earthquakes and archaeology
Weather draws in: a high, high white screen of cloud across the sky, so that there is still blue all over the south, but over us a canopy that is softening all the shadows to near-invisibility. Tomorrow the forecast is for rain.
Last night I woke up repeatedly. It was hot (the felt blackout over our window raises the temperature a few degrees); my pillow was damp. I dreamed of sitting here at my PC, when suddenly the house lurched sideways, then back another way. I was thrown into the air, bounced off a wall--I realized with panic that this was an earthquake, the only question was how strong, how long. I was thrown straight up, sending my head through the ceiling. I cringed, but there was no impact: the ceiling was only a hologram--or my head was. I was already awake.
I don't remember dreaming of an earthquake before. It is a sudden catastrophic release of pent-up tension in the earth. Imperceptibly slow movement loads a giant spring, which pops violently. The ground, proverbial for its solidity and immobility, suddenly lurches and devours what rests upon it. What is the ground under me? What do I take for granted for its stability--especially, perhaps, with relation to my work, done here on the PC? We describe news or events as earth-shaking. What is shaking the earth under me?
More feelings of aimlessness today. I came down and keyed notes from From Eden to Exile. What to make of this book? David Rohl is retelling the Bible, translating its stories into a new narrative based on modern archaeology and the study of ancient documents. He finds that the Bible stories are, broadly, substantiated by the other ancient records, with a bit of creative interpretation. His story is fascinating and quite persuasive, and I'm sympathetic with his mission of presenting a plausible narrative, as though to say, "This is what actually went down."
But did it? It raises the question of what we choose to believe, and why.
Yesterday Kimmie and I talked after breakfast. I told her about my visit to the Amazon.com website to link to Joseph Campbell's The Hero with a Thousand Faces. There are 68 reviews of the book on the site. Scanning through many of them, I felt that people, in general, did not really understand the book or the magnitude of Campbell's achievement. One review in particular was by a self-confessed Christian who took exception to Campbell's description of the Christian story and theology as mere myth, along with the other myths of the world.
Kimmie rolled her eyes. "Oh brother."
"Why does he believe the Christian story is true?" I said. "Ultimately it will be because somebody told him to. Yes, he'll say he's looked into it and compared the teachings with his experience, but it will have come in via those around him, being raised in it. Like all religions, it has to believe it has a lock on the truth, and everyone else is wrong. Most often, people believe what they're told to believe. That's not what Campbell was about."
I don't think that's what Rohl has done with his retelling of the Old Testament. I believe his take is that there is more historical baby in the bathwater of the Bible than most contemporary historians and archaeologists give it credit for. He finds historical events in there--datable ones. Joseph, vizier of the pharaoh, died in 1617 BC. Moses was born in 1520 BC. It's a fascinating idea, and may very well be true.
But what does it mean? Of this I'm not sure. I feel it's important, but it's hard to say exactly why. It has to do with my idea of the mythology of facts, which I've written about before.
I'll think more about that. Meanwhile, I'm keying a retold Bible, and am enjoying it.
Last night I woke up repeatedly. It was hot (the felt blackout over our window raises the temperature a few degrees); my pillow was damp. I dreamed of sitting here at my PC, when suddenly the house lurched sideways, then back another way. I was thrown into the air, bounced off a wall--I realized with panic that this was an earthquake, the only question was how strong, how long. I was thrown straight up, sending my head through the ceiling. I cringed, but there was no impact: the ceiling was only a hologram--or my head was. I was already awake.
I don't remember dreaming of an earthquake before. It is a sudden catastrophic release of pent-up tension in the earth. Imperceptibly slow movement loads a giant spring, which pops violently. The ground, proverbial for its solidity and immobility, suddenly lurches and devours what rests upon it. What is the ground under me? What do I take for granted for its stability--especially, perhaps, with relation to my work, done here on the PC? We describe news or events as earth-shaking. What is shaking the earth under me?
More feelings of aimlessness today. I came down and keyed notes from From Eden to Exile. What to make of this book? David Rohl is retelling the Bible, translating its stories into a new narrative based on modern archaeology and the study of ancient documents. He finds that the Bible stories are, broadly, substantiated by the other ancient records, with a bit of creative interpretation. His story is fascinating and quite persuasive, and I'm sympathetic with his mission of presenting a plausible narrative, as though to say, "This is what actually went down."
But did it? It raises the question of what we choose to believe, and why.
Yesterday Kimmie and I talked after breakfast. I told her about my visit to the Amazon.com website to link to Joseph Campbell's The Hero with a Thousand Faces. There are 68 reviews of the book on the site. Scanning through many of them, I felt that people, in general, did not really understand the book or the magnitude of Campbell's achievement. One review in particular was by a self-confessed Christian who took exception to Campbell's description of the Christian story and theology as mere myth, along with the other myths of the world.
Kimmie rolled her eyes. "Oh brother."
"Why does he believe the Christian story is true?" I said. "Ultimately it will be because somebody told him to. Yes, he'll say he's looked into it and compared the teachings with his experience, but it will have come in via those around him, being raised in it. Like all religions, it has to believe it has a lock on the truth, and everyone else is wrong. Most often, people believe what they're told to believe. That's not what Campbell was about."
I don't think that's what Rohl has done with his retelling of the Old Testament. I believe his take is that there is more historical baby in the bathwater of the Bible than most contemporary historians and archaeologists give it credit for. He finds historical events in there--datable ones. Joseph, vizier of the pharaoh, died in 1617 BC. Moses was born in 1520 BC. It's a fascinating idea, and may very well be true.
But what does it mean? Of this I'm not sure. I feel it's important, but it's hard to say exactly why. It has to do with my idea of the mythology of facts, which I've written about before.
I'll think more about that. Meanwhile, I'm keying a retold Bible, and am enjoying it.
posted by paulv at
3:22 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home