14:8-12 records that four kings, who apparently came from Northern Syria and/ or Iraq, defeated five kings who lived around the Dead Sea. The four kings took the booty from the defeated kings, and this included Lot, Avraham's nephew. A refugee from the war escaped and told Avraham about Lot's plight, 14:13. Avraham then assembled an army of 318 men and chased the four kings until Dan, 14:14. There was a battle at Dan, and then Avraham's army chased the four kings until Hovah, which is left or north of Damascus, 14:15. At that point, Avraham freed Lot and the four kings apparently went back home, 14:16.
One question about this battle is where did it take place? Where was Dan? The usual identification of Dan is in the northern Galilee of Israel by the rivers (streams?) that feed into the Jordan River (or then the Hula Lake), as for example Rabbenu Saadiah Gaon explains Dan as the Banias, see also Megillah 6a. This would seem to tally with the idea that Avraham continued to pursue them until Hovav, which was near Damascus, and Damascus is north of the rivers. Furthermore, the tribe of Dan and hence the place Dan, is associated with the north, see Devarim 34:1. Initially, the tribe of Dan received land in the middle of Israel by the coast, but then some (all?) of the tribe moved north. With this identification, Avraham chased the four kings until Dan in the north.
The problem with this identification is that the book of Yehoshua (19:47) records that the tribe of Dan captured a city called Leshem which they renamed Dan. The book of Judges records a similar story but there it states (18:29) that the initial name of the place was Laish. How could the place be called Dan in the time of Avraham if only centuries later it was called Dan? The Torah should have recorded that Avraham chased the four kings until Leshem or Laish.
One answer is that the name Dan was based on prophetic knowledge, see Kasher (1992, Torah Shelemah 14:72,73,75), Hizkuni (on 14:14) and Hertz (1960, p. 52). This prophetic knowledge could have been imparted to Avraham that he knew the place would eventually be called Dan or to Moshe when he wrote the Torah. See also Rashi and Radak on 14:7.
A second answer is that the place was called Dan in the time of Avraham unrelated to the future tribe. With this possibility, the question is why did the book of Yehoshua and the book of Judges state that the initial name of the place was Leshem or Laish. Asher Vizer (quoted by Keel, 1997, p. 382, footnote 54b) suggests that the initially the name was Dan, then Leshem or Laish and then Dan again, but the books of Yehoshua and Judges did not mention that really the original name was Dan.
A third answer (see Luzzatto on 14:14) is that the place Dan here is different than the place Dan from the one referred to in the book of Yehoshua and Judges. The Torah Temimah (on 14:14) even suggests that the last letter of the previous word, daled, should be joined with the word Dan, and then Avraham chased the four kings to a place called Dedan.
I wonder if the place Dan in 14:14 was in the north altogether. It is generally assumed that the battle with the five kings was in the southern part of the Dead Sea, and it is approximately 240 kilometers from the southern portion of the Dead Sea until the Northern Galilee. Avraham who was chasing the four kings started from Hebron (13:18 and 14:13) which is approximately 200 kilometers from the Northern Galilee. Hebron is approximately 60 kilometers northwest from the southern portion of the Dead Sea. Thus, it probably took the refugee two days to travel to Avraham after the battle, but it could have been less as 19:16 records that Avraham walked from his house in Hebron to an overlook of Sedom. Also, most likely the soldiers of the four kings needed to rest a day or two after the battle before starting to march again. In addition, the four kings would have been burdened down by the booty that they took, since much of it had to be carried and the people they took would not have been able to march as fast as the army Avraham assembled. Finally, it seems that it did not take Avraham a long time to assemble his men, as 14:1 records that he took his servants. Thus, Avraham would have caught up to the four kings way before they reached the north of Israel.
Also, the "proof" that Dan is in the north since the battle continued to Hovav which was near Damascus is weak. If Hovav was near Damascus, then it was 60 kilometers from the Northern Galilee, and if it was north of Damascus, then it was even further, see Sarna, 1989, p. 108. Thus, if Dan was in the Northern Galilee, Avraham still had to chase the four kings for at least another two days. How different is chasing another two days, five days or ten days?
My guess is that Avraham traveled north from Hebron, since he knew the four kings had to travel north, and he would have caught up with them somewhere in the Jordan Valley. Avraham would have not have directly attacked the four kings since they were a stronger army, but began to harass then, especially at night. (Note 14:15 does not state that Avraham defeated the four kings at Dan just that they struck them.) The four kings continued their march northwards to go back home, and Avraham continued to harass them on their way. Eventually when the four kings reached Hovav, they left behind all the booty they had captured. Avraham stopped harassing them since he had accomplished his purpose in freeing Lot. With this scenario, Dan was somewhere in the Jordan Valley and had nothing at all to do with the place the tribe of Dan would capture many years later. (With this idea, maybe Devarim 34:1 is also referring to Dan in the Jordan Valley, which could seen more easily from Mount Nevo than a valley in the Northern Galilee.)
A second question about this incident is, why did the Torah record this battle? Radak (on 14:1) writes that the point of this episode is to show that a person must risk their lives to save one's relatives. Ralbag (purposes 2 and 4 of chapter 14) says that from Avram's actions we see that one should not endanger one's self but that one should act to save one relatives, even when they do not act appropriately to you, as Lot had previously picked a fight with Avram. Emerton (1971) writes that the point of the story is to portray Avram as a hero.
Cassuto (1954, vol. 2, pp. 328,329) offers a more likely answer. First, he notes the congruence between the places the four kings marched through and Devarim (1:4, 2:10-12, 2:20), that later on the Jewish people with Moshe would walk to the same places in the opposite direction. Accordingly, when Avram defeated the four kings and chased them from the southern part of Israel to Syria, this shows that Avram attained the ownership to all of the land on both sides of the Jordan River that the four kings had attained. Thus, Avram's descendants have a historical claim to the land independent of G-d's promise of the land.
One could add to Cassuto's explanation, that his idea is the fulfillment of G-d statement to Avraham right before the battle with the four kings. 13:14-17 records that G-d gave the land of Israel to Avraham, and that Avraham was to walk through the land. Thus, when Avraham chased the four kings, he fulfilled this command to walk through the land. This was apparently R. Eliezer’s and maybe R. Eleazar’s opinion, as quoted in the Talmud Baba Bathra 100a.
Yet, Avram only walked through the central and northern areas of the land of Israel in his battle with the four kings, how or when did he acquire the southern part of the land? The answer is that his treaty with Avimelekh with reference to Beer Sheva, 21:27-32, gave him ownership of the southern part of the land. Also, it is possible that Yitzhak was given the additional land of Gerar by the western coast of the land, 26:3,4,6.
Bibliography:
Cassuto, Umberto (1883-1951), 1954, Bereshit, in Encyclopedia Biblica, edited by Cassuto, Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, vol. 2, pp. 323-335.
Emerton, J. A., 1971, The riddle of Genesis XIV, Vetus Testamentum, vol. 21, pp. 403-439.
Hertz, J. H. (1872-1946), 1960, The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, second edition, London: Soncino Press.
Kasher, Menachem (1895-1983), 1992 (first volume appeared in 1927), Torah Shelemah: A talmudic-midrashic encyclopedia of the five books of Moses, Jerusalem: Beth Torah Shelemah, The Torah Shelemah Institute.
Keel, Yehuda, 1997, 2000 and 2003, Commentary on Bereshit: Da'at Mikra, Three volumes, Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook.
Sarna, Nahum (1923-2005), 1989, The JPS Torah Commentary: Genesis, Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society.
No comments:
Post a Comment