Customer Reviews

Masada Myth: Collective Memory and Mythmaking in Israel

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Starting from the little that is known of Masada from the writings of Josephus and the archeological excavations which have taken place at the site, Nachman ben-Yehuda traces the development of the "history" of Masada over the course of the twentieth century and the use to which this history has been put in the building of Israeli national identity. Recognizing that little may be certain as to who was actually at Masada (patriots or thugs) and what actually happened there (suicides or murders), he traces the development of the Masada story into a "never again" national saga. Very interesting reading for anyone interested in the development of historical truth, and how loosely it might relate to what really happened. The book is well written, although somewhat repetitive in places, and (for example, in showing how various youth groups in Palestine and later Israel dealt with Masada) sometimes tells us more than we need to know about the subject. Recommended reading

What really happened?

It's really impossible to know, for sure. The only available source is Josephus. And Josephus as a source raises doubts. But he is the only source.

His original Aramaic texts have not been found. And only the translated Greek texts have been found. It was generally acceptable at the time, that the Roman translators would allow their own interpretation into text.

The modern Israeli legend on Masada, of the heroic last stand there by the Zealots, does not correspond to the translated writings of Josephus. For one thing it was the Sicarii who were besieged by the Romans, rather than the Zealots. The Sicarii were a splinter group, detached from, at odds, and in conflict with the Zealots.

Nachmans book starts with his own discovery of the discrepancy between what he use to believe (the legend) and what Josephus narrates. Without this discovery or knowledge, Nachman's book looses it's significance. Nachman discovered this through his own incredulous reaction to an article written by David Rappaport that contradicted the Masada legend. Nachman after a few hour perusal of Josephus, had to subsequently agree with Rapaport & then he got the idea to write a book on how Josephus's rendition was turned into a legend.

I would suggest potential readers to find the complete texts of Josephus (if you do not already have it) and follow the index for all citations of the word "Masada", as Nachman did & you will reach Nachman & Rapport's conclusion. Josephus rather depicts the Sicarii (not the Zealots) as pervasive thugs and murderers.

Nachman then shows how the Masada legend was created (via interviews with one of it's main creators (Shmaria Gutman)) and shows how the legend is more attributed to Israel's 20th century reality, than to Josephus.

Nachman, investigated how the last stand of alleged thugs and murderers, as this is the very way Josephus describes the Sicarii, was instead made into a modern national legend, and it's function as such.

Item was in brand new condition and was the first of my books to show up - thank you very much!

In modern history it has become popular to de-bunk or revise everything that we know to be true. Thus the `Masada myth' must be revised just as the `Jesus Myth' or the George Washington `myth' must be revised, the people involved must be defamed and somehow this makes history more pure, more accurate and more `fair'. But what is behind all these works of defamation is not a `search for the truth' but rather a search to do the opposite of what one perceives is untrue, or embellished history. Did the Zealots all commit suicide at Masada? Has the `last stand' been glorified by a nation in search of a national heroic myth? This is the base question, but the answer is not what one would expect. Rather then explaining the problems of the source i.e Josephus, and concluding that perhaps we don't know exactly what happened at Masada the author of this book works hard to portray every person described by Josephus and the excavations of Yadin as the opposite. So rather then the Romans using Jewish slaves suddenly the Romans are honorable peace lovers and the Jewish `Zealots' become murders and thugs. But what is interesting here is that there is NO bases for alluding to the Zealots as `thugs' and `murderers'. Whereas the Masada story, of people committing suicide to stop Roman tyranny is at least based on a historical account, one written by someone who lived during the event, and told of it through accounts he recorded.
Similar attempts to question the New Testament also work hard to pretend that Jesus never existed, which is yet again an example of how revisionism goes to far. In order to seek an accurate telling of history one does not have to pretend that every known historical fact never happened. This book is mostly a hateful spiteful book that alludes to many transgressions without confirming or denying anything; rather the only thing proved here is that the idea of Masada was embellished, sort of like the Boston massacre or any important nation-founding event. Historians today like to debunk national events, not to clarify history, but to serve their own political ends, the end here is nothing less then the defamation and delegitmization of Israel, a sad conclusion to an important topic.

Seth J. Frantzman