether imposing modern views of "nomadism'
            (sociologically nuanced or racist) is appropriate or demanded by the
            evidence in this case. Though I appreciate the move away from the
            older 'wave theory' approach to Semitic migrations in Finkelstein's
            work, one wonders why there is still a clinging to the concept that
            material culture is closely related to ethnic group. The 19th century
            racist thought which equated ethnicity with a particular social mode
            (e.g. nomadism for Semites, agriculture for Europeans) and tied that
            to material culture and ideology/religious beliefs should not cast
            such a shadow on current studies.
            Please realise that I am not accusing any recent historians of
            racism, just decrying the continued influence of conclusions based on
            earlier racist ideas.
            It is interesting to see Mendenhall's very 60s social uprising theory
            has been modified for a new era.
            Lemche's more nuanced view about the possibilities of interpretation
            of evidence with regard to culture and nomadism is more acceptable
            but one wonders what the archaeological evidence can really tell us
            about such things.

            Samuel Jackson.

            --- In ANE-2@yahoogroups.com, "Niels Peter Lemche" <npl@...> wrote:
            >
            > It is not that different from Alt's ideas as pointed out by Thomas
            Thompson. Alt envisaged two stages, a stage of migration, a peaceful
            infiltration of nomads, and a second stage, a conquest.
            >
            > Finkelstein, following a number of people including Mendenhall,
            Gottwald, and this writer, gave up the idea of a foreign origin of
            the changing living circumstances in the hill lands of Palestine.
            Many reasons for this, first and foremost the lack of cultural
            change.
            >
            > His ideas about nomadism, and his evidence for it are, however, not
            the best part of hios study. E.g. the fortified camps: Nomads don't
            build fortified camps, peasants do -- against the nomad raiders.
            Nomads rely on their mobility.
            >
            > On the other hand, in his 1988 book, Finkelstein adopted my
            continuum idea from Early Israel (1985), i.e., the continuum of
            cultural forms, that people who may once have been full nomads may at
            other times move along a socio-cultural line ending up as peasants,
            quasi-peasant who are also partly nomads, city-dwellers, whatever.
            Types like peasants, nomads and city dwellers are stereotypes,
            invented by European anthropologists and historians to better
            understand a foreign culture.
            >
            > Niels Peter Lemche
            >
            > -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
            > Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] På vegne
            af Lisbeth S. Fried
            > Sendt: 28. februar 2007 01:22
            > Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
            > Emne: RE: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory
            >
            > His theory is not a conquest theory. The theory is that the
            Israelites were
            > indigenous and went through the same process of waves of settlement,
            > followed by waves of pastoral-nomadism, and then a return to
            settlement as
            > did the Ammonites, Moabites, Edomites, etc., who are also
            indigenous.
            >
            > Liz Fried
            >
            >
            >
            > _____
            >
            > From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On
            Behalf Of
            > Thomas L. Thompson
            > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 6:40 PM
            > To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: VS: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > ________________________________
            >
            > Fra: Thomas L. Thompson
            > Sendt: on 28-02-2007 00:22
            > Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
            > Emne: SV: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory
            >
            > Dear Liz,
            > It is not very far removed from Albrecht Alt's Die Landnahme der
            Israeliten
            > in Palästina (Leipzig, 1925). As that was talked about and touted
            very
            > highly until about 1968, I suppose you could say that the very
            oldest among
            > us seemed once to have been very enthusiastic about it.
            > Thomas
            >
            > Thomas L. Thompson
            > University of Copenhagen
            >
            > ________________________________
            >
            > Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com på
            vegne af
            > Lisbeth S. Fried
            > Sendt: ti 27-02-2007 19:06
            > Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
            > Emne: RE: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory
            >
            > Hi NP,
            >
            > Yes, the LBA-EI transition. He proposes that waves of pastoral
            nomads
            > settled down, then became nomads again, then settled down again,
            remaining
            > settled. This would have occurred over a 2500-year period, 3500-
            1100 (but
            > that's his low chronology which I don't want to get into). He
            argues that
            > the circular shape of the settlement indicates the nomadic origins
            of the
            > populace. Also, the large number of bovine bones during the period
            of
            > settlement and their small number plus the large number of sheep
            and goat
            > bones between the periods of settlements indicates this
            fluctuation. He
            > argues also that the final settling down and building cities was
            caused by
            > the collapse of the large Canaanite city states.
            >
            > How has this overall theory been received?
            >
            > Liz Fried
            >
            > _____
            >
            > From: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
            > <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.
            > <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com <mailto:ANE-2%
            40yahoogroups.com> ] On
            > Behalf Of
            > Niels Peter Lemche
            > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 12:25 PM
            > To: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
            > <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>
            > Subject: SV: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory
            >
            > Dear Liz, and Jim,
            >
            > It is not that easy.
            > Liz, your question is not very precise. What especially are you
            hinting at?
            > The LBA-EI transition? The appearnce of new village settlements in
            the
            > highlands? His low chronology for pottery? Although these subjects
            are
            > related, they are not necessarily mutually dependant.
            > And to Jim,
            >
            > Yes in Tel Aviv and in other places, but not really at the Hebrew
            > University, and when it comes to dating of pottery, Avi Mazar
            should not be
            > disregarded just because he seems more conventional.
            >
            > Niels Peter Lemche
            >
            > -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
            > Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
            > [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com] På
            vegne af
            > Jim West
            > Sendt: 27. februar 2007 17:59
            > Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups. <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> com
            > Emne: Re: [ANE-2] Finkelstein's theory
            >
            > Lisbeth S Fried wrote:
            > > Dear All,
            > >
            > > Ignoring the dating, how has Finkelstein's theory of the early
            Iron Age
            > Israel, as discussed for example in The Bible Unearthed, been
            received?
            > > Thanks,
            > >
            > > Liz Fried
            > >
            >
            > Extremely enthusiastically!
            >
            > Best,
            >
            > Jim
            >
            > --
            > Jim West, ThD
            >
            > http://drjewest. <http://drjewest. <http://drjewest./> />
            <http://drjewest.
            > <http://drjewest.googlepages.com/> googlepages.com/
            <http://drjewest.
            > <http://drjewest.googlepages.com/> googlepages.com/> >
            googlepages.com/ --
            > Biblical Studies Resources
            > http://drjimwest. <http://drjimwest. <http://drjimwest./> />
            > <http://drjimwest. <http://drjimwest.wordpress.com> wordpress.com
            > <http://drjimwest. <http://drjimwest.wordpress.com/>
            wordpress.com/> >
            > wordpress.com -- Weblog
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.