Origin of the Hebrews

This was a class on Israelite origins, if you couldn't figure that out...

Key Questions:

When did the Hebrews/Israelites first emerge as a nation? Where did they come from?

There are a few issues that we need to look at. The first is what can we find independently of the Bible. The second is how much we can ‘rely’ on what the Bible says- in other words, can we establish the traditions as generally accurate or not?

Traditional Narrative:

Abraham migrates from Ur, via Haran, to Canaan (i.e. Israel). Thus, the Hebrews are ‘from the opposite side of the river’ (Euphrates) ‘were you forefathers.’ The word עבר means ‘opposite.’ Biblical Chronology indicates that Abraham lived about 4000 years ago. Abraham had Isaac, who subsequently had Jacob. Jacob then had 12 sons, who became the 12 Tribes of Israel.

So, what we need to confirm is:

1) Do Ancient Israelites come from Mesopotamia?

2) Did they make a pit stop in Haran? (seemingly smaller point)

3) Is the timeframe correct?

Thus far, there has been no psychical evidence of the Patriarchs, but that’s not that surprising. Although the Bible does claim Abraham’s relative importance, he is clearly not within society’s power structure, being at most a distinguished outsider. Thus, it would be unlikely that any Canaanite sources talk about him.

So what do archaeologists try to do here? They try to find background information to make the Biblical story seem likely or unlikely, based on certain markers within the text and within the material and political history of ancient cultures. So what relevant information have they found about the Ancient Near and Middle East?

-lots of other possible migrations- Abraham migrating wasn’t so weird.

-concordance of names: cognates of Abraham and Isaac were common in Mesopotamia about 2000 BCE.

-lots of people migrated also

- Mari (halfway between Haran and Ur) was a normal place for people to go through when traveling; otherwise why didn’t Abraham just go straight to Israel?

-genetics!

Nuzi Tablets

When these were discovered they seemed to give the Bible a lot of context. Many of these interpretations have been disputed.

a) barren wife giving a handmaiden to her husband (i.e. Hagar)

b) bride chosen for the son by the father (i.e. Rebekah)

c) dowry paid to the father-in-law (i.e. Jacob)

d) work done to pay a dowry (i.e. Jacob)

e) the unchanging oral will of a father (i.e. Isaac)

f) father giving his daughter a slave-girl (i.e. Leah, Rachel)

g) sentence of death for stealing a cult gods (i.e. Jacob).

However, many of these practices continued for the next 1500, so even if these interpretations are accurate, maybe all they tell us is that the Bible was written in the Middle East.

Alternative Theories:

Habiru

The relationship between the Habiru and the Hebrews would be quite difficult to prove, but if found accurate they lend some hope. The Habiru were indeed from Mesopotamia/Babylonia, and did invade Canaan. This would discount the Exodous- they went straight from the Middle East to the Near East. As well, it would seemingly discount Abraham as the father of the Israelites.

However, many scholars interpret the Habiru as representative of a socio-economic class, rather than an ethnicity. This doesn’t necessarily dissuade us from claiming the Habiru as the precursors to Israelites, it would simply mean that the Israelites don’t have a common ancestor.

Israelites were Canaanites!? Biblical Minimalists Abound!

So, we don’t have much to confirm the accuracy of the Biblical account, and maybe there are other explanations for Israel’s genesis. Israel Finkelstein concludes that the Israelites were actually Canaanite separatists.

-common material culture between Canaanites and Israelites- however, does this actually prove anything? Maybe the Hebrews were just trying to keep up with the Hurriyas?

-some of the tribal names seem to either predate the Israelites conquest (another contentious matter) and others seem to be based off of Semitic gods. (also descedant from handmaidens, and later added on)

-Dan- may have come from Denyen, one of the Sea Peoples who invaded the Ancient World

What we definitely know

1) That there definitely existed a group identifiable as Israel by 1200 BCE, as indicated by the Merneptah Stele.

2) That these separatist communities likely practised some form of Kashrut, as evidenced by bones found at these sites.

3) They were materially similar to the Canaanites, but a whole lot poorer.

So what do we do with the Biblical Narrative?

Is it all made up? Is it reliable, and archaeologists just haven’t found the evidence yet? How would Finkelstein’s conclusions affect someone who does believe in the authenticity of the Torah?

There are many unquoted sources here. In addition, these were the notes, not the entirety of the class- please take that into consideration...