This study analyses the intellectual output of Adya Gur Horon (Adolphe Gourevitch, 1907-1972), a Ukrainian-born, Russian-speaking, French-educated ideologue of modern Hebrew nationalism, and one of the founding fathers of the anti-Zionist ideology known as "Canaanism", whose heyday was mid 20th-century Israel. The dissertation's starting point is that if the "Canaanites" (otherwise the Young Hebrews) declared themselves to be above all a national movement independent of, and opposed to, Zionism, they should be analysed as such. In treating "Canaanite" support for the existence of an indigenous Hebrew nation in Palestine/Israel as equally legitimate as the Zionist defence of the Jews' national character (both ultimately constituting "imagined communities"), this work comes to the conclusion that the movement should indeed be classified as a fully-fledged alternative to Zionism; not a radical variation of the latter, but rather a rival national ideology. My chief assertion is that the key to a proper understanding of "Canaanism" is Horon's unique vision of the ancient Hebrew past, which constitutes the "Canaanite" foundational myth that stands in sharp contradiction to its Zionist counterpart. Furthermore, I demonstrate that Zionism and "Canaanism" are incompatible not only because they differ over history, but also because some of the basic socio-political notions they employ, such as national identity or nation-formation, are discordant. A methodology such as this has never before been applied to the "Canaanite" ideology, since most of those who have studied the movement treat "Canaanism" either as an artistic avant-garde or as a fringe variation of Zionism. This study demonstrates that, despite being sidelined by most researchers of "Canaanism", Adya Horon is beyond doubt the leading figure of the "Canaanite" movement. I believe that only by giving due weight to the divergence in national historiographies between "Canaanism" and Zionism can we grasp the former's independence from the latter, both intellectually and politically, without negating "Canaanism's" complex relationship with Zionism and the sometimes significant overlaps between the two. The dissertation makes systematic use of many newly discovered materials, including Horon's writings from the early 1930s to the early 1970s (some of them extremely rare), as well as his private archive. My study thus sits at the intersection of three fields of academic enquiry: nationalism studies; language-based area studies; and historiographical discourse analysis.

This study is done from an autobiographical perspective. It focuses on three issues: myths, the resurrection of Jesus from death, and the canon. It approaches the traditional ecclesiastical and confessional teachings from the perspective of a postmodern hermeneutics of suspicion. Being autobiographical, the study is in the first place relevant for its author. In the second place, because he is a researcher, the study has also relevance for the scholarly community. The faith community also asks their questions. Then there is the institutionalized church that is a watchdog for the dogma, and, lastly there is the secular community who is also interested in the debate. The study aims to find answers to the question how the myth of Easter faith developed into kerygma, which became a text with canonical status? It is a search for the relationship between myth, resurrection and canon. On the issue of myth, the study concludes that myth is just as important to postmoderns as it were to their pre-modern ancestors. The Christ myth is a first century Mediterranean version of an ancient inherited subconscious archetypal myth. It represents stories in the language, symbols, and metaphors of the cultures and peoples in which it originated. It is language recycled. On the question about the resurrection, the study concludes that the Christ cult and its narratives developed within a mythological worldview. First, there was the kerygma of a dying and resurrected Christ. Then narratives, as material for preaching in the early congregations emerged around the figure of the historical Jesus. The resurrection as the content of the kerygma is perceived as mythical speech that serves as the foundational myth for the Christ cult. The third issue was about the documents called canon and questions such as how did it emerge, and how did it become authority bearing? To recap the argument: In the beginning, there was the kerygma! The content of this kerygma was the death and resurrection of Christ. During the development stages of the Christ myth, this kerygma was linked to the life and death of the historical Jesus. His story became a mythical narrative that serves as the foundational myth for the Christ cult. It explains its reason for existence and its rituals. As this faith community grew and became more and more institutionalized it produced more and more literature. Orthodoxy in early Christianity decided which of these writings contain the truth and the right teaching. They are the books, which became the index of what is called the Christian Bible today. The author of this study believes in a canon behind the canon. For him, the Jesus figure is the “vehicle” that makes the content of the kerygma accessible. He is a mythological figure, with historical roots that has become the observable face of God to Christians. The New Testament represents kerygmatic narrative with an invitation to its readers and hearers to join in this mythological experience and encounter with God. / Thesis (DD (New Testament))--University of Pretoria, 2006. / New Testament Studies / unrestricted