This Symposium asks whether a 'history of Israel' can be written, and if it can, how? Can the Hebrew Bible be used as a source for such history? The question of writing the 'history of ancient Israel' has become fiercely debated in recent years. It is a debate that seems to generate more heat than light because of quite different concepts of historical methodology. The European Seminar on Methodology in Israel's History was founded specifically to address this problem. Members of the Seminar hold a variety of views but all agree that there is a problem to be tackled. The first meeting of the Seminar, held in Dublin in 1996, was devoted to some broad questions: (1) Can a 'history of ancient Israel' (or Palestine, Syria, the Levant, etc.) be written? (2) If so, how? What place does the Hebrew Bible have as a source in writing this history? This first volume contains the main papers that were prepared to set the stage for the discussion, along with an introduction to the Seminar, its aims and its membership. The editor also provides a concluding chapter summarizing and reflecting on the debate.

When methodology relating to the history of ancient Israel is discussed, the issue of historiography is frequently injected into the debate. This includes both principles of writing history from a modern perspective and also historiography as it relates to ancient writings. The first part of this most recent volume in the European Seminar in Historical Methodology series contains essays on historiography, including such well-known scholars as Ehud Ben Zvi, Philip Davies, and Axel Knauf. The second part is made up of reviews of histories of Israel or related works by such writers as William Dever, Baruch Halpern, Steven McKenzie, Mario Liverani, Alberto Soggin, Lester Grabbe, Jens Bruun Kofoed, and Iain Provan, V. Phillips Long, and Tremper Longman, III. Reviewers include Rainer Albertz, Niels Peter Lemche, Joseph Blenkinsopp, Philip Davies, Bob Becking, Ehud Ben Zvi, and Lester Grabbe. The original authors had the opportunity to respond to the reviews, while the editor provides an introduction that summarizes the various contributions and a conclusion that provides personal reflections on the debate.