In this
book, meant as a textbook for a college-level course, Miller and Hayes,
professors at Emory University’s School of Theology, guide the reader through
archaeological and biblical evidence and history of the two Yahwist kingdoms of
Israel and Judah. I found the analysis in the book really interesting, and I especially
like the convergences and differences within the biblical and archaeological
records. I think that it gives us a much better understanding of both the bible
and the history of the region.
One very
cool aspect of the book and the history it describes is the analysis of the
ethnic group that would become the Hebrews of Israel and Judah. Hayes and
Miller suggest that the people that would eventually make up those kingdoms
were not likely to have come in a huge exodus with a pre-established culture.
More likely, they argue, is that they were nomadic Aramaeans who settled in the
Levant and mostly adopted Canaanite culture. This is because there is no significant
break in architectural or artistic styles in the time when Hebrews emerged as a
people. Something interesting in the biblical record that may support this is
that in the table of nations (Genesis 10), Israelites are identified as closely
related to the peoples of the Transjordan, such as they Edomites, Moabites, and
Ammonites. The Edomites are supposedly descended from Esau, Isaac’s first son.
The Israelites were not, in the table of nations, identified closely with the
peoples of the coastal zone, the Philistines and the Phoenicians. This is an
interesting sort of cultural/historical memory that may have existed, informing
ideas about who is related to who. Similarly, within the tribes of Israel, it’s
interesting to think about how the bible must have been written looking backwards
for explanations about why the tribes are where they are and why certain tribes
are related with others. For example, the Levites were the only tribe with no
land. They were, in the bible, commanded by God to live off of the other tribes
and serve as their priests. Hayes and Miller argue that this explanation was
developed afterwards to explain what archaeological evidence suggests- which is
that Levites were a priestly line first and subsumed into the “tribes of Israel”
second.
Hayes
and Miller assert that Saul, David, and Solomon, the three kings of the united
Jewish state based in Jerusalem, were likely real people or based on real people
who were local kings. The Late Bronze Age, when they would have lived, is
largely thought of as a dark age, as most written sources disappear, At that
time, it was easier for a small state like David’s to survive, as empires
receded. However, after the splitting of the kingdom into Israel and Judah, both
kingdoms would face more and more pressure from renascent empires: Egypt,
Assyria, and Babylon. Power had probably declined somewhat by the time of Solomon.
Saul and David had been moderately powerful warlords, but under Solomon, the
kingdom settled down and he forced Israelites to labor on major projects. When
his son, Rehoboam, told the tribes of Israel (mainly Ephraim) that he would
continue this, they seceded, leaving Judah in control of Jerusalem and the south
and Israel in control of the north. It didn’t help that five years after Solomon’s
death, an Egyptian pharaoh invaded Israel. In the bible, he is called Shishak
and is believed to be known to Egyptians as Sheshonk I, which causes the
biblical timeline some problems. This was probably occurring in the 10th-9th
centuries BC.
Much of
the Old Testament can be described as a work by Judean priests consolidating
power in Jerusalem. For example, the story of the golden calf is likely
inspired by the fact that non-Levite priests made golden calves in Bethel. The
bible was written from the perspective of Levite priests in Jerusalem, so it
often condemns idols, worship outside of Jerusalem, and sacrifices not made
with Levite priests, all things that they opposed. As such, it is ironic that
the bible portrays the northern kingdom of Israel as the weaker and less
important of the two when archaeological evidence suggests that it was far more
powerful than Judah, controlling better land and trade routes. Rather, it is
that the bible was finished after the destruction of Israel by Assyria and
seeks to rationalize this and settle scores with the Israelites by condemning
their religious practices. While the bible says little of Israelite kings and
generally has bad things to say when it does say much, Israel hit its zenith
under Omri and Ahab, making Judah its vassal state for most of their history.
The Israelites, being that their capital (Samaria) was on major trade routes,
built temples in their cities to other gods, as more foreigners passed through.
The bible condemns Ahab specifically for building a temple to Ba’al, a Phoenician
god. Interestingly, Ba’al and “El,” a term for god used in Judaism today, are
likely derived from the same, much earlier religious belief. Apparently it had
not bothered the king of Judea much at the time, as King Jehoshaphat brought
Judea closer to Israel under Ahab, just a few generations after the schism.
There is an interesting theory that the two kingdoms briefly united again, as
Jehoshaphat’s son, Jehoram shares a name with his contemporary in Israel,
suggesting that they may have been the same person. Even if the two did not unite,
intermarriage between the royal houses was common.
The
Omride line ended in Israel with a palace coup by someone named Jehu. He and
his son Jehoahaz would rule an Israeli kingdom under Assyrian domination. Jehoahaz’s
son Joash was challenged by the Judahite king Amaziah, who must have resented
Jerusalem’s subservience to Samaria. He would lose, and Joash’s response in
Second Kings 14:9-10 is amazing. He said, “A thorn bush on Lebanon sent to a
cedar on Lebanon, saying, ‘Give your daughter to my son for a wife’; but a wild
animal of Lebanon passed by and trampled down the thorn bush. You have indeed
defeated Edom, and your heart has lifted you up. Be content with your glory, and
stay at home; for why should you provoke trouble so that you fall, you and Judah
with you?” Basically, “you think you’re tough, but you’re not.” Israel was
definitely on the up-and-up during the reign of Joash (804-789) and his son
Jeroboam II (788-748). But by the time Tiglath-Pileser III came to the throne
of Assyria in 745, that national restoration was already fading.
There
were coups and a failed invasion of Judah, and Israel was weakened. It paid
tribute to Assyria under Ahaz in 733, but Hoshea rebelled in 722, and Assyria
destroyed Samaria, the Israelite capital, and annexed the kingdom, a tremendous
trauma for Israel. Judea survived under Assyrian domination despite a failed
rebellion under Hezekiah in 701. During the lengthy reign of Manasseh
(689-644), Judea was a vassal of Assyria. The reign of Josiah (641-610) is
particularly interesting. This is not only because Assyria collapsed during his
reign, giving Judah more room to breathe (though they really just traded
Assyria for Egypt as a master), but because the bible has a lot to say about him.
It is during his reign that Deuteronomy is “discovered” while repairing the
temple, although most scholars believe it was just written during his reign. He
also purged the religious institutions and centralized religion in Jerusalem,
something that would be codified in the bible. There is also a prediction found
in 1 Kings 13:1-2 of Josiah’s birth, something that modern-day scholars believe
was a piece of propaganda by Josiah himself. Josiah ended up not turning out to
be such a great king, as he was killed by Pharoah Neco II in 610 (2 Kings
23:29) for unknown reasons. The kingly line of Jerusalem would continue until King
Zedekiah, against the advice of Jeremiah, rebelled against the new player on
the scene: Babylon. You know the rest of the story. Babylon captures Jerusalem
and destroys the Temple in 586 and the Babylonian captivity begins.
Something
that really made me think while I read this book is that the authors almost
never mention “Judaism,” which comes from the same word as Judah. Rather, they
call it Yahwism, the worship of Yahweh. It is interesting to think about how
seemingly random and lucky is that this one primitive religion survived all
these wars and competing peoples at the time. There must have been a million
little kingdoms like Israel and Judah all over the world throughout history
that worshipped and maintained independence for a time that were eventually
swallowed up and forgotten. It is incredible to me that the Jewish people have
survived all of this and even returned to the land of our ancestors. That, to
me, is miraculous. The book is certainly academic but is very clear and offers
great information about the time period. I want to read something next about
the period of time under Persia, then Greece, and then Rome until the Second
Temple was destroyed.
Miscellaneous Facts:
- The name “Crimea” comes from the nomadic tribe “Cimmeria”
- Most Old Testament names that end in “iah,” like Jeremiah, Nehemiah, and Azamiah, are derived from the same root as “Yahweh,” which is clearer when you see the Hebrew.
- Scythians from Siberia raided as far as Egypt during the time of Jeremiah
No comments:
Post a Comment