Review: Economic and social relations in the Israelite-Jewish empires - Arkady Erusalimsky

Studies in the history of economic and social relations in the Israelite-Jewish empire(s): from immigration into Canaan until the Babylonian exile. M. Lurie (see note below). Gießen: Verlag Alfred Töpelmann, 1927, p. 64 (published in German): http://sammlungen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/freimann/content/structure/1205134

Reviewed by Arkady Erusalimsky in the journal Историк-марксист ("Historian-marxist"), nr. 11, 1929, pp. 182–84.

The peculiar fate of problems, connected with history of the Jewish people, is determined by the fact that a type of constant and, perhaps, sometimes even for the researcher himself inconspicuous presumption is extending the problem to the emergence of Christianity. And if the problem of Jewish history, which has become the object of a truly immense literature, in its formulation has been determined by interests for early Christianity, then its resolution and treatment received a quasi theological striving. Thereby history of the Jewish people, which was interesting, mainly, as history of the Jewish religion, acquired traits of distinct significance. The grandiose work of Protestant critique was not still able to overcome this basic presumption: "Israelitische und jüdische Geschichte" of the greatest representative of this school, Julius Wellhausen, has as its concluding and quasi crowning chapter – "Gospel."1 How great and strong the tradition of the, so to speak, "Christian-centric" view of Israelite history is, can be seen from the fact that it impacted even Kautsky's Marxist attempt to solve the question of the origin of Christianity. Through the present expansion of problems and attraction of new methodological postulates the old problem of Jewish history gets a new light: with the analysis of economic and social relations, developing in Jewish history, all "Christian-centric" presumption crumbles, theological strivings lose all ground from under them, the picture of the development of Jewish religion takes a proper place and becomes understandable, and historical-religious convergence, taken in the context of determined social and economic relations, becomes material for broad sociological generalizations. In this area there has not been done too much, and therefore everything new induces interest.

Our author states himself as Marxist – for epigraph of his work he puts: "The history of all previous society is the struggle of classes."

The book under review does not give a full consideration of the history of economic and social relations. Before us are only Stücken (pieces), attempts through close and painstaking study of the material to highlight some features of these relations and identify the main lines of their development. Almost all previous work by formal criticism of the source, the necessity and importance of which is understandable to anyone engaged in this area, lies outside, beyond the presentation. Beginning his research with the analysis of agrarian relations, the author entirely correctly notes the very early differentiation of classes. The sources indeed provide sufficient evidence in this respect, and if we approach the issue from the perspective of the distribution of land ownership, it will be possible to make adjustments to the old picture about a supposedly long prevalence of social equality. The prevalence of private property for ancient Israel is, of course, without doubt, and the author only clarifies this once again, based on the analysis of some institutions, inevitably connected with the development of property. But further the author tries to restore on the basis of later facts remnants of collective ownership. If the author has succeeded in this, then the point of view of Max Weber, which relies on analysis of the ancient "Law," would be shaken. In any case, the listed, although also quite meager material, indicates that in this question there is some possibility for further study.

In this case the author does not mention Max Weber; however, in the reviewed work the impact of the latter turns out to be quite strong.

For example, in considering the question of the origin of land ownership, the author proceeds from Max Weber's conception, and from the by the latter established six ways of "appearance of lords' property" (cf. Wirtschaftsgeschichte 1923, p. 60 et seq.) four ways he mechanically tries to slid into the Israelite-Jewish empire. However, from this he makes fully acceptable conclusions, in particular on the question on the genesis and social nature of royal power: "what else was Saul, than a chief of the aristocratic Kish family?" (p. 11) This is all the more important to note, since in old literature the strengthening of big landed aristocracy usually is referred to a later period, approximately, to the era of independent existence of the northern and southern kingdom. And if, on the one hand, the author suggests that remnants of collective ownership (Gemeinbesitz) can be related to quite late times, then, on the other hand, – and this sounds more convincing, – class differentiation, occurring based on emerging private property, – he finds earlier in time.

The main outlines of already sufficiently developed agrarian relations detected, and the formulation of the next question – about social relations – assumes, of course, the determination of prevailing economic forms. For some reason the well-known scheme of Bücher serves the author as starting point for this determination. On the material of Israelite history once again is opened the negative features of this scheme, but it remains unclear – why the author needed to carry here still another outdated periodization (Antiquity, Middle Ages, Modern times). The overwhelming significance of agriculture for the ancient Jews before the era of Babylon captivity is well-known. Those facts, which are given in the second chapter of the reviewed work regarding craft and industry, are interesting (pottery industry, treatment of woolen cloth for the market and even for export), just as the information about external trade, which was conducted in the interests of the royal court and aristocracy and which laid their burden on the lower strata of the population. However, all this characterizes rather only the quantitative side of the question. It is no accident in this sense that the latter part of the second chapter is devoted to a special calculation of the population number, that, to say in passing, usually leads (as also happened even with Karl Beloch) to questionable results. Analysis of the class character of jurisprudence of the era of Kings, legal position of different social groups, allotment of a higher bureaucracy, the role and activities of officials in local management, finally, the nature and significance of the tax burden (by the way, the question of corvée in this regard is not mentioned) – all this has found its coverage in the by us considered work. However, the for a Marxist basic question – the question of the nature of these relations, remains unclear. Some features of economic and social relations are regarded not only statically, but also isolated, and of course, it is not by accident that, for example, the problem of feudalism is not even posed by the author.

By establishing that the class differentiation in agrarian relations comes from the time of the Judges, the author relates the growth of the importance of the city to later times, to the epoch of Kings, arguing in this latest question against Max Weber, who talks about the political force of "Stadtsässigen Sippen," (city sibs) of the epoch until the captivity. This question, of course, is resolved by sociological understanding of the ancient city. However, the question remains unilluminated, on the positive or negative resolution of which depends the general understanding of prevailing and developing relations: the question of the appearance, role and development of money economy relations. Quite artificial sounds the social characterisation of the urban proletariat, to which, it turns out, it is necessary to include not only day laborers, but also craftsmen and even a part of small traders. The principle of such combination is, obviously, political disenfranchisement of these groups, under conditions of personal freedom, but all this, of course, is not a Marxist treatment of the question.

However, precisely the last chapter, which begins with the section "Proletariat and slavery" and in which the author tries to give a Marxist scheme of "social movement, civil war2 and revolution," is interesting. As widespread, as incorrect is the presentation about prophets, like revolutionaries of their time, decisively rejected by the author. Prophets were, of course, not social reformers, and the author successfully emphasises, that "the rule of proletarian masses is for the prophets the greatest plague of God." (p.59) The definition is given by the negative side and therefore the social characteristics of the prophets' movement is somewhat blurred. However, in such a small sized work it is difficult to give a more detailed analysis of this peculiar phenomenon. The study ends by an analysis of certain aspects of the social legislation of Deuteronomy. And, despite the fact that the resolution of some fundamental and methodological problems remains on the sidelines or in doubt, we have before us still quite a serious attempt to highlight certain aspects of the economic and social life of Israelite-Jewish history, an attempt, which in the future under a more determined breakaway from Max Weber and with a more consistent Marxist formulation of the question can serve as basis for large scientific studies of the given section in history of the ancient East.

A. Erusalimsky

Studien zur Geschichte der wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Verhältnisse im israelisch-jüdischen Reiche: von der Einwanderung in Kanaan bis zum babylonischen Exil. (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentische Wissenschaft. 45). S. 64. M. Lurje. – Аркадий Ерусалимский

Note

Moishe Ilyich Lurye (Моисей Ильич Лурье), alias Alexander Emel (1897–1936), Comintern agent in the KPD. In 1928 he send Riazanov his treatise on slavery in ancient Egypt. Not to be confused with another soviet historian with the same name (different middle name Львович).

Oddly I first was guessing the author could be Yuri Larin (1882–1932, RSDLP member since 1901) who published sometimes under his name M. Lurje, and whose father was a Hebrew author. Larin at the time was involved with OZET (Society for Settling Toiling Jews on the Land in the Soviet Union).

For a leftwing interpretation of the book of Exodus, cf. Moses in Red: The Revolt of Israel as a Typical Revolution. Lincoln Steffens, 1926. https://archive.org/details/MN41644ucmf_10

Index of the journal "Historian-marxist": http://annales.info/sbo/contens/istmarx.htm Issues online can be found for example at: https://vk.com/marxinfsem

• 1"Israelite and Jewish history." An English translation seems to exist only for volume one: Prolegomena to the History of Ancient Israel.
• 2(The period that Lurje analyses starts from I Kings, 16: ".21. Then were the people of Israel divided into two parts: half of the people followed Tibni the son of Ginath, to make him king; and half followed Omri. 22. But the people that followed Omri prevailed against the people that followed Tibni the son of Ginath: so Tibni died, and Omri reigned." Civil war breaks out again under Zechariah, lasting two generations, until the destruction of Samaria by Sargon.)