Historical Origin of the 12 Tribes of Israel 

You have to admit "bronze age goat-herders" was a funny joke. "Iron age city dwellers" just doesnt have the same punch.

I have a theory that Moabites, Ammonites and Edomites used to be Judahites and Israelites but rebelled or refused to join the confederations and that's why they're given related status through Haran for Moab and Ammon and Jacob and Esau being brothers. Brotherness with Esau and cousins with Lot's race solely do to distance But narrations in the Bible is full of love and hate. So love verses are reconciliations for when they Annex and conquer them, and hatred, in that they were at war. I theorize that the Moabites and Ammonites were of the original 12 tribes, but Judah and Simeon redacted them and inserted themselves in. While Edomites used to be jews but rebelled before later rejoining Judah when John Hyrcanus conquered them. A reconciliation of this narrative being the inserted story of Jacob and Esau loving, hating than reconciling each other. That's why cherry pick Bible verses has love and redemption hope for Edom, Moab and Amon, but lots of hate as well. Yes, I'm calling Ammonites and Moabites Israelite and calling Edomites Jews. The Yahweh Chomosh battle? Could be same God recognized differently than immediately turned around that chomosh didn't exist and was yahweh all along helping the Ammonites. Of all the Canaanite tribes afterall, why is Moab, Edom and Ammon mentioned? Lastly, I believe the Bible racial identification is based on who Israelites live or hate or are neutral too. The various X Y Z tribes called Shuahites, Zimranites, Jokshanites, Medanites, Midianites, Ishmaelites and Ishbakites were Isaac's brother. So? Is it that they were friendly towards the Israelites? And that the multiple other Arab tribes were unmentioned? Is the Hamitic narrative simply Canaanite and Egyptian people the Hebrews hated, Philistines, Berbers (levi from Egypt and fault berbers) the Egyptians and Canaanite tribes who didn't join the Israelite confederation were called Hamitic. And Semitic were neutral familiar races. And Japhethite is whoever Israel doesn't contact much or like. Afterall some groups like Hittites and Greeks we'd assume be Japhethites, are called Hamitic. Any wartime lingering memory? Certainly Arab tribes who you'd think be called Semitic is hamitic war enemy of Israel, Nimrod the Babylonian tyrant a hamite, Assyrians, mix Hamitic and Semitic, So love hate. See what I'm saying? Hate i.e conquest and love because Job went to Nineveh to convert them to Judaism, my interpretation? 10 lost tribes inhabited Nineveh. And Samaritans are the other 10. I actually think job is a Israelite not judahite.

​@@ems4884 it's only a joke because people think that goat-herders are bumpkins who don't think. There's a lot of free time to think when herding goats. For your average city-dweller, not so much: they have to work harder and longer hours just to keep from starving.

This video is the Biblical Scholarship equivalent of "I found irrefutable PROOF that the US Civil War really happened! I have therefore chosen to not believe the United States ever existed or Declared Independence from Britain."

@@dougjardine8545 OK. I'll rmember remember that next time I meet a goat-herder that he is most likely a great intellectual Perhaps he will want to strike up conversation about Kirkegaard.

Vive la différence! 😂

Well, Canada had more of a French/English colonial origin, while the US had a Spanish/French/English origin. And now Canada is split between French and English languages, while the US is primarily English with Spanish rising up, and some residual French influences such as in New Orleans/Louisiana. so yes, similar origins, but only 1 (or 1.5 if you include the one major region of the US with French) shared language.

​@@Jess-737 Central-South America has a far more wide indigenous descent than the US and Canada.

Also if Canada and the United States merged together, I'm sure more than 1 state would have been added. Each province could become another state.

US residents are called Americans because they have "America" in the name and no other part of the country name is conducive to converting into a name in the local language (English). Neither "Uniteds" or "Unis" or "Teds" for short, nor "Stateses", "Staters", "Statesians" or "Stays" works well. How many other countries in North America or South America have the same problem and would prefer to be known by the name "American"?

Top ten copper merchants, hands down.

The worst copper seller of all time

wait i missed that, where was he referenced?

@@cesarionoexisto2848the timeline, just a generic sumerian statue 😂 @ 4:15

I like how the internet just randomly decided that this statue was Ea-nasir

I don’t know why but I did not expect to see another Extra Mythology fan Greetings my friend!

@@stratisgeorgilis7703 greetings to you as well

​@@michaelmoon3429Truly a great qoute. Something I have to use regularly towards people who think its superstitious and unscientific to believe in myths and practices

I think the logical fallacy here is ignoratio elenchi - it presents an argument that is sound, but it's conclusion is nonsense. The last sentence is fair; myths are indeed ahistorical tales that are culturally relevant, but in no way does that mean they're "not untrue." Whilst some, such as the Trojan War, may have roots in reality the claims of Gods and Heroes cannot be supported even if it was culturally relevant. The very reason they don't fit into the historical record is because they make extremely large claims and have no evidence to back it up. As such, all, or almost all, can be dismissed as false until such time than any evidence appears. Understanding them is still valuable to understanding how people at the time thought, but the point this quote is making is a horrible one.

@@srajandikshit7590 It is. You can believe whatever you want and do whatever you want, but don't try to pass off unfalsifiable pseudoscience as science. The quote is also logically fallacious and makes no sense; I put a full reasoning of how in a comment to the original commenter if you would like to see.

Yes please.

@@UsefulChartsawesome

friendship ended with Uruk, now Assur is my best friend

Let's call them Ferro-Bougeoisie, or Iron Yuppies, or Sidero-Hipsters (that would explain the beards).

DUDE i just LOVE the hustle and bustle of ramparted Uruk, it’s so DYNAMIC and makes me feel like i’m in one of my favourite EPIC POEMS. you should totally come on down to my dwellingplace, it’s got EXPOSED MASONRY OF KILN-FIRED BRICK walls and everything, we can crack open a nice beer fit for a king or seven and get crazy watching some lyre-maids [The rest of the tablet is damaged beyond recognition]

As an American, I had a hearty laugh as well. The US and Canada are kind of the siblings or cousins that rib each other from time to time, but we generally have each other's backs when things get really bad.

There is an anime that has all yhe countries as people. Ive only seen a few episodes, but Canada, USA, and Englands interactions are highlarious.

@@p12423073 I think I've heard of it. Is it similar to the countryballs that's been gaining popularity??

@@MarsJenkar I'll be honest: Canadians don't feel as jocular about the relationship. There's a lot of anti-American sentiment up here.

@@CharlotteIssyvoo Anti ''American politics'' sentiment would be more precise. But politic is going to shit in here too. I'd say there is friendly banter on the net... (you McDo eating cowboys vs us maple syrup drinking moose riders)

Exactly my experience! A lot of videos I see are just like a 1 minute summary or they tell you about one detail and don't give any context, assuming you've already studied this stuff.

You should take a look at the Quran. I'm amazed at how close they are to catholics. And the story of Mary is so very detailed. Their history is much easier to fact check

@@Dani_sister4peace I've been planning to at some point, I didn't realise how similar Islam is to Judaism and Christianity beyond having arguably the same god, it's fascinating to see the overlap

​@@Dani_sister4peaceas a catholic, this is the first time i've heard anyone ever said that islam is similar to catholics. How do you make that assertion?

​@@yunaru3643yeah, I'm a Muslim interested to convert into Catholicism and I don't see any similarities beyond fasting for a month and the veneration of Mary. even then, it doesn't come close to how catholics venerate her. muslims used to pray to saints too, but wahabbis killed that practiced so we don't do it

It's more than possible; it's likely. That story takes place some decades before the Exodus story which could be a narrative decision and both are inspired by the same events. The Collapse is heavily tied to the eruption of Thera which was an extremely powerful volcanic event (potentially the loudest sound ever heard by human ears, fun fact). It alone would have caused every one of the plagues for at least a few hundred kilometers of lower Egypt. It did also cause volcanic winter and that tracks with several years of bad harvest. The sea people may be the remnants of the Minoans as well as general hungry pirates.

Same case with the book of Judges, which some Bible scholars posit to have happened around up to 1200 BC

I always imagined it echoes the second intermediate period, during the Hyksos rule: Semitic pharaohs allowing other Semitic tribes to settle into Egypt in order to have more loyal subjects , with the possibility for foreigners to quickly climb the social ladder. And then, after the return of a local dynasty, bad times for those same minorities.

​@@SAOS451316 Thera volcano? Where is that located? Or maybe you are referring to the Lake Toba volcano in Indonesia. Or the Tambora volcano in Indonesia. 🙏

​@@nicholassilverio2227 The Thera eruption that happened on the island of Santorini in the Aegean Sea in 1600 BC.

It's still true, just that it's so convoluted, there's no point showing the breakdown. We still have 2 stories of Noah's flood crammed together as one telling. We still have two separate creation myths at the start of the bible.

I think that would have been worth his clarifying, it almost sounded as though he didn't think that was the case to me

@@fcsuper My understanding is the time lines for the two Jesus birth stories don't exactly align which is no surprise. Different writers who almost certainly did not know each other. Remember, it is the message, not the minor details, that matter.

​@@benniepatton6544The Documentary Hypothesis with the JEPD sources pertains to the Old Testament, not the New Testament.

The what.

Don't we all?

These days, it seems more likely that the US will destroy itself!

@@UsefulCharts As a fellow Canadian, I don't think we can be very smug about what's going on in the US as many of those same forces are at work here and... holy moly... our federal government and bureaucracy are currently headed in that same direction. BTW, I loved the 'Howdy Hosers' joke. :)

@davidc1878 Sadly, you're right.

​​@@davidc1878it's obviously totally unrealistic, but if Canada did suddenly annex itself to the US under the current US Constitution, it would marginalize the crazy wing of the American right in a heartbeat. Ok. So Alberta might team up with Alabama. And Quebec would probably go completely rogue. But Ontario alone would change everything. It Canada annexed the US under your constitutional system, it would take a couple decades for GOP voters to even begin to understand how the parliamentary system works ... and how to pronounce Nunavut and where PEI is.

You might want to explore some of the conservative scholarship that leans towards the factual end of things. On RU-vid the obvious places to start are the Ancient Egypt and the Bible channel and the various videos of the late Michael Heiser's talks on a variety of issues. In terms of things to read, the best starting place on the Old Testament would be Kenneth Kitchen's "On the Reliability of the Old Testament", which gives a good overview of how a scholar can come to the conclusion that the books of the Old Testament are reasonably reliable historical sources.

If you believe the scriptures aren’t true, are you even a Christian? I think you are torn because you don’t commit fully to God’s word. Compromising is and will always be source of terrible anxiety. We cannot serve two masters. 2 Peter 2:21 For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them.

@@stephengray1344 I checked out the "Ancient Egypt and the Bible" Channel. I find it more to do with dogma than scholarship.

​@@Iskandar75 A true Christian is one who does not take the Bible literally, but take its message seriously! The message of love, forgiveness and compassion. One the other hand, a fake Christian takes the Bible as literal word of God ( i.e. dictated by God) and support death penalty, torture, war, guns and weapons.. and even genocide. All in the name of God!. One sees them all over the US.

@@stephengray1344 I checked out a few videos on the "Ancient Egypt and the Bible" channel. I find it is more to do with dogma than true scholarship.

Looking back to a mythical golden age when life was simple and natural seems to be almost as old as humanity itself.

​@@AnaIvanovic4ever"back in my day"

Seems like religious hierarchies hate places of cultural diversity. From, like, the dawn of time.

Because cities until the 20th century where filthier and more disease ridden than the countryside, more people died in cities than were born there and the population had to be supplemented by people from the country moving there Still today, cities while much safer than in the past or often more dangerous than areas outside of them

I imagine they were the 'make judah great again' folks...

1. What was Reuben calling........ 2. What was Simeon calling....... 3.what was Levi calling........ 4. What was Judah calling...... 5. What was Issachar calling..... 6. What was Zebulun calling..... 7. What was Dan calling...... 8. What was Gad calling...... 9. What was Asher calling..... 10. What was Napthali calling.... 11. What was Joseph calling...... 12. What was Benjamin calling...... Each tribe has a specific calling from GOD.....calling such as sonship....watchman...and high priest.

That is correct

Just wanted to mention there is no "angel" in the Hebrew text of that event,in the original text it says Jacob fought off Shadowy aggressive man and after that "man" gave him blessing and his name "Israel"(he who fought/struggled with God).

It did not seem like 32 minutes tbh. I could have had another hour and been enrapted.

No offense, but his hypothesis of our history of the Jewish nation is just as accurate as summers the fairytales he states are in the Bible. The Bible of thousands of years ago is quite a bit more accurate than researches Coming up with assumptions today.

@@HowlingWo1f No offense, but what he actually he said was that the stories in the Bible aren't fairytales but rather a mix of historical truth and myth. If you want to believe that *all* the stories narrated in the Bible are historically accurate based on faith, that's fine. But if you expect to persuade those of us who are more skeptical that *everything* the Bible says is historically factual, you're going to need to provide something more, like independent evidence.

He’s Coming Soon When Jesus comes, the rapture question will be clarified, the church will be unified, the saints will be glorified and the sinners will be horrified. When Jesus comes, the devil will be stultified, the nation of Israel will be vivified, the sonship will be satisfied and the entire Bible will be verified. If you think the coming of Jesus is a probability or a possibility, you missed it. The coming of Jesus is inevitability. Acts 2:36-38; 4:10-12; Ephesians 4:5; Colossians 3:17 KJV

He’s Coming Soon When Jesus comes, the rapture question will be clarified, the church will be unified, the saints will be glorified and the sinners will be horrified. When Jesus comes, the devil will be stultified, the nation of Israel will be vivified, the sonship will be satisfied and the entire Bible will be verified. If you think the coming of Jesus is a probability or a possibility, you missed it. The coming of Jesus is inevitability. Acts 2:36-38; 4:10-12; Ephesians 4:5; Colossians 3:17 KJV

HaHa

Right?? Like when he pointed out that Judah is unusually favored when Joseph was Jacob’s fave. I very much remember younger me thinking the same thing and now I finally have an answer

Agree, it is nice getting the Cliffs Notes version of several thousand years of history backed up what what scholars have managed to find in the archeological and written records. One item I had not heard before is that some of the Sea People became a component of early Jewish society rather then just one of the causes of the 1177BC collapse.

"no one answered" = you didn't like their answers 😂😂😂

@@user-kp3ks7dk5h The reason why Judah was “unusually favored” over Joseph in Jacob’s blessing is because Christ came from the line of Judah, not from the line of Joseph. Throughout the Bible there’s a concept where the fathers would bless their sons (often prophetically) and many times the blessing is something unexpected. Although Jacob may have desired to bless Joseph and Benjamin over the other tribes (because he favored their mother Rachel), he couldn’t help but prophetically bless Judah over those tribes, because this was the tribe that would bring forth Christ, the Messiah. Therefore, the blessing needed to be greater. The real question here is- why would God choose Jesus to come from the tribe of Judah over the tribe of Joseph? My theory is that Jacob supposedly went against God’s will in choosing Rachel. He was provided Leah first and he should have accepted Leah, but instead he chose to work for 7 more years to earn Rachel. Only bad things came from Rachel: the tribe of Joseph-which eventually ended up bringing everyone to Egypt where they were enslaved for hundreds of years and the tribe of Benjamin- which produced both Sauls (Saul son of Kish who persecuted David- who was a Christ-like figure, and Saul of Tarsus who persecuted Christians before becoming Apostle Paul). Thus, the favoring of Judah over Joseph and Benjamin becomes much clearer. God would obviously favor the lineage that He chose to bring the Messiah, not the one originating in deceit. It’s a shame the people you asked in church couldn’t provide a good answer for you honestly

Your comment is interesting, because as a Muslim, it’s customary in our religion to believe that The Prophet Muhammad PBUH is descended from Isaac

​​@@xtrct7303Ismail do you mean?

@@xtrct7303 interesting. since ancient christians or non-orthodox jews who became christians, and as well later before christianities formality set in became muslims, they followed sentiment of skism from the teaching of the orthodox. maybe then issac was the true superior prophet for christians and muslim orginate tribes, or at the very least muslim tribes, thus the direction of prophets bloodline?

@@xtrct7303ismail you mean

​@@xtrct7303Muslims believe he was a descendant of Ishmael, not Isaac.

Yet it's not that large and there's no proof of a kingdom there.

We know that Israel was a minor regional power and that the major powers rarely felt the need to mention Judah. We know that Israel had commerce, cultural interchange, and cities, while Judah was comparatively poor and sparsely populated. When we reconcile this with the claim that Jerusalem -- which was hardly more than a fortified town at the time -- was the cultural and political centre of the region it's hard to parse it as anything but over-compensation, especially since they are the only ones claiming it. If I told you that I was the coolest guy in my high school, super athletic, handsome, and popular -- and totally went to prom with the three hottest girls in school instead of just staying home -- would you believe me? Spoiler alert, I have a school photo where my glasses are literally taped together.

It was a Kingdom. The Old Testament has references to many Petty Kings. If you controlled a walled settlement and nearby villages/farmlands you were a King. In fact when the Egyptian Emigrants entered Canaan they were welcomed by Melkhezedek, The Priest-King of Jerusalem. The Kingdoms in these early days were basically just City-States.

My guess is that the need to have it be 12 stems from Babylonian influences. The Babylonians loved anything in sets of 12 or 60 (5×12), and if what he described in the video is correct, the final editing happened during our just after they were in Babylonia. In a related note, the concept of 12 zodiac signs, as well as 12 hours for both day and night, the idea of 360 (60×60) degrees in a circle also have their roots in the Babylonian numerical system

@@robertmauck4975 Shnayim-Eser (שְׁנֵים-עָשָׂר or יב / Twelve) “It had a great, high wall with twelve gates, and with twelve angels at the gates. On the gates were written the names of the twelve tribes of Israel.” (Revelation 21:12) The number 12, which is one of the numbers symbolizing perfection, is unmistakably important in Scripture. It appears throughout the Tanakh (Old Covenant) and the Brit Chadashah (New Covenant). In Judaism, this number symbolizes totality, wholeness, and the completion of God’s purpose. It is considered the number of governmental perfection as it symbolizes God’s power and authority. The number 12 is also linked to the concept of time; for example, the ancient Israelites marked 12 lunar cycles representing the 12 lunar months of the year. They divided the day and the night into 12-hour periods.

Thought the 360 was symbolic for the days in a year. It makes a day (dia) about a degree. Also aren't the twelve constellations meant to give symbol to the twelve moons (months) we have on a yearly basis ?

@@robertmauck4975 360 - divisible by every single digit number except seven; they could likely count that high on their fingers. (by the way 60 x 60 = 3600)

It doesn't make sense

Judah doesn't get a good image in much of the Hebrew bible suggesting this 'spin' is exagerrated.

Juden

​@@Catholic_KnightII???

@@Achill101 don’t worry

@@Catholic_KnightII - I just worry if an apparent fellow Catholic makes cryptic comments that could be antisemitic.

Are you suggesting that UsefulCharts change name to Religion for Lunch?

There are some threads of the history that Matt describes in his video that can be seen in the Biblical narrative. Saul is, after all, a Benjaminite, and does stand as a hypothetical “first king” of the northern confederacy. Aside from two stories (Goliath and David the Harpist of King Saul), David is mostly a tribal leader of Judah, who is at war with Israel and is often aligned with the Philistines. After Saul’s death, his son Ish-Baal succeeds him as king of Israel, and David is not king of a united monarchy until after Ish-Baal’s death. David is king of Israel long enough to take the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem, after which he is constantly fighting with “rebels” who control the north. When David dies and Solomon is anointed king, he is opposed by Jeroboam, the leader of the north, who Solomon forces into exile but later returns to take up the throne of Israel. So, even with a strict reading of the Bible-accepting the political facts on their face but not accepting their interpretation of the facts-there’s a strong case for Israel always having been a separate entity from Judah, and that, except for a brief interlude of maybe 20 years under Solomon, there really wasn’t a truly united monarchy between Judah and Israel.

Love him. He smacks the crap out of people who think they can read a few articles and become experts. Many just want to have RU-vid sites and make money.

Secondly, the version of the “biblical” account of events seems to be the Young Earth one. Though it is the traditionally held belief, it ignores the Hebrew gematria used across the Bible, so I’m unsure why you dated it that way. I do not take this video personally, but so far it seems a bit concerning. I love a lot of your work, so this seems to run counter to everything else. If you bring up any good points, I’ll definitely make note of those.

Thirdly, Egyptian rule of Canaan was nothing like medieval/modern rule of colonies. The Egyptians took canaanite city-states as their vassals. They were easy to avoid. There are also documentaries that showcase how the story of the exodus has no anachronisms to it, and perfectly fits within the timeframe of the early Ramesside Period. That is a lot to demand out of a story told generations later. And yet it tells it, with details such as Egyptian birthing stools and tube-shaped baskets, things that weren’t prominent in Iron Age Israel.

4th, I’m unsure how the same scribes have to be the definitive authors of both Deuteronomy and it’s succeeding books. The only evidence for this is that they share the same grammatical style. Is there anything else proving that? There’s also evidence that tribal people have accurate cultural memories lasting for many centuries. I know we’re only focusing on archeology today, and that is respectable. But ignoring linguistics and cultural memory then saying this is all the “real” history of the people? I do not understand this claim.

A P source that’s separate from J makes sense. I understand post-exilic ideas are used in some of the passages. But why is D also separate from J? A lot of the “D” ideas could’ve easily existed in the Bronze Age.

20:02 it’s a little odd that the criteria for this division isn’t given. I read a couple books on what’s consider pre-exilic vs post-exilic, and some of it seems to be just an accusation of anachronisms? If that’s true then how’s that fair?

Philistines were absorb the by Babylonians during the Captivity.

His point is that from the historical POV, there likely weren't 12 original tribes as many of them had outside origin and their mythos were mostly made up to seem that they were always there.

I listed them in the order that they appeared in each passage which is important because it shows that there was no standardized order and that different tribes were prioritized at different times.

This video summarises the scholarly consensus. It would be incredibly long if it also tried to explain the whole history of where scholars got their information for each particular fact. There are many other videos and articles elsewhere which explain and debate the details, if you're curious and have the time. I don't believe this video contains any assertions which Matt has just assumed without having done the research. But we're talking about ancient history here. We don't have videotapes of the events, and DNA and archaeology can only tell us so much. So historians have to make the best guess from the evidence available.

@@Sarcasticronlink the video with that info….i want to go to into that rabbit hole 😊

Finally someone with some wisdom. Thank you

Believe in what, though? It's an interesting exercise to read through all of the Bible passages that relate to belief and faith, and keep track of what it says to believe in. In the margin notes to my second edition KJV reprint, the translators say that "believe in" could also be translated as "believe on," or just "believe." Also keep track of every passage that relates to God's word or eternal laws. Some preachers have never done this, and many of them add things that were never actually in the text. If they don't even know that the Bible says righteous people test the scriptures, and that priests can be wicked, it's hard to believe that they really take their holy book seriously.

Matt are you aware of russel gmirkins platonic Torah theory?

In the Talmud, the "Samaritans" are known as Kutim, implying they are descendants of Cutheans who moved to Samaria after the Assyrian conquest. Its likely that their descendants later converted to a branch of Judaism down the road.

Yes, I'll be doing a video on this.

@@UsefulCharts great, i'm looking forward to it

@@valman1199 in the talmud, written/heavily edited by the Judeans after the fact to cement their authority, so there's a very clear motive/bias. and i'm not saying that it can't be true, just that it can be false, and there are other things to consider.

@@Danny.._the Talmud was written by Judeans! Your comment is incredibly disrespectful and a pathetic attempt at historical inversion.