No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Note on Biblical Archealogy
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 October 2024
Extract
It is noteworthy that in 1943, when the whole world was embroiled in war, the Holy See issued an Encyclical letter on Biblical studies and the opportune means of promoting them. Much stress is laid on new efforts, certainly, but also on new preoccupations, new investigations, new orientations, in a word, on the changed conditions of Biblical study, ‘for deeper archaeological research has given rise to new questions offering occasion for a closer investigation of the subject’. Indeed, we are urged to pay close attention to archaeological findings; ‘Archaeology’, or its equivalent, is referred or appealed to some six or seven times and unquestionably holds a high place among the many endowments expected of those whose duty it is to make known the Biblical authors’ meanings.
And so a note on some recent Biblical archaeology will not seem out of place.
Writers on Biblical archaeology like to refer to ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ evidence about Biblical narratives; and it is usually said that very few finds bear directly on the Bible, whereas the indirect contribution is very rich. But this division into ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ seems fruitless and unessential; rather should we say that any little information, from any source whatever, however tenuous, if it throws light on the sacred text, is to be highly prized, and ‘receives an added and nobler dignity, a consecration as it were, when it is used to shed a brighter light on divine things’. It is true no doubt that we must widen the term ‘Archaeology’ and bring in considerations of topography, history, and in fact anything illustrative; possibly ‘sacred antiquities’ would describe better that ensemble of findings which help us to know the mind of the inspired writer and the way in which he expressed it.
Information
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 1946 Provincial Council of the English Province of the Order of Preachers
References
1 Divino Afflante Spiritu. September, 1943.
2 Cf. Hennequin in Supplement du Dictionnaire de la Bible. 368–524. Fouilles et champs de fouilles en Palestine et Syrie.
3 De Langhe. Les Textes de Ras Shamra Ugarit et leur rapport avec le milieu biblique de l'Ancient Testament. 2 vols. Gerbloux et Paris, 1945.
4 Cf. Palestine Exploration Quarterly. April, 1940, pp. 36–56.
5 At Abn Gosh. Cf. Suppl. D.B. ‘Fouilles,’ col. 872; and at the so‐called ‘Tombs of the Kings’ in Jerusalem.
6 Suburb of Jerusalem on the Bethlehem road.
7 Revue Biblique, Jan., 1946, pp. 125–134.
8 To Bethlehem (1939) Sumaria‐Sebasti (2nd Ed. 1944) by B. W. Hamilton, to Acre by N. Makhouly (1941), to Beisan by I. Ben‐Dor (1943) to Megiddo by G M. Shipton (1942, 3), etc.
9 The Bible and Archaeology. p. 181 A similar expression by Macalister, Prof. in Cambridge Ancient History. vol. IV, p. 353. Google Scholar
10 Vincent and Abel, Jérusalem Antique. Jérusalem Nouvelle. Abel, Géographie de la Palestine. I (1933)Google Scholar and II (1938). Vincent, L'Authenticité des Lieux Saints. Paris, 1932. And numerous other works and articles, e.g., La topo‐graphie des Evangiles (Vincent) in Vivre et Penser. 3rd Series, Paris, 1945, pp. 45–76.
11 Scweich Lectures, 1936, p. 58.
12 Cf. an attempt to localise Daniel story in Galilee, Mémorial Lagrange. Paris, 1940, pp. 29–37
13 E.B., 1938, pp. 163.183.
14 Cf. de Vaux in E.B., Jan., 1946, p. 152. Eeview of 0. Tuffnell, C.H. Juge, and L. Harding: The Fosse Temple. Lachish II. Oxford, 1940.
15 Cf. De Langhe op. cit. vol. I, p. 372.
16 But Dussand points out rightly that up to now the Bible explains Ras Shamra texts rather than vice versa. Dussaud, his Découvertes de Eas Shamra et l'Ancient Testament. 2nd Ed., Paris, 1941, pp. 79–80.
17 Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Kesearch, 1938, p. 24.
18 Divino Afflante.
- 1
- Cited by