jewish quarterly review 03

iCO

ICO

wSSiw2j^&t!&

Digitized by the Internet Archivein

2010 with funding fromUniversity of Toronto

http://www.archive.org/details/jewishquarterlyr03drop

THE

JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEWNEW SERIES

EDITED BY

CYRUS ADLER AND

S.

SCHECHTER

VOLUME1912-1913

III

PHILADELPHIA

THE DROPSIE COLLEGE FOR HEBREW

AND COGNATE LEARNINGLONDON: MACMILLAN & COMPANY,LTD.

"N

CAHAN PRINTING218S.

CO., INCU. S. A.

FOURTH STREET.

PHILADELPHIA. PA

CONTENTSPACEAdler, Cyrus: Review of

"A

History of EducationPierrepont

before the Middle Ages" by Frank

Graves

565

Adler, Cyrus: Review of "Michael Heilprin and

His Sons" by Gustav Pollak

567Its

Bentwich, Norman

:

Review of "Pharisaism:R. Travers Herford

Aim and Method" byBrody, H.:

54983of

A

Tokehah by R. Saadya Gaon:

Buchler,

Adoeph

ReviewS.

of

"Documents

Jewish Sectaries" by

Schechter

429221

Cohen, A.

:

Arabisms

in

Rabbinic Literature

Friedeaender,

Israel:

"A

Moses

Legend"

by179

Samuel Krauss

Friedeaender, Israee: Jewish-Arabic Studies

235

Greenstone, Jueius H.: Review of "The Use ofthe Bible in the Education of the

Young" by T.571

RaymontHalper,B.:

Hefes

b.

Yasliah's

Lost

Book

of

Precepts

317

Halper, B.

:

A

Note on R. Hai's Liturgic Fragment

545575

Hoschander, Jacob: Assyro-Babylonian Literature

Huhner, Leon: Review

of "History of the Jews in

America" by Peter WiernikIII

557

Malter, Henry: Saadia Studies

487101 17

Margous, MaxMargolis,

L.

:

Recent Hiblical Literature

Max

L.

:

"Man

by Man," Joshua

7,

319

Mordell, PhinEAS: Origin of Letters and Numeralsin

Sefer Yesirah:

517Correctionsto

Perles, Felix

Additions and

Mis-

cellany of Lexical

and Textual

Notes on the313

Bible

Perles, Felix

:

v\n&

=

Hair

547

Philipson, David: Review of "Ethics of Judaism"by M. Lazarus167

Poznanski,Ginzberg

S.

:

Review of

"Geonica"

by

Louis

397Disputation in an Italian NovelPolity

Radin,

Max: A

511the

Revel, Bernard: Notes on "The

of

Ancient Hebrews" by Judge Sulzberger

315of

Revel,

Bernard:

Inquiry

into

the

Sources

Karaite Halakah

337181

Sciiechter,

S. S.:

:

An Unknown Khazar DocumentAnnouncement

Schechter,

:

485

Segal, M. H.Zadokite

Additional Notes on "Fragments of a

Work"

301:

Sulzberger,

Mayer

The

Polity

of

the

Ancient1

Hebrews

IV

THE POLITY OF THE ANCIENT HEBREWS*By Mayer Sulzberger,1*

Philadelphia

In accepting the

flattering invitation of

this

learned

institution to deliver a course of lectures

on the Institutesthe natural re-

of

Government of the Ancient Hebrews,to

luctance

assume

a

novel

duty

was overcome by the

earnest suggestion that at least so

much was due

to the

cause and to the venerated Founder of this college.the course of a long

In

and active

life,

he always found time

and opportunity to further the cause of Hebrew learning, andthis munificentfitting

endowment bycrown upon

his last will

and

testa-

ment was thecause.

his lifelong labors in the

The western worl

!

the

world of modern

civilization

hasit

always

felt

and evinced a transcendentHebrews.

interestin

in the polity of the anciei.is

The books

which

recorded were once universally accepted as

literally

inspired,

and although the modern course of thought hasthis

tended to raise important dissents fromstill

view,it

it

is

widely accepted, and even those

who

reject

have

contributed some of the most valuable aids to the under-

standing of the biblical literature.

*A1912.

course

of

four

-rtures

delivered before

the

DROPSIE COLLEGEiS,

FOR HEBREW AND COGNATE LEARNING,

March

21,

25

and

28,

Malter, Henry: Saadia Studies

487101

Margous, Max

L.

:

Recent Biblical Literature

Margous,

Max

L.

:

"Man

by Man," Joshua

7,

17

319

MoRDELL, Phineas: Origin of Letters and Numeralsin

Sefer Yesirah:

517Correctionsto

Perles, Felix

Additions and

Mis-

cellany of Lexical

and Textual Notes on the313

Bible

PERLES, Felix

:

*lt3B>

=

Hair

547

Phiupson, David: Review of "Ethics of Judaism"by M. LazarusPoznan'skIjS.:

167

Review of

"Geonica"

by

Louis

Ginzberg


Radix,Revel,

Max: A

511the

Bernard: Notes on "The

of


315of

REVEL,

Bernard:

Inquiry

into

the

Sources

Karaite Halakah

337181

Sciiechter, SciiechtER,

S.S.:

:


:

485



Work"Mayer: ThePolity

301ofthe

SULZBERGER,

Ancient1

Hebrews

IV

THE POLITY OF THE ANCIENT HEBREWS*By Mayer Sulzberger,1

Philadelphia

\this

In accepting the

flattering invitation of

learned


on the Institutes

of Government of the Ancient Hebrews, the natural reluctanceto

assume a novel duty was overcome by the


much was due

to

the

cause and to the venerated Founder of thisthe course of a long and activelife,

college.

In


and opportunity to further the cause of Hebrew learning,andthis

munificentfitting


his last will

and

testa-

ment was thecause.


The western worl

1

the

world of moderna

civilization

hasit

always

felt

and evinced

transcendent

interestin

in the polity of the ancieris

Hebrews.

The books

which


literally

inspired,



view,it

it

is


who

reject

have



*A1912.

course

of

four

--.tures

delivered before the

DROPSIE COLLEGE18,


March

ax,

25

and

28,

Mai.tkr.

Henry: Saadia

Studies

487101 17

Margolis,

Max

L.

:

Recent Biblical Literature''Alan by

Margolis,

Max

L.

:

Man," Joshua

7,

319

Mordell, Piiineas: Origin of Letters and Numeralsin

Sefer YesirahCorrectionsto

517

Perles, Felix: Additions andcellany of Lexical

Mis-


Bible

Perles, Felix

:

ei&6?

=

Hair

547

Philipson, David: Review of "Ethics of Judaism"by M. Lazarus167of

Pozxaxski,Ginzberg

S.:

Review

"Geonica"

by

Louis


Radix.Revel,

Max: A

511the


of


315of

REVEL,

Bernard:

Inquiry

into

the

Sources

Karaite Halakah

337181

Sciiechter,

S.

:


SciiECiiTER, S.

:

485


:


Work"Mayer: ThePolity

301ofthe

Sulzberger,

Ancient1

Hebrews

IV


Philadelphia

\

In accepting the

flattering invitation

of this learned


on the Institutes

of Government of the Ancient Hebrews, the natural reluctanceto



much was due

to

the


In

and active

life,


and opportunity andthis

to further the cause of

Hebrew

learning,testa-

munificentfitting


his last will

and

ment was thecause.


The western worl

'

the

world of modern

civilization

hasit

always

felt

and evinced aHebrews.

transcendent

interestin

in the polityis

of the anciei.

The books

which


literally

inspired,



view,it

it

is


who

reject

have



*A1912.

course

of

four

'--tures

delivered before

the

DROPSIE COLLEGEiS,


March

21,

25

and

28,

Malter. Henry: Saadia StudiesMargolis,

487101 17

Max

L.

:

Recent Biblical Literature

Margous,

Max

L.

:

"Man

by Man," Joshua

7,

319

Mordell, Phinkas: Origin of Letters and Numeralsin

Sefer Yesirah:

517Correctionsto

Perles, Felix

Additions and

Mis-

cellany of Lexical


Bible

Perles, Felix

:

pibb>

=

Hair

547

Philipson, David: Review of "Ethics of Judaism"by M. Lazarus167

Poznanski,Ginzberg

S.

:

Review of

"Geonica"

by

Louis


Radix,Revel,

Max: A

511the


of


315of

Revel,

Bernard

:

Inquiry

into

the

Sources

Karaite HalakahSciieciiter, S.:

337181


Sciiechter,Segal,

S.:

:

485

M. H.


Zadokite

Work"

301:

SULZBERGER,

Mayer

The

Polity

of

the

AncientI

Hebrews

IV


Philadelphia

\

In accepting the

flattering invitation

of this learned


on the Institutesthe natural re-

of

Government of the Ancient Hebrews,to

luctance



much was due

to the


In

and active

life,


and opportunityandthis

to further the cause of

Hebrew

learning,testa-

munificentfitting


his last will

and

ment was thecause.


The western worl

*

the

world of moderna

civilization

hasit

always

felt

and evinced

transcendent

interestin

in the polity of the anciei.is

Hebrews.

The books

which


literally

inspired,



view,it

it

is


who

reject

have



*A1912.

course

of

four '--tures delivered before the

DROPSIE COLLEGEiS,


March

si,

25

and

28,

2

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW

A

phenomenon

so remarkable cannot be merely casual the legislation of the great Asiatic

or accidental.

Whereas

empires of India and China has merely aroused the curiosity of the scholar, the polity of the

Hebrews has awakcleric

ened the earnest attention of learned and simple, of

and layman, of statesman andthat the ancient

poet.

There

is

a

feeling

Hebrew

ideals of

government concur withAbsoluteautocracy,

our

own

in their

deepest

meanings.

the lordly disregard of the humble, the exclusive concern

of the individual for himself, these are

all

attributes

which

appear to us to be present

in

the great and powerful of

Eastern lands, and they repel us.the ideals are the reverse.people,

In the

Hebrew

polity

The King was

to live for his

was governed by

a fixed law

which he had not made

and which he could not unmake, and was checked by anational council, representative of the people.

Theowedtionstions.

judicial function was, as time progressed, severed

from the general sovereignty and became a power whichallegiance to the law aboveall

other masters, antici-

pating in this respect that distribution of sovereign func-

which

is

an essential attribute of modern constitu-

Aliens were no longer looked on as enemies, but wereto

be treated

with

fairness

and

regarded

as

friends.

Slavery was abhorred, and the abuses of capitalism weredeplored and restrained.

Awhichthe

few years ago

I

had the honor

to deliver a lecture

before the Jewish Theological Seminary atI

New;

York,

in

endeavored to show that

this trait

was present

in

Hebrew

people from the earliest times

that the avertransi-

sion to absolute kingly authoritytory, but could be traced

was not modern or

back historically to the election

;

POLITY OF ANCIENT HEBREWS

SULZBERGERlast,

3

and control by the people's representatives of the kings

from the verythatalsois,

first

of them, Saul, to the very

ZedekiahI

through a period of more than four centuries.demonstrateessential

endeavored to

that

this

representative

council,

which had

qualities

of modern parlia-

ments, was for long

known

as the 'am ha-ares, a technical

term which,

in

the mutations of time and circumstance,last

acquired other and totally alien connotations, until atthe true

meaning was forgotten.

The very

simplicity of

the words, the ease with

which a mere tyro can translatedictionary, became, in later times,

them with the help of a

a powerful obstacle to the recovery of the true meaning.

OnphiaIsrael

that occasion

I

said

(The Am-ha-arctz, Philadel:

(Greenstone),

1910,

page 58)

"The Parliament ofwhere the

had

its

humble beginnings

at the city gate,

elders of the town, 'comers to the gate,' sat to hold the

Town

Council and the Municipal Court.evolved,

Gradually there was

from

this institution, the tribaldistrict

'Am, which dealtinhabited by the

with the larger matters of thetribe.

Friendliness

among

neighbors, and the necessity of

defense against enemies, produced alliances between severaltribes,all

and

finally

there

resulted a union

of

all

or

nearly

the tribes of Israel.

Then only could

there have

been formed a general gathering of delegates, an 'Am ofthe land, our

'Am

ha-aretz."

Further

investigation

has

not

resulted

in

findingevi-

evidence that a tribal 'am ever existed.

Perhaps suchit

dencelikely,

may

be forthcoming in the future, butso, that the actual

is

just as

and even more

development of thelogical

'am did not follow the symmetrical and

course

I

had marked out forhas a

it.

Life with

its

rich

and varied aspects

way

of disappointing the most rigid and exact logical

4processes.

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEWThisfact,

however,

in

no wise renders doubtful

the

main

thesis that the

'am ha-arcs, a great representativepart'

body,

played

an

important

in

the government of

ancient Israel.

This present course will be limited

in the

main

to the

examination of the "city gate," where the council {zekcnim,be'alim,

anashim)MunicipalI

sat,

not only to hold the but toexercise

Townmuchin

Councilhigher

and thepowers.

Court,

shall

endeavor to show that

pre-Israelite

times Palestine was composed of

many

little city

kingdoms,

independent of one another, sometimes leagued togetherfor offence or defense, sometimes arrayed against one another.earth,local

They lackedjurisdiction.

large ideals.

Their heaven,

like their

was parceled out among many, each with Gods and Kingsalike

limited

were profusely

numerous.

Upon them came downreligious]

the

Hebrews with

their large

and national

ideas.

They

believed at least thatrule over Pales-

iivii

was the true and only God who hadand thatall

tine,

other

Gods were

in that

domain

rebels

and usurpers.longed tothe

The

heathen's thought that the land be-

many gods and many

kings came in conflict with

Hebrew

notion of Canaan as one land, the portion of

one God (Jhvh), for the use of one nation, Jhvh's own,his helek

(Deut. 32, 9), his segullah (Exod. 19, 5).divided to the nations their inheritance,

"When Elyon

WhenI

he separated the sons of Adam,

[e

set

bounds for the (seventy) peoples, (Gen.

46, 27).

Their number even as the B'ne Israel

Jhvh's portionJacob theI

is

his people,

lot

of his inheritance.in the desert land,

le

found him

;


SULZBERGER

5

And

in the waste,

howling wilderness;

He HeAs

led

him about, he instructed him,up her

kept him as the apple of his eye.the eagle stirrethnest,

Fluttereth over her young,

Spreadeth abroad her wings,

Taketh them,Beareth them on her wings,

So Jhvh alone did lead him

With him

there

was no

alien

God" (Deut.

32, 8-12).

The Hebrews cameto wrest a country

as an army.its

Their purpose was

from

possessors, a task that couldIf they

only be accomplished by war.

had hopes of suddendissipated.

and complete conquest, these were soonstrife

The

went on for decades,

if

not longer, and even at the

end the goal was never quite reached.

Some

parts of the

country always continued in the possession of the natives,while in others a

mode

of compromise was found which

enabled the natives and the invaders to live together inpeace.

While on the march

it

was

well for

Moses

to

pray

Jhvh10,

to scatter Israel's enemies

and

to protect the

myriads

(divisions)

and regiments of the Hebrew armies (Num.

35-36), but

they were confronted with the

when they were being settled on the land, many perplexing problems

with which peaceful governments must deal.

The

task of ruling a country

is

far

more complex thanthe unity

that of governing a camp.

The compactness andfeatures,

of the

camp

are

its

essential

while the former

demands the

scattering of the people into a thousand sev-

eral places, separated

from each other by

obstacles, natural

and

artificial.

6

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEWTheactual condition of the countryto he considered in

and the people, old

and new, hadment.

framing the new govern-

That they met the

difficulties

and practically overterritory

came them, history shows.

The newstate.

was

in the

end welded into a solid Hebrew

The

city-kings

and

city-gods disappeared, and in their place

came

a true nation

and a national God

a

conception which ultimately ex-

panded more and more

until the idea of

one humanity and

one God became deeply rooted.

Ourwith theitsis

task in this course

is

to ascertain

what were the

early stages of this development, dealing in the first place

common

theory of tribal organization, ascertainingits

true nature, and showing that

duration was less than

usually believed.

We

shall

next examine the pre-Israelite

city-states

and

their

mode

of government, following this up

by a view of the Hebrew statesmanship which, retaining the

form of organization ofessence.

city-states, materially

modified

its

The

notices preserved in the Bible of the actual

exercise of the jurisdiction by the

Hebrew

cities will

next

be considered, to be followed by a consideration of thelegal

provisionsstill

concerning

these

Hebrew

city-councilslastly

which

survive in the Pentateuch.

And

we

shall

endeavor to show that by degrees the national religiousidea

was spread by the Levites and the Nebiim,were

until a true

Federal state evolved, with incidental remarks as to the

mode by whichI

these great changesin

effected.like

need scarcely say that

an inquiry

this

into

obscure points of

Hebrew

Constitutional history, any lan-

guagesertion.light

I

may

use must not be construed into dogmatic asareall

We

fellow-students, earnestly striving for

and knowledge, with the consciousness that the task

POLITY OF ANCIENT HEBREWSis

SULZBERGERis

J

difficultit

and that the work of many minds

required to

give

even a semblance of completeness.is

The common opinion undoubtedlycommonwealth was formed by(

that the

Hebrewclans

the union oi twelve tribes

mattot,

shcbatim),

which were

subdivided

into

(mishpahot), the latter into families (bct-abot), and thesein their

turn were composed of warriors (gebarim).classical text

Theof

on the subjectrelates that the

is

in the

seventh chap-

ter of Joshua,

which

war

for the conquestthe

Canaan was auspiciously begun by the capture of;

walled city of Jericho

that by Divine order,

its

inhabitantsto extinc-

(save a few favored for cause)tion,

were doomedthat

and,

moreover,

it

was commandedit

the victorsas such

should avoid taking booty, since

was herem and

would contaminate not only the(Josh.6,

taker, but the

whole camp

18).

A

soldier yielding to temptation captured

and hid away a goodly Babylonish garment, two hundredshekels of silver, and a golden ornament of fifty shekels

weight.Instantly the Divine favor

was withdrawn.which seemed

The

city

of Ai, the point of next

attack,

easy of

capture, resisted and defeated the Israelite force.

Joshua,

perturbed, inquired of the oracle and was informed thatthe disfavor

was due

to the breach of the order against

booty.

It

became

his task to discover the guilty person.is is

The mode of7.

consulting the oracleseries of questions

given at length (Josh.asked, and the oracle,

16-18).

A

through the priest in charge of the Ark of the Covenant,

makes

reply.

Incidentally, too.ization.

we

learn the

scheme of army organtribe:

A

representative

of

each

being

broughtof these

before the Ark, the question was put

To which

8tribes

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW(shebatim) does the offender belong?

The answer

was. JudaJi.

Thereupon the representatives of the severalJudah were placed before the Ark, and:

clans of the tribe of

the question propounded

To which

of these mishpahot

does the offender belong?

The answer was, Zerah.ofthe

The

representatives of the several families

Zerah clan

being placed before the Ark, the next question was:

ToThe

which of these bet-abot does the offender belong?answer was, Zabdi.

Thereupon the gebarim (individual

warriors) of the Zabdi family, being put before the Ark,the question

was put

:

Which

of these gebarim

is

the guilty

man? And

the answer was, Achan, ben Karmi, ben Zabdi,

ben Zerah, of the tribe (mattek) of Judah.slightly defective, but a careful reading ofit

The

text

is

justifies this

translation.

We(mattot,

have here a perfect scheme of organizationshebatim),clans

:

tribes

(mishpahot),

families

(bet-

abot), gebarim (individual soldiers).It

does not, however, stand alone.is

The scheme putdivides the hosts

before Moses by Jethrointo

different.

It

thousands

(alaphim),f

hundreds(Exod.18,

(me'ot),21).

fifties

(hamishim) and tens

(

asarot)

Atat

the selection of Saul for

King

(I

Sam.

10,

17-25)

Mizpeh the people were dividedclans

into tribes

(shebatim)

andel,

(mishpahot).being pickedis

Theof

bet-abot are not mentionthe

Saulthere

out

mishpahah of Matri.In verse 19, the word

And

still

another

difficulty.

alaphim

is

used for the mishpahot, a phenomenon whichin the story

occur- alsothatIk-

of Gideon (Judges

6,

15),

who

says

belonged to a poor clan (eleph).the

To add

to the

confusion,

passage

Numbers

1,

16 seems to identify


SULZBERGERtribes.

9

the nesi'im of the tribes with the rasliim of the alaphim,

and would make theIn later times the

latter

word mean

word clcph obtained

a

meaning even

more extended.promised(alaphim)speaksofto

Whenthe

Saul was eager to seize David, hethefastnesses

hunt him out of

or

districts5,1

ofthe

Judean wilderness, while \Iicahof

city

Bethlehem

as

among

the cities

(alaphim) of Judah.

WhetherJethro (Exod.

the

systems of Joshua

(7,

14-18)

and of

18, 21) existed contemporaneously,

may

be

incapable of determination on the evidence, but the fact

seems scarcely probable.

It

maycame

be a fair conjecture tofirst,

believe that the tribal system

and as time wentSo,

on the organization of the army became more perfect.likewise, as the

Hebrew army occupied andwould takeits

settled the land

piecemeal, an organization quite unlike the military organization in either shapeplace.

The Jethrosimple,

organizationfirst,

being

military,

pure

and

would go down

while the tribal organization,to a certain extent

founded on notions of kinship andneighborhood settlement, would

by

last longer.

As

the civilit

government became more and more powerful,easily appropriate old tribal militarytoofficers

would

terms and attach themlife,

and circumstances of

civil

creating at the

same time new meanings, wholly ortheir original meaning.

partially unrelated to

So only can we explain the confusioneleph, which,

in the

termis

meaning

at first a

regiment of soldiers,

in

antiquarian records confoundedclan,

now

with

tribe,

now

with

and

in the

speech of the day comes tocitv.

mean

a district

of land, or even a

10


Onthem

this principle Jethro's

scheme becomes

plain.

He

would form regiments of a thousandinto

(alaphim), divide

companies of a hundred (mc'ot), divide each of(hamishim), and

these again into half-companies of fifty

then subdivide the latter into squads

(corporal's guards)

of ten, each division and subdivision having a proper officer(sar).

20.

Some such arrangement appears indicated in Judges 10, where a squad of ten men out of every hundredto provision the

(company) are designatedstatement(me'ot),10,000).is

army, and theare companies(rebabot,

incidentally

made

that

there

regiments

(alaphim),

and

divisions

There are other passages confirming

this view.

In the

Song of Moses (Deut.

32, 30) the poet asks:

"How

should?"

one chase a regiment (eleph) or two a division (rebabah)

And

in Deut. 33, 17, the militaryis

prowess of the house of

Joseph

based on the rebabot (divisions) of Ephraim, and(regiments) of Manasseh.is

the alaphim

The enmity

con-

ceived by Saul for David

related as having originated in

the former's mortification at the extravagant language of

a popular song which represented David as slaughtering

whole divisions {rebabot), while Saul had only decimatedregiments (alaphim)(I

Sam.

18, 8).

Perhaps even the term hamushim (soldiers) originated

from these half-companies of1.

fifty

(Exod.

13,

18; Josh.

14; 4, 12;

Judges

7,

11).

And

the

word

sar long con21,

tinued to be applied to military officers

(Isai.

5; II

Chron. 32, 21).Ifthis

theory be correct,

we

are entitled to believe

that as early as the time of Saul the tribal system

had so

weakened

that they used

mishpahah and eleph

indifferently

POUTY OF ANCIENT HEBREWSfor

SULZBERGERin

II

each other and did not keep bet-abot

mind, and

that in later times there

were

still

wider divergences from

the ancient meaning.

The wholefirm this view.

history of the shophctim also tends to con-

Gideon, whose connection with any otheris

tribe than Manasseh

not

made

clear,

wasis

early considered

the shophet of

all Israel.

And

the

same

true of his son

Abimelech (Judges11).to

9,

22), as also of Jephthah (Judges 11,still is

More

significanttribe

the fact that

we

are not told

which

Shamgar,

Deborah,

belonged, an omission scarcely explicable

each tribe had some kind of awithinits

or Abdon we assume that government of its ownIbzan,if

ownis

territory.difficulty in

There

no

concluding that the real tribal

organization disappeared with the conquest and survived

only in names and in fragments of institutions.as the time of David, the census

As

early

lumps the tenI

tribes to-

gether as Israel (II Sam. 24, 9;

Chron. 21, 5-6).tribalterri-

Solomon's government seems to have ignoredauthority.

His twelve nissabim had jurisdiction overis

tory, but their tribal connection4,

not mentioned (I Kingsfor

7-19).

Jeroboam was Solomon's supervisor of labor11,all

Beth- Joseph (I Kingsalternative(I

28), which seems to have been anIsrael outside of

name11,

for

Judah-Benjamin

Kings

28).

The

narrative concerning the latter's

strange investiture into

the

kingly

office

by the prophet(I

Ahijah would seem to allow of no other conclusion

Kingsout,

11,

31).is

And

finally,

when

the

rebellion

breaks

there

no mention of any

tribe.

All Israel (kol(I

Israel) shouted:

"To your

tents,

O

Israel!"

Kings

12,

16).

12

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEWStill

more

significant of the effacement of tribal lines

is

the fact that

we do

not

know

to

which

tribe

belonged

Omri, Ahab, or Jehu, the three most notable kings of thenorthernline.

The evidence seemsthe

conclusive2

that

this

effacement of tribal lines had gone on forthat

few centuries,

we

see

movementit

in

progress in the Song of

Deborah, and that

was nearly accomplished by the time

of the priest-sJwphct Eli.that

At

all

events, the tradition

was

Deborah judged not

a tribe or a small4,

group ofEli(I

tribes,4,

but the B'ne-Israel (Judges18)

5)(I

and that

Sam.

and Samuel did the sameit

Sam.

7,

16-17).

AndIsrael,

althoughcalled

may

well be that

some of

the military chiefs,

shophctim (judges), ruled only a section of

the evidence that this rulescanty.

was

tribal in its

nature

is

very

Jephthah, one of the most renowned of them, was

the head of Gilead,

which was not a

tribe but a territory.

At

all

events, the oldest traditions of Israel

were that there

washead.

in

those old times a national union with a national

Assuming,

then,

that

this

military

organization

for

conquest became gradually modified as the invasion grew

more and more

successful,

it

becomes interestingplace.to

to learn

how and why such changes tookTheobjective purpose of

Moses was

overcome and

possess Canaan, the territory between the Mediterranean

and the Jordan,as a unified

and

to

establish

therein the B'ne-Israel

commonwealth with righteous aims and soundto

laws.

For reasons which seemed

him good and

sufficient,

he determined that the attack should be made from theeast,

by fording the Jordan.

In a friendly

way

he requested

the

powers controlling the eastern territory to grant

him

leave to pass.

This being refused, he fought his way, and

POLITY OF ANCIENT HEBREWSthus the

SULZBERGER

I

3

war began

in a

country on which he had no hostileSihon,

designs and at a time earlier than he had planned.

king of the Amorites, was theinvaders.

first to

go down before thein

At thelost

battle of his land

Jahaz he was defeated, and

consequencetookall

from Arnontheir

to Jabbok.

Israel

his

cities

with

banot and occupied them

(Numb.35), and

21, 24-25, 32).

Og, king of Bashan, was the nexttotally routed

to suffer.

At Edrei he was

(Numb.

21, 33,it

Israel took possession of his domain, as

had

before dealt with the Amorite land

(Numb.

21, 34).

The advance was then madeJericho,

to the Jordan,

oppositeto begin

from which point

it

had been designed

the war.

At onceit

the important question obtrudedto

itself,

whetherfor an

.

were wise

abandon the conqueredit

territory

enemyportion

to re-occupy, or to retain

and thus enlarge theto

of

land

which would

fall

each.

The B'ne

Reuben and

the B'ne-Gad offered to send their military

contingent to aid in the conquest of Canaan proper, andto

waive their share of that land,

if

the territory east of

Jordan were assigned to them as their portion.

Their offerhalf-tribe ofin

was accepted and*

they,

togetherto

with the

Manasseh (which appears

have joined them

their

project), received the territory which had been reft

from32,

Sihon and from Og, with the1-33), theirtheir villages13,

cities

thereof

(Numb.32, 42),

dependencies

(banot)

(Numb.

and

(hawwot) (Numb.

32, 41), or

haserim (Josh.

28).

The momentous naturewas soonrealized.

of the question facing Israel

Two

tribes

and a half were

to leave

their wives, their children,territory,

and

their cattle in theall

conquered

while the active warriors,

the

men between

14

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEWfifty

twenty and

years of age, were to leave the country to

carry on in the land west of Jordan afor years.

war

that might last

The

necessity of providing for the

governmentto

of this East-Jordanic territory

was obvious.

Order had

be preserved, enemies guarded against, quarrels adjusted.

The dutyfifty,

naturally devolved on the zekenim, the

men

over

who had become exempt fromfield.

active military service

in

the

Circumstances did not favor the immediate

establishment of a

permanent

tribal

government

in

the

East-Jordanic territory.tary chiefs

The vigorous and ambitiousto

mili-

were about

depart on a long and perilous

expedition; the country was already organized into a seriesof city-states or district states, and,system,it

how everT

faulty the

had worked somehow.

As

a temporary arrange-

mentIsrael.

it

may have commendedIt

itself to

the best minds of

This nascent nation had great ambitions but no

past

history.

had never owned land or

cities,

but

it

sacredly cherished ancient ambitions which told of divine

promises of both.

Nowof these

it

suddenly and unexpectedly became the mastercity-kingdoms.

little

Sentiment doubtless soon became active.the legends of old, that the first

Men

recalled

a city (Gen. 4, 17)in the city

;

that the

man who left Eden built patriarch Abraham sojourned;

of Gerar (Gen. 20, 1)

that Isaac

was concerned

in the

founding of Beersheba (Gen. 26, 33), and that Jacobit

had stopped at Luz and had given19)-

a

new name (Gen.T

28,

But whatever the power of sentiment, there was alwaysin

Israel a certain practical

judgment which regulated

it.

The

great obstacle to the adoption of thesatisfied

modewas

of governthat Israel

ment which had

the aborigines,

POUTY OF ANCIENT HEBREWSwasin its;

SULZBERGER

I

5

governmental notions republican and not monviews democratic and not aristocratic.

archical

in its social

The Canaanite

city-states

were founded on principles which

revolted the Hebrews.

Thelist

twelfth chapter of Joshua (vv. 9-24) gives us athirty-onecity-states,is

of

each

governed

by

a

king

(melck) and the inference

not remote that the

cities east

of the Jordan were similarly governed, Sihon and

Og

being

overlords, kings of the federations of city-states, each of

which had a kinglet of andall

his

own.13,

The17),

expressions "Heshbon"thecities

her cities"

(Josh.

and

their

villages"

(Josh. 13, 23. 28) used of places east of Jordan

give support to this view.

Such

a city-state

was composed:

in general of at least

three constituent elements

the fortified city proper, with

walls and towers of defense; several neighboring towns.

and a number of outlying

villages.

The

fortified city itself

sustained the relation of mother (em) to the neighboring

towns and

villages.

The towns werehawwot

called

daughters

(baiwt), and the outlying villages

or haserim.

In the absence of powerful kingdoms, the formation

of such small

city-kingdoms,

or

more

properly,

district

kingdoms, was inevitable.fertile

The

relatively small territory of

land betwen the Mediterranean Sea and the Eastern

Desert was then, as now, subject to incursions from the

Bedouins

in years

when

a decreased rainfall

narrowed

their

grazing-ground.

Driven westward by the mere

instinct of settled

self-preservation, they

would swoop down upon the

land and strip

it

bare.

The shepherds and

agriculturiststhis necessity

had to take measures to save themselves.thefortifiedcity

Of

was born.

The

inhabitants of villages

and towns were compelled

to have a protected place of re-

6

1


fuge where their lives and asthey could store would behordes.

much

of their property asthecity,

safein the

against

mauraudingwherein the

This they found

walled

inhabitants of a district within easy call could promptly

gather for defense against the dreaded enemy.

These overmastering

necessities

affecting

both sidesfor ages

created an irrepressible conflict, which

was waged

and the memory of whichhatred

is

preserved in the undying

denounced

against6,

the

nomadic

Midianites;

and

Amalekites (Judges17,

1-6; 7, 23-25; Isai. 9, 3 (4)

Exod.

16; Deut. 25, 19).It is

probable that the kings of these numerous city-

states

governed despotically by the aid of ministers of theirIf they

own

selection.

were aided or restrained by a conrepresentative of the com-

siderable

body of

councillors,

munity, the evidence of the fact does not survive in ourrecords.

Howeverall

this

may

be, the

advent of Israel swept awaya

these kinglets.city,

Whenever

Hebrew army captured andwasat

occupied alished.

a government by elders

once estab-

That

this

change was disagreeable to the aborigines

who continued to live alongside of the invaders, is probable. Of this state of feeling there is perhaps a hint in the narrative recording

Abimelech's attainment of the

office

of city-

king of Shechem.

The:

persuasive argument in his favorprefer to be ruled over by2).

was the interrogatory-evenly or by one?

Do you

(Judges

9,

Such a disharmony between the

aborigines and

the

invaders could not have been exceptional.the

The

notes on

subject are too

numerous

to be disregarded or to be

treated lightly, and they establish the fact that the conquest

7


SULZBERGERwho

1

was

partial in this, that the aborigines

survived the

wars lived peacefully with and alongside of the conquerors.

Here are specimens of

texts supporting this

view

:

Theday

B'ne-Judah could not drive out the Jebusites from Jerusalem, but the Jebusites dwell there with(Josh. 15, 63).

them

to this

The B'ne-Benjaminthis

did

not drive out the Jebusitesto

from Jerusalem, but the Jebusites dwell there with themday (Judgesi,

21).valley

Judah could not drive out the inhabitants of the(Judges1,

19).

Manasseh did not drive out

the inhabitants of Beth-

shean and her banot; nor of Taanach and her banot, norof

Dor and her

banot, nor of Ibleam

and her banot, nor of

Megiddo and herthis district

banot, but the Canaanites remained in1,

(Judges

27).

Ephraimin

did not drive out the Canaanites1,

who

lived

Gezer (Judges

29).

Zebulun did not drive out the inhabitants of Kitron,nor those of Xahalol, but the Canaanites continued to dwellwith them (Judges1,

30).

Asher did not drive out the inhabitants of Acco, northose of Zidon, nor those of Ahlab, nor those of iVchzib,

nor those of Helbah, nor those of

Aphik,

northe

those

of

Rehob; but the Asherites(Judges1,

dwelt

among

Canaanites

31-32).

Xaphtali did not drive out the inhabitants of Beth-

Shemesh, nor those of Beth-anath, but he lived among theCanaanites

who

paid him tribute (Judgesin

1,

33).in1,

The Amorites dweltin Shaalbim, but

Mount Heres,

Aijalon and35).

became

tributaries (Judges

8

1


the

From this mass of evidence Hebrew conquerors found itwho were

it

must be concluded

that

necessary or agreeable toin

adopt a policy of conciliation and compromise,that the nativesto

order

either too strong or too useful

be eliminated, might live content with the

new

insti-

tutionsIt

and customs introduced by the B'ne-Israel.thus appears that at the very outset ofits

nationaljustly

career, Israel

had to learn how

to deal wisely

and

with the natives,

who had

different notions of

government

and of

religion

and who, by the advent of the conquerors,aliens in their

had practically become

own

birthplaces.

Thestrangers

solution of the difficulty, so far as governmental

features were concerned,

was foundonly to

in the

doctrine thatrights, but to

are

entitled

not

equal

genuine respect and brotherly

affection.

Having brought

the

Hebrews

into

contact with the

natives and their organized governments, and having sug-

gested that a policy prevailed whichable,if

may

be called remark-

not unique, for those times and climes,

we

shall

reserve the detailed consideration of the subject for our

next lecture.

II

The problems whichcally differenttion.

beset an invading

army

are radi-

from those which confront ais

settled popula-

In the one case the purpose

aggression, in the other

defense.

We

have seen that the Hebrew conquerors ofto

Eastern

Palestine had

face

both kinds of

difficulties.

They werefrom

settling in the east

and conquering

in the west.

Hence, notwithstanding the disadvantage plainly accruinga policy of

compromise, they adopted

it

as the lesser

:

POUTY OF ANCIENT HEBREWSevil

SULZBERClto

K

19

and arrangedthe

to allow the natives to live withrights.

them

in

enjoyment offorthis

Means

procure general

favorhistory

course

were not wanting.itsc

Legend and

could be invoked inis

behalf.

The

patriarch

AbrahamI

made

to say to the

am

ha-ares of the Hittites;

am

a resident alien (gcr zve-toshab) (Gen. 23, 4)

Moses

declares that he has been an alien (gcr) in a foreign land(crcs nokriyah)

(Exod.

2,

22;

18,

3).

In his proposed

covenant between

Jhvh and

Israel,

he expressly recognizes29, 10),

the alien (gcr) in the

camp (Deut.

and

in his fare-

well address, delivered after the capture of the cities east

of Jordan, he provides for national reunionsof the future commonwealth, and includes

in the capital

among

the con12).

gregants the alien

(ger)

from

the cities

(Deut. 31,

So

likewise Joshua,

when he read

the whole law before

the whole congregation, did not forget to procure the at-

tendance of the ger (Josh.

8,

35).

That the sentiment behind these utterances was strong

may

be inferred from

its

persistence in later times.is

David'sto.

friendly relations with foreigners

frequently alluded

There

is

no

finer instance of loyal fidelity than the devotion

of Ittai of Gath, the captain of David's body-guard, to hisroyal master.

About

to flee

from the west-landhesaidto

in conse:

quence of

Absalom's

rebellion,

Ittai

Why?

shouldst thou an alien

(nokri)

share

my

fallen

fortunes

whenIttai

the king that

is

would gladly

retain thee in thy officezi'c-hc

Swearing the great oath (hai Jhvhreplied:

adoni ha-melek),for

"My

place

is

with

my

lord the King,

death or for life!" and David said: Pass on.these great souls scant speech sufficed (II

Between15. 19-22).

Sam.

So too Solomon,

in

his

great dedication prayer,(I

re-

membered

the nokri of distant lands

Kings

8.

4 I_ 43;

20

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEWand even took a census of the gerimin

II Chr. 6, 32. 33),

the country which ascertained that their

number exceeded

150.000 (II Chr.

2.

16 (17)).

Cireat social facts like these necessarily find expressionin legislation,

which

is

in the

main the mere

crystallization

of custom.

Accordingly

we

find that the institution of the

Sabbath

is

to give rest not only to Israel but to the ger

[who

is

in

thy

cities]

(Exod.

20,

10; Deut.

5,

14); or

simply to the ger (Exod. 23, 12).

Benevolent provision for the poor comprehends theger as well as the Israelite (Deut.14, 28.

29; 26, n-13).

Oppression of the ger

is

insistently reprehended.

"Do

not vex a ger, nor oppress him, for ye were gerim

in the land of Egypt"'

(Ex. 22, 20 (21)

;

23, 9; Lev. 19, 33).

"The gernot vex.shalt love

that dwelleth withshall

you

in

your land ye

shall

Hehim

be to you as an czrah (native).

Thou

as thyself; for ye19,

were gerim10,

in the land of

Egypt" (Lev.

33. 34; Deut.

19).

"Thouin

shalt not oppress a

poor and needy hired serv-

ant (sakir), whether he be of thy brethren or of the gerim

thy land in thy24,

cities.

Pay him

his

wage before sun-

down" (Deut.

14.

15).

The ger was "Ye(Exod.shall12,

entitled to the equal benefit of the law.

have the same mishpat for ger as for ezrah"

49; Lev. 24, 22;

Num.

9,

14).

"Hear between your brethren and judge righteouslybetween a16).

man and

his

fellow-Israelite or ger"

(Deut.

I,

"Pervert not the judgment of the ger or of the yatom"I

Deut. 24, 17).

POLITY

.OF

ANCIENT HEBREWSkilled a

SULZBERGERis

21entitled

The ger who has

man

unwittingly

to the benefit of the city of refuge.

"The

cities

of refuge are for the B'ne-Israel and

>n T

ip*na &\s

nnJl 'l-'TTt:

t

:

v:

D;srrbiJ

Dnann

pja-^N

p)a

pzb inxia term inxSnf

f

n^

baa

pfl

v

mi

iivti

pn

,nnp_ dot36

mb*

jr[p

:

d^jS niay

sanguineousthisit

women (W1J?).word,to

Or

is

iTTNBQ

=

?PTOfj

(Dan.implied.

3,

19)?

InD12'.

case

a

suchread6,

like T12'

PI31T,

would have

to

be

For

woul be better31

Comp. Prov.

27; II Chr. 24, 27; II Kings 19, 22

(=

Isa.

37,

23).

trn,a

feci, as

often in

Targum and Talmud.couldcontain

After

KWOn Fletters,

still

has vSj,\ thenSt?',

narrowthatto32

space

whichto

only

two

and the X ofto

sois

X7

seems

have been missing here.

According

our version N7

be connected alro with the following 12V.

Comp. Prov.derived

7,

23; Lev.

1,

16;,

Num.33,

24,

10; Ezek. 21, 19; II

Sam.

14,

14-

lOPITl,

from

Miami

Job

20.

pED, MS.

pIBD.

F

has

a

lacuna.333435

Prov.II

6,

33. 16,9.

13ttn

=

of

it

(of

the

sin).

Chr.

Comp. Job

18, 4;I

Prov. 29, 24; Ps. 109, 17; Zech.49,

5,

4.

F

has 2\- for;

fpltt

.

For Ty, as

read according to Gen.

27,

MS. hasM t2

TS

F"3is

has a

lacuna.30

Comp. Prov.eliminated,

31,

16; I

Kings

21,

19;

Job

24,

18.p.

J,

fromthe'

J,*

,

the 3

being

comp.

Zunz,

Synagogale Poesie,

873;

vowel

92rata ip'nzi

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW^psnabap ,*?*a 353

ntfaa

,btfo37

nSa bo\

mCD

njra"ia ianT

T

:

T

tm

,3*^

dov -:t-

te>a3

:-

nion ,v^jS tt:

nato t

inkna fc6a ins:p ' :

:

t

rmcCO t

W :n^ bnb wtea

r&r p$

nw

tfnb 'p.nar -iar42

:bnn prp Dnwjr!>ai jnair icappi Kapo irP

letter. jHfl,

he resolves and brings his resolution into execution by murderingwealthunlawfully.pft",

and

acquiring

B>"V

,

MS.:

BH

.

113J?

pDJ?2,

is

here

in

connection with

nnj, 7XJHP

comp. Ibn Ezra on Hosea

17;

Saadya,

according to a citation by David Kimhi, interprets the passage in a differentway.37

Comp.

Jer.

2,

26;

Esth.

7,

8;

Prov.

14,

28.

38

Comp. Dan.Comp. Prov.

1,

10; Judg.18;

16,10,

30;11

Prov.

14,

29.

1B'B3

is

missing in MS.

39

15,

Eccl.

(where XiSn for ^2).

F has

ttipB"

for

B*pB*.4"

He drinks

the

water of the sea to thestill

laste.

drop, deprives the rivers

(of their water)

andIsa.

he does not restextinct

(i.

he

is

insatiable);his

the fire

of

the

smelting-furnace

becomes6;

theExod.7.

flames19,18.

of

jealousy

burn

forever!41

Comp.Ps.

19,

JobLev.

40,13,

23;2. 6.

Comp.

140,

12;

8;9.

Job

5,

2.

PUSF:

(or

f'Uft),3,

or his body, already in the Hebr.11.

Ben

Sira

10,

lilCD'

,

lfl'M', Lam.

nmoS39,4-

PIDatrO inNOJn, his hatred leads him hurriedly to destruction, comp.

fob.

24;

MS. hasEccl.9,

PIE'ttDE lrVOJfl.6.

Comp.

A TOKKIIAU BY SAADYA GAON161

BRODYcnBtoA?

93

z v'*:":

,

,

""-v

nferA

n^DC ir

trap*

rwn avij

-*:i"

-:r

t

*W

inr t

tateaa : :

nsa fho t r'

roT*

rip *â .:'t-: ^p-m nirbat *nnn3:

T

T

T

W

ty z'^r

on; mru

rJtirirQa

np^ npb

ds rnyu nnSc"joan

psv

*

43

Comp.

Isa.

40.

a

and elsewhere; Ps.

5a,it

4;

Jer.

34. to

1.

The sensethey

is

no doubt as follows: If he attains authority

becomesand

him

a sharp-edged

swordremainsatisfy

(a

danger);to

[he

must]

please

friends

servants

(that

maynevei

faithfulfully

him and help maintainwishes

his

power),

but

he

can

their

and

desires.

For

IT.

(F shows

T

and then a

lacuna)**

MS. hasComp.

VT

and

niSHOmLam.

for3,

DjnomPs.59.

ludg.

so,

4.;:

5;.

5.

F has VTTV

for

|Wl,

for

~D' both45

archetypesPs.69,

exhibit

"|Wjo.

Comp.the

4;

Job

6.

The

ruler

should

intervene

between

Cod andefforts are

people and act on earth according to the will of Cod, but his

in vain.

and.

his toil

remains

fruitless.it

T.D1D3to

is

vocalized in the

MS. TD1D246

ipsin

F

is

lacking, but

seems

have read tpET.T.

Far from being ablea

to

devote himself securely to the problem allottedblissful influenceto

to

him by Cod and exertagainstplots

he

mustif

very

often

defend

himselffall

and conspiracies,theno;

which,

not

guarded,

he could

a victim

whereTer.

is

his glory,3,

his

power?

MS. has

B)B1V for 'ur.

* Comp.**

17.17.

Job

24.

tfWty (from

'Tiy) barrenness.a,

Comp. Prow

ai;

Ezek. 21, ao; Isa. 47, 9; 65, 23; Lam.

aa.

94*p*o

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEWfpan^fan jrv-ja

w-pfejr

/Qh^d idb6

r

feA

atn?

b^V

1

hnt nSr

"rioiS

P^'N^

nsrri rja ras*

ffynr\

inspnn ny ?

rrt&eto

;vJ>k

ran

*3 ribfe*

rfpr'a sp.OTiya

^lî

ib"!fe\*D

*6

&w

,injnt t

^:

lireoj: :

,nK>2D-i:..:

vbv lnabi tt t

:

mp&> Dimi t v v

nvO t t

52

iEa }'pn

rniani rnrnpnnvjfanb togo

^Wt t

frn

n&w

wry?

noW:

iivaD

t

t

:

t

iboa trnVxa db" T.

.

.

..

dn.

riTB'.

"oai ...

vnab>:

6W1 :t:

,mijn":

lias

îpD

na T -

,n>n:

:

inn Dnon ,irrn t t t -::

pia*t t

ont

vn

innyn- mn -:t t\:

-lyj

49

Comp. Gen.

26,

20;

I

Sam.

25,

10.

Before

>o-^y

BRODY"wijDn-ipac>

95

bb" ,n*pna m*na

s

oo imn

îaoD ton J

-n T33.ni

nnnn

nip*

a

,Tm

^d-id^

1

)

waya pjvay ,ob rnva anj56

n^pni

iab

.nxr

-or

:,T

:mprrSao Naâ nv TV t T:

naW

rsrO

n*?.

1

fi3

nr]P2 flatten ntf

ny

5>

,-ivy *iki

rnpa

y^

,ina pni afc^

t t v

t

:

D-jni

oyo &n ai3 D'trsnp

/jnp_-ii

inb\ wy

,npsa

injta*

Dp

a

i!?yi-.

:

imo tt

ynv -

iabi:

,nmno ixt t:

o

vnioy:t

fova60

na -t

ib

inofcf:

t

rby bp:

ior *oaa

ksi_

*# râJrioa

rrnay

n"^ yDo nnx yDo yp61

:nunw

>i:yni

pH>3d

rrbnnT V T-:

tw '

T

id -

mo VT

Dia'

nn&j>T T

,vnio'Ni T

mo-'San ,vtv taeni v'^V V T T^ T ;

"

!

62

*l>'pa

mrin

s5

Comp.

Hosea

7,

14;

Isa.

9,

12.

'31BOD,

veins,

frequent

the

Talmud.56

Comp.for

Ps.

56,

1;

Isa.2,

38,

14;

Exod.

8,

11;

Isa.

63,

17.

MS. has

Dm:57 5859

WU

(comp. Nah.I

8),

D'D31 for D1D31.5,

Comp.

Sam.

23,

26;

Eccl.is

14.

NowComp.

for the first time heIsa.51, 8;19,10,

able to suppress his wrath.

Job

14,

1;

Exod.10;

47, 9-

MS. has3,

XrfasW* for \TbSM,

60 61

Comp. Job Comp. Job Comp.Ezek.I

15;

Prov.20,

14,

Lam.4.

28.

i"IXin?3,

outwardly.

20;4,

25;

Ps.10,

146,

62

Sam.23,34.

19;

Dan.

16;

Ps.

18,

5;

116,

3;

55,

5;

I

Sam.

15,

32;

:

:

96iBtea :

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEWnnpm :

,wi- nan ma t:

t t

,r\p& rnicvy v\:

jySi'

t

:

,tr*o

inSe vj'bV *::

t

t

64

3iBn ions DW*i - . .

teno -

q, e.

-

^n.

f

T

nD2n: 2nin T T T T_.

..

n-ui isD3 bun _ _.

.

.

ivV _*r

.riNT ")3r

65

:mnK rpn*no

nixiS vryo n^:p

s

t>

isU

n3Tt-

dx D v> nn

nma :

rinnyy :tt:

"ib>kv -:

jnvb t

,ruiy-tat:

v

ip>s: :

nmB :tt

mnfo t:

*a

nbSnt

ny-i

tt nroa

--t,yiBhv::

nxo pvrbi) t-'-tt:

Wv

t t:

tiino

miB t:

itf&Ji ,nnfc>zi ~:

batMi:

dndj ::

,hyw to^s t t

-ie>xv -;

t

,ym ?pn ruB t t v::

68

nbi< vbv V T T T Iswai \>B

jnD nvb taoetea

prm

lips

rnnr6

Sw

* inni

n^69

:p3^nn

bh):

intrno d*i*6 tsd nfra pnb pxrrbKi tt: tt *t vtt' :

byo nnb t t

Kip*t:-

-i,y

53

Comp. Job

si, 24;

Prov.

13,

9

and elsewhere;

Isa.

5,

30.

|J?S

=

bibl.

ny;b.64

Comp.Comp.

Eccl.

12,3,

6;

Job6,

14,

11;

Lam.

4,

1.

05

Eccl.I

22;

12; b.

Sotah 27b.

MS. vSj?0

for

VS'yO..

68

Comp.

Sam.

25, 29; II Chr. 24, 7.

MS. has JNB^Prov. 27,

for yiX*S

innj,'\

in

the Bible only Hiph. and67

Hoph.Eccl.5,

Comp.

I

Chr. 21,

27;

15;

8.

68c9 70

Comp. Deut. Comp. Job Comp.Ps.

28, 54; Ps.5;

146, 959,4,

and elsewhere; Job

9,

31;

14, 22.

41,50,

Isa.

10.

4;

Amos

13;

b.

Sanhedrin 91a (further sources arep.

offered by S. Krauss,

Antoninus und Rabbi,

63,

note 1); Hagigah

5a.

MS.

imar

for

wn3?.

A TOKEHAH BY SAADYA GAOX*Jtt

BRODY

97

nw

inanzi 'ftra ,pi2 D nn -11x3 lisn,J,

Krona i^s:b npi^

Bta

mfoKn t:

:

,-inKS v:b iap< ,atf kSi ryete 121 t tt: :

t

:

t t

dx

fota

:

afta |bJ{ -T

"nerift.nxr "isr :*7

:dejit t:

phm -:-

patf ,trat

vry t

-layt

ra^ DHsbn

nap*

mp

,Dnitfsirby

din*

oa ro^P]u,

x^n

nrp

33 npa'aa

nno.in*

n^srfip

rTBnrn

tara

^

,ni33 Sy

-

pb^p ,o^Siy

n'D

âftftfrta,i^-|3D-;-np\Sn

nvap ,guDi -kdk

*a

^s

,-133

dd* inn ;^pft

T6

ftD|râa

pn-^nn

nawo rinupKD opîp hdko ,u^

*ftn

nta ).

the climax, to which

leads up,

is

snipped off"

(p.

"The

cutting up of most of the

an

entire

contemptthe

for

Hebrew prophets into fragments, with Hebrew literary tradition, which is theseems to

delight

of

German

intellect,(p.

me

to

be based upon

precariousthority of

principles"

in).

He

has no scruple, on the au-

Sirach, to accept the Isaianic authorship of the second

RECENT BIBUCAL LITERATUREpart

MARGOUS"All

[OgIsaiahs

of

Isaiah.

''The

Deutero, Trito-, and many other(p.

tend to dwarf the original Isaiah"

112).

men agreewrite

that

David wrote the kinah on the death of Saul and Jonathan and thekinah on the death of Abner.

The man who could

such

poems wasDavid

a master of his art.

Heis

could turn his hand to other

and even deeper themes.

By

this

admission the fancy portrait ofshattered....

as a half-heathen savage

His people were

right in attributing to

David, magnanimous, brave, and a genius,the heart of theashis

poetry that has to-day histhereis

stirred

world,(p.

and

which

tells

faults

as

well

virtues"

163).

Accordinglyin

a substantial portion of genuinely

Davidic productions

the Psalter.

"I

am awarelater

that there

is

a general agreementis

among

Hebrew

scholars that the

language of Koheleth....

impossible to

Solomon, and muchbeen said by

But

it

may

also

be said, and has

language

is

not decisive.is

many competent scholars, including Pusey, that the The whole tone and substance and manlike

ner of the book

Solomon's old age

....is

With regard

to the

language

it

mayjust

be said that the languageItis

not the language of

any post-captivity writing.late.

only peculiar and supposed to bein

Xow

in

this

matter there seems extreme danger

a

too

confident

criticalin

position.

For

it

is

certain

that

Solomon,in

and especiallydialects.Itis

his

old age,

was an expertthat

linguist

cognatewithhis

not

conceivablein

he

held

converse

numerous foreign wivesand spokentongue.init

dumbto

show.

He mustsame

have thoughtashis

dialectsis

allied

but not the

native

And

not unnatural to his old age, therefore, that hisstill

language,

though

pure

Hebrew

in

the

main,

should have a

colour of foreign words and foreign turns of expression given toit"

(p.

195).

I

fear that readers

who

are a bit

more

familiar with

the history of theto

Hebrew language than

the author shows himself

be

and perhaps with the recollection of what Krochmal has

said about the language of Koheleth will be tempted to smile at

the well-intentioned but naively absurd theory with which

wefor

arethe

here regaled.ketib in Josh.also

Of an equal merit5,)1.

is

the

author's

brief

Verse 6

(

tf?; the Septuagint,in

by the way, read

UJTQxb

cannot be citedat

support,

as

any Jew might soin

have expressed himself

any time.

The

ketib4,

verse

1

is

a

plain error due to aberration of the eye to

23.

The Masoretes

110

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEWit.

had no compunction about correctingby the Septuagint.bookletto be

The kere

is

substantiatedthe

To

a

reader

coming

from WellhausenBut criticismwill

may prove

a serviceable antidote.

have

demolished with more formidable siege-works.

Reasonable

Biblical

Criticism.

By Willi sand

J.

Beech er,

D.

D.,

Professor

of(

Hebrew

Language

Literature,

Auburn

Seminary

1871-1908).iqti.

Philadelphia:pp. xvii-f-

The Sunday School

Times Company,

335.

Wider den Bonn der Quellenscheidung.Moeller.Giitersloh:C.

Von

Lie. theol.

Wilhem229.

Bertelsmann,

1912.

pp.

Cber DoppelbericJiteund einegeistlicher

in

der Genesis.Priifung.

Eine kritische Untersuchung

prinzipielle(sic)

Von

Dr.

ArthurStudien.

AllgeiER,

Lehrer

am FriedrichsgymnasiumTheologischeder

zu Freiburg

im

Breisgau.

(Freiburgerder

UnterFakultat

Mitwirkung

Professoren

theologischen

herausgegeben von Dr. G. Hoberg und Dr. G. Pfeilschifter.Drittes

Heft.)

Freiburg im Breisgau:pp. XVI-f"T

Herdersche Verlags-

HANDLUNG, IQU.1.

43-

Mose 14. Eine historisch-kritische Johaxxes Meinhold, Professor(Beiliefte

Untersuchung.der

Vonin

D.

Theologie

Bonn.Wissen-

zur

Zeitschrift:

fiir

die

alttestamentliche1911.

schaft,

XXII.) Giessento

Alfred ToepELmann,

pp. 50. A.,

An

Introduction

the

Pentateuch.

By(

A. T.

Chapman, M.Bible

Emanuel

College,

Cambridge.

Theat

Cambridge

for

Schools and Colleges.)1911.

Cambridge:

the University Press,

pp.

xx

+

339critics equally falls short of:

Professor Beecher's attack on thethe the

mark.book.

The reader expects"ReasonableBiblical

a

"counter-critique"leads

theto

title

of

Criticism,"

him

suspect

concessions of a certain kind.

But nothing of the sort happens.

You cannoting to the

offset criticism

by allegorical interpretation, by imput-

sacred

writers thoughts that are foreign to their lanIf

guage, nor by a multitude of harmonistic devices.succeedsin

the

work

con firming

in

their inherited beliefs the particular kind

RECENT BIBLICAL LITERATUREof readers to whose level of cultureit

MARGOUSit

III

its

homespun

style descends,will

will

have achieved

its

purpose;in

I

doubt whether

producetheir

even so

much

as

a

ripple

the circles of the critics and

immediate

disciples.

Ontion.

the

other hand,the:

Moller's

work oughttheir

He meetstakes

critics

on

to command attenown ground. His bookpositive.

consists of

two partsupthe

a negative

and a

In the

formerinto

he

reasons

which have ledthat

to

the

analysis

"documents."if

He shows

the

doublets

or

parallel

accounts,

they are to serve as a clue to disentangling the knot, issue in a

deadlock.

There remain doublets within one and the same docustill

ment

that

are left to be accounted for.

Apparently

it

is

all

a matter of degree, since a certain

amount of duplication

is

conif

sidered harmless.

Where

then

is

the line to be

drawn?

And

an attemptthe

is

made

to carry the analysis to its logical conclusion,itself

"documentary" theory resolves

at

the hands of Gunkel;

and Sievers for instance into the "fragmentary" hypothesis

the

"documents" accordingly ceaseinto an

to be such

and the text

is

broken up

amorphous mass ofcharacter.

infinitesimal parts, disjointed, without

As for the criterion of divine names, it Somehow the ancient writers forget themlikewise breaks down. selves and introduce Jhvh where you expect Elohim and vice versa. The critics thus cornered lay the blame at the door of the compiler or editor. But who is to tell where his exercise of auunity

or

thority

stops?

For the current conception of the editor:

is

that

hefor

is

altogether mechanicalis

he transcribes the "documents" word

word, heby

blind

to

contradictionsso

and incongruities, heas he can

is

perturbed

no

duplication,all

long

save from the

ancient documentshis

that

is

possible.

But once you grant that

individuality

assertsin

itself,

and occasionally also beyond the

assumed bracketsreally

long portions which;

show

literary

skill,

he

becomes an authornot

but then

it

becomes apparent that heheuseshis

does

mechanically

transcribe at

all,

"sources"

intelligently like so

many anto

ancient or

moderntheir

historian.

And

to

returnearlier

oncecritics;

more

theat

divinethe

names, the one Elohist of thesuccessors aa

received

hands of

twinthird

brother

but

now

it

is

becoming evident that there was

112Elohist

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEWwhocriticsis

the most archaic.

For

in certain

legends of Genesis

which

are constrained to place in pre-Israelitish times, the

destruction of

Sodom and Gomorrah

is

an instance, Elohim

is

a

non-descript appellation of the deity as might have been current

with any people.sceptical use ofto

As an analogue one may thinkElohimin

of the philosophic-

Koheleth.

But

if

this

be true, that

is

say

if

the

choiceit

of the divine

name

beof

conditioned inauthorship,in

the

subject-matter,

ceases to be a criterionled

as

one

and the same author would becriminate.If

by the subjectare

hand

to dis-

style

andit

phraseologyallall

to serve as indices ofif

disparatesufficientlyalitysplit;

authorship,

is

well

enough

the

documents are

lengthy to show

those traces of linguistic individu-

but when, as with Gunkel and Sievers, J and

E

and

P

are

up into multitudinous fragments, the similarity of language

in

certain

groupsthe

of

fragmentsthatto

becomes

a

puzzle.

Moller

is

sensitive

of

fact

overcome the dominant method ofcriticismwill

criticism

mere fault-finding and negative

not avail.

Hence

in the positive part

he proceeds to show by an example (the27-25,

story of

Abraham, Gen. n,

11)

how by

a

more profounddifficulties

delving into the intent of the sacred

writer supposed

disappear and

all

assumes a harmonious aspect.to

As

in the case of

Eerdmans, we are readywithits

admit that criticism has been too

facile

universal

remedy and that often the malady which they

sought to cure was but imaginary.

Whatis

differentiates the latter-

day

commentary

to

its

disadvantage

the

unwillingness to do

exegetical

work

pure

and simpleengagedin;

of theto

kind thatwithallit

anthe

earlier

generation

laboriously

operateis

analysis

of the texts carried to an absurd point

after

an easy matter.takes a life-time

Withto

a

modicum

of linguistic preparation (andtine

enter into the

points

of

Hebrew

construction and style)

and with the dissecting method which one so readily acquires andimitates, the

commentarywith

is

all

ready, almostis

made

to

order.

If

our present fashion of shallownessforlittle

to pass

away and make roomstudied,

the

seriousness

which

Holy Writ should be

a

scepticism

concerning the efficacy of the analytical methodLet us be grateful to thoseinto the

will

go a long way.

who

are willing

to inject thistors.

wholesome doubtwill

minds of Bible commentain

The

result

probably be a saner criticism held

check

RECENT BIRLICAL LITERATURE

MARGOUSwill

[13shrink

by sound learning and a sense of responsibility which

from

vagaries.

Moller's

little

book accomplishes the

important

service of stirring our conscience as expounders of Scripture.

We

have

had

occasion

to

see

how

divided

even

modernis

Catholics are on the critical position.ished by the

Another example

furn-

work of

Allgeier who, at least for the book of Genesis,

endeavors to refute the arguments for the existence of parallel

(and contradictory) accounts which were advancedby Schulz publishedthein

in a

monograph

1908.

The harmonisticworks of the

devices are

muchthough

same

as elsewhere in the

traditionalists

bolstered

up by much erudition.

The seconddefinition

part

of

the

work

which deals with the dogmatic objectionsis

to the theory of duplicates

interesting as

showing that noin the

ex cathedra has so farto the all-important

been forthcoming

Church with referenceit

matter of inspiration.

Henceand

is

that for the time being a certain

measure

of

freedom

divergence

of

opinion

exists

amongof the

Catholic dogmaticians which makes for the infiltration of criticisminto the

works of Catholic students of theis

Bible.

The toneit is

monograph, though polemical,

dignified;

and since

but proper

that in a controversy both sides should be heard, Allgeier's

work

by the side of that of Schulz will holdpositionis

its

own.

An

intermediate

certain to win out in the end.all

In spite of

these attacks,

it

is

but fair to say that a saneis

adherence to the dominant type of criticismProfessorGenesisis

holding the ground.chapteris

Meinhold's

monograph onafair

the

fourteenthof

of

perhapsto a

not

specimencritics.

what

currently

acceptable

large

bodyin

of

His

demolitionofthe

of the

archaeological

evidencenarrative

favor

ofbit

the

historicityfar.

main

pointsis

in

the

goes a

too

Post-exilicall

Judaism

a convenient

enough receptacle for accommodatingis

manner

of literary productions for which onein

unwilling to find a place

earlier

epochs,

chiefly

for

the

reason that the centuries con-

secutive

upon the work of Ezra are so obscure.ofrightto

Unstintedthe

praise

belongs

Chapman's Introductionof the

to

Pentateuch

publishedColleges.

as

a

part

Cambridgeon the

Bible for Schools andsubject

The

current

treatises

are

so

technical

and overmastering that we know of no work

better suited to the

114


needs of the beginner than this admirable presentation by Chapman.

Ato

sober tone prevails throughout.the

Counter-arguments are brought

attention

of

theIt

learner

and their force submitted

to

a

searching criticism.studentinall

was a wise procedure notof

to entangle the

the

ramifications

Pentateuchaloutlines are

analysis

of

the

so-called advanced type.in

The broad

sedulously kept

mind.

As

ait

work of information onwill

the position of the Wellin the

hausen school

remain useful for some time to come

hands of English-speaking students.

Egypt and

Israel.

By W. M. FlindersLondonpp.:

Petrie, D. C.

L.,

LL.

D.,

F. R. S., F. B. A.

Society for Promoting ChristianI

Knowledge,

191

i.

x

+

5-

Cntndsteine zur Geschichte Israels.

Alttestamentliche Studien von

Martin

Gemoll.

Mit

zwei

Karten.I9II.

Leipzig:VIII-f"

J.

C.

HlNRICHS'sche

BUCHHANDLUNG,imAlien

pp.

480.

Die

Indogermanen

Orient.

Mythologisch-historischeLeipzig:

Funde und Fragen.

Von Martin Gemoll.I9II.

J.

C.

HlNRICHS'sche BUCHHANDLUNG,ProfessorexplorersofPetrie,

pp.

VIII

+

I24.

preeminent

among

living

excavators

and

ancient

Egypt, has written a popular work on the

relations of the land of the

Pharaohs and

Israel.

He

begins with

Abram,

the shepherd prince, and concludes with the Christian age.;

Hestele

places the exodus in the year 1200 B. C.

he accordingly asPalestine in the

sumes from the mention ofof

Israel as resident in

Mereneptah that only a part of the

Israelites

went

into

Egypt.

He

describes the relations to Egypt in the period of thefinds

monarchy, the bearing of the Elephantine

on the beginnings of

the Jewish immigration into Egypt, the great Alexandrian colony,

the temple of Onias the foundations of which were laid bare by

himof

;

he shows

how

the Logos doctrine

was developed on the

soil

Egypt,

how

again the discovery of the Logia of Jesus sheds

light

on the composition of the Gospels,

how

finally certain

elementsItis

of the Egyptian religion have entered into Christianity.tainly a very useful treatiseinterest.

cer-

on a subject which nodifficulty

will

always excite

Petrie

apparently has

about accepting the

;

RECENT BIBLICAL LITERATUREsojournin

MARGOUS

I

I

5

Egypt and the exodus asis

historical

though no direct

reference to either

found on the monuments.is

Gemoll, on the other hand,

radical.

There have been othersin

who

played

fast

and loose with the traditions deposited

the

Bible concerning an event to which the sacred writers never wearyof alluding.

His starting-point

is

an investigation into the mean-

ing of "Misraim."

Winckler's theories on a Misr contiguous to

but nevertheless outside Egypt are gone into at length.

But the

author arrives at the conclusion that the biblical Misraim togetherwith the land of Goshen are to be soughtItis

in

Southern Palestine.a

there that Israel

was oppressed, and the exodus means but

forced

migration

of

some

tribes

further

Xorth,

pushed out of

their seats by a

fresh

wave of migration.

By

a series of daring

and highly questionable geographical identifications Gemoll transfers

Jephthah and Gilead from across the Jordan to the Westis

Jabesh-Gileadjearim);

the

same

as Jebus-Jerusalem

(=

Salem

= Kiriathand both

the Canaanites and Kenites are;

made

identical

proclaimed non-SemitesHorites

with them are furthermore identified thecapital

=

Haru

=

Aryans whose;

Jerusalem was

;

the

Hyksos were likewise AryansJahveh," and Peres-Uzzais

mount Zion wasAaronand

the "mountain of

but the deformed Iranian pa'xrxdaeza

=

paradise

:

the

high-priest

Araunah

upon

whose

threshing-floor David built an altar are brought together with the

Iranian

deity

Varuna

;

Jahveh accordingly becomes Yima-Yama,

Ahura-Varuna's twin-brother.novel contentionsderived by theis

The sum and substancein

of

all

these

that

Jahveh though indigenous

Canaan wasIn his

Israelites

from the Aryans

in

Palestine.

subsequent work, "Die Indogermanen im Alten Orient," a mass ofCeltic loreis

adduced to show that the population which occupied

Palestine in pre-Israelitish times

was not

specifically Indo-Iranian,

but rather generally Indo-European and that the invasion proceeded

from the West.s

jewish quarterly review 03

Documents

jewish quarterly

jewish quarterly

unknown khazar

arabians bore

freiburg im

recent biblical

jewish quarterly

jewish ethical