Physical space, imagined space, and "lived space" in ancient Israel

Biblical Theology Bulletin, Spring, 2003 by Victor H. Matthews

Abstract

One way in which to analyze biblical narrative is by examining the ways in which the ancient Israelites perceived and used space. This includes theological concepts like the "Promised Land," political dimensions such as "from Dan to Beersheba," and "lived space" such as the village gate or the threshing floor. By placing an emphasis on where events occur and on how kings, prophets or other characters use significant space/place to their advantage, and by noting the impact that space has on the development of tradition and local custom (hospitality, use of boundary stones) it is possible to better understand the social world of ancient Israel.

**********

In recent years there has been a growing interest in a critical examination of the spatial aspects of the biblical text (Flanagan 1999a: 26-30). Of course, every society forms its own concepts of space and thus these concepts will vary from one society to another. James Flanagan (2001) expands on this by noting that, "space is a fundamental subtext in all social understanding ... [it] is constructed through praxis and therefore based on experience." As a result, "lived space" (those places in which human occupations and activities occur) becomes the determinant of group identity and social boundaries (McNutt). It can thus be said that "by acting in space in a particular way the actor is inserted into a particular relation with [his/her society's] ideology" (Cresswell: 17). Physical space is continuously redefined by human presence and individual interpretation of the ideology of place. One term used by cultural geographers is "landscape" when referring to "the relation between the natural environment and human society" (Rose: 86). For instance, the view of a field by a farm worker evokes particular connotations: how it can be planted, contoured, irrigated, made more productive. On the other hand, that same field, when viewed by a real estate developer is first mentally and then physically transformed into plots of land for houses, schools, parks, and commercial establishments.

In a summary of the current discussion of critical spatiality theory within the AAR/SBL Seminar on Constructions of Ancient Space, Claudia Camp (2) uses the term "firstspace" to identify those concrete items that can be mapped and which we determine to be "geophysical realities as perceived" by society (Berquist: 6). Using the work of Edward Soja (1996: 10; 1987), she then points to what we consider to be represented or imagined space, in other words "ideas about space," which can be referred to as "secondspace." Finally, there is a "thirdspace," which can be thought of as "lived space" (Flanagan 1999; Lefebvre; Gunn: 157-59). There is value in employing this framework for understanding how space is lived and perceived in the ancient world by different elements of society (male and female, peasant and king, farmer and merchant). By applying these concepts, it becomes possible to classify how space is associated with events, legal formulations, architectural design, political boundaries, and personal ambitions.

One means of deciphering the spatial understanding of the ancient Israelites as they viewed or lived in particular places, is to examine the ways in which space is both defined and manipulated by persons and events. This can be as simple as identifying the physical places where the Israelites work, worship, transact business, practice and execute legal decisions, and gather for important announcements (all thirdspace designations). These mundane social practices take on different meanings, purposes, or intentions, however, depending on where in space and time that they occur and who is performing the action in question. Thus the content or substance of the act (farming, speech, ritual, and transaction) derives meaning from (1) the rank, authority, or status of the person involved, and (2) the physical and symbolic "space" (including time, place, occasion, or setting) involved.

Furthermore, one must also take into account the ways in which space or specific designations for space are intentionally manipulated or transformed. For instance, the term "all the land" (Josh 11:16; Deut 19:8) may be used for "the possession of Yahweh," and thus is to be considered "sacred space," but it also is a geographic reality with specific dimensions, "From Dan to Beersheba" (2 Sam 3:10), giving it political and economic implications (Grosby: 183). As a result, this terminology encompasses both aspects of secondspace and firstspace. On a smaller scale, humans, as social beings, decorate their space both physically with personal items that set an aesthetic tone as well as symbolically through cultural markers or communal understandings. Along these lines, Anne Buttimer (171) argues for an unconscious or preconscious perception of space. This would suggest that "the meanings of place to those who live in them have more to do with everyday living and doing than with thinking." I would add that there is a confluence of Buttimer's emphasis on thirdspace concepts with secondspace imagery that helps to determine how we imagine our space to be as well as how we live in it.