Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Judges 4:1 - 4:11
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
The Servitude To Jabin, King Of Canaan. Deborah, The Female Judge Of Fiery Spirit, And Barak, The Military Hero.
__________________
Ehud being dead, Israel falls back into evil-doing, and is given up to the tyranny of Jabin, king of Canaan. Deborah, the Prophetess, summons Barak to undertake the work of deliverance
Jdg_4:1-11
[2 Jdg_4:5.— éåֹùֶׁáֶú : Bachmann also translates “sat” (sass), although he interprets “dwelt;” cf. Jdg_10:1; Jos_2:15; 2Ki_22:14. “As according to the last of these passages the prophetess Huldah had her dwelling ( éåֹùֶׁáֶúåְäִéà ) in the second district of Jerusalem, so the prophetess Deborah had her dwelling ( åְäִéà éåֹùֶׁáֶú ) under the Palm of Deborah.”—Tr.]
[3 Jdg_4:6.— åּîָùַׁëְúָּ áְּäַø úָּáåֹø : Dr. Cassel,—Ziehe auf den Berg Tabor, proceed to Mount Tabor. So many others. For áּ with a verb of motion, cf. Psa_24:3. But inasmuch as îùַׁêְ recurs immediately in Jdg_4:7, and is there transitive, Bachmann proposes to take it so here: go, draw sc. an army, to thyself or together, on Mount Tabor. Cf the Vulgate.—Tr.]
[4 Jdg_4:7.— åְàֶúÎøִëְáּåֹ : properly, “and (not, with) his chariots,” etc., although Cassel also has mit. àֵú is the sign of the accusative, not the preposition, as appears from the fact that it has the copula “and” before it.—Tr.]
[5 Jdg_4:10.— áְּøַâְìָéå : if the subject of åַéַּòַì be Barak, as the E. V. and Dr. Cassel take it, áְּøַâְìָéå can hardly mean anything else than “on foot,” as Dr. Cassel renders it; cf. Jdg_4:15. But the true construction—true, because regular and leaving nothing to be supplied—is that which De Wette adopts: “and there went up, áְּøַâְìָéå , ten thousand men.” In this construction, which harmonizes perfectly with the context, áְּøַâְìָéå evidently means “at his feet,” i. e. as De Wette renders, “after him.”—Tr.]
[6 Jdg_4:11.—Dr. Cassel’s translation adheres strictly to the order of the original: “And Heber, the Kenite, had severed himself from Kain, the sons of Hobab, the brother-in-law of Moses, and had pitched his tent near Elon-Zaanannim, by Kedesh. On the rendering “brother-in-law,” instead of “father-in-law,” cf. Keil, on Exo_2:18; Smith’s Bibl. Dict. s. v. Hobab.—Tr.]
Jdg_4:2-3. And Jehovah gave them up into the hand of Jabin, king of Canaan, etc. Joshua already had been obliged to sustain a violent contest with a Jabin, king of Hazor. He commanded a confederation of tribes, whose frontier reached as far south as Dor (Tantûra) on the coast, and the plains below the Sea of Tiberias. The battle of Jabin with Joshua took place at the waters of Merom (Lake Huleh); and from that fact alone Josephus inferred that “Hazor lay above ( ὑðåñïåῖôáé ) this sea.” But its position was by no means so close to the lake as Robinson (Bibl. Res., iii. 365) wishes to locate it, which is altogether impossible The course of Joshua makes it clear that it lay on the road from Lake Merom to Zidon. For in order to capture Hazor, Joshua turned back ( åַéָּùָׁá , Jos_11:10) from the pursuit. It appears from our passage, and also from Jos_19:37 that it must have been situated not very far from Kedesh, but in such a direction that from it the movements of Israel toward Tabor, on the line of Naphtali and Zebulon, could not be readily observed or hindered: that is to say, to the west of Kedesh. That its position cannot be determined by the similarity of modern names alone, is shown by the experience of Robinson, who successively rejected a Hazîreh, a Tell Hazûr, and el-Hazûry (for which Ritter had decided). For a capital of such importance as Hazor here and elsewhere appears to be, an elevated situation, commanding the lowlands ( îֶìֶêְÎëְּðַòַï ), must be assumed. It must have been a fortress supported by rich and fertile fields. These conditions are met by Tibnîn, as is evident from Robinson’s extended description of it (ii. 451 ff.; iii. 57 ff.). The similarity of name is not wanting; for the Crusaders must have had some reason for calling it Toronum. William of Tyre (Hist. lib. xi. 5; in Gesta Dei Francorum, p. 798) described the place as adorned with vineyards and trees, the land fertile and adapted for cultivation. It lies midway between Tyre and Paneas, and is of immense importance for the control of the country. Robinson has justly remarked, that a fortress must have been on this spot long before the time of the Crusaders; nor does it raise any great difficulty that William of Tyre reckoned it to the tribe of Asher, on whose borders, at all events, it lay.—The Jabin, king of Hazor, of our passage, evidently cherished the design of regaining, in some favorable hour of Israelitish supineness, the territory taken from his ancestors by Joshua. With this object in view, his general-in-chief, Sisera, kept the languishing nation under discipline at another point. The name of Sisera’s residence was Harosheth Hagojim. It may perhaps be possible to fix this hitherto wholly unknown place also. The power of the present Jabin must have extended as far as that of the earlier one (i.e. to Tantûra and the region south of the Sea of Tiberias); since otherwise the battle with Barak would not have been fought at the Kishon. Moreover, Naphtali, Zebulun, and Issachar were all interested in the war against him (Jdg_5:15). This being the case, it is certainly probable that Sisera’s residence was in this southern part of Jabin’s dominions. Sisera was commander of an army dreaded chiefly for its nine hundred iron chariots. But these were of consequence only on level ground. That is the reason why, Jos_17:16 such prominence is given to the fact that just those Canaanites who lived in the plains of Beth-shean (Beisân) and Jezreel, through which latter the Kishon flowed, had iron chariots. The name itself of Harosheth Hagojim suffices to suggest its connection with iron chariots. Harosheth (Heb. Charosheth) is the place where iron was worked (charash, the smith). It is only natural to look for it in the plains just named. But the residence of Sisera is called Harosheth Hagojim, the Harosheth of the Gojim. By Gojim we must understand a race different not only from Israel, but also from the Canaanite, Aram, Edom, Moab, etc. The Targum translates Harosheth Hagojim by fortress or city of the Gojim ( ëְּøַëֵּé òַîְîַéָà ), and thus refers us to Gelil Hagojim (Isa. 8:23 [E. V. Isa_9:1]), which is translated in the same way ( ëְּøַëֵּé stands often for òִéø , city). The prophet in the passage referred to, locates this Gelil of the Gojim on this side of the Jordan, in the neighborhood of the Lake of Tiberias. It is clearly erroneous to make this Galilœa Gentium cover the whole district of Galilee; for that included Zebulun, Naphtali, and the shore of Lake Tiberias, which the prophet mentions separately. If it be proper to interpret the passage geographically, Gelil Hagojim must lie south of Lake Tiberias, where subsequently Galilee began. Joshua himself also conquered a king of the Gojim in “ âִּìְâָּì ” (Jos_12:23). From the position given to this king in the catalogue, no geographical inference can be drawn, since the enumeration is made without any regard to the situation of localities. The passage becomes clear only when âִּìְâָּì is taken as âָּìִéì , making Joshua victorious over the king of the Gojim in Gelil. Now, it cannot escape notice that among the kings conquered by Joshua, no king of Beth-shean is found, although in Jos_17:16 this place appears so important, and its territory must have been conquered, and although the cities in the plain of Jezreel are named. The conjecture, therefore, is plausible that Beth-shean is represented by the king of the Gojim. Beth-shean was the starting-point of the later Galilee (cf. Lightfoot, Opera, i. 216, etc.); it was the city of iron chariots; its population was always of a mixed character (Canaanites, Gojim, Jews, Jdg_1:27; Chulin, 6 b). From the date of the first Greek notices of it (in the Septuagint, Josephus, etc.; cf. Ritter, xv. 432 [Gage’s Transl. ii. 335]), it appears under the name Scythopolis, city of the Scythians. On the question how this name originated, we are not to enter here. Thus much is certain, that it is not unsuitable to take the term Scythians as equivalent to Gojim; especially when we compare Gen_14:1, where Tidal, king of the Gojim, is named in connection with Elam, Shinar, and Ellasar. Although our historical data are not sufficient to raise these probabilities to certainties, several considerations suggested by the narrative are of some weight. If Harosheth Hagojim is to be looked for in the vicinity of Beth-shean, the whole geography of the war becomes quite plain. Jabin and Sisera then occupy the decisive points at the extremities of the kingdom. The southern army of Sisera is the most oppressive to Israel, and its dislodgement is the main object. Barak is not to attack Hazor, for that is surrounded and supported by hostile populations, which it is impracticable as yet to drive out. Deborah’s plan is to annihilate the tyrannical power, where it has established itself in the heart of Israel. Tabor is the central point, where Naphtali and Zebulun can conveniently assemble. A straight line from Kedesh to that mount, runs through the territories of both. Sisera must fight or allow himself to be cut off. His overthrow is Israel’s freedom. His army is Jabin’s only hold on those regions. Hence, Sisera’s flight from the Kishon is northward, in order to reach Hazor. On the way, not far from either Hazor or Kedesh, his fate overtakes him.
Jdg_4:4. And Deborah a prophetic woman, àִùָּׁä ðְáéàָä . According to Num_11:25, the prophetic gift has its source in the “Spirit of Jehovah.” Its office answers to its origin: it preaches God and speaks his praises. Cause and effect testify of each other. Every one, whether man or woman, may prophecy, on whom the “Spirit of Jehovah” comes. The prophetic state is a divine ecstasy, a high poetic enthusiasm ( ἐíèïõóéÜæåéí , from èåüò ), under the influence of which the praises of God are spoken. On this account, the prophet resembled at times the Greek ìÜíôéò (from ìáßíïìáé ); compare especially Jer_29:26 ( ÷íֵí ; îùֻׁáָּò åּîִçְðַëֵּà , connected with nabi, in the same chapter, Jdg_4:8, is actually rendered ìÜíôéò by the LXX.). In itself, however, both as to derivation and meaning, naba, niba, is to be compared with ἔðåéí . The prophet utters the ἔðïò , in which the Spirit of Jehovah manifests itself; he declares the greatness and glory of God. He is a spokesman of God and for Him. Hence Aaron could be called the nabi of Moses (Exo_7:1). He was the ready organ of the spirit which resided in Moses. Doubtless, in the highest sense, Moses was himself the nabi With him, God spake mouth to mouth, not in visions and dreams and enigmas (Num_12:6-8); not, that is, as He announced himself to Aaron and Miriam. Miriam was the first prophetess who praised God in ecstatic strains of poetry, with timbrels and dances, before all the people (Exo_15:20). It has been asked (cf. my treatise Ueber Prophetinnen und Zauberinnen im Weimar, Jahrbuch für Deutsche Sprache, vol. iv.), how it comes about that prophetic women constitute a “significant feature” of the old German heathenism only, whereas Jewish and Christian views assigned the gift of prophecy to men. The contrast certainly exists; it rests in the main upon the general difference between the heathen and the Scriptural view of the universe. The subjective nature of woman is more akin to the subjective character of heathenism. So much the higher must Deborah be placed. She was not, like Miriam, the sister of such men as Moses and Aaron. The objective spirit of her God alone elevates her above her people, above heroes before and after her. Not only the ecstasy of enthusiasm, but the calm wisdom of that Spirit which informs the law, dwells in her. Of no Judge until Samuel is it expressly said that he was a “prophet.” Of none until him can it be said, that he was possessed of the popular authority needful for the office of Judge, even before the decisive deed of his life. The position of Deborah in Israel is therefore a twofold testimony. The less commonly women were called to the office she exercised, the more manifest is the weakness of those who should have been the organs of divine impulses. That she, a woman, became the centre of the people, proves the relaxation of spiritual and manly energy. But on the other hand, the undying might of divine truth, as delivered by Moses, comes brilliantly to view. History shows many instances, where in times of distress, when men despaired, women aroused and saved their nation; but in all such cases there must be an unextinguished spark of the old fire in the people themselves. Israel, formerly encouraged by the great exploit of a left-handed man, is now quickened by the glowing word of a noble woman.
The name Deborah does not occur here for the first time. It was also borne by the nurse of Rebecca, who was buried near Bethel (Gen_35:8). Many find the name peculiarly appropriate for the prophetess. Its proper meaning is, “bee”; and in Hellenic oracles also bees play an important part (cf. Paus. ix. 40, etc.). This honor they enjoyed, however, only in consequence of the erroneous derivation of the name melitta from melos, a song. In like manner, Deborah ( ãְּáֹøָä ), the bee, is not connected with dabar ( ãָּáַø ), to speak; nor does it properly mean the “march of the bees” (Gesenius); neither is it “buzzing” (Fürst); but, as melitta from meli, honey, so Deborah is to be derived from debash ( êְּáַùׁ ), which also means honey, the interchange of r and s being very common (honor, honos, etc.). Deborah is a female name akin in meaning to the German Emma,—and does not necessarily imply any reference to the prophetic office in the case of our Deborah any more than in that of Rebecca’s nurse.
A woman of a fiery spirit, àֵùֶׁú ìַôִּéãåֹú . The majority of expositors, ancient as well as modern, regard Lapidoth as the name of Deborah’s husband. Yet it was felt by many that there was something peculiar in the words. If the ordinary interpretation were the true one, it would be natural to look also for a statement of the tribe to which the husband belonged. In accordance with the style of the ancients, the designation would have been at least once repeated (at Jdg_5:1). To make it seem quite natural for Deborah always to appear without her husband, it had to be assumed that he was already dead. To avoid this, some old Jewish expositors assert that Barak was her husband,—Barak and Lappid being of kindred signification, namely, “lightning” and “flame.” But in all this no attention is paid to the uncommonness of the phenomenon presented in the person of a woman such as Deborah. What a burning spirit must hers have been, to have attained to such distinction in Israel! It was in perfect keeping with the poetical cast of the language of the age, that the people should seek to indicate the characteristic which gave her her power over them, by calling her àֵùֶׁú ìַôִּéøåֹú . If a capable woman was called àֵùֶׁú äַéִì , from äַéִì , strength (Pro_31:10),—and a contentious woman, àֵùֶׁúîִãְåָðִéí (Pro_21:19); and if in àֵùֶׁú ëְּíִéìðּú (foolish woman, Pro_9:13), we are not to regard kesiluth as a proper name, it must also be allowed that àֵùֶׁú ìַôִּéãåֹú may be rendered “woman of the torch-glow,” especially when we consider what a fire-bearing, life-kindling personage she was. It is a fact, moreover, that lappid (torch) occurs almost as often in figurative as in literal language. The salvation of Jerusalem shines “like a torch” (Isa_62:1). “Out of his mouth torches go forth” (Job_41:11 (19)). The appearance of the heroes of Israel is “like torches” (Nah_2:5 (4)). The angel who appeared to Daniel had “eyes like torches of fire” (Dan_10:6). “The word of Elias,” says Sirach (Sir_48:1), “burned like a torch.” Concerning Phinehas, the priest, the Midrash says, that “when the Holy Ghost filled him, his countenance glowed like torches” (Jalkut, Judges, § 40).
The spirit of Deborah was like a torch for Israel, kindling their languid hearts. It was the power of her prophetic breath which fell on the people. This is the secret of her influence and victory. The moral energy which was at work is traced to its source even in the grammatical form of the word which describes it— ìַëִּéãåֹú , not ìַôִéêִéí , albeit that the former, like ëּíéìåּú occurs but once.
She judged Israel. Inasmuch as in the gift of prophecy she had the Spirit of God, she was able to judge. Notwithstanding her rapt and flaming spirit, she was no fanatic. She judged the thronging people according to the principles of the law. The wisdom of this “wise woman” was the wisdom revealed by God in his law. She deals in no mysterious and awful terrors. The îִùְׁôָּí (judgment), for which Israel came to Deborah, was clear—did not consist in dark sayings, like the verses of the Pythia, though these also were called èÝìéóôåò , èÝìéôåò (statutes, îִùְׁôָּèéí ; cf. Nägelsbach, Nachhom. Theologie, p. 183). The comparison with the Sphinx, instituted by Bochart (Phaleg, p. 471), was not fortunate; not even according to the notions of the grammarian Socrates, who represented the Sphinx as a native soothsayer, who occasioned much harm because the Thebans did not understand her statutes (cf. Jaep, Die griechische Sphinx, p. 15).
Jdg_4:5. She sat under the palm-tree of Deborah. Under the palm still known to the narrator as that of Deborah (cf. “Luther’s oak,” in Thüringia). It is impossible to see why C. Bötticher (Ueber den Baumkultus der Hellenen, p. 523) should speak of “Deborah-palms.” She sat under a large palm, public and free, accessible to all; not like the German Velleda, who, according to Tacitus, sat in a tower, and to whom no one was admitted, in order to increase the veneration in which she was held. The palm was the common symbol of all Canaan; it adorned the coins of both the Phœnicians (Movers, ii. 1, 7) and the Jews. From these coins, carried far and wide by sailors—and not, as is generally assumed, from the appearance of the coast when approached from sea, which showed many other things besides palm-trees,—arose the custom of calling those who brought them Phœnicians ( öïῖíéî , the palm). The symbolism of the palm, which the ancients admired in Delos, was based on ideas which were unknown to Israel. It referred to the birth of Apollo, not to divination.
Between ha-Ramah and Beth-el, on Mount Ephraim. Beth-el lay on the border between Ephraim and Benjamin; so likewise Ataroth (Jos_16:2). Robinson discovered an Atâra in that region (Bibl. Res., i. 575). Not far from it, he came to a place, called er-Râm, lying on a high hill, which he regarded as the Ramah in Benjamin (Jdg_19:13), while Ritter (xvi. 537, 538 [Gage’s Transl. iv. 230]), identifies it with the Ramah of our passage. Both conjectures are tenable, since neither interferes with the statement that Deborah sat between Beth-el and Ramah, on Mount Ephraim,—on the border, of course, like Bethel itself (cf. áָּäָø , Jos_16:1).
Jdg_4:6-7. And she sent and called Barak out of Kedesh-naphtali. That which especially comes to view here, is the moral unity in which the tribes still continued to be bound together. Deborah, though resident in the south of Ephraim, had her eyes fixed on the tyranny which pressed especially on the tribes of the north. While of the priests at Shiloh none speak, she nevertheless cannot rest while Israel is in bondage. But she turns to the tribes most immediately concerned. Kedesh, to the northwest of Lake Huleh, has been identified in modern times, still bearing its old name. It is situated upon a rather high ridge, in a splendid region (Rob. iii. 366 ff.). There, in Naphtali, lived Barak (“lightning,” like Barcas), the man fixed on by Deborah to become the liberator of his people. The names of his father and native place are carefully given, here, and again at Jdg_5:1. The power of Deborah’s influence shows itself in the fact that Barak, though living so far north, readily answers her summons to the border of Benjamin. At the same time, Barak’s obedience to the call of the prophetess, is in itself good evidence, that he is the called deliverer of Israel. But she not only calls him, not only incites him to the conflict; she also gives him the plan of battle which he must follow.
Go, and gradually draw toward Mount Tabor, with ten thousand men of Naphtali and Zebulun. ( ìֵêְ åּîַùַׁëְúָּ áְּäַø úָּáåֹø åְìָ÷ַçְúָּ òîְּêָ ) The word îָùַׁêְ always conveys the idea of drawing, whether that which is drawn be the bow, the furrow, or the prolonged sounds of a musical instrument; tropically, it is also used of the long line of an army, advancing along the plain. Its meaning here, where the object which Barak is to draw is put in another clause, “ åְìָ÷ַúְúָּ òִîְêָ òֲùֶׂøֶú ,” is made plain by the analogous passage, Exo_12:21. There Moses says, îִùְׁëåּ åּ÷ְúåּ ìָëֶí öֹàï ìְîִùְׁôְּçֹúֵéëֶí ; and the sense is evidently that the families are to sacrifice the passover one after another ( îùֶׁëåּ ), each in its turn killing its own lamb. The same successive method is here enjoined by Deborah. Barak is to gather ten thousand men toward mount Tabor, one after another, in small squads. This interpretation of the word is strengthened by the obvious necessity of the case. The tyrant must hear nothing of the rising, until the hosts are assembled; but how can their movements be concealed, unless they move in small companies? For the same reason they are to assemble, not at Kedesh, but at a central point, readily accessible to the several tribes. Mount Tabor (Jebel Tor), southwest of the Sea of Tiberias, is the most isolated point of Galilee, rising in the form of a cone above the plain, and visible at a great distance, though its height is only 1755 (according to Schubert, 1748) Par. feet. Barak, however, is not to remain in his position on the mountain. If Sisera’s tyranny is to be broken, its forces must be defeated in the plain; for there the iron chariots of the enemy have their field of action. Hence, Deborah adds that Sisera will collect his army at the brook Kishon, in the plain of Jezreel. “And I”—she speaks in the “Spirit of Jehovah”—“will draw him unto thee, and deliver him into thine hand.”
Jdg_4:8. And Barak said. Barak has no doubt as to the truth of her words, nor does he fear the enemy; but yet he will go only if Deborah go with him, not without her. Her presence legitimatizes the undertaking as divine. It shows the tribes he summons, that he seeks no interest of his own—that it is she who summons them. He wishes to stand forth as the executor merely of the command which comes through her. The attempt to draw a parallel between Deborah and Jeanne d’Arc, though it readily suggests itself, will only teach us to estimate the more clearly the peculiar character of the Jewish prophetess. The latter does not herself draw the sword, for then she would not have needed Barak. Joan, like Deborah, spoke pregnant words of truth, as when, on being told that “God could conquer without soldiers,” she simply replied, “the soldiers will fight, and then God will give victory;” but she fought only against the enemies of her country, not the enemies of her faith and spiritual life. It was a romantic faith in the right and truth of an earthly sceptre, for which the poor maiden fell: the voice which called Deborah to victory was the voice of the Universal Sovereign. No trace of sentimentalism, like that of Dunois, can be discovered in Barak; nevertheless, he voluntarily retires behind the authority of a woman, because God animates and inspires her.
Jdg_4:9-10. She said: the expedition on which thou goest, shall not be for thine honour; for Jehovah will give Sisera into the hand of a woman. The victory will be ascribed, not to Barak, but to Deborah. It will be said, “a woman conquered Sisera.” This is the first and obvious meaning of the words; by the deed of Jael they were fulfilled in yet another sense. The honor of hewing down Sisera did not fall to Barak. Nevertheless, Barak insists on his condition. He will have the conflict sanctified by her presence. Something similar appears in Greek tradition: with reference to a battle in the Messenian war it is said (Paus. iv. 16), that “the soldiers fought bravely, because their Seers were present.”
And Deborah arose, and went with Barak to Kedesh. For the sake of the great national cause, she leaves her peaceful palm; and by her readiness to share in every danger, evidences the truth of her announcements. Kedesh, Barak’s home, is the place from which directions are to be issued to the adjacent tribes. Thither she accompanies him; and thence he sends out his call to arms. Some authority for this purpose, he must have had long before: it is now supported by the sanction of the prophetess. When it is said, that he “called Zebulun and Naphtali to Kedesh,” it is evident that only the leaders are intended. It cannot be supposed that the troops, in whole or in part, were first marched up to Kedesh, and then back again, southward, to Tabor. In Kedesh, he imparts the plan to the heads of families. Led by these, the troops collect, descending on all sides from their mountains, like the Swiss against Austria, and proceed towards Tabor—“on foot” ( áְּøַâְìָéå ), for they have neither chariots nor cavalry. Their numbers constantly augment, till they arrive on Tabor,—Barak and Deborah always at their head.
Jdg_4:11. And Heber, the Kenite, had severed himself from Kain, the sons of Hobab, the brother-in-law of Moses. We read above that the tribe of the Kenite, the father-in-law of Moses, decamped from Jericho with the tribe of Judah (Jdg_1:16), and, while the latter carried on the war of conquest, settled in Arad. From there the family of Heber has separated itself. While one part of the tribe has sought a new home for itself below, in the extreme south of Judah, the other encamps high up, in the territory of Naphtali. It is as if the touching attachment of this people to Israel still kept them located at the extremities of the Israelitish encampment, in order, as of old, to show them the way. Above, Jdg_1:16 they are called “sons of the Kenite, the father-in-law of Moses”; here, “Kain (cf. Num_24:22), the sons of Hobab, the brother-in-law of Moses.” Ancient expositions have been the occasion of unnecessary confusion as to Jethro’s name. äָúï means to contract affinity by marriage; and, just as in German Schwäher (father-in-law) and Schwager (brother-in-law) are at bottom one, so the Hebrew çåֹäֵï may stand for both father-in-law and brother-in-law. The father-in-law of Moses was Jethro; as priest, he was called Reuel ( øְòåּàֵì ). He did not accompany Israel, but after his visit to Moses, went back to his own land (Exo_18:27). His son Hobab, however (Num_10:29), had remained with Israel; and when he also would return home, Moses entreated him to abide with them, that he might be for eyes to them on the way, and promised him a share in whatever good might be in store for Israel. The proposal was accepted, and the promise was kept. In the north and south of Canaan, the Kenites had their seats. They are here designated “sons of Hobab,” because it was from him, the ancient guide of Israel, that they derived their position in the land. Heber’s tent was in the vicinity of Kedesh, near Elon Zaanannim, mentioned also at Jos_19:33, as a place on the border of Naphtali. The name may have originated from the sojourn of the Kenites; a supposition which becomes necessary, if with an eye to Isa_33:20; Isa_33:17 it be interpreted to mean the “oak of the wandering tent.”
[Bishop Hall: It is no wonder if they, who, ere four-score days after the law delivered, fell to idolatry alone; now, after four-score years since the law restored, fell to idolatry among the Canaanites. Peace could in a shorter time work looseness in any people. And if forty years after Othniel’s deliverance they relapsed, what marvel is it, that in twice forty years after Ehud they thus miscarried?—The same: Deborah had been no prophetess, if she durst have sent in her own name: her message is from Him that sent herself. “Hath not the Lord God of Israel commanded?” Barak’s answer is faithful, though conditional; and doth not so much intend a refusal to go without her, as a necessary bond of her presence with him. Who can blame him, that he would have a prophetess in his company? If the man had not been as holy as valiant, he would not have wished such society.—The same: To prescribe that to others, whieh we draw back from doing ourselves, is an argument of hollowness and falsity. Barak shall see that Deborah doth not offer him that cup whereof she dares not begin: without regard of her sex, she marches with him to Mount Tabor, and rejoices to be seen of the ten thousand of Israel.—Hengstenberg (Genuineness of the Pentateuch, ii. 101): To grant succor through a woman was calculated to raise heavenwards the thoughts of men, which are so prone to cleave to the earth. If the honor was due to God alone, they would be more disposed to show their gratitude by sincere conversion. That Barak was obliged to lean on Deborah, depended on the same law by which Gideon was chosen to be the deliverer of Israel from the Midianites, though his family was the meanest in Manasseh, and himself the youngest in his father’s house; that law by which Gideon was divinely directed to take only three hundred men from the whole assembled host; the women Deborah and Jael stand in the same category with the ox-goad of Shamgar. In all ages God is pleased to choose for his service the in considerable and the despised.—Tr.]
Footnotes:
[Jdg_4:4— àֵùֶׁú ìַôִּéãåֹú : Dr. Cassel, taking the second of these words as an appellative, renders,—ein Weibsen Feuergeist, a woman of fiery spirit, cf. his remarks below. The possibility of this rendering cannot be denied; but it is at least equally probable that the ordinary view which regards Lapidoth as a proper noun is correct. Bachmann points out that the succession of statements in this passage is exactly the same as in “Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron,” “Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum,” “Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel,” etc. These instances create a presumption that in this case too the second statement after the name will be one of family relationship, which in the absence of positive proof the mere grammatical possibility of another view does not suffice to countervail. The feminine ending of Lapidoth creates as little difficulty as it does in Naboth, and other instances of the same sort. Of Lapidoth we have no knowledge whatever. The mention here made of him does not necessarily imply that he was still living. Cf. Rth_4:10; 1Sa_27:3; etc.—Tr.]
[Jdg_4:5.— éåֹùֶׁáֶú : Bachmann also translates “sat” (sass), although he interprets “dwelt;” cf. Jdg_10:1; Jos_2:15; 2Ki_22:14. “As according to the last of these passages the prophetess Huldah had her dwelling ( éåֹùֶׁáֶúåְäִéà ) in the second district of Jerusalem, so the prophetess Deborah had her dwelling ( åְäִéà éåֹùֶׁáֶú ) under the Palm of Deborah.”—Tr.]
[Jdg_4:6.— åּîָùַׁëְúָּ áְּäַø úָּáåֹø : Dr. Cassel,—Ziehe auf den Berg Tabor, proceed to Mount Tabor. So many others. For áּ with a verb of motion, cf. Psa_24:3. But inasmuch as îùַׁêְ recurs immediately in Jdg_4:7, and is there transitive, Bachmann proposes to take it so here: go, draw sc. an army, to thyself or together, on Mount Tabor. Cf the Vulgate.—Tr.]
[Jdg_4:7.— åְàֶúÎøִëְáּåֹ : properly, “and (not, with) his chariots,” etc., although Cassel also has mit. àֵú is the sign of the accusative, not the preposition, as appears from the fact that it has the copula “and” before it.—Tr.]
[Jdg_4:10.— áְּøַâְìָéå : if the subject of åַéַּòַì be Barak, as the E. V. and Dr. Cassel take it, áְּøַâְìָéå can hardly mean anything else than “on foot,” as Dr. Cassel renders it; cf. Jdg_4:15. But the true construction—true, because regular and leaving nothing to be supplied—is that which De Wette adopts: “and there went up, áְּøַâְìָéå , ten thousand men.” In this construction, which harmonizes perfectly with the context, áְּøַâְìָéå evidently means “at his feet,” i. e. as De Wette renders, “after him.”—Tr.]
[Jdg_4:11.—Dr. Cassel’s translation adheres strictly to the order of the original: “And Heber, the Kenite, had severed himself from Kain, the sons of Hobab, the brother-in-law of Moses, and had pitched his tent near Elon-Zaanannim, by Kedesh. On the rendering “brother-in-law,” instead of “father-in-law,” cf. Keil, on Exo_2:18; Smith’s Bibl. Dict. s. v. Hobab.—Tr.]
[Bachmann identifies “Hazor with Hŭûr or Hazîreh, two hours W. of Bint Jebeil, in the heart of Northern Galiee, on an acclivity with extensive ruins and a sepulchral vault of great antiquity,” cf. Rob. iii. 62. He remarks that for Tibnîn nothing speaks except its importance from a military point of view, which of itself is not sufficient evidence. “The similarity of the mediæval name Toronum (= Hazor?) is wholly illusory.”—Tr.]
[To our author’s identification of Harosheth ha-Gojim with Beth-shean, Bachmann objects that the latter city is known by its usual name to the writer of Judges; cf. Jdg_1:27. He is “inclined to adopt the view of Thomson, The Land and the Book, Judges 29, who finds Harosheth in Harthîeh, a hill or mound at the southeastern corner of the Plain of Akka, close behind the hills that divide this plain from that of Jezreel, on the north side of the Kishon, yet so near the foot of Carmel as only to leave a passage for the river. This mound is covered with the remains of old ramparts and buildings.”—Tr.]
[From the same root with emsig, industrious, and meise, emmet, ant.—Tr.]
[That is, apparently, the energy proceeds from a woman, and therefore the word which figuratively characterizes it, has, by a sort of attraction, a feminine, rot masculine plural given it.—Tr.]
[Stanley (Jewish Church, i. 352): “On the coins of the Roman Empire, Judæa is represented as a woman seated under a palm-tree, captive and weeping. It is the contrast of that figure which will best place before us the character and call of Deborah. It is the same Judæan palm under whose shadow she sits, but not with downcast eyes, and folded hands, and extinguished hopes; with all the fire of faith and energy, eager for the battle, confident of the victory.”—Tr.]
The rendering of the Targum here is quite remarkable: “And she sat in the city, in Ataroth Deborah.”
Cf. Ritter, xv. 393 [Gage’s Transl. ii. 311; also Rob. ii. 351 ff.]
[This is the first and obvious meaning of the words, and it is very strange that Bachmann should pronounce this interpretation, from which but for Jael no one would ever have dreamed of departing, impossible.—Tr.]
In giving Jethro seven names, homiletical applications were followed. Thus, Hobab was taken as a surname of Jethro, “because he was dear to God.” (Jalkut, Judges, n. 38.)
To pitch one’s tent “in the vicinity” of a place, is expressed by òַã : so here, òַã àֵìåֹï ; so Gen_38:1, òַãÎàִéùׁ òֲãֻìָּîִé .
[Where, according to De Wette’s translation, Jerusalem is spoken of as a “Zelt das nicht wandert”—a tent that does not wander.—Tr.]
The reading äñõὸò ðëåïíåêôïýíôùí , found in some Greek versions, expounds öַòֲðַðִּéí as if it came from áָּöַò ; while the ἀíáðáõïìÝíùí of other versions giver it the sense of ùַׁàֲðָï , which is so rendered, Jer_48:11