Avraham Norin asks about discrepancies in between academic and traditional versions of Biblical chronology. The question is based on the assumption that Biblical chronology and the chronologies presented by Hazal (e.g., Seder Hadorot) are meant to be taken literally. This issue is particularly contentious regarding the date of the Purim story. For a broad overview on the topic he might want to direct his student to Mitchell First’s Jewish History in Conflict (Jason Aronson, 1997) who presents a range of Rabbinic perspectives on whether Seder Olam is indeed to be taken literally. As Seder Olam is a midrash, Rambam’s approach to midrash is worthwhile remembering, along with his warning about those who read midrash at face value (and, I add, even more so for those who publish their face value reading as authoritative fact).
Rabbi Dr Joshua Berman has written extensively on the question of academic scholarship in conflict with tradition, and notes that writing history was a foreign concept in the ancient world. “Historical†documents in the ancient world were not meant to record facts but to create a sense of meaning by framing events in a particular way (see his series of articles in Mosaic at [
mosaicmagazine.com] and his recent Ancient Literary Convention and the Limits of source Criticism, published by Oxford University Press).
I suggest these as good places to start for Rabbi Norin and his student.
Kol Tuv,
Zvi Grumet
