This article may appear to concentrate on people in ancient
history, but it is really about the present and the future. My
contention is that current historical versions and images in the
dominant discourses need to be adjusted if there is to be a
prospect for a real (that is, cultural) peace. Because historical
versions rely heavily on religious narratives and are inaccurate,
images that accompany them are either controlled by inventions or
are short-circuited by ideologies. As a result, current
identifications contain contradictions and fallacies that prevent
the emergence of a more coherent and a healthier kind of identity
in each of the two conflicting societies.
There are two reasons for using information about Cana'an and the
ancient Cana'anites. First, exploring Cana'anite culture reveals
traces of real history and thus exposes many assumptions in the
dominant monotheistic discourses. Second, as available facts show,
this culture could provide prospects for commonality in the
region.
Behind the conflict, there is a clash of competing claims to
presence in the land by two groups of people. The Jewish claim is
largely based on old religious connections and narratives derived
from the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament). The Palestinian claim to
the land is based on periods of continuous habitation and contact
with the land. It includes the argument that all religious
communities coexisted peacefully before the introduction of the
counterclaim by a Zionist ideology imported by Europeans. Usually,
the Palestinian presence is connected (by most Jews and even by
many Palestinians) to the Muslim conquest in the 7th century that
brought "Arabs" to Palestine. Disagreement between the two sides
about ancient history is a central part of the present conflict and
its current images.
Since "Canaan" (in Western usage) represents an idealized construct
identical to "promised land," it is central to the biblical claim
of Zionist settlement in Palestine - as it was a justifying
strategy in colonizing paradigm used by settlers in places like
America and South Africa. European "pilgrims" to North America
during the 17th century used the construct "Canaan" in biblical
imagery about "chosen people" and "New Israel" to justify their
conquest and their eradication of the native population and, later,
the enslavement of black people (for a discussion, see
Prior).
However, though condemned as idolatrous and pagan, Cana'anite
religion has been shown to underlie the origins of monotheism.
Forgotten and devalued, the Cana'anite past is still visibly buried
in both present Palestinian daily life and customs and the belief
system known today as monotheism (Judaism, Christianity, Islam). It
is important to bring this latent heritage into surface awareness,
to correct perception of past and present, and to complement
religious perspectives, to influence positively consciousness and
identity construction among Israelis and Palestinians.
Why Are the Cana'anites Important?
The term "Cana'anite" is problematic: it is often misused, and the
same people were called by other names ('Amorites, Jebusites,
Phoenicians and others), depending on geographical location and/or
period. It is difficult, however, to find another term that would
capture related groups of people, a language, a culture, and a way
of living. Regardless of how they may have thought of themselves,
the Cana'anites were a recognizable cultural reality throughout the
Mediterranean basin for several thousand years, more definitely
from about 4500 years before the present (i.e. 2500 BCE-600 CE).
Their initial concentration occurred in an area stretching inland
from the eastern Mediterranean, from NW Arabia north across the
Fertile Crescent (including Jordan and Palestine, Syria and
Lebanon, or "Greater Syria").
About 4000 years ago, Cana'anites invented the alphabet, the origin
of all Eastern or Western scripts. English letters, for example,
come from Latin through Etruscan, which derives from Cana'anites.
The Arabic language ha preserved most of the sound and word
inventories of Cana'anite, just as Hebrew descends from Aramaic, a
development from Cana'anite. The Cana'anites spread this alphabet
and the city-state concept and migrated to many islands and
coastlands of the Mediterranean from Greece to North Africa and the
Iberian Peninsula. For well over 2500 years, they radiated
influence across the Mediterranean basin and maintained an advanced
culture distinguished for its eclecticism and high artistry.
Even more significantly, the Cana'anites had a highly developed
pantheon. This pantheon was more accurately outlined after the
discovery of Ugarit in 1928 and the translation of the tablets that
contained mythological stories and other literary works. The same
pantheon was later reproduced in Greece, with name changes: El is
Kronos, Ba'al is Zeus, and so on. More significantly, the
Cana'anite pantheon contained elements that explain later
monotheistic development. (On the origin of monotheism, see Smith's
book and essays by Niehr and Ra'ad.)
The god El is head of the pantheon, father of gods and creator,
represented as a wise old man with a grey beard; 'Asherah is his
consort and mother of gods. The fertility god-son Ba'al dies and is
resurrected. 'Ashtar[at] is the "virgin goddess" who, from El,
immaculately conceives and delivers two gods, Sahar and Salem. As
in other cases, "Salem" became the god of a city (Ur-Salem, that is
Jerusalem). Some scholars are now convinced that Cana'anite
religion is the direct ancestor of the later Israelite religion.
"Yahweh," the Old Testament god, was one member of the Cana'anite
pantheon who later had dominance in one geographical region, as
happened elsewhere in Syro-Palestinian religions (as Psalm 82,
accurately translated, shows). A more exact translation of biblical
passages such as Exodus 6.3 tells us that El is the god of Abraham
and Jacob, whom Moses was to start calling Yahweh. El is the one
God of Melchisadek, the Jebusite king who blesses Abraham in the
story.
Demographic Simplifications
Both history and DNA studies now indicate that the population of
Palestine has remained more or less continuous since prehistoric
times, despite changes in religion, movement of some population out
or in, and various ethnic mixtures by reason of invasion or other
events.
Yet, terms like "Israelite," "Hebrew," "Jew," "Arab," "Muslim" and
Christian are formative models for the dominant views of identity
in Israel and Palestine. Are present Israelis, in matters of
identity, connected to the ancient Israelites, to Hebrews, or to
Jews, or are they as yet an undefined entity? Are present
Palestinians identifiable with Arabs or Muslims, with the
Philistines or Cana'anites, or is their identity as yet undefined?
Should Palestinian Christians date their presence to the conversion
of Constantine?
All such terms should be approached with caution in discussing
identity formation. They represent either constructed communities
or stereotyped notions that make possible inaccurate
simplifications of demographic and ethnic complexities, past and
present.
Let us take, for example, Palestinian Christians. Some of them
assume that, since Christianity came to Palestine as a dominant
religion in the time of Constantine, they can say, "We have been
here for 1700 years." In fact, historical records point to
systematic efforts by Constantine to suppress paganism among the
local population, which policy his mother Helena helped implement
by fixing the presumed locations of biblical events by using pagan
sites and having churches built on them (Hunt 1982: 102,
136).
Or take the two assumptions that present Jews are descendants of
the "Hebrews" or "Israelites" or that "Arabs" in Palestine came
along with the Muslim conquest. This sequencing is very convenient
for certain political agendas. Even some Palestinians and Arabs
fall into the trap of this thinking: "We have been here for more
than 1300 years" (i.e., since the Muslim Conquest in 638).
Conversely, consistent with this view, most Israeli Jews hang on to
the mythic assumption that: "This is our ancient homeland since
Abraham (or Jacob, or Joshua, or Bar Kohba)." And to maintain such
a constructed historical claim active, ever-new logic attempts to
link terms and to create connections to the past that are
unsupported by history and that require increasingly more
sophisticated arguments.
Monotheistic identifications fall into the traps of fallacious
history, willingly, or by design, or due to ignorance. One strategy
limits thinking and constructs claims based on chronological
sequencing of the three monotheistic religions (Judaism,
Christianity, Islam). Along with this sequencing is an assumption
by each religion of being the carrier of the truth (or the
innovative first or the inclusive last). Along with this sequencing
is an assumption by each religion of being the carrier of the truth
(or the innovative first or the inclusive last). All religious
traditions include many values that promote spirituality and
morality, but they also have their certain exclusivities and
inconsistent practices.
Monotheistic assumptions confuse myths with realities, and so
negate all historical, archaeological, linguistic, and (now with
genetic studies) scientific facts. In addition, as indicted, the
monotheistic traditions are rooted in previously "pagan" religion
that was appropriated, modified, developed, and then denied. It
should be a cause for humbling thought that no one holds anything
called the truth. This humbling is not a reason to disbelieve in
everything, but it is reason for an affirmation that there are
human continuities, even with what is assumed to be "pagan." In
fact, that we owe more to the "pagans" that we let out.
Confusion of Historical Links and Terms
Politicization of religion has always led to polarization and
arbitrary terminology. It is in the interest of a dominant
narrative to promote itself as historical fact, and to do so it has
to oversimplify history and wield it to its purpose. To give the
classic Zionist claim to Palestine ("Canaan") primary historical
and religious legitimacy, it is necessary to connect Jews of today
with followers of the Jewish faith who lived in Palestine 2000
years ago, and further to connect them to the "Israelites" about a
thousand years earlier (David and Solomon, etc.), and the Hebrews
even earlier (for more ancient biblical figures).
All these connections require varying degrees of argument and blind
leaps of faith. They confuse religion with ethnicity and literary
narratives with historical events. All are problematic even if one
were to assume that the Bible is an accurate reflection of history.
However, most scholars today understand that the Bible is not
history.
In this politicized atmosphere, the images are formed and made
consistent with particular claims. The inherited stereotypes of
"Arabs," "Jews" and "Muslims" are magnified and expanded. The
Palestinians are labelled as "Arabs," "Ishmaelites," or "Muslims"
in this narrative's terminology, so as to give them a shorter
historical presence and to diminish their connections to the land
as farmers and constant inhabitants. Images and rationalizations
are very adaptable and shift in association as seems most
serviceable.
If the identification and bias is approached differently, the
Palestinians become the biblically-hated Philistines.4 (Political
use of "Philistine" to attack the peace process with the
Palestinians is exemplified in Bennett and similar writing.) From a
biblical perspective, the Phoenicians are considered mere pagan
traders and made distinct from other Cana'anites in Palestine;
"Phoenicians" are seen as outsiders to the special community of
ancient Israel in the biblical literary construct. Further, in this
concocted view, the "Arabs" are disqualified from connecting to
more ancient cultures in the region - cultures that they obviously
inherit by reasons of continued presence, development and
descent.
Contradictions between Palestinian and Muslim
Identification
Sometimes, religious beliefs overshadow people's own ancient
history and shorten its heritage. I was reminded of this irony
during an autumn visit to a friend in a Palestinian village west of
Ramallah. September is a month of agricultural plenty: grapes,
figs, and other fruits and vegetables. We sit on the roof that
overlooks the distant Mediterranean to the west (but near the
village to the east there is an Israeli colony). We are sipping
tea, eating grapes and figs, when my friend's father arrives. After
the usual long greetings, the old farmer comments, "How good the
fruits and vegetables used to taste when they were grown ba'al." I
ask, "Do you know why we use this word to describe agricultural
produce that is not irrigated?" I try to explain this is an
inherited term that refers to natural soil moisture caused by
Ba'al, the ancient Cana'anite god of thunder and rain. Indignantly
the old man replies, "But the Cana'anite were pagans and idol
worshippers condemned by Allah in the Qur'an."
This anecdote illustrates how the Palestinians themselves often
unknowingly participate in the biases against them. Partly, this
self-bias is caused by lack of awareness; partly, it comes about
when religious identification overwhelms deeper, subaltern cultural
traits. The Palestinians and other people in the region, who carry
habits, customs and a language that connect them to the ancient
world, are often unaware that they do so. In this way, they
truncate their own history and shorten its memory. Most
Palestinians make no attempt to claim their own ancient heritage,
and by neglecting it allow its free appropriation by others.
Another contradictory aspect of identity is reflected in some
traditions about holy places. Almost all "holy places" in Palestine
and Israel were previously pagan sites ("Unearthing, Ra'ad 2001),
associated usually with the burial of biblical or other holy
characters. Even in the recent past, as Meron Benvenisti describes,
many Palestinian sacred places were turned into synagogues and
Jewish sites after 1948, even in places where "there had never been
a Jewish tradition" (268-275). The process was repeated after the
occupation in 1967.
This applies to the place in Hebron where tradition says Abraham
was buried. In the 4th century CE (i.e., AD), this site in Hebron
was used for pagan sacrifice around a well and a tree, until the
time Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity and ordered
churches to be built there and in many other places with the
express purpose of suppressing paganism. Pagan practices were hard
to erase, and contemporaneous writers tell us that the people
continued to offer pagan sacrifices there for about two hundred
years (Fowden 2002, 128). Later, a mosque was built in the same
area and called El-Haram il-Ibrahimi. After the occupation in 1967
and infiltration by Jewish extremists, supported by the Israeli
army, the mosque was forcibly divided and half of it made into a
synagogue. In this way, the association with a name (Abraham), not
a fact, was used to create an unwieldy kind of reality and a point
of contentious attachment.
It is similar to what happened with the Western Wall and El Haram
esh-Sharif, now bones of contention. As mentioned in Encylopaedia
Judaica, the Wailing Wall was not associated with any temple or
Jewish memory by earlier Jewish visitors or sources until 1520 CE
(A.D.) when Spanish Jews came to Jerusalem after the Ottoman
occupation. All three monotheistic religions have accumulated, in
different periods, metaphoric associations in connection with these
sites that now carry intense emotional value.
An interesting case is Maqam en-Nabi Musa, named after Moses. The
shrine, however, is not near Mount Nebo but southwest of Jericho,
west of the Jordan River. How do we explain this Muslim tradition,
especially when the story says Moses died east of the Jordan and
his burial place is unknown! More pertinently, for a Palestinian
Muslim it should be somewhat troubling to associate the conquest
narrative given in the Qur'an with that given in the Bible, a story
that forms part of the Zionist claim system. (It is too complex to
discuss the conquest story here, but the legendary source is
different from that indicated in the Bible, since there is no
archaeological or other evidence of a Joshua conquest in Jericho.)
The discrepancy about this Maqam is one reason why Israeli
authorities have not taken control of it, since in other cases the
mere association with names (Daoud/David, Ibrahim/Abraham,
Rahel/Rachel, et cetera) has led to Jewish appropriation of Muslim
sites. So, it is the very emphasis of Islam on being inclusive of
the other two monotheistic religions that has precisely given
Israeli authorities literal excuses to control the sites.
The dilemma between identity and belief is equally acute for some
Palestinian Christians, whether it is because of Constantine, or
the Crusades, or the priesthood, or colonial designs to make
Palestinian Christians feel separate in their identity and
connection to the land.
Archaeology, Culture and Narratives
Despite intense efforts by early Israeli scholars to support the
Bible, recent research and discoveries are showing that biblical
accounts are not supported by either history or archaeology. Such
revelations apply to a number of narratives like the Exodus and the
adventures of David, and many common religious and demographic
assumptions. Stories like the Exodus and the Greek Sojourn are
recycled from Cana'anite folklore memories (Redford 1992: 422).
Hundreds of articles and books can be cited to support similar new
findings.
Since the classic Zionist version of history involves a conquest
event (the book of Joshua, which recounts how the Cana'anites were
massacred), it sees a major challenge and a threat in any
archaeological discoveries that disprove the story. One theory that
has emerged is the "peaceful infiltration" and another theory about
a slow local development whereby the "Israelites" grew out of
Cana'anite society. However, such theories to replace a conquest
seem to be merely more "politically correct" historical
reinterpretations. While they may have grains of truth, they are
still rationalizations and scholarly adaptations, and therefore no
less a justificatory strategy for claims, now modified to appeal to
more acceptable trends in scholarship.
DNA Studies: Will the Real Cana'anites Please Stand
Up?
So who are the Canaanite descendants today? And why does it matter
to know?
Some recent DNA studies seem to be headed toward answering such
questions. One study by a group of Israeli and US scientists (Nebel
et al 2000) came to the conclusion that Palestinian Arabs have
close genetic similarity to Jews and that the findings agree with
historical records indicating that "Moslem Arabs in this country
[Palestine and Israel] descended from local inhabitants, mainly
Christians and Jews, who had converted after the Islamic conquest
in the seventh century AD." More recent research by the same group
(2001) found Jews to be more closely related to populations in the
northern Fertile Crescent.
Another genetic study (Antonio Arnaiz-Villena et al) recently
caused a furor after its publication in Human Immunology. The
journal took the unusual step (under pressure) of asking
subscribers and libraries to disregard or preferably tear out the
article. This study found that "Jews and Palestinians share a very
similar HLA genetic pool ... that support [sic] a common ancient
Canaanite origin." The study also hypothesized other close
relatives to the Palestinians in people like "Cretans, Egyptians,
Iranians, Turks and Armenians." Then follows the well-meant
conclusion:
The Eurocentric confusion "Arab=Muslim" has also lowered [sic] the
Palestinian identity by identifying the country were [sic] Mohammed
was born (Saudi Arabia [sic]) with the Muslim religion; it also has
artificially divided peoples both coming from ancient Canaanites
(Jews and Palestinians). (Arnaiz-Villena et al 2001: 897)
As obvious from this quotation, the published study is replete with
editorial errors, and it also confusingly uses "Palestinians" to
refer to "Philistines." Nevertheless, its conclusion is important
and worth pursuing in future studies.
DNA studies have the potential to show unexpected human
commonalities. But careful sampling criteria should be adopted, and
efforts made to avoid historical preconceptions. If DNA studies can
be used to understand the Etruscans and their relationship to
present populations in Italy, there may be even more pressing
reasons to find potential connections in our region.
Conclusion
It is advantageous for religiously based claims to emphasize links
to narratives in sacred books, and thus to consider them as true
history. However, these books should be seen as sources of
spiritual values and as literary products. All histories are
constructed, and more seriously so when religious and literary
histories are perceived as literal and exclusive. Such
constructions, once established, try to find support by
increasingly complex appropriations and justifications that are
endless and humanly destructive. It continues to cause harm, in our
context, to limit identity questions to recent "nation state"
concepts or only to religious identifications, as is increasingly
done.
How is it possible then to balance the need for mythic belief and
respect for tradition with knowledge and consciousness - I mean a
sensitive higher consciousness? Perhaps an inclusive cultural
perspective holds promise (of which the Cana'anite past is a factor
that offers possibilities), even if it is combined with positive
aspects from monotheistic religious outlooks. There is a pressing
need to negotiate collective memories and narratives in a manner
that is likely to reconcile them equitably, to reverse the drive
toward more invention. Otherwise, the general public will continue
to believe myth is truth in ways that poison people's minds and
actions. A cultural outlook would diminish intensity and blindness
- a difficult thing to do. Here, it may be that only when
recognition is given to cultural connections that the potential for
consistency within each identity and genuine rapprochement between
peoples can become at all possible.
References
Arnaiz-Villena, Antonio, et al. 2001. "The Origin of Palestinians
and their Genetic Relatedness with Other Mediterranean
Populations." Human Immunology 62: 889-900.
Bennett, Ramon. 1995. Philistine: The Great Deception. Jerusalem:
Jerusalem Arm of Salvation.
Benvenisti, Meron. 2000. Sacred Landscape: The Buried History of
the Holy Land Since 1948. Berkeley: U of California P.
Diamond, James. 1986. Homeland or Holy Land: The "Canaanite"
Critique of Israel. Indianapolis: Indiana UP.
Fowden, Elizabeth Key. 2002. "Sharing Holy Places." Common
Knowledge 8.1: 124-46.
Hunt, E.D. 1982. Holy Land Pilgrimage in the Later Roman Empire
AD312-460. Oxford: Clarendon.
Nebel, Almut, et al. 2000. "High-resolution Y chromosome haplotypes
of Israeli and Palestinian Arabs reveal geographic substructure and
substantial overlap with haplotypes of Jews" Human Genetics
107:630-641.
. 2001. "The Y Chromosome Pool of Jews as Part of the Genetic
Landscape of the Middle East." American Journal of Human Genetics
69: 1095-112.
Niehr, Herbert. 1995. "The Rise of YHWH in Judahite and Israelite
Religion." The Triumph of Elohim: From Yahwisms to Judaisms.Ed.
Diana Vikander Edelman. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Prior, Michael. 1997. The Bible and Colonialism: A Moral Critique.
Sheffield: Sheffield Academic.
Ra'ad, Basem L. 2001. "Primal Scenes of Globalization: Legacies of
Canaan and Etruria." PMLA 116.1: 89-110,
. 7 February 2001. "Unearthing Rachel's and Other Tombs." Palestine
Report www. Jmcc.org/media/report/01/Feb/2.htm.
Redford, Donald B. 1992. Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient
Times. Princeton: Princeton UP.
Silberstein, Laurence J. 1999. The Postzionism Debates: Knowledge
and Power in Israeli Culture. New York: Routledge.
Smith, Mark S. 2001. The Origins of Biblical Monotheism. New York:
Oxford UP.
Tubb, Jonathan N. 1998. Canaanites. London: British Museum.
"Western Wall." Encyclopedia Judaica. 1972 ed.