1990s, much of the pretense of science and the positivism of the new archaeology had faltered, although the ecological orientation and interdisciplinary thrust seemed likely to become permanent fixtures. Out of this frustration, came “postprocessual archaeology,” which is more particularistic and focuses once again on culture-history. It is also more eclectic and less dogmatic than the previous approaches. Not surprisingly, the historical orientation of postprocessual archaeology is more congenial to Near Eastern archaeologists, who possess a long and textually documented history with which to deal.

Another aspect of the theoretical flux of the early 1990s is a spin-off of postmodernist, poststructuralist critical theory. In this perspective, archaeology should no longer be seen as “antiquarianism” but as a means of applying archaeological reconstructions to current social environmental, socioeconomic, and other problems, an archaeology as “cultural critique” or even political ideology.

Conclusion

Syro-Palestinian archaeology has had a long and checkered history, but it remains a uniquely interesting and significant branch of Near Eastern archaeology. It contributes to our understanding of the Bible by illuminating the context in which it originated, thus giving it tangibility and a certain kind of credibility. Perhaps more important, however, is the contribution that Syro-Palestinian archaeology can make to elucidating the origins of civilization and the long process of social and cultural change along the periphery of the Fertile Crescent between its two principal foci in ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt. The “archaeological revolution” predicted by our forerunners is not over; it has scarcely begun.

William G. Dever

References

Bar-Yosef, O., and A. Mazar. 1982. “Israeli Archaeology.” World Archaeology 13: 310–325.

Ben-Tor, A., ed. 1992.The Archaeology of Ancient Israel. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Dever, W.G. 1985. “Syro-Palestinian and Biblical Archaeology.” In The Hebrew Bible and Its Modern Interpreters, 31–74. Ed. D.A. Knight and G.M. Tucker. Chico, CA: Scholars Press.

———. 1989. “Archaeology in Israel Today: A Summation and Critique.” In Recent Excavations in Iron Age Archaeology, 143–152. Ed. S. Gitin and W.G. Dever. Winona Lake, IN: American Schools of Oriental Research.

Dornemann, R. 1983. The Archaeology of the Transjordan in the Bronze and Iron Ages. Milwaukee: Milwaukee Public Museum.

Drinkard, J. F., G.L. Mattingly, and J.M. Miller, eds. 1988. Benchmarks in Time and Culture: An Introduction to Palestinian Archaeology. Atlanta: Scholars Press.

King, P.J. 1983. American Archaeology in the Mideast: A History of the American Schools of Oriental Research. Winona Lake, IN: American Schools of Oriental Research.

Mazar, A. 1990. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible 10,000–586 b.c. New York: Doubleday.

Moorey, P.R.S. 1991. A Century of Biblical Archaeology. Cambridge: Lutterworth Press.

Perdue, L. G., L.E. Toombs, and G.L. Johnson, eds. 1987. Archaeology and Biblical Interpretation: Essays in Memory of D. Glen Rose. Atlanta: Scholars Press.

———. 1982–1992. Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan. 4 vols. Amman: Jordanian Department of Antiquities.

Ward, W.A. 1994. “Archaeology in Lebanon in the Twentieth Century.” Biblical Archaeologist 57, no. 2: 66–85.

Weiss, H., ed. 1985. Ebla to Damascus: Art and Archaeology of Ancient Syria. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.