A Review and Response to Shlomo Sand's "The Invention of the Jewish People": PART 1by Mikhayah ben David

בשם יהוה הרחמן הרחם/بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

To begin with, the author of the work at hand must make it clear that he does not take issue with the title, or even the central aims of Shlomo Sand’s work, The Invention of the Jewish People (2009). There are, however, numerous points that the professor overlooks in his research, which is admittedly far too broad an endeavor for a man of his particular specialization. This review is prompted, in part, by the misuse of Sand’s work within the Muslim world, and by proponents of the so-called "Black Hebrew Israelite" phenomenon.

Anti-Semitism or Anti-Jewish Polemic? A Word On Saying What We Mean

Critics of Sand's work, even and especially those who have not read it, privately express irritation that his work - however legitimate his intentions - could be used as fuel for Anti-Semitism. They are indeed correct that it could be, and has - since its publication - been most wholeheartedly embraced by such individuals (many who have not read the work in its entirety). As a preface, however, it must be said that such use will not be termed “Anti-Semitism” in this response. It will, instead, more accurately be describes as “Anti-Jewish attitudes” or “Anti-Judaism” and so on.

The term “Anti-Semitic” is particularly relevant to 19th century German use, and even Hitler was forced to clarify what he meant by this term in the second edition preface to his Arabic translation of Mein Kampf. In the spring and summer of1936, Jeffrey Herf explains, “Nazi officials had reassured Arab diplomats that Nazi ideology and policy were directed against the Jews only, not non-Jewish Semites, which they explained had never referred to anyone other than Jews in German parlance. Nazism viewed Arabs and Muslims as different from the Germans but, in clear contrast to the racial hierarchy presented in Mein Kampf, not as racially inferior.”[1]

Herf continues, that “at least some Arab and Persian diplomats” had begun to incorporate the lingo of Nazism and “had become accustomed to thinking about peoples and nations in the racist categories emerging from the National Socialist regime.”[2] In spite of the Reich’s pledges, some of the language in Mein Kampf would prove problematic in courting the Arab and Iranian-Aryan world.[3] To intercept this potential problem, Fritz Grobba, ambassador to Iraq (1932-39), serving in the German legation in Kabul, Afghanistan (1923) urged a revision of certain passages. Grobba opined that a translation of the book into Arabic “would be met by Arab readers” throughout the Middle East “with great interest,” so long as a maodification of certain passages, which detailed racial hierarchy, could be made “in ways that correspond to the sensitivities of the race conscious Arabs.” He suggested “replacing the term ‘anti-Semitic’ with ‘anti-Jewish’ and ‘anti-Semitism’ with ‘anti-Judaism’”.[4] Thus, we see that even the Nazis no longer regarded their opposition to Jews as Anti-Semitic, but specifically targeted to Jewish, rather than Arab, Semites.

Furthermore, Grobba suggested a disclaimer for the Arabic translation, which was published in 1936, and remains a popular best-seller in the Arab Middle East. “German racial legislation does not want to pass judgment on the quality and worth of other peoples and other races,” he offered to Hitler. The Nazi Fuehrer “had agreed to a translation” with these edits, “modify[ing] his racist arguments” as well as deleting “passages bound to offend Arabs and Muslims.”[5]

It is thus an unconvincing appellation from Anti-Jewish polemicists who, on occasions of such individuals being Arab, appeal to their “Semiticness” to legitimize what are all too often sweeping generalizations and blanket hatred towards Judaism and Jews. Thus, the phrasing herein will be specific, and in so doing will be far more accurate.

Sand’s Own Claims of Errors, and His Invitation to Correct Them

From the outset, Sand explains that his work oversteps the bounds of his scholastic authority. It is therefore problematic when those who cite a passage from his book attempt to utilize his authority as a Professor and Historian in order to validate all of his attempts to incorporate histories as they relate to religious origins and the presence of religious groups' migrations in certain lands. It is furthermore problematic when, by Sand’s own admissions, he is no scholar of Halakhah. Thus, his work is purely a reaction to Nationalistic and particularly Israeli understandings of Jewishness.

To be sure, Sand collects a mountain of data that damns any hopes of a Jewish Nationalist to define Jewishness in racial terms. In spite of the fact that the vast majority of Jewry, particularly in Israel, is unaware of Jewishness as defined by Judaism and not post-Shoah imposed misconceptions, there is absolutely nothing in Sand’s presentation which should theologically clash with the Tanakhic and Talmudic definitions and descriptions of Jewishness.

If anything, Sand's study is lacking in a necessary concentration on what Judaism’s great scriptural works teach regarding “Who is a Jew”, and thus how Jewishness is not effected by mass entrances of newcomers to Judaism, such as has occurred in Persian, Idumean and Himyarite mass conversions, nor by mass-exits, such as this study will document has occurred throughout German Jewish history.

Sadly, most of those theological experts who know the religious sources, which this study will explore, are often victims of the same national myths that Sand admits he was nurtured on. Thus, while it is a rare rabbi who does not know that the founders of Talmudic Judaism were in many cases converts themselves, it is equally as rare for that majority which does know this to openly speak about it.

Sand’s work is thus necessary on many levels, but also necessary is critique of its flaws. It is because the author of this review cannot wholeheartedly endorse the presentation of all materials in his work that the review and response must be written. This should be seen as a brief companion to his work, for the critically-minded reader, as Sand’s himself explains that would he have found experts in the necessary fields to work with him, “it would have been better had the book been written by a team of scholars rather than by a lone historian.”

Though the present work was composed by a professional historian, it takes risks not usually permitted or authorized in this field of endeavor. The accepted rules of academe demand that the scholar follow prescribed path ways and stick to the field in which he is supposedly qualified. A glance at the chapter headings of this book, however, will show that the spectrum of issues discussed herein exceeds the boundaries of a single scientific field. Teachers of Bible studies, historians of the ancient period, archaeologists, medievalists and, above all, experts on the Jewish People will protest that the author has encroached on fields of research not his own. There is some truth in this argument, as the author is well aware. [6]

Thus, Sand explains, “some inaccuracies may therefore be found in this book, for which the author apologizes.” Furthermore, he “invites critics to do their best to correct them.” Sand explains that he “does not see himself as an Israeli Prometheus, stealing the fire of historical truth for the Israelis.” His goal is “only to draw attention to a well known phenomenon-that venturing outside of a specific field, or walking on the fences between several of them, may occasionally yield unexpected insights and uncover surprising connections.” His work, as far as one can tell from his own explanation, is an attempt to catalyze a discussion and further critical inquiry into the issues he addresses. “Because the recognized experts in Jewish history are not in the habit of confronting simple questions that at first glance may seem surprisingly fundamental, it may be worthwhile doing it for them.”[7]

While the author of this present work does not have any delusions of being a “recognized expert”, he does not hesitate to describe himself as an expert on several periods of Jewish history, particular regarding those eras when mass-conversions were most prominent. It is with all of the above in mind, that we proceed with what will hopefully be an edifying work for the author and reader alike.

Footnotes:

[1] Jeffrey Herf, Nazi Propagnada for the Arab World, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009), 24
[2] Ibid
[3] Iran’s name change coinciding with this period and the adoption of Nazi terminology in the Middle East.
[4] Herf 24
[5] Ibid 25
[6] Shlomo Sand, The Invention of the Jewish People, (trans. Yael Lotan; London & New York: Verso, 2009), 20
[7] Ibid