The Emergence of the Israelites

1. The Emergence of the Israelites

2. Settlement: • (See Textbook, pp. 69-98) • The books of Joshua and Judges are part of the Deuteronomistic History; • Theology of this history may be summarized (Deut 28-30): • when Israel is faithful to Yahweh and follows the Torah it will prosper; • when Israel sins, e.g., mixing the cult of Yahweh with Canaanite elements, the nation will suffer national defeat; • thus, a cycle: sin; punishment; repentance; forgiveness; restoration. • (see Judges 3.7-11; 3.12-30; 4.1-5.31; etc.).

3. Settlement: • thus, a theological interpretation of history; • as a result, Finkelstein says that we must turn to archaeology and extra-biblical texts to learn about the emergence of Israel in the central highlands of Palestine in the 12th-11th century; • the Merneptah Stele: testifies to the presence of an “Israel” in Canaan in the late 13th century BC; • archaeology provides evidence of a wave of settlement in the highlands of Canaan at about the same time.

4. Merneptah Stele: • Merneptah (1213-1203 BC) (13th son of Ramesses II); • the stele primarily commemorates a victory in a campaign against the Libu and Meshwesh Libyans and their Sea Peoples allies ( in Year 5…, that is, 1209/1208 BC); • however, final two lines refer to a prior military campaign in Canaan at the end of the 13th century; • the conquest of three cities: Ashkelon, Gezer, and Yanoam; and • the annihilation of a group of people called “Israel”; • thus, evidence for the presence of a group by the name Israel in Canaan at this time (a people; not a country).

5. Merneptah Stele – Thebes (granite stone)

6. Merneptah Stele (318 x 163 cm).

7. Route described on the Merneptah Stele.

8. Settlement: • (See Textbook, pp. 69-98) • Intensive archaeological surface surveys in the central hill country of Palestine and elsewhere; • reveal an entirely new settlement pattern in Iron Age I (1200-1000 BC – traditional dating); • hundreds of new, small sites were inhabited in the mountainous areas of the Upper and Lower Galilee, in the hills of Samaria and Ephraim, in Benjamin, in the northern Negev, and in parts of central and northern Transjordan (however, not in southern Transjordan); • can much of this activity be related to the Israelites or proto-Israelites?

9. Tribal Allotment According to the Bible.

11. Settlement: • in Galilee: small agricultural villages ca. 1 acre in area; • at Hazor and Dan: occupational strata attributable to the Israelites? • in Lower Galilee; • in the Central Hill Country: evidence of intensive settlement: • largest villages were 10-20 acres in area; • others ranged between 2-5 acres or less; • in Ephraim: very small, extending from a few houses to 1.1.5 acres of built-up area; • for example: Shiloh, `Ai, Bethel, Khirbet Raddanah, and `Izbet Sartah.

12. Settlement: • In the land of Benjamin: • some 12 Iron Age I (1200-1000 BC) sites, for example, Tell en-Nasbeh, Tell el-Ful. • In the hills of Judah: • sites attributable to the Israelite settlement is almost completely non-existent in the Hebron hills south of Bethlehem; • the site of Giloh, south of Jerusalem, in an exception.

15. Settlement: • In the region of Arad and the Beersheba Valley: • no Late Bronze Age settlements, and only a few sites established in the Iron Age I, for example, Tel Masos (a 20-acre site);

16. Settlement: - Population: 60, 000 according to Finkelstein.

17. Settlement: • Many of the early Iron Age I agricultural settlements abandoned at the end of the 11th century BC; • is this related to the concentration of population in the emerging towns in the period of the Monarchy, from the 10th century onward?

18. Finkelstein’s Position on the Emergence of Israel: • Much in common with two previous waves of occupation in these areas; • processes of sedentarization and nomadization of indigenous groups in response to changing conditions; • much of Iron I settlement was part of a long-term cycle: • the early Israelites were, in fact, Canaanites.

19. Finkelstein’s Position on the Emergence of Israel: • - the outcome: the emergence of the Israelite and Judahite territorial states; • The historical emergence of the Israelite state around 900 BC in the northern highlands; • the biblical depiction of the rise of early Israel was shaped by the rise of the Judahite state in the late Iron II period; • this depiction cast by the Deuteronomistic Historian to serve Judah’s purposes; • the biblical narrative of the emergence of Israel held sway until archaeology came to the center stage of historical research on Canaan-Israel.

20. Mazar’s Position: • Nothing in the archaeological findings points to the foreign origin of the hill-country settlers; • a combination of components from all three theories on the Conquest/Settlement may explain the hill-country settlement as a complex process; • the origins of the groups could have been quite diverse: • some could have been local pastoralists; • others could have been pastoralists arriving from Transjordan or other parts of the country; • the archaeological evidence appears to depict a settlement process involving tribal groups; • possibly included are displaced Canaanites or immigrants from Syria, that is, refugees.

21. Mazar’s Position: • Who was responsible for the traditions concerning the sojourn in Egypt, the Exodus, Mount Sinai, and the figure of Moses? • perhaps the “Shasu of Se`ir” of the Egyptian inscriptions; • Shasu Yahwi: in Egyptian texts as well; • Yahweh comes from Seir, that is, Edom (Judg 5.4, see also Deut 33.2); • Shasu are related to Edom in the Egyptian sources; • Frank Cross: the “Moses group” migrated during the 13th-12th centuries BC from Egypt to Midian (see Exodus 2.15-22; 3.1) then to Edom and Canaan bringing the new religion, Yahwism, with them.