Archaeology is rubbish. Or at least that’s the title of an archaeological guidebook written by Tony Robinson. It is a reference to the fact that archaeology generally deals in the material that got lost, broken and left behind.
That is the crucial reason why the further we go back in history the less substantial remains are found for the people, places and events that we might find written about in literature. The Bible is overflowing with information about the ancient history of the Israelites and God’s dealings with them. It is therefore, all the more remarkable how much rubbish and debris has been found that does help to confirm that this is reliable history.
However, it should not surprise us that there are many gaps in the archaeological record. In this column we often draw attention to headline discoveries: King David’s name on the Tel Dan stela; a recent gateway from the time of King David; seals bearing the names of Hezekiah and Isaiah. But, the critics can always point to something else for which we don’t have direct unambiguous archaeological confirmation – King Saul, Gideon or Moses.
A good example of this is that even sceptical scholarship has come to acknowledge the existence of a Hebrew kingdom at the time of King David. But among some this is only a begrudging admission. The charge is still made that the biblical writers exaggerate the size and significance of such a kingdom.
Abel Beth Maacah is a site at the very northern limit of the biblical description of the Kingdom of David (2 Sam. 20:14-22). It is close to the modern border with Lebanon. Among many scholars that had been thought to be well outside the realm of Israel during the time of David. Were stories of a kingdom stretching so far north at the time of David and Solomon just fiction or propaganda? Excavations have been underway at Abel Beth Maacah for many years and its discarded debris is gradually revealing its history. In January a discovery was announced that has dramatically brought Israel into the picture of Abel Beth Maacah’s early history.
3,000-year-old broken pieces of a wine jar were uncovered with a clear Hebrew inscription stamped on the handle. Dating from the tenth/ninth century BC they provide evidence of Israelite presence this far north. The Hebrew inscription reads ‘Belonging to Benayahu’, which is an Israelite name that includes the divine name, Yahweh. The evidence is that the pot had belonged to someone local, probably along with an entire wine cellar.
In itself this is a small piece of evidence and does not prove that the town belonged to a united Hebrew nation. But it does fit with what the Bible leads us to expect. And it is the kind of ‘rubbish’ from archaeology that can change scholarly scepticism. A curator at the Israel museum in Jerusalem commented that this find ‘may force us to rethink some of our conclusions … it’s always important to adjust our interpretation when new evidence emerges’.
New evidence continues to emerge. And as these tiny pieces of rubbish are pieced together, a picture emerges that undermines the brash claims of sceptical critics and continues to confirm the trustworthiness of the biblical account.
