Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Ancient Israel and settler colonialism

2013; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 4; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/2201473x.2013.812944

2201-473X

Pekka Pitkänen,

Colonialism, slavery, and trade

AbstractThis essay looks at ancient Israel as a settler colonial society. After an introductory paragraph that describes the significance of the study of ancient Israel for the study of settler colonialism, it summarises various approaches to the study of the history of ancient Israel. It then presents evidence for seeing the Israelite documents and early history in settler colonial terms. Finally, it looks at some aspects of decolonisation of the biblical narrative based on acknowledging at least the very possibility of a settler colonial nature of early Israel. Notes1. This story has a parallel in the books of Chronicles. In the books of Chronicles, the story, however, does not start from creation, but from the beginnings of the Israelite monarchy.2. Cf. e.g. Richard Waswo, From Virgil to Vietnam: The Founding Legend of Western Civilization (Hanover and London: Wesleyan University Press, 1997).3. See e.g. Eryl Davies, the Immoral Bible: Approaches to Biblical Ethics (London: T&T Clark, 2010); Robert P. Carroll, Wolf in the Sheepfold: The Bible as Problematic for Theology, 2nd ed. (London: SCM Press, 1997).4. I will use the term Old Testament here, those preferring the word Hebrew Bible may substitute with it in the presentation.5. Keeping in mind that the ancient Israelite legal materials actively allowed slavery (see e.g. Ex 21: 2–11, 20–27; Lev 21: 42–46; Deut 15: 12–18) and Paul in the New Testament, writing in the context of the Graeco-Roman society, did not at least actively discourage it (1 Tim 6: 1–2; Philem.).6. See e.g. Waswo, From Virgil to Vietnam; John Docker, The Origins of Violence: Religion, History and Genocide (London: Pluto Press, 2008), esp. 113–29; Michael Prior, Bible and Colonialism: A Moral Critique (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997).7. See e.g. Lorenzo Veracini, Israel and Settler Society (London: Pluto Press, 2006).8. See esp. Mark G. Brett, Decolonizing God: The Bible in the Tides of Empire (Sheffield: Phoenix Press, 2008).9. See Veracini, Settler Colonialism: A Theoretical Overview (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), 104–8 for this problematic.10. See e.g. Gordon J. Wenham, Exploring the Old Testament Vol 1: The Pentateuch (London: SPCK, 2003), 162–3.11. P itself was divided into P 'proper' and H, the so-called Holiness Code, broadly consisting of Lev 17–26.12. Julius Wellhausen, Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israel, sechste Ausgabe. (Berlin: Druck und Verlag Georg Reimer, 1905). First published 1878, English translation Prolegomena to the History of Israel (Edinburgh: A. & C. Black, 1885). English translation also available at http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/4732; Cf. e.g. Gordon J. Wenham, 'Pondering the Pentateuch: The Search for a New Paradigm', in The Face of Old Testament Studies: A Survey of Contemporary Approaches, ed. D.W. Baker and B.T. Arnold (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books), 116–44 and idem, 'Pentateuchal Studies Today', Themelios 22.1 (October 1996): 3–13, also available at http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_pentateuch_wenham.html.13. See e.g. Wenham, 'Pentateuchal Studies Today'.14. See e.g. R.N. Whybray, The Making of the Pentateuch: A Methodological Study, JSOTSS 53 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1987); Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative (New York: Basic Books, 1981).15. See e.g. the summary table in Eckart Otto, Deuteronomium 1,1–4,43, HTKAT (Freiburg im Breisgau: Verlag Herder, 2012), 256; Erich Zenger and Christian Frevel, Einleitung in das Alte Testament, 8th ed. (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer), 67–231. Note in passing that one problem of biblical (notably including Pentateuchal) criticism is that there is a limited number of texts studied by a large number of people over the course of a couple of centuries up till now. While there are differences between texts (see e.g. Emanuel Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 3rd ed., Revised and Expanded (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012)) and one can think of possible modifications to an initial work based on comparative empirical study of ancient Near Eastern documents (see esp. Jeffrey Tigay, The Evolution of the Gilgamesh Epic (Wauconda, IL: Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers, 2002, a reprint of 1982 edition published by Philadelpia: University of Pennsylvania Press); David M. Carr, The Formation of the Hebrew Bible: A New Reconstruction (New York: OUP, 2011)) and the biblical materials themselves suggest that they have utilised sources (see e.g. Josh 10: 12–13; 1 Kings 11: 41), the biblical textual and ancient Near Eastern evidence do not really empirically support most of the source and redaction critical theories. Arguably we have a problem here that is in some ways similar to the problem with modern string theory (see Lee Smolin, The Trouble With Physics: The Rise of String Theory, The Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2006); cf. Barton Zwiebach, A First Course in String Theory, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: CUP, 2009), 3–12). There is a felt need to produce new theories in order to advance the field, but there are many theories that can be constructed that can fit current empirical evidence. In biblical studies there are probably an infinite, or at least a large number of permutations that can be achieved by modifying source and redaction critical theories, and it is comparatively easy to produce a new research paper, book or dissertation by making a new permutation. However, as with current string theory, one cannot verify the resulting theories against empirical evidence (more theories are possible if one includes theories that do not match evidence fully) and thus the faith of the academic community (or subcommunity) that the approach is an appropriate one is the main force in driving further research within the adopted theoretical framework (Proponents of string theory do tend to explicitly acknowledge at the outset the problem with empirical verification, see Zwiebach, A First Course in String Theory, 9–11, biblical scholars do not [i.e. mutantis mutandis], save for the relatively rare exception). So the conundrum for biblical studies would be that if certain types of theories are discontinued, what would the academics do, as perhaps for Physics in that if string theories were not to be pursued any more, what would physicists do? (Cf. the Kuhnian concept of a research paradigm; see Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1962; 50th anniversary edn/4th edn 2012), esp. 23–51.) More seriously, and more in line with our considerations below, ultimately these exercises in biblical source and redaction criticism are in a number of ways a fairly esoteric in the wider societal context in terms of their impact (cf. the comments in David M. Carr, Writing on the Tablet of the Heart: Origins of Scripture and Literature (Oxford: OUP, 2005), 293–5), however, they, even if probably in many ways inadvertently so, do contribute towards maintaining an overall mainstream approach to the history of Israel that has implications for decolonising the Bible, as will be discussed below.16. See Wellhausen, Die Composition des Hexateuchs und der historischen Bücher des Alten Testaments, 3rd ed. (Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1899; 1st ed. 1876/77); Gerhard von Rad, 'The Form-Critical Problem of the Hexateuch', in idem., The Problem of the Hexateuch and other Essays (Edinburgh and London: Oliver Boyd, 1965; German original in BWANT 4th series, vol XXVI, 1938), 1–78.17. Martin Noth, The Deuteronomistic History, 2nd ed., JSOTSS 15 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991; German original: Überlieferungsgeschichtliche Studien I, Halle: M. Niemeyer, 1943).18. As already mentioned above, the books of Chronicles broadly provide a parallel account for the time from early monarchy to the exile and provide a subject for study on their own. These books themselves clearly suggest that they were written in the postexilic time, even though themselves claiming to utilise sources that date back to an earlier time.19. E.g. Otto, Deuteronomium 1,1-4,43; Carr, The Formation of the Hebrew Bible, and this author.20. Following section based on Pitkänen, Joshua, AOTC 6 (Leicester: IVP, 2010), 30–31, used with permission.21. See e.g. P.R.S. Moorey, A Century of Biblical Archaeology (Cambridge: Lutterworth Press, 1991).22. Note also that textual artefacts unearthed by archaeology are of importance for biblical studies. Such textual artefacts from countries surrounding ancient Israel reveal that these surrounding countries shared a number of cultural features (and sometimes there was direct interaction between these peoples) with ancient Israel and the texts (and sometimes non-literary artefacts) can thus be used to illuminate the ancient Israelite customs in a comparative sense. The archaeological discipline in this respect branched into the fields of ancient Near Eastern studies of Assyriology, Egyptology, Hittitology, etc., now essentially completely independent, even if cognate, fields on their own.23. See e.g. Amihai Mazar, Archaeology and the Land of the Bible 10000-586 BCE, The Anchor Bible Library (New York: Doubleday, 1992); Thomas E. Levy, ed. Historical Biblical Archaeology and the Future: The New Pragmatism (London: Equinox, 2010).24. See e.g. J. Maxwell Miller and John H. Hayes, History of Ancient Israel and Judah, 2nd rev. ed. (London: SCM Press, 2006) for an interpretation of the history of Israel as a whole from such a perspective.25. See e.g. William G. Dever, Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come from? (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003).26. See Avraham Faust, Faust, Israel's Ethnogenesis: Settlement, Interaction, Expansion and Resistance (London: Equinox, 2006), esp. 170–87.27. See e.g. Niels Peter Lemche, The Israelites in History and Tradition (London: SPCK/Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998); Thomas L. Thompson, Early History of the Israelite People: From the Written and Archaeological Sources (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1992); Philip R. Davies, In Search of 'Ancient Israel', JSOTSS 148 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992); Mario Liverani, Israel's History and the History of Israel (London, Equinox, 2005; Italian original 2003).28. See e.g. Wenham, Genesis 1–15, Word Biblical Commentary (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987); idem., Genesis 16–50, Word Biblical Commentary (Waco, TX.: Word Books, 1994); Kenneth Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, Mi: Eerdmans, 2003); Iain Provan, V. Philips Long and Tremper Longman, A Biblical History of Israel (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003).29. There is of course individual variation between each scholar even within each interpretative tradition. One might go as far as to say that there are as many opinions as there are academics, which would seem an apt description of Humanities in general.30. See Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 1–15 for a summary of past research.31. Pitkänen, Joshua is a recent example of such work.32. See e.g. Waswo, From Virgil to Vietnam; Docker, Origins of Violence; Carroll, Wolf in the Sheepfold; Regina M. Schwartz, The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997); Davies, Immoral Bible.33. See below for further details on this.34. See e.g. Douglas S. Earl, 'Reading Joshua as Christian Scripture' (doctoral thesis, Durham University, 2008), available at Durham E-Theses online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/2267/. Also published in slightly revised form as Reading Joshua as Christian Scripture, Journal of Theological Interpretation Supplement 2, (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2010) for an elaborate construction of a 'mythical' provenance of the related concepts in Joshua.35. See Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 102–8.36. Veracini suggests that peoples originating outside the land(s) they occupy tend to see their existence in historical terms, whereas indigenous peoples see themselves in ontological terms (personal communication, 2013).37. Note the definitions in Jürgen Osterhammel, Colonialism: A Theoretical Overview (Princeton, NJ: Markus Wiener, 2005; original German edition 1995 by C.H. Beck, Munich; translated by Shelley Frisch, with a foreword by R.L. Tignor and an updated bibliography), 'A colony is a new political organization created by invasion (conquest and/or settlement colonization) but built on pre-colonial conditions. Its alien rulers are in sustained dependence on a geographically remote "mother country" or imperial centre, which claims exclusive rights of possession of the colony.' (p. 10) and 'Colonialism is a relationship of domination between an indigenous (or forcibly imported) majority and minority of foreign invaders. The fundamental decisions affecting the lives of the colonised people are made and implemented by the colonial rulers in pursuit of interests that are often defined in a distant metropolis. Rejecting cultural compromises with the colonised population, the colonisers are convinced of their own superiority and their ordained mandate to rule.' (pp. 16–17).38. Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 5339. See e.g. Kitchen, On the Reliability, 318–19, 333–4.40. It should be noted that there is no direct evidence for an exodus as described in the book of Exodus, and the matter is hotly contested, for positive considerations, see esp. James K. Hoffmeier, Israel in Egypt: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997); idem., Ancient Israel in Sinai: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Wilderness Traditions (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005); for negative ones, see e.g. Liverani, Israel's History, 277–82.41. But note also the mixed multitude ('erev rav) that went out of Egypt in the Exodus according to Ex 12: 38.42. Veracini, Settler Colonialism defines transfer essentially as 'cleansing' the settler body polity of its (indigenous and exogenous) alterities (p. 33). As Veracini suggests, 'a successful settler society is managing the orderly and progressive emptying of the indigenous and exogenous others segments of the population economy and has permanently separated from the abject others' (Ibid., p. 28; abject others are those permanently excluded from the settler polity and have lost their indigenous or exogenous status, pp. 27–28). Veracini then goes on to define 26 different forms of transfer (Ibid., pp. 35–50), and it should be noted that killing, deportation etc. constitute only a subset of the possible transfers, there are other strategies that are more subtle, such as assimilation. Note also that indigenous others (really original people of the land where settlement is taking place) are normally considered as a threat to the settler collective as their continuing existence constitutes a threat and challenge to the very existence and legitimacy of the settler collective (Ibid., pp. 24–6, 33–4), whereas exogenous others (these might include people from lands external to the settler collective who might join the collective) are generally seen as people who can collaborate with the settler collective (Ibid., pp. 26–7).43. The last two noted by John F. Brug, 'Where Did the Name "Philistines" Come From?', paper presented at ASOR Annual Meeting in Atlanta, Georgia, 2010, pp. 5–6.44. Cf. these with charts in Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 25–9. In any case, taking these people in seems closely connected with Veracini's transfer by assimilation (Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 37–9).45. Necropolitical transfer in Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 35.46. Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 35 classifies this as an ethnic transfer.47. Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 41 (Narrative transfer I).48. This seems close to Narrative transfer IV in Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 42–3, even though there also seem to be differences.49. See Pitkänen, Joshua, 210–11 for a summary.50. Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 35–6 calls this a transfer by conceptual displacement.51. Cf. Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 26–8 for the concepts in settler colonial terms. Note however that there is a debate as to what extent ancient Near Eastern law is to be taken as theoretical or as practical, for example, no court cases referring back to legal codes exist in the ancient Near East from around the time in question (see e.g. Raymond Westbrook, 'Introduction: The Character of Ancient Near Eastern Law', in idem., ed., A History of Ancient Near Eastern Law (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 2003), 1–90 (esp. 18–19).52. But this seems essentially similar to the treatment of the Gibeonites as indicated above, at least in some respects.53. Cf. Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 88–9.54. David Day, Conquest: How Societies Overwhelm Others (Oxford: OUP, 2008).55. The two are not exactly the same, as a society can supplant through 'internal colonisation' which can be different from settler colonialism (Day 2008, p. 6).56. Day, Conquest, p. 7.57. Day, Conquest, p. 8.58. Ibid.59. Ibid.60. Ibid.61. The Holiness Code is generally considered a stylistically separate unit within the Pentateuch, largely consisting of Leviticus 17–26.62. Day, Conquest, 7–9.63. I will divide into: staking a legal claim, mapping the land, naming, foundation stories, supplanting the savages and the genocidal imperative, by right of conquest, tilling the soil and peopling the land, defending the territory. What follows below is a summary, full details are available in Pitkänen, Pentateuch-Joshua: A Settler-Colonial Document of a Supplanting Society, under consideration of a journal.64. The Hebrew root tur in 13:1 has also the meaning 'to spy'.65. Cf. also R.J.A. Talbert, ed. Ancient Perspectives: Maps and their Place in Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece and Rome (Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 2012).66. Cf. e.g. Pitkänen, Joshua: 261–64, quoting G. Beckman, Hittite Diplomatic Texts, SBL Writings from the Ancient World 7, ed. Harry A. Hoffner, Jr (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996; 2nd ed., 1999), 109–11, for an example of Hittite border descriptions (in a treaty context).67. See e.g. Faust, Israel's Ethnogenesis, esp. pp. 159–66, 221–6; Israel Finkelstein, The Archaeology of the Israelite Settlement (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1988), 324–30; Eero Junkkaala, Three Conquests of Canaan: A Comparative Study of Two Egyptian Military Campaigns and Joshua 10–12 in the Light of Recent Archaeological Evidence (Turku: Åbo Akademi University Press, 2006; PDF version available for download from https://oa.doria.fi/handle/10024/4162), esp. 308–9.68. See also Day, Conquest, pp. 96–7, referring to the defeat of king Sihon, and making a parallel with later conquistadors.69. Day, Conquest, p. 96; see e.g. Joshua 1: 3; 14: 9.70. See W.G. Dever, Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From? 98.71. Cf. Carroll P. Kakel, The American West and the Nazi East: A Comparative and Interpretive Perspective (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011). Cf. also e.g. David L. Preston, The Texture of Contact: European and Indian Settler Communities on the Frontiers of Iroquoia, 1667–1783 (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2009), 1–22.72. Cf. our comments above about the practicality of ancient Near Eastern materials.73. Patrick Wolfe, 'Structure and Event: Settler Colonialism, Time and the Question of Genocide', in Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation and Subaltern Resistance in World History, ed. A.D. Moses (Oxford/New York: Bergahn Books, 2008), 102–32 (130n71).74. Wolfe, 'Structure and Event', 103.75. In any case, we do know that the ancient Canaanite societies as attested in the Amarna letters in the Late Bronze Age are transformed into Israelite societies in the ensuing centuries, even if one takes a minimalist approach into the history of Israel.76. For considerations of Ai and other 'problematic' places, see e.g. Pitkänen, Joshua (pp. 182–4 for Ai specifically). Note on the other hand that, for example, there is clear archaeological evidence of a destruction at Hazor at the time (Josh 11: 10–12; see e.g. Pitkänen, Joshua, 232).77. Note also that e.g. Joshua 11: 13 indicates that the Israelites did not burn many of the conquered towns, and if so, it would not be easy (if even possible) to find archaeological evidence of destruction at the relevant sites.78. For some further examples of people movements in the ancient Near East in the second millennium BCE based on extrabiblical sources, see Kitchen, On the Reliability, 254. For a recent work dedicated to colonisation in general in the ancient Near East, see Maria Eugenia Aubet, Commerce and Colonization in the Ancient Near East (Cambridge: CUP, 2013; Spanish original 2007).79. See esp. Trude Dothan and Moshe Dothan, People of the Sea: The Search for the Philistines (New York: Macmillan, 1992); Assaf Yasur Landau, The Philistines and Aegean Migration at the End of the Late Bronze Age (Cambridge: CUP, 2010).80. See e.g. Yasur-Landau, The Philistines and Aegean Migration; Aren M. Maeir, L.A. Hitchcock and L.K. Horwitz, 'On The Constitution and Transformation Of Philistine Identity', OJA 32.1 (2013), 1–38.81. See Pitkänen, 'Ancient Israel and Philistia: Settler Colonialism and Ethnocultural Interaction', under consideration of a journal.82. On this 'system' and its collapse, see e.g. Itamar Singer, The Calm Before the Storm: Selected Writings of Itamar Singer on the End of the Late Bronze Age in Anatolia and the Levant, WAW Supplements 1 (Atlanta: SBL, 2011); Eric Cline, Sailing the Wine-Dark Sea: International Trade and the Late Bronze Age Aegean (Oakville, CT: David Brown Book Co, 2009).83. Cf. e.g. Day, Conquest.84. In particular, keeping in mind the principle of Occam's razor, that the documents have been read as supporting settler colonialism fits perfectly with the idea that they themselves were produced by settler colonialism.85. Such as e.g. Kitchen, On the Reliability.86. See Kuhn, Structure; Paul K. Feyerabend, Against Method, 3rd ed. (London: Verso, 1993; 4th ed. in 2010).87. Cf. Kuhn, Structure; Feyerabend, Against Method.88. It is not possible to really get into the debate on dating biblical documents here. However, for a literary critical examination that enables a closer proximity to the events, see Pitkänen, Central Sanctuary and Centralization of Worship in Ancient Israel: from the Settlement to the Building of Solomon's Temple, 2nd Gorgias Press Edition (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press; first edition 2003). See also the considerations in Pitkänen, Joshua.89. While to my knowledge I am the first person to suggest the settler colonial character of the relevant texts and history in an explicit settler colonial sense, the issues under discussion have already largely been pointed out as such in their individual detail. It is suggested here that seeing matters from a settler colonial perspective greatly clarifies the issues and provides for an enhanced discussion.90. See Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 95–116.91. Cf. Davies, Immoral Bible, 63–100, 101–19.92. See Davies, Immoral Bible, 3–100.93. A good summary of such approaches is Earl, 'Reading Joshua as Christian Scripture'. See also Brett, Decolonising God, esp. 62–93.94. The myth of an empty or 'virgin' land is one powerful parallel to this; see Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 83–8.95. Cf. Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 89–90.96. Ibid.97. Keith W. Whitelam, The Invention of Ancient Israel: The Silencing of Palestinian History (Abingdon/New York: Routledge, 1996).98. See e.g. Veracini, Israel and Settler Society.99. Cf. Veracini, Settler Colonialism, 112–15.100. For example, Brett, Decolonising God.101. For some of this, see Shlomo Sand, The Invention of the Jewish People (London: Verso, 2009); Idem., The Invention of the Land of Israel (London: Verso, 2012).102. See e.g. Marc Ferro, Colonization: A Global History (London: Routledge, 1997; Original French edn 1994).103. See e.g. Avi Shlaim, The Iron Wall: Israel and the Arab World (London/New York: Penguin Books, 2000); Sand, Invention of the Jewish People; Idem., Invention of the Land of Israel; cf. Ilan Pappe, A History of Modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoples (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).104. See e.g. Robert G. Clouse, The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1977) at a popular level; cf. John M. Court, Approaching the Apocalypse: A Short History of Christian Millenarianism (London: I.B. Tauris, 2008).105. As suggested by Davies, Immoral Bible.106. Granted, many modern missionary organizations have already embraced such an approach.107. Cf. e.g. Michael Mann, The Dark Side of Democracy: Explaining Ethnic Cleansing (Cambridge: CUP, 2005).