Political Science, Moses, and Ancient Hebrew Thought

• Author: Mulford Q. Sibley
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/106591297903200205
• Published date: 01 June 1979
• Date: 01 June 1979
• Subject Matter: Article

POLITICAL

SCIENCE,

MOSES,

AND

ANCIENT

HEBREW

THOUGHT

A~ULFOFUI

Q.

SIBLEY

University

of

Minnesota

N TREATING the history of political ideas, American political scientists have

for some reason tended to ignore the ancient Hebrews. Typically, we start

I

with the ancient Greeks, examine post-classical thought, give

a

very few words

to the early Christians, and then plunge into the Middle Ages, with, at best, only

cursory references to the Hebraic tradition.

In defense of our tendency to ignore the Hebrews, it may be urged that the

Greeks were the first

systematic

political thinkers. This is obviously true, of course.

But it does not excuse our neglect of

Moses

and the prophets. The historian of

political thought should surely be concerned to some extent with non-systematic

political thinkers, if only to contrast them with

the

system-builders. Besides, Hebrew

thought is interesting

in

itself. But whatever the value

of

Hebrew ideas intrinsically,

they had

an

enormous impact on the whole development

of

political thought in the

Western tradition. IVe cannot understand Christian thought without them, any

more than we

can

comprehend it without references to the Greeks. Even after the

breakdown of the “medieval synthesis,” during which there had been countless

allusions to ancient Hebrew kings and prophets, Hebraic notions played

a

vital

role:

thus the Covenant idea

was

central for the early Calvinists. In many respects

Karl

Man

belongs squarely to the Hebrew prophetic tradition. And Woodrow

Wilson, that great twentieth century Calvinist, employed the term

covenant

to

designate the constitution of the League of Nations.

Aside from the Covenant notion, which,

of

course,

was

ubiquitous in ancient

Hebrew thought, we need to explore such themes

as

the Hebrew theory of king-

ship; the conception of political history; the evolution

of

legal conceptions; the

political

role

of

the prophet; and the conception of alienation (which is definitely

an

ancient notion).

I

devote

a

rather long chapter to such problems in my book

Political Ideas and Ideologies,

yet obviously can barely scratch the surface.

As for Rapoport’s paper, it deals with

an

important problem in ancient Hebrew

thought:

the

relation of the Covenant idea to “charisma” in leadership. It argues

that the role of the Covenant in establishing legitimacy was central and that leaders

such

as

Moses must always be understood against the background of the Covenant.

The role of the leader

was

to call attention to the ways in which institutions and

laws often concealed or distorted the meaning and prevented full application of

the Covenant. The Covenant

was

primary, the leader secondary.

The Covenant notion was

a

very ancient one. Thus the Lord is said to have

made

a

Covenant with Noah after the flood. The association of Moses with the

Covenant is,

as

the paper suggests, that

of

an implementor

and

administrator.

\Vhile the Covenant runs like

a

golden thread through ancient Hebrew thought,

interpretations differ from one another in their emphases. Thus if we acccpt

certain views in modern biblical scholarship, earlier conceptions of the Covenant

stressed the implementation of mainly ritualistic commandments

-

those involving

modes of sacrifice in worship, for example. Later

on,

particularly after the eight

century

B.c.,

the emphasis became ethical and political.

Although

I

should agree with the paper in emphasizing the Covenant idea

as

central for legitimacy and in seeing the charismatic Moses

as

subordinate to the

Covenant,

I

worould add that the charismatic leader must also be viewed

as

affecting

the \vay in which the Covenant is viewed and interpreted. Legitimacy

flows

pri-

marily from the Covenant hut the interpretation of the Covenant is also affected

by the charisma

of

particular leaders like Moses.