Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch Old Testament Commentary

The Victory on the Third Day's Engagement. - Jdg 20:29. The account of this commences with the most important point, so far as their success was concerned: Israel set liers in wait (troops in ambush) round about Gibeah. Jdg 20:30 They then advanced as on the former occasions. Jdg 20:31-32 The Benjaminites came out again to meet the people (of Israel), and were drawn away from the town (the perfect הנתּקוּ without ו is subordinate to the preceding verb, and defines more precisely the advance itself, whilst the mode in which they were drawn away from the town is not described more fully till Jdg 20:32, Jdg 20:33), and began to smite the beaten of the people (who pretended to fly) as formerly upon the roads (where two roads part), of which one led up to Bethel and the other to Gibeah, into the field (Gibeah is the town at which the battle took place, that is to say, somewhere in the neighbourhood, so that a road might easily run from the field of battle towards the town into the field), "about (sc., putting to death) thirty men of Israel." This statement introduces the more precise definition of the חללים. Jdg 20:32 Then the Benjaminites supposed that Israel was beaten by them as before; but the Israelites said: We will flee, and draw it (the tribe of Benjamin) away from the town to the roads (the high-roads mentioned in Jdg 20:31). On the Dagesh dirimens in נתקּוּהוּ, see Ewald, 92, c. Jdg 20:33 Carrying out this plan, "all the men of Israel rose up from their places," i.e., left the place they had occupied, drew back, "and set themselves in battle array" in Baal-thamar, i.e., palm-place, which still existed, according to the Onom., in the time of Eusebius, as a small place in the neighbourhood of Gibeah, bearing the name of Bethamar. While this was going on, the ambush of Israel broke forth from its position "from the plains of Geba." The ἁπ. λεγ. מערה, from ערה to strip, denotes a naked region destitute of wood. גּבע is the masculine form for גּבעה, and ממּערה־גבע a more precise definition of ממּקומו. This rendering, which is the one given in the Targum, certainly appears the simplest explanation of a word that has been rendered in very different ways, and which the lxx left untranslated as a proper name, Μαρααγαβέ. The objection raised to this, viz., that a naked level country was not a place for an ambush, has no force, as there is no necessity to understand the words as signifying that the treeless country formed the actual hiding-place of the ambush; but the simple meaning is, that when the men broke from their hiding-place, they came from the treeless land towards the town. The rendering given by Rashi, Trem., and others, "on account of the tripping of Gibeah," is much less suitable, since, apart from the difficulty of taking מן in different senses so close together, we should at least expect to find העיר (the city) instead of גּבע. Jdg 20:34 Through the advance of the ambush there came 10,000 picked men of all Israel "from opposite to Gibeah" (who now attacked in the rear the Benjaminites who were pursuing the flying army of Israel); "and the contest became severe, since they (the Benjaminites) did not know that the calamity was coming upon them." Jdg 20:35 And Jehovah smote Benjamin before Israel (according to His promise in Jdg 20:28), so that the Israelites destroyed of Benjamin on that day twenty and five thousand and an hundred men (i.e., twenty-five thousand and upwards). This was the result of the battle, which the historian gives at once, before entering more minutely into the actual account of the battle itself. He does this in Jdg 20:36-46 in a series of explanations, of which one is attached to the other, for the most part in the form of circumstantial clauses, so that it is not till Jdg 20:46 that he again comes to the result already announced in Jdg 20:35. (Note: The opinions expressed by De Wette, etc. that Jdg 20:35 is spurious, and by Bertheau, that Jdg 20:36-46 contain a different account of the battle, simply prove that they have overlooked this peculiarity in the Hebrew mode of writing history, viz., that the generally result of any occurrence is given as early as possible, and then the details follow afterwards; whilst these critics have not succeeded in adducing even apparent differences in support of their opinions.) Jdg 20:36-38 The Benjaminites, for instance, saw (this is the proper rendering of ויּראוּ with vav consec., which merely indicates the order of thought, not that of time) that they were beaten, and the man of Israel vacated the field before Benjamin (מקום נתן, to give place by falling back and flying), because they relied upon the ambush which they had placed against Gibeah. The Benjaminites did not perceive this till the ambush fell upon their rear. But the ambush itself, as is added in Jdg 20:37 by way of further explanation, hastened and fell (fell as quickly as possible) into Gibeah, and went thither and smote the whole town with the edge of the sword. To this there is added the further explanation in Jdg 20:38 : "And the arrangement of the Israelites with the ambush was this: multiply, to cause smoke-rising to ascend (i.e., cause a great cloud of smoke to ascend) out of the city." The only objection that can be raised to this view of הרב, as the imperative Hiphil of רבה, is the suffix ם-attached to להעלותם, since this is unsuitable to a direct address. This suffix can only be explained by supposing that there is an admixture of two constructions, the direct appeal, and the indirect explanation, that they were to cause to ascend. If this be not admitted, however, we can only follow Studer, and erase the suffix as an error of the pen occasioned by the following word משׂאת; for the other course suggested by Bertheau, namely that הרב should be struck out as a gloss, is precluded by the circumstance that there is no possible way of explaining the interpolation of so apparently unsuitable a word into the text. It certainly stood in the text used by the lxx, though they have most foolishly confounded הרב with חרב, and rendered it μάχαιρα. Jdg 20:39-41 "And the men of Israel turned in the battle:" that is to say, as is afterwards more fully explained in Jdg 20:39, Jdg 20:40, in the form of a long new circumstantial clause, whilst Benjamin had begun to smite, etc. (repeated from Jdg 20:31, Jdg 20:32), and the cloud (המּשׂאת = העשׁן משׂאת, Jdg 20:38) had begun to ascend out of the city as a pillar of smoke, and Benjamin turned back, and behold the whole city ascended towards heaven (in smoke), Israel turned (fighting) and Benjamin was terrified, for it saw that misfortune had come upon it (see Jdg 20:34). In Jdg 20:41, the thread of the narrative, which was interrupted by the long circumstantial clause, is again resumed by the repetition of "and the men of Israel turned." Jdg 20:42-43 The Benjaminites "now turned (flying) before the Israelites to the way of the desert," i.e., no doubt the desert which rises from Jericho to the mountains of Bethel (Jos 16:1). They fled therefore towards the north-east; but the battle had overtaken (reached or seized) them, and those out of the towns (had perished). The difficult expression מהערים ואשׁר, of which very different, and for the most part arbitrary, explanations have been given, can only be in apposition to the suffix attached to the verb: "Benjamin, and in fact those who had come to the help of Gibeah out of the towns of Benjamin" (see Jdg 20:14, Jdg 20:15), i.e., all the Benjaminites. The following words, וגו משׁחיתים, are a circumstantial clause explanatory of the previous clause, הדב המּלחמה: "since they (the men of Israel) destroyed him (Benjamin) in the midst of it." The singular suffix בּתוכו does not refer to Benjamin, as this would yield no sense at all, but to the preceding words, "the way of the desert" (see Jdg 20:45). - In Jdg 20:43 the account is continued by three perfects attached to one another without a copula: "they enclosed (hedged round) Benjamin, pursued him; at the place of rest they trod him down to before Gibeah eastwards." מנוּחה is not used adverbially in the sense of "quietly," which would not give any fitting meaning, but is an accus. loci, and signifies place of rest, as in Num 10:33. The notice "to before Gibeah" refers to all three verbs. Jdg 20:44 In this battle there fell of Benjamin 18,000 men, all brave men. The את before כּל־אלּה is not a preposition, "with" (as the lxx, Cod. Al., and Bertheau render it), but a sign of the accusative. It serves to show that the thought which follows is governed by the principal clause, "so far as all these were concerned, they were brave men." Jdg 20:45 The remainder fled to the desert, to the rock (of the place) Rimmon, which is described in the Onom. (s. v. Remmon) as a vicus fifteen Roman miles to the north of Jerusalem. It has been preserved in the village of Rummn, which stands upon and around the summit of a conical limestone mountain, and is visible in all directions (Rob. Pal. ii. p. 113). "And they (the Israelites) smote as a gleaning upon the roads 5000 men." עולל, to have a gleaning of the battle, i.e., to smite or slay, as it were, as a gleaning of the principal battle (vid., Jer 6:9). Mesilloth are the high-roads mentioned in Jdg 20:31. "And pursued them to Gideom, and smote of them 2000 more." The situation of Gideom, which is only met with here, is not precisely known; but it must have been somewhere between Gibeah and Rimmon, as the rock Rimmon, according to Jdg 20:47, afforded a safe place of refuge to the fugitives. Jdg 20:46-47 On the total number of the slain, see the remarks on Jdg 20:15. - In Jdg 20:47 the statement already made in Jdg 20:45 with regard to the flight is resumed; and it is still further related, that 500 men reached the rock Rimmon, and dwelt there four months, i.e., till the occurrence described in Jdg 21:13. Jdg 20:48 The Israelites turned (from any further pursuit of the fugitive warriors of Benjamin) to the children of Benjamin, i.e., to such of the people of the tribe of Benjamin as were unarmed and defenceless, and smote them with the edge of the sword, "from the town (or towns) onwards, men to cattle (i.e., men, women, children, and cattle), to every one who was found;" i.e., they cut down men and cattle without quarter, from the towns onwards even to those who were found elsewhere. כּל־הנּמצא עד (to all that was found) corresponds to מעיר (from the city), and עד־בּהמה מתם (men to beast) serves as a more precise definition of the עיר (city): everything that was in the city, man and beast. מתם is pointed wrongfully for מתם, men, the reading in several MSS and most of the early editions (see Deu 2:34; Deu 3:6). They also set fire to all the towns that were met with, i.e., all without exception. Thus they did the same to the Benjaminites as to the Canaanites who were put under the ban, carrying out the ban with the strictest severity.