John Kitto Morning Bible Devotions: June 23

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

John Kitto Morning Bible Devotions: June 23

Today is: Saturday, April 20th, 2024 (Show Today's Devotion)

Select a Day for a Devotion in the Month of June: (Show All Months)

The Foxes

Jdg_15:1-7

Samson did not see his wife on his return to Timnath from Askelon, but went straight home to Zorah, when he had paid his forfeit. This is usually attributed simply to his resentment. But pondering lately, with deep admiration, upon the masterly picture which the chief of poets has drawn of the self-consciousness of impulsive ferocity in Achilles, which renders him solicitous to prevent Priam from saying or doing anything to provoke his terrible wrath, and cast him loose from his little self-control, it struck us that Samson feared to see his wife for the same reason—lest he should be tempted by her presence, while the sense of his great wrong was still warm within him, to commit some outrage upon her if he trusted himself into her presence. The very singular vengeance he took upon the Philistines when he found, after a while, that his wife had been, in his absence, given away in marriage, to the very man who had acted as his “friend” at the wedding-feast, has engaged much attention. The fields were white for harvest, and Samson determined to set this harvest on fire. As his aggressive movements upon the Philistines seem to have been commissioned even before his birth, we cannot say anything against this. But any other man who did this would deserve to be hanged. Bread is in our eyes, as in that of the Orientals, so precious a gift of God—the staff of man’s life—that it looks like both a religious and social sacrilege, deliberately to waste and destroy it. We must confess that we never read this fact without horror—too forgetful, perhaps, of the commission under which the Hero acted, to do to the Philistines all the harm in his power.

He caught, probably by the help of others, no fewer than three hundred foxes—animals which, to this day, abound in the same region. These, at the time he had chosen, he tied tail to tail, fixing a slow firebrand, likely to be kindled into flame by the air in rapid motion, between each pair of tails. Being then let loose, the alarmed animals naturally sought shelter among the standing corn, and soon set it in a blaze in every direction.

Some difficulties have been started with regard to this account. As to the number of foxes collected, it is admitted that in this there was no insuperable difficulty. But it is asked, why foxes at all? could it not have been done better without any foxes? We answer: the tendency of foxes to run to cover when in trouble, rendered them peculiarly suited to this service. Dogs, for instance, would, in the like case, scour the open roads, and not run to shelter among corn. Still, it is asked, why should the foxes be tied tail to tail? They would surely then attempt to run in opposite directions, and so not run at all. The answer is that the bushy tail of the fox rendered it well qualified for this service. Any brand tied to the tail of one only, would drag on the ground and be extinguished, whereas between two it would be sustained at tension by their mutual exertions. Besides, a single fox, with a brand at its tail, would, in its alarm, have run to its hole, which was rendered impossible by two being attached together, not only because they would have different retreats; but because the same hole could not be entered by both. As to their pulling in opposite directions, we wish the experiment were tried. In this and in many other matters, people write large dissertations to prove or disprove points which might be determined in five minutes by a simple experiment. We certainly never saw two foxes fastened tail to tail, but we happened lately to see two dogs somewhat similarly attached, and in the recollection that Samson’s foxes would shortly come under our consideration, we paused to see how they would act. They certainly did pull in opposite directions, and wasted some minutes in rather awkward movements. But finding the futility of their efforts, they inclined their heads to each other, and after a hasty consultation, turned round so as to bring their bodies parallel to each other, and then ran off with considerable speed. Now foxes have not the reputation of being duller than dogs; we have no doubt that they would, and that Samson’s foxes did, hit upon the same device, in the execution of which the length of their tails would give them much advantage, while the same length of tail, by enabling them to run more apart, would render their operation with the brands the more destructive. Still, it must be supposed that, even thus; they would so thwart each other in running as, by occasional pauses, to give the fullest effect to the intentions of the destroyer. It will appear, therefore, upon the whole, that Samson did not adopt a senseless or ill-considered means of effecting the object he had in view.

To estimate the full effect of the destruction thus produced, the reader must recollect that the cultivated lands are not separated by hedgerows into fields as with us, but are laid out in one vast expanse, the different properties in which are distinguished by certain landmarks known to the owners, but not usually obvious to a stranger. Thus, as the time of harvest approaches, the standing corn is often seen to extend as far as the eye can reach, in one vast unbroken spread of waving corn. Hence the flames, once kindled, would spread without check till all the corn of the locality was consumed; and we are further to remember that there were three hundred foxes, forming a hundred and fifty pairs, let off, doubtless, in different parts. The operation seems, however, to have been confined to the neighborhood of Timnath, the whole harvest of which, for the year, was destroyed. The flames would cease when they reached the limits of local culture, for at the time of harvest, the herbage, in Palestine, is not in that parched state which would enable it to transmit the fire to distant fields; and we should suppose that the brands, with which the foxes were furnished, would die out before they could carry them any considerable distance.

The Philistines were at no loss to discover that this was the work of an incendiary. Indeed, the mode in which it was effected may very probably have been rendered obvious to them, by some of the foxes having been found, nearly disabled or dead, with their tails scorched, and the remains of the brand between them. Their inquiries would disclose the occasion of this mischief; and on learning that it had been produced by Samson’s indignation at the treatment he had received from his wife, her father, and his own “friend,” the popular feeling found vent in setting their house on fire and burning them to death therein. Thus the miserable woman found, in the end, that very death, the mere threat of which, by the bridesmen, had caused her to sin so deeply against the faith she owed her husband. We see also that the Timnites themselves were made to suffer by the very agency which they had invoked for the purpose of drawing Samson’s secret from his wife.

The hero does not seem to have considered himself bound by this to abstain from farther aggressions upon the Philistines; for he probably thought, as we do, that this was not so much intended as an act of justice to himself, as an outbreak of popular fury, of which he would himself have been the object had he been within reach. He soon after, therefore, found an opportunity of assailing a large body of Philistines. The occasion is not stated; but his assault was perhaps provoked by an attempt to seize his person, which was by this time well known to the Philistines. We are told, that on this occasion “he smote them hip and thigh with a great slaughter.” This phrase of hip and thigh, seems to have been one of those proverbial expressions which exist in every language, and the precise signification of which eludes detection when it has passed out of living use. Many such expressions, now obsolete, engage incessant inquiry in our periodicals as to their real import; and many still exist in popular use, which will be inscrutable should the English ever become a dead language. Lexicons and grammars avail little for their solution. The phrase is literally “leg upon thigh.” One learned interpreter Note: Gesenius in his Thesaurus. makes this to mean, that he cut them in pieces in such sort, that their limbs, their legs and thighs, were scattered and heaped promiscuously together. This is too literal, and wants point. If that were the meaning, “leg upon arm” would have been more significant; and in fights of this sort, arms are more frequently lopped off than legs, and would therefore have been more obvious to notice in a popular phrase. Others take it to be a phrase equivalent to “horse and foot;” seeing that the riders sit on their hips, and the latter are on their legs. But it is forgotten, that men do not appear to have yet in this country rode on horseback, and even in fight they rode in chariots; and besides, that in fight men did not sit in chariots, but stood in them. One further explanation which we may adduce, is the quaint one of Christopher Ness—“Thereupon he falls pell-mell (as we may say) upon them, and smote them hip and thigh, a proverbial expression, denoting that he laid upon them with his heavy hands and lusty legs, cuffing and kicking them, so that he not only knocked to the ground all that felt his fatal blows and spurns, but also he lamed them by putting their hips and thighs out of joint, so rendering them incapable of any military employ against Israel, which peradventure was the only design of Samson in this present expedition: and although we read with a great slaughter, yet the Hebrew may be read with a great stroke, and possibly his blows were mortal unto some—his mauling them with his hands and punching them with his feet (for he had no weapon in his hand), might give passport (as we say) to a few, yet at this time he aimed only to maim and lame them, so as to render them useless for war.” Note: History and Mystery, ii. 148.