History Speaks:
Monarchy, Exile and Maccabees

by Manfred Davidmann



Volume 2

Monarchy Followed by Two Kingdoms (First Temple period)
Period under King Saul and King David
King Solomon's Rule
Laws of Kingship (government)
The Two Kingdoms
Social Conditions at the Time
Warnings of the Prophets
The Monarchy and the Two Kingdoms
Return from Exile and Maccabean Dynasty
Return from Exile
Maccabean Dynasty (The Hasmoneans)
First Generation
Second Generation
Third Generation
Fourth and Fifth Generation
The Struggle of the Maccabees
Rome and Herod
Notes and Bibliography
Notes <..>
Bibliography {..}
1 First Temple and Solomon's Palace
2 Maccabean Dynasty

Relevant Current and Associated Works

Relevant Subject Index Pages and Site Overview


This report is one of a series of four which together cover the social laws and social system of the Pentateuch (Torah) and the fundamental scientific 'Social Cause-and-Effect Relationship' which it describes.

The essential but little-known core social laws and social system of the Pentateuch underlie all freedom and liberty.
See Struggle for Freedom: The Social Cause-and-Effect Relationship
Much is known about King Solomon's reign and about the fundamental changes which took place during the Maccabean dynasty to Jewish belief and practice, social conditions and government. Oppression increased both during Solomon's reign and under the Maccabean (Hasmonean) dynasty. Scriptures and other ancient sources look at events from the point of view of the people over whom they ruled. History shows that each time the country was lost, it was lost in accordance with the Social Cause-and-Effect Relationship.
See History Speaks: Monarchy, Exile and Maccabees
The Social Cause-and-Effect Relationship had been described in detail, stating how people's behaviour determined the course of events. The prophets knew and understood the Relationship and so were able to predict what would happen as a result of the way people behaved. They warned rulers, establishment and people in advance about the effects of their behaviour. Loss of country, expulsion and persecution occurred as predicted by the prophets, in accordance with the Relationship.
See Struggle for Freedom: The Social Cause-and-Effect Relationship
and History Speaks: Monarchy, Exile and Maccabees

The social laws of the Pentateuch (Torah) underlie equality, independence, freedom from oppression and exploitation, and a good life of high quality. But at the time of the Maccabean dynasty, the Jewish establishment argued against such laws so as to expose the people to exploitation through need. The resulting decisive internal struggle changed Judaism, determined the fate of the Jewish people and gave rise to Christianity, shaped today's world and today's problems.

What happened at about the time of Jesus to Jewish belief and practice was recorded in the contemporary early part of the Talmud which describes both the struggle and its outcome.

See At the Time of Jesus, This is What Actually Happened in Israel: The Truth about Hillel and his Times which is factual, conclusive and fully documented, including much previously undiscovered material from the Talmud.

It includes a clear and concise summary statement outlining what the Talmud is and how it came to be written, describing its relative authority and that of its components. Included also is a similar statement about the Halachah (code of Jewish rabbinical law). Torah, Talmud and Halachah are related to each other and their relative scope and authority is outlined and defined.

They argued in religious terms about social and political policies. You can see how the Talmud records the bitter feelings of ordinary people about what establishment scholars were doing to Torah (Pentateuch) and people. And when some scholars attempted to provide their own statements with an authority they did not have, the practice was scathingly condemned in the Talmud.

You can see how the Talmud refers in one detailed example to early Christians and their beliefs, and codes used by the early writers of the Talmud to ensure that later generations could not distort or misrepresent the message which was really there. And relevant stories and arguments were linked in the same way as was used contemporaneously by Christian gospel writers.

See One Law for All: Freedom Now, Freedom for Ever. This is a fully documented conclusive record of previously undiscovered material about the decisive struggle then going on within Judaism.

This struggle was about position, influence and control over communities, about changing benevolent rules of behaviour so that people could be oppressed and exploited. It changed Judaism, determined the fate of the Jewish people and gave rise to Christianity and it is this struggle which is exposed here to the light of day.


This is a review and analysis of Jewish history, more particularly of what is known about King Solomon's reign and that of the Maccabean dynasty, finding the causes of the defeat of the people and loss of country.

Manfred Davidmann looks at the social conditions and the trend of events in relation to the type and style of government.

Also discussed are the warnings of the prophets in relation to the Social Cause-and-Effect Relationship.

Much has been written about King Solomon and his glorious reign, his wisdom and his riches. But Jewish Scriptures and other ancient sources look at his reign from the point of view of the people over whom he ruled and tell a different story. Oppression increased during Solomon's reign and some of the country had already been lost by the time he died.

A similar pattern of events can be seen under the Maccabean (Hasmonean) dynasty, given here in considerable detail.

Manfred Davidmann succeeds in opening our eyes to what actually happened, a matter of biblical archaeology. Jewish history shows that each time the country was lost, it was lost in accordance with the Social Cause-and-Effect Relationship.

The prophets warned rulers, establishment and people in advance about their behaviour. But the prophets were not listened to. And loss of country, expulsion and persecution occurred as predicted by the prophets in accordance with the Social Cause-and-Effect Relationship.

We see a consistent pattern which is paralleled by current events and trends. But it is possible and utterly important to learn the lessons of the past. We do not have to repeat the same mistakes.


The successful struggle for liberation under the leadership of Moses was followed by the conquest of Canaan under Joshua. It was incomplete and for the next 200 years the tribes struggled against their neighbours, at times led by so-called Judges.

The period under the Judges was followed by a period of roughly 100 years under the 'Monarchy'. Samuel reluctantly agreed to Saul becoming King. Saul was followed by David who in turn was succeeded by his son Solomon. At the time of king Solomon's death the country split up into two kingdoms called Judah and Israel (Samaria). Israel fell about 200 years later and Judah fell roughly another 130 years later with the destruction of Jerusalem and the first Temple.

King Solomon, greatly praised, of such wonderful wisdom, of great power, wealth and horses, having many wives. But his reign was immediately followed by the kingdom splitting into two kingdoms which fought each other, which largely disregarded Jewish law until both kingdoms were destroyed and the people exiled to Babylon.

On the surface it seems unlikely that the reign of one so great should have contained within itself the causes of subsequent weakness and destruction. But it did and we need to understand what happened to avoid history repeating itself, to avoid making the same mistakes again, to avoid weakness and destruction.

What then was it that caused the decline and destruction?


We know that Samuel reluctantly appointed Saul in God's name. The tribes were loosely knit together and while perhaps able to hold their own and defend themselves, had been unable to complete the conquest of the country. Saul apparently struggled to set up a single command and to impose his authority. But he followed his own judgement rather than subject himself to God's will. Hence Samuel appointed David while Saul was still alive.

Shortly after king Saul's death, David was able to unite the tribes under his rule and defeat the Philistines and other foreign tribes and complete the conquest of the country.

Initially it was those who were in distress, in debt or discontented who joined David who became captain over them {1}.

But David ruled for 40 years and became rich and powerful. He had properties throughout the land {2} and took concubines and wives {3}. There was a 'levy', apparently a form of conscription for military service, or for royal service such as working on royal properties, or for both {4}. He also numbered the population for his own purposes and against God's will, almost certainly for the purposes of recruiting and taxation {5}. The census was apparently disliked. It met with opposition and was thus incomplete.

The popular leader of those who were oppressed and in need became powerful. He started to use the people and consequently met with some opposition.


Much has been written about Solomon and his glorious reign, his wisdom and his riches. But Jewish scripture and other ancient sources look at his reign from the point of view of the people over whom he ruled and tell another and completely different story.

Solomon continued the process David had started. Under his reign the country seemed secure from external attack but the king's power over the people increased. Scripture and other writings tell what actually happened in many different ways. You will see that it is plainly told, consistent and to the point.


'Raising a levy' seems to mean getting together people to labour for the king, this being compulsory (forced) labour. Adoniram was in charge of the levy {6}, Jeroboam was in charge {7} over the levy of the house of Joseph.

'King Solomon raised a levy {8} out of all Israel; and the levy was 30,000 men, under Adoniram. And he sent them to Lebanon, ...'. They spent one month out of every three in Lebanon, 10,000 each month, in turn.

In addition Solomon had 70,000 who 'bore burdens' and had 80,000 who were 'hewers in the mountains' besides 3,300 chief officers who ruled over the people that did the work. This is further amplified {9} by an 'account of the levy which king Solomon raised; ...'. The levy consisted of all strangers living in the land, a 'levy of bondservants ...'.

'But of the children of Israel did Solomon make no bondservants; but they were {9} the men of war, and his servants, and his princes, and his captains, and the rulers of his chariots and of his horsemen'. There were 550 chief officers who ruled over the people that did the work.

This clearly mentions <1> that Hebrews served Solomon as soldiers and officers and also as servants, supervisors and administrators. The numbers must have been considerable.

Horsemen, Horses and Chariots; Taxation and the Tribe of Judah

Solomon had 12 'officers' over all Israel who were responsible for providing what provisions the king needed for himself and for his household, each in turn providing for one month in each year {11}.

He had 40,000 'stalls of horses' for his chariots and 12,000 horsemen {12} <2> and 'they let nothing be lacking', also providing swift horses and barley and straw for the horses.

He had 12,000 horsemen as well as 1,400 chariots, located {13} in 'chariot cities' as well as with the king in Jerusalem.

They provided for the king and the needs of his 'household'. Presumably they also provided for the upkeep and arming of the horsemen and their officers, collecting all this from the people of Israel.

The tribe of Judah is pointedly omitted from the list {14} of those being taxed. The name of the officer in overall charge is also pointedly omitted {15}.

David and Solomon were of the tribe of Judah. The king's tribe was the king's establishment. It seems that his tribe was exempted from paying the tax but was in charge of collecting it, presumably enforcing its collection and probably also enforcing conscription. Hence it is mentioned separately and before the people {16}.

Income and Wealth

The king had a very great annual income {17} in addition to that from the merchants, the traffic of the traders, the kings of the mingled people, the governors of the country. Some of this, if not all of it, must have come from the people of the country either directly or indirectly.

The amount of this additional income is given as 666 talents of gold each year <3>.

He made 200 targets of gold and 300 shields of gold but all of these together amounted to no more than 55 talents of gold <4>. Compared with the wealth of gold being stored, his annual income is vast. It amounts to 2 million shekels <5> and could have bought all his 12,000 horses.

The population of the country at the time of Solomon has been estimated as about 1,800,000 {18}.

He obtained the vast sum of 2 million shekels annually from an unspecified source. This amounts to at least 1 shekel per person and correspondingly more per family.

He could have collected such a vast sum each year only by taxing the people. To pay a tax of something like 5 shekels each year is likely to have been a heavy burden.

His wealth is described as having been very great indeed {19}. 'All king Solomon's drinking vessels were of gold, and all the vessels of the house of the forest of Lebanon (Solomon's palace) were of pure gold; none were of silver'. And we are told that {20} every man brought his present, 'a rate year by year'.

It seems to me that the figures confirm the thought. We are being told that he obtained his wealth by taxing the people, that this was paid as an annual tax and that this was a heavy burden on the people.

We saw that Solomon had formed a force of 12,000 horsemen and officers who provided him and his 'household' with provisions {12}. It seems that under the control of the tribe of Judah they collected the provisions from the people.

But later {22} the king with the help of this force 'made silver to be in Jerusalem as stones'.

This force did not just provide provisions for his household, but also collected and probably enforced both the tax and the compulsory labour service.

Other Gods

The Hebrews were told by God that there were people with whom they must not have any contacts as otherwise these people would turn Israel's heart towards their beliefs.

We are told {23} that king Solomon loved many foreign women from these people, that his foreign wives turned away his heart after other gods, that he built places of worship for all his foreign wives {24}.

We are also told {25} that his heart was turned towards their beliefs and it seems that he is here being accused of following some of their practices. Some of these foreign gods are mentioned by name and it may be that he is being accused of the particular practices of these religions. We know only little about the rites and practices of these people but it seems that he is being accused of promiscuous and incestuous behaviour, of allowing the children of the people to be influenced by foreign beliefs and practices, of turning their allegiance towards the beliefs of those who oppressed their people.

If he had adhered to the laws of the Torah then he would not have been able to oppress the people. In other words, he ignored basic Jewish law and weakened its application so as to weaken resistance to oppression, so as to oppress the people.

Wives and Concubines

Solomon {25} had '700 wives, princesses and 300 concubines'.

Solomon is most unlikely to have had 700 wives and 300 concubines. I have seen it stated that his marriages were politically motivated but then how many countries and tribes surrounded Israel or were known? Very few.

We have already seen that all foreigners who lived in the country were put to forced labour. So perhaps most of these women were slaves? Or are we being told indirectly (as with the amount collected by tax) that most of these were Hebrew girls?

Pharaoh's Daughter

After Solomon had eliminated those who might have disputed his rule he 'became allied to Pharaoh king of Egypt by marriage' and brought Pharaoh's daughter to Jerusalem until he had built the Temple and a palace for himself {26}. He also built a house for Pharaoh's daughter {27}.

It seems that what is being said here is that Solomon had learned Pharaoh's ways, that he began to oppress the people. He started to oppress them just as soon as he was unopposed and had undisputed authority.

Temple and Palace

King Solomon built the first Temple {28} and he also built a palace for himself {29}. It took seven years to build the Temple and after that it took thirteen years to build Solomon's palace. Figure 1 compares the dimensions of the two and it can be seen that the porch alone of Solomon's palace occupied more groundspace (1,500 sq cubits) than the combined Temple and Temple porch (1,400 sq cubits). Looked at another way, Solomon's palace occupied over four times the groundspace which the Temple occupied.

Figure 1


          Temple     Solomon's Palace
Main Building        
  Length (cubits)   60   100
  Breadth (cubits)   20   50
  Height (cubits)   30   30
  Length (cubits)   20   50
  Breadth (cubits)   10   30
  Main building (sq. cubits)   1200   5000
  Porch (sq. cubits)    200   1500
  Total Groundspace   1400   6500
Time to build (years)   7   13

Solomon held a feast to celebrate the completion of the Temple {30} <6> which lasted two times seven days but he sent the people away on the eighth day.

So who was it who feasted during the second seven-day period after the people had been sent home?

We are also told {31} that 'when he had built the Temple and completed it, he arranged a seven-days' dedication, and then he further celebrated the seven days of the festival. <7> Thus they forgot to observe the Day of Atonement, and were distressed.'

Who was it who forgot about the Day of Atonement, about Yom Kippur?

Solomon's palace was much bigger than the Temple and this indicates the relative importance of the two in Solomon's mind. Particularly so when one remembers that the Temple served all the people.

The point is being made that it was Solomon and his establishment who feasted after the Temple had been completed and after the people had been sent home. It was Solomon and his establishment who forgot about that most solemn occasion, namely Yom Kippur. They ignored the social legislation, the basic constitution which guaranteed freedom and independence, because they were running the country for their own benefit.

We are also told {32} that there were two celebrations after Solomon had built the Temple and taken the daughter of Pharaoh to wife: 'the one in rejoicing for the erection of the Temple, the other in rejoicing for the daughter of Pharaoh'. Said God: 'Whose (rejoicing) shall I accept, of these or of the others?' At that moment it entered His mind to destroy Jerusalem.

Presumably the question was whether the constitution, the Torah, was being applied in the land or whether the people were being oppressed, that is whether it was the people or the establishment which were stronger, which were rejoicing. Solomon and his establishment were the stronger, laughed louder, and hence the automatically following consequence of the destruction of the system, that is of the country and of its oppressing establishment and of its people.


Scripture tells us in religious language that Solomon had a choice, namely to follow the law or not, that is either to lead or to rule. He was warned about the inevitable consequences described by the cause-and-effect relationship.

We are told {33} about the feasting at the completion of the Temple. This is immediately followed by a warning to Solomon that he can either follow the law when Israel will be successful for ever, but that if he or his children turn away from following God then will Israel be cast out of the land and punished terribly.

Scripture then tells us what Solomon did and {34} the resulting anger of God.

We read that God will punish Solomon by taking the kingdom away from his dynasty, out of the hand of his son {34}. Foreign opponents began to be 'raised' against him. Of three opponents {35} of Solomon, two found refuge in Egypt where they were hospitably received while the other reigned in Damascus.

We see that scripture tells us how he behaved, that he went against the law and that this started the processes which destroyed the oppressive authoritarian system.

Later Ancient Interpretations

What Solomon did and what happened as a direct result is told in many different ways. Here are a few examples.

The Midrash tells us {36} that Solomon left his palace and travelled without being recognised. He visited the synagogues, academies, and the houses of the eminent men of Israel, saying {37} 'I, Koheleth, have been king'. Then they smote him with a rod, and set before him a dish of grits. He wept and exclaimed, 'This was my portion from all my labour' {38}.

This story clearly tells how unpopular the king was. But it also clearly tells why they treated him in this way. The particular sentence which is quoted reads as follows:
And whatsoever my eyes desired I kept not from them; I withheld not my heart from any joy, for my heart had joy of all my labour; and this was my portion from all my labour.

In other words, he did whatever he wanted to do regardless of the law and the last sentence has Solomon acknowledging in sorrow that the treatment he received was the result of what he had done.

The gemara in the Talmud {39} tells that the doors of the sanctuary of the completed Temple would not open to receive the Ark no matter what prayers Solomon uttered. It was only {40} when he asked God to remember the good deeds of his father 'David your servant' that the doors opened to admit the Ark.

The story is told {41} that when the Torah, the law, accused Solomon before God of having broken the kingship laws that God replied "As you live, Solomon and a hundred of his kind shall be annihilated before a single one of your letters shall be obliterated.

Solomon's Wisdom

There is one last point about Solomon. He is said to have been very wise.

Just how 'wise' is a ruler who betrays and destroys his people and thus the foundation on which his home is built?

All we now know about Solomon makes one strongly suspect that the stories about his 'wisdom' may well have the reverse meaning of that commonly read into them. Scripture would not state that it is wise to betray God and oppress the people.

Take the well-known story about the two women, the king being asked to decide which of the two was the baby's mother. Does the judgement {42} say clearly to whom the child is to be given? The verdict could refer to either one of the two women. The whole story could have quite a different meaning.

Solomon's Reign

Solomon died after he had reigned for forty years and Rehoboam his son took over {43}.

The whole record of Solomon's reign which I have given here shows a ruler who is more concerned with personal wealth and power than with leading the people towards a better life.

We are told that he broke the 'kingship' laws, the laws of government which protect the people. It is these laws which are discussed in the next section.


The Torah {44} leaves little doubt about what a ruler in Israel must not do:

He must not 'multiply horses to himself'.

He must not 'cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses'. This means that he must not amass servants to himself and that he must not cause the people to be oppressed and enslaved for his own benefit.

He must not 'multiply wives to himself' so that his heart is not turned away.

He must not 'greatly multiply to himself silver and gold'.

He must read this law 'all the days of his life', 'that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them; that his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left; to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he and his children, in the midst of Israel.'

The king must be 'from among your brethren', may not be a foreigner who is not a brother. This suggests to me that he has to be a fellow Jew, that is one who observes the law and its intent and who aims to see it applied. He must follow the law and abide by it every day.

The Torah states that the king should copy out these few sentences and that he should read them regularly so as never to forget them. It seems to me that the king soon ignored the laws of the Torah which clearly states that he should not oppress the people so as to increase his own possessions and power, that he should not put himself above the people and so enrich himself. The Torah warns against him oppressing people so as to multiply his power (horses), it prohibits his taking a large number of wives and the amassing of silver and gold.

Positive laws point the way ahead towards greater strength and freedom, negative laws (prohibitions) protect people from the anti-social behaviour of others, safeguard the people's strength and freedom.

Hence the laws quoted here protect people and safeguard their strength and freedom.

While at this point the Torah does not define the kind of rule or administration one should have, what rulers and their establishment may do is clearly limited by these laws. They may not grasp power, may not oppress the people, may not behave promiscuously, may not enrich themselves.


Solomon died and his son Rehoboam reigned in his place. Before he could be installed, however, the people sent to Egypt for Jeroboam and all went and spoke to Rehoboam saying {45} 'Your father made our yoke grievous; now therefore make you the grievous service of your father, and his heavy yoke which he put upon us, lighter and we will serve you'.

Rehoboam asked the old men who had advised his father Solomon and they said 'If you will be a servant to this people this day, and will serve them, and answer them, and speak good words to them, then they will be your servants for ever.'

Rehoboam also asked the young men of his own age and they advised him to oppress the people even more severely than his father had done.

So Rehoboam answered the people roughly and said 'My father made your yoke heavy, I will add to your yoke; my father punished you with whips, but I will punish you with scorpions'.

Israel then rebelled against the descendants of David, and installed Jeroboam king over all Israel. However, the tribe of Judah followed the descendants of David. In this way Solomon's kingdom split up into two separate kingdoms, namely Judah and Israel (Samaria).

Oppression increased during Solomon's reign and once again it was the internal conflicts which broke up the country and so destroyed it. The lesson is driven home very clearly by the advice given to Solomon's son Rehoboam by the elders as compared with the advice he received from his younger and more impetuous contemporaries who had been persuaded to follow other gods, that is who had been turned against God and the people. The point is very clearly made that the choice was his. Just as Solomon was given a choice and judged according to the way in which he behaved, so here Solomon's son is given a choice by the people of Israel and decided to opt for strict rule instead of leadership, decided to increase their burdens. The result was that they rebelled and gained independence.

Rehoboam sent Adoram who was in charge of the forced labour but he was stoned by 'all Israel' so that he died.

Rehoboam then assembled the house of Judah and the tribe of Benjamin in Jerusalem so as to fight against the house of Israel to bring the kingdom back to Rehoboam {46}. They were told by a 'man of God' not to fight against the house of Israel 'for this thing is of Me' and they did not fight.

In this way the kingdom of Solomon was split into two separate countries.

Jeroboam ruled over Israel and made two calves of gold, saying that these were the gods which brought Israel out of the land of Egypt, the people being persuaded to worship them, priests being appointed who were not of the house of Levi. He even changed the times for the festivals.

With these changes the new ruler moved even further away from Jewish law and its application, changing the religion so as to strengthen his grip on the people, so as to increase his personal power over them by separating the two parts of the Jewish people even further so that the people would not return to Jerusalem, so that the people of 'Israel' would not join the people of 'Judah'.

The application of the Torah, the basic constitution which protects the people, had been abrogated and the people were worse off than before, had even less protection against the ruler and his establishment, against the misuse of his power.


This is what Ze'ev Falk {62} says:
... Transfers of land were made without any limitation based on the rules of the Jubilee (Yovel) and of redemption. Under the monarchy it became possible to acquire large estates and to have them cultivated by slaves and hired workers. Poor farmers were often forced to mortgage their holdings, to sell them and even to suffer their own or their children's enslavement. By the time of the first prophets, real as well as personal property changed hands frequently and capital was concentrated in the hands of a few.
Omri, king of Israel, ruled about fifty years after Solomon's death. At that time {47} there grew up a wealthy class
with luxurious standards of personal comfort and little regard for the basic rights of others. The process of dispossessing people from their land was hastened in defiance of Jewish tradition by pitiless administration of the laws of debt. Large estates were accumulating, worked by slave labour. Official religion tended to be more and more formalised, concentrating its attention on the execution of ceremonial, to the exclusion of all that was ritual. Justice was frequently corrupt, and at its best, rigid.

It seems that interest was charged and that farmers fell into debt, that the ownership of land and houses passed into the hands of a few people and that the poor were oppressed and forced into severe forms of bondage.


A few quotations from the sayings of the prophets show clearly that the prophets were very much aware of the consequences of what was taking place. They pointed out what was bound to happen if the rulers, their establishment and perhaps also the people continued to behave as they were doing and events proved them right. We would now say that intuitively or consciously they were aware of the social relationships, that they were aware of the social consequences of different types of behaviour.

The prophets, motivated by a deeply seated sense of social responsibility and urgency, by love of God, Torah and people, continued with increasing frequency and increasing urgency to warn of the inevitable consequences unless rulers and establishment changed their ways, pointing out that all the people would suffer horribly unless behaviour changed. They were bitterly opposed by the rulers and establishment of the day and struggled for God and people while alone and unsupported. They were not listened to, the rulers and their establishments continued to corrupt and oppress the people until both kingdoms were destroyed and the people most viciously dispersed.

So now let us look at the kind of behaviour the prophets warned against as it was that kind of behaviour which was weakening the people and thus the country. For example at the time of Elisha we read {48} about the widow whose two children are to be taken away to be bondmen by the creditor (money lender or person to whom the money is owed) and see that money could pay the debt and thus protect the children {49}.

Amos, Hosea, Isaiah and Micah warned about the coming destruction in the period preceding the fall of Israel. They accused the rulers and their establishment of the kind of practices which need to be corrected if Israel and Judah are to survive.

Amos, for example, says {50} that they 'sell the righteous for silver, and the needy for a pair of shoes', that a man and his father 'go unto the same maid'. He accuses them of oppression, that they 'know not to do right', that they oppress the poor, crush the needy, tell their establishment to 'bring, that we may feast'. He further accuses them, saying that they trample on the poor and that they take from him 'exactions' of wheat. It is clear {51} that he is addressing himself to, and attacking, the rulers of the country. Later on {52} he addresses those who would 'swallow the needy, and destroy the poor of the land', who make 'the ephah small and the shekel great' (that is who give less and charge more), those who cheat so as to 'buy the poor for silver, and the needy for a pair of shoes, and sell the refuse of the corn'.

He warns {53} about the coming destruction of Judah and Jerusalem because Judah has rejected the law of the Lord. He warns Israel {54} about the disaster that was going to overtake it. Events proved him right. He shows his understanding of the relationship between cause and effect by telling them that defeat is certain as they will not have the moral or physical strength to fight or to escape. He refers to and discusses {55} the 'day of the Lord'. He is clearly referring not so much to a day of redemption as to a day of retribution against the oppressor, making the point that there will be no escape and that it would be better to change their ways before disaster overtakes them, here plainly referring to the disaster which will strike Israel and Judah. Perhaps he is stating that the hope of all mankind for justice and freedom is no empty dream, that justice takes its course, that the law is such that oppressors are punished in the end.

Hosea {56} makes the point that there is no truth, no mercy, no knowledge of God in the land, that there is lying, killing and stealing, that there is prostitution (harlotry) and adultery. He compares the princes of Judah to those who 'removed the landmark'.

Isaiah {57} also points to those who join house to house and field to field, thus increasing their own estate. He refers {58} to people either being sold, or having sold themselves, to creditors.

Micah {59} points out that those who want fields take them, that those who want houses take them away; that they 'oppress a man and his house, even a man and his heritage'. He accuses {60} the 'heads of the house of Jacob' and the 'rulers of the house of Israel' of abhorring justice, of perverting all equity, that they 'build up Zion with blood and Jerusalem with iniquity', that their heads 'judge for reward' and that the priests 'teach for hire'.

We see that the prophets warned about the consequences of delinquency, crime, sexual permissiveness and corruption. They warned about land being concentrated in the hands of a few, of Jew exploiting and oppressing Jew, of people being oppressed and enslaved through debt and through need.

So far I have covered in outline some of the knowledge which we have from the warnings of the prophets about the behaviour of the Hebrew rulers and their establishment, a story of increasing oppression and exploitation of the people, of increasing disregard of basic Torah law, with consequences which were very clear to the prophets who warned and who appear to have had a clear understanding of the inevitability with which the law acts, of the inevitability with which the behaviour of the establishment caused the effects which destroyed their people and thus the rulers and their establishment themselves.


At the beginning of this period the tribes are scattered and on their own, each more or less fighting its own battles and looking after its own interests. We see freedom, people following the law and behaving in a way which guarantees freedom and a good life. We see the tribes coming together under a single central rule with combined forces. Military success went hand in hand with bringing the tribes together in one united country, resulted in the opposing foreign tribes being defeated, resulted in a country and a people which were united and powerful. Then we see those who rule using their power for their own benefit and to impose their rule. We see the emergence of those who grasp power and rule and then weaken the law so as to rule more forcefully, so as to oppress, so as to exploit the people. This led inevitably to internal confrontation and conflict which divided the country.

The Year of Release (shemittah) and Year of Freedom (yovel) laws safeguard the people from oppression and exploitation. It was from the time that laws such as these, as well as some of those relating to behaviour, were beginning to be disregarded that the Jewish people moved away from equality and co-operation, towards oppression by a few and consequent conflict. In this way they moved away from religious observance, humane behaviour and freedom, moved towards oppression, internal stress and conflict.

The prophets based their statements on a deep understanding of Jewish law and of the consequences of antisocial behaviour. They acted for the people and for freedom. They knew that Jewish law underlies all freedom, understood the inevitable disastrous consequences of behaviour contrary to the law and warned accordingly.

The story of the two kingdoms is not just one of the rulers and their establishment oppressing their own people in each of the two countries, but also one of two kingdoms struggling with each other. It is a story of a divided people weakening each other by fighting each other, sinking into behaviour which was harming them, weakening them to the point of destruction.

It seems to me that during the period of the monarchy and of the two kingdoms there was a continuous struggle between the forces which supported God, Judaism and the people, and those forces which supported central rule, the establishment and oppression of the people. It was the rulers who generally acted contrary to Jewish law and the Jewish religion seems to have been belittled, opposed and in some ways negated by them.

Outstanding is that the warnings of the prophets were ignored, that the establishment of the day ignored the writing on the wall. They did not act then, they did not act at other times. In so doing they did not just oppress their people, what they were doing was to destroy their people and to destroy themselves as well.

During the period of the monarchy, that is during the period of Saul, David and Solomon, we see central military authority being more effective in an emergency and see the military leader subsequently taking over the administration, taking over the government. This is followed by increasing centralisation of power and the formation of an establishment (secular and religious) which serves the source of power and is used to oppress the people. The military are used to give and obey orders but the skills involved are completely different from those expected from an effective manager. In general, while authoritarian organisations are effective in an emergency they are generally ineffective and wasteful at other times. What we see is increasing centralisation of power, increasing corruption and oppression, increasing enslavement of the people with consequent social stress and subsequent destruction.



The two kingdoms were destroyed. The country was desolate. Most of those Jews who survived in the country had been taken to captivity in Babylon.

The details are obscure but what we do know is that the Persians took over Babylon. Cyrus, King of Persia, called for the rebuilding of a Jewish community and of the Temple in Jerusalem. He asked the Jewish community in exile to support the expedition financially while he himself contributed the Temple treasures which the Babylonians had carried off to Babylon when the first Temple was destroyed some 50 years earlier.

It took about 100 years for the Temple to be rebuilt and for the walls of Jerusalem to be reconstructed. We have a pretty good idea about how an enlightened administrator, called Nehemiah, struggled to overcome the oppressive practices of the Jewish establishment and about the struggle for re-establishing the application of Jewish law in the daily lives of the country's inhabitants, of re-establishing the observance of the law of Moses.

People were poor, times were hard and once again many had to mortgage their land to the Jewish rich. When in need they not only had to hand over their fields but had to give their children to serve others, had to sell their children as slaves, were forced to lose their own freedom.

Nehemiah argued with the nobles and the rulers and in a moving speech {61} succeeded in persuading them to return the fields, vineyards, oliveyards, houses, the 'hundred pieces of silver', the corn, wine and oil that had been exacted from the people. Marrying out (intermarriage) was denounced, the law clearly stating that it was prohibited. They agreed to stop charging interest on loans and the practice of bondage for debt was abolished. Nehemiah also ensured that the Sabbath was observed and they also instituted the Year of Release (shemittah year).

About 60 years later Alexander the Great conquered the country which became part of his empire. When he died about 10 years later his generals fought with each other for the succession. Ptolemy I took over in Egypt and conquered Israel, with Seleucus I opposing Ptolemy from what is now Syria. About 125 years after the death of Alexander the country passed to the Seleucids (198 BCE).



We know little about life in Israel during the period of about 300 years between the time of the return from Babylon and the time of the taking over of the country by the Seleucids. We do know that religious observance was so important that they would not even defend themselves when attacked on the Sabbath (the weekly day of rest) so as not to desecrate it.

The Seleucid rulers started a process of hellenisation. Among the Jewish leadership were those who served the Seleucid rulers by offering greater annual taxes for the sake of obtaining personal power. They collected them from the people. At the same time they weakened and opposed the influence of the Jewish religion so as to weaken the people. It was of course the people who suffered and who became more and more discontented.

The Seleucids robbed the Temple of its wealth and destroyed the walls of Jerusalem. They then attempted to hellenise the country by brutal force. Those who observed the Jewish laws and customs were bitterly persecuted, pagan worship and practices were introduced into the Temple and they destroyed written records (scrolls) of the law whenever they could find them. The high priest Menelaus continued in office but served Jupiter.

Mattathias (a priest) rebelled against pagan worship. The people could stand no more and led first by Mattathias and then by his son Judah Maccabee they rebelled against the imposed vicious rule of the Seleucids.

First Generation: Liberating the Country, Centralising Power

Judah Maccabee was one of the five sons of Mattathias and for a period of 30 years the brothers led the people against the oppressing invader.

Judah Maccabee was followed by Jonathan who in turn was followed by Simeon. The leadership of the three brothers covers a period of 30 years during which much of the country was freed.

Jonathan was appointed high priest about 8 years after taking over the leadership. Simeon was confirmed by the 'Great Assembly' as high priest, ethnarch (ruler) and commander of the Jewish people. Simeon's positions were to be hereditary.

It seems that the family was united and that the brother who was ruling at the time had the full support of the other brothers. What is known is that whenever the brother who was ruling at the time was either killed in battle or assassinated by the enemy, that one of the other brothers simply stepped into his place and provided the required leadership. In this way they struggled successfully.

Appointing Jonathan as high priest transferred religious authority and power to a secular leader. When the Great Assembly confirmed Simeon's position, a few years after he had assumed the leadership, they confirmed that religious and secular as well as military authority and power had been vested in one person and were to be hereditary.

What had happened was that able military and secular leadership absorbed religious authority and power. That this concentration of all authority and power in the hands of one person was to be permanent and later to be transferred to his descendants is an indication that the establishment of the day was already concerned with consolidating its own position.

I think that combining all power in the hands of a single ruler is against the spirit and intent of Jewish law as religious authority which should serve God and the people, which should indicate direction and provide drive, may then too readily be misused to serve the establishment of the day instead of God and the people.

Second Generation: Power Centred on Ruler, Start of Discontent

Simeon was succeeded by John Hyrcanus I who ruled 30 years. He was very successful in consolidating gains which had been made and in expanding the area under his control. His conquests included the whole of Edom and he forcibly converted the Edomites to Judaism. Under his leadership the country gained what probably amounted to complete independence.

But the struggle was not just between the Jewish people and the Seleucid rule but also between the Jewish people and their own ruler. What we know is that during his reign opposition against the combination of religious and secular power, against the dominating role of the hereditary ruler and his establishment in all aspects of life, began to be felt.

It was a struggle against those rich and 'high born' who were in sympathy with and actively supported hellenic ideas and practices, it being the mass of the population who would not relinquish their beliefs, who could not and would not relax religious observance.

It seems that under the reign of John Hyrcanus I the opposing factions became known as pharisees and sadducees.

Third Generation: Country Consolidated, Conflict Between Royal Brothers, Increased Conflict Between Opposing Factions

John Hyrcanus I was succeeded for about a year by his eldest son Judah Aristobulus I.

The indications are that he supported hellenic ideas and it was either he, or his brother Alexander Yannai who succeeded him, who first adopted the title of 'king'.

Link to larger version
Figure 2

(Click illustration to see full-size chart)

When Judah Aristobulus died his brother Alexander Yannai married the widow (as required by Jewish law) and ruled Judea for just under 30 years. He succeeded in expanding the area under his control which covered much if not all of the area settled originally by the tribes.

When Alexander Yannai died the leadership passed to his wife, Salome Alexandra.

The indications are that Aristobulus I placed his personal power above family and that he attempted to impose his personal authority by eliminating opposition from his mother and brothers.

During Alexander Yannai's reign the conflict between opposing factions deepened. It seems that he was ruthless and that secular and religious power were concentrated in his hands to a previously unknown extent.

Queen Salome Alexandra ruled for about nine years. She had two sons. The older son was Hyrcanus II, the younger son was Aristobulus II.

We saw that Alexander Yannai died and that his wife Salome Alexandra succeeded to the throne. By that time both secular and religious power and authority were centred on the person of the ruler and this was of course strictly against the spirit and intent of the original Hasmonean revolt, against the spirit and intent of the Torah.

It seems that Queen Salome Alexandra attempted to halt and reverse the trend of centralisation of power and consequent oppression and exploitation of the people, attempting to move the government towards greater observance of the Torah and its social legislation. The elder son, namely Hyrcanus II, was high priest and considered the heir to the throne. The younger brother, namely Aristobulus II, was the military commander. In this way the power to rule and oppress was less important than the authority of the ruler who was high priest and would thus be expected to place greater importance on the meaning and intent of the Torah rather than on exploiting the people for his own benefit.

It seems that civil war broke out while the Queen was still alive and that the younger brother who was the military commander (Aristobulus II) was able to defeat his elder brother who was high priest and heir to the throne (Hyrcanus II).

Fourth and Fifth Generation:

(a) Civil War by Aristobulus Against Hyrcanus

When Queen Salome Alexandra died the younger brother (Aristobulus II) proclaimed himself king and high priest. The elder brother (Hyrcanus II) surrendered his power to the younger brother as he had been defeated in battle. The younger brother (Aristobulus II) ruled for about four years.

Hyrcanus then obtained the support of the Nabateans by promising to hand over to them some parts of Judea. He defeated Aristobulus and besieged him in Jerusalem.

But by this time the Romans had arrived in Syria which had become a Roman province. The Roman commander (Scaurus), apparently favouring Aristobulus in return for a large sum of money, told the Nabateans to withdraw from Jerusalem and this they did.

Shortly afterwards a new Roman commander, namely Pompey, took over the command. The dispute between the brothers was taken to him and it seems that he favoured Hyrcanus. Aristobulus surrendered to Pompey but managed to get away. The Roman army advanced on Jerusalem and while Hyrcanus' followers opened the gate of the city to the Romans, it took the Romans three months to take the Temple Mount. It seems that thousands of its defenders were killed.

This was virtually the end of independence for the country as they were now subservient to the Roman governor of Syria. Judea was very much reduced in size and its rulers were not allowed to call themselves kings. Once again the Jews were obliged to pay taxes to a foreign government.

(b) Antipater and Herod

What had happened was that the two brothers, struggling against each other for the sake of personal power, had involved foreign powers. The brothers were seemingly more concerned with struggling against each other than with the future existence, welfare and strength of the people and the country as a whole.

It was Antipater II, one of the converted Edomites, whose advice Hyrcanus had followed when he made common cause with the Nabateans against Aristobulus.

Pompey had seemingly favoured Hyrcanus, and Aristobulus had apparently been taken to Rome. Julius Caesar defeated Pompey. It seems that Aristobulus was poisoned in Rome supposedly by supporters of Pompey. Caesar had been helped in Egypt by Hyrcanus and Antipater and subsequently confirmed Hyrcanus as high priest and ethnarch. But Antipater and his two sons (Phasael and Herod) gained much power and influence.

The title 'ethnarch' means 'head of the people' and presumably indicates that the holder of that position represents his people in relation to the foreign ruling power, possibly taking his orders from the local Roman governor in Syria.

Caesar was assassinated. Cassius who was apparently one of the conspirators gained control of Syria and Judea and tried to get as much money as he could out of the people of Judea. Antipater and his sons sided with him.

It seems to me that Antipater and his sons Phasael and Herod advised and acted throughout with complete disregard of the Jewish people, apparently concerned solely with gaining control over them, with their own personal power and influence.

(c) Civil War by Aristobulus' Son Antigonus Against Hyrcanus.
End of Dynasty: Herod

It was Aristobulus II who started the civil war which in the end resulted in the country being overrun, the country and its people losing their independence to the Romans. His youngest son was called Antigonus.

When the Parthians invaded Rome's eastern provinces, Antigonus allied himself with them so as to replace his uncle Hyrcanus, so as to rule himself.

When Hyrcanus and Phasael were negotiating with the Parthians they were taken prisoner. Apparently Hyrcanus was mutilated by having his ears cut off so as to disqualify him from the priesthood. Aided by the Parthians, Antigonus was thus able to make himself king of Judea.

But Herod was able to escape and made his way to Rome so as to obtain political backing and military assistance. He was given the title 'king' by the Romans. This was in 40 BCE. Herod returned to Israel with some Roman legions and started to take the country from Antigonus. After the Romans defeated the Parthian armies they were able to considerably reinforce the Roman legions which were fighting Antigonus. Jerusalem was taken by Herod and the Romans after a siege lasting five months and Antigonus was defeated. During the course of his campaign against Antigonus, Herod had also married Mariamne (6th generation), a granddaughter of Hyrcanus II. Antigonus was put to death by Herod and so Herod ruled Judea for Rome, an Edomite king over the Jewish people.

Once again the Jewish people had been divided against each other by behaviour contrary to basic Jewish law and in this case the result was the ending of the rule of the Maccabean dynasty, of the revolt for the application of Jewish law in everyday life. The people were ruled by an Edomite king who may have been regarded as Jewish by some but whose whole actions showed that Judaism and behaviour according to Jewish law were very far from his thoughts.

The Struggle of the Maccabees

Mattathias, his sons and his grandson John Hyrcanus battled together and supported each other and John Hyrcanus was able to build the country and complete the work the others had started.

The country was built and enlarged until it became strong and independent through one central unifying purpose: to build a country in which Jewish people could live as Jews and practise their faith. Single minded, the members of the royal family were loyal to the ruler and as soon as one died the next one was ready to take over and was in turn supported by the rest of the family.

With Aristobulus I it seems that power had corrupted but he did not rule for long and Alexander Yannai was able to do very well indeed.

Following the popular rebellion for Judaism, for Jewish law and thus for freedom, the rulers formed a dynasty and a supporting establishment, had tasted power and meant to have it. Hence they battled for power with each other, allied themselves with foreign powers against each other. In so doing they divided the people and weakened all.

To begin with all were united and struggled against the brutal oppression. They struggled for Torah, freedom and the people. Against them were foreign invaders who believed in slavery and who were trying to impose their way of life through imposing their beliefs.

After three generations the situation had changed and we now see very clearly increasing internal confrontation, a struggle between people and Torah on the one hand against oppressive rulers and their oppressing establishment on the other.

The oppression of Jew by Jew, of the Jewish people by their own rulers and establishment, and the resulting struggle between them defeated both. It ended Maccabean rule, lost the land which had been gained, resulted in enormous hardship to the people. It resulted in the handing over of the country and its people to Herod and the subsequent introduction by Herod of 'hellenisation'. This meant the introduction and popularisation of a foreign ideology, supporting and based on slavery. It was indeed this which the Maccabees had struggled against.

The Jewish leadership, the Jewish establishment, supported centralised power, the oppressive ruling authority and its influence, since the ideas which were being imported helped them to oppress their own people. In so doing they disregarded the welfare of the people, disregarded Jewish law, disregarded the intent and purpose of Jewish law.

Outstanding is that the people were unable to restrain their leaders. The result was total destruction of people and country, and the dispersion of the Jewish people.


This is what Cecil Roth {47} says about Herod and his times:
Herod was cold, calculating and cruel. He arrested and executed almost immediately 45 members of the leading aristocratic families of the realm. He appointed his wife's handsome young brother, another Aristobulus, to the high priesthood but he became popular and so Herod had him drowned. Herod also executed his own uncle, had the aged Hyrcanus (his wife's grandfather, formerly king and high priest) murdered and put to death his own wife, Mariamne, and followed this by eliminating her mother Alexandra. When Herod's own children by Mariamne, Alexander and Aristobulus, grew to manhood the two princes were charged with treachery and strangled in prison (7 BCE). The ultimate Roman overlordship was at all times plain. The tribute paid to them was heavy. Roman legionaries were never absent from Jerusalem, and Roman institutions prevailed in the country more and more. The old constitution of the country was overruled. The Sanhedrin was deprived of all executive or deliberative power, so that it became to an increasing degree an academic and religious council. The office of the high priesthood became less and less important.

It seems that Herod, an Edomite (Idumaean), one of the ancient enemies of Judaism and the Jewish people, had taken the country over and eliminated the opposition, the Jewish establishment, and the Maccabean line and then set about to try and destroy the religion, the hold which the religion had on the people, the people's beliefs, so as to do what the Greeks had tried to do, so as to render Jewish religion and Jewish beliefs ineffective.

Herod was devoted to fashionable hellenic culture, to the complete neglect of everything Jewish. He did reconstruct the Temple in Jerusalem but in Sebaste he actually established a temple for the cult of the Emperor.

The hellenisation against which the Maccabeans had fought became deeply implanted. When the king died in 4 BC, vast strides had already been made under his inspiration in the process which was to end with the final extrusion of Judaism from the country.

Herod re-established the state of Israel, but what he re-established was a secular state which gave equal if not more importance to other religions, which was a 'state like any other'.

He attempted to replace Jewish beliefs which demand freedom, secure independence and social security with those of a culture based on slavery, on the often inhuman exploitation of man by man. He brutally oppressed and exploited the people.

He moved far in the direction of negating Judaism and its protection and safeguards for the people and thus merely brought about the inevitable destruction of his regime and establishment.

'Inevitable' not just because it actually happened, but because what happened was predictable, happened in accordance with the social cause-and-effect relationship we discussed in the first volume.



<1>     There is a later account which pointedly ignores Solomon's Hebrew servants {10}.
See also <6>.
<2>   1,000 men/ruler of 1,000.
<3>   1 score = 20.
<4>   1 talent = 3,000 shekels
200 targets @ 600 shekels = 120,000 shekels = 40 talents
1 lb (maneh) = 50 shekels
300 shields @ 3 lbs (maneh) = 300 x 3 x 50 = 45,000 shekels = 15 talents
<5>   666 talents = 666 x 3,000 shekels = 1,998,000 shekels
Say = 2 million shekels
<6>   Once again the later Chronicles {21} tells a pointedly different story. See also <1>.
<7>   Tabernacles
<8>   Used throughout: Scriptures {63}; Talmud {64}


{1} 1 Samuel 22, 2
{2} 1 Chronicles 28, 1
{3} 2 Samuel 5, 13
{4} 2 Samuel 20, 24
{5} 2 Samuel 24, 1; 1 Chronicles 21, 1
{6} 1 Kings 4, 6
{7} 1 Kings 11, 28
{8} 1 Kings 5, 27-30
{9} 1 Kings 9, 15, 20-23
{10} 2 Chronicles 8, 9
{11} 1 Kings 4, 7
{12} 1 Kings 5, 6-8
{13} 1 Kings 10, 26
{14} 1 Kings 4, 7-19
{15} 1 Kings 4, 20
{16} 1 Kings 4, 20; 5, 5
{17} 1 Kings 10, 14-17
{18} Ency. Judaica 12, 869
{19} 1 Kings 10, 21
{20} 1 Kings 10, 24-25
{21} 2 Chronicles 7, 8-10
{22} 1 Kings 10, 26-27
{23} 1 Kings 11, 1-2
{24} 1 Kings 11, 4, 8
{25} 1 Kings 11, 3
{26} 1 Kings 3, 1
{27} 1 Kings 7, 8
{28} 1 Kings 6, 2-3, 38
{29} 1 Kings 7, 1-2, 6
{30} 1 Kings 8, 65-66
{31} Midrash Rabba, Num 17, 2
{32} Midrash Rabba, Lev 12, 5
{33} 1 Kings 9, 1-
{34} 1 Kings 11, 9-
{35} 1 Kings 11, 14-40
{36} Midrash Rabba, Ecclesiastes II, 3
{37} Ecclesiastes 1, 12
{38} Ecclesiastes 2, 10
{39} Moed Katan 9a; Sabbat 30a; Sanhedrin 107b
{40} 2 Chronicles 6, 42
{41} Talmud Yerushalmi (Legends of the Jews, 4, 165)
{42} 1 Kings 3, 27
{43} 1 Kings 11, 43
{44} Deut 17, 14-20
{45} 1 Kings 12
{46} 1 Kings 12, 21-
{47} A Short History of the Jewish People, Cecil Roth, East & West Library, 1969
{48} 2 Kings 4, 1
{49} 2 Kings 4, 7-
{50} Amos 2, 6-
{51} Amos 6, 4-
{52} Amos 8, 4-6
{53} Amos 2, 4
{54} Amos 2, 6-
{55} Amos 5, 18-
{56} Hosea 4, 1, 2
{57} Isaiah 5, 8
{58} Isaiah 50, 1
{59} Micah 2, 2-
{60} Micah 3, 5-
{61} Nehemiah 5, 6-13
{62} Hebrew Law in Biblical Times, Ze'ev W. Falk, Wahrmann, 1964
{63} The Holy Scriptures, The Jewish Publication Society of America
{64} The Babylonian Talmud, Soncino Press, London

Relevant Current and Associated Works

Other relevant current and associated reports by Manfred Davidmann:
Title   Description
The Meaning of Genesis: Creation, Evolution and the Origin of Evil   Shows that there is no conflict, no contradiction, no divergence, only awe-inspiring agreement, between what is recorded in Genesis and what we know about the evolution of human beings. And Genesis defines good and evil, pointing to the root of evil.
Genesis: Nephilim, Dominance and Liberty   Genesis on consequences of gaining and misusing power over others. Summarises corresponding present social problems. Describes the Pentateuch's social laws and social system for achieving and keeping liberty and a good life of high quality.
Meaning and Significance of the Names of God in Genesis   This short report describes the meaning and significance of the names of God which are used in Genesis. These are of the greatest importance for understanding the meaning of the text of the Bible.
Bible Translations, Versions, Codes and Hidden Information in Bible and Talmud   Shows how changes made in the past have obscured the original intended meaning. Describes the ways in which hidden information has been encoded and labelled so that its original meaning could not be misunderstood or misinterpreted.
ORIGIN OF CHRISTIANITY and JUDAISM   Proves by methods of biblical archaeology what Jesus really taught, how Paul changed what Jesus had taught, how this became Christianity's official doctrine. Outstanding are sections on Paul and the Gospels, on concurrent corresponding changes in Judaism.
Causes of Antisemitism   Shows that there are two separate root causes of antisemitism. One cause can be remedied by increasing peoples' awareness, the other is under the control of the Jewish people and can be remedied from within.
The Right to the Land of Israel   This report proves that the right to the land in which one lives, that is the strength and success of a people, depends on how people behave towards each other. This applies to all. The history of the Jewish people provides a convincing example.
Jewish Belief and Practice   Provides the required background knowledge of the essential core of Jewish belief and practice for drawing the only possible conclusion that the procedure called 'Prosbul' is contrary to the laws and intent of the Torah. The Prosbul is then annulled.
The God-given Human Rights, Social Laws and Social System   A comprehensive statement of the God-given human rights which underlie all freedom, liberty and independence. They are the foundation of the main religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, and they underlie and determine a good life of high quality.

Back to Contents list


Other Subjects; Other Publications

The Site Overview page has links to all individual Subject Index Pages which between them list the works by Manfred Davidmann which are available on the Internet, with short descriptions and links for downloading.

To see the Site Overview page, click Overview

Back to Contents list


Copyright    ©    Manfred Davidmann    1978, 1982, 1989, 1995, 2002, 2007
ISBN 0 85192 037 3    Second edition 1982
All rights reserved worldwide.

26/03/02 Added 'Overview' and 'Links to Relevant Works'.

Updated   2021  -  the following links were added:
About Manfred Davidmann and his Works
Privacy Notice
Contact form