Epithets from the living world in the epigrams on the tribes
In the odes to the
tribes in the Bible, animal imagery plays a central part in that the name of
the tribe is accompanied by an epithet from the fauna or from the flora. This
symbolizes the qualities or the state of that tribe. The assumption that the
qualities or collective behavior of that tribe inhere in the eponymous name is
linked to the presupposition that these qualities are innate in the members of
the tribe, who are the progeny of one forefather. In some of them the epithets
serve as a grip for irony regarding the behavior of the tribe, a sort of personification
of it, which in conditions of crisis and war also become satire.
a. Issachar.
In Jacob’s blessing, Issachar as the tribal name is depicted in the following epigram:
Issachar is a strong
ass, crouching between the sheepfolds;
he saw that a resting place was good and that the land was pleasant;
so he bowed his shoulder to bear, and became a slave at forced labor
(Gen. 49:14)
This characterization
of Issachar is obviously not complimentary. חמור נרם namely, an ass with a powerful body, which “crouches between the משפתים which are apparently
the saddlebags placed on an ass’s back (Kimḥi in his commentary to this verse),
is not a flattering image in the personification of the tribe, and it contains
a trace of ridicule even though the name Hamor in itself has no pejorative
connotation (The name ḥamor [חמור] in itself does not
represent a negative meaning, cf. Gen 34:2; like camel [גמל] it is a very common
name among the Arabs). The satirical element is in the antithesis between
Issachar’s intention of living leisurely and pleasantly (“he saw that a resting
place was good and that the land was pleasant”) and the actual outcome: “So he
bowed his shoulder to bear and became s slave at forced labor.” Issachar acquired
his ease at the cost of the burden he placed on his shoulder, and therefore
merits the epithet “a strong ass.” The critical political message is clear
also: Issachar became enslaved to the Canaanites to return for “rest” (מנוחה), but in that way
the tribe forfeited its patrimony (נחלה). This satirical “blessing,” or epigram, reflects censure
of Issachar’s political condition in complete contrast to what is described in
the Song of Deborah. Here the tribe wins a blessing for rallying to the call
and for its special contribution to the war against the Canaanites: “The princes
of Issachar came with Deborah, and Issachar was faithful to Barak; into the
valley they rushed forth at his heels” (Jud 5:15)
b. Dan. In the
blessing of Moses it is said of Dan: “. . . [he] is a lion’s whelp that leaps forth
from Bashan” (Deut 33:22). In Garsiel’s view (Garsiel, Midrashic Names in
the Bible [ramat Gan,, 1987], 48 [Hebrew]) this image is based on Dan’s
inheritance in Laish (ליש) being a synonym for אריה (lion) (Jud 18:7, 14, 27, 29). Since the tribe of Dan proved a
disappointment in that it did not take up arms against the Canaanites, Deborah
taunts Dan through the punning use of the image of a loin’s whelp (גור): “Why did he abide
with the ships?” (יגור) (Jud 5:17). The
verb HEB in the Bible has two meanings, “live” and “fear,” and if the Song of
Deborah intended the latter in its barb, then there is here more than a trace of
derision and irony. These belong with the other satirical portrayals in the
poem, such as the sketch aimed against Reuben, who remains “among the
sheepfolds to hear the piping for the flocks,” while his brother-tribes are
fighting the Canaanite enslaver (5:16-17); and this sketch portraying Sisera’s
mother awaiting her victorious son’s return from the warm (5:28-31), which
Kaufman has rightly called a “poem of ridicule and malicious joy” (Y. Kaufmann,
The Book of Judges [Jerusalem 1962] 145 [Hebrew]).
If in these poems
disguised satirical use is made of animal epithets applied to the tribes for
the purpose of abuse or ridicule in connection with the set of relationships
among the tribes of Israel, it may be concluded that already an early stage in
the history of Israel, possibly prior to the establishment of the kingdom,
satire constituted a basic feature in popular composition, and one of the
characteristics of the genre known as the “oracles about the tribes” (J. Bewer,
The Literature of the Old Testament [New York, 1933], 11ff.; R.
Pfeiffer, Introduction to the Old Testament [New York, 1948], 275ff).
Even those who prefer to regard these examples as irony alone—because they
refer to fraternal tribes—and not as satire (glee at the downfall of an enemy),
must admit that we have to do here with political irony. (Ze'ev Weisman, Political
Satire in the Bible [The Society of Biblical Literature Semeia Studies 32;
Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1998], 11-13)
