Jews remained in Palestine in the 5th century of the common era

Angela

Elite member
Messages
21,822
Reaction score
12,338
Points
113
Ethnic group
Italian
See:
https://phys.org/news/2018-07-discoveries-archaeology-team-clues-life.html
That Palestine was not denuded of Jews following their rebellions against the Romans has long been known, contrary to the implication of this article, although this is nice proof of it.

"The discoveries indicate villagers flourished under early fifth century Christian rule, contradicting a widespread view that Jewish settlement in the region declined during that period. The large size and decoration of the Huqoq synagogue point to an unexpected level of prosperity."

The fact that this particular village was prosperous doesn't mean that the entire area remained so.

The following is less well known, although this isn't the only known example:
"
"The mosaics decorating the floor of the Huqoq synagogue revolutionize our understanding of Judaism in this period," said Magness. "Ancient Jewish art is often thought to be aniconic, or lacking images. But these mosaics, colorful and filled with figured scenes, attest to a rich visual culture as well as to the dynamism and diversity of Judaism in the Late Roman and Byzantine periods."

Along the north aisle, mosaics are divided into two rows of panels containing figures and objects with Hebrew inscriptions. One panel labeled "a pole between two" depicts a biblical scene from Numbers 13:23. The images show two spies sent by Moses to explore Canaan carrying a pole with a cluster of grapes. Another panel referencing Isaiah 11:6 includes the inscription "a small child shall lead them." The panel shows a youth leading an animal on a rope. A fragmentary Hebrew inscription concluding with the phrase "Amen selah," meaning "Amen forever," was uncovered at the north end of the east aisle.
During this eighth dig, the team also continued to expose a rare discovery in ancient synagogues: columns covered in colorful, painted plaster still intact after nearly 1,600 years."

As with Christianity, there were different sects, with different beliefs during late antiquity.
TPTxgtw.png
[/IMG]
 
Doesn't this tend to support the Shlomo Sand thesis that Jewish peasants and small villagers remained in Palestine down to the present age, and that the exile of the Jews after 70 AD, and again after the 130s AD, was in truth the dispersion of elite castes (mainly priestly castes).
 
I'm not aware of him having said that. It's odd if he did, given his stance that the Jews have no "historical" right to the Eretz Israel. I don't pay much attention to anything the man says given that he agrees with Elhaik, who has been completely and utterly discredited. We now have massive amounts of data from genetic research into Jewish origins. Yes, Jews absorbed "foreign" admixture in their host countries, but they originated in the Levant. Their y lines alone tell the tale.

There is also no indication in the archaeology or in documentation from the succeeding centuries of a large scale presence of Jews lasting from the end of the Bar Kochba revolt in 135 A.D. down through the centuries.

We do have documentation of what happened after the final revolt:
"[FONT=&quot]Due to the large number of Jewish rebels, instead of waging open war, Severus besieged Jewish fortresses and held back food until the Jews grew weak. Only then did his attack escalate into outright war. The Romans demolished all 50 Jewish fortresses and 985 villages. The main conflicts took place in Judea, the Shephela, the mountains and the Judean desert, though fighting also spread to Northern Israel. The Romans suffered heavy casualties as well and Hadrian did not send his usual message to the Senate that “I and my army are well.”[/FONT][FONT=&quot]The final battle of the war took place in Bethar, Bar-Kokhba’s headquarters, which housed both the Sanhedrin (Jewish High Court) and the home of the Nasi (leader). Bethar was a vital military stronghold because of its strategic location on a mountain ridge overlooking both the Valley of Sorek and the important Jerusalem-Bet Guvrin Road. Thousands of Jewish refugees fled to Bethar during the war. In 135 C.E., Hadrian’s army besieged Bethar and on the 9th of Av, the Jewish fast day commemorating the destruction of the first and second Holy Temples, the walls of Bethar fell. After a fierce battle, every Jew in Bethar was killed. Six days passed before the Romans allowed the Jews to bury their dead.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Following the battle of Bethar, there were a few small skirmishes in the Judean Desert Caves, but the war was essentially over and Judean independence was lost. The Romans plowed Jerusalem with a yoke of oxen. Jews were sold into slavery and many were transported to Egypt. Judean settlements were not rebuilt. Jerusalem was turned into a pagan city called Aelia Capitolina and the Jews were forbidden to live there. They were permitted to enter only on the 9th of Av to mourn their losses in the revolt. Hadrian changed the country’s name from Judea to Syria Palestina.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In the years following the revolt, Hadrian discriminated against all Judeo-Christian sects, but the worst persecution was directed against religious Jews. He made anti-religious decrees forbidding Torah study, Sabbath observance, circumcision, Jewish courts, meeting in synagogues and other ritual practices. Many Jews assimilated and many sages and prominent men were martyred including Rabbi Akiva and the rest of the Asara Harugei Malchut (ten martyrs). This age of persecution lasted throughout the remainder of Hadrian’s reign, until 138 C.E.[/FONT]

That's from the Jewish Virtual Library. It sounds as if far from sparing the elite, he executed them all.

Now, since the 900 plus villages which were destroyed couldn't be rebuilt, and the Temple and Jerusalem were effectively gone, what elites would remain? Therefore, it makes sense only some villagers in the undestroyed villages would remain.

Whether this impoverished little group stayed there for the next 1500 years or so under Byzantine and then Islamic rule seems a little far fetched to me, given that the Jewish communities close by in Asia Minor, for example, could be accessed.

What is known is that after the expulsion from Spain, many Sephardic Jews settled in areas under the control of the Ottoman Empire because they were better treated there.

"[FONT=&quot]Historically,very few Jews emigrated to Palestine from the diaspora, and those who did were typically supported by charitable donations from abroad, there being little to no Jewish commerce or industry in the Holy Land. In the Ottoman period, the more favorable relations between the Sultans and his Jewish subjects resulted in an increased Jewish presence in Palestine. Jewish immigration to Palestine was only a trickle compared to the far larger settlements in important trade centers such as Salonika and Constantinople, but for Jews, Palestine had unparalleled historic and spritual appeal. Some sought refuge in the protection of the Ottoman Empire, seeking to recreate the life they had enjoyed in Spain. For them, the move to Palestine was an ironic double diaspora, a return to the days of Roman Palestine, living in the zionic homeland under a foreign king — a situation, we should remember, that was in perfect accordance with the rabbinic thought of the times."

[/FONT]
"[FONT=&quot]The reconstruction and settlement of Tiberias (an ancient site prophecied to be the arrival point of the messiah) by Don Joseph Nasi during the 1550s, against the backdrop of the gathering of messianic kabbalists in nearby Safed at the same time, provides us with a snapshot of the twin discourses of de-diasporization: the prophetic and the political."

[/FONT]
https://davidwacks.uoregon.edu/2012/01/31/settlement/

There's a great fictional treatment of this phenomenon in James Michener's The Source. I read it years ago, and then my children were assigned it as summer reading between Junior and Senior Year. It's amazing how right he was about so many things. I guess he had tremendous researchers.
 
Sand is not denying that many Jews were slaughtered by the Romans. Rather, his position is that Jewish peasants by and large survived and remained on the land. Somebody had to work the land so that Rome could profit from its rule. Peasants stay in place, elites scatter. (Many priestly elites were killed, but others found Roman patronage, prime example Josephus.)


However, the real question is whether modern Jewish populations are descendants of a single people cast out of the land or the descendants, instead, of other groups that converted to Judaism.

Sand cites several studies that suggest "former Punics" (my term) were highly receptive to Jewish proselytism. From the fall of Carthage down to circa 300 AD, Judaism spread through the Mediterranean via the conversion of sympathetic groups, Punics in the first instance. If this were the case, and if Punics by and large carried the same haplogroups as Jews, how would genetic studies ever be able to tell the difference, absent incredibly fine-grained studies.

There were presumably a lot more "former Punics" than "former Judeans" in late Antiquity.
 
Sand is not denying that many Jews were slaughtered by the Romans. Rather, his position is that Jewish peasants by and large survived and remained on the land. Somebody had to work the land so that Rome could profit from its rule. Peasants stay in place, elites scatter. (Many priestly elites were killed, but others found Roman patronage, prime example Josephus.)


However, the real question is whether modern Jewish populations are descendants of a single people cast out of the land or the descendants, instead, of other groups that converted to Judaism.

Sand cites several studies that suggest "former Punics" (my term) were highly receptive to Jewish proselytism. From the fall of Carthage down to circa 300 AD, Judaism spread through the Mediterranean via the conversion of sympathetic groups, Punics in the first instance. If this were the case, and if Punics by and large carried the same haplogroups as Jews, how would genetic studies ever be able to tell the difference, absent incredibly fine-grained studies.

There were presumably a lot more "former Punics" than "former Judeans" in late Antiquity.

To my knowledge, no one knows how many non Jews converted to Judaism, or why. They certainly weren't just "Punics".

This is just a way to make Jews not Jews by choosing a group that has similar yDna.

If you want to know who disappeared, it was the Carthaginians. There weren't all that many of them from the beginning. That's why their armies were mostly formed of mercenaries, something for which we have a lot of proof. We also have proof that they were killed in battle and those who survived the battles were enslaved. Soldiers who were sold into slavery most often were sent to man the oars, work in the mines or other dangerous endeavors. Their longevity was measured in months or a few years.

Then the Romans went to their homeland, killed or enslaved everyone there and then sowed the fields with salt.


This is all in contrast with the situation with the Jews. I don't know where he or you get the idea that all or even most Jews lived in Judea. I would suggest doing some reading on the period in question. There were already Jewish communities all over the Roman World during the times of the rebellions. Alexandria was full of them (1/3 of the city), so was what was called Asia Minor, the Aegean, Greece, North Africa (Simon of Cyrene), Spain, and Italy itself. Some historians guesstimate that they could have numbered up to 10% of the Empire at their height. Haven't you ever read the epistles of Paul, previously known as Saul of Tarsus (in present day Turkey)? He traveled all over the known Roman world proselytizing in Jewish communities as he went. So did the other Apostle.

Having read the Bible comes in handy.

I'm sorry. The man has no credibility. Plus, you're asking for me to prove a negative.

The only people who give him any credence are anti-Semites.


45ad8b2600742b391dbf0ffd83dbeeec--world-religions-sabbath.jpg


98188-004-843CD3A7.jpg

3840292.gif


The first Christians were Jews. From that "home base" in every city, Paul branched out, eventually, to Gentiles.
98188-004-843CD3A7.jpg
 
as far as i know the name is zand ( not sand)
And yes he is a joke😂
(and he is been used as a tool by european left
which hide there anti-semite agenda)🤔
 
Nowhere do I deny or evince ignorance that there were Jewish communities outside of Judea before 70 AD. So please refrain from any attempts to humiliate me.

Rather, the question is how did there get to be so many Jews and Jewish communities throughout the Mediterranean world after the Fall of Carthage in 146 BC? A very likely explanation, it seems to me, is that "Phoenicians" (or "Punics") became Jews.

Full disclosure, I have not actually read a book devoted to this subject, other than relevant chapters of Sand's book. Perhaps I will now read two others: (1) "Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World," by Louis H. Feldman, published 1993; and (2) "Crossing Over Sea and Land: Jewish Missionary Activity the Second Temple Period," by Michael Bird, published 2010.

If anybody here could suggest other titles, please offer them.

In the meantime, I consulted Wikipedia, which attributes to Louis Feldman this argument. (Feldman was Professor of Classics & Literature at Yeshiva University, and considered a leading expert on Josephus) ----->>>>>

"One theory has espoused the idea that, with the destruction of Tyre and Sidon, and their daughter-city Carthage, there was created an orphaned Phoenician diaspora not unlike that of the Jews and that the puzzling disappearance of Phoenicians may have been due to the attraction they might have felt for a similarly dispersed people, leading to conversion to Judaism." See the Wikipedia entry "History of the Jews in Carthage"

Or perhaps once Carthage fell, Jerusalem was now seen at the center of West Semitic civilization, and so Phoenicians began to identify with Judaism and its one God. (Ba'al and other gods now discredited.)

So far as I can tell, the first scholar to advance this theory was Georg Rosen, a German Jew, in the early 20th century. The following is from an academic review article published in 1930, which I am lifting from a JSTOR preview, as it nicely states the thesis --->>>

"Georg Rosen conceived the idea of explaining the rapid growth of Hellenistic Judaism as a result of the spread of the Hebrew religion among other Semites, and particularly among the Phoenicians, already scattered about the Mediterranean in pre-Christian times . . . . [His] main thesis is that the so-called Diaspora was more a spread of the Jewish religion than a multiplication of the Jewish race. Colonization and natural increase are thought to be quite insufficient to account for the numerous adherents of Judaism throughout the Roman world at the beginning of the imperial period. There must have been a large accession of proselytes, particularly from among the Phoenician emigrants, who culturally were nearest akin to the Jews. The theory is offered to explain the rapid disappearance of the large Phoenician population scattered around the Mediterranean before the Romans gained the ascendancy." See https://www.jstor.org/stable/1196127?seq=1

The "Phoenicians Became Jews" theory also does much to explain the origin of the Sephardic communities in Spain. Simply put, the Carthaginian colonies in Spain converted to Judaism.

The overall model is this ===

(1) Phoenicians establish colonies throughout the Mediterranean, from circa 900 BC down to 146 BC, in Cyprus, Sicily, Sardinia, the Maghreb, the Balearic Islands, southern Iberia, plus many smaller "trading post" communities.

(2) From early on, Judean merchants have a presence in these colonies, but probably a small presence.

(3) After the Fall of Carthage, the larger Phoenician populations convert to Judaism.
 
I am interested in facts, whether they come from archaeology, genetics, or contemporaneous writings. I see nothing of any of that in your post or the fantasies of the people you name.

There is not one shred of evidence to support this bizarre theory. It's all baseless musings.

As such, I have no interest in pursuing the subject.
 
Well, for anybody else here who might be interested, it seems the notorious crackpot Salo Baron had similar bizarre musings

"In the Hellenistic-Roman period the Phoenician colonies, in particular, not only persisted all over the Mediterranean but perhaps even grew in size and affluence after the loss of all political power by their mother country . . . . These outposts of the ancient Canaanite race constitute more than a parallel, however. The Phoenician colonies and especially Carthage, the largest among them, with her dependencies offered a vast field of activity to Jewish propagandists. Even after the Punic Wars, Carthage was not such a deserted region as would appear from Roman literary records. Excavations make it ever clearer that a flourishing Semitic civilization persisted in North Africa for centuries after the destruction of the capital by Scipio. There the Jews began to play a prominent part. The families of the Phoenician slave traders, often permanent or temporary owners of Jewish captives, may have been exposed to Jewish habits and ideologies more than any other group of the population. Being of a closely related racial and linguistic stock, conversion to Judaism would have transformed them almost instantly into full-fledged Jews. Greeks and Romans often would not become full proselytes because of the necessity for circumcision . . . . The Phoenicians, however, had practiced circumcision for ages.

"Most decisive seems to have been the social situation confronting these colonists after the loss of national independence of their mother cities of Tyre, Sidon, and Carthage. While tenaciously clinging to their ethnic and economic peculiarities, these Phoenician ghettoes in Rome and Alexandria, in Persia and in Spain, gradually developed the characteristics of a nationality without state and territory. Hard pressed, this race could have quite naturally have adopted the patterns of belief and behavior developed by a related people through centuries of similar experience. Thus it came about that, in the centuries following the annihilation of Phoenician and Carthaginian political power, these Semites, carrying with them a considerable admixture of native blood (in North Africa especially Berber), swelled the ranks of Jewish converts with a related type of people. That is why there are extant Jewish records from an early period only of those western districts previously under Carthaginian rule. Nor was Rab's choice of localities purely accidental when he declared that 'from Tyre to Carthage they know Israel and their Father in Heaven'. In short, a vanishing world factor, the Phoenician, disappeared with the new world factor, the Diaspora Jew."

Citation taken from Salo Baron, A Social and Religious History of the Jews, Volume 1, published 1952, pages 175 to 176.

I will now quote at length from Shlomo Sand, who relies in this pasage on the work of the French historian Marcel Simon --->

"The successful spread of Judaism in the Maghreb was probably due to the presence of a Phoenician population in the region. Although Carthage was destroyed back in the second century BCE, not all its inhabitants perished. The city was rebuilt, and was soon an important commercial port once more. Where, then, did all the Punics--the African Phoenicians--who populated the coastline go? Several historians, notably the French Marcel Simon, have suggested that a large number of them became Jews, accounting for the distinctive strength of Judaism throughout North Africa.

"It is not beyond reason to assume that the close resemblance of the language of the Old Testament to ancient Phoenician, as well as the fact that some of the Punics were circumcised, helped promote mass conversion to Judaism. The process may also have been stimulated by the arrival of captives from Judea after the fall of the kingdom. The old populace, originating from Tyre and Sidon, had been hostile to Rome for a very long time, and probably welcomed the exiled rebels and adopted their particular faith. Marcel Simon suggests that the philo-Jewish policy of most of the Severan emperors, a dynasty originating in North Africa, might also have contributed to the popularity of Judaization.

"North Africa was one of the outstanding successes in the history of proselytization in the Mediterranean region. Although in the third and fourth centuries CE, as noted in the previous chapter, the rate of conversion to Judaism slowed down in Egypt, Asia Minor, Greece and Italy--the heart of ancient Western civilization--along the coast of the Maghreb the communities of believers in Yahweh did quite well. Archaeological and epigraphic evidence depicts thriving Jewish religious life. Archaeological excavations near ancient Carthage uncovered a number of tombs from the third century CE inscribed in Latin characters, or even Hebrew or Phoenician, with images of candelabra engraved alongside. Also all over the region a large number of tombstones have been found at the graves of proselytes with Greek or Latin names, and their religion is always stated beside the non-Hebrew names . . . .

"[Tertullian] was especially concerned about the strength of Judaism in his native city of Carthage. His extensive knowledge of the Old Testament and Jewish tradition indicates the strength of the local Jewish religious culture. His sharp attacks against the proselytes also testify to the popular appeal of this movement. He sought to explain the success of Judaism, in contrast to that of persecuted Christianity, by noting that it was a legal religion in Roman law, hence easier to adopt. He showed respect for the Jews, especially the Jewish women for their modesty, but fiercely attacked the Judaizers."

So we have Salo Baron, Harry Feldman, Marcel Simon, Georg Rosen, Shlomo Sand, and, yes, the master of sci fi himself--HG Wells--all engaging in SHEER SPECULATION, based on nothing more than patchwork evidence and raw intuition. But such is the historian's art. And this is where the science of population genetics can make invaluable contributions. However, it will require great resolution of haplogroups and lots & lots of specimens to distinguish (1) Phoenicians from Judeans circa 500 BC; distinguish (2) Carthaginians from Judeans circa 200 BC; and then determine (3) how each of these populations may have contributed to the formation of Sephardic populations circa 500 AD, and possibly other Jewish groups

And no, I'm not joking about HG Wells. From his Short History of the World, published in 1922 ---->

"After the fall of Tyre, Sidon, Carthage and the Spanish Phoenician cities, the Phoenicians suddenly vanish from history; and as suddenly we find, not simply in Jerusalem but in Spain, Africa, Egypt, Arabia, the East, wherever the Phoenicians had set their feet, communities of Jews"

But if HG Wells can be easily dismissed, and Shlomo Sand deemed a leftist radical, Salo Baron is about as authoritative one can get. Should we simply reject the speculations of Baron and Feldman out of hand?

I will close my remarks by linking to an essay celebrating Salo Baron's life and work --->https://magazine.columbia.edu/article/salo-wittmayer-baron-demystifying-jewish-history
 
It's known that Jews prefered the Middle East over the post Roman Europe of the Dark Ages.

At least up until about 1000 AD.
At that time the Christian Crusades were weakening the Middle East.
And the Spanish Reconquista was retaking Spain.

Then started moving to Europe where they have been for centuries.
They also came back to the Ottoman Empire and North Africa after the European Kingdoms expelled them.

But decolonization and the creation of the State of Israel drove them out.
 
Excerpt from recent article by Ron Unz:

Jews as Phoenicians and Carthaginians?

However, in reviewing this genetic evidence I saw an obvious puzzle that seemed to have passed unnoticed in all of the discussions I’d read.

Most mainstream experts seemed to quietly concede that Sand was correct in arguing that by the time of the Roman Empire the overwhelming majority of the Jews living along the shores of the Mediterranean were probably of convert stock, having little ancestry from the Israelites of Palestine. Yet the genetic evidence painted a very different picture for the major subsequent Jewish populations.

As mentioned, the Ashkenazi Jews seem to derive from Middle Eastern males who took European wives in the centuries after the Fall of Rome. Meanwhile, the Sephardic Jews of Muslim Spain are also of Middle Eastern ancestry, and they were the wealthiest and most numerous component of Jewry throughout much of the Middle Ages prior to their 1492 expulsion by Ferdinand and Isabella. So if only a small fraction of Jews had roots in Palestine, it appears quite odd that these would have become the progenitors of both the Sephardic and male Ashkenazi lines. Genetic evidence seems to conflict with strong literary and historical evidence.

I think the solution to this apparent mystery comes from considering a very simple question. If millions of pagans across the Mediterranean world probably converted to Judaism during the centuries following the conquests of Alexander the Great and the rise of Rome, we should ask ourselves which pagans were the most likely to do so.

The Greeks dominated the Hellenistic world, and the success and appeal of their culture was so overwhelming that large numbers of the Jews in Palestine became ardent Hellenizers, incorporating pagan elements into their lifestyle and eventually sparking the Maccabean revolt against such detested foreign influences. So it seems very unlikely that substantial numbers of Greeks or Greek-influenced groups would have converted to Judaism when the evidence is that the flow of quasi-converts was far stronger in the opposite direction. And the long history of bitter hostility between the very large Greek and Jewish populations of Alexandria further undercuts the notion of numerous Greek converts.

Similarly, the world-conquering Romans of the Republic ruled Palestine, and there seems no evidence that any of them converted to Judaism or found that religion attractive, with Cicero’s remarks suggesting that the Jews were merely considered a disruptive and disreputable nationality. During the early Empire, the Romans brutally crushed several Jewish revolts and although some elite Romans were attracted to the religion, the Jewish population across the Roman world had already become very large by that point, with no indication that it had been swelled by Roman converts.

So if it seems rather unlikely that substantial numbers of either Greeks or Romans had converted to Judaism prior to the birth of Christ, what was the probable source of the huge number of such apparent converts?

An intriguing possibility presents itself. The ancient Judeans were a Semitic people, closely related in language and culture to the neighboring Canaanites, primarily distinguished by their fiercely monotheistic religion. And by far the greatest and most important of these Canaanite peoples were the Phoenicians, whose coastal city-states included Tyre, Sidon, and Byblos, and who centuries earlier had founded Carthage as a North African colony on the coast of Tunisia. These Punic peoples—the Phoenicians and Carthaginians—were renowned as the greatest merchants of the ancient world, and they had successfully established a far-flung trading empire long before the rise of Classical Greece or Rome, an empire that endured for nearly a thousand years. Their business activities had also made them great innovators, and the Greeks credited them with having invented the Alphabet, which was later borrowed and adapted by all other peoples.

The Phoenician cities had eventually been subjugated by the large Semitic land empires of the Assyrians and the Babylonians, becoming tributary vassals, and this status continued under the Persian Empire, which relied upon the Phoenicians to provide most of its navy. But during Alexander the Great’s successful campaign to conquer Persia, he destroyed Tyre and any residue of Phoenician independence was permanently lost under his Hellenistic successors.

By this same era, Carthage had established a large North African empire in the Western Mediterranean, including many colonies of its own, and had probably become the largest and wealthiest city of the ancient world. But during the following century, the Punic Wars against Rome ended with Carthage’s total defeat and the loss of all of its territories, ultimately culminating in its final destruction in 146 BC.

We know that the Israelites had certainly had regular contact with their nearby Phoenician cousins. According to the Bible, King Solomon relied upon the skilled artisans of Tyre for his building projects, and a later king of Israel married into the ruling dynasty of that same city. Although these particular historical incidents seem quite plausible, I think a much more realistic perspective is that the wealthy, sophisticated merchants of Phoenicia regarded the Israelites as their rustic country cousins, probably poor and ignorant and fanatically religious with their monotheistic creed.

However, once Phoenicia had permanently fallen under the alien rule of the Hellenistic heirs of Alexander and the surviving Carthaginians had been incorporated into the empire created by their bitter Roman enemies, it is easy to imagine that many members of both those Punic populations might have gradually become drawn towards a messianic religion such as Judaism espoused by a closely-related Semitic people. According to modern estimates, Carthage’s North African empire probably included 3-4 million inhabitants at its peak, easily explaining the source of so many of the apparent Jewish converts who later appeared in that same part of the world.

Alexandria was the largest and most sophisticated city in the Eastern portion of Rome’s empire and one-third of its million residents were Jews, often locked in communal strife with the one-third who were Greek. It seems far more likely that these urbanized Jews were the descendants of Phoenician converts rather than Judean peasant farmers who had somehow been transformed into city-dwellers in such huge numbers. The very large Jewish community in Cyprus off the coast of Lebanon also seems likely to have had similar roots. Indeed, Michael Grant noted that as early as 6 AD a leading Jewish rabble-rouser involved in anti-Greek agitation in Palestine bore the distinctly Punic name of Hannibal.

The Palestinian Jews had no sea-faring tradition nor any history of colonization and were never known as merchants, with their most notable characteristic being their religious fanaticism and the violent rebellions it regularly inspired. But by the time of the early Roman Empire, we find enormous Jewish populations in coastal trading cities and islands, with Josephus making the (probably exaggerated) claim that 500,000 Jews lived in Cyrenaica on the Libyan coast, not far from destroyed Carthage. How plausible is it that Judean peasants could have migrated to all those distant locations in such large numbers, or had suddenly become the successful merchants and traders that many of these Jews seemed to be?

Outside the vicinity of the Middle East, those regions that later became centers of large Jewish populations were Spain and portions of the North African coast, both of which had been Carthaginian territory, a very suggestive pattern. And even as the Jewish population of the Roman Empire grew larger and became an increasing topic of discussion in the histories of that era, any mention of the residual Phoenicians or Carthaginians became less and less frequent, with those two historical trends possibly being connected.

Furthermore, conversion to Judaism required adult circumcision, a very painful and sometimes dangerous process that functioned as a major deterrent to potential adherents, and by foregoing that requirement, Christianity was able to greatly swell its ranks of Gentile converts. But Herodotus and some other ancient sources claimedthat the Phoenicians already practiced circumcision, which would have made it much easier for them to become Jews.

The cities of the Phoenicians were located in present-day Lebanon and much of that country’s population are their direct descendants. For centuries, the Lebanese, whether living at home or in their far-flung diaspora, have been widely regarded as some of the world’s shrewdest businessmen and traders, surely reflecting that Phoenician heritage and its enduring traditions. But although the Jews of Judea never had any such reputation, the Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews certainly did, further suggesting that their true origins lay with a different Semitic people.



Sand spent a few pages discussing the possibility of Jewish converts from among Phoenicians and Carthaginians, but he failed to give the idea the importance it deserved, instead devoting many times more space to the far less plausible Khazar ancestry of the European Jews. Indeed, his discussion was so meager that the issue was never mentioned in the long Wikipedia page devoted to his book nor in any of the reviews that I read. And although Sand cited a French work from 1962 that had briefly asserted the possibility, I have never seen the hypothesis mentioned anywhere among modern writers. For example, Paul Johnson’s widely praised 1987 bestseller A History of the Jews runs over 650 pages, but neither “Phoenician” nor “Carthaginian” appear anywhere in its index.

Although there seems no indication that this origin theory had ever circulated within the Jewish community, strong sympathy for those other Semitic peoples has been quite common. For two thousand years, Jews have regarded the Romans as their most hated enemy, the foreign nation that conquered and oppressed them, brutally subdued their repeated revolts, and demolished their Second Temple, the central shrine of their religion. But more than a century before it seized Jerusalem, Rome itself had nearly been destroyed by Carthage during the Second Punic War, so throughout history many Jews have greatly admired that kindred Semitic empire. During that war, the Carthaginians had been led by Hannibal, widely regarded as one of history’s most brilliant military commanders, who repeatedly destroyed far superior Roman armies before the weight of their greater resources finally overwhelmed him. Hannibal later fled overseas, offering his services to all enemies of Rome, and many years afterward when he was about to fall into Roman hands, he chose suicide by poison rather than captivity, thus explaining the name of the Israeli government’s controversial “Hannibal Directive.” For related reasons, Sigmund Freud explained that as a Jew he had always regarded Hannibal as one of his personal heroes.

So unless modern DNA testing has become sufficiently precise to distinguish the genetics of the ancient Judeans from that of their close Phoenician cousins, I think the latter group should be treated as a leading candidate for the true origin of the modern Jews, including both the Sephardics of Spain and the male line of the Ashkenazis of Eastern Europe.

I wish I could take personal credit for this bold, seemingly persuasive hypothesis that solves many different puzzles, but I can’t. Nearly fifty years ago I happened to read The Outline of History, the sweeping 1920 history of the world by British polymath H.G. Wells, whose narrative stretches from the origins of life to the end of the world war, and he devoted a couple of paragraphs in its 1,200 pages to presenting this exact theory of Jewish origins, which he regarded as so plausible as to almost be self-evidently true. I found his hypothesis quite convincing at the time and have always been surprised that no one else seems to have ever taken it up in the hundred years since it was first proposed.
 
Did the Arabs write about the Jews when they invaded and spread islam? Did they often write about people they encountered?
 
Unz Review continues to publish articles developing the "Carthaginian Theory." See https://www.unz.com/article/religious-implications-of-the-carthaginian-theory/
Another intriguing continuity is the role of Saturn in Jewish culture. The historian Eusebius records that the Phoenician supreme deity, El, was deified as the star Saturn. The Romans also linked Saturn with the Carthaginian supreme deity, Baal-Hammon, possibly reinforced by the fact that Saturn ate his children in Roman mythology.

Roman and Medieval Jewish sources attest that at least some form of Saturn/Baal-Hammon worship remained even after the Carthaginians mass converted to Judaism. Shlomo Sela, a professor in the Department of Jewish Thought at Bar Ilan University, analyzed the works of Abraham ibn Ezra, a prominent Medieval Jewish commentator, who wrote a lengthy work attempting to defend the link between the Jews and Saturn. Sela wrote that this link is “historically vouched for in almost all the sources which have been presented above to demonstrate the persistence of the Saturn-Jewish connection from antiquity till the Middle Ages. Thus, both Tacitus and St. Augustine asserted that the Jews made the Sabbath their rest day in order to honor or worship Saturn.”[6] (p. 40)

Lest anyone think that this was just Roman or Christian propaganda, Sela also states: “That Jewish society of the Talmudic period recognized the same association is shown by the fact that the Babylonian Talmud (Shabbat 156a) refers to Saturn as Shabbetai, i.e., the star of Shabbat (Saturday).”[7] Ibn Ezra himself did not deny that the Shabbat (Sabbath) was related to Saturn, but defended it by saying that Jews rested to protect themselves from Saturn’s malignant influence, which was supposedly strongest on that day. The Jewish newspaper, Forward, also admits the link, but claims that the Jews named Saturn after the Sabbath simply because the Romans believed the Jews were resting in honor of Saturn.[8]

Both of these explanations raise serious questions. The Old Testament clearly and repeatedly states that God blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy, and that it’s to be dedicated only to God (Exodus 20:8-11). If devout Jews rest for Saturn, even if we are to believe that it’s to protect themselves from Saturn, this would be religiously errant at the very least. Along with that, one would think that pious Jews would be deeply offended by the Roman accusation that they dedicated the Sabbath to a malicious pagan deity and would strenuously resist such a connection given the severe scriptural warnings against idol worship. Instead, they appear to have had no problem with naming Saturn “the Sabbath star”, casting doubt on the idea that the Romans were wrong about this.

However, an anonymous commenter Fuchs objected to the Carthaginian theory on the grounds that Ashkenazi do not have elevated NW African or Berber ancestry:
The Phoenician-descended populations of Imperial Roman Northafrica should have had significant native Nordwest African heritage (as measured by the Dodecad K=12 and it’s “NW African” ancestry component), due to admixture in Carthagenian and post-Carthaginian times (500 year or more!).
Hence, if modern European Jews are derived from these people, they should show elevated levels of that ancestry compared to
a) Iron-Age Israelites
b) Modern-day reference populations in the Levant

With this rebuttal:
Even though there was inevitably some miscegenation between the Punic settlers and the native North Africans, that miscegenation must have been limited since at the time of the fall of Carthage, the Punic settlers and the native North Africans remained quite distinct from each other. In fact, the Numidian natives were allies of Rome and played a vital role in the campaign that culminated with the destruction of Carthage.
 
The most recent Unz article on the topic was a most interesting read. But whether it's true or not, remains to be seen. The Carthagians weren'r exactly mixed with North Africans, so that objection in the comments doesn't really add anything to the debate. The "rebuttal" makes more sense. Besides, we're only talking about the male line. Middle Eastern males might have dominated in the early stage of the formation of future Ashkenazim Jews but they weren't the only ones, whereas the females were almost entirely of Northern Italian and German stock. Unz credits H.G. Wells with the "Phoenician/Punic theory." It's interesting that Shlomo Sand never picked up this theory but rather decided to waste his time on the nonsensical Khazar theory, although it didn't play a central role in his writings. Sure, there might be some Ashkenazi Jews with some ancient Khazar roots but the claim that all AJs descended from Khazars was always BS.

Unz' conclusion is quite the plot twist: the Palestinians are the actual Israelites while the Jews, if only through their paternal lineage, descended from the "cursed Canaanites."
 
Back
Top