excerpt from Joshua and the Promised Land
by Roy H. May, Jr.
The nature of Israel's national and cultural origin is complex. Even the Book of Joshua suggests this complexity. For example, Fewell believes that Joshua's encounter with the "man with the sword" (5:13-15) questions the absolute assurance the Israelites seem to have had about their own identity in relation to the Canaanites. Joshua did not recognize the man. He did not know if he were friend or foe. He had to ask. "Neither," the man replied, "but as the commander of the army of the Lord I have come." Joshua was ordered to remove his sandals "for the place where you stand is holy." Identity was uncertain. Fewell says "holiness," not race or culture, identified one with Yahweh. She argues, "Fluid identity boundaries render nationalistic categories ambivalent and call into question the obsession with annihilating outsiders." (5)
Early on, when Yahweh ordered Joshua to cross the Jordan River (1:2), the Israelites were referred to as "all this people." The Hebrew word for "people" (as citizens of a country) is 'am. Israel is the 'am or people of Yahweh. Boling explains that 'am "resists mere ethnic or nationalistic definition." Rather, "this people's peculiarity was specifically its constitution by covenant with Yahweh." (6) Culture defines one neither as enemy nor as Israelite. Identity is determined by relationship to Yahweh. That relationship was open to any racial or cultural group, as evidenced by Rahab the Canaanite and Caleb the Kenizzite.
In this respect, the word "Hebrew" is important. This word became the name of the Israelites. Its origin is not cultural or racial but social and political. As indicated in chapter 2, the word probably is related to habiru or 'apiru. Scholars are not sure of the connection. It seems that the word "Hebrew" became a general word for everyone the powerful viewed as social outcasts and troublemakers. It was a pejorative nickname applied to those who caused problems. Cultural identity made no difference. Thus, Canaanite and Amorite misfits were also "Hebrews." The new followers of Joshua and the Moses-tradition also were "Hebrews." (7) During the upheaval that overthrew the kings and the cities and finally gave the land to farmers, the name Hebrew became associated with those who rebelled in the name of Yahweh.
By 1300 B.C.E. (a hundred years before the "conquest"), many of these "Hebrews" had left the city-states and the agricultural estates owned by the kings and their friends. They moved to the hill country. There the cities had little influence. Trade routes, agriculture, and military technology favored the coastal plains. In the hill country, these "Hebrews" became farmers. There was only a loose relationship among them. Some Israelites from east of the Jordan River gradually moved westward. More recent arrivals, influenced by the experience of Egyptian slavery, edged into Canaan from the Negeb. Together these were the people who eventually took the Promised Land. They became the people of Israel.
The tribes are believed to have emerged in this social context. The number twelve is firmly anchored in early tradition. However, many scholars believe that the number evolved over time. They note, for instance, that Judges 5 refers to only ten tribes. In the hill country, the "Hebrews" gradually grouped themselves into tribes based on extended family relationships, charismatic clan leaders, and geographic proximity. They celebrated their own histories and took the name of heroic ancestors. During the struggle for the Promised Land, these tribes were also fighting units. This, in turn, defined their identity in reference to other tribes and also fixed their land claims! Later during the monarchy, particularly under David, the tribes were systematized into twelve. These became the basic administrative units of the kingdom.
This history reveals that Israel was formed in social struggle. It does not imply racial or cultural identity. Instead, it implies a religious and political identity that was formed by poor outsiders. As Schwantes concludes, "Israel was the solution peasants found for the crisis." (8)
5. Dana Nolan Fewell, "Joshua," in Carol A. Newsom and Sharon H. Ringe, eds. The Women's Bible Commentary (London and Louisville: SPCK and Westminster John Knox Press, 1992), p. 63. (return to text)
6. Robert G. Boling, Joshua: A New Translation with Notes and Commentary, The Anchor Bible (Garden City: Doubleday and Company, 1982), p. 121. (return to text)
7. For discussions of this relationship see Boling, Joshua, pp. 83-84 and Norman K. Gottwald, The Tribes of Yahweh: A Sociology of the Religion of Liberated Israel, 1250-1050 B.C.E. (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1979), pp. 419-452. (return to text)
8. Milton Schwantes, "Las tribus de Yavé: una experiencia paradigmá," in Paulo Suess, Quema y siembra: de la conquista espiritual al descubrimiento de una nueva evangelización (Quito: Ediciones Abya Yala, 1990), p. 213. (return to text)
Return to Joshua: Covenant Ritual
 Order the Study Guides |
 Visit our other Joshua pages |
|
The Joshua
Website is a resource from:
Created by the Joshua Project Team who would appreciate your feedback. |
