Amid charges of mud-slinging, a group of archaeologists turned to dirt-digging — literally — in their fight against a controversial fellow academic.
On Monday night, Columbia University’s pro-Israel student group played host to the latest installment in a lecture series aimed, at least partially, at rebutting Nadia Abu El-Haj, whose work has been critical of the traditional narratives of Israeli archeology.
Abu El-Haj, an assistant professor of anthropology at Barnard since 2002, first gained notice with her 2001 book “Facts on the Ground: Archaeological Practice and Territorial Self-Fashioning in Israeli Society,” in which she argued that Israeli archaeologists use their research to validate a national origin myth. The book was praised in some quarters — it won the top award from the Middle East Studies Association — but was slammed by others as poor scholarship motivated by ideology. Columbia is currently deliberating whether Abu El-Haj should be given tenure, and the university has received petitions from her opponents and supporters.
“If you get real live archaeologists on campus who know the material, they’re naturally going to contradict her,” said Alan Segal, a professor in Barnard’s religion department who delivered the first lecture in the series. The bottom line, Segal said, is that Abu El-Haj “hates Israelis.”
Abu El-Haj could not be reached for comment.
On the academic level, the debate about Abu El-Haj has drawn out a conflict between those scholars who believe archaeology has the potential for objectivity, and others — particularly younger scholars in disciplines such as anthropology — who see archaeological practice as inextricably tied to ideology.
On Monday night, the featured speaker was William Dever, a retired professor of Near Eastern archaeology at the University of Arizona who is a critic of Abu El-Haj. Although he never referred explicitly to Abu El-Haj in his lecture, Dever challenged notions advanced by some academics about archaeology’s inherent biases.
“Archaeology has never been edited,” he said. “When we dig these things up, they are pristine.”
Judith Jacobson, a member of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, made the opening remarks at Dever’s lecture. She said that the lecture series, titled “Underground: What Archaeology Tells Us about Ancient Israel,” was conceived partly to remind the community that good Israel archaeology exists in abundance. Asked if she thought the series served a political purpose, Jacobson answered carefully.
“Only to inform the community,” she said. “It’s all we can do.”
Future lecturers in the series include two other archaeologists critical of Abu El-Haj, Jodi Magness of the University of North Carolina and Aren Maeir of Israel’s Bar-Ilan University.
This sort of behavior of Jewish groups is very similar to the Communism defenders just before the crash of the Soviet block.
For Alan Segal to claim that Abu El Haj "hates Israelis" is preposterous. I'd like to see Ms. Brostoff ask the Barnard professor's critics to support these wild accusations when they're made. They can't because they simply have no evidence to do so. I know Abu El Haj personally and she has close relationships with many Israeli Jews. There are also Jewish academics who support her getting tenure. There may be aspects of Abu El Haj's work that should be legitimately criticized--I'm not an anthropologist or archaeologist so I can't tell for sure. But this campaign is based on lies, innuendo & distortion, rather than on legitimate criticism.
Abu El Haj does worse than merely criticize the traditional narratives of Israeli archaeology. She makes wild accusations, such as accusing Israeli archaeologists of deliberately destroying Arab artifacts with bulldozers with the purpose of denying Arabs a deep history in the land. Her eivdence? she talked to a couple of unnamed "student volunteers" at a dig. She goes on to deny that Jerusalem at the time of Herod and Jesus was a Jewish city. She even denies that any ancient Israelite kingdoms eexisted. It's really bad scholarship.
Richard, You claim ignorance of the subject yet you seem sure about the "lies and innuendo". You wouldn't know legitimate criticism of your friend if it hit you in the face. Someone who argues that legitimate archeological finds are really manufactured by those devious Jews to validate the myth of their origin is like the Holocaust deniers who refuse to believe historical truth due to their underlying hatred. Considering Columbia's recent questionable judgment with invited speakers I think Columbia is the perfect place for someone like her. As Abraham Lincoln said, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." The quote also applies to you Tarshisha.
"This sort of behavior of Jewish groups is very similar to the Communism defenders just before the crash of the Soviet block." Tarshisha Wishful thinking, Tarshisha Syriana. You know nothing about Communist defenders of whom you would have been one since they supported your anti-Zionist point of view.
"There may be aspects of Abu El Haj's work that should be legitimately criticized--I'm not an anthropologist or archaeologist so I can't tell for sure. But this campaign is based on lies, innuendo & distortion, rather than on legitimate criticism." Richard, if you "can't tell for sure" if her work is legitmate than why defend her? From what I have read about her so called "anthropologist or archaeologist" (and I am familiar with the field) she is indeed using her field to try and delegitimize the Jewish State. Your loyalty to your friend is commendable. It doesn't however make her work more accepatble. She isn't qualified to be a tenured Professor at Columbia.
The Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, the Forward requires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, the Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.