• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
Issue 154, January 2009
A progressive manifesto
by David Bodanis
Through misreadings and mistranslations, the ten commandments have come to be seen as the rantings of a vainand vengeful God. In fact, they are an early blueprint for self-government forged by refugees escaping tyranny David Bodanis won the Aventis prize for Electric Universe (Abacus). He is writing a book on the ten commandments
To comment on this article visit First Drafts, Prospect 's blog I am a fan of Christopher Hitchens. There's that delightful disdain with which he impales his opponents, his flashing wit--andthe hints of seriousness to show that it's all more than just a jousting game.But sometimes he gets things very wrong, and his attitude to the ten commandments--one he shares with many modernatheists--is one such mistake. They represent little more, he argues, than the rantings of an angry, vain and vengeful God. Whowould possibly want to follow their "vague pre-Christian desert morality," which shows every sign of being invented by a"Bronze Age demagogue"? Martin Luther King, for one. He found great power in the commandments and the entire Exodus story. By extension, then,they motivated many people in the struggle for civil rights, and helped to transform the US at a crucial moment in its history.Hitchens is responding to the mythical story of the commandments found in the standard religious accounts: the Koran andthe old testament. But if he looked at them as a historian or an anthropologist, he might take a more sympathetic view of thisextraordinary list--which has bequeathed to us the weekend, the principle of innocent until proved guilty, the Sunni/Shia splitand much else besides.Moses, of course, dominates the biblical account. On Mount Sinai, amid storms and booming trumpet blasts, it's he whobrings down the perfect tablets, direct from God. Yet this is not the sole source of understanding of the commandments' power.Something quite extraordinary was also happening in real political history at the time. Clues scattered in the Bible,archaeological digs and other sources show that the commandments, at least at the beginning, were quite unlike anything aBronze Age demagogue would have proposed. They weren't designed to keep a people in servile, superstitious passivity. Infact, they were a progressive creed: helping a band of escaping refugees to find freedom in a new land.
 
 ***The story of the Israelites begins sometime between 1250 and 1150BC. At the start of that period, the ancient near eastwas little more than a giant prison house. Along the eastern Mediterranean coast, most people struggled as serfs, tied to thecity-states that dominated the region. Further west, in the great kingdom of Egypt, serfdom was also widespread--and slaverywas as harsh as described in the book of Exodus. Some of these slaves were Semitic-speakers from Canaan (around modern Israel) who had emigrated as free men to the lushEgyptian delta, only to be enslaved. Others were Libyan sand-dwellers or black-skinned Nubians, often taken prisoner inwartime. Egypt's rulers had built a vast series of forts on their eastern borders, not just to defend the kingdom from attack, butalso to keep these slaves in. Egypt had divided the eastern Mediterranean with the kingdom of the Hittites (based in modern Turkey), and a flourishingbuffer zone existed between them. This system had survived for centuries, and neither the serfs stuck in the city-states nor theslaves in Egypt stood much chance of escape. Then, in the decades leading up to 1200BC, a series of changes unpicked this easy imperial détente, and began to destroy thestructures that had kept these forced workers trapped for generations. At the northern limit of the known world, cities inancient Greece began to be destroyed, swamped by mysterious attackers who came to be known as the "Sea peoples." No oneknows precisely who they were. Some were probably displaced tribesmen from the north of Greece, others pre-existing pirates,others new recruits, joining when their cities were destroyed. But the impact of these raids was rapidly felt. Shortages ineverything from food to dock equipment leapfrogged across the Mediterranean. Hunger, starvation and social unrest followed.Eventually the Sea peoples reached Egypt. Their attacks beat back the imperial army, which abandoned its frontier forts. Forthe first time in memory, Egypt's borders were scarcely defended. This turmoil left open a window that any slave group, withthe right leader, could slip through. How do we know that some escapees in this period were ancestors of the historical Hebrews? There is some suggestiveevidence; and the Bible itself is a source. The famous story of the escaping Israelites passing through the Red sea is not theonly account recorded in the Bible. Hidden away, an earlier, more plausible story exists, long missed in English translations.To find it, you need to know that the Old Testament is written in "ordinary" Hebrew; a few sections, however, are composed inmore archaic language. To the trained eye, these sections are as different as Chaucer and Hemingway. The archaic version says nothing about walls of water. Indeed, it says nothing about crossing a body of water at all. Instead,it suggests a story in which Egyptian soldiers, chasing after escaping slaves, ventured into the water on barges to catch them,and were flipped over in waves, or perhaps found their chariot wheels bogged down in marsh. Such accounts could easily havebeen distorted by centuries of retelling.
 
 Later translations into Latin and vernacular languages--as with the King James translations of the early 1600s--make theseexaggerations yet more extreme, translating the Hebrew yam sûp as "Red sea." The Red sea is a vast body of water, and a longway from the main cities that housed Semitic-speaking slaves. On the other hand, there really were many marshy wetlands andshallow reed-filled lakes nearer these cities, all with their own sudden currents and treacherous mudflats. The Hebrew yam sûpis much more likely to mean simply "sea of reeds." But even if a handful of slaves did escape, where would they go? Across the Sinai desert rose the forested highlands of Canaan, a perfect refuge from authority (and where some of them had probably originally come from). In this violent periodaround 1200BC, several hundred new hamlets began to appear in those isolated highlands. Egypt's rulers seem to have beenfurious about that for, shortly after, imperial scribes recorded on a ten-foot granite slab the exploits of a military mission sentinto Canaan. Its task was to attack a new, loose-knit community of peoples that consisted of escaped slaves and farmers fleeingthe lowland city states. The hieroglyph used to describe them had never been used before. When sounded it came out as"Is-ra-el." ***It's a good story, but one might still ask: So what? Why should any sensible person today wish to follow the tribal laws thata random group from that ancient time might have come up with? This is where the greatest twist begins.History suggests that almost all slave rebellions break down. The rebellion's leader dies, and either dissension tears thegroup apart or a new dictator takes over. But in the Canaan highlands something peculiar happened. By the mid 1100s BC, tensof thousands lived there, and they came from utterly diverse backgrounds: the lowland farmers and escaped slaves--a mix of Semitic-speakers and Nubians and Libyans--from Egypt itself. Indeed, it's quite likely that the ten commandments were draftedbefore the foundation of Judaism, to cover this much broader community, of whom the soon-to-be-Jews were just onecomponent. This makes intuitive sense, given that many of the Old Testament's ethical attitudes apply universally, rather thansimply to the Jews themselves--a legacy of the commandments' original function of helping a diverse community treat itsmembers fairly. The villages created in this new refuge were almost entirely unfortified. Archaeological records show few signs of aprotective state, and there are none of the ruined storehouses, stables or palaces abundant elsewhere in the region. Thiscommunity of exiles left nothing but the remnants of small-scale co-operation, from limestone-lined cisterns for collectingwater to agricultural terraces too complex for any one individual family to cultivate on the uneven ground. The new residentswere spread out over tens of thousands of acres, yet were cooperating on their own, without coercion. Not only had theyescaped tyranny, they had also found a new way of ensuring unprecedented social cohesion and co-operation. How did they do it? Here's where we can begin to understand the lasting, progressive influence of the commandments. Thecentral clue is hidden in the structure of the commandments themselves. Most people today imagine a physical list written ontwo joined slabs. But that image originated in 13th-century England, when Jews were forced to wear cloth markers of thatdesign. The Bible does not mention joined slabs; only that they were written on two tablets. For modern archaeologists it'simmediately clear what this means. City-states in the no-man's-land between the Egyptians and the Hittites often neededprotection, and signed a series of "Hittite suzerainty" treaties to provide it. Dozens survive, and they were always written ontwo tablets, with the complete text on each, allowing both parties to have a full copy. The tablets were small enough to fit in a
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...