The creation of political ‘facts on the ground’ together with the instrumentalisation of cultural heritage is key to all modern settler-colonial projects.

The treatment of the cultural heritage of Palestine as a tool for Zionist settler purposes is central to Israeli educational policies, the Israeli biblical academy and the Israeli government’s renaming projects. The creation of a usable past (Peled-Elhanan 2012: 12) by the Israeli educational system and the Israeli biblical academy has been examined by several Israeli academics and authors, including Nurit Peled-Elhanan (2012: 12–47), Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi (1992), Shlomo Sand (2011), Meron Benvenisti (2002) and Gabriel Piterberg (2001, 2008). In Original Sins: Reflections on the History of Zionism and Israel, Beit-Hallahmi (of Haifa University) comments on Israel’s biblical ‘knowledge’:

Most Israelis today, as a result of Israeli education, regard the Bible as a reliable source of historical information of a secular, political kind.

The Zionist version of Jewish history accepts most Biblical legends about the beginning of Jewish history, minus divine intervention.

Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are treated as historical figures. The descent into Egypt and the Exodus are phases in the secular history of a developing people, as is the conquest of Canaan by Joshua.

The Biblical order of events is accepted, but the interpretation is nationalist and secular.

The historicisation of the Bible is a national enterprise in Israel, carried out by hundreds of scholars at all universities. The starting point is Biblical chronology, then evidence (limited) and speculation (plentiful) are arranged accordingly. The Israeli Defence Ministry has even published a complete chronology of Biblical events, giving exact dates for the creation of the world … Claiming this ancient mythology as history is an essential part of Zionist secular nationalism, in its attempt to present a coherent account of the genesis of the Jewish people in ancient West Asia. It provides a focus of identification to counter the rabbinical, Diaspora traditions. Teaching the Bible as history to Israeli children creates the notion of continuity. It is Abraham (‘the first Zionist’, migrating to Palestine), Joshua and the conquest of Palestine (wiping out the Canaanites, just like today), King David’s conquest of Jerusalem (just like today). (Beit-Hallahmi 1992: 119)

Reflecting on the tight state control and supervision of the history of Palestine and ‘biblical knowledge’ in the Israeli educational system, Shlomo Sand (of Tel Aviv University), further explains:

The teachings of the Bible, used more as a book of national history than sacred religious canons, also became a separate subject in primary and secondary education in the eyes of the first immigrant [pre-1948

Yishuv] community in Palestine. Each student in every level of the Hebrew school system studies the history of their collective past separately from universal history. It was logical that the development of the collective memory was completed by an adequate university education. The ‘three-thousand years of Jewish nation’ had the right to a separate field of pedagogy and research prohibited to ‘unaccredited’ historians who would presume to access it. One of the most striking results of this original approach was that from the 1930s to the 1990s, no teacher or researcher from the various departments of ‘History of the Jewish People’ in Israeli universities considered him- or herself to be a non-Zionist historian. Historians of general history whose Zionist identity was not always as confirmed had the freedom to treat questions dealing with Jewish history, but they were ineligible for budgets, scholarships, research institutes, chairs or directing doctoral theses relate to Jewish history. (Sand 2011: 159–160)

Commenting on the production, propagation and dissemination of biblical geographical and archaeological ‘knowledge of the country’, Meron Benvenisti, Israeli author and former deputy mayor of Jerusalem (from 1971 to 1978), explained that in the state school curriculum and in the army the subject of ‘knowledge’ of the land of the Bible (yedi’at haaretz)

is obsessional. Furthermore, ‘knowledge of the land’ is both militarised and masculinised. This obsessive state-directed search for rootedness in the land by Israeli academia and often Western-funded Zionist research centres, and the treatment of the Bible as actual ‘history’, is conducted by predominantly secular Ashkenazi historians, nationalist archaeologists and biblical academics. Benvenisti writes:

The Bible became a guidebook, taught by reference to the landscape, less for its humanistic and social message – and not for its divine authorship. There is nothing more romantic and at the same time more ‘establishment’ than to be connected in some fashion with this cult. Its priests are the madrichim – guides and youth leaders. An extensive institutional network sustained yedia’t haaretz [knowledge of the biblical country]: research institutes, field schools, the Society for the Preservation of Nature in Israel (SPNI), the Jewish National Fund, youth movements, paramilitary units, the army. (Benvenisti 1986: 20; also 2002)

In Zionism, the selective reconstruction of antiquity and manufactured ‘biblical memory’ was part of the historical mission of reviving the ancient national roots and spirit. ‘[Selective] Antiquity became both a source of legitimacy and an object of admiration’ (Zerubavel 1995: 25). The American Israeli academic Selwyn Ilan Troen, of Brandeis University and Ben- Gurion University, under the subheading ‘Reclaiming by Naming’, remarks on the continuity of European Zionist colonisation of Palestine and 19th century/early 20th century Western Christian archaeological excavations and knowledge production:

Zionism also set out to ‘re-imagine’ and ‘re-constitute’ the country’s landscape. The process actually began with Christian explorers, and archaeologists and Bible scholars from Europe and the United States who visited Palestine from the mid-nineteenth century when the country was under Turkish rule. Contemporary Arab names were but adaptations or corruptions of ancient designations found in sacred texts or other historical sources. Zionist settlers continued the process, although for them it was not merely to recapture the Holy Land of Scriptures. Rather it was a deeply personal attempt to re-imagine themselves in the land of their ancestors. As a consequence, in renaming the land they consciously ignored or set aside many of the physical markers as well as the social and cultural ones of both Europe and the Arab neighbours … Zionists celebrated the return to history of Biblical Rehovoth30 and Ashkelon [‘Asqalan] … In addition, thousands of names were given to streets, public squares and the landscape, with signs in Hebrew everywhere. The total effect invited observers to appreciate that the settlements were the concrete manifestation of national revival by a people who could legitimately claim to be returning natives. (Troen 2008: 197)