The Legacy of Solomon
Page 69
In ancient times folk tales and legends were passed on orally from generation to generation becoming traditions in societies before writing was invented. After contact with the Assyrians or Phoenicians writing reached small tribes such as the Hebrew with the result their local traditions and legends were recorded becoming the basis for the biblical narrative.
Whether there conquests were great or not or had really taken place the legends were there, for the honour of the tribes and its families, in reality minor skirmishes with neighbouring nomadic tribes and vague memories of other events of local importance.
These were transformed into a more coherent story by the scribes whose role was to create history for the glorification of the leaders of a growing people. In the long run these fabricated histories were the justification of claims on adjacent territories with historical proof in the form of the written word or sacred book. Thus they modified history to suit their ambitions and in the case of the Hebrews history went back to the glory of King David, the first to ruler of the land of Israel.
‘Are you saying that the story of the conquest of the land is a complete fiction?’ asked Laura.
‘The story as it is presented in the Bible certainly never took place,’ replied Shlomo. ‘Archaeology evidence has shown that there are no historical grounds to support it. The problem is many of the sites mentioned in the Bible story of the conquest of Canaan did not even exist at the time indicated.’
‘So there was nothing to conquer?’
‘According to serious archaeologists nothing – just a few hills and rocks. Jericho, at that time, was not even a settlement, certainly not fortified and definitely without walls.’
‘What do the Egyptians or Assyrians say of Israel at that time?’
‘Nothing, at the time of the supposed conquest of Canaan according to biblical dating took place in the 13th century BC, the problem is that region was ruled by the all powerful Egyptians at that time of which there is no mention in the Bible.’
‘Is there any mention in Egyptian documents of Israel?’
‘Yes – the stela in the museum in Cairo – that mentions the word Israel for the first time in written form. You see the son of Ramesses II made a military expedition to Canaan conquering Ashkelon and Gezer, and the rather enigmatic inscriptions on the stela says Israel is spoiled, his seed is not. That event took place in 1207 BCE that is to say after the biblical conquest.
‘So if there was no conquest, where did the Israelites come from?’
‘Egypt was a mighty empire that ruled here with an iron fist. In the 14th century BC local kings in the region of Israel asked the Pharaoh for help in their fights with each other, asking him to send 50 soldiers, not very many, but apparently enough to quell any disputes, probably due to marauding nomadic tribes.
‘So can you explain how a few invaders from the desert conquer Canaan?’
‘As I said there was no conquest, probably the gradual migration of different Hebrew tribes from the east, who pushed by climatic conditions started to settling the hill regions of Canaan, then over many generations slowly encroached on the heartland of the Canaanites, who over time because assimilated with the new arrivals.’
‘So there was no war?’
‘No, very probably skirmishes, but no war of conquest with huge armies as described in the Bible.’
‘So going back to those who wrote the bible, the must have had a programme?’
‘In the 7th century BC Kingdom of Judah the story justified the conquest of the Kingdom of Israel.’
‘So Joshua did not exist?’
‘I didn’t say that. Perhaps some great military leader existed. The problem is the Bible speaks of events that happened in the 13th century BC, but it was written in the 7th century BC, that’s six hundred years after.’
‘Perhaps there were some kinds of records?’
‘No, in the 13th century BC the alphabet had even been invented.’
‘In any case Judah and Israel became united.’
‘Many people talk of the United Monarchy, what this was however is another question and there is not the least evidence it ruled over a large empire.’
‘Not all archaeologists and historians agree with what you say?’
‘If we look at the figure of Solomon he resemble an Assyrian king, magnificent, rich, wise, a great warrior in other words an idol in the modern sense of the term, unfortunately nothing in the archaeology record supports this, there is not the least evidence of great wealth in terms of palaces, monuments and public buildings in Jerusalem between the 10th and 8th centuries BC, until the arrival of the Assyrians when it was a small village, remote, miserable and unfortified.’
‘So there was no Jerusalem to speak of and no Temple?’
‘What I’m saying is that if in the 7th century BC an old tradition probably existed in Jerusalem that said the temple on the hill had been built by the founders of the dynasty. That’s a possibility but it doesn't mean that it was a huge and magnificent structure.’
‘So are you saying that the United Monarchy is an invention?’
‘That’s another question. Two palaces were found at Megiddo. Yigael Yadin dates them from the 10th century BC, but I think they are from the 9th century BC, which corresponds to the time of the northern kingdom.’
‘This then confirms the biblical dating!’
‘The north at that time was Canaanite, whilst David and Solomon ruled in Jerusalem, and perhaps the southern hill region with part of the northern hill region. But they did not rule in the northern valleys or in Galilee, consequently there could have been no split of the monarchy. At the outset there were two separate entities, northern and southern, it would appear as I said the biblical story served to justify Joshua’s conquest in the 7th century BC, Now we will establish the monarchy anew, and it will be united eternally.’
‘There is absolutely no archaeological or historical evidence that the Hebrews were ever in Egypt.’
‘What about the Canaanites then?’
‘There is some archaeological evidence of that in the second millennium BC.’
‘The story of the Patriarchs is nothing but folklore, there is no again there is no evidence of their existence outside of the Bible.’
‘What about the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron?’
‘It was built in the time of Herod, centuries after the Patriarchs are supposed to have lived.’
‘The Hebrews then, they existed!’
‘There were a people that the Egyptians called the Apiru, perhaps a tribe, maybe they were the Hebrews, but in any case they were not a nation, at least before the 10th century BC.’
‘So before that there was nothing?’
‘The Bible may contain the remains of some traditional myths that go back to the 12th century. It’s impossible to say with a sort of great legendary leader in the very distant past, like King Arthur. But there is nothing in the archaeology record about an Abraham.’
‘So archaeology can’t help?’
‘Archaeology is based on tangible evidence. My role is to piece together evidence related to the existence of past events through the evidence that has been handed down to us, buildings, pottery, jewellery, weapons and so on, not forgetting written accounts that match with this evidence corroborated by other parallel texts.’
‘What about the Palestinians?’
‘The Palestinians? Who are the Palestinians? For me they are descended from the ancestral peoples of this land. Not all the inhabitants of this land were Jews, not all Jews remained Jews, the same goes for non-Jews. History has transformed the descendants of these peoples into what they are today, Palestinian Muslim Arabs. An Arab is someone who speaks Arabic as his mother tongue, Islam is a religion like Judaism. These things change with wars and invasions, in ancient times these peoples were Hellenised, Romanised, Christianised and finally Muslims.’
‘Not all Israelis would agree with your analysis?’
‘No, I’m neither a politician nor a fanatic nationalist
!’
‘The Palestinians have their own archaeologists.’
‘Yes, they have their own historians and Syro-Palestinian archaeologists also carrying out their own research work. They also use the Hebrew Bible and other ancient texts and documents to support their excavation work.’
‘I see.’
‘You know Israel was a just small country situated on a strategic crossroad betweens the great powers of the ancient world since it beginning and has remained so ever since. The Bible draws on this geopolitical configuration with sources based on the ancient texts of the countries and empires that surrounded it Phoenicia, Palestine, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Persia. These texts included inscriptions, tablets and letters that detailed events, political relationships, religious laws, commercial transactions which all describe in one form or another the functioning of daily life in those times.’
‘So what it all boils down to is Israel and Judah were simply small buffer states that lay between powerful neighbours. The vast majority its population lived in small towns and villages linked by kinship, community, and tribe.’
‘Absolutely, very small buffer states without any great importance.’
‘Except for the Bible!’
‘Yes, the most remarkable book known to man.’
‘I’m glad you agree with that!’
He ignored the remark and continued, ‘The problem with historians in general is that they always focus on the great events in history. We archaeologists on the other hand get down to the nitty-gritty – pots and pans, food, dwelling place, drainage systems, tombs, skeletons that describe the daily life of ordinary people. As for the Bible it is a remarkable piece of evidence in that it shows the astonishing multi-ethnic society of those times, when the Jews were just one of the many peoples that lived and mixed together.’
‘It’s not the case today.’
‘Quite so, now ethnic cleansing is the rule!’
69
Tel-Aviv University