According to the Bible, the Israelites are the descendants of Jacob, a patriarch who was later renamed as Israel. Following a severe drought in Canaan, Jacob and his twelve sons fled to Egypt, where they eventually formed the Twelve Tribes of Israel. The Israelites were later led out of slavery in Egypt by Moses and conquered Canaan under Joshua's leadership, who was Moses's successor. Most modern scholars agree that the Torah does not provide an authentic account of the Israelites' origins, and instead view it as constituting their national myth. However, it is supposed that there may be a "historical core" to the narrative.[17][18][19] The Bible also portrays the kingdoms of Israel and Judah as the successors of an earlier United Kingdom of Israel, though the historicity of the latter is disputed.[20][21]
The first reference to Israel in non-biblical sources is found in the Merneptah Stele in c.1209 BCE. The inscription is very brief and says: "Israel is laid waste and his seed is not". The inscription refers to a people, not an individual or nation state,[26] who are located in central Palestine[27] or the highlands of Samaria.[28] Some Egyptologists suggest that Israel appeared in earlier topographical reliefs, dating to the Nineteenth Dynasty (i.e. reign of Ramesses II) or the Eighteenth Dynasty,[29] but this reading remains controversial.[30][31]
In the Hebrew Bible, Israel first appears in Genesis 32:29, where an angel gives the name to Jacob after the latter fought with him.[32][33][34] The folk etymology given in the text derives Israel from yisra, "to prevail over" or "to struggle with", and El, a Canaanite-Mesopotamiancreator god that is tenuously identified with Yahweh.[35][36] However, modern scholarship interprets El as the subject, "El rules/struggles",[37][38][39] from sarar (שָׂרַר) 'to rule'[40] (cognate with sar (שַׂר) 'ruler',[41]Akkadianšarru 'ruler, king'[42]), which is likely cognate with the similar root sara (שׂרה) "fought, strove, contended".[43][44]
Afterwards, Israel refers to the direct descendants of Jacob,[45][46] a view that was reinforced by Second Temple Judaism.[46] Some scholars suggest that the Israelite identity was much more inclusive and included gentiles (i.e. resident aliens) who assimilated in the Israelite community.[45][46] In fact, it was likely that tribal membership in Israel was based on one's self-declared allegiance or residency within an assigned tribal territory (Ezekiel 47:21–23).[46][12][47]Israel might also exclusively refer to a religious identity,[48][49][50] with Troy W. Martin arguing that it was based on 'covenantal circumcision' rather than ancestry (Genesis 17:9–14).[50]
Israel was also known as Hebrew or son of Israel. These ethnonyms may refer to literal descent or as contextual-based ethnonyms. I.e. Hebrew referred to Israelites of immigrant or economically impoverished backgrounds.[51][52][53][54]Son of Israel referred to citizens/members of the Israelite community after Israel's biological family transitioned from a clan to a society (Exodus 1:9).[55] They were also known as son of God, reflective of the Hebrew Bible's attempt to portray Israel as a wayward son who is disciplined and nurtured by Yahweh.[56]
In a secular context, Israel refers to a population with a distinct material culture in Iron Age Levant.[12] During the period of the divided monarchy, it refers to the inhabitants of the northern Kingdom of Israel[57] although it later included the inhabitants of the southern kingdom. Israel is also contentiously contrasted with Jew/Judea, with Samaritans being recognized as non-Jewish Israelites for example.[58]
Biblical narrative
Summarize
Perspective
Mid-20th century mosaic of the 12 Tribes of Israel, from the Etz Yosef synagogue wall in Givat Mordechai, Jerusalem
The history of the Israelite people can be divided into these categories, according to the Hebrew Bible:[59]
As a monarchic state, the Israelite tribes were united by the leadership of Saul, David and Solomon. The reigns of Saul and David were marked by military victories and Israel's transition to a mini-empire with vassal states.[62][63] Solomon's reign was relatively more peaceful and oversaw the construction of the First Temple,[64] with the help of Phoenician allies.[65] This Temple was where the Ark of the Covenant was stored; its former location was the City of David.[66]
Map of the Holy Land, Pietro Vesconte, 1321, showing the allotments of the tribes of Israel. Described by Adolf Erik Nordenskiöld as "the first non-Ptolemaic map of a definite country"[67]The monarchic state was divided into two states, Israel and Judah, due to civil and religious disputes. Eventually, Israel and Judah met their demise after the Assyrian and Babylonian invasions respectively. According to the Biblical prophets, these invasions were divine judgments for religious apostasy and corrupt leadership.
After the Babylonians invaded Judah, they deported most of its citizens to Babylon, where they lived as "exiles". Cyrus the Great conquered Babylon and established the First Persian Empire in 539BCE.[68] One year later, according to traditional dating, Cyrus permitted the Judahites to return to their homeland.[68] This homeland was re-named as the Province of Yehud, which eventually became a satrapy of Eber-Nari.[68]
This period is covered by the entirety of the Book of Daniel.
Persian Period (c. 539–331BCE)
In 537–520BCE, Zerubbabel became Yehud's governor and started work on the Second Temple, which was stopped.[69] In 520–516BCE, Haggai and Zechariah goaded the Judahites to resume work on the Temple. Upon completion, Joshua became its high priest.[69][69] In 458–433BCE, Ezra and Nehemiah led another group of Judahites to Yehud, with Artaxerxes's permission. Nehemiah rebuilt the temple after some unspecified disaster and removed foreign influence from the Judahite community.[70][71] That said, some Judahites elected to stay in Persia, where they almost faced annihilation.[72][73]
Efforts to confirm the biblical ethnogenesis of Israel through archaeology have largely been abandoned as unproductive.[19] Many scholars see the traditional narratives as national myths with little historical value, but some posit that a small group of exiled Egyptians contributed to the Exodus narrative.[b]William G. Dever cautiously identifies this group with the Tribe of Joseph, while Richard Elliott Friedman identifies it with the Tribe of Levi.[77][78]Josephus quoting Manetho identifies them with the Hyksos.[79][80] Other scholars believe that the Exodus narrative was a "collective memory" of several events from the Bronze Age.[81][82]
In addition, it is unlikely that the Israelites overtook the southern Levant by force, according to archaeological evidence. Instead, they branched out of indigenous Canaanite peoples that long inhabited the region, which included Syria, ancient Israel, and the Transjordan region.[83][84][85] Their culture was monolatristic, with a primary focus on Yahweh (or El) worship,[36] but after the Babylonian exile, it became monotheistic, with partial influence from Zoroastrianism. The latter decisively separated the Israelites from other Canaanites.[83][9][failed verification] The Israelites used the Canaanite script and communicated in a Canaanite language known as Biblical Hebrew. The language's modern descendant is today the only surviving dialect of the Canaanite languages.[86][87] Genetic studies show that contemporary ethnicities in the Levant were, like Israel, distinguished by their unique cultures, due to their descent from a common ancestral stock.[88][89]
Gary Rendsburg argues that some archaic biblical traditions and other circumstantial evidence point to the Israelites emerging from the Shasu and other seminomadic peoples from the desert regions south of the Levant, later settling in the highlands of Canaan.[90]
Several theories exist for the origins of historical Israelites. Some believe they descend from raiding groups, itinerant nomads such as Habiru and Shasu or impoverished Canaanites, who were forced to leave wealthy urban areas and live in the highlands.[94][27] The prevailing academic opinion is that the Israelites were a mixture of peoples predominately indigenous to Canaan, with additional input from an Egyptian matrix of peoples, which most likely inspired the Exodus narrative.[95][96][97] Israel's demographics were similar to the demographics of Ammon, Edom, Moab and Phoenicia.[96][98][pageneeded]
Besides their focus on Yahweh worship, Israelite cultural markers were defined by body, food, and time, including male circumcision, avoidance of pork consumption and marking time based on the Exodus, the reigns of Israelite kings, and Sabbath observance. The first two markers were observed by neighboring west Semites besides the Philistines, who were of Mycenaean Greek origin. As a result, intermarriage with other Semites was common.[12] But what distinguished Israelite circumcision from non-Israelite circumcision was its emphasis on 'correct' timing.[99][100] Israelite circumcision also served as a mnemonic sign for the circumcised, where their 'unnatural' erect circumcised penis would remind them to behave differently in sexual matters.[99]Yom-Tov Lipmann-Muhlhausen suggests that Israelite identity was based on faith and adherence to sex-appropriate commandments. For men, it was circumcision. For women, it was ritual sacrifice after childbirth (Leviticus 12:6).[101]
The Mount Ebal structure, seen by many archeologists as an early Israelite cultic site
Genealogy was another ethnic marker. Whilst it was likely that Israelite identity was not exclusively based on blood descent,[46][12][47] the Israelites used genealogy to engage in narcissism of small differences but also, self-criticism since their ancestors included morally questionable characters such as Jacob. Both these traits represented the "complexities of the Jewish soul".[12]
Names were significant in Israelite culture and indicated one's destiny and inherent character. Thus, a name change indicated a 'divine transformation' in one's 'destines, characters and natures'. These beliefs aligned with the Near Eastern cultural milieu, where names were 'intimately bound up with the very essence of being and inextricably intertwined with personality'.[100]
In terms of appearance, rabbis described the Biblical Jews as being "midway between black and white" and having the "color of the boxwood tree".[102] Assuming Yurco's debated claim that the Israelites are depicted in reliefs from Merneptah's temple at Karnak is correct,[103] the early Israelites may have wore the same attire and hairstyles as non-Israelite Canaanites.[104][105] Dissenting from this, Anson Rainey argued that the Israelites in the reliefs looked more similar to the Shasu.[106] Based on biblical literature, it is implied that the Israelites distinguished themselves from peoples like the Babylonians and Egyptians by not having long beards and chin tufts. However, these fashion practices were upper class customs.[107]
In the 12th century BCE, many Israelite settlements appeared in the central hill country of Canaan, which was formerly an open terrain. These settlements lacked evidence of pork consumption, compared to Philistine settlements, had four-room houses and lived by an egalitarian ethos, which was exemplified by the absence of elaborate tombs, governor's mansions, certain houses being bigger than others etc. They followed a mixed economy, which prioritized self-sufficiency, cultivation of crops, animal husbandry and small-scalecraft production. New technologies such as terraced farming, silos for grain storage and cisterns for rainwater collection were simultaneously introduced.[108]
These settlements were built by inhabitants of the "general Southland" (i.e. modern Sinai and the southern parts of Israel and Jordan), who abandoned their pastoral-nomadic ways. Canaanites who lived outside the central hill country were tenuously identified as Danites, Asherites, Zebulunites, Issacharites, Naphtalites and Gadites. These inhabitants do not have a significant history of migration besides the Danites, who allegedly originate from the Sea Peoples, particularly the Dan(an)u.[108][109] Nonetheless, they intermingled with the former nomads, due to socioeconomic and military factors. Their interest in Yahwism and its concern for the underprivileged was another factor. Possible allusions to this historical reality in the Hebrew Bible include the aforementioned tribes, except for Issachar and Zebulun, descending from Bilhah and Zilpah, who were viewed as "secondary additions" to Israel.[108]
El worship was central to early Israelite culture but currently, the number of El worshippers in Israel is unknown. It is more likely that different Israelite locales held different views about El and had 'small-scale' sacred spaces.[35][36]
Himbaza et al. (2012) states that Israelite households were typically ill-equipped to handle conflicts between family members, which may explain the harsh sexual taboos enforced against acts like incest, homosexuality, polygamy etc. in Leviticus 18–20. Whilst the death penalty was legislated for these 'secret crimes', they functioned as a warning, where offenders would confess out of fear and make appropriate reparations.[110]
Part of the gift-bearing Israelite delegation of King Jehu, Black Obelisk, 841–840BCE.[111]
The historicity of the United Monarchy is heavily debated among archaeologists and biblical scholars: biblical maximalists and centrists (Kenneth Kitchen, William G. Dever, Amihai Mazar, Baruch Halpern and others) argue that the biblical account is more or less accurate, while biblical minimalists (Israel Finkelstein, Ze'ev Herzog, Thomas L. Thompson and others) argue that Israel and Judah never split from a singular state. The debate has not been resolved, but recent archaeological discoveries by Eilat Mazar and Yosef Garfinkel show some support for the existence of the United Monarchy.[20]
From 850 BCE onwards, a series of inscriptions mention the "House of David". They came from Israel's neighbors.[112][113]
Compared to the United Monarchy, the historicity of the Kingdom of Israel and Judah is widely accepted by historians and archaeologists.[114]:169–195[115] Their destruction by the Assyrians and Babylonians respectively is also confirmed by archaeological evidence and extrabiblical sources.[13][116][117][118][119][114]:306
Christian Frevel argues that Yahwism was rooted in the culture of the Kingdom of Israel, who introduced it to the Kingdom of Judah via Ahab's expansions and sociopolitical cooperation, which was prompted by Hazael's conquests.[120] Frevel has also argued that Judah was a 'vassal-like' state to Israel, under the Omrides.[120] This theory has been rejected by other scholars, who argue that the archaeological evidence seems to indicate that Judah was an independent socio-political entity for most of the 9th century BCE.[121]
Avraham Faust argues that there was continued adherence to the 'ethos of egalitarianism and simplicity' in the Iron Age II (10th-6th century BCE). For example, there is minimal evidence of temples and complex tomb burials, despite Israel and Judah being more densely populated than the Late Bronze Age. Four-room houses remained the norm. In addition, royal inscriptions were scarce, along with imported and decorated pottery.[122] According to William G. Dever, Israelite identity in the 9th-8th centuries BCE can be identified through a combination of archaeological and cultural traits that distinguish them from their neighbors. These traits include being born and living within the territorial borders of Israel or Judah, speaking Hebrew, living in specific house types, using locally produced pottery, and following particular burial practices. Israelites were also part of a rural, kin-based society, and adhered to Yahwism, though not necessarily in a monotheistic way. Their material culture was simple but distinct, and their societal organization was centered around family and inheritance. These traits, while shared with some neighboring peoples, were uniquely Israelite in their specific combination.[123]
The Kingdom of Israel was conquered by the Neo-Assyrian Empire around 720 BCE.[124] The records of Sargon II of Assyria indicate that he deported part of the population to Assyria. Some Israelites migrated to the southern kingdom of Judah,[125] while those that remained in Samaria, concentrated mainly around Mount Gerizim, came to be known as Samaritans.[126][127] Foreign groups were also settled by the Assyrians in the territories of the conquered kingdom.[127] Research indicates that only a portion of the surviving Israelite population intermarried with Mesopotamians settlers.[128][129] In their native Samaritan Hebrew, the Samaritans identify as "Israel", "B'nai Israel" or "Shamerim/Shomerim" (i.e. "Guardians/Keepers/Watchers").[130][131][132][133] Despite this, belief in the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel emerged because of the heavy assimilation faced by Samarian deportees.[134]
With the fall of Babylon to the rising Achaemenid Persian Empire, king Cyrus the Great issued a proclamation known as the Edict of Cyrus, encouraging the exiles to return to their homeland after the Persians raised it as an autonomous Jewish-governed province named Yehud. Under the Persians (c.539–332 BCE), the returned Jewish population restored the city and rebuilt the Temple in Jerusalem. The Cyrus Cylinder is controversially cited as evidence for Cyrus allowing the Judeans to return.[139][140] The returnees showed a "heightened sense" of their ethnic identity and shunned exogamy, which was treated as a "permissive reality" in Babylon.[141][142] Circumcision was no longer a significant ethnic marker, with increased emphasis on genealogical descent or faith in Yahweh.[48][49] Jason A. Staples argues that the majority of contemporary Jews, regardless of theology, wished for the reunion of northern Israelites and southern Jews.[58]
In 332 BCE, the Achaemenid Empire fell to Alexander the Great, and the region was later incorporated into the Ptolemaic Kingdom (c.301–200 BCE) and the Seleucid Empire (c.200–167 BCE). The Maccabean Revolt against Seleucid rule ushered in a period of nominal independence for the Jewish people under the Hasmonean dynasty (140–37 BCE). Initially operating semi-autonomously within the Seleucid sphere, the Hasmoneans gradually asserted full independence through military conquest and diplomacy, establishing themselves as the final sovereign Jewish rulers before a prolonged hiatus in Jewish sovereignty in the region.[143][144][145][146] Some scholars argue that Jews also engaged in active missionary efforts in the Greco-Roman world, which led to conversions.[147][148][149][150] Several scholars, such as Scot McKnight and Martin Goodman, reject this view while holding that conversions occasionally occurred.[151] A similar diaspora existed for Samaritans but their existence is poorly documented.[152]
In 63 BCE, the Roman Republic conquered the kingdom. In 37 BCE, the Romans appointed Herod the Great as king of a vassal Judea. In 6 CE, Judea was fully incorporated into the Roman Empire as the province of Judaea. During this period, the main areas of Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel were Judea, Galilee and Perea, while the Samaritans had their demographic center in Samaria. Growing dissatisfaction with Roman rule and civil disturbances eventually led to the First Jewish–Roman War (66–73 CE), resulting in the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple, which ended the Second Temple period. This event marked a cataclysmic moment in Jewish history,[153] prompting a reconfiguration of Jewish identity and practice to ensure continuity. The cessation of Temple worship and disappearance of Temple-based sects[154] facilitated the rise of Rabbinic Judaism, which stemmed from the Pharisaic school of Second Temple Judaism, emphasizing communal synagogue worship and Torah study, eventually becoming the predominant expression of Judaism.[155][153][156][157] Concurrently, Christianitybegan to diverge from Judaism, evolving into a predominantly Gentile religion.[158] Decades later, the Bar Kokhba revolt (132–135 CE) further diminished the Jewish presence in Judea, leading to a geographical shift of Jewish life to Galilee and Babylonia, with smaller communities scattered across the Mediterranean.
Modern-day groups seen as descendants, or claiming connections
A Samaritan elder participates in Passover prayer services held on Mount Gerizim
As of 2024, only one study has directly examined ancient Israelite genetic material. The analysis examined First Temple-era skeletal remains excavated in Abu Ghosh, and showed one male individual belonging to the J2Y-DNA haplogroup, a set of closely-related DNA sequences thought to have originated in the Caucasus or Eastern Anatolia, as well as the T1a and H87mitochondrial DNA haplogroups, the former of which has also been detected among Canaanites, and the latter in Basques, Tunisian Arabs, and Iraqis, suggesting a Mediterranean, Near Eastern, or perhaps Arabian origin.[171]
A 2004 study (by Shen et al.) comparing Samaritans to several Jewish populations (including Ashkenazi Jews, Iraqi Jews, Libyan Jews, Moroccan Jews, and Yemenite Jews) found that "the principal components analysis suggested a common ancestry of Samaritan and Jewish patrilineages. Most of the former may be traced back to a common ancestor in what is today identified as the paternally inherited Israelite high priesthood (Cohanim), with a common ancestor projected to the time of the Assyrian conquest of the kingdom of Israel."[172]
A 2020 study (by Agranat-Tamr et al.) stated that there was genetic continuity between the Bronze Age and Iron Age southern Levantines, which included the Israelites and Judahites. They could be "modeled as a mixture of local earlier Neolithic populations and populations from the northeastern part of the Near East (e.g. Zagros Mountains, Caucasians/Armenians and possibly, Hurrians)". Reasons for the continuity include resilience from the Bronze Age collapse, which was mostly true for inland cities such as Tel Megiddo and Tel Abel Beth Maacah. Elsewhere, European-related and East African-related components were added to the population, from a north-south and south-north gradient respectively. Late Neolithic and Bronze Age Europeans and Somalis were used as representatives.[173]
"While there is a consensus among scholars that the Exodus did not take place in the manner described in the Bible, surprisingly most scholars agree that the narrative has a historical core and that some of the highland settlers came, one way or another, from Egypt..." "Archaeology does not really contribute to the debate over the historicity or even historical background of the Exodus itself, but if there was indeed such a group, it contributed the Exodus story to that of all Israel. While I agree that it is most likely that there was such a group, I must stress that this is based on an overall understanding of the development of collective memory and of the authorship of the texts (and their editorial process). Archaeology, unfortunately, cannot directly contribute (yet?) to the study of this specific group of Israel's ancestors."[76]
.jpg)
_-_Samaritan_Elder_in_Passover_Prayer_Service.jpg)