Once again, questions surrounding Gaza have captured the nation’s attention as pop culture is dragged into the debate.
Rapper Macklemore was dropped from Ed Sheeran’s tour after lecturing the audience about what he called a genocide in Gaza. Then we have comedians, like Bill Maher, who called Macklemore ignorant for his ideas on Gaza. Maher insists that it is not a genocide but a defensive war and that Jews have a historical right to live there.
These are complicated issues, and in some ways they are different questions. While both the Jews and Palestinians living there today claim ancestry from the ancient peoples who inhabited the region, both populations have experienced centuries of migration, intermarriage, and interaction with other nationalities and ethnic groups. As a result, neither population is genetically or culturally identical to the ancient peoples from whom they trace their ancestry.
What makes this even more difficult is that the biblical account does not always match up neatly with the historical one. As a Christian, I try to give the biblical perspective, but as a historian, I also must explain what historical evidence tells us.
The first important point is that in the beginning both historically or biblically in the land called Israel today, there were no political entities called Israel or Palestine. The land was inhabited by different peoples organized into tribes and cities. The Bible does not give a specific name to this region from Adam to Noah, but historians generally refer to this broader geographic area as the Levant.
The first name for the region that appears in the Bible is Canaan. Canaan was the son of Ham, who was the son of Noah. History agrees that a civilization known as Canaan emerged during this time. The Bible also describes Abraham as coming through the lineage of Noah’s other son, Shem, showing the ancient Israelites and Canaanites as related peoples. We see this area first named when Abraham arrives from Mesopotamia in the land of Canaan, which was already populated by Canaanites.
This is where the Bible and history diverge. There is no solid, independent, historical evidence for Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob. That does not mean they did not exist; it means there is currently no historical evidence outside the Bible.
Abraham’s importance comes from the biblical covenant. God promised Abraham that his descendants would inherit the land of Canaan. Abraham then had two sons, Isaac, whose descendants became the Israelites, and Ishmael, whose descendants, according to Jewish,
Christian, and Muslim tradition, became Arabs. Isaac then had Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel. Jacob had 12 sons, traditionally regarded as the ancestors of the Twelve Tribes of Israel. The biblical story therefore presents the Israelites as descendants of Abraham who were promised a land that was already occupied by the Canaanites.
Next comes Egypt. The Bible has Jacob and his family leaving Canaan and traveling to Egypt during a famine, where the Israelite population eventually became enslaved. Moses later led the Israelites out of Egypt, and Joshua led them back into Canaan.
There is no historical evidence that independently proves this entire story exactly as it is described in the Bible. Archaeologists have not found evidence demonstrating that all 12 tribes left Egypt together in a massive migration under Moses. There is, however, evidence that makes portions of the broader story historically plausible. Egyptian records show that people from Canaan lived in Egypt and that some foreigners were used as forced laborers. It is therefore historically possible that groups of people left Egypt and eventually became part of the populations living in Canaan.
The best early archaeological evidence for the existence of Israel comes from around 1208 BC. The Egyptian Merneptah Stele refers to a people called Israel who were clearly present in Canaan at that time. Archaeologists have also found numerous new settlements appearing in the central highlands of Canaan around this period. Their material culture is associated with the emergence of early Israel, meaning they emerged within the broader population of Canaan.
Historically, there are three main explanations for how the Israelites emerged in Canaan. First is the conquest model, which most closely resembles the biblical account. It argues that a large Israelite population came from Egypt and conquered Canaan. Second, the indigenous model argues that the Israelites developed primarily from Canaanite populations already living in the land, gradually developing a distinct cultural and religious identity. Finally, the mixed model combines the two. It proposes that most Israelites may have come from local Canaanite populations, but that smaller groups from outside the region, possibly including people who had lived in Egypt, joined them, and became part of the emerging Israelite people.
What is most interesting is that when we talk about the modern question of who conquered whom and who has the right to the land, the two scientific models in some ways give Israel a better shared historical claim to the land than the biblical account of Israel coming in and conquering the land from the Canaanites.
As for modern Israel, it is difficult to determine who “should” possess the land based solely on an “I was here first” model. If you go back far enough, the lines separating the two peoples become increasingly difficult to draw. In fact, according to the historical and archaeological evidence, the story may be even more complicated because the ancient peoples who eventually became Israelites emerged from the Canaanite population, giving them an equal claim.
In the end, however, whoever originally owned the land centuries ago does not necessarily answer the modern question of who should possess it. You would be hard-pressed to find any population today living in exactly the place where their ancestors first originated.
James Finck is a professor of American history at the University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma. He can be reached at james.finck@swoknews.com. Thanks to the Southwest Ledger and the Lawton Constitution for sharing his column.
