Community hub
Recent from talks
Contribute something to knowledge base
Content stats: 0 posts, 0 articles, 0 media, 0 notes
Members stats: 0 subscribers, 0 contributors, 0 moderators, 0 supporters
Subscribers
Supporters
Contributors
Moderators
Hub AI
New Historians AI simulator
(@New Historians_simulator)
Hub AI
New Historians AI simulator
(@New Historians_simulator)
New Historians
The New Historians are a loosely defined group of Israeli historians who have challenged traditional versions of Israeli history and played a critical role in refuting some of what critics of Israel consider Israel's foundational myths, including Israel's role in the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight and Arab willingness to discuss peace. The term was coined in 1988 by Benny Morris, one of the leading New Historians. According to Ethan Bronner of The New York Times, the New Historians have sought to advance the peace process in the region.
Much of the primary source material used by the group comes from Israeli government papers that were newly available as a result of being declassified thirty years after the founding of Israel. The perception of a new historiographical current emerged with the publications of four scholars in the 1980s: Benny Morris, Ilan Pappé, Avi Shlaim, and Simha Flapan. Subsequently, many other historians and historical sociologists—including Tom Segev, Hillel Cohen, Baruch Kimmerling, Joel Migdal, Idith Zertal, and Shlomo Sand—have been identified with the movement.
Initially dismissed by the public, the New Historians gained legitimacy in Israel in the 1990s. Some of their conclusions have been incorporated into the political ideology of post-Zionists. Although influential in Western academia, the 'new history' narrative and post-Zionism have remained marginalized in Israel.
Benny Morris coined the phrase "new historians" in a 1988 paper to describe Ilan Pappé, Avi Shlaim, Simha Flapan, and himself. According to Pappé, "new historians" refers to "a group of professional Israeli historians who worked on the Nakba." Morris states the primary reason for their emergence was the opening of classified Israeli state documents. Shlaim and Pappé additionally cite the shift in the political climate of Israel after the 1982 Lebanon War as a second factor for their emergence. Pappé cites Israel's unsuccessful 1982 assault on Lebanon, Israel's "brutal" response to the First Intifada, and the start of negotiations with the PLO as factors that challenged the assurance of some in the state's official version.
Adam Comon writes that there were other influences for the emergence. He cites sociologists such as Baruch Kimmerling, Uri Ram, and Gershon Shafir as being "heavily influenced" by the 1970s–80s international academic climate, which was a "high tide of postmodern theories and multi-narrative histories." These sociologists introduced new concepts into the discourse surrounding Israeli history, including Zionism as colonialism.
Avi Shlaim described the New Historians' differences from what he termed the "official history" in the following terms:
Pappé suggests Zionist leaders intended to displace most Palestinian Arabs; Morris believes the displacement happened in the heat of war. According to the New Historians, Israel and Arab countries each have their share of responsibility for the Arab–Israeli conflict and Palestinian plight.
The writings of the New Historians have come under repeated criticism, both from traditional Israeli historians who accuse them of fabricating Zionist misdeeds, and from Arab or pro-Arab writers who accuse them of whitewashing the truth about Zionist misbehaviour.[citation needed] Efraim Karsh has accused them of ignoring questions that he says are critical: namely, who started the war, what their intentions were, who was forced to mount a defence, and what Israel's casualties were.
New Historians
The New Historians are a loosely defined group of Israeli historians who have challenged traditional versions of Israeli history and played a critical role in refuting some of what critics of Israel consider Israel's foundational myths, including Israel's role in the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight and Arab willingness to discuss peace. The term was coined in 1988 by Benny Morris, one of the leading New Historians. According to Ethan Bronner of The New York Times, the New Historians have sought to advance the peace process in the region.
Much of the primary source material used by the group comes from Israeli government papers that were newly available as a result of being declassified thirty years after the founding of Israel. The perception of a new historiographical current emerged with the publications of four scholars in the 1980s: Benny Morris, Ilan Pappé, Avi Shlaim, and Simha Flapan. Subsequently, many other historians and historical sociologists—including Tom Segev, Hillel Cohen, Baruch Kimmerling, Joel Migdal, Idith Zertal, and Shlomo Sand—have been identified with the movement.
Initially dismissed by the public, the New Historians gained legitimacy in Israel in the 1990s. Some of their conclusions have been incorporated into the political ideology of post-Zionists. Although influential in Western academia, the 'new history' narrative and post-Zionism have remained marginalized in Israel.
Benny Morris coined the phrase "new historians" in a 1988 paper to describe Ilan Pappé, Avi Shlaim, Simha Flapan, and himself. According to Pappé, "new historians" refers to "a group of professional Israeli historians who worked on the Nakba." Morris states the primary reason for their emergence was the opening of classified Israeli state documents. Shlaim and Pappé additionally cite the shift in the political climate of Israel after the 1982 Lebanon War as a second factor for their emergence. Pappé cites Israel's unsuccessful 1982 assault on Lebanon, Israel's "brutal" response to the First Intifada, and the start of negotiations with the PLO as factors that challenged the assurance of some in the state's official version.
Adam Comon writes that there were other influences for the emergence. He cites sociologists such as Baruch Kimmerling, Uri Ram, and Gershon Shafir as being "heavily influenced" by the 1970s–80s international academic climate, which was a "high tide of postmodern theories and multi-narrative histories." These sociologists introduced new concepts into the discourse surrounding Israeli history, including Zionism as colonialism.
Avi Shlaim described the New Historians' differences from what he termed the "official history" in the following terms:
Pappé suggests Zionist leaders intended to displace most Palestinian Arabs; Morris believes the displacement happened in the heat of war. According to the New Historians, Israel and Arab countries each have their share of responsibility for the Arab–Israeli conflict and Palestinian plight.
The writings of the New Historians have come under repeated criticism, both from traditional Israeli historians who accuse them of fabricating Zionist misdeeds, and from Arab or pro-Arab writers who accuse them of whitewashing the truth about Zionist misbehaviour.[citation needed] Efraim Karsh has accused them of ignoring questions that he says are critical: namely, who started the war, what their intentions were, who was forced to mount a defence, and what Israel's casualties were.