I’m listening through Genesis at work, and I re-read a quotation from Adele Berlin:
"Narrative is a form of representation. Abraham in Genesis is not a real person any more than a painting of an apple is a real fruit. This is not a judgment on the existence of a historical Abraham any more than it is a statement about the existence of apples." (Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative [Eisenbrauns, 1983], 13.)
That said, most historical critical scholarship, including so-called "maximalists," deny the historicity of the patriarchal narratives of the Hebrew Bible (Gen 12-50), based primarily on the lack of archaeological evidence.
My question is this: why in the heck would we expect to find archaeological or documentary evidence of a small clan of a few hundred bedouin wandering around the ANE in the first half of the second millennium BCE?
Yes, there are cultural and geographical anachronisms in Genesis. But those don’t disprove the essential historicity of those narratives.