---
description: Sources for the Archaeological Confirmations article. Mykytiuk's 53-person list was read in full from his deposited copy; the underlying inscriptions were not consulted individually, and the forgery-trial judgment was not read.
agents: Claude Code
models: claude-opus-5[1m]
last_reviewed: 2026-08-30 15:15 ET
theme: common/themes/berean2/theme.php
---

# Literature review — Archaeological Confirmations of the Old Testament

## Read in full

| Source | Route | What it supplied |
|---|---|---|
| Lawrence J. Mykytiuk, "53 People in the [Hebrew] Bible Confirmed Archaeologically" (2017), supplementing his 2014 and 2017 *BAR* articles | Author's deposited copy at Purdue e-Pubs, `docs.lib.purdue.edu/lib_fsdocs/182/`.  Plain curl gets HTML;  `bin/fetch-via-chrome.py` with the landing page returns the PDF | The whole list with groupings and dates;  the three-identifying-marks criterion and the Hananiah/Azzur worked example;  the "almost real" category with Shebna and Balaam;  the exclusions (Shalman, Osnappar, and Josephus on Ethbaal) |

## Not obtained

1. **The individual inscriptions behind the 53 entries.**  None was consulted directly.  Mykytiuk documents each with primary citations and the article relies on that documentation.  For the entries this project has independently verified — Belshazzar (via `dating-daniel`), Jehoiachin, Jehucal, Gedaliah (via the exile article), David (via the monarchy article), Mesha — the cross-links say so.  The rest are relayed on Mykytiuk's authority.
2. **Mykytiuk's monograph**, *Identifying Biblical Persons in Northwest Semitic Inscriptions of 1200–539 B.C.E.* (SBL, 2004), abbreviated *IBP* throughout his notes.  This is where the method is argued rather than stated.  Get it before publication.
3. **The Golan/Deutsch judgment** (Jerusalem District Court, 14 March 2012).  The article's account is from press coverage and the Biblical Archaeology Society's trial resource guide.  For an article whose Part 5 turns on the exact meaning of the verdict, this is a real gap.
4. **The 2003 IAA expert panel reports** on the James Ossuary, Jehoash Inscription and Ivory Pomegranate.  Not obtained.
5. **Sennacherib's prism, the Kurkh Monolith and the Black Obelisk** in critical editions.  Named in Part 4 without citation.  The project holds `luckenbill-1926` and the mesopotamian-absolute-chronology article has verified several of these synchronisms directly — pull the locators from there rather than re-doing the work.

## Added 2026-08-30

- **Grabbe, *Ancient Israel* (2007), leaf 40** — search-inside on `ancientisraelwha0000grab`.  Supplies the proportion check now in Part 5: forgery headlines "can leave non-specialists with a rather distorted picture of what is consensus and what is genuine controversy.  Museums around the world are filled with artifacts relating to ancient Israel and Judah that no one questions.  It is the unprovenanced objects sold on the antiquities market that cause the problems."  A moderate saying this is worth more here than either camp saying it.
- **ABR, "Israelite Kings in Assyrian Inscriptions"** supplied the Kurkh Monolith translation now quoted in Part 4, replacing an uncited claim.  Still relayed;  check against `luckenbill-1926`.

## Consulted and deliberately not used

- **Mykytiuk's New Testament list** ("30 People in the New Testament Confirmed").  Out of scope for this section;  it belongs with the Jesus and the Gospels material.
- **The Deir ʿAllā Balaam inscription's own text.**  The article uses only Mykytiuk's assessment of its evidential weight.  The inscription itself (COS 2:140–145) is interesting for other reasons — it is a non-Israelite prophetic text mentioning El and the *shaddayin* — and deserves separate treatment.
- **The full site-and-event inventory.**  Part 4 is deliberately a short index with cross-links rather than a treatment, because each item is handled in a sibling article.  Duplicating them here would fragment the evidence.
- **"Bible confirmed" lists from apologetics ministries.**  Several were seen in search results and none was used.  The article's whole argument is that a list without a stated criterion is not usable, and citing one would undercut it.

## Open questions

1. **Is the period distribution claim exactly right?**  The article states that 52 of the 53 fall between roughly 950 and 400 BC with David as the sole earlier entry.  This was read off Mykytiuk's own date column and should be re-checked entry by entry, because it is the article's most load-bearing original observation.
2. Does Mykytiuk's *IBP* method survive criticism?  Kitchen reviewed it favourably (cited in Mykytiuk's own notes, which is not independent).  Find a critical review.
3. What is the current scholarly status of each of the five disputed market items after 2012?  The article says the dispute continues;  that should be documented rather than asserted.
4. Pull verified locators for the Kurkh Monolith, Black Obelisk and Sennacherib prism from the mesopotamian-absolute-chronology research folder instead of leaving Part 4 uncited.