Israeli
Founder Contests Founding Myths
The Torah (or Old Testament) is a master
work of literature and faith, but it tells
many mythological tales that have little or
no basis in real history, as Uri Avnery, one
of Israel’s founders, has had the courage to
declare, with an introduction from retired
U.S. diplomat William R. Polk.
By William R. Polk
January 03, 2015 "ICH"
- The speech below is from the great Israeli
commentator Uri Avnery, a former Irgun
terrorist who fought for the creation of
Israel; he also was a member of the Israeli
parliament. What he has to say is not
exactly new. Much of it has been pointed out
by many of us historians for a long time and
by other Israeli scholars.
The political effects of the
myth on the creation of Israel
are laid out by Shlomo Sand in his
The Invention of the Jewish People and
On the Nation and the Jewish People.
But since neither the reality nor the
critique of the myth is known to many, even
practicing Jews, and what we know to be
factual is firmly disbelieved by many, even
practicing Christians, and because, like
many religious myths, it can be lethal, the
story deserves attention.
We are having enough
trouble trying to make peace without being
blindsided by myths. So I welcome having the
myths treated as they should be treated, as
myths, openly by a hero of the Israeli
nation. Only if much of the imagination
about the past and much of the basis of
current ideology can be cleared away do we
have a chance.
Uri Avnery’s
keynote speech at Israel’s Kinneret College
conference on “the Rock of our Existence –
the connection between Archeology and
Ideology”:
First of all, let me thank
you for inviting me to address this
important conference. I am neither a
professor nor a doctor. Indeed, the highest
academic title I ever achieved was SEC
(Seventh Elementary Class). But like many
members of my generation, from early youth I
took a profound interest in archeology. I
shall try to explain why.
When asking themselves
about my connection with archeology, some of
you will think about Moshe Dayan. After the
June 1967 war, Dayan was a national – even
international – idol. He was also known for
his obsession with archeology.
My magazine, “Haolam Hazeh,”
investigated his activities and found that
they were highly destructive. He started
digging alone and collecting artifacts all
over the country. Since the primary aim of
archeology is not simply to discover
artifacts but also to date them, and thus to
put together a picture of the consecutive
history of the site, Dayan’s uncontrolled
digging created havoc. The fact that he used
army resources only worsened matters.
Then we discovered that
not only did Dayan expropriate the artifacts
which he found (which by law belonged to the
state) and stock them at his home, but he
had also become an international dealer,
getting rich by selling articles “from the
personal collection of Moshe Dayan.”
Publishing these facts and
speaking about them in the Knesset bestowed
on me a singular distinction. At the time, a
public opinion institute identified every
year the “most hated person” in Israel. That
year, I attained that honor.
However, the important
question does not concern Dayan’s morals but
a much more profound matter: Why were Dayan
and so many of us at the time concerned with
archeology, a science considered by many
people as a rather dreary business? It held
for us a profound fascination.
That Zionist generation
was the first one born in the country
(though I myself was born in Germany). For
their parents, Palestine was an abstract
homeland, a land they had dreamed about in
the synagogues of Poland and Ukraine. For
their native-born sons and daughters it was
a natural homeland. They were yearning for
roots. They trekked to every corner, spent
nights around a campfire, came to know every
hill and valley.
For them, the Talmud and
all the religious texts were a bore. The
Talmud and other scriptures had sustained
the Jews in the Diaspora for centuries, but
evoked no interest here. The new generation
embraced the Hebrew Bible with unbounded
enthusiasm, not as a religious book (almost
all of us were atheists) but as an
unequalled masterpiece of Hebrew literature.
Since they were also the
first generation for whom the rejuvenated
Hebrew was their mother tongue, they fell in
love with the lively, concrete Biblical
Hebrew language. The much more
sophisticated, abstract language of the
Talmud and other later books repelled them.
The Biblical events had
taken place in the country they knew. The
Biblical battles had been fought in the
valleys they knew, the kings had been
crowned and buried in the localities they
knew intimately.
They had looked at night
at the stars of Megiddo, where the Egyptians
had fought the first recorded battle in
history (and where, according to the
Christian New Testament, the last battle –
the battle of Armageddon – will take place).
They stood on Mount Carmel, where the
prophet Elias had slaughtered the priests of
Baal. They had visited Hebron, where Abraham
had been buried by his two sons, Ishmael and
Isaac, fathers of the Arabs and the Jews.
This passionate attachment
to the country was by no means preordained.
Indeed, Palestine played no role in the
birth of modern political Zionism. As I have
mentioned before, the founding father,
Theodor Herzl, did not think about Palestine
when he invented what became known as
Zionism. He hated Palestine and its climate.
Especially he hated Jerusalem, which to him
was a foul and dirty town.
In the first draft of his
idea, which was addressed to the Rothschild
family, the land of his dream was Patagonia,
in Argentina. There, in recent times, a
genocide had taken place, and the land was
almost empty. It was only the sentiments of
the Jewish masses in Eastern Europe that
compelled Herzl to redirect his efforts
towards Palestine. In his founding book,
Der Judenstaat (“the Jewish State”),
the relevant chapter is less than a page
long and entitled “Palestine or Argentina.”
The Arab population is not mentioned at all.
Once the Zionist movement
directed its thoughts towards Palestine, the
ancient history of this country became a hot
issue. The Zionist claim to Palestine was
solely based on the Biblical history of the
Exodus, the conquest of Canaan, the kingdoms
of Saul, David and Solomon and the events of
those times. Since almost all the founding
fathers were avowed atheists, they could
hardly base themselves on the “fact” the God
had personally promised the land to the seed
of Abraham.
So, with the coming of the
Zionists to Palestine, a frantic
archeological search started. The country
was combed for real, scientific proof that
the Biblical story was not just a bunch of
myths, but real honest-to-God history. (Pun
intended.) Christian Zionists came even
earlier.
There started a veritable
attack on archeological sites. The upper
layers of Ottoman and Mamelukes, Arabs and
Crusaders, Byzantines and Romans and Greeks
and Persians were uncovered and removed in
order to lay bare the ancient layer of the
Children of Israel and to prove the Bible
right.
Huge efforts were made.
David Ben-Gurion, a self-appointed Biblical
scholar, led the effort. The Chief of Staff
of the army, Yigael Yadin, the son of an
archeologist, and himself a professional
archeologist, searched ancient sites to
prove that the Conquest of Canaan really
happened. Alas, no proof.
When remnants of the bones
of Bar Kochba’s fighters were discovered in
Judean desert caves, they were buried on
Ben-Gurion’s orders in a big military
ceremony. The uncontested fact that Bar
Kochba had caused perhaps the greatest
catastrophe in Jewish history was glossed
over.
And the result? Incredible
as it sounds, four generations of devoted
archeologists, with a burning conviction and
huge resources, did produce exactly:
Nothing.
From the beginning of the
effort to this very day, not a single piece
of evidence of the ancient history was
found. Not a single indication that the
exodus from Egypt, the basis of Jewish
history, ever happened. Nor of the 40 years
of wandering in the desert. No evidence of
the conquest of Canaan, as described at
length in the Book of Joshua. The mighty
King David, whose kingdom extended –
according to the Bible – from the Sinai
peninsula to the north of Syria, did not
leave a trace. (Lately an inscription with
the name David was discovered, but with no
indication that this David was a king.)
Israel appears for the
first time in sound archeological findings
in Assyrian inscriptions, which describe a
coalition of local kingdoms which tried to
stop the Assyrian advance into Syria. Among
others, King Ahab of Israel is mentioned as
the chief of a considerable military
contingent. Ahab, who ruled today’s Samaria
(in the north of the occupied West Bank)
from 871 BC until 852 BC was not beloved by
God, though the Bible describes him as a war
hero. He marks the beginning of the entry of
Israel into proven history.
All these are negative
pieces of evidence suggesting that the early
Biblical story is invented. Since
practically no trace whatsoever of the early
Biblical story has been found, does this
prove that it is all fiction? Perhaps not.
But real proof does exist.
Egyptology is a scientific
discipline that is separate from Palestinian
archeology. But Egyptology proves
conclusively that the Biblical history until
King Ahab is indeed fiction.
Up to now, many tens of
thousands of Egyptian documents have been
deciphered, and the work is still going on.
After the Hyksos from Asia invaded Egypt in
1730 BC, the Pharaohs of Egypt took very
great pains to watch the happenings in
Palestine and Syria. Year after year,
Egyptian spies, traders and soldiers
reported in great detail on events in every
town of Canaan. Not a single item has been
found, telling of anything remotely
resembling Biblical events. (A single
mention of “Israel” on an Egyptian stele is
believed to refer to a small territory in
the south of Palestine.)
Even if one would like to
believe that the Bible only exaggerates real
events, the fact is that not even a tiny
mention of the exodus, the conquest of
Canaan or King David has been found. They
just did not happen.
Is this important? Yes and
no. The Bible is not real history. It is a
monumental religious and literary document,
that has inspired untold millions throughout
the centuries. It has formed the minds of
many generations of Jews, Christians and
Muslims.
But history is something
else. History tells us what really happened.
Archeology is a tool of history, an
invaluable tool for the understanding of
what took place. These are two different
disciplines, and never the twain shall meet.
For the religious, the
Bible is a matter of belief. For
non-believers, the Hebrew Bible is a great
work of art, perhaps the greatest of all.
Archeology is something entirely different:
a matter of sober, proven facts.
Israeli schools teach the
Bible as real history. This means that
Israeli children learn only its chapters,
true or fictitious. When I once complained
about this in a Knesset speech, demanding
that the full history of the country
throughout the ages be taught, including the
chapters of the Crusades and the Mamelukes,
the then minister of education started to
call me “the Mameluke.”
I still believe that every
child in this country, Israeli and
Palestinian, should learn its full history,
from the earliest days to this day, with all
its layers. It is the basis of peace, the
real Rock Of Our Existence.