When was Israel given its name?

Answer 1

The name "Israel" comes from The Bible, and it was called that, among other names, when the Jews lived there before and during Roman times.

When they were forcibly exiled, and the Turkish empire took control of the land after the dark ages, Israel was called the Turkish for "Palestine" and the land continued to have that name, and be called so, by most people. The Jews never stopped calling it Israel.

Since its declaration of independance in '48 the land has been officially called Israel, but before then it was a disposessed wasteland owned by no particular peoples and with no sovereign state.

Answer 2

The earliest recorded name, and there is abundant archaelogical evidence for this, was simply "The Land of Canaan." The region now known as Israel/Palestine, was populated by several Semitic peoples that were never unified politically, like Greece, it was a confederation of city states united by culture and not by law, that is the reason it was relatively easy for the ancient Hebrews to conquer them. The Hebrews of Joshua's time were not a professional army, truth be told they were barely different from your stereotypical Arab beduin raider.

You know those movies where screaming Arabs charge on horseback, courageously take the enemy camp, or serve as antagonists against the French Legion in old 1950's films and all that garbage? Well, according to the bible, the ancient Hebrews did it too; under Moses, the Hebrews lived as desert dwellers, their dwelling place being vast tracts of the Sinai desert which they used as a sort of "fortress" to prevent the Canaanites from chasing after them and punishing them for any raids, and, they also encamped in the wilderness between Canaanite cities.

Imagine, to put this into a modern perspective, that the United States was not united, each city was independent, city states reliant on their surrounding farms for food, and only the surrounding farms, no real roads connecting the cities, the cities connected only to the farming communities. Obviously, in between the cities, you have a lot of wilderness. A group of 1 million Mexicans comes in, and, as a group of people, their whole life is exclusively warfare and raiding. After some time, due to the lack of unity, they would eventually take over many cities.

Putting things into perspective that was the situation in ancient Canaan; their lack of political unity, basically made them easy pickings for Hebrew raiders, who learned how to fight, largely just from surviving in the desert. The reason the Israelites wandered the desert for 40 years, logically speaking, was not so much a punishment from God but rather, to allow the generation of slaves to die off, while a generation that grew up battle hardened by the desert, took its place. You must remember that the Hebrews that Moses led out of Egypt were all slaves, not soldiers, so naturally when they encountered the "giants" of Canaan, they cowered and ran. However their children, the younger generation which was battle hardened from life in the desert, were not so cowardly, and they willingly did the nasty things the former generation would not do.

Although only a brief period in Hebrew history, for roughly 40 years, during the time of Moses, the Hebrews lived like Beduin, and yes, raided, quarreled and warred like them. The time in the desert, did great damage to the Hebrew people because it sowed the seeds of disunity that would result first in the Assyrians enticing 10 tribes with a better life, and then, the remnants of the tribes of Judah and Levi, struggling to hold on to those lands.

You must understand that the tribe of Levi was corrupt; their religious taxes, were ridiculous at times, and the tribe of Judah, after the time of David and Solomon became corrupt, drunk with power, especially the family of David. Princes of David's bloodline were infamous for, basically, if they spotted a girl they liked, they would ride their horse full gallop, snatch the girl, and then he would proceed to take her back to the palace and, well, have his way with her. Because they were the prince, most girls gave themselves up readily, however in some instances yes, there were rapes.

The other 10 tribes got sick of David's royal house raping the women, and the priests taxing them to death, when the Assyrians came along they were not seen as conquerors, but rather as liberators. When the Assyrians marched on the lands then called "Israel," the 10 tribes said to the tribe of Judah and Levi "screw you" and left of their own accord. They were never "kidnapped." Again, the vast bulk of the Hebrew people became sick and tired of the corruption of the tribe of Judah, and the unfair religious taxation of the Levites, which was at times deeply oppressive.

So, "where are they now?" The majority of the descendants of King David, are either Iraqi Jews, who are predominantly pure, ancient semitic Hebrew, or Spanish Sephardic Jews provided their paternal AND maternal ancestry is Hebrew. Because it is true that Sephardic males were womanizers, in Spain, Sephardic men there fathered literally hundreds of illegitimate kids, in Latin America genetic studies have revealed that the paternal Jewish connection is as high as 30% among some Latinos.

If you have ever seen "Arabic" looking Latinos, or Latinos who look like a mix of native American and semitic, chances are they descend from Marrano Jews. Lyndon B. Johnson's own wife, came from a Mexican family that changed its name, of Sephardic origin in Mexico, and later, they moved to Texas. I'm just saying that the descendants of David may number in the millions, well beyond established bloodlines. The descendants of King David, as Y chromosomes get around, can be found throughout the middle east, particularly the northern Arabian peninsula, throughout north Africa and southern Europe, and throughout Latin America. They can be found, literally all over the western and Arabic speaking Muslim world.

If haplogroup J2 is everywhere, it only proves the Biblical stories, of the 1,000 wives King Solomon had.

Back to your question, sorry I got on a tangent; establishing an official "timeline" here.

1) First, Moses led the "people of Israel," so named because they were the sons and daughters of Jacob, whom God renamed "Israel" or "He who struggles with God."

2) That generation of slaves died off after 40 years of desert life, and their children, became hardened desert nomads. This was bad, because if you are familiar with Arab culture, tribal rivalries can be bitter and long lasting, and the tribal rivalries that occured during their life in the desert endured even to the time of King David. The ancient Hebrews were plagued by inter tribal war, just as much as the Arabs were further south (e.g. the Ishmaelites).

3) Under, for all intents and purposes, their new "Sheikh," Joshua, the Hebrews conquered Canaan piece by piece. Over a period of 30 years, it was not instantaneous, Joshua defeated I think a grand total of 50 Canaanite Kings. For the exact number consult the Bible, I believe the book of the same name (Joshua).

4) Next, came a period of Judges, not prophets, but defacto "saints" in Judaism chosen by God to be military leaders.

5) Next, came the time of the Kings, which proved to be extremely corrupt and it lead to the ultimate downfall of the Kingdom of David.

So, taking it together; throughout Old Testament times, the land itself was never called "Israel" that I can remember ANYWHERE from the Old Testament. In Joshua's time and before, to the earliest parts of the book of Genesis when it is first mentioned it was called "The Land of Canaan." After that, the PEOPLE called themselves the "nation of Israel," but, it was the same thing as having a man's kids call themselves "the nation of Robert." When David conquered Jerusalem, and unified the tribes, it was not called Israel but "The Kingdom of David." As the tribe of Judah was where the women who bred heirs to the throne were from, not to mention the fact that David's own advisors were from the tribe of Judah, because as the defacto "tribe of Kings," symbolized by a Lion, to ensure there would be no disunity, David gave the tribe's name, to the whole of the Hebrew people.

The word "Jew," is derived directly from the Hebrew "Yehuda," hence we have the word "Jew" to refer to anyone who belongs to the Hebrew people. The word "Yehuda" is anglicized to mean "Judah," and the word "Jew" refers to "one of the people of Judah." When the Kingdom of David was ruled by Solomon, and later on the grandsons of David, eventually it collapsed; David was cunning, and a masterful tactician however he left no lasting legacy. Far as kings go, he sucked.

See, Persian Kings, rose and fell, rose and fell, throughout Persian history. The same was true in India, China, Japan, basically throughout the whole of the eastern hemisphere. However even as the kingdoms fell, the people kept their lands, they kept their cultural unity, and just as important, they kept their genetic integrity, whereas a large chunk of the Jews have not. Call me a racist, but I consider the pressence of paternal European blood among the Jews to be a violation.

Call me overly religious, but now is not the time in Hebrew history to be mixing with anybody; there is a strong chance, that everything written, or at least some of what is written in the Hebrew texts is true, thus a Hebrew can not truly be considered Jewish unless he is Hebrew on both sides. I personally do not recognize "mother only" Jews.

Personal feelings aside though, back to the history; the Kingdom of David, left no real lasting legacy. Britain's King Arthur was so just, he became a myth, and he gave the British people an identity so strong, although turd behavior, the Brits conquered vast portions of the world largely BECAUSE of King Arthur. If you want to know how strong and just Arthur Pendragon was, it is said that his spirit, permeates the very lands of Britain, and that his strength, is in every British soldier. Arthur, ARTHUR, was a KING, not that trash from Saudi Arabia. Among the Druids it is believed, the land and the king, share the same spirit. I believe that belief to be true; unlike most white people, modern day whites of Celtic descent, the Druids were very wise. Modern day whites, especially American, are predominantly, honorless cowards. The turds have no clue how far they have fallen. I have much respect for the ancient Celts, but I don't care too much for modern ones.

The point I am trying to make is, more than just a strong Legacy, King Arthur was such a good king he became a MYTH. It took arduous, even passionate research on the part of British scholars who believed the stories, to prove he was real. Modern day Brits have fallen so far on the moral scale, they can't believe ANY ancient Celtic King, was such a good man. Think about that for a moment. If you are American chances are some of your ancestry is Celtic, provided you're not a Kraut of course.

Also, throughout Europe, the French call themselves the French, because of the Frankish Kings. The Chinese call themselves the Han people, because of the Han dynasty, everywhere in the world where Kings reigned, they left a legacy of land and culture for their people but tell me, what did Jews ever get from David?

An "identity?" A belief they there "god's chosen people" come on!

The mark of a truly good ruler, is not the fact that they ruled; any fool can rule, if he has enough support, but a true leader, a true King leaves a LEGACY. Like for example, Arthur's, or Charlemagne's.

I spotted a website once, of Sephardic Jews wishing to "reclaim our royal lineage," as there is a tradition of descent from King David among many of them. Sickest joke I ever encountered; you are not royalty, if the Kingdom where your ancestor ruled is long destroyed. Besides in Henry VIII's time plenty of people could claim to be the "son of the King" he was such a womanizer. You think Henry VIII ever wore a condom? Come on now.... A wench is a wench, and the King of England demands full satisfaction, so now sheep skin raincoat!

Later, when conquered by the Persians, Greeks, Babylonians etc, it had no special name, it was just another province in their empire. However the Romans gave the land a name, two actually, the first being "Judaea," meaning, literally "Land of the Jews." The second, to break their spirit due to the revolt of 70 A.D. was "Palestina," meaning "Land of the Philistines."

So you see, Arab political rhetoric is not only flawed its stupid; are the Arabs claiming they are in fact Philistines? Because that is what the Latin "Palestina" means; "Land of the Philistines." "Palestine" literally translates as "Land of the Philistines," not only is that political rhetoric stupid, but, the Arabs insult THEMSELVES on a daily basis because, in calling themselves "Palestinian," they are calling themselves Philistines.

"Don't touch that! you, you, PHILISTINE!!!"

What does the word "Philistine" mean in the English language?

An ignorant, uncivilized savage, who doesn't even wipe when they take a dump.

"We are Palestinians in our land of Palestine, and we are so proud to be Palestinian!!!!!"

I mean, do those poor people even REALIZE, how they are insulting themselves?

Its kind of funny, in a cold blooded kind of way, but its also true. Saying "I'm Palestinian" is akin to saying "yes, I am an uncivilized savage." In Latin, when the name of a country ends in "a," used in a feminine context, it means "land of," same with ancient Persian, the prefix "Stan" means "land of."

For instance, the Spanish Columbia, and Spanish is a direct descendant of Latin, in fact strictly speaking, Spanish is in fact vulgar Latin, basically Latin but with a few modifications. Anyway, the word "Columbia" literally means "Land of Columbus," in the Latin language roots sense of the word.

"Judaea," in Latin, "Judea," in Spanish.

"Palestina" in the ancient Latin, and, imagine that, "Palestina" in modern Spanish. Spanish and Latin are so close together, any reasonably educated Spanish speaker can read Latin if they try. Really try; it makes for a slow read but its not impossible. Again Latin and Spanish, are closer to each other than Latin and Italian. How the hell is that possible? The Lombard invasion of Italy buddy; they introduced a lot of Germanic in there, which corrupted Latin.

The name "Israel" was not used to refer to the name of a country, until the birth of Zionism in the 19th century.

Sorry for inserting so much history in here but, making a point, the Arabs are wrong the name of that land is NOT Palestine, not UNLESS the Arabs want to call themselves Philistines, rather than descendants of Ishmael. In the English language, the word "Philistine" is an archaic, even snobbish insult, used largely more by the British than by Americans. However the implications of the insult, what it means IS indeed deeply offensive trust me.

What is the proper name for those lands? Well according to the Bible, God himself called it "The Land of Canaan."

"Go hence, Abraham, I command thee to dwell in the land of Canaan...."

According to the Torah itself, from God's own mouth, it was called "The Land of Canaan." Also nowhere in the Koran, or the Hadith is the word "Falastin" ever mentioned. Arab dishonesty, prevents world sympathy, and, it keeps the state of Israel were it is; I have no love for ashkenazi Jews, as I consider them dishonest liars too BUT, they were nowhere near as dishonest as the Arabs are, and most people of the world see Israel as the lesser evil, between two very evil semitic peoples.

The world, has no love for Arabs, for a very good reason; no, its not terrorism, its the ridiculous oil prices set in Saudi Arabia, prices that are often unnecessary, that border on outright greed. The countries of Africa need that fuel to run farm equipment that makes the growing and transport of food possible, part of the reason they are starving, is because primitive farming methods simply can not support a modern sized, modern day population. Worse yet, the truth is, that rumors have long circulated in the Arab world that Saudi Arabia has kept from the world, oil reserves to last 1,000 more years. Plus, their oil production is so huge, they can afford to lower the prices to keep Africa fed.

However the ARAB, note the key word there, ARAB, not Jewish, Al-Saud, are keeping Africa, on a state of starvation, it is the Arabs, who are killing Africa, not the Jews. And it is the Arabs who are directly responsible for one of the worst genocides in human history.

I have no love for the ashkenazi, but absolutely the IDF deserves its revenge; some of the people who fight for Hamas are from Saudi Arabia, Muslim extremists come from all over you know.

Answer 3

Jacob (Ya'akov), one of the 3 Jewish forefather from the Bible had a night-long

battle described in the closing verses of the 32nd chapter of Genesis. Jacob is preparing for his encounter with Esau the next day. He ferries his family across the Yabbok stream, but "remained behind alone" (according to the Talmud, he stays to retrieve some "small jars" of his that were left behind). There, "a man wrestled with him until dawn." Jacob is injured in the struggle, but is undefeated. At daybreak, Jacob's combatant pleads with him to let him go. Jacob says: "I will not let you until you bless me." The man accedes and confers upon him the name Israel, "because you have struggled with the divine and with men, and you have prevailed." (Israel, Yisrael in the Hebrew, means "he who prevails over the divine.")

From then on, Yaakov was also know as Yisrael (Israel). As God had promised Abraham and the forefathers, the Jews, called Bnei Yisrael (lit. sons of Israel (Jacob) would inherit the land, then know as Cana'an, and its new name will be Eretz Yisrael (Land of Israel). Although the name has changed by the succesion of Gentile conqueres countless times during the 2000 year exile of the Jews, the Jews, whether in Europe, Asia, Africa and later the Americas always called it Eretz Yisrael. So when it was time to get a name for the State of Israel, they chose the Yisrael (Israel), from its biblical name.

Answer 4

A:The Merneptah Stele, dated to approximately 1205 BCE, refers to "Israel", although not a a state or kingdom but merely as a people or tribal group without a central government as far as the Egyptians were concerned.

There is a developing consensus among historians that, contrary to the biblical record, Israel did not become a state until the time of Omri, whose reign began around 880 BCE. This was probably the time when there was actually a national entity called "Israel". The Tel Dan stele mentions "the king of Israel" and is usually dated to the time of Omri or his son Ahab.

Answer 5

The land was named Israel by 1200 BCE, because that is the date the oldest Egyptian stele mentioning Israel exists (Merneptah Stele). It may have been named before that, but it is unknown if it was.

Answer 6

The Kingdom of Israel was first declared as early as the reign of Saul nearly 3000 years ago.

In terms of the Modern State of Israel, it was used starting in 1948.