A Battle of Biblical Proportions

The ancient tales present glorious scenes of a united monarchy of Israel familiar to every Bible reader: King David, so brave that he slew a giant. Solomon, so wise that he ruled a vast empire and built the first Jerusalem temple. But 3,000 years after the great monarchs are thought to have lived, their epic stories are at the center of a vitriolic debate today over how much is actually history.

On one side are most archeologists and modern biblical scholars, who believe that the Bible contains historical truth--although exactly how much is a matter of decided disagreement. On the other side is a small but emergent group of scholars who are gaining increasing public attention for their provocative views that the Hebrew Bible, also known as the Old Testament, is all or mostly fiction.

Based mostly in Europe, the revisionists have recently been joined in their skepticism by such well-respected Israeli archeologists as Israel Finkelstein and Ze'ev Herzog at Tel Aviv University. While these Israelis do not deny the existence of David and Solomon as some Europeans do, they argue that tales of a vast united kingdom are exaggerations and that the rulers were at best local tribal chieftains.

The controversy will be aired in Los Angeles beginning Monday, when the California Museum of Ancient Art presents the first of a four-part lecture series, "The Archeology of Ancient Israel." William Dever, one of North America's leading archeologists, will kick off the series with a lecture rebutting the revisionists and presenting the archeological evidence for the biblical portrait of David and Solomon.

"The revisionists have become ideologues who repeat their astounding claims without any evidence," said Dever, a professor of Near Eastern archeology and anthropology at the University of Arizona. "They are dangerous because they are dishonest, and they're not going to go away."

Finkelstein calls the attacks on him "an orchestrated attempt, when people have no ammunition, to disqualify my scientific observations with name-calling."

Herzog defends the revisionist positions as a willingness to analyze the evidence uncolored by any religious agenda to prove the Bible's historical veracity. "It is part of a scientific revolution, and younger scholars are more willing to accept revolution than older ones," he said.