Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Judges 19:15 - 19:15
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
And they turned aside thither to pass the night in Gibeah; and he (the Levite) remained in the market-place of the town, as no one received them into his house to pass the night.
Jdg 19:16-19
Behold, there came an old man from the field, who was of the mountains of Ephraim, and dwelt as a stranger in Gibeah, the inhabitants of which were Benjaminites (as is observed here, as a preliminary introduction to the account which follows). When he saw the traveller in the market-place of the town, he asked him whither he was going and whence he came; and when he had heard the particulars concerning his descent and his journey, he received him into his house. וֶאֶת־בֵּית י הֹלֵךְ אֲנִי (Jdg 19:18), “and I walk at the house of Jehovah, and no one receives me into his house” (Seb. Schm., etc.); not “I am going to the house of Jehovah” (Ros., Berth., etc.), for אֵת הָלַךְ does not signify to go to a place, for which the simple accusative is used either with or without ה local. It either means “to go through a place” (Deu 1:19, etc.), or “to go with a person,” or, when applied to things, “to go about with anything” (see Job 31:5, and Ges. Thes. p. 378). Moreover, in this instance the Levite was not going to the house of Jehovah (i.e., the tabernacle), but, as he expressly told the old man, from Bethlehem to the outermost sides of the mountains of Ephraim. The words in question explain the reason why he was staying in the market-place. Because he served at the house of Jehovah, no one in Gibeah would receive him into his house,
(Note: As Seb. Schmidt correctly observes, “the argument is taken from the indignity shown him: the Lord thinks me worthy to minister to Him, as a Levite, in His house, and there is not one of the people of the Lord who thinks me worthy to receive his hospitality.”)
although, as he adds in Jdg 19:19, he had everything with him that was requisite for his wants. “We have both straw and fodder for our asses, and bread and wine for me and thy maid, and for the young man with thy servants. No want of anything at all,” so as to cause him to be burdensome to his host. By the words “thy maid” and “thy servants” he means himself and his concubine, describing himself and his wife, according to the obsequious style of the East in olden times, as servants of the man from whom he was expecting a welcome.
Jdg 19:20
The old man replied, “Peace to thee,” assuring him of a welcome by this style of greeting; “only all thy wants upon me,” i.e., let me provide for them. Thus the friendly host declined the offer made by his guest to provide for himself. “Only do not pass the night in the market-place.”
Jdg 19:21
He then took him into his house, mixed fodder for his asses (יָבֹול from בָּלַל, a denom. verb from בָּלִיל, to make a mixture, to give fodder to the beasts), and waited upon his guest with washing of feet, food, and drink (see Gen 18:4., Jdg 19:2).
Jdg 19:22
Whilst they were enjoying themselves, some worthless men of the city surrounded the house, knocking continuously at the door (הִתְדַּפֵּק, a form indicative of gradual increase), and demanding of the master of the house that he would bring out the man who had entered his house, that they might know him,-the very same demand that the Sodomites had made of Lot (Gen 19:6.). The construct state בְנֵי־בְלִיַּעַל אַנְשֵׁי is used instead of בְּנֵי־בל אֲנָשִׁים (Deu 13:14, etc.), because בליעל בני is regarded as one idea: people of worthless fellows. Other cases of the same kind are given by Ewald, Lehrb. §289, c.
Jdg 19:23-24
The old man sought, as Lot had done, to defend his guests from such a shameful crime by appealing to the sacred rights of hospitality, and by giving up his own virgin daughter and the concubine of his guest (see the remarks on Gen 19:7-8). נְבָלָה, folly, used to denote shameful licentiousness and whoredom, as in Gen 34:7 and Deu 22:21. אֹותָם עַנּוּ, “humble them.” The masculine is used in אֹותָם and לָהֶם as the more general gender, instead of the more definite feminine, as in Gen 39:9; Exo 1:21, etc.
Jdg 19:25
But as the people would not listen to this proposal, the man (no doubt the master of the house, according to Jdg 19:24) took his (the guest's) concubine (of course with the consent of his guest) and led her out to them, and they abused her the whole night. It is not stated how it was that they were satisfied with this; probably because they felt too weak to enforce their demand. בְּ הִתְעַלֵּל, to exercise his power or wantonness upon a person (see Exo 10:2).
Jdg 19:26
When the morning drew on (i.e., at the first dawn of day), the woman fell down before the door of the house in which אֲדֹונֶיהָ, “her lord,” i.e., her husband, was, and lay there till it was light, i.e., till sunrise.
Jdg 19:27-28
There her husband found her, when he opened the house-door to go his way (having given up all thought of receiving her back again from the barbarous crowd), “lying before the house-door, and her hands upon the threshold” (i.e., with outstretched arms), and giving no answer to his word, having died, that is to say, in consequence of the ill-treatment of the night. He then took the corpse upon his ass to carry it to his place, i.e., to his home.
Jdg 19:29-30
As soon as he arrived there, he cut up the body, according to its bones (as they cut slaughtered animals in pieces: see at Lev 1:6), into twelve pieces, and sent them (the corpse in its pieces) into the whole of the territory of Israel, i.e., to all the twelve tribes, in the hope that every one who saw it would say: No such thing has happened or been seen since the coming up of Israel out of Egypt until this day. Give ye heed to it (שִׁימוּ for לֵב שִׂימוּ); make up your minds and say on, i.e., decide how this unparalleled wickedness is to be punished. Sending the dissected pieces of the corpse to the tribes was a symbolical act, by which the crime committed upon the murdered woman was placed before the eyes of the whole nation, to summon it to punish the crime, and was naturally associated with a verbal explanation of the matter by the bearer of the pieces. See the analogous proceeding on the part of Saul (1Sa 11:7), and the Scythian custom related by Lucian in Toxaris, c. 48, that whoever was unable to procure satisfaction for an injury that he had received, cut an ox in pieces and sent it round, whereupon all who were willing to help him to obtain redress took a piece, and swore that they would stand by him to the utmost of their strength. The perfects וְאָמַר - וְהָיָה (Jdg 19:30) are not used for the imperfects c. vav consec. וַיֹּאמֶר - וַיְהִי, as Hitzig supposes, but as simple perfects (perfecta conseq.), expressing the result which the Levite expected from his conduct; and we have simply to supply לֵאמֹר before וְהָיָה, which is often omitted in lively narrative or animated conversation (compare, for example, Exo 8:5 with Jdg 7:2). The perfects are used by the historian instead of imperfects with a simple vav, which are commonly employed in clauses indicating intention, “because what he foresaw would certainly take place, floated before his mind as a thing already done” (Rosenmüller). The moral indignation, which the Levite expected on the part of all the tribes at such a crime as this, and their resolution to avenge it, are thereby exhibited not merely as an uncertain conjecture, but a fact that was sure to occur, and concerning which, as Judg 20 clearly shows, he had not deceived himself.