Biblical Archaeology Review

I really don't have a set opinion on the over-arching veracity of the Bible. It simply isn't a necessary part of my religious beliefs that the Bible be absolutely and perfectly factual. So in a discussion about the authenticity of a particular artifact what I want is science and corroboration. Unfortunately BAR has gotten embroiled in the controversy over the James Ossuary and has moved well past the point of scholarly return.

Nor is this the only conflict where they have taken sides. The dating and significance of the Ahwat ruins is another sore point. And they seem to be at war with the Israel Antiquities Authority. This simply does not make for the kind of solid journalism that should mark a field of study that is important to many people of dramatically different faiths. The sad thing is that there are no alternatives that can claim the broad coverage the BAR once provided.

Once the writers veer off from the agruments and vitriol, they manage some interesting discussions, but personally, I would hold off from a subscription. Use the money to do a bit of research and find books and academic materials that may be a bit less exciting to read, but will be much more informative.


A SUNDAY SCHOOL PRIMER POSING AS A JOURNAL   October 11, 2003
hominuslupus (albuquerque, nm USA)
41 out of 89 found this review helpful

If you are an unquestioning believer and are looking for a magazine that both poses as an objective archeology journal while reinforcing your recieved faith-based beliefs, then this is the periodical for you. Biblical Archeology Review (BAR) is dedicated to 'proving' that the Bible's text is the best source of information on the ancient Biblical world rather than empirical archeological evidence. BAR's standard has reached an all time low recently with its editor's oportunistic promotion of the now debunked James ossuary. It serves as a cautionary tale of the predetermined and crack pot modus operandi employed by BAR. The equation goes like this: 1. The text of the Bible is not to be questioned and 2. If you can find any archeological artifact or discovery that you can bend and twist beyond all context to support #1 than you can get it published in BAR. Also, ever present within BAR is a fear and deprication of independant empirical archeology which interprets archeological evidence without predetermined beliefs as having a primacy over the Bible's text (a text that each generation was free to constantly redact to fit its own political exigencies of the day). BAR articles of full of unproven faith-based assumptions and are of little use to the serious student of Biblical archeology. Unfortunately, I wasn't warned about this and subscribed to an entire year, now every few months I have to waste a few seconds taking BAR from my mailbox directly to the trash can where it belongs.


When they drop the anti-Semitism bickering, it excels   February 8, 2005
33 out of 38 found this review helpful

I had a subscription to BAR previously and I absolutely LOVED the articles when they presented excellent photos, interesting finds and deep discussion. My interest started to wane when it seemed that a fair number of discussions turned to how "Dr. X is/was an anti-Semite and therefore his discoveries/theories should be invalidated/discredited/etc.", also implying that Jewish archaeologists' work should be magnified over anyone else's.

I'm not Jewish. I'm also not a racist. The reason why I (or anyone else, I'd presume) would take interest in the magazine was for the aforementioned photos, discoveries, and so forth, not so I can put my money down to read people's discourses on finger-pointing about anti-Semitism.

Yes, racism is bad. Yes, Judaism plays an important part in understanding Biblical archaeology (but not to the point of excluding Christian researchers or thinking anyone outside of Judaism can't be a decent scholar). Even if accusations of anti-Semitism are true about Dr. X, Y, or Z, if their research is scientifically sound, get over it and go argue with Dr. X, Y, or Z on his own turf, not in the magazine, because frankly, I as a reader just don't care about your beef.

I am in agreement with other reviewers who say the magazine excels when it sticks to facts, and is tedious when it goes off on finger-pointing. If you can handle both, buy the magazine. It put me off years ago, but I might consider going back if the quality remains.


Cancel my subscription. Not!   June 11, 2003
FrKurt Messick (Bloomington, IN USA)
27 out of 40 found this review helpful

It seems that at least one letter to the editor in each edition of Biblical Archaeology Review and its companion magazine, Bible Review, has a request to 'cancel my subscription'! Indeed, at one point upon renewing my subscription, I received the bonus gift of a small book that bore the title 'Cancel My Subscription!' These are letters which come from people who have found something offensive or unsettling among the many articles in an issue. And that is perfectly understandable -- these magazines are touching upon very core beliefs in a way that is no respector of interpretative frameworks. BAR and BR are wonderful at letting the scholars, reviewers and other contributors speak for themselves. In fact, one might go so far as to say that the controversies are encouraged -- for every reader who cancels, there are many more who are thankful for the illumination of differing viewpoints.

Biblical Archaeology Review has to its great credit early calls to the end the monopolistic tactics that the review team of the Dead Sea Scrolls seemed to have, and seemed to be poised to keep the scrolls out of the public view for yet another generation of scholars.

BAR takes issue with those who block the free transmission of knowledge and the free exercise of research. They have also taken public issue with archaeologists (the community with whom one would think they need to stay in good standing) for their fairly regular failure to publish results of archaeological research in a timely manner, or at all. And, as much archaeological research involves an element of destruction (when you move one layer off another layer, the top layer is usually destroyed -- documentation of what was removed is critical, or else it really is lost) archaeologists who do not report what they've done are really burying the past more securely than any ocean tide or sand dune could.

The Biblical Archaeology Society (which produces these two magazines and a third, which I haven't read extensively and so do not yet feel qualified to review) also hosts regular seminars and gatherings. When I went the the AAR/SBL (American Academy of Religion/Society for Biblical Literature) conference last year, I also attended the BAS seminars held nearby. These are wonderful occasions, with noted scholars who regularly appear in the pages of BAR and BR, with groups of people, both amateurs and professionals, who are intensively interested in the topics presented. And, of course, one of the questions which always arises is, 'Where is Hershel?'

This refers to Hershel Shanks, editor and founder, who has, through his efforts and style, seemed to have established an instant rapport with his readers, such that those who have never met him feel they are on a first-name basis.

BAR has various sections with short newsy updates and in-depth articles on current archaeological problems, issues or discoveries. They also highlight personalities. Some scholars have regular columns (Elie Wiesel has been contributing a regular column to Bible Review for the past few years on significant figures from the Hebrew Scriptures).

Articles include an examination of current archaeological investigations and digs, as well as past digs that were not adequately covered. Architectural and artifact analysis is done, with extensive scientific reporting, but not so much that the articles are inaccessible to the interested layperson. Textual analysis and new interpretations are presented, both on newly discovered biblical and proto-biblical texts (the Dead Sea Scrolls aren't the only ones), as well an non-biblical texts from the region, to illustrate better the culture and society. There is usually at least one article on a major player in the field, again past or present, often in an interview with Hershel Shanks.

For the low price, one gets a wonderful magazine that always leaves one wanting more. Glossy pages, beautiful photography, interesting maps and diagrams -- this magazine is a visual feast as well as an intellectual treat. Biblical Archaeology Review invests as much in the outstanding photography (for which it has won awards) as it does in the clear and precise writing. BAR is not afraid to contradict itself (archaeological evidence is often susceptible to multiple, sometimes conflicting interpretations) and will be up front with what it does and does not believe. It does not purport to support any particular doctrinal or dogmatic view, inviting the reader to take what is presented and work for her or himself the implications for faith, both spiritual and historical.

Read it to find out what you agree with; don't be afraid to disagree -- write in and tell them about it! Just don't cancel your subscription!


the fastest, most enjoyable way to get up to speed on a fascinating area   August 18, 2006
David A. Baer (Indianapolis, IN USA)
27 out of 28 found this review helpful

I once asked the Regius Professor of Hebrew at the University of Cambridge how he stays abreast of fast-moving developments in biblical archaeology, a field of investigation that is related but decidely peripheral to his own work.

'I mostly read BAR ... ', he said, in an unexpectedly low-brow response for the hallowed halls of the Great University. 'Then if I want to know more about a topic, I move on to more scholarly publications.'

It was a vote of confidence in a magazine (*not* an academic journal!) that I've read for years and found equally useful in maintaining a generalist knowledge in an area of investigation that - let's address the elephant in the room - most of us come to out of religious interests.

BAR effectively combines the well-edited prose of leading scholars with due general-interest attention to color photos and complementary resources like slides (in a past era) and phenomenally well-produced videos and dvds.

An issue pulled at random from my shelves (November/December 2001) contains articles entitled:

-Excavating Philistine Gath. Have we found Goliath's hometown
-The Monastery of the Cross. Where heaven and earth meet
-The Rise and Fall of the Dead Sea
-Is It or Isn't It - a Synagogue?

In addition, the usual suspects appear issue by issue in interesting columns that add color commentary to a polemical field where personalities as well as artefacts and theories loom large.

You'll want to ignore the over-heated reader responses on one brand of disillusionment or another. But you'd be wrong to heed some reviewers' critiques of the political headbashing that goes on among archaeologists. When elephants of this kind collide, it's usually over an ideological argument that matters. It does us no good to deride such battles as mere politics. BAR has had the good sense to play both a spectator's and a provocateur's role in such infighting over the complaints of readers who wish things were more placid around here.

They are not. And the things we continue to dig up from the rocky ground of Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt and other locations continue to insure that we never fall prey to boring consensus regarding the history of these great lands and the faiths they engendered.

Read BAR if this sounds remotely interesting and decide for yourself.