Monday, 26 June 2006: selections from the Exodus story in the Old Testament of the Bible (student provides; King James / Revised Standard version preferred);

Web highlight: Gordon Lewis

Objective 4 

“Our deep historical model for “national migration” is the ancient Jews who migrated from Egypt to Canaan in the Bible’s Exodus story. Unlike the American model of immigrants, the Jews moved as a group and resisted assimilation and intermarriage with the Canaanites. American Jews have followed this pattern until recent generations, when intermarriage has increased.”

From Joel Carter’s 4333 Final Exam, excerpts on the comparison between the Jews in Exodus and the Pilgrims           

A close look at the group migration of the ancient Hebrews and the Pilgrims exposes salient characteristics of immigrants and the immigrant narrative. Additionally, these accounts of group exodus also serve as a window to the characteristics of the dominant culture into which the immigrant groups assimilate—albeit with varying degrees of success and resistance. The Jewish Exodus and the Pilgrim migration revolve around group identity whereas the story of the dominant culture is typically defined by the individualistic pursuits of its members. One essential element of group migration is resistance to assimilation, which is seen as a tool to preserve group identity and viability. The Jews and the Pilgrims both experienced successful resistance to outsiders (the Canaanites and the American Indians, respectively).

Analogies

The Pilgrim’s 17th century rendition of the Exodus story became a new model for immigration to America: Bradford led the Pilgrims as Moses led the Jews. The Pilgrims crossed the Atlantic as the Jews crossed the Red Sea—albeit somewhat less dramatically. As Bradford notes, it was God who had brought the Pilgrims “over the vast and furious ocean” (69). But the Pilgrim’s success, which helped ensure that they became the dominant culture, is unlikely to be duplicated since it is into this mold that all subsequent immigrant groups have assimilated.

            Becoming American essentially means adapting some of the same style—or lack thereof—that the Pilgrims brought with them to Massachusetts. Since the dominant culture is so entrenched, resistance to assimilation and intermarriage has become significantly less beneficial to the immigrants that followed the Pilgrims. The Old Testament has clear prohibitions against race mixing and intermarriage: “And ye shall make no league with the inhabitants of this land” (Judges 2:2). “Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son” (Deut. 7:3). The reverberations of these divine directives can still be felt, although on a smaller scale: Now, a “group” of immigrants is no longer an entire village or community or ethnic group; it is usually no larger than a single family who desires to retain as much of their identity as possible (i.e. no intermarriage) while simultaneously trying to blend in.

From Bethany Fenner’s 4333 Final Exam

Objective 4 and Objective 5

family

In the traditional Old World, extended families prevail. In the modern New World, assimilated people live in nuclear families

community and laws

Old World culture is often organized by traditional or family laws.

  religion:

In traditional societies of the Old World, religion and political or cultural identity are closely related.

      Religion is the identity factor that resists assimilation the longest—but not necessarily forever..

. . . both the Pilgrims and the Jews were people of God.  Both groups left lands of religious persecution in order to find a place suitable for free worship of their God.  In order to accomplish this, the groups each exhibited class Objective 4 concerning National Migration.  The entire groups immigrated and, to maintain their religious integrity, had no intention of assimilating.  Rather, they kept themselves completely separate and condemned intermarriage.  In the Bible, the command against intermarriage came from God in Deuteronomy 7:3.  For the Pilgrims, they decided before arrival in America that they would not marry the “savage and brutish [people]…little otherwise than the wild beasts” of America (Bradford, 26).  Because of this decision, both the Jews and the Pilgrims placed much importance on husbands, wives, and children.  The nuclear family, the basic social unit in America today, was the means by which each group protected their religious purity.  (Objective 5)

Their commitment to live as God’s people led the Pilgrims to develop certain ideas, many of which can again be traced to the Jews.  Leaders of both migrating groups placed great importance on writing and literacy.  According to the commands of God, there should be no graven images, no attempt to show the likeness of God.  As a result, the written word and people’s ability to read it became all important as the one device to record God’s will.  In keeping with the idea that the Word of God should not be embellished or changed by humans, Bradford was faithful to write in the “plain style” that is characteristic of his unmarked culture.  In Puritan views, nothing should stand out, or be seen as more beautiful or lavish than God. 

The Puritan work ethic is also an ideal which passed to them from Biblical origins.  In Exodus 23:12 God commanded the Jews: “Six days do your work, but on the seventh day do not work.”  The Pilgrims were very strict about this.  Pilgrims expected everyone to work on every day but the Sabbath Day.  Perhaps this habit is where the American Dream stems from.  Everyone can work in America.  If you work hard enough, you will certainly be successful.

From Carmen Ashby

            The Exodus story tells of how the ancient Jews leave Egypt to Canaan.  They were being mistreated by the Pharaoh, so as a group they left for the “promised land.”  On their journey God spoke to them through Moses.  By doing this the disbelievers were either killed or left behind, thus keeping the culture together.  The Pilgrims also fled because they were being mistreated.  The American Indians were already in North America, but the Pilgrims outnumbered them and refused to assimilate, therefore becoming the dominant culture. 

            Although the dominant culture migration and the traditional migration stories differ, there are also similarities.  At some point in either story, both may experience any of the five stages of the immigrant narrative listed in Objective 2.  With the Pilgrims and ancient Jews, they both left the Old World (stage 1) because of oppression or mistreatment by their ruler.  The journey to the New World (stage 2) was also experience by the Pilgrims and ancient Jews.  There was shock when arriving in the New World (stage 3),

From Mary Tinsley

there is a specific classification related to the movement of larger groups to new lands, known as “national migration”.  Primary examples of national migration include the exodus of the Ancient Jews and the journey of the Pilgrims and American Jews to the “New World”.

            In the case of the Ancient Jews and the Pilgrims, settlement in a new country included the displacement of native peoples, which established these invading groups as the forerunners of what would one day become the dominant culture.  There are several unique features of these two groups that contributed to their foundations as cultural inventors.  Both the biblical Jews and their English counterparts, the Pilgrims, viewed themselves as God’s “chosen people”, and were motivated primarily by a search for religious freedom, as opposed to the pursuit of economic improvements that would drive the majority of future immigrants. Additionally, each of these groups was led by a religious figurehead (Moses for the Jews and William Bradford for the Pilgrims). After many trying years of wandering in the Egyptian desert, the Ancient Jews arrived in the “Promised Land” of Canaan, where they promptly displaced the Canaanites.  Similarly, upon arrival in America, the Pilgrims ignored the existing land rights of the Native American Indians.  Unlike the numerous immigrant groups that would follow, neither the Jews nor the Pilgrims ever intended to assimilate, choosing instead to establish a new social order for themselves in the midst of foreign lands.  By retaining their strong religious beliefs and avoiding intermarriage with the natives, both groups were successful in maintaining separate identities.

Bethany Fenner’s  “Immigration of the Freedmen from South to North” Excerpts

African Americans experienced their . . . second phase occurred when they were suddenly freed and many moved to the North to escape the ongoing tyranny of white Southerners who still supported slavery. 

Those who did choose to go faced a long and costly journey.  They undertook the journey, like most immigrants before them, to escape an oppressive past and to forge a new life in the North. One point that did surprise me regarding stage 2 is that the New World was not always in the North.  For some freedmen, the New World was in the West.  In 1879, approximately 15,000 former slaves immigrated to Kansas (Smith, 85).  In fact, so many people went to the West that they were named “Exodusters.”  Apparently, they never achieved great riches in Kansas, but did achieve their coveted freedom.

Once in the North, slaves took to freedom almost immediately.  Often, the first thing they did was change their names (Levine, 60).  This was a symbol of their new life and a denial of the names they were given by their masters when they were slaves.  This is similar to what other immigrants did when they came to America.  Names were “Americanized” to symbolize a new life in a new world, and to throw off the old identities of the Old World.

I had a very naïve idea that once in the North, freedmen were accepted and able to live out their lives as white men’s equals.  One of the books I read simplistically said that “free blacks found jobs, earned money, and raised their families” (Levine, 61).  Although this may have been the case in absolute terms, and may still be widely believed, none of that came easily to freedmen who immigrated to the North.  Stage 3, especially regarding exploitation and discrimination is represented abundantly in the research information that I found.  Freedmen in the North still faced much discrimination.  Although most northerners officially endorsed freedom for the black people, they did not necessarily support equality.  Like most immigrants, blacks faced a period of assimilation.  Changing their names and taking on jobs is evidence that the freedmen were willing to assimilate to Northern culture.  However, unlike most other immigrant groups, freedmen had dark skin.  While they were willing to assimilate, many whites refused to accept their assimilation. 

Blacks were denied civil rights, were segregated in most public places, and were often denied access to public transportation.  As a result, many freedmen did what other immigrants had done.  They began to develop racial enclaves within major northern cities.  They “founded their own churches, schools, and orphanages.  They created mutual aid societies to provide financial assistance to those in need”.

Although immigration of freedmen is different from other immigrants in that the former slaves migrated within the same country, the journey north entailed all of the stages of the classical immigrant story.  Freedmen left the Old World (the South) to escape persecution.  They journeyed to the New World (the North) and attempted to assimilate into the dominant culture.  Compared to European immigrants, however, assimilation took much longer due to freedmen’s dark skin color and the bigotry of the “dominant race.” 

. . . more recently we have seen a reassertion of African-American ethnic identity.  It has taken a long time, but the descendants of former slaves have finally begun the completion of the five stages of the immigrant narrative.

Because of the large numbers, in many ways the migration to the North was most similar to “National Migration.”