Because fabricating history, even ancient history is often the claim to authority of today's politicians. Nowhere is this more pronounced that in that part of the world.

I agree. But I have read two instances in the books of reputable historians, although neither are Ancient Historians (my initial degree incidentally) so it is not simply politics.

Perhaps its easier to believe in constructed narratives where everything falls into place, not the complexities of real history. No Two United Kingdoms and no Mecca either.

I should perhaps rephrase. History is used by politicians to justify now or to demand something in the future. The justification for the state of Israel is claimed by some to be based on historical/theological origins, neither of which stand up to proper historical scrutiny. It is of course not necessary to justify Israel by these abstract references. The country is international recognised irrespective of its mythical origins.

Many states make claims based on these factitious accounts of history. Some elements of the story are true, like all good propaganda always is, and some fabricated from myth and reinterpretation.

It is absolutely correct that constructive narratives are more comfortable than actual history. The British Empire was a pernicious and oppressive despotism but to some is still the shining light of civilisation.

Barry,

There is a case for claiming the Israel character of Palestine is certainly mythical, as their birthright is mainly asserted by the Bible. Migration of Arab speakers into the area from 400 BCE ensured a longer habitation by Arab groups than Jewish groups.

Still the idea has had a long life and seems as much to do with monotheist pretentions, the idea of universal religions centred in Jerusalem as anything more recent.

I agree with Barry Turner.

It is a curious concept that nationhood is by birthright any case in the 21st century. We know that nation states are transient as are all political structures. Most of the states of the world are at the longest a few hundred years old many much younger.

I discussed the issue of Israel on another thread I started some time ago. It sadly was constantly distracted by superfluous religious arguments about the veracity of the Torah as a historical basis for the state of Israel.

The Levant is and always has been a fluid multicultural geographical area which for thousands of years has seen expansions and contractions of one empire after another along with migrations, often for economic purposes. In terms of structured societies the origins of nation states in this area starts with Mesopotamians and Egyptians who formed recognisable states with political structures and bureaucracies some 5000 years ago.

Clearly some much older settlements around Jericho and further north in Anatolia sedentary cultures began farming and building permanent settlements 11,000 years ago. (Çatalhöyük, Göbekli Tepe) Judging by the variations in building structures at these sites some form of polity was underpinning the maintenance of this permanent early urbanisation.

Barry,

Rather than polities more likely shared ideas, one being the primacy of human beings, already then evident. As Jared Diamond points out the mere circumstance of having animals around suitable for domestication such as sheep, goat and pigs and the likely beginnings of cattle (domesticated bovine) in North Africa, suitable cereals for domestication, favoured early domestication.

But I read an article recently on the DNA mixture within the area and it seems to have been very volatile from very ancient times. In terms of languages, very much so in Syria and Palestine. Hebrew was probably stabilised through religious script utilised mainly by the elite. The Torah,etc, is an elite construction in a similar fashion to other scripts and languages of the time.

Stanley

The DNA mixture in that area will be very varied. It was one of the main routes out of Africa many millennia before any type of settlement or community as we would recognise them formed. It is the natural highway for migration along a coated path with plenty of food for hunter gatherer bands.

Migration occurred across the Levant from all directions for thousands of years. Egyptians from the south, Hittites from the north, Assyrians and Sumerians from the east. The proto-Indo-European languages merged there with Semitic and even older languages. It is possibly the oldest genetic and cultural convergence zone on the planet.

Throughout the classical period and into the modern historical period the Middle East has been the target of all cultures. Even if we were to start with Alexander the Great only 24 centuries ago there have been vast numbers of imperial incursions and population migrations in that part of the world.

The complexity of the history is unfathomable. That is probably what so much mythology is used as a substitute.

I heartily agree with you on your last statement, Barry. Mythology forms part of how humans think, whether in narrative form that infuses religions, or other understandings of human development. As religion for long periods has produced those narratives, history became a matter of wars and the heroes who won them. For example, David rather than the slow and complex establishment of small and greater polities probably due in the 10th c to pressures on the Shephelah from Sea peoples and Philistines (who had possible origins amongst them) as well as more peaceful incursions by phoenician merchants. A figure head is required.

The truth remains that Judea was a small polity throughout these periods. In the 10th century Jerusalem was small and did not compare with Megidda to the north. It is mentioned in the 10th c only in passing. Of course the great empire of the Hebrews is not mentioned at all.

I agree with Barry Turner.