History of the Land of Israel

Jewish history has continually throughout millennia been deliberately misconstrued by historiographers for religious, political and academic purposes.


Until the 19th century was it the predominant notion in academia that the Hebrew Bible should be understood literally as an exact science on the basis of the long Christian tradition of scriptural literalism. The fact that Christians certainly did not write this collection of texts which is the ancient Israeli state archive did not deter the academic literalists.

With the coming of the era of Para-Christian semiotic hegemony over Christianity entered the notion that religious narratives are just an assemblage of curious myths to be collected by atheist academic curators as blindly believing in apophatic epistemology, a barely secularized Para-Christian transmutation of Christian apophatic theology. Here entered the peculiar hermeneutic device of apophatic epistemology which came to be deployed by Anti-Zionist historians accoring to which if something was mentioned in the Hebrew Bible then surely that is evidence of this not being true!

Political texts in the ancient world were written with a view of eluding persecution and in the case of ancient Israel genocidal military aggression from Egypt, the sole superpower at the time and which once engaged in such a genocidal military campaign against Atenist Israel.

Biblical historiographical narratives as relating to time prior to King David is generally a melange of narratives of Sumerian and Egyptian history and religion. As ancient Israel lived in great fear of another genocidal campaign of war against it was it deemed necessary to discursively disguise the Atenist nature of Israelite religion in its syncretism with Canaanite ethnic culture. The historical event of Atenist Levites fleeing the fall of state Atenism in Egypt hence turned into an embellished Israelite drama of narrative foundation.

King David apparently sought to guide the future by partially disguising the past by means of literary devices of the Great Tradition of the Art of Writing in discursively navigating so as to protect Israel from potentially yet another Anti-Atenist genocidal military campaign in Anti-Atenism being a certain continuation of Egyptian aversion against the ruling Canaanite Hyksos. As the Canaanite Hyksos had long ruled Egypt was there apparently significant ethnic animosity against them at the time of the Atenist Levite escape from Egypt.

The Sumerian gynocentric origin of Atenism was considered so profoundly shameful as exemplified by marital sexual practices of the transmale Pharaoh Akhenaten that the likewise transmale King David apparently preferred discursive dissimulation so as to hide that great secret of transmales engaging in physical intimacy with cis-females.The Israelite historiographical narrative was thus founded as a certain teleology of the closet and hence the pervasive structural religious dissimulation in (Orthodox) Rabbinic Judaism.

Ancient Israel was founded as a certain rebirth of Sumer with the invention of regional geographic communities (“tribes”) on the basis of the city states of ancient Sumer. Religious cults were in the hands of the Levites (descendants of the ruling priest-kings of Sumer) as well as rival cults as described in the Hebrew Bible as being controlled by the highly ethnically diverse princess consorts of King Solomon.

There is thus significant discursive tension in biblical texts between heavily censored residual Sumerian gynocentrism and the social terror/tyranny of Canaanite patriarchy, something which explains frequent contradictions inside texts of this literary anthology that is the Israelite state archive as the Hebrew Bible was continually subjected to heavy state censorship. In Egypt were records of Atenism removed from Egyptian state archives and a similar and parallel process of archival censorship took place within the Israelite state archive which in modern times became known as “the Hebrew Bible”.

The historical significance of King David however lies with affording sacerdotal status to his citizens, something which had hitherto been limited to the urban Levite elite. This act of emancipation became the foundational egalitarian ethos of what later developed as Judaism, including in modern times rabbinical feminism.

The Israelite state became two divided into two. The Jewish population of the northern Kingdom of Israel was deported by the neo-Assyrian empire to Media within and near what is now Kurdistan while the Jewish population of the southern Kingdom of Judah was deported by Babylonia to Babylonia and only later were returned to the land of Israel. The deportees in Media did however remain in becoming instrumental in founding the Median Empire with Median Judaism transforming into Zoroastrianism during the subsequent Persian Empire.

The Median Maggid (“Magi”) Kohanim for centuries travelled worldwide in trade and so syncretically shared Median Judaism with every human people with the exception of the surviving Jewish people in bringing almost the entire humanity into the Northern Jurisdiction of Israel with the exception of the Jewish people itself. They also established themselves as an hereditary priestly caste in cultures around the world in their capacity as patrilineal descendants of the male prince consorts of the transmale King David.

Ancient Israel is described in the Hebrew Bible as being highly ethnically diverse and this diversity was apparently transformed into the invented tribal “genealogy” of Israel. The Greek textual collection which is known as the the “New Testament” is one of the most important sources of ancient Jewish history in providing highly detailed and accurate accounts of daily life in the Roman Province of Judea (Latin Provincia Ivdaea). What is clear however from the literary accounts as provided by the “New Testament” is that this was a thoroughly Jewish country. The question therefore arises as to what happened to the multiethnic diversity of ancient Israel? Since the Israelites were themselves indigenous Canaanites were the ethnically diverse populations of ancient Israel granted hereditary sacerdotal status by King David and the Levite urban sacerdotal elite as this act of emancipation signaled the ethnogenesis of what became known as the Jewish people.

Canaanite religion practiced child sacrifice, engaged in animal sacrifice and ritual sexual abuse; namely religious practices as central to what is known in Eurocentric parlance as “satanist” religious denominations around the world. Judaism in being born out of synthesis of Crypto-Sumerian Atenism and Canaanite ethnic religion thus also incorporated many less than attractive aspects and narratives of Canaanite religion as also present in biblical and some other religious texts such as in the Siddur, they book of prayer. The problem of “satanist” intrusion into organized religion is one that is discussed in the respective religious texts and narratives of many religious traditions and so it should be cautioned that this problem is in no way exclusive to Judaism but is rather a global problem indeed.

Extensive DNA studies have proven beyond any doubt that Rabbinic Jews and Palestinians are patrilineally virtually identical in thus confirming common Canaanite origins. The divergent binary historical narratives of violent conflict in the land of Israel have been long pointed out as a main source of conflict and so we need understand not only what differentiates the two narratives but also what the two narratives have in common structurally speaking.

Israeli historians and Palestinian historians are perfectly aware that Palestinians are descended from Canaanites who became Jews as indeed Rabbinic Jews themselves. However, any Israeli historian trying to write a book on the subject will find himself severely harassed by Israeli Police Intelligence (Lishkat haModi’in) until s/he changes direction in research. Any Palestinian historian trying to do the same thing will similarly become harassed by Palestinian police intelligence. There is thus a certain imposed silence as both Israeli historians and Palestinian historians are aware of Palestinian endogamous clans (hamulas) being descended from Jews of primarily Alawite Judaism, Druze Judaism, Rabbinical Judaism and Samaritan Judaism who were less than voluntarily converted by religious imperialism, by Christian religious imperialism and later by Muslim religious imperialism.

Historiography in Islam-dominated countries is highly propagandistic and more so than in other countries in historiography not only as everywhere being a tool of statecraft but indeed being far more extremely and prominently and so are non-Muslims increasingly eliminated from historiographies.

Historical narrative is by its very structural nature selective as inevitably based on perspective, experience and cultural/social bias. What is included and what is not included in any particular historical narrative is thus a matter selection at the discretion of the author of any particular historiographical account. While the Palestinian narrative commonly deny the Holocaust and virtually every aspect of the history of the Jewish people in seeking discursive annihilation does the Israeli historical narrative as originally devised in the 1950s deliberate hide certain aspects of history not deemed to support Israel’s diplomatic interests and in particular so relating to the induced exodus of the populations of the majority of Palestinian villages by means of primarily “whispering operations” (but also through expulsions) as intended to induce relocation of Palestinian villages aligned with the enemies of the Jewish people as a militarily fully legal means of preventing intended Arabist genocide against the indigenous Jewish people in the land of Israel.

The two historiographical narratives however share something in common that is essential to deconstructing this discursive binary of competing culturally ethnocratic patriarchies. Both prominently deliberately ignore the Jewish roots, history and heritage of Palestinian hamulas (endogamous clans). Both did so out of structural xenophobia in seeking to portray each other as ostensibly “rootless cosmopolitans” with “no historical connection to the land” when in fact both share common Canaanite background, shared Israelite ethnogenesis involving their respective ancestors and a history of being severely structurally oppressed and mistreated by religious imperialism.

For the Palestinian narrative was it essential to deny all aspects of Jewish history including as pertaining to the Palestinians themselves so as justify its structural discursive xenophobia against particularly ethnically Ashkenazi Jews and thus prevent the indigenous Jewish people from coming home to its indigenous land. For the Israeli narrative was it essential to systematically ignore the Jewish background, heritage and history of Palestinian hamulas in order so as to rationalize Palestinian loss of most of their private land ownership. Both narratives thus engaged in structurally xenophobic “othering” whose core was the structural denial of the Jewish background, heritage and history of all Palestinian hamulas.

Yet this needs be understood also in cultural terms and not solely in political terms. It is culturally normal for Crypto-Jews to systematically overtly deny their own Jewish communal background, heritage and history as Crypto-Jews as a means of self-preservation indeed. Rabbinic Jews suffered much structural oppression including persecution, massacres and involuntary conversions to religious imperialism with only a fraction of the Jewish people succeeding to survive the Diaspora in thus remaining part of the Jewish people. There is a structural attitude of suspicion in the traditional culture of Rabbinic Jews towards Crypto-Jews in systematically and without any ground whatsoever “suspecting” them of “being imposters” and subsequently humiliating them by treating them as non-Jews in demanding so called “conversion” as if they were not already Jewish.

This is based on Diaspora social strategies of communal survival in keeping the community together by preventing marriage to persons discursively deemed “external”. This endogamy has in fact been rigorously enforced in Palestinian hamulas as well with Palestinian hamulas thus “protecting” their endogamous Jewish ancestry and status as recognized endogamous Crypto-Jews under rabbinic halakhah, the traditional religious law of the Jewish people in constituting a certain synthesis of Atenist Sumerianism and Canaanite ethnic culture.

The population of Samaria remained Samaritan until coercively converted to Christianity as subsequent to the Samaritan revolts in the 5th and 6th century CE. Only a small fraction of Samaritans remained openly Samaritan after the revolts were crushed by the Byzantine Empire. The Samaritan revolts are interestingly fully absent from Israeli textbooks and Palestinian textbooks alike.

Until the end of the first millenium Common Era was the majority of hamula populations fully and openly rabbinically Jewish until the Fatimid Caliph Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah (born in 985 and demised in 1021) coerced most hamulas into becoming Muslims by threatening them with becoming exiled from the land of Israel if they did not become Muslims. This is no doubt one of the most central events in the history of both Palestinians and Rabbinic Jews yet is consistently ignored in the two competing historiographical narratives.

About 40% of all Palestinian hamulas (80% of hamulas in Israel) still have a significant degree of Jewish communal awareness. Para-Jewish customs in Palestinian hamulas were systematically documented already by David ben Gurion (1886-1973) in the 1930s who went on to become Israel’s first prime minister in 1948.

Palestinian society in 1948 was only superficially Muslim with few Friday mosques existing in the land of Israel and hamulas which remained inside Israel in 1949 had generally and still have a significant degree of Crypto-Jewish communal awareness. When military enlistment of Israeli Palestinians to the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) was announced in the 1950s did the interest in enlistment become so gargantuan that the plan had to be shelved altogether in enlistment being limited to hamulas deemed sufficiently fanatically loyal to the state by the Israeli intelligence community at the time.

David ben Gurion as a specialist in the Para-Jewish anthropology of Palestinian hamulas always preferred communal reversion to engineering mass displacement but most of the Zionist leadership thought otherwise in being misguided by culturally structural xenophobia of structural suspicion against Crypto-Jews. Israel’s second president Yitzhak ben Zvi (born 1884 and demised in 1963) was a specialist in global Para-Jewish studies but these Zionist leaders although otherwise highly influential remained a small informed minority within the Zionist leadership and sadly did they not embark on a major educational effort to educate their fellow Zionist leaders.

While Rabbinic Jews are the indigenous population of the land of Israel are Palestinians hamulas with significant retained Jewish communal awareness also part of the land’s indigenous population. What is thus needed is not only to deconstruct the misleading existing historiographical narratives of conflict which were deliberately devised for self-interested geopolitical gain but more importantly is it essential to devise new historical narratives in also fully expressing the Jewish/Para-Jewish/Crypto-Jewish history of the land of Israel.

This is not to somehow imply that this is the only important aspect of the history of the land of Israel as historiography typically suppresses many other aspects of history such as female history, children’s history, sex workers’ history, LGBTQI history, peasant history and so on and so forth. The point is rather that the Jewish aspect of the history of the land of Israel as other systemically suppressed aspects of history need be rediscovered and integrated with new socially inclusive historiographical narratives indeed.

While it would be false and wrong to describe Israelis and Palestinians generally as xenophobic is it essential understand how both peoples historically tragically failed to be inclusive towards one another. The Jewish people failed in not welcoming Palestinian hamulas seeking communal reversion in returning home to the Jewish people. The Palestinian people failed in not sufficiently welcoming the indigenous Jewish people to the indigenous land of Israel. This resulted in the Palestinian leadership in exile in Germany during WWII actively encouraging the extermination of the Jewish people as well as in the Zionist leadership in 1947-1949 engineering the displacement of majority of hamulas as a legally legitimate military contingency so to avert yet another Holocaust.

The Zionist movement also had the peculiar idea of becoming farmers in thus purchasing land from Ottoman land owners in Istanbul with subsequent mass evictions of Palestinian peasants from land which they tilted yet did not legally own. This obviously created significant resentment and ethnic tensions with the Zionist movement often being highly culturally insensitive with respect to honor-based Middle Eastern cultures of Palestinians and Jews from Islam-dominated countries alike.

The Israeli stratagem has always been lie to, deceive and manipulate Palestinians to the detriment of Palestinians themselves. This has hardly served to inspire trust among Palestinians for Israelis although Jewish communal awareness despite all remain high in non-refugee hamulas although far less so among Palestinian hamulas which tragically became refugees. Arabist, Palestinist and Islamist strategies of wars of aggression, genocide, terrorism and dissemination of Nazi-style Anti-Jewish propaganda has of course hardly and understandably not so served to inspire trust in Palestinians among Israelis.

Although communal reversion should have commenced already in 1917 does this remain the only available and realistic path to peace. As processes of communal reversion in Palestinian hamulas as performed by Palestinian intelligence in close coordination with Israeli intelligence increasingly advance from top clan leaders in involving more and more hamula members in the process of communal reversion is this the path, the real path and indeed the only path to peace. All other narratives of conflict resolution offer illusions of false consciousness that simply discursively perpetuate the tragic situation. Optimal partition could have been an option had Palestinian hamulas not desired communal reversion but they universally and therefore is optimal partition not an option although theoretically yet not actually remaining a possibility.

While there are obviously diplomatic rituals and ritual diplomatic statements is it essential that the international community refrains from words that serve to inflame ethnic tensions. Restored indigenous Israeli communities in Judea provide inspiration for an affluent future for Palestinians of neighboring villages and strongly serve to further motivate communal reversion. For Palestinians is communal reversion psychologically akin to winning a million in some currency in a lottery. It is difficult to understand for non-Palestinians outside of the region how extremely attractive communal reversion is indeed and not only for hamula leaders but indeed for Palestinians generally once informed about their Para-Jewish background, indigenous heritage and communal ancestry.

While Samaria should become an independent state once its own processes of communal reversion are completed need Judea become annexed and fully enfranchised once processes of communal reversion have been completed. Jerusalem is part of Judea and so no one should doubt the future of Jerusalem as the capital of the united Israel-Judea and indeed the capital of a future United Israel on the two banks of the Jordan River once comprehensive processes of communal reversion in Jordan have fully won over the trust of the voting Israeli public.

There is no “demographic threat” in this process as citizens who are treated with trust also becoming trusting and loyal indeed. As most descendants of Palestinian refugees will need be settled in restored hamula communities in comprehensively greened deserts of Jordan is it essential to understand the importance of parallel culturally sensitive processes of communal reversion for communities of 10 million Bnei Anusim (Sephardi Crypto-Jews) so as to bring them on communal Aliyah to Israel.

The feminist social revolution including return to Sumerian gynocentrism of feminist ritual sex is an essential element in indigenous communal reversion as masculinist social norms in all societies are the most important obstacle to interethnic mutual social harmony. Religious imperialism clearly needs be phased out in being a constant source of Anti-Jewish animus and therefore also interethnic friction. Social Behavioral Training (SBT) is therefore very much essential to the process of communal reversion in serving to undo physionomism (anti-body ideology) and DOLP (discrimination, oppression, lies and prejudice) generally.