Jewish history, nation formation, and the first Jew

There is no simple way to understand Jewish history. Even terminology limits the discussion, as the adjective "Jewish" was invented after the completion of the Hebrew bible and the word itself is not found in the biblical narrative. Therefore, it must be understood that Jewish history is an umbrella term which implies Hebrew history and its correlation with the nation of Israel--all of which tie into a tradition later pronounced Judaism.

The question of Jewish history turns the inquisitive eye toward the Hebrew bible; however, the inconsistencies and unsubstantiated claims of the Torah fuse myth with history and provide only a single source necessary in a multi-faceted approach to discovering the origins of who we now call the Jewish people. At the same time, without the Hebrew bible, historians and archaeologists would have no reference point with which to skeptically examine the ancient world. In other words, the Torah provides initial direction in examining the past, and without biblical input--accurate and unfounded--modern day scholars would have no basis to reckon historical fact.

Therefore, to establish the origins of a working Jewish history, the process is three-fold. Primarily, one must over-rule the option of biblical literalism through examining the construction, content and influences of the five books of Moses. Secondly, modern scholarship must tease out moments of historical feasibility and examine them in conjunction with extra-biblical corroborating sources to create a factual framework of the Near East and the biblical era. Lastly, academic understandings of nation formation must be fused with the operations of ethnocentrism and tradition in preserving a people.

DEBUNKING THE BIBLE

In order to over-rule the option of biblical literalism, one must breakdown the credibility of the bible at face-value. From a religious standpoint, it is accepted that Moses authored the five books, despite the fact that this includes the particulars of his own death. Furthermore, the bible’s linguistic composition is at odds with single authorship, as “scholars pointed out to what appeared to be different versions of the same stories within the books of the Pentateuch, suggesting that the biblical text was the product of several recognizable hands,” (Finkelstein, p 11). Another red flag of multiple authorship is the recurrence of doublets in Genesis, Exodus and Numbers—meaning the writing includes:

Two conflicting versions of the creation (1:1-2:3 and 2:4-25), two quite different genealogies of Adam’s offspring (4:17-26 and 5:1-28), and two spliced and rearranged flood stories (6:5-9:17). In addition, there were dozens more doublets and sometimes even triplets of the same events in the in the narratives of the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, and the giving of the Law. (Finkelstein, p 11)

Despite repeated accounts and the variation, there is an undoubted cohesion to the stories. Yet this cohesion is marked by distinctive differences in diction to refer to the god of Israel. While some stories utilized the tetragrammaton YHWH, another set referred to god as Elohim or El. YHWH seems to be used in reference to the tribe of Judah, while El operates in describing the northern tribes. Scholars have described the use of YHWH as J text, the use of El as E text, the “distinctive style” of Deuteronomy as D text, and the sections that are neither J, E nor D as P text. Finally, the compilation of these texts together, complete with transitional sentences and asides, creates yet another distinct author known as the redactor, and his work referred to as R text (Finkelstein, p 12).

TEASING OUT HISTORY

The mythos of the Hebrew bible has political functions in preserving unity and encouraging theocracy, but it also contains elements of historicity. In fact, the Hebrew narrative has helped modern day scholars understand the topography of the ancient world. Biblical reference and archaeological remains allowed American Congregationalist minister Edward Robinson to identify “historically verified biblical sites” and to “identify dozens of ancient mounds and ruins with previously forgotten biblical sites,” (Finkelstein, p 15). Moreover, excavations have unearthed datable artifacts that allow researchers to construct the “archaeological context into which the bible must fit,” (Finkelstein, p 19). In addition to geography, the bible reinforces scholarly understandings of ancient legal frameworks. For example, the “Laws of Hammurabi” were compiled during the rule of a Babylonian king circa 1792-1750 B.C.E, formulating the legal practices of the time that are in line with the way in which Jacob “made good” the loss of Laban’s flock, (Hallo, p 11). This also illustrates the ways in which biblical content is influenced by other sources and civilizations.

While location and codes can be traced through time, many areas of the narrative remain gray and unsubstantiated from a historically sound perspective. Although there is no extra-biblical corroboration of the Exodus, hieroglyphics and cuneiform circa 1600-1200 B.C.E. in the Near East speak to the existence of the Habiru (or Hapiru)—persons of “diverse ethnic affiliation…[and] a common social status as outcasts and aliens, uprooted from their homes homes…by newer populations,” (Hallo, p 14). While Egyptian records do not describe the enslavement of Hebrews during the period before the Exodus, they do preserve “general descriptions of border-crossings by nomadic tribesman from the east, their recruitment into labor gangs for construction projects, and the provisioning of these gangs with carefully allotted rations,” (Hallo, 15). Simply because scholarship cannot confirm events in the bible does not mean they did not happen, and it is entirely plausible that the Habiru are the same people we today call “Hebrew,” especially considering the enslavement of nomadic peoples is a documented fact—although exactly who these slaves were is unknown.

Additionally, the historical feasibility of the Exodus must also take into account the political fragility of Egypt during the same time period, and therefore it “fits well into the general picture of Egyptian weakness and preoccupation with the onslaughts of seaborne invaders at the end of the thirteenth century B.C.E.” (Hallo, p 16). Regardless, the actual existence of Moses is doubtful, although the abandoned infant who returns to challenge the king is a common theme in folklore, (Hallo, p 16). The fusion of myth and history is highlighted in the interconnections among the downfall of the Egyptian empire, the legendary persona of Moses, and divine guidance. In fact, the first extra-biblical source to confirm Israel as a nation with any relationship to Egypt occurs between 1220-1211 B.C.E., when Israel is mentioned on the Merneptah stele “in the context of settled cities and peoples on Egypt’s Asiatic frontier, (Hallo, p. 20).

The historical foundation of the Hebrew narrative is complicated by the fact that much of the text is written thousands of years after occurrences it describes. The bible is understood to be more reliable approaching 922-300 B.C.E. for two reasons: events begin to be recorded at the time they are taking place, and extra-biblical corroborative sources begin to confirm the kingship, Jewish commonwealth and construction of the Holy Temple. At the same time, history as understood by contemporary scholars cannot fully prove or disprove all of the events in the world of the Hebrews.

THE FORMATION OF A NATION

Just as the seven-day period of creation coincides with the archaeological emergence of civilization throughout a span of time, the instantaneous appointment of a single man, Abraham, as the father of a nation is representative of a longer period of time that shaped the Israelites as a people. Thus, the Hebrew bible reduces formative spans of time and translates them into instantaneous metaphors for the sake cementing a legacy and producing a cohesive narrative of national unity. Taking such literary devices into consideration, Jewish history is best understood through understanding how a nation is born.

In the world of the Hebrew bible, a nation comes to life simply through the word of god. This is at odds with historical thought, which asserts that individuals do not create nations, but that nations form with many people over time. Particularly, nations emerge as ethnic identities are crafted. “Recent research has demonstrated that culture and ethnicity are more matters of belief and custom than they are proof of common descent,” (Hendel, p 47). In his work Israel Among the Nations, Hendel makes a provocative but sociologically-sound claim that the land of Canaan was occupied by several rural groups and West Semetic cultural traditions. Therefore, being an Israelite is not profoundly different from being a Canaanite, an Ammonite or a Moabite.

Even if some or many of these formative events did not really happen in the way that they are told, they were—and still are—felt and understood to be a shared memory of a collective past. Such stories of an epic past function as a symbolic shaper of community, joining people together around a common ethnic, cultural and religious identity…Jewish identity, from its beginnings to the present day, is formed in no small part by the recitation of these stories (p 47).

As a culture and people are born, the boundaries of a nation are regulated by a shared past (whether real or imaginary), ethnocentrism, and perpetuation of an “us” versus “them” binary. Therefore, distinct characteristics must separate those inside the group from those outside the group. A strong connection with the Hebrew narrative as a guiding text is only one example. Hendel argues that Jewish tradition utilizes three ritual boundaries: the body, food, and time. While circumcision is considered a “sign of the covenant,” the practice was carried out by both Israelites and their neighbors. In fact, the only immediate neighbors that did not carry out this tradition were the newly arriving Philistines, who were becoming “the dominant political and military force of the region,” (Hendel, p 59). Therefore, the Philistines served as the Other, and “in the biblical stories about this period, the term ‘uncircumcised’ is often used as a synonym for ‘Philistine,’” (Hendel, p 60).

Food operates in a manner similar to circumcision. Also like circumcision, food laws become prominent factors during the era of “Philistine hegemony.” Archaeological excavations reveal the dietary polarities of the two peoples, with excessive pig bone findings in Philistine dwellings, and little or none in Israelite dwellings. Lastly, time remains a significant factor of Jewish observance, as the “institution of the Sabbath” creates a clear demarcation of weeks and provides the “growing system of ritual practices that served to display the inclusions and exclusions of Israelite cultural identity,” (Hendel, p 63). Thus, a nation emerges over time as groups of people come together with common practices and identity, distinguishing themselves with non-members through belief and custom.

JEWISH HISTORY AND THE FIRST JEW

A historical perspective of the Hebrew bible differs from a literalist view in content and in certainty. Frankly, a biblical literalist has all of the answers because divine inspiration has provided them explicitly through the Torah. History, on the other hand, is not so clear. What is certain is that the bible is not a reliable source of fact, although certain aspects of history can be extrapolated from it. Considering how a nation comes into being, it is likely that many groups found their way into Canaan and, over time, similar lifestyles fused multiple peoples into a nation, set apart by a unique history and ritual boundaries. That unique history, also known as the Hebrew bible, is likely a combination of different aspects of the multiple histories from some or all of the groups in Canaan, contrived thought and symbolic mythos influenced by other ancient works and civilizations, as well as the actual experiences of the now nation of Israel through its evolutionary stages. At the same time, the Exodus is likely an embellishment of the experiences of one or more of the groups of Canaan in Egypt, who feasibly found their way to the “Promised Land” after leaving enslavement by whatever means. All things considered, there is no “first Jew,” and Jewish history itself must be viewed as a process, not a moment, in which religious tradition must be explained alongside historical fact to create a context for truth, mythos, and uncertainty.

Works Cited

1. Finkelstein, Israel and Silberman, Neil. The Bible Unearthed. New York: Simon and
Schuster.

2. Hallo, William and Ruderman, David. Heritage, Civilization and the Jews. United States
of America: Prager Publishers

3. Hendel, Ronald. "Israel Among the Nations: Biblical Culture in the Ancient Near East."
Cultures of the Jews.