Replacing old myths with new ones

I will let my few readers here on a little secret - "myth-busting" is one of the most cherished and sought-after prizes among would-be and actual historians. Alongside lifetime prizes and collegial respect, nothing makes our mouth water more than the prospect of making a conference presentation or writing an article - stating that everything historians believed up until now is baloney - and watch them squirm.

It goes without saying that I have nothing against "myth-busting" efforts per say. "Myth-busters", however, must be very knowledgeable people - they must know what they are talking about. Otherwise, instead of squirming, the prospective buster will be laughed out of the room as an ignoramus and never heard from again.

It is with some regret and much satisfaction that I must place the recent "Hannukah Myth-Buster" written in Slate, for the most part, in the latter category. Although a number of facts presented in this openly anti-Zionist piece are correct, the article overall contains factual holes large enough to drive a train through, or even an Hellenic army. The fact that I can say this even though my specialty is the Modern Period makes Ponet's effort even more laughable (The fact that he is the Jewish chaplain for Yale is disturbing). While I invite others more knowledgeable to punch more holes, I will point out some of the main problems:

• Ponet makes no mention of other sources such as Josephus, who is our only source for the period post-Shimon.
• Ponet neglects to mention that of all the ethnic groups that were in Hellensitic Palestine - only two have survived - the Jews, and a small sect of Samaritans. Everyone else, the Edomites, the yeturim and the Nabateans, all disappeared. This does not bode well for the "it's possible to survive and maintain one's identity under foreign rule" thesis.
• Ponet "conveniently" forgets that the decrees by Antiouchus Epiphanes - attested to in the Macabees books - may very well have been recommended by said Hellenic Jews (Bickerman's argument).
• The fact - attested to by archaeology - that almost all of Eretz Israel aside from Samaria became Jewish under the Hasmoneans is forgotten. Before that we were geographically confined to the Jerusalem-Lydda area and likely would have suffered the fate of the Edomites.
• The "civil war" between the Perushim and the Zedukim during the Hasmonean and Roman periods (as opposed to the hellenists) is well documented in Jewish sources.
• The claim that the "Maccabean dream" was the main reason for the Great revolt and the Bar Kokhba revolt (as opposed to, I don't know, say Roman oppression, ethnic conflict between Jews and non-Jews, social conflict between the elite and the dispossessed, the establishment of the destroyed Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina etc) is a load of BS.
• As for whether an ethnic group needs a nation-state, in light of the ever-shrinking Jewish population in the diaspora, my answer would be an emphatic yes.

  So remember - "myth-busting" is only for those who have a command of history - AIWAC