18:1 VA YIKAHALU KOL ADAT BENEY YISRA-EL SHILOH VA YASHKIYNU SHAM ET OHEL MO'ED VE HA ARETS NICHBESHAH LIPHNEYHEM
וַיִּקָּהֲלוּ כָּל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל שִׁלֹה וַיַּשְׁכִּינוּ שָׁם אֶת אֹהֶל מֹועֵד וְהָאָרֶץ נִכְבְּשָׁה לִפְנֵיהֶם
KJ: And the whole congregation of the children of Israel assembled together at Shiloh, and set up the tabernacle of the congregation there. And the land was subdued before them.
BN: And the whole congregation of the Beney Yisra-El assembled together at Shiloh, and set up the tabernacle of the congregation there. And the land was subdued before them.
SHILOH: There is Ha Shilo'ach, which Yesha-Yah speaks about in Isaiah 8:6. Then there is the unnamed pool in the foothills of Yeru-Shala'im (Isaiah 22:9), thought by many to be the Pool of Silo'am, though there is no evidence in the text for that. And are the two, Ha Shilo'ach and Silo'am,the same place anyway? If you look at my link for Isaiah 8:6, which is a traditionally Jewish website, it mistranslates Ha Shilo'ach as Silo'am, and then doesn't translate the second half of the verse at all, probably because the information in the second half confirms that this is not Silo'am, or any other pool, in Yeru-Shala'im at all, but Ha Shilo'ach, elsewhere, somewhere between Retsin and Ramal-Yah perhaps, if those are place-names; but Isaiah 7:1 makes clear that they are king-names, so this must indicate a location between their thrones; the first in fact is a king in Damascus and the second the king of the northern kingdom of Ephrayim, the two allied to defend themselves against an invasion from Ashur.
BN: And the whole congregation of the Beney Yisra-El assembled together at Shiloh, and set up the tabernacle of the congregation there. And the land was subdued before them.
SHILOH: There is Ha Shilo'ach, which Yesha-Yah speaks about in Isaiah 8:6. Then there is the unnamed pool in the foothills of Yeru-Shala'im (Isaiah 22:9), thought by many to be the Pool of Silo'am, though there is no evidence in the text for that. And are the two, Ha Shilo'ach and Silo'am,the same place anyway? If you look at my link for Isaiah 8:6, which is a traditionally Jewish website, it mistranslates Ha Shilo'ach as Silo'am, and then doesn't translate the second half of the verse at all, probably because the information in the second half confirms that this is not Silo'am, or any other pool, in Yeru-Shala'im at all, but Ha Shilo'ach, elsewhere, somewhere between Retsin and Ramal-Yah perhaps, if those are place-names; but Isaiah 7:1 makes clear that they are king-names, so this must indicate a location between their thrones; the first in fact is a king in Damascus and the second the king of the northern kingdom of Ephrayim, the two allied to defend themselves against an invasion from Ashur.
Nehemiah 3:15 helps clarify these differences to some degree, but only at the expense of the bad translators, because he is clear that the irrigation pool at the foot of the King's Garden is not Silo'am at all, but Shelach - though you will see that the KJ version at my link still insists on getting it wrong, going this time for Siloah rather than Siloam.
And then there is the place named in our current verse of Joshua, which is Shiloh, and it is an entirely different place, between Beit-El and Shechem, in the heart of today's West Bank, or the territory of Ephrayim back then. (see the link under the name, and also my note to Joshua 16:6)
Is there not also a grammatical error with Shiloh? I shall name it: "The Inconsistent Dative". Though actually on this occasion it needs a prefix, ideally BE (בְּ) for "in".
Tabernacle of the congregation: is this the same as the Ark, the Mishkan? The answer is yes, and this is where the Mishkan is going to be kept for the foreseeable future, making Shiloh one of the most important locations in the land, functioning as the Temple would later, as the place to bring your sacrifices on each of the three Pilgrim Festivals. And no, it definitely is not in Yeru-Shala'im. And yes, we know exactly where it was located, regardless of Retsin or Ramal-Yah. Click here for the latest report on the excavations at Tel Shilo.
NICHBESHAH: The root, KAVASH, means "conquer", but it has been made clear several times that the land has by no means been conquered.
Is there not also a grammatical error with Shiloh? I shall name it: "The Inconsistent Dative". Though actually on this occasion it needs a prefix, ideally BE (בְּ) for "in".
Tabernacle of the congregation: is this the same as the Ark, the Mishkan? The answer is yes, and this is where the Mishkan is going to be kept for the foreseeable future, making Shiloh one of the most important locations in the land, functioning as the Temple would later, as the place to bring your sacrifices on each of the three Pilgrim Festivals. And no, it definitely is not in Yeru-Shala'im. And yes, we know exactly where it was located, regardless of Retsin or Ramal-Yah. Click here for the latest report on the excavations at Tel Shilo.
NICHBESHAH: The root, KAVASH, means "conquer", but it has been made clear several times that the land has by no means been conquered.
18:2 VA YIVATRU BIVNEY YISRA-EL ASHER LO CHALKU ET NACHALATAM SHIV'AH SHEVATIM
וַיִּוָּתְרוּ בִּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר לֹא חָלְקוּ אֶת נַחֲלָתָם שִׁבְעָה שְׁבָטִים
BN: And there were seven tribes left among the Beney Yisra-El, which had not yet received their inheritance.
Which makes the complaint of Ephrayim in the last chapter even more obnoxious. And also raises a question, because we were told that some of their territory impinged on Asher and Yisaschar; but according to this verse, Asher and Yisaschar haven't yet received a portion, so how can that be? To which there is only one logical answer, that receiving a portion doesn't mean being told what it will be, but actually, physically obtaining it. The "distribution" is an idealisation, not a reality. From its continuous use, and its continuous non-realisation, can we simply re-read LO CHALKU ET NACHALATAM as a euphemism for "had not yet succeeded in conquering"? And this in spite of NICHBESHAH in the previous verse.
I have put a list of the order in which they "received" their inheritance among the other lists in my page on the Number Twelve.
18:3 VA YOMER YEHOSHU'A EL BENEY YISRA-EL AD ANAH ATEM MITRAPHIM LAVO LARESHET ET HA ARETS ASHER NATAN LACHEM YHVH ELOHEY AVOTEYCHEM
וַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹושֻׁעַ אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל עַד אָנָה אַתֶּם מִתְרַפִּים לָבֹוא לָרֶשֶׁת אֶת הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נָתַן לָכֶם יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי אֲבֹותֵיכֶם
BN (borrowed standard translation): And Yehoshu'a said to the Beney Yisra-El: "How long are you slack to go to possess the land, which YHVH the god of your fathers has given you?
Whoa there! Has Yehoshu'a retired, and is making one of those know-it-all speeches that retired PMs and Presidents and sports captains make, sitting in the commentary box, saying how they would have done it? Or is he still the man in power, Hail the Chief as well as God Bless The Nation, the man with executive power to order his troops into battle? If the former, retire gracefully and give your successors room. If the former, the criticism reflects on you much more than it does on them.
Or is it, as I suspect, the third option: that Yehoshu'a has had enough of fighting, has claimed the lands he wants for himself, has nepotised his close family and friends, and frankly... in today's parlance, the Jacob Zuma principle. Because the implication is that the lands they were "due to receive" had not yet been conquered; and that he was not planning to conquer them for them; exactly as he just told Ephrayim in the last chapter. So he favours Re'u-Ven and Gad, because he inherited their agreement with Mosheh; and the sons of Yoseph for historical reasons; and obviously Yehudah, which is his own tribe; plus possibly some ambivalent mentions of towns within Asher and Yisaschar, but no one else - and you can check the mothers' list for yourself to see what this signifies.
And then: how to translate it? There is a part of me that wants to render this as:
BN (speculative colloquial translation): And Yehoshu'a said to the children of Yisra-El: "When are you going to get off your lazy backsides and conquer the rest of this benighted land that YHVH our ancestral diety has promised us?"
18:4 HAVU LACHEM SHELOSHAH ANASHIM LA SHEVET VE ESHLACHEM VE YAKUMU VE YIT'HALCHU VA ARETS VE YICHTEVU OTAH LE PHI NACHALATAM VA YAVO'U ELAY
הָבוּ לָכֶם שְׁלֹשָׁה אֲנָשִׁים לַשָּׁבֶט וְאֶשְׁלָחֵם וְיָקֻמוּ וְיִתְהַלְּכוּ בָאָרֶץ וְיִכְתְּבוּ אֹותָהּ לְפִי נַחֲלָתָם וְיָבֹאוּ אֵלָי
BN: Choose from among you three men for each tribe: and I will send them, and they shall get up and go through the land, and make a map of it according to their inheritance; and they shall come again to me...
I do like the idea though, of Yehoshu'a sending out spies to scour the land of Kena'an, to see whether it might be conquerable or not. O how history doth repeat itself! (But three from each tribe; when he went for Mosheh they were just one from each tribe). What happens if they come back quoting Numbers 13:28 and 31 instead of 30? And speaking of Numbers 30, why not include one of Kalev's sons or grandsons among the spies?
YICHTEVU: Given the way that the territory of Yehudah was "mapped" in chapter 15, it is not precisely accurate to translate this as "draw a map", more a listing of towns and notable natural locations, with directions between them; but nonetheless, mapping the land in the most precise detail they are able is what Yehoshu'a is asking them to do.
And can we also deduce that the way the "conquests" and the "tribal inheritances" have been presented in several previous chapters, and now, and onwards, reflects the manner of "describing" that these spies used?
18:5 VE HIT'CHALKU OTAH LE SHIV'AH CHALAKIM YEHUDAH YA'AMOD AL GEVULO MI NEGEV U VEIT YOSEPH YA'AMDU AL GEVULAM MI TSAPHON
וְהִתְחַלְּקוּ אֹתָהּ לְשִׁבְעָה חֲלָקִים יְהוּדָה יַעֲמֹד עַל גְּבוּלֹו מִנֶּגֶב וּבֵית יֹוסֵף יַעַמְדוּ עַל גְּבוּלָם מִצָּפֹון
KJ: And they shall divide it into seven parts: Judah shall abide in their coast on the south, and the house of Joseph shall abide in their coasts on the north.
BN: And they shall divide it into seven parts. Yehudah shall remain on its southern border, and the house of Yoseph shall remain on their northern border...
As with the previous chapter, this House of Yoseph, and the first person singular used there, does seem to imply that Menasheh and Ephrayim are still functioning as a single, combined tribe.
GEVULO...GEVULAM: This needs to be translated precisely. A GEVUL is not a coast, it's a border. This is a military enterprise being set up, and the inference of the verse is that those who have territories will put armies very visibly in the field, right on the border, to frighten the enemy, but defensively, not themselves threatening war. So the spies will know they have support if anything untoward should happen.
18:6 VE ATEM TICHTEVU ET HA ARETS SHIV'AH CHALAKIM VA HAV'ETEM ELAY HENAH VE YARIYTI LACHEM GORAL POH LIPHNEY YHVH ELOHEYNU
וְאַתֶּם תִּכְתְּבוּ אֶת הָאָרֶץ שִׁבְעָה חֲלָקִים וַהֲבֵאתֶם אֵלַי הֵנָּה וְיָרִיתִי לָכֶם גֹּורָל פֹּה לִפְנֵי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ
BN: You shall therefore map the land in seven parts, and bring the map back here to me, so that I can cast lots for you here before YHVH our god...
TICHTEVU: As per my note to verse 5, "write down", or maybe "draw", but not "conquer" - and therefore "describe", but not yet "obtain". And by the lots which will be cast now, and not according to the ones in Mosheh's bequest, if indeed there were such - all of which again infers a hierarchy within the tribes, the first group superior, and given the best land. The verb now means "to write", but there was no writing then as we understand the term. Hieroglyphs and cuneiform, picture words. How would they have drawn or written them? And on what? There is some suggestion among the archaeologists that a "slang" version of hieroglyphs was in use among the generals of the Egyptian army, a kind of pre-alphabet, though how exactly it was written (papyrus and quill?) has not yet been answered; nevertheless, it is hard for us to imagine an army planning and executing military activities without something, however primitive.
VE YARIYTI LACHEM GORAL: The first time we have heard any detail of the process, and frankly it is rather disappointing. The tribes won't even get to put their own hands in the raffle-bag and pull out a number. Did Yehoshu'a use the Urim and Tumim?
18:7 KI EYN CHELEK LA LEVIYIM BE KIRBECHEM KI CHEHUNAT YHVH NACHALATO VE GAD U RE'U-VEN VA CHATSI SHEVET HA MENASHEH LAK'CHU NACHALATAM ME EVER LA YARDEN MIZRACHAH ASHER NATAN LAHEM MOSHE EVED YHVH
כִּי אֵין חֵלֶק לַלְוִיִּם בְּקִרְבְּכֶם כִּי כְהֻנַּת יְהוָה נַחֲלָתֹו וְגָד וּרְאוּבֵן וַחֲצִי שֵׁבֶט הַמְנַשֶּׁה לָקְחוּ נַחֲלָתָם מֵעֵבֶר לַיַּרְדֵּן מִזְרָחָה אֲשֶׁר נָתַן לָהֶם מֹשֶׁה עֶבֶד יְהוָה
KJ: But the Levites have no part among you; for the priesthood of the LORD is their inheritance: and Gad, and Reuben, and half the tribe of Manasseh, have received their inheritance beyond Jordan on the east, which Moses the servant of the LORD gave them.
BN: But the Leviyim have no share among you; for the priesthood of YHVH is their inheritance; and Gad, and Re'u-Ven, and half the tribe of Menasheh, have received their inheritance on the farther, the east side of the Yarden, which Mosheh the servant of YHVH gave them.
LEVIYIM: See the link.
18:8 VA YAKUMU HA ANASHIM VA YELECHU VA YETSAV YEHOSHU'A ET HA HOLCHIM LICHTOV ET HA ARETS LEMOR LECHU VE HIT'HALCHU VA ARETS VE CHITVU OTAH VE SHUVAH ELAY U PHOH ASHLICH LACHEM GORAL LIPHNEY YHVH BE SHILOH
וַיָּקֻמוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים וַיֵּלֵכוּ וַיְצַו יְהֹושֻׁעַ אֶת הַהֹלְכִים לִכְתֹּב אֶת הָאָרֶץ לֵאמֹר לְכוּ וְהִתְהַלְּכוּ בָאָרֶץ וְכִתְבוּ אֹותָהּ וְשׁוּבוּ אֵלַי וּפֹה אַשְׁלִיךְ לָכֶם גֹּורָל לִפְנֵי יְהוָה בְּשִׁלֹה
BN: And the men got up, and went. And Yehoshu'a instructed those who went to map the land, saying: "Go and walk through the land, and map it, and come back to me here, so that I can cast lots for you before YHVH in Shiloh."
Is the gathering at Shiloh simply a second version of the gathering at Gil-Gal, and Yehoshu'a's speech a variation of that one? The division appears to repeat the previous division.
The other problem with this is that the land they will then receive by lots will, in several cases such as Asher, be remarkably coincidental to the meanings of their names; the story is really a cover-up to conceal the cultic roots, which are about the constellations of the heavens, not the hills and towns on Earth.
As noted above, translations give KOTEV in the above verses as "describe", but what he is really asking for is maps; by words if not by drawings.
18:9 VA YELCHU HA ANASHIM VA YA'AVRU VA ARETS VA YICHTEVUHA LE ARIM LE SHIV'AH CHALAKIM AL SEPHER VA YAVO'U EL YEHOSHU'A EL HA MACHANEH SHILOH
וַיֵּלְכוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים וַיַּעַבְרוּ בָאָרֶץ וַיִּכְתְּבוּהָ לֶעָרִים לְשִׁבְעָה חֲלָקִים עַל סֵפֶר וַיָּבֹאוּ אֶל יְהֹושֻׁעַ אֶל הַמַּחֲנֶה שִׁלֹה
BN: And the men went, and they travelled throughout the land, and wrote down their descriptions city by city, in seven parts, on a scroll, and they came back to Yehoshu'a and the gathered assembly at Shiloh.
A book? Michelin's Guide to Biblical Israel! Papyrus scrolls possibly, or carved tablets. But in what language? Egyptian hieroglyphs, or Babylonian cuneiform? And where did they learn to read and write it? At last, after questioning this for several verses, we can conclude that it must be anachronistic, and date the text to (no earlier than) the time of Shelomoh, which was the epoch when alphabetic writing was first invented.
18:10 VA YASHLECH LAHEM YEHOSHU'A GORAL BE SHILOH LIPHNEY YHVH VA YECHALEK SHAM YEHOSHU'A ET HA ARETS LIVNEY YISRA-EL KE MACHLEKOTAM
וַיַּשְׁלֵךְ לָהֶם יְהֹושֻׁעַ גֹּורָל בְּשִׁלֹה לִפְנֵי יְהוָה וַיְחַלֶּק שָׁם יְהֹושֻׁעַ אֶת הָאָרֶץ לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כְּמַחְלְקֹתָם
KJ: And Joshua cast lots for them in Shiloh before the LORD: and there Joshua divided the land unto the children of Israel according to their divisions.
BN: And Yehoshu'a cast lots for them in Shiloh before YHVH. And there Yehoshu'a shared out the land among the Beney Yisra-El according to their divisions.
GORAL: used hear to mean "lots", but elsewhere it has been understood otherwise. Most Jews would recognise the word today from the opening verses of the Aleynu: "Aleynu leshabeyach la Adon ha kol, latet gedulah le yotser berayshit, she lo asanu ke goyey ha aratsot, ve lo samanu ke mishpechot ha adamah, shelo sam chelkeynu kahem, ve goraleynu ke chol hamonam." In this context GORAL clearly means "destiny", which is to say the divine rather than the material inheritance.
pey break
18:11 VA YA'AL GORAL MATEH VENEY VIN-YAMIN LE MISHPECHOTAM VA YETS'E GEVUL GORALAM BEYN BENEY YEHUDAH U VEYN BENEY YOSEPH
וַיַּעַל גֹּורַל מַטֵּה בְנֵי בִנְיָמִן לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם וַיֵּצֵא גְּבוּל גֹּורָלָם בֵּין בְּנֵי יְהוּדָה וּבֵין בְּנֵי יֹוסֵף
BN: And the lot of the tribe of the Beney Bin-Yamin came up according to their clans, and the border of their lot came out between the Beney Yehudah and the Beney Yoseph.
How does this fit with the strange story of Bin-Yamin's failure to attend the national covenant renewal in Judges 20 ff?
GORAL: Coast: again the use of this term in many English translations, which was fine for Ephrayim and Menasheh, but Bin-Yamin is landlocked (except for a tiny piece of the river Yarden, which might once have given access to the Red Sea a hundred miles south, before the volcanic cataclysm changed the geography for ever; and now the Yarden dies in the Dead Sea).
וַיְהִי לָהֶם הַגְּבוּל לִפְאַת צָפֹונָה מִן הַיַּרְדֵּן וְעָלָה הַגְּבוּל אֶל כֶּתֶף יְרִיחֹו מִצָּפֹון וְעָלָה בָהָר יָמָּה [וְהָיָה כ] (וְהָיוּ ק) תֹּצְאֹתָיו מִדְבַּרָה בֵּית אָוֶן
BN: And their northern border ran from the Yarden; and the border went up to the north side of Yericho, and on through the mountains westward; and its terminus was at the wilderness of Beit Aven.
BEIT AVEN: See Joshua 7:2.
18:13 VE AVAR MI SHAM HA GEVUL LUZAH EL KETEPH LUZAH NEGBAH HI BEIT-EL VE YARAD HA GEVUL ATROT ADAR AL HA HAR ASHER MI NEGED LE VEIT CHORON TACHTON
וְעָבַר מִשָּׁם הַגְּבוּל לוּזָה אֶל כֶּתֶף לוּזָה נֶגְבָּה הִיא בֵּית אֵל וְיָרַד הַגְּבוּל עַטְרֹות אַדָּר עַל הָהָר אֲשֶׁר מִנֶּגֶב לְבֵית חֹרֹון תַּחְתֹּון
BN: And the border crossed from there towards Luz, passing by Luz, which is Beit El, on the southern side; and the border went down to Atrot Adar, near the hill that lies on the south side of the lowest part of Beit Choron.
LUZ: Once again we confront this seeming confusion of a town with two names, one of which is the town, the other the shrine in the town, or possibly, even probably, a half a mile or so outside the town.
BEIT EL: See the link.
ATROT ADAR: See my note to this at Joshua 16:5.
BEIT CHORON: See my note to this at Joshua 16:3.
18:14 VE TA'AR HA GEVUL VE NASAV LIPH'AT YAM NEGBAH MIN HA HAR ASHER AL PENEY VEIT CHORON NEGBAH VE HAYAH TOTS'OTAV EL KIRYAT BA'AL HI KIRYAT YE'ARIM IR BENEY YEHUDAH ZOT PE'AT YAM
וְתָאַר הַגְּבוּל וְנָסַב לִפְאַת יָם נֶגְבָּה מִן הָהָר אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי בֵית חֹרֹון נֶגְבָּה [וְהָיָה כ] (וְהָיוּ ק) תֹצְאֹתָיו אֶל קִרְיַת בַּעַל הִיא קִרְיַת יְעָרִים עִיר בְּנֵי יְהוּדָה זֹאת פְּאַת יָם
BN: And the border was drawn from there, and it encompassed the corner of the sea on the Negev side, from the hill that faces the south side of Beit Choron; and its terminus was at Kiryat Ba'al, which is Kiryat Ye'arim, a city of the Beney of Yehudah: this was the west quarter.
NEGEV: See the link. But note that the word is being used here as the name of the region, where it will be used in the next verse as a compass-point: south.
KIRYAT BA'AL: But 15:9 and 15:60 made the distinction differently, with Kiryat Ba'al and Ba'alah as separate villages, or possibly a village and a shrine, and Ba'alah regarded as Kiryat Ye'arim.
KIRYAT YE'ARIM: See the link.
The sea in question here is Yam Ha Melach, the Dead Sea, which it was then, as it is now.
18:15 U PHE'AT NEGBAH MIKTSEH KIRYAT YE'ARIM VE YATS'A HA GEVUL YAMAH VE YATS'A EL MA'YAN MEY NEPHTO'ACH
וּפְאַת נֶגְבָּה מִקְצֵה קִרְיַת יְעָרִים וְיָצָא הַגְּבוּל יָמָּה וְיָצָא אֶל מַעְיַן מֵי נֶפְתֹּוחַ
BN: And the southern quarter ran from the end of Kiryat Ye'arim, and the border went out on the west, all the way to the spring of waters of Mey Nephto'ach:
NEPHTO'ACH: Again see Joshua 15:9.
18:16 VE YARAD HA GEVUL EL KETSEH HA HAR ASHER AL PENEY GEY VEN HINNOM ASHER BE EMEK REPHA'IM TSAPHONAH VE YARAD GEY HINNOM EL KETEPH HA YEVUSI NEGBAH VE YARAD EYN ROGEL
וְיָרַד הַגְּבוּל אֶל קְצֵה הָהָר אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי גֵּי בֶן הִנֹּם אֲשֶׁר בְּעֵמֶק רְפָאִים צָפֹונָה וְיָרַד גֵּי הִנֹּם אֶל כֶּתֶף הַיְבוּסִי נֶגְבָּה וְיָרַד עֵין רֹגֵל
BN: And the border came down to the foothills of the mountain, where it becomes the Valley of Ben Hinnom, which is on the northern side of the Valley of the Giants, and ran through the Valley of Hinnom, on the southern Yevusi side, down to Eyn Rogel.
GEY BEN HINNOM: Really this should be Gey Hinom; the dot inside it indicates a double-letter, but there is nothing in the root to endorse that, and anyway, in the Bible, the pointing is commentary, not text. I have left it as a double-letter anyway, against all my principles, because this is how it has come down to us, in both modern Yehudit and English. Gey Hinnom is Gehenna. (See Joshua 15:8). GEY means "valley", though it is not obvious what distinguishes a Gey from an Emek - probably a Gey was a steep and narrow gorge between two hills, while the Emek stretched out longer and wider and was good for agriculture. No one has the feintest notion who or what was the source of the name Hinnom.
EMEK REPHA'IM: See Joshua 12:4, 13:12 and 17:15, in all of which Repha'im is usually translated as "Giants", identifying them alongside the Anakim and Nephilim as the troglodytic ancestors of Kena'ani Man.
EYN ROGEL: The pool at the foot of Gey Ben Hinnom, with many historic Biblical connections. See my note to Joshua 15:7.
18:17 VE TA'AR MI TSAPHON VE YATS'A EYN SHEMESH VE YATS'A EL GELIYLOT ASHER NOCHACH MA'ALEH ADUMIM VE YARAD EVEN BOHAN BEN RE'U-VEN
וְתָאַר מִצָּפֹון וְיָצָא עֵין שֶׁמֶשׁ וְיָצָא אֶל גְּלִילֹות אֲשֶׁר נֹכַח מַעֲלֵה אֲדֻמִּים וְיָרַד אֶבֶן בֹּהַן בֶּן רְאוּבֵן
BN: And it was drawn from the north, going down to Eyn Shemesh, and from there toward Gelilot, which is opposite the hill of Adumim, and descending to the Stone of Bohan in Re'u-Ven.
TA'AR: "drawn" is an accurately literal translation - in the sense of an artist drawing a picture, not a horse drawing a cart. Yehoshu'a asked them to "describe" the geography, so perhaps they did indeed make a map of some sort, and this is why it is presented in this manner. Sheep's blood, using a bird's feather, on a dried out palm-leaf.
EYN SHEMESH: See my note to Joshua 15:7. "Going down to Eyn Shemesh" ("the well of the sun", or possibly "the eye of the sun") has to be regarded as a deliberate play-on-words. People who live in Sunrise, Florida, understood that you always go "up" to sunrise, regardless of which direction you are travelling, just as inhabitant of Los Angeles know that you always go "down" to Sunset Boulevard (and boy has Sunset Boulevard gone down in recent years!).
GELILOT: "Circles", because the root means "rolling", and things don't, or at least not smoothly, if they are anything other than circular.
But then word association upon hearing GELILOT takes me to the Galil, or Galilee in English, spelt exactly the same: Gimel-Lamed-Lamed. Hills and mountains make up most of the Galil, and of course the Sea of Galilee, the Lake Kineret or Genesaret, in its valley. Rolling hills, full of large rocks and stones and boulders. But also mounds of dung, from sheep and goats and other mountain creatures: GALAL is also the word for those very round droppings (Zephaniah 1:17, Ezekiel 4:12), and once for human dung (1 Kings 14:10).
But that is only one possible explanation. Ezra 5:8 and 6:4 speak of the rebuilding of the Temple; in the former, the governor of a neighbouring province writes to Emperor Darius to tell him of the work, and notes that they are building it with "EVEN GELAL (אֶ֣בֶן גְּלָ֔ל)", usually translated as either "large stones" or "heavy stones", or even, though this must surely be incorrect "hewn stones". Given the proximity of Gelilot to both Adumim and Bohan, I think we should regard this as a megalithic site.
ADUMIM: The root is DAM - "blood" - rather than ADAM or EDOM, though it yields both. The rich, iron-red soil that also gives the word ADAMAH for the earth itself - the soil rather than the planet. Given that we are on the borders of Re'u-Ven, at the north-eastern edge of the Dead Sea, can we assume that all this redness, all these rocks, are in fact the southern end of Petra?
BOHAN: Was it already named after Re'u-Ven at that time? Somewhat surprising if it was. BOHAN means "thumb", so presumably we can deduce the shape of the rock, and reckon that the reference to Re'u-Ven is geographical, not genealogical, as per my translation.
18:18 VE AVAR EL KETEPH MUL HA ARAVAH TSAPHONAH VE YARAD HA ARAVATAH
וְעָבַר אֶל כֶּתֶף מוּל הָעֲרָבָה צָפֹונָה וְיָרַד הָעֲרָבָתָה
KJ: And passed along toward the side over against Arabah northward, and went down unto Arabah.
BN: And it crossed through the foothills facing the northern Aravah, and went down into the Aravah.
ARAVATAH: To anyone coming randomly to this page, the next comment will be meaningless; to those who have been following me through the various texts, it should raise a wry smile: after all those Inconsistent Datives, at last, grammatically completely correct. HA ARAVAH the first time, nominative singular, "the Aravah desert"; HA ARAVATAH, the second time, "dative singular", "to the Aravah desert",and needing the definite article (HA) to achieve it. So the scribes clearly did know how to do it! Now can we go back and unravel, for instance, Timna and Timnatah (see Joshua 15:10 and 15:57)?
I should also point out, given that we know the precise location of this, that it confirms our previous reading that the Aravah was the name for the scrub desert to the east of the Yarden, as well as to its west.
18:19 VE AVAR HA GEVUL EL KETEPH BEIT CHAGLAH TSAPHONAH VE HAYAH TOTS'OT HA GEVUL EL LESHON YAM HA MELACH TSAPHONAH EL KETSEH HA YARDEN NEGBAH ZEH GEVUL NEGEV
KJ: And the border passed along to the side of Bethhoglah northward: and the outgoings of the border were at the north bay of the salt sea at the south end of Jordan: this was the south coast.
BN: And the border passed along the northern side of Beit Chaglah, and the egress of the border was at the north bay of Yam ha Melach, at the southern end of the Yarden: this was the southern border.
BEIT CHAGLAH: See Joshua 15:6 and 17:3.
HAYAH: The scribes may know their grammar, but alas they do not always use that knowledge. TOTS'OT are plural; the accompanying verb, HAYAH, is singular: it should be HAYU, which is plural. The second bracket confirms that Jewish scholars noticed this a long time ago.
18:20 VE HA YARDEN YIGBOL OTO LIPH'AT KEDMAH ZOT NACHALAT BENEY VIN-YAMIN LIGVULOTEYHA SAVIV LE MISHPECHOTAM
18:19 VE AVAR HA GEVUL EL KETEPH BEIT CHAGLAH TSAPHONAH VE HAYAH TOTS'OT HA GEVUL EL LESHON YAM HA MELACH TSAPHONAH EL KETSEH HA YARDEN NEGBAH ZEH GEVUL NEGEV
וְעָבַר הַגְּבוּל אֶל כֶּתֶף בֵּית חָגְלָה צָפֹונָה [וְהָיָה כ] (וְהָיוּ ׀ ק) [תֹּצְאֹותָיו כ] (תֹּצְאֹות ק) הַגְּבוּל אֶל לְשֹׁון יָם הַמֶּלַח צָפֹונָה אֶל קְצֵה הַיַּרְדֵּן נֶגְבָּה זֶה גְּבוּל נֶגֶב
BN: And the border passed along the northern side of Beit Chaglah, and the egress of the border was at the north bay of Yam ha Melach, at the southern end of the Yarden: this was the southern border.
BEIT CHAGLAH: See Joshua 15:6 and 17:3.
HAYAH: The scribes may know their grammar, but alas they do not always use that knowledge. TOTS'OT are plural; the accompanying verb, HAYAH, is singular: it should be HAYU, which is plural. The second bracket confirms that Jewish scholars noticed this a long time ago.
18:20 VE HA YARDEN YIGBOL OTO LIPH'AT KEDMAH ZOT NACHALAT BENEY VIN-YAMIN LIGVULOTEYHA SAVIV LE MISHPECHOTAM
וְהַיַּרְדֵּן יִגְבֹּל אֹתֹו לִפְאַת קֵדְמָה זֹאת נַחֲלַת בְּנֵי בִנְיָמִן לִגְבוּלֹתֶיהָ סָבִיב לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם
KJ: And Jordan was the border of it on the east side. This was the inheritance of the children of Benjamin, by the coasts thereof round about, according to their families.
BN: And the Yarden itself was the eastern border. This was the inheritance of the Beney Bin-Yamin, the borders encompasing it, according to their clans.
18:21 VE HAYU HE ARIM LE MATEH BENEY VIN-YAMIN LE MISHPECHOTEYHEM YERIYCHO U VEIT CHAGLAH VE EMEK KETSITS
וְהָיוּ הֶעָרִים לְמַטֵּה בְּנֵי בִנְיָמִן לְמִשְׁפְּחֹותֵיהֶם יְרִיחֹו וּבֵית חָגְלָה וְעֵמֶק קְצִיץ
BN: Now the cities of the tribe of the Beney Bin-Yamin, according to their clans, were Yeriycho, and Beit Chaglah, and the valley of Ketsits;
KETSITS: The very spelling takes us into ritual territory, the Tsits being the fringes of the Tallit Ketan, the undergarment worn by all Jewish men. The root however has nothing to do with this. Tsitsim are "feathers", as on a bird's wings. The use of the word in the Tallit Ketan is metaphorical.
And does any of this have anything to do with the town named Ketsits? Nothing at all, but Jewish students always ask, so I am providing the answer. In fact the root here is KATSATS, completely unconnected. It is used for judicial amputation of a hand (Deuteronomy 25:12), and metaphorically for "cutting the ropes of the wicked" in Psalm 129:4; also for the removal of the beard in Jeremiah 25:23... but wait a minute; it isn't actually the beard that is being removed, it is the corners of the hair that are being cut, an act of rounding which is strictly prohibited by Mosaic law (Leviticus 19:27), which is precisely why the orthodox grow side-curls, which go with the Tallit Ketan as a kind of face-fringe... and so, back to the Jewish students, yes, you were right after all to recognise the word Tsits in here.
But it still has very little to do with the town named Ketsits, a place that was presumably "cut off" geographically.
18:22 U VEIT HA ARAVAH U TSEMARAYIM U VEIT-EL
18:22 U VEIT HA ARAVAH U TSEMARAYIM U VEIT-EL
וּבֵית הָעֲרָבָה וּצְמָרַיִם וּבֵית אֵל
BN: And Beit Ha Aravah, and Tsemarayim, and Beit-El;
BEIT HA ARAVAH: Once again we appear to have both the shrine and the town, in the way that Kent has Tunbridge and Tunbridge Wells; and many another example throughout the world. Indeed, we know from previous references (see verse 13) that the same is true for Beit-El - it being the shrine attached to Luz.
TSEMARAYIM: Note the multiple plural ending, as with Mitsrayim (Egypt) and Yeru-Shala'im. It appears to indicate a group of towns formed into a conurbation, a city-state, even a country.
18:23 VE HA AVIM VE HA PARAH VE APHRAH
וְהָעַוִּים וְהַפָּרָה וְעָפְרָה
KJ: And Avim, and Parah, and Ophrah,
BN: And Ha Avim, and Ha Pharah, and Aphrah;
HA AVIM: See the link.
HA PARAH: See the link.
APHRAH: Or perhaps Ophra? Or perhaps Ha Parah and Aphrah are the same place but different dialect pronunciations? As York and Yorvik, Cambrensis and Cambridge, Oxenford and Oxford are each the same place, but using forms of English several hundred years apart; or as New Amsterdam and New York are the same place, but each using a name from a different historical period. The Ayin (ע) in Aphrah would appear to suggest that they are different places, but a phonetic choice made centuries after the event could still go either way.
See also my note to Oreph in Joshua 7:8, because we are in precisely the geographical region where David of Yehudah was pursued by Sha'ul of Bin-Yamin, and by the Dead Sea, where the Yisra-Eli equivalent of Eurydice turned into a pillar of salt.
18:24 U CHEPHAR HA AMONI VE HA APHNI VA GAV'A ARIM SHETEYM ESREH VE CHATSEREYHEN
וּכְפַר [הָעַמֹּנִי כ] (הָעַמֹּנָה ק) וְהָעָפְנִי וָגָבַע עָרִים שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה וְחַצְרֵיהֶן
BN: And Chephar ha Amoni, and Aphni, and Gav'a - twelve cities with their suburbs;
That Bin-Yamin should be divided into twelve cities should come as no surprise if you have been following my commentaries. The likelihood is that all 12 tribes divided themselves in the same way, enabling the geography and hierarchy of the heavens to be reflected in the land, and within the tribes as well. But wait, the last verse of this chapter says 14, which is Osher's (Osiris') number, denoting the Egyptian cosmology, which was different from the Yisra-Eli - or is it simply a random total?
CHEPHAR HA AMONI: is not how most translations render it! It means "village of the Beney Amon," but this is lost in the common translations. See also my previous notes to CHEPHER (Joshua 12:17, 17:2).
APHNI: Like Ophrah above, is that Ayin vowelled O or A? (How do you pronounce that lovely English tea-cake, a "scone"?)
GAV'A: Should that not be GEV'A, which goes with the other Gebite towns, including Giv-On in the next verse? See my notes and map-link at Joshua 9:3.
18:25 GIV-ON VE HA RAMAH U VE'EROT
גִּבְעֹון וְהָרָמָה וּבְאֵרֹות
KJ: Gibeon, and Ramah, and Beeroth,
BN: Giv-on, and Ha Ramah, and Be'erot;
GIV-ON: See my notes and map-link at Joshua 9:3.
HA RAMAH: could be Hormah without the pointing; only its geographical location, in relation to Giv-On and Be'erot, seems to argue against this, though all three have names that recur in many parts of Kena'an: Giv-On is "a mound", usually a tumulus, Ramah is a "high place", Be'erot are "wells".
BE'EROT: See the link.
18:26 VE HA MITSPEH VE HA CHEPHIRAH VE HA MOTSAH
וְהַמִּצְפֶּה וְהַכְּפִירָה וְהַמֹּצָה
BN: And Ha Mitspeh, and Ha Chephirah, and Ha Motsah;
All three towns in this verse are preceded with a definite article. Why?
HA MITSPEH: Sometimes Mitspeh, as here, but sometimes Mitspah - with or without the definite article!
HA CHEPHIRAH: See my notes to Joshua 9:17.
HA MOTSAH: See the link.
18:27 VE REKEM VE YIRPHE-EL VE TAR'ALAH
וְרֶקֶם וְיִרְפְּאֵל וְתַרְאֲלָה
BN: And Rekem, and Yirphe-El, and Taralah;
REKEM: See the link.
YIRPHE-EL: See the link.
TARALAH: See the link.
18:28 VE TSEL'A HA ELEPH VE HA YEVUSI HI YERU-SHALA'IM GIV'AT KIRYAT ARIM ARBA ESREH VE CHATSEREYHEN ZOT NACHALAT BENEY VIN-YAMIN LE MISHPECHOTAM
וְצֵלַע הָאֶלֶף וְהַיְבוּסִי הִיא יְרוּשָׁלִַם גִּבְעַת קִרְיַת עָרִים אַרְבַּע עֶשְׂרֵה וְחַצְרֵיהֶן זֹאת נַחֲלַת בְּנֵי בִנְיָמִן לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם
BN: And Tselah, Ha Eleph, and Ha Yevusi, which is Yeru-Shalayim, Giv'at Kiryat; fourteen cities with their villages. This is the inheritance of the Beney Ben-Yamin according to their clans.
Again the use of the definite article, but differently here: with Ha Eleph as though we said "the Rome" instead of Rome, but meaning the place, not the people; with HA YEVUSI as though we said "the Romans" instead of Rome, but meaning the people, not the place.
TSEL'A: Once again we find a town whose very name suggests religion rather more than geography, and in a list which enhances rather than diminishes that conjecture.
First, as per 2 Samuel 21, it was in Tsel'a that Sha'ul built a rather fancy cave-sepulchre for his father Kish, and given that Sha'ul and She'ol (the Yisra-Eli Underworld) are indistinguishable without pointing, that everything in the Sha'ul-David story mirrors that of Eurystheus and Herakles, and that the 12 Labours, like the 12 Tribes, the Twelve Disciples, the Twelve Knights of the Round Table, and even the Twelve Merrie Men of Golin Robin (Robin Hood), all reflect the constellatory mythology... and I have made the Samuel link to the whole chapter, and not just the specific verse 14 which names Tsel'a, because the story that precedes and accompanies the burial both further endorses the cosmology and completes the mythology that we have deduced in the tale of the Beney Giv-On - for whom see verse 25, above - adding the seven to the twelve.
Second, the word means "rib", and was used for the side-chapels in the Temple in Yeru-Shala'im, logically enough if you think of your local church, which is modelled on the Temple: nave and aisles providing the spine, and all those vestries and side-chapels down the sides filling up the ribs.
HA ELEPH: Or is that Tsela' ha Eleph, with the inference of a second, lesser Tsel'a somewhere else - Barnet adjacent to High Barnet, Wycombe to High Wycombe, et al; as opposed to the two towns of Upper and Lower Beit Choron in Joshua 16:3 and 5, which were on the same hillside, like Big Sur and Little Sur.
YEVUSI: As per my note at the start of this verse, should that not be YEVUS?
GIV'AT: yet another Geb town? Probably not on this occasion.
KIRYAT: As noted previously (Joshua 9:17), where a Kfar is a village tending towards a hamlet, a Kerayah is a village growing towards becoming a town. Any Jew who came from such a place might be known as Judas (Yehudah), "a man from one of the Kerayot" (Ish ha Kerayot = Iscariot).
ARBA ESREH: It can't be both 12 (verse 24) and 14 (this verse), so we can assume that two different lists have become conjoined without the scribe taking responsibility for proof-reading. Given Bin-Yamin's strong Egyptian connections (his mother named him Ben-Oni, which identifies him with On,or Heliopolis, in Mitsrayim), does this allow us to infer that the Egyptian amphictyony would have been fourteen, reflecting the Osiric horoscope, where the Kena'ani, and now the Beney Yisra-Eli, is twelve, reflecting the Davidic horoscope? It will need some exploration of Egyptian archaeology to resolve that conundrum, but it seems to be a logical explanation.
And as to the correlations of names in this verse. Tsel'a, adjacent to the Eleph (the Alpha, in the beginning, but also the thousandth or myriad, at the point of infinity), next to Yevus (which is only Yeru-Shala'im anachronistically, named as such by... David, after he succeeded Sha'ul), and which Kiryat? Ye'arim perhaps (see verse 14), where the Ark was kept between its departure from Shiloh (see verse 1), and until David brought it to Yeru-Shala'im?
pey break
No comments:
Post a Comment