|
Home
About IsraCampus
Search
עברית
Русский
Ben Gurion U
Hebrew U
Tel Aviv U
U of Haifa
Other Schools
A-C
D-G
H-K
L-N
O-R
S-V
W-Z
Israeli
Academic Extremism
Israeli Academic Extremists outside Israel
Anti-Israel Petitions Signed by Israeli Academics
ALEF Watch
IDI Watch
IsraCampus Essays
How to Complain
Contact Us |
Tel Aviv University
Tel Aviv University – Hillel Halkin reviews Shlomo Sand’s (Dept
of History) book; calls Sand’s conclusions “a thoroughly dishonest
manipulation of the facts”
Jewish Peoplehood Denied, While
Israel’s Foes Applaud
By Hillel Halkin
Published June 24, 2009, issue of
July 03, 2009.
Although there is probably no book too foolish to go un-admired
by someone, there are subjects for which the market for foolishness
is especially large. Any list of these would have to include “Jews”
and “Israel” near its top, as has once again been demonstrated by
the granting of this year’s prestigious Aujourd’hui Award to the
French translation of Israeli academic Shlomo Sand’s book “The
Invention of the Jewish People.” (This is the title of the English
edition, due to appear in September from left-wing publisher Verso.)
Sand’s book, which argues that there was no such thing as a
Jewish people until one was “constructed” by Zionism and Jewish
nationalism in the 19th century, would have attracted little notice
had it been written by a professor of history at the University of
Damascus. As the work of a supposed historian at the University of
Tel Aviv, it is a scandal, a fashionably phrased political screed
against Zionism that cherry-picks its data while pretending to be
history. Alas, it will be accepted as history by many readers who
are as dutifully impressed by its 568 footnotes, as were, it would
seem, the French journalists on the Aujourd’hui panel.
Not that Sand gets everything wrong. His book is full of
perfectly correct and quite unoriginal observations: some
elaborating why today’s Jews are not all descendants of biblical
Israelites and stem in part from ancestors who joined the Jewish
people by religious conversion over the ages (although Sand’s
treatment of the considerable genetic research on the subject is
shockingly shoddy, he is not wholly wrong about the matter); some
pointing out that Diaspora Jews never shared a single spoken
language or material culture, let alone territory, as do most
peoples; and some dwelling on the problematic nature of the State of
Israel, which aspires to be Jewish, democratic and secular while
denying non-Jews certain privileges extended to Jews and defining
Jewishness in terms of traditional religious law. These are all
issues worthy of discussion, and there is nothing wrong with raising
them.
And yet to go from there to Sand’s absurd conclusions that the
Jews, who considered themselves a distinct people from their early
history, were “invented” as one in modern times; that their
historical connection to Palestine is “imaginary,” because they are
not descended in their entirety from ancient Palestinian Jewry; or
that the idea of a Jewish state is therefore less acceptable than
the idea of a French or Spanish state, demands a thoroughly
dishonest manipulation of the facts. Indeed, if one is talking about
the “construction” of national identities, an enterprise that
numerous post-modernist historians of nationalism to whom Sand is
indebted have written about, it is the French and Spanish who are
the parvenus, having undertaken the task only in the late Middle
Ages. And if you are looking for peoples who accomplished this even
later, in the last two or three centuries, say, you might consider
the Italians, the Germans, the Americans, the Brazilians, the
Indians and a host of others (including those latest of latecomers,
the Palestinians). You would never, unless you wanted to flaunt your
ignorance, mention the Jews, who had a fully developed nation |