Proto-Israelites : the story of a misleading term
Abstract: The prefix “proto”, originally from the Greek, carries several meanings, including first, earliest, original and primitive. A “prototype” is the first or original type, and “proto” may indicate something in the way of becoming. In this article we offer a critical review of the history and...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
Taylor & Francis
2023
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://repositorio.uca.edu.ar/handle/123456789/17422 |
| Aporte de: |
| Sumario: | Abstract: The prefix “proto”, originally from the Greek, carries several meanings, including first, earliest, original and primitive. A “prototype” is the first or original type, and “proto” may indicate something in the way of becoming. In this article we offer a critical review of the history and uses of the term “proto-Israelites” in biblical and archaeological studies since 1943. The prehistory of ‘early Israel’ has shrunk from the Early Bronze to the Iron Age, but the use of “proto-Israel” has grown since the 1990s, tied to issues of historicity and ethnicity. “Proto-Israelite” is a misleading term. It enables scholars to re-find a united, ethnic Israel, by projecting it onto the past in disguise, as “proto-Israel”. There are no “proto-people” that carry “proto-ethnicity”. The use of “proto-Israelites” serves modern ideologies. We suggest more neutral terms, which do not beg the question whether an Israelite ethnic community existed, or can be identified in material remains of the Iron Age I. |
|---|