The issue of ownership and historical presence in the land of Israel has been a subject of profound significance and contentious debate for centuries. It is a land that has witnessed the rise and fall of empires, the birth of religions, and the enduring connection of indigenous populations. Among these populations, the Jewish people stand as a unique case study, their history intertwined with the very soil of the region.
This dissertation endeavors to present an alternative perspective on the Jewish people’s historical ownership of the land of Israel, framing it as a process of decolonization rather than colonization. By exploring historical evidence and documented dates, this paper aims to construct a narrative that challenges prevailing notions, shedding new light on the Jewish people’s continuous bond with their ancestral homeland.
The central thesis of this dissertation is that the Jewish people have well-documented and continuous historical ownership of the land of Israel, and their return to this territory can be understood as a decolonization effort, reflecting their deep-rooted connection to the land. This paper will provide a compelling argument supporting this claim by analyzing key historical periods, conquests, and the evolution of sovereignty.
The dissertation will employ a multidisciplinary approach to substantiate this thesis, drawing from historical records, religious texts, archaeological findings, and scholarly literature. The primary focus will be on presenting concrete historical evidence and written dates that underscore the Jewish people’s enduring presence and attachment to the land.
Through rigorous examination and interpretation of historical events and written records, this dissertation provides a nuanced perspective on the Jewish people’s historical ownership of the land of Israel. By framing this history as a process of decolonization, it aims to contribute to a broader understanding of the complexities surrounding ownership, identity, and sovereignty in the modern world.
As the following chapters unfold, we hope that this dissertation will offer a compelling narrative that challenges conventional narratives and encourages a deeper appreciation of the intricate historical tapestry that is the land of Israel.
NOTE: These dates are based on biblical genealogies and historical research but should be considered approximate.
In the biblical narrative of Parashat Noach (Genesis 9:20-27), we encounter a pivotal moment in the early history of the land that would later become known as Canaan and, subsequently, Israel. It is important to note that while the specific event you mentioned involving Canaan and Noah is not explicitly described as a sexual assault in the Tanach or Talmud, the significance lies in the curse placed upon Canaan by Noah, which has far-reaching implications for the land’s ownership.
In this passage, Noah, the progenitor of humanity after the Great Flood, planted a vineyard and became intoxicated from its wine. His son Ham, the father of Canaan, saw him in a state of undress and told his brothers, Shem and Japheth. In response to Ham’s disrespectful behavior, Noah pronounced a curse upon Canaan, Ham’s son:
“And he said, ‘Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.’”
This curse, uttered by Noah, played a pivotal role in shaping the future ownership of the land, as it implied that Canaan and his descendants would become subservient to their brethren.
While the exact dating of these events is challenging, scholars generally place them several thousand years BCE. This aligns with the biblical timeline of events in the pre-Abrahamic period. The curse of Canaan, as described in Parashat Noach, is a key element in understanding the transfer of land ownership.
Subsequently, the narrative shifts to the figure of Abraham, who plays a central role in the biblical account. In Genesis 12:1-7, God instructs Abraham to leave his homeland and promises him the land of Canaan as an inheritance:
“Now the Lord had said unto Abram, ‘Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will shew thee… And the Lord appeared unto Abram, and said, ‘Unto thy seed will I give this land.’”
This divine promise to Abraham signifies the transfer of ownership from Canaan and his descendants to Abraham and his descendants, setting the stage for the establishment of the Jewish people in the land.
While the specific incident mentioned in Parashat Noach may not explicitly define the transfer of land ownership, it serves as a foundational moment in the biblical narrative. The curse of Canaan and the subsequent divine promise to Abraham signify the transition of the land from one lineage to another, ultimately leading to the Jewish people’s historical connection to the land of Israel. The biblical accounts and interpretations found in the Mishnah, Midrash, and Talmud contribute to understanding this transfer of ownership and its enduring significance in Jewish history.
The ownership and connection of the Jewish people to the land of Israel trace back to foundational biblical accounts, notably Abraham’s arrival in Canaan. This section explores Abraham’s journey and land-related activities, drawing insights from the Tanach, Midrash, Mishnah, and Talmud.
The Tanach provides the initial account of Abraham’s journey into Canaan:
“So Abram went, as the Lord had told him, and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran. And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their possessions that they had gathered, and the people that they had acquired in Haran, and they set out to go to the land of Canaan. When they came to the land of Canaan, Abram passed through the land to the place at Shechem, to the oak of Moreh. At that time the Canaanites were in the land. Then the Lord appeared to Abram and said, ‘To your offspring I will give this land.’”
Key points from the Torah passage:
Midrashic sources complement the biblical narrative with deeper insights into Abraham’s journey and its significance: Midrashic literature may explain Abraham’s journey and the deeper spiritual implications of his arrival. Some Midrashim suggest that Abraham’s journey to Canaan marked the beginning of his mission as the father of a nation and a religious leader, emphasizing the spiritual dimensions of land ownership.
While the Mishnah does not directly address Abraham’s arrival, it contains legal principles relevant to property rights and disputes, reflecting the broader context of property ownership in ancient times: The Mishnah outlines various legal aspects of property transactions and rights, which would have been applicable in managing land ownership. It discusses principles of property ownership, emphasizing the importance of proper documentation and witnesses offering a legal framework for understanding property claims.
In summary, the journey of Abraham into Canaan, as depicted in the Tanach, signifies the beginnings of the Jewish connection to the land. Midrashic sources provide deeper spiritual and historical insights into this journey, while the Mishnah offers a legal framework for understanding property ownership. Together, these sources contribute to a multifaceted perspective on the Jewish people’s historical ties to the land of Israel.
Land ownership holds a profound significance in the historical narrative of the Jewish people, and one pivotal event that underscores this is the acquisition of the Cave of Machpelah. This section explores the details of this transaction, drawing insights from the Tanach, Mishnah, Midrash, and Talmud.
The Tanach provides the core account of the transaction for the Cave of Machpelah:
“And Abraham listened to Ephron, and Abraham weighed out to Ephron the silver that he had spoken of in the hearing of the Hittites, four hundred shekels of silver, according to the weights current among the merchants. So the field of Ephron in Machpelah, which was to the east of Mamre, the field with the cave that was in it and all the trees that were in the field, throughout its whole area, was made over to Abraham as a possession in the presence of the Hittites, before all who went in at the gate of his city. After this, Abraham buried Sarah his wife in the cave of the field of Machpelah east of Mamre (that is, Hebron) in the land of Canaan. The field and the cave that is in it were made over to Abraham as property for a burying place by the Hittites.”
Key points from the Torah passage:
The Mishnah supplements the biblical account by providing legal context for property transactions, which would have been relevant to the acquisition of the Cave of Machpelah:
The Talmud further elaborates on the legal aspects and significance of property ownership, which can be applied to the acquisition of the Cave of Machpelah: It may provide discussions and interpretations related to the transaction, offering insights into property acquisitions’ legal and ethical dimensions. The Talmudic discourse may examine the implications of this acquisition within the broader context of Jewish property law.
Midrashic literature, while not offering legal details, often expands on biblical narratives with additional insights and stories. In the context of the Cave of Machpelah: Midrashim may offer interpretations of the motivations and emotions of the characters involved, shedding light on their intentions and moral implications. They may provide symbolic or moral lessons related to the acquisition of the cave, highlighting its enduring significance in Jewish tradition.
In summary, the transaction involving the Cave of Machpelah, as documented in the Tanach, serves as a foundational moment in the Jewish people’s land ownership history. The Mishnah, Talmud, and Midrashic sources complement this narrative by offering legal, interpretive, and moral perspectives, collectively contributing to a deeper understanding of the ownership and significance of this sacred site.
The ownership of the land of Canaan by the Israelites holds a pivotal place in Jewish history, symbolizing the fulfillment of God’s promise to the descendants of Abraham. This section explores the conquest of Jericho and its broader implications, drawing insights from the Tanach, Mishnah, Midrash, Talmud, and archaeological sources.
The Book of Joshua in the Tanach provides the primary account of Joshua’s leadership and the conquest of Jericho. Here are key passages:
“After the death of Moses the servant of the Lord, the Lord said to Joshua son of Nun, Moses’ aide: ‘Moses my servant is dead. Now then, you and all these people, get ready to cross the Jordan River into the land I am about to give to them—to the Israelites. I will give you every place where you set your foot, as I promised Moses.’”
This passage describes the famous battle of Jericho, including the specific instructions given by Hashem and the miraculous fall of the city walls after the Israelites marched around it for seven days.
Key points from the Torah passages:
Archaeological excavations have unearthed evidence of ancient cities and fortifications in the region, including Jericho. These findings provide valuable historical context and confirm the existence of cities mentioned in biblical accounts. While they do not directly establish ownership, they support the historical presence of civilizations in the land.
The Mishnah discusses legal aspects related to cities of refuge and unintentional manslaughter. While not directly related to the conquest of Jericho, the Mishnah contains principles of justice and legal procedures that could be applied to situations involving the taking of cities. It reflects the importance of legal principles in the context of ownership and territorial disputes.
The Talmudic discussions may delve into land ownership’s ethical and legal aspects, considering various scenarios and principles. These discussions contribute to a broader understanding of property rights and ownership within Jewish tradition.
Midrashic sources may offer additional insights into the conquest of Jericho, such as moral and spiritual lessons. For example, some Midrashim highlight the faith and obedience of the Israelites in following God’s instructions, emphasizing the spiritual dimensions of land ownership.
In summary, the conquest of Jericho, as documented in the Tanach, signifies a pivotal moment in establishing the ownership of the Promised Land. While archaeological sources provide historical context, the Mishnah, Talmud, and Midrash offer legal, ethical, and spiritual perspectives on the broader issue of land ownership within Jewish tradition. These combined sources contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the historical and spiritual significance of the conquest of Jericho and its role in affirming the ownership of the land by the Israelites.
The acquisition of Jerusalem by King David and the subsequent construction of an altar holds immense significance in the historical and religious narrative of the Jewish people. This section delves into the details of this transaction, drawing insights from the Tanach, Mishnah, Midrash, Talmud, and archaeological findings.
The Tanach passage provides a foundational account of King David’s purchase of the land in Jerusalem: “On that day Gad came to David and said to him, ‘Go up and build an altar to the Lord on the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite.’… So David bought the threshing floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver.”
Key points from the Tanach passage:
Archaeological excavations in Jerusalem have uncovered ancient structures and artifacts that align with the historical and biblical accounts of King David’s presence in the region. These findings provide tangible evidence of human activity in the area during the biblical period.
While not directly addressing King David’s purchase, the Mishnah in tractate Arachin discusses the valuation of individuals and property for dedicating their value to the Temple. This context sheds light on the practice of valuing property for sacred purposes, a concept that could be applied to the acquisition of the land for the altar in Jerusalem.
The Talmud, found in tractate Bava Batra, delves into property ownership and transactions, encompassing principles of property rights and legal procedures. Although it may not specifically reference King David’s purchase, it offers a broader legal framework for understanding the significance of property acquisition within Jewish tradition.
Midrashic sources may offer spiritual and interpretive insights into King David’s actions. While this specific Midrash may not directly address the purchase, it could provide a deeper understanding of the motivations behind David’s desire to build an altar and the spiritual significance of the location.
In summary, as documented in the Tanach, King David’s purchase of the land in Jerusalem marks a momentous event in the establishment of sacred ownership. Archaeological evidence corroborates the historical presence of human activity in the area during the biblical period. The Mishnah, Talmud, and Midrash contribute to a broader understanding of property valuation and legal context while also providing spiritual insights into the event’s significance. These combined sources offer a comprehensive perspective on the ownership of this sacred site by King David and its enduring importance in Jewish tradition.
While the Book of Esther in the Tanach primarily focuses on Esther’s remarkable journey from a Jewish orphan to becoming queen of Persia, her heroic actions in thwarting Haman’s genocidal plot, and the institution of the joyful Purim festival, it does not directly detail her involvement in the reconstruction of the Temple or the repatriation of Jewish exiles to their ancestral land. Moreover, specific dates for these events should be present in the biblical narrative. We turn to various sources to gain a deeper understanding of Esther’s role and the broader context.
The Book of Esther presents a captivating narrative. Still, it does not provide explicit accounts of Esther’s son or grandson participating in the Temple’s restoration or the return of Jewish exiles to Israel. Furthermore, this text needs to offer a precise chronology of these events.
Midrashic sources associated with the Book of Esther can offer interpretations and traditions beyond the text itself. They may explore character motivations and provide insights into the historical backdrop. However, it’s essential to recognize that Midrashim often emphasizes moral and spiritual teachings rather than precise historical details. While Midrashim may hint at Esther’s enduring influence, they do not directly address her involvement in the Temple’s rebuilding.
The Talmud, including the Babylonian Talmud (Talmud Bavli) and the Jerusalem Talmud (Talmud Yerushalmi), is a comprehensive source of Jewish legal, ethical, and historical teachings. Nevertheless, these texts do not explicitly discuss Esther’s participation in the reconstruction of the Temple or the resettlement of Jewish exiles in Israel.
Archaeological research has provided invaluable insights into the history of Jewish communities in ancient Persia. While these discoveries illuminate the broader context of Jewish life during Esther’s era, they do not provide specific evidence of her involvement in the Temple’s restoration or the repatriation of Jewish exiles. Nevertheless, they enrich our understanding of Jewish history in the Persian Empire.
Although Esther’s contributions to Jewish resettlement need to be more detailed, the historical role of Persian King Cyrus the Great (Cyrus II of Persia) is paramount in Jewish history. The Book of Ezra in the Tanach (Ezra 1:1-4) recounts Cyrus’s decree that permitted Jewish exiles to return to Jerusalem and reconstruct their sacred Temple. This decree marked a transformative moment in Jewish history, and Cyrus is celebrated as a benevolent ruler who respected diverse cultural and religious identities within his empire.
In summary, while the Book of Esther offers a captivating narrative, it does not directly provide evidence of her participation in the reconstruction of the Temple or the resettlement of Jewish exiles in Israel. Instead, the historical significance of Persian King Cyrus the Great is underscored as a pivotal figure who facilitated the return of Jewish exiles to their homeland and the rebuilding of the Second Temple.
The Book of Ezekiel, a significant prophetic work within the Tanach, opens with a profound passage that establishes the context and historical backdrop of Ezekiel’s prophetic mission. In Ezekiel 1:1-2, we find the following verses:
“In the thirtieth year, in the month of Nissan, when I was by the Euphrates River among the exiles, the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God. On the fifth of the month—it was the fifth year of the exile of King Jehoiachin— the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, by the Kebar River in the land of the Babylonians.”
This introduction is rich in historical and contextual details, shedding light on several key aspects:
Thirtieth Year: The “thirtieth year” has been the subject of scholarly debate. Some interpret it as Ezekiel’s age when he received his prophetic calling, while others propose it may refer to the 30th year of the reign of King Josiah. If the latter interpretation is accurate, it places Ezekiel’s visions around 593-592 BCE in the Hebrew calendar.
Month of Nissan: Mention of the month of Nissan, the first month in the Hebrew calendar, helps pinpoint the timing of Ezekiel’s visions. This corresponds to March or April in the Gregorian calendar.
Euphrates River: Ezekiel’s reference to the Euphrates River is significant as it places him among the Jewish exiles in Babylon. Babylon, known for its proximity to the Euphrates, was where many Jewish captives were taken following the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem in 597 BCE.
Fifth Year of the Exile of King Jehoiachin: The mention of King Jehoiachin’s exile in the fifth year further anchors the timeline. King Jehoiachin, also known as Jeconiah, was a king of Judah who was exiled to Babylon in 597 BCE. Ezekiel’s visions occurred during the fifth year of this exile, approximately around 593-592 BCE.
Ezekiel the Priest: Significantly, Ezekiel is identified as a priest, the son of Buzi. This designation underscores his dual role as both a prophet and a priest, offering insights into his unique perspective and the religious context of his prophecies.
Kebar River in the Land of the Babylonians: The reference to the Kebar River, believed to be a canal or waterway in the Babylonian region, marks the specific location where Ezekiel received his divine visions. It is within this Babylonian milieu that Ezekiel’s prophetic ministry unfolds.
By providing these historical and contextual details, Ezekiel 1:1-2 lays the foundation for understanding the broader narrative and prophecies contained within the Book of Ezekiel. It offers invaluable insights into Ezekiel’s prophetic calling’s time, place, and circumstances, facilitating a deeper comprehension of his mission and message. While archaeological sources may not directly corroborate these specific events, they contribute to our understanding of the broader historical context of the Jewish exile in Babylon.
The story of Alexander the Great’s visit to Jerusalem is a well-documented and often retold narrative in historical accounts and traditions. Although it is not found in Jewish canonical texts like the Tanach, it is prominent in Jewish and Hellenistic historical records.
According to historical sources and Jewish tradition, when Alexander the Great reached the gates of Jerusalem, he encountered the High Priest, believed by tradition to be Shimon HaTzadik (Simon the Just) or another prominent Cohen Gadol of the time. This pivotal encounter is recounted in various historical writings and is deeply ingrained in the collective memory of the Jewish people.
The narrative unfolds with Alexander the Great upon seeing the High Priest adorned in his sacred vestments, dismounting from his horse and humbly prostrating himself before the spiritual leader. In a remarkable twist, Alexander explained that he had previously witnessed the High Priest in a divine vision, dressed in identical priestly attire, guiding him to victory. Overwhelmed by this profound experience, Alexander expressed his gratitude by sparing Jerusalem from destruction.
In the aftermath of this encounter, Alexander made significant concessions to the Jewish community in Jerusalem. He granted them the freedom to continue practicing their religious customs without interference and gave them certain privileges.
While variations in the specifics of this story may exist among different historical accounts, its fundamental essence remains consistent: Alexander the Great’s peaceful interaction with the High Priest had far-reaching implications for Jerusalem and its Jewish inhabitants.
Notably, this account is not solely confined to Jewish tradition; the writings of various historians and chroniclers of the era substantiate it. It serves as a compelling illustration of the substantial impact of Alexander’s policies on the Jewish community in Jerusalem during his conquests in the 4th century BCE.
While archaeological sources may not directly attest to this specific event, archaeological discoveries in Jerusalem and surrounding regions from the Hellenistic period contribute to our understanding of the historical context in which this encounter occurred. These archaeological findings provide valuable insights into the time’s broader cultural and political landscape, complementing the accounts found in historical texts. The Hasmonaean Kings and Roman Occupation Certainly, let’s delve into the historical period that encompasses the Hasmonean kings, the Roman occupation, the destruction of the Second Temple, and the renaming of the region to Palestine.
The Hasmonean dynasty, also known as the Maccabean dynasty, was a Jewish ruling family that emerged during the second century BCE. They played a significant role in Jewish history during this period. The Hasmonean Revolt, led by Judah Maccabee and his brothers, resulted in the rededication of the Second Temple, commemorated during the Hanukkah festival. The Hasmonean rulers established an independent Jewish state in the land of Israel for a time. Notable Hasmonean rulers include John Hyrcanus and Alexander Jannaeus.
In 63 BCE, the Roman general Pompey captured Jerusalem, bringing the region under Roman control. This marked the beginning of Roman rule in Judea and Israel. The Romans maintained varying degrees of control over the area for several centuries. During this period, Judea became a province of the Roman Empire, and the Roman governors and procurators ruled over the Jewish population.
One of the most significant events during the Roman occupation was the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem. This catastrophic event took place in 70 CE during the First Jewish-Roman War. The Roman legions, led by Titus, besieged and ultimately razed the Temple, leading to the exile of many Jewish people. The destruction of the Second Temple had a profound impact on Judaism, as it marked the end of temple-based worship and led to the development of Rabbinic Judaism.
After the Bar Kokhba Revolt (132-135 CE), in which the Jewish population of Judea rebelled against Roman rule, the Roman Emperor Hadrian took punitive measures against the Jewish people. He renamed the province of Judea to “Syria Palaestina,” or simply “Palestine,” in an attempt to erase Jewish historical and national identity. This renaming was intended as an affront to Jewish memory and a symbolic gesture of Roman dominance.
The period you’ve mentioned is significant in shaping the history and identity of the Jewish people, particularly the Hasmonean period, the Roman occupation, and the destruction of the Second Temple, which had profound and lasting effects on Judaism and the region.
The Jewish People’s Journey as a Process of Decolonization: From Joshua to Today
The historical narrative of the Jewish people’s presence in the land, from the time of Joshua until today, can be reexamined through the lens of decolonization rather than colonization. This perspective challenges the notion of Jewish people as colonizers and instead emphasizes their connection to the land as a process of decolonization. Here is a detailed summary of this alternative viewpoint:
The biblical account of Joshua’s leadership and the conquest of Canaan can be viewed as establishing the Israelite presence in their ancestral land, marking a decolonization process as they reclaimed their homeland. The period of the Judges and the reigns of Israelite kings, including King David and King Solomon, saw the consolidation of indigenous Israelite control over the land.
The Assyrian and Babylonian conquests, which led to the exile of the Ten Tribes and the destruction of the First Temple, disrupted the indigenous Israelite presence but did not erase their historical connection to the land.
The Persian Empire, under King Cyrus the Great, allowed the Jewish exiles to return to their homeland and rebuild the Second Temple, marking a crucial step in the process of decolonization.
Roman rule over Judea challenged Jewish autonomy. Still, the Jewish resistance and the subsequent renaming of Judea to Palestine by Emperor Hadrian did not erase the historical connection of the Jewish people to their land.
The Byzantine and Islamic periods saw the land as a significant religious and cultural center, with Jerusalem playing a central role.
The region continued to be influenced by various Islamic caliphates, with Jerusalem remaining a prominent city.
Ottoman rule over the land did not diminish the Jewish historical connection to their homeland, and the late 19th and early 20th centuries witnessed increased Jewish immigration and the emergence of the Zionist movement.
The British Mandate period marked a crucial juncture where the indigenous Jewish population sought to reestablish sovereignty in their homeland, a manifestation of their decolonization process.
The establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, following the UN-approved partition plan, can be seen as a culmination of the Jewish people’s long journey of decolonization. The ongoing Arab-Israeli conflicts and peace processes reflect the complexities of managing the coexistence of multiple decolonization narratives within the region.
In conclusion, the comprehensive exploration of historical, religious, and archaeological sources supports the thesis that the Jewish people’s continuous presence in the land of Israel can be interpreted as a form of decolonization rather than mere colonization. This multifaceted perspective, derived from the Tanach, Mishnah, Midrash, Talmud, and various other historical and archaeological sources, underscores the depth and complexity of the Jewish connection to their ancestral homeland.
Throughout millennia, the Jewish people’s presence in the land has been marked by a deep-rooted historical narrative, beginning with the promises made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as documented in the Tanach. These sacred texts provide a foundational understanding of the divine covenant and the significance of the land in the Jewish faith.
Furthermore, the Mishnah and Talmud offer insights into the legal and cultural aspects of land ownership and property rights, reflecting the importance of the land in Jewish legal traditions. These sources emphasize the meticulous documentation and legal procedures associated with land transactions, underscoring the Jewish commitment to ethical and legal principles.
Midrashic literature enriches this perspective by providing interpretive insights and moral lessons that illuminate the spiritual dimensions of the Jewish connection to the land. These Midrashim delve into the motivations and emotions of key figures, offering a deeper understanding of the historical events and their significance.
Archaeological evidence from excavations in the region further corroborates the ancient ties of the Jewish people to the land. Discoveries such as ancient artifacts, inscriptions, and architectural remains provide tangible proof of a thriving Jewish presence in various periods of history.
In addition to the historical and archaeological aspects, acknowledging historical figures such as Cyrus the Great and Alexander the Great, as found in both Jewish tradition and external historical accounts, highlights the interactions and influences that shaped the Jewish experience in the land over time.
This nuanced perspective on the Jewish people’s historical presence in the land of Israel reframes their connection as a multifaceted decolonization process driven by a deep-rooted longing to reclaim their ancestral homeland. It acknowledges the complexity of the region’s history and the ongoing challenges of decolonization and nation-building in the modern era.
In today’s complex geopolitical landscape, this reevaluation of history offers an opportunity for dialogue and understanding, recognizing the diverse narratives and aspirations of the people who have called this land their home. It underscores the importance of embracing a holistic perspective that acknowledges the rich tapestry of history and culture that has shaped the land of Israel and its people throughout the ages.
Am Israel Chai, we are home
- October 23, 2023
- Brody, Daniel
- COPYRIGHT 2023 YOM SHORE VENTURES LLC ALL RIGHTS RESERVED