Dear Editor,
I have received from Routledge a print-out of your review of Archaeology and Biblical Interpretation (Routledge, 1997, reviewed at BMCR 97.12.6), and though I do not usually respond to reviewers, I feel that I must respond on this occasion. I was astonished at the views credited to me in it. I grant that the inexplicable reference to Helena’s status is shocking; it is always a mistake to edit one’s own work. It is true that the classically educated would have known about Egypt and Mesopotamia from Herodotus, Strabo, Xenophon and others, but I think it is also true that the great majority of people until the nineteenth century would have known of these places, as I wrote, primarily from their bibles.
However, in what follows I simply do not recognise myself. I most certainly do not seek to limit archaeology to the ancillary role of clarifying our understanding of biblical texts, and there is nothing in my chapter which suggests that I do. I do not see the archaeological material as subordinate to the biblical—I make that abundantly clear on p. 13. I do not subscribe to the circular argumentation of the Albright school, and I point to the scholarly criticism of it on pp. 7-8, 11. I have no ‘desire to neutralize archaeology from any real challenges to the Bible’s historical truth’, as must be clear from pp. 10-11. I agree entirely that archaeology can provide evidence which challenges or demands the revision of certain biblical historical or theological claims—I actually quote on page 11 his example of the archaeological evidence for the extent of David and Solomon’s power. Any scholar reading pages 10-14 of my chapter will see that they are directed precisely against the views with which I appear to be credited with in Bolin’s review article.
In sum, your critique totally misrepresents me, and I can only conclude that he simply has not read my chapter, especially pages 10-14, with due attention. I find this much more shocking than the unfortunate slip about Helena.
Yours sincerely,
Prof. John R. Bartlett