But when three days had passed after they made this pact with
them, they learned that they were neighbors, living among them. So the
Israelites set out, and on the third day they came to their towns; these towns
were Gibeon, Chephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim. But the Israelites did not
attack them, since the chieftains of the community had sworn to them by the
LORD, the God of Israel. The whole community muttered against the chieftains,
but all the chieftains answered the whole community, "We swore to them by
the LORD, the God of Israel; therefore we cannot touch them. This is what we
will do to them: We will spare their lives, so that there may be no wrath
against us because of the oath that we swore to them." And the chieftains
declared concerning them, "They shall live!" And they became hewers
of wood and drawers of water for the whole community, as the chieftains had
decreed concerning them. Joshua summoned them and spoke to them thus: "Why
did you deceive us and tell us you lived very far from us, when in fact you
live among us? Therefore, be accursed! Never shall your descendants cease to be
slaves, hewers of wood and drawers of water for the House of my God." But
they replied to Joshua, "You see, your servants had heard that the LORD
your God had promised His servant Moses to give you the whole land and to wipe
out all the inhabitants of the country on your account; so we were in great
fear for our lives on your account. That is why we did this thing. And now we
are at your mercy; do with us what you consider right and proper." And he
did so; he saved them from being killed by the Israelites. That day Joshua made
them hewers of wood and drawers of water -- as they still are -- for the
community and for the altar of the LORD, in the place that He would choose.
(Josh 9:16-27 | 1985 JPS Tanakh)
Commenting
on Josh 9:16-27 when the Joshua and the Israelites realised that they were deceived
by the Gibeonites, Marten H. Woudstra wrote the following commentary in the
NICOT volume on Joshua:
16 Having called attention to the ill-advised
rashness with which the treaty had been entered, the narrator now points to the
evil consequences resulting from this carelessness. The chief consequence will
be the presence of a Canaanite enclave in Israel’s midst, which Deut. 7 had
expressly forbidden. Three days after the conclusion of the treaty the truth
comes to light: The Gibeonites are neighbors.31 It is probably best
to take the three-day interval to consist of the day the Gibeonites left,
followed by a day of preparations for the breaking of camp (v. 17) plus a day’s
journey to Gibeon. The distance between Gilgal and Gibeon was only 19 miles.
17–21 For the first time in the narrative the
reader is informed of the fact that Gibeon was part of a larger group of cities
to which belonged Chephirah, Beeroth,34 and Kiriath-jearim.
18 Verse 18 reports, by anticipating the final
outcome of this incident, that the
Israelites did not kill them. The verse must be understood as introductory
to all that transpires subsequently. The sparing of the Gibeonites’ lives is
attributed to the sanctity of the oath taken (v. 15), a sanctity which was
apparently felt even though the oath had been based on the false presentation
of facts by one of the parties to the treaty. This oath had been sworn by the Lord the God of Israel (see 7:13,
19–20; 8:30) and therefore could not be broken.
The reaction of
the congregation is one of murmuring. Apparently the people felt that violence
was being done to the rules laid down in Deut. 7. Joshua’s role at this point
is not immediately apparent. It is the princes
of the congregation, who had sworn to the treaty (v. 15) and who seem to
bear the brunt of the people’s complaint, who now reply.
When compared to
v. 18a, v. 19 makes clear the nature of the Hebrew narrative at this point.
That which the preceding verse had stated in summary form is now elaborated.
The princes emphatically assume responsibility for the oath taken. (The Hebrew
uses the independent personal pronoun: “we ourselves have sworn.”) Note also
the repetition of the phrase the Lord,
the God of Israel (see v. 18). The princes see no reason to violate this
oath, to which God has been witness, by killing the Gibeonites.
The alternative
to “touching” the Gibeonites is to let them live (v. 20). One might paraphrase
v. 20a as follows: “We must do something of the following to them, which will
result in letting them live.” The princes’ true reason for maintaining the oath
is to avoid the wrath of God which
otherwise would strike them. For the concept of wrath (Heb. qeṣep̱) see 22:20; Num. 1:53; 18:5; 2 K.
3:27. The wrath of God in the Bible is always morally conditioned and
represents a holy reaction on God’s part toward a human infraction upon his
holiness.
The verdict of
the princes is to let the Gibeonites live, in keeping with the oath recorded in
v. 15. Immediately, anticipating what is yet to be reported in vv. 22–23, the
narrator reports that the Gibeonites became hewers of wood and drawers of water
(v. 21). Further details of these functions, as well as the addition/or the whole congregation, are supplied
later (see v. 27, which makes this more specific). The final words of v. 21 (as the princes had spoken of them) presuppose that this decision was
not communicated directly to the Gibeonites by the princes but that this was
left for Joshua to do.
22–27 Joshua now summons the Gibeonites (probably
the same people who had originally come to him for a treaty) and openly rebukes
them for their deceitful actions. This treachery deserves an appropriate
penalty. After the summary of the misdeed follows, in typical fashion (therefore you are cursed (v. 23), Heb. we ‘attâ arûrîm ’attem),
the pronouncement of the verdict. In this curse formula the one cursed occupies
a position of subordination to the one cursing. Such a person is thus expelled
from a communal situation which previously had guaranteed security, justice,
and happiness. While the Gibeonites’ lives are spared, they are reduced to the
position of perennial serfhood instead of remaining allies. Servants should be taken in the most
pejorative sense here. As woodcutters and
water carriers the Gibeonites will perform only menial services (see Deut.
29:11).
Apparently the
story serves more than one purpose. In v. 14b the author makes clear that
Joshua and the Israelites were at fault in not consulting God’s counsel. By
this omission they unquestionably endangered the sanctity of Israel, for they
allowed a segment of Canaan’s population to live. However, another side to this
can be shown. The Gibeonites, through their deceit, have brought about this
situation. The oath sworn to them cannot be undone, but the anomaly which has
resulted must be clearly marked as another indelible reminder (for other
“monuments” in the Joshua stories, cf. 4:9, 20; 6:26; 7:26; 8:28–29) of what
has happened. Thus the need for complete separateness between Israel and its
idolatrous neighbors would be felt and called to mind in the very treatment
that the Gibeonites received. Those of the Canaanite population that were
spared from the ḥerem (see 6:17)
would nevertheless live as accursed ones among Israel. This curse also recalls
Gen. 9:25, where Canaan was reduced to perpetual servitude to his brethren.
What had been
said in general terms in v. 21 (to the
whole congregation) is now repeated more specifically. The service rendered
will be with respect to the house of my God (v. 23). In v. 27 the elements
of communal and cultic service are combined, and the altar is mentioned instead
of the house. The sacrifices and the ritual washings at the sanctuary required
a great deal of wood and water. To supply these, the Gibeonites would henceforth be used.
In their reply,
the Gibeonites speak, in a way similar to earlier sentiments reported in the
book (see 2:9; 5:1), of the fear the Canaanites have felt at the coming of the
Israelites. They show an acquaintance with the Lord’s promise to Moses (see
Deut. 7:1–5; 20:16–17) that he would give the land to Israel and destroy its
inhabitants. Led by fear, they resorted to the ruse which has now caused them
to be cursed. Without any further defense they surrender fully to Joshua and
give him a free hand. The narrative hereby gives a third instance of Canaan’s
submission to Israel, in addition to Jericho and Ai, both of which had been
subjected involuntarily. Gibeon, an important city (see 10:2), submits
voluntarily. This emphasis agrees with what had been stated in 1:5, and
confirms the triumphant note which characterizes the book of Joshua throughout.
Joshua carries
out the word spoken earlier (v. 23). By making the Gibeonites temple servants
for the rest of their existence as a people, he delivers them from the hand of
the Israelites. The murmuring of the latter (see v. 18) had been with the
intent of putting the Gibeonites to death in accord with Deut. 7. Therefore,
the emphasis of the story is a negative one. The Gibeonites are not put to
death. That this also may have resulted in a later inclusion of the Gibeonites
in the circle of the covenant is not spelled out, although the possibility for
such inclusion has now been created. That, however, does not appear to be the
point of the story.
The story
concludes with a final statement that the Gibeonites were indeed assigned the
task of woodcutters and water carriers.
Their task appears to have been twofold, non-cultic (for the congregation) and cultic (and for the altar). For the customary phrase that this condition
continued to this day, see 4:9; 5:9;
7:26; 8:29. The author wishes to explain that the well-known custom of using
Gibeonites for these menial services dates back to this time. Their functioning
in that capacity, moreover, may serve as yet another “monument” which will help
Israel to remember what God had commanded concerning its relationship to the
people of Canaan.
In order to
define the locale of the Gibeonites’ service even more precisely, the author
concludes by adding the customary phase in
the place which he would choose (lit. “for the place which the Lord will
choose”; see Deut. 12:5, 11, 14, 18, 21, 26; 14:23, etc.). This phrase shows
the anti-Canaanite thrust of Israel’s cultic legislation. Exod. 20:24 permits
the building of altars where God grants a special theophany. In Moses’ days the
theophany came to be associated with the presence of the cloud over the
tabernacle. However, the phrase does not as such forbid the building of altars
other than at the location of the central sanctuary. In the days of Joshua and
the Judges it came to be used for all those places where the tabernacle would
be stationed. This lasted till the erection of Jerusalem’s temple (1 K. 8:16,
44, 48; 11:13, 32, 36). Hence it would include Shiloh (18:1) and Gibeon (1 Ch.
16:39; 21:29; 2 Ch. 1:5).
The use of this
phrase at the conclusion of the Gibeon narrative shows the writer’s concern
with the legitimate worship of God. The Gibeonites, who themselves were a
living embodiment of Israel’s difference from the population of Canaan, were to
serve only at such cultic centers as were clearly Israelite and hence
non-Canaanite. (Marten H. Woudstra, The Book of Joshua (The New International Commentary on the Old
Testament; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans,1981], 161–166)
