Harmut Dicke - Origin of Judaism

[JoeySteel]

About the origin of Judaism

development and importance



I

Among the cultural-historical questions, the question of the origin of Judaism undoubtedly occupies a fundamental position. On the one hand, because as a 3000-year-old phenomenon it has had a lasting influence on the entire history of the Mediterranean region as well as on Europe and, via this, on the entire development of the world, on the other hand because it is also the source of the two largest religions and the moral views they spread. These religions, however, including Judaism, absorbed a wealth of early historical experience, but also transformed it in a very specific wayrelationships of domination at the time of their creation. You helped shape the thinking. But from all this it follows as a matter of course that Judaism carries within itself a fundamental social question of origin and substance.

Since the 17th century, individual tablets from antiquity, the ancient Egyptians, the Mesopotamian peoples and even the Hittites [1] have been discovered . But only in the nineteenth century, with the development of capitalism andof internationalization and the spread of bourgeois rule, the old testimonies were systematically targeted and the old cultures, which also played a central role in the spread and emergence of Judaism and numerous other religions, began to be analyzed.
In 1822 Champollion succeeded [2]to decipher the Egyptian hieroglyphic writing and thus to make a decisive step in the study of the ancient, pre-antiquity societies. The cuneiform script had been deciphered to some extent around 1800, but here too the decisive step was only taken in the course of the 19th century through systematization. The analysis of the cuneiform scripts of Mesopotamia turned out to be particularly rewarding, because everyday life in Mesopotamia was already recorded on clay tablets, thousands of which were found during the excavations.

In 1887 the cuneiform archive was even found in El Amarna, the site of a former Egyptian capital, Akhetaton, which was supposed to play a brief but very revolutionary and important role; it was the diplomatic archive of the 18th dynasty of the New Kingdom in Egypt, which conducted intensive correspondence with the peoples of Mesopotamia, especially with the Babylonian Empire and the Hittite Empire, as well as with smaller potentates. At that time, the three states formed the world powers in the entire "Middle-Eastern sphere", fought a struggle for hegemony, numerous wars among themselves, but also had intensive trade contacts. The evaluation of these as well as other finds made it possible to research the history of the second millennium BC in relative detail.before the Jewish religion arose in its fixed form of the Old Testament.
Since about 1840 we have had excavations in the modern systematic sense. Decade after decade they provided a more complete picture of prehistoric times. And one saw that as early as this second and even the third millennium before dZ Mesopotamia had contracts in the economy, money, a legal system, literature and poetry, even the beginnings of a systematized philosophy at its disposal, and one saw how the religious beliefs had developed over the centuries. As early as the turn of the 20th century, numerous proofs of the origin of the individual religious cult acts were available, the Bible was analyzed according to individual authors, a date was determined and the changes were analyzed.
More important, however, was the discovery that a number of Biblical motifs had long existed in ancient culture and had been reworked centuries later by Old Testament writers. So there is the story of the genesis of the world and that of man from the earth, the serpent motif, the Deluge and the story of Noah's Ark in these much older Mesopotamian documents. And what about Christianity? It was to be found that many of the ideas had their forerunners in Egypt or in Jewish groups long before the change in time. In short, the religions could be analyzed, that was already clear at the outbreak of the First World War.
During the war, the internationally operated excavations continued. Finally, during the 1920s, further sensational finds in Egyptian history were made. What's more, the history of the Palestinian space (namely between the great powers) could be analyzed in more and more detail and the tribes mentioned in the Bible could be described in detail.
All this research was not well received by either the Church or Jewish orthodoxy, let alone Islam. Because they took away the aura from the entire foundation of religions. The Church spoke out openly or indirectly against this research, because she felt that this knowledge dissolved her teaching. The Pentateuch, the five books of Moses, was the product of the literary, and indeed the politically determined, literary activity of the Jewish priesthood and the literary reworking of earlier texts. This research work should not be underestimated, it is also an essential pillar for the scientific penetration of human development and our world, i.e. our modern world view.
There were also clerics who took part in the investigation of the texts themselves, such as the Protestant theologian Ernst Sellin, who, with detailed detective work, investigated contradictions in the development of the early Bible texts and the world of experience of the Jewish people in its origin. The explanation of religion occupied a large space in humanistic research in the 1920s and even 1930s. [3]

Among those who took up this research was also Sigmund Freud, who otherwise hardly came forward with historical analyzes or research, but instead stands for the "psychoanalysis" he founded.
Following on from all this research, he undertook a work that stands out from all his other works, the attempt to put the most important results and discoveries concerning Egypt in context.
It is about "The Man Moses and the Monotheistic Religion", which should be hotly debated in professional circles, but is much less known to the general public, especially Chapter II, which in contrast to virtually all other works by Freud represents a kind of historical outline or historical reconstruction. The first chapter is an introduction to this. Freud himself emphasizes that this presentation is a development of a hypothesis, with which he tried to correspond as closely as possible to the firm clues in order to arrive at a coherent picture. After several years of preparatory work, Freud published this work as individual parts, first in Vienna in 1937 and in exile in 1939 as a coherent work. The 2nd World War II hampered the necessary subsequent discussion, although these publications immediately provoked the most violent reactions. Finally, part 3 within the overall work places Freud's own theory of religion in the foreground again, there an attempt is made to verify the aforementioned presentation. As early as 1912 he had done the religious-historical work "Totem und Taboo", which included elements from the hypothetical group and horde nature of mankind that were typical for the author in the explanation of early religion. This he now tried to connect. As early as 1912 he had done the religious-historical work "Totem und Taboo", which included elements from the hypothetical group and horde nature of mankind that were typical for the author in the explanation of early religion. This he now tried to connect. As early as 1912 he had done the religious-historical work "Totem und Taboo", which included elements from the hypothetical group and horde nature of mankind that were typical for the author in the explanation of early religion. This he now tried to connect.

However, the reference to Sigmund Freud requires comment here. For what is the position of his other writings, i.e. the so-called psychoanalysis, in the debate since the end of the 19th century? What, then, did Freud and his followers find as a starting point in the sciences when they began?
Beyond the teachings of the 17th and 18th centuries, a further stage of understanding of social development had already been reached. As in the natural sciences, a new degree of closedness of knowledge had been gained in questions of the development of society. Karl Marx succeeded in developing a very complete view of the development of the economic foundations, social institutions and the superstructure. Even the bourgeois world would be unimaginable without his teachings after attempts were initially made to keep them silent. Analyzing the social world from the point of view of its own contradictions was now also the method used by bourgeois sociologists.

It is against this background that we must evaluate the Freudian theory of "psychoanalysis". It leaves the social factors radically outside, portrays man as a product of isolated instincts and makes an isolated point of view, sometimes obtrusively directed at the navel-gazing of the individual, into a basic principle. One must understand this as a kind of opposition to existing social knowledge. We cannot assume that Freud and his comrades-in-arms had not heard of the then new social theories; there is nothing to support such a thesis for a man as educated as Sigmund Freud. It is - to put it bluntly - the opposition of people who refuse certain insights and at the same time work in sectors
So why study this scripture under these conditions? On the one hand, it is necessary because new areas are addressed here - what Marxism developed about the cultural elements from the early days has by no means been fully developed. On the other hand, it represents an exceptional development, so that it cannot be ignored at all in the analysis of the origin of religion and especially of Judaism.


The starting point for Freud's development is bourgeois medicine, which has always been closely associated with government and which has been understood as a power factor within the state.
Again. So while Marxism and other social theories such as those of Max Weber were spreading throughout Europe, Freud postulated his "psychoanalysis". Freud very strongly embodies ignorance of the social context. If one considers that at that time the whole intellectual world and the political struggle revolved around this very innovation, one cannot assume that Freud did not take note of it. He pointedly ignored it. Instead, there are ways of looking at the drives as the dominant force of the human being, in a factually constant, unchangeable form that stands outside of social development and formation. They are outside his consciousness or above his ego, that is, above his identity. This directly opposed the urge for emancipation at the time, to gain more and more knowledge about one's own development, which was expressed in all development theories of society and the natural sciences. Nevertheless, one has to state that, even if this theory suffers from a complete one-dimensionality, it nevertheless linked to certain points and open questions. Thus Freud wrote the book "Totem und Taboo", which in certain theses linked to a series of teachings on early history and the development of religion. But how he approaches these questions must interest us here, because he connected it with certain theses that he later developed. which expressed itself in all development theories of society and the natural sciences. Nevertheless, one has to state that, even if this theory suffers from a complete one-dimensionality, it nevertheless linked to certain points and open questions. Thus Freud wrote the book "Totem und Taboo", which in certain theses linked to a series of teachings on early history and the development of religion. But how he approaches these questions must interest us here, because he connected it with certain theses that he later developed. which expressed itself in all development theories of society and the natural sciences. Nevertheless, one has to state that, even if this theory suffers from a complete one-dimensionality, it nevertheless linked to certain points and open questions. Thus Freud wrote the book "Totem und Taboo", which in certain theses linked to a series of teachings on early history and the development of religion. But how he approaches these questions must interest us here, because he connected it with certain theses that he later developed. Thus Freud wrote the book "Totem und Taboo", which in certain theses linked to a series of teachings on early history and the development of religion. But how he approaches these questions must interest us here, because he connected it with certain theses that he later developed. Thus Freud wrote the book "Totem und Taboo", which in certain theses linked to a series of teachings on early history and the development of religion. But how he approaches these questions must interest us here, because he connected it with certain theses that he later developed.
The book "The Man Moses and the Monotheistic Religion" therefore occupies an exceptional position within his work. The centrepiece, the second chapter on the (possible or probable) Egyptian descent of Moses, is not a "psychoanalytic" article but a historical treatise, an attempt to provide circumstantial evidence for an explanation of Judaism. Almost towards the end of this chapter Freud apologizes for his historical explanations and argues that this is necessary for his further explanations. What an exceptional position this little book occupies is also made clear by the controversies it provokes. There are already a large number of books that deal with the theses of this book, especially in the English-speaking area.


As an example, Ilse Grubrich-Simitis, who is the editor of Freud's works, is a staunch defender of "psychoanalysis", among other things the author of a book "Back to Freud's Teachings". But it spits poison and gall against the above-mentioned writing, which would like to explain it as a "daydream", the product of an aging Freud who, due to the circumstances of his life, was no longer master of himself [4 ] . She would love to make this writing disappear.
However, Freud had been working on this topic for at least 6 years and in fact put all his remaining energy into it. On the contrary, in this writing one senses that the author is trying to lay down his thoughts as precisely as possible. He repeats the representations several times, always redefining them. Although neither a historian nor an archaeologist by profession, he tries very carefully to do justice to the various available pieces of knowledge and also tries to follow up contradictions in his own arguments. The fact that he was finally able to publish the entire work in his London exile a few months before his death was an important satisfaction for him.


So there were attempts to formulate these historical connections before Freud, and there was Freud's own paper of 1912. Here, however, Freud went much further. He tried to put things in a logical, historical context and to explain Judaism, which he now had a wealth of evidence to draw on.

He assumed that the exodus from Egypt described in the Bible, led by Moses, was based on actual events, and that Moses - the name is Egyptian from its origin - was a follower of the special "reform" pharaoh Akhenaten acted, or a follower of a comparable direction. Akhenaten was a pharaoh who fomented a brief but intense revolution in the Egyptian state that declared war on the utterly corrupt operations of the ancient Amun priesthood and a new, almost naturalistic cultintroduced to the sun disk Aton. His original name was Amenhotep IV, he changed his name to Achenaten, which we usually write as Akhenaten.
Underlying this break were concrete changes in Egyptian society. The old social conditions saw themselves through the wars [5]and by trading against an international world, Egypt relativized itself and absorbed new ideas, one can speak of a kind of universalism; the ancient world of totem gods, which had ruled Egypt for 1500 years, stood in the way of this renewal in the field of ideas. Soon after Akhenaten's death, the old forces regained power in Egypt and carried out a fierce restoration. In Freud, the Egyptian Moses, as a follower of a new school at a time when it is already being opposed by Egyptian rule, goes to the - historically safe - Hebrew tribes in Egypt to try to apply the new teachings there. Under the conditions in Egypt, which are now hostile to the subversive doctrines, he seeks an exodus.
He develops his views on a possible to probable course of events.

On or after the passage through Sinai, this exodus encounters another tribe of Hebrews, ethnically related to the first, but on aon a completely different level than the tribes and families that may have been present in Egypt for several generations. Here are the sources for a second figure of Moses, which is in fact to be found in the Old Testament and is not at all inconspicuous. He represents a tribal religion, native to the east of the Jordan Valley and Gulf of Aqaba, so unlike the original Moses. Here an original god Yahweh is presented, who is a kind of angry volcano god who teaches friend and foe to fear. From this source comes the Midianite prophet. This figure is superimposed on Moses in later depictions and placed in his place. [6]Following the reflections of another religious scholar, Freud assumes that the original Egyptian Moses was murdered by the members of the trek that he himself led. Freud sees possible character traits such as lust for power and the fundamental problem for an Enlightener of getting along with a tribe like the Hebrews, which still has original ideas, as causes for this. This leads to a kind of trauma.
But the old doctrine, which is initially stifled, always comes through because it has something fundamental and forward-looking to show. It is the fundamental of Judaism, while at the same time another superimposed teaching is also expressed in Judaism, it is a matter of usurpation. Freud presents this from his point of view, one clearly senses his social views. Here, however, he grasps a certain core of the presentation that interests us. It says for example:

”Because so imperfect our reports on the ethical side ofAton religion, it cannot be meaningless that Ikhnaton regularly referred to himself in his inscriptions as 'living in Maat ' (Truth, Justice). In the long run it did not matter that the people, probably after a short time, rejected the teaching of Moses and got rid of him himself. The tradition of it remained , and its influence reached, albeit only gradually over the centuries, what Moses himself had been denied. God Jahve had received undeserved honor when, from Qadesh [7] onwards, Moses' deed of liberation was credited to his account, but he hadto atone heavily for this usurpation. The shadow of the god whose place he took grew stronger than he; at the end of the development behind his nature that of the forgotten Mosaic God had come to light. Nobody doubts that only the idea of ​​this other god allowed the people of Israel to survive all the blows of fate and kept them alive up to our times." [8th]

When using religious terms in these quotations, one must always keep in mind that in the early period social questions were at least very often dealt with in a religious form.


These theses, with which Freud tries to decipher Judaism, are verified in a whole series of historical phenomena. Finally, in this work, Freud also deals with the emergence of anti-Semitism, or rather anti-Judaism, and also provides a number of elements for explaining Christianity. It goes without saying that these historical explanations were not without an outcry. Both the Church and the Jewish clergy were strongly opposed to this analysis. Freud did not long outlive them. He died in exile in London three months after publication, aged 83.

Unfortunately, one has to state that this important achievement of the analysis of religion, of materialism, did not find the appropriate appreciation and continuation after the Second World War, although the excavations and antiquity research as well as the research of the Stone Age had made enormous progress. This must be explained by the political changes after 1933 and after 1945. The USA, which was largely founded by religious groups, fears these disclosures, and in Germany, too, where the churches are anchored in the state, there is an interest in keeping this development of human knowledge and enlightenment under a lid.


II.

The connection between Judaism and Mesopotamian culture is obvious. An extensive literature has been developed over the past hundred years. In particular, the story of Genesis (1st Book of Moses, the history of the origin) reveals the predecessor of Mesopotamian legends and myths. The early Sumerian Garden of Eden may have provided the model for "paradise," with its unfolding of systematic horticulture and richness, the development of knowledge. Ultimately, prosperity and class society developed, as well as conflict with outside usurpers, who initially put an end to construction and shifted it to northern zones. The story of the Flood has long been known there and appears in more than one document.


Abraham, according to the biblical legend the progenitor of Judaism, came from Mesopotamia, as it is said from the city of Ur, a Sumerian foundation. It is recorded that he immigrated to what is now Palestine via northern Mesopotamia. This was contested by various powers, Egyptian dominance already existed in the south, Phoenician cities ruled in the north, and the Hittites clashed with their hegemony against that of the Egyptians, who ruled the southern part.

The Sumerian culture also created the earliest known legal works or collections, which in turn found a further development in the Code of Hammurabi. There are numerous parallels between this law and the laws of the Old Testament, but there are clear differences, especially in the moral area.

All of Mesopotamia goes through a turbulent history with alternating empires, in the course of which the upper class hardened more and more. The Mesopotamian culture, at least in the beginning, has a very unbiased attitude towards sexuality, which is also very directly linked to religious rites. Matriarchy, although long since superseded, still lives on in religious ideas, and temple prostitution is regulated in a bureaucratic manner that corresponds to the class system of the state. It must be assumed that the evolution and brutalization of the bureaucratic and slave-owning rule in this area, eventually passing into the rule of the Assyrian Empire, produced every form of degeneration and despicable villainy towards the working masses in these states.
The demarcation from this country of origin, the demarcation from this decline, can be seen in the Abrahamic tribe, that is, in its literary representation, which has come down to us in the history of the patriarchs. This story as it is found in the Bible today was recorded by priests at a much later time. They clearly wrote their ideology into the Bible and added later elements. This striving for renewal, for a new starting point, can still be recognized as substance. The stories may be rewritten, assuming they had no real background is itself unreal, as is the Egyptian Exodus, which is the lynchpin of the entire Old Testament.
And not only from the past one differentiated oneself, but also from the varietiesthe "fertility" cults that prevailed in the new homeland, in the land of Canaan. The somewhat later Phoenicians, for example, who became famous throughout the world as daring seafarers, discoverers and inventors, were still on a backward level in terms of cults. It is not improbable that elements were taken over from them at the same time. It is not for nothing that the overcoming of the "firstfruits" in man himself, concerning the first male descendant, the story of Isaac, plays such a central role in early history. [9]In the Phoenician foundation of Carthage (near today's Tunis), which played a dominant role in the western Mediterranean, the eldest son was still offered as a sacrifice at the time of the conflict with the Romans, i.e. a good 1000 years later. The history of the advance development of Judaism in the depiction of the Bible is an examination of these cultures.

This process of demarcation certainly did not come about all at once; on the contrary, one had to repeatedly come to terms with the surrounding tribes. It is also questionable whether the monotheism of the Jews was created here in one fell swoop. That's unlikely.
There were such immigrants from the Mesopotamian region, and the relatively central position of this region, the rivalry of the great powers there, which set barriers between them, was a favorable condition for the newly invading tribes. This was also the situation in which parts of this new tribe entered and settled in Egypt. According to the Joseph legend, one of Abraham's descendants managed to rise to the highest positions in Egypt. This is possible. It roughly coincides with the Hyksos period, the 2nd Intermediate Period, when foreign conquerors ruled Egypt for two centuries, as the Middle Kingdom's own central Egyptian rule had collapsed.

The monotheism of the Jews also has precursor developments in other areas. In Mesopotamia, too, one can observe an increasing internalization of religion, a shedding of nature cults, which can be explained by the increased level of knowledge in society.

A new morality was developed here, a higher relationship to sexuality, a higher demand of man on himself, which will form an essential element of the cohesion of the coming societies.
The development of Judaism at first seems rather small, if you will, "puny" in comparison to what Egypt or Babylon represent. But the elements that were born here -- if not only here -- were to prove of the utmost importance.
Compare this moral development, say, with that of much of ancient (pre-Discovery) America—with its excessive sacrificial cults that dictated stagnation to society. India, too, has had a completely different development in this area; it forms a counter-example to the Mediterranean-European development. What initially developed among the Jews could not be perfect. With the questions addressed here, we will then deal with the contradictions in the further development itself. With the arrival of the
Egyptian epoch in the development of Judaism, a new one follows, building on these early preliminary stages fundamental element that ties in with these initial developments.

III.

From the beginning it was clear that the Egyptian experience played a fundamental role in Judaism, since it occupies a large part of the Pentateuch itself. The inconsistency of the presentation, the interruptions and repetitions in the text, which is obviously made up of different edits, all attracted attention. But the Israelite religion seemed to have nothing to do with the Egyptian world of gods, as they dominated there for thousands of years, because they were completely different, rather one could discover certain similarities with Christianity in view of the emphasized ideology of the afterlife of the Egyptians. With the discovery of the Amarna period, which predates Moses' exodus from Egypt by several decades, new possibilities came up for debate. Here was a religionidentified reconstructions that shared some important common ground with the biblical tradition of the Pentateuch. The first assumptions that the ideology of the Amarna period, the epoch of the Aton cult, could have something to do with the emergence of Judaism are discussed very soon after the excavations between 1900 and 1910. The religious scholar Eduard Meyer was already acting against such theses in 1906, and such a connection is indicated in one of the first relevant books by Arthur Weigall about Akhenaten [ 10 ] .
Many have already heard of the best-known representatives of the epoch, Akhenaten or Nefertiti, but what is connected with this epoch in terms of content, when it took place, is by no means common knowledge. Therefore, a brief overview is given here.

Egyptian history begins around the time of 3200 BC, and in a short space of time it rises to extraordinary heights compared to the pre-cultures that prevailed there. One of the impulses for the sudden rise was the unification of the two kingdoms of the Nile delta (Lower Kingdom) and the elongated Nile valley (Upper Kingdom) above the delta into one state around 3100 BC. The reason for the sudden appearance of this advanced civilization is not yet entirely clear. Some also suspect the invasion of a conquering people from the Mesopotamian region, in which forms of high culture already prevailed at that time, but this is by no means certain. It is safe to assume that the fundamental advance in the mastery of the forces of nature, in the skill of craftsmanship, the development of writing and, above all, the ability to systematically exploit the flooding of the Nile for agriculture were decisive points. Undoubtedly, the unification unleashed enormous synergy forces throughout the new state.
According to the current state of knowledge, one must also know that neither Egypt nor Mesopotamia represent the beginnings of the culture. The current state of the excavations shows that the age of metalworking goes back thousands of years in Central Europe as well as in the Mediterranean region. Already in these epochsdivision of labor and long-distance trade developed. The early Egyptian culture, which was determined for a long time by stone processing and copper, and later bronze, also builds on this. As we know today, the handicraft development in the processing of stone and bone goes back even further to the younger Palaeolithic. Here the cultural tendencies are already differentiated, and Egyptian culture ties in with certain of them.
The Egyptian culture clearly shows African influences via Upper Egypt, on the other hand it is undoubted that already in the "prehistory" of Egypt, in the time of the "Negade cultures" [ 11 ], influences have come from today's Palestinian and Mesopotamian territory. The development of the period from about 3200 to 2700 BC, i.e. the development of the unification of the empire up to the first peak of the time of the pyramids in the Old Kingdom, is an epoch of radical upheaval, both politically and culturallyas well as from the side of technical developments changed life. With the first dynasty around 3000, a unified empire is formed. Finally, another thesis must be considered, which concerns the influence of the much older archaic culture in the area of ​​today's Sahara desert. This culture still existed around 6000 BC when this area was still water-rich. With the devastation caused by climatic change, people withdrew to the remaining water zones, including the Nile Valley. [ 12 ]

So a whole host of factors come together that made possible the "cultural explosion" in Egypt after the 3100 AD period. The merging of different cultural factors, but also favorable conditions in the Nile valley and delta to increase one's interaction with nature and to achieve social wealth are decisive.
On the one hand, there was a uniform control of water and agriculture, uniform legislation and land surveying, but it is not only that the centralization of the former chief positions to a comprehensive despotism developed what was then a progressive form of the state. There is also a social organization in the management of water management from the bottom up. The systematic exploitation of the Nile floods and the resulting possibility of agricultural overproduction meant, above all, social collective organization of the people, which formed the main trump card of Egypt. Furthermore, these factors entail the development of science, land surveying, then architecture experience an unprecedented peak. The priests of the school of Heliopolis (bibl.

At this point we have to make a leap. I can't outline the entire history of Egypt here in the briefest form either. Egypt continued to develop in this form until the emergence of the New Kingdom 1400 years later. In the meantime, Egypt has twice been shaken by social unrest. The social class struggle is also evident here, in bureaucratic Egyptian society. The empire breaks apart as a unitary state and foreign conquerors seize power. One speaks of the two intermediate times. After the first as well as after the second interim period, the princely house of Thebes took the initiative and once again unified the empire from its seat.

As already explained, after the Second Intermediate Period Egypt experienced a new, hitherto unknown heyday in the New Kingdom. In this epoch, Egypt emerges as a major imperial power, and it is itself challenged by other empires that rival Egypt in the territory of Palestine. The worldwide connections as well as the wars, which Egypt has to wage far away, lead to a broadening of the intellectual horizon. In addition to the wealth from its own production, incredible wealth from other countries flows together in Egypt. In Egypt itself, the Iron Age is finally making its way, which, starting in Asia Minor, has already arrived in other regions. Although Egyptian society continues to draw from its own development dynamics, Due to its long history, it has strong internal driving forces itself, so it is internationalizing and modernizing at the same time. This is the connection that makes the extraordinary epoch of the 18th Dynasty and finally Akhenaten possible.

Akhenaten's direction, which initially appears as a singular phenomenon, is by no means the result of a pharaoh's personal attitude; radical changes have taken place in Egyptian society and contradictions have developed. The school of Heliopolis, which ties in with the early phase of Egyptian history (pyramid builders) described above, is considered a driving force behind the changes associated with Akhenaten's name. In general, we must abandon the notion that these changes are the product of a small group of "top down" potentates. History teaches that such leaders of royalty sometimes seize upon currents which have developed underhand and transform them into their personal initiative,

The development of powerful international and internal trade, as well as an upsurge in handicrafts, characterize the New Kingdom of the 18th Dynasty. Alongside the long-established civil servants, the traditional families, new rising classes, if you will, forerunners of the bourgeoisie, are forming. Under the father Amenhotep III. the new trend is already breaking out, he himself is also stepping outside of the traditions, does not marry a "sister's wife" as prescribed by the pharaohs (preservation of the old blood ties of prehistory!), but such a "commoner", Teje, the herself will be one of the best-known female figures of ancient Egypt.
The greatest power in Egypt has long been held by the priesthood of Amun, which has played a dominant role since the Middle Kingdom, i.e. for a thousand years. They represented the ancient nature and totem gods, among which Amun first distinguished himself. At the same time, these priests, with their vast temple estates and their connections with the old civil service, represent the conservative element of Egypt. They represent the old and at the same time enrich themselves with the new imperial and international developments. A struggle ensues between these old forces and the new, expressed by Akhenaten and his wife Nefertiti.

Akhenaten suppressed the priesthood of Amun from the fourth year of his rule and had their temple demolished. But more importantly, a new cult is being created that betrays a new approach to the world. The entire world of the gods of the hundreds of totem gods, often half animal, half human, is abolished and the exclusive cult of the sun disk Aten is introduced in its place. It is a kind of naturalistic monotheism that is introduced here for the first time. The new cult opens up thinking towards mastering nature and mastering actual human life. The art suddenly represents the everyday life of the royal family. Also something completely new: Queen Nefertiti is herself one of the first political advocates of these innovations. She herself takes an active part in the political struggle.
The best-known document of this cult is the so-called Canticle of the Sun, attributed to Akhenaten himself, which is truly a unique document of a new forward-looking worldview. Many authors who deal with the Amarna period describe Akhenaten's teaching as anticipating the Enlightenment, i.e. ideas of the 18th century! Akhenaten had the common modern Egyptian raised to the written language, a very important measure for the life of the country. However, he centralized all political and religious power in his hands, which was important in the confrontation with the theocracy.
However, the period of Echnaton lasts only 17 years, the entire Amarna epoch together with its successors only about 35 years. The break came abruptly and, as far as is known, only affected the upper and middle classes. The peasant masses had reached these innovations only slightly. Finally, there are indications that compromises had already been made during Akhenaten's reign and that there were discord within the new direction. The old elements had to show up again in their own ranks, there was hardly a mass base, all of which offered a target for the counter-reaction. The change begins among the successors; the second successor, Tut-Ench-Aton, has to assume the name Tut-Ench-Amun as a child.
In the heated debate about the esteem in which Akhenaten was held, a number of authors came to the disparaging conclusion that Akhenaten acted arbitrarily and ultimately failed. But of course you can't blame him for that, because you can hardly expect a man of the 14th century BC to have Hegelian dialectics or even the philosophical methods of Descartes or the theory of evolution at his disposal.

Finally, the military usurper Haremheb seizes power and begins to fully restore the old power. That leads to the next dynasty. He and his followers attempt to radically eradicate this entire epoch from consciousness. The systems of this era are being razed and destroyed. The state chronology places the beginning of the reign of Horemheb at the end of Amenhotep III. merge, i.e. the state bureaucracy and the priesthood, which has regained power, have the period Akhenaten - Nefertiti declared non-existent, and treat them as such.
That is, this epoch became oblivion decreed , and their stone documents must go. Of course, behind such a regulation there is a ban on a strict instruction to talk about a certain matter at all. And this ban also allows conclusions to be drawn. It expresses the fact that one was dealing with a current whose resurgence one had to fear, and therefore measures had to be taken.

Erik Hornung's book "Echnaton" [ 13 ] is a well-known recent publication on this subject. It is an interesting compendium in the presentation of the most diverse opinions and the development of the discussion about this historical epoch. But there are also a number of short-circuited judgments that need to be challenged.

”How did this total oblivion come about? Akhenaten's revolution did not end violently. One stepped across it to new shores, one simply forgot it, even if it continued to have an effect in undercurrents. King Horemheb used to be considered the 'Liquidator' of the Amarna period, but it seems that only Seti I and Ramses II actively turned against Akhenaten and his immediate successors”

And further:

“There were no martyrs of the new religion, there was not even a reason to persecute it, because it survived Akhenaten by only a few years. What followed was total oblivion, after a brief, vague recollection of the 'wicked of Achetaton'."(p.13)

That's a very unlikely representation. How does the author even know that? It is not to be expected that later opponents would put anything down in stone documents about adherents of the new direction.
It is a trivialization of the opposites, which ignores the fact that two sides acted mutually with repression. Despite his pharaoh position, Akhenaten was not able to push through his "reform" without further ado, but had to counteract the determined pressure of the old forces, which remained a power factor due to their leading position for almost a thousand years.
Such a trend as that of Akhenaten was not the result of a single person, but was born out of the needs of the epoch. Therefore, with the political overthrow of them, the social forces that produced them could not disappear completely. The conclusion advanced by the author is not advanced without political reference to the thesis with which we are concerned.

Around 300 BC, a full thousand years later, the historian Manetho, a priest, compiled a chronology of the Egyptian pharaohs and he describes that during this period lepers and Hyksos (foreign conquerors of the Second Intermediate Period) ruled Egypt. So the harsh reaction at this time! But the direction must have been based on tens of thousands of supporters and activists, where have they gone? Were they all murdered, or "turned," to use a new expression? The events in Egypt must have stirred the souls of countless of the most intellectually advanced people, and the collapse must have led to severe disappointment. The stones and evidence of building could not be destroyed but the effects in people's minds. The subsequent 19th dynasty, the so-called Ramessides, embody the reaction, but still have to adopt many of the ideas in art, despite going back to the traditional style. They deflect in the direction of external conquest, another move not uncommon in history.
Did this direction also affect Judaism, which was in Egypt at the time through tribes? After all, the epoch of Moses has long been dated to around 1250 BC, but these events took place around 1340. And Moses not only has one of the most common Egyptian names, he also comes from Egypt. Therefore, the question of a connection is quite logical.
This question has been asked by historians and archaeologists for almost as longconcerned with Amarna.
Already Eduard Meyer came to the conclusion in his book:

”In the actual religion, belief in gods and cult, I can nowhere discover an Egyptian element; The living conditions and the views based on them were too varied for that. Therefore there is no greater contrast than between the pantheistic Mystery God of Egyptian culture, appearing in countless names and forms, and the strictly personal God of the Semites and especially of Israel, between the solar monotheism of Chuenaten and the exclusive Yahweh of the prophets. Anyone looking for borrowings here knows neither the Egyptian nor the Israelite religion.” [ 14 ]

First of all we see here that there must have been a discussion as early as 1906 on the point that concerns us. And since then this reply has been countered again and again. She overlooks one thing: If these traditions were transmitted through an exodus with longer migrations and overlapping of other groups, then one must assume that this influence was only able to persist in certain elements of principle. One cannot expect the Aten cult as it existed in Egypt to be reflected in any Aten sun disc. Even the merging of one or a few Egyptians with a platoon of a few thousand Israelites must lead to considerable concessions. Then, over the course of decades and centuries, theRites and ways of thinking further adapted by the majority of the population. They have to offer essentials so that they are retained in certain crucial points.

To demonstrate a point of commonality, consider another very early work on the subject, Weigall's 1910 book Akhenaten, which today, like Breasted's epoch-making works, is often attacked. [ 15 ]Weigall attempts to capture similarities between Judaism and the Amarna religion. In complete contrast to all previous Egyptian religion, the "afterlife" plays virtually no role in the Aten cult. In the ancient Egyptian cult, everything is geared towards the hereafter. Not only does everything that has status and reputation affords expensive equipment for the "beyond", it also plays an important role in the entire thinking. - And in Judaism it is a prominent feature that it does not deal with the hereafter. So ask, which other Middle Eastern religion has no or only a marginal role to play as a trailblazer? Another immediately striking point is the tradition of circumcision among the Jews. There is general agreement here that
The discussion about these points cannot be dismissed that easily. The question arises as to whether different historical branches base their judgment on the kind of turbulence and resistance that certain theses would provoke. Although the discussion was dismissed by certain historians and Egyptologists, it kept flaring up. Recently again clearly in the last 10-15 years. Let's quote Klaus Koch here:

”Did the Aten religion, which quickly perished in Egypt, find successors elsewhere, namely in Israel? Ever since the archaeologists rediscovered Amarna and Akhenaten, the suspicion that the religion of the Bible, geared exclusively to the worship of a god and creator, is descended from the Egyptian heretic king, has not gone away. Israelite monotheism is traditionally associated with Moses. Isn't he called as a revealer when he and his people are in Egypt? Doesn't he have a typical Egyptian name and is said to have been brought up by a pharaoh's daughter? 'Moses' is the name of many Egyptians, the word means 'the one fromGod X born', compare royal names like Thutmose. – As tempting as such a connection may appear at first glance, it is misleading. Moses announces to his compatriots a mountain god from the southern desert, Yahweh of Sinai, as the sole decisive power; he does not concern himself with the solar disc and its invigorating effect. Nothing, absolutely nothing in the biblical Exodus tradition shows traits that are also found in the religion of Akhenaten. Any transition from the Egyptian heretic king to the pro-Israelite charismatic Moses cannot be proven historically." [ 16 ]

The author is not even aware of the argument as it has been developed in religious studies. Can one simply ignore the superimposition, which has long since been developed as a thesis? That still falls behind what has been developed for a hundred years. He has never heard of the Midianite Moses, of the merging of several components, although a specialist? One must assume that he wanted nothing to do with it.


However, if one removes this hypothesis, one assumes that this Egyptian connection did not exist, but then, in my view, a number of fundamental points in the explanation remain open. The theses of a connection with Egyptian culture and in particular with the revolutionary upheaval in the 18th dynasty are therefore by no means easy to dismiss.
Dealing with this topic was so important for Freud because he saw it as a means of explaining the development of Judaism and even of its renewal. That's why he invested such extraordinary effort over the years.
The different position of this historical work in relation to the rest of Freud's work has already been pointed out. However, if you are III. chapter, then one recognizes that he has different things for his psychological "primordial theory" [ 17 ]trimmed. Those are interesting details. Nevertheless, it is important that here in his theory Freud develops the opposing sides within Judaism itself. The "Egyptian Hypothesis" serves him as an explanation. As already shown, the contradiction already arises from the Pentateuch, because there at least two very contradictory Moses are written one on top of the other. I call this the development of the contradiction of Judaism, which explains a multitude of other phenomena.
The question we must ask ourselves is this: how is it that in Judaism the supreme claim to be a blessing to all peoples stands alongside that which proclaims the most profane exploitation of others as the "highest" guiding principle? Judaism plays a fundamental role in the development of the most fundamental cultural elements of the western hemisphere, it is impossible to imagine life without it, and on the other hand it also has elements that amount to a complete defamation and contempt for other nations. This also leads to the grasping of the right-wing currents, of anti-Semitism, which only picks out the latter from Judaism and now, conversely, the contemptof Judaismused to attack the entire civilization at the same time. It is no coincidence that the most radical manifestation of this direction, the so-called "National Socialism", ended in factual and actual cannibalism. This meant the attack on civilization in general, the marriage of modern technology with the most primitive, suicidal tribal ideology.

And on the other hand, when Freud published his work, he was met with a torrent of hatred straight from Judaism itself. The author Peter Gay [ 18 ] in his book on Freud describes the reactions [ 19 ] , which went so far that an anonymous letter writer expressed his regret that the Nazis had not acted against Freud. The book polarized from the start, just as the uncovering of the figure of Akhenaten and his direction polarized opinions.
The positions that have since been developed by Egyptology, especially after the Second World War, also need to be checked. In addition to the examples that have already been mentioned, there are more that could be mentioned here. Hornung's book, which was quoted above, is a really modern and interesting compendium. Much of what is in it as facts and evidence is not at all convincing that there should have been no connection to later developments such as that of Judaism. Another well-known Egyptologist, Jan Assmann, has written an extensive book "Moses - Der Ägypter" with an unbelievable wealth of material, which leaves a lot open at the same time, but still reveals a negative position. This indeed constitutes rich material on how this issue is being dealt with. Finally, Rolf Krauss should also be mentioned, who wrote a veritable book of struggles against the theses mentioned above. I want to leave it in this context.

The analysis and decoding of Judaism, which is covered here, is itself an approach to the cultural revolution, at least wherever Judaism or Christianity or Islam played or play a significant role, and that is in very many areas of the world Case.

- - - - - - - -

With this explanation I have tried to give an overview. It provides a framework for a series of planned discourses on history. In the past, a book often took a long time to prepare, but I can't take decades for such a job, the times are far too turbulent. Since I am tied to my political work, I can only gradually explain the individual topics. The disclosure of the goal of the presentation also enables feedback in the form of discussion and suggestions, which can then be taken into account again at the next stage of the presentation.

May 11, 2003


Written from June 2002 to Spring 2003


© Copyright Hartmut Dicke, 2003 Berlin and Dortmund, all rights reserved, private disclosure permitted with indication of the imprint , any commercial or other professional distribution or public placement in whole or in part requires the express written permission of the author. Linking permitted and encouraged.

A2

[1] Hittites
The Hittites are a group of peoples that is less well known in terms of general historical knowledge, living mainly in the area of ​​today's Anatolianhave lived in the highlands. They suddenly appeared in the 2nd millennium with great development of power. After a relatively short time, they were able to compete with the long-established Egyptian empire. They spoke an Indo-European language in various dialects, some of which are closely related to Latin. The early use of iron in their culture is striking.

to the text
[2] Champollion, Jean-Francois, (1790-1832) was the first to decipher the assumption that Coptic was a further development of the ancient Egyptian languageEgyptian hieroglyphs on the Rosetta Stone complete. This stone was found during military construction work by Napoleon's army in Egypt in 1799. It contained a longer text in parallel in Greek, hieroglyphic and Demotic (Egyptian colloquial language).
to the text
[3] Incidentally, the anti-Semites had nothing in mind with this research activity. They used Judaism as a bugbear, as a lightning rod, because in reality they are against modern society and even more so against modern science. The rational worldview is oneEnemy object of all these directions. It is part of being scientific to grasp as many aspects of a thing as possible, to try to explain a development from its material roots.
to the text
[4] Ilse Grubrich-Simitis,"Freud's Moses Study as a Daydream", A Biographical Essay, Fischer TB, 1994
to the text
[5] In the 18th dynastyEgypt rose to become an international power. Under Thutmose I, Egypt reached the Euphrates for the first time and got to know another high culture and river culture that was equal to the Egyptian.
to the text
[6] The MidianitesSources of the Old Testament have been known for a long time, presented most extensively in a well-known work by Eduard Meyer.
to the text
[7] Qadesh Maribat,Place in southern Palestine where a kind of unification conference with a religious compromise is said to have taken place
to the text
[8] "The man Mosesand the monotheistic religion", Fischer TB, 1st edition 1975, published several times since then, p.61/62, Hvhg. in the original
to the text
[9] In the story ofIsaac "God commands" Abraham to sacrifice his son, when Abraham declares his willingness to do so, the same God renounces this. The end of human sacrifice is decided.
to the text
[10] Arthur Weigall, "Akhenaten - King of Egypt and his time", original English edition, 1910, German translation 1923, Basel, Switzerland
to the text
[11] Negade cultures,Negade or Naqada, village north of Karnak, site of over 3000 graves from which the development in the 4th millennium can be traced over several dozen stages. A distinction is made between Negade I and Negade II
to the text
[12] Walther Wolf, "TheWorld of Egyptians", Cottasche Buchhandlung, Stuttgart, 5th edition 1962, 1st edition 1954, p.13
to the text
[13] Erik Hornung, "Akhenaten - The Religion of Light", Artemis and Winkler, Zurich 1995
to the text
[14] Edward Meyer, "The Israelites and their Neighboring Tribes", 1906, p.449
to the text
[15] Indeed, Weigall was in error in this book because he was subject to the then popular belief that Akhenaten's body was embalmedfound. This later turned out to be a mistake. However, this does not call other assessments worth mentioning into question.
to the text
[16] From Klaus Koch,"History of Egyptian Religion: from the Pyramids to the Mysteries of Isis", Kohlhammer, 1993, p. 348f.
to the text
[17] Progenitor theory
One of Freud's hypotheses, according to which a progenitor existed in the primordial horde, who ruled the other male representatives, who monopolized women. Eventually, the "sons" overpower the forefather and eliminate him. Freud called this a crime, which he also apostrophized as the beginning of human culture. It is an extremely primitive model of primitive human society, for which there is accordingly no evidence. It is perhaps something different if one takes it as a certain abstract schema for processes within certain early social forms.
It is impressive how these theses of “psychoanalysis” thrown down by Freud differ from the historical theses on development that have been thought through again and againof Judaism. This contrast is evident within the book "Man Moses" as the last chapter then proceeds to the application of the so-called "forefather theory".
to the text
[18] Peter Gay, "'A Godless Jew'- Sigmund Freud's Atheism and the Development of Psychoanalysis", 1987 AmericanOriginal, Yale University Press, German S. Fischer Verlag, Ffm 1988
to the text
[19] ”The book caused a storm of protest in Jewish circles everywhere. Freud was deluged with criticism and an avalanche of letters, most from strangers, wanting to hold him accountable for the outrage he had committed." p.106f, ibid
to the text