R. Kletter, Łukasz Niesiołowski-Spanò, Emanuel Pfoh
{"title":"原以色列人一个误导性术语的故事","authors":"R. Kletter, Łukasz Niesiołowski-Spanò, Emanuel Pfoh","doi":"10.1080/09018328.2023.2267879","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":42456,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament","volume":"59 1","pages":"187 - 209"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Proto-Israelites: The Story of a Misleading Term\",\"authors\":\"R. Kletter, Łukasz Niesiołowski-Spanò, Emanuel Pfoh\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09018328.2023.2267879\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42456,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"187 - 209\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09018328.2023.2267879\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09018328.2023.2267879","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
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.