My understanding is that the desert of Tzyn is the Arava (the desert south of the Dead Sea), and the desert of Paran is the northern Sinai/ western Negev area. According to this, the spies did not start by traveling north through the Negev, but initially they went eastwards through the Negev until they reached the desert of Tzyn. This roundabout route would accord with the furtive nature of the mission. When they reached the Arava, they turned north, as even though we do not know where Rehov or Levo Hammat are located, they must be in the northern part of the country since Bemidbar 34:8 records that Levo Hammat was along the northern border of the land of Canaan.
I found two different suggestions as to the location of Levo Hammat. The most popular suggestion is that it is located approximately 75 miles north of Damascus, while Hertz (1960, p. 624) writes that it is located by Mount Hermon, south of Damascus. With the first suggestion, the spies would have traveled approximately 550 miles, an average of 14 miles a day if they walked on Shabbat, while following Hertz, they would have traveled approximately 360 miles, an average of 9 miles a day if they walked on Shabbat. Yet, these calculations only cover the north south directions, but the spies reported that they saw the Canaanites by the Jordan River and by the coast, 13:29, which means that they also had to travel in both the eastern (Jordan River) and western (coast) parts of the country.
The beginning of 13:22 records that the spies "went up into the Negev, and they came to Hevron." How does this verse relate to the previous verse that recorded that the spies traveled from the Negev to the north of the country? Hevron is north of the Negev, but it is located in the south of the country. The spies should have reached Hevron way before they got to Rehov, at Levo Hammat, which is recorded in 13:21.
Moskovitz (1988, on 13:21) writes that first the Torah gives an overall description of the route of the spies, 13:21, and then in 13:22-24, the Torah specifies some of the specific places where they visited. The Torah only mentions two specific places, Hevron and Wadi Eshkol, and then one would have to argue that these places were mentioned since they were important for the report of the spies. Hevron was important since this was where the spies saw giants (Hizkuni on 13:22), and Wadi Eshkol was important since this was where they found the grapes that they brought back to the Jewish people, 13:27.
While this idea is reasonable, the conveying of the grapes becomes problematic. According to this understanding, Hevron was the first place the spies journeyed, and Wadi Eshkol, whose exact location is unknown, is thought to be near Hevron since this was an area of vineyards. If this is true, then the spies carried the grapes almost their entire trip from the Hevron area up north and then back south again. This would not have been a simple matter because the grapes were so large that it required two people to carry them on a pole, 13:23.
A different possibility is that the spies traveled in a concentric circle. First, as recorded in 13:21, they traveled from the encampment of the people in the western Negev east to the Arava, and then they turned due north traveling along the Jordan River. Once they reached the northern most point, Rehov at Levo Hammat, then they turned west towards the coast. When they reached the coast, they turned south traveling along the coast until they reached the northern part of the Negev. They would then have been close to the encampment of the people, but then they turned northeast to tour the hilly section of Israel, 13:17. Accordingly, as recorded in 13:22-24, they then traveled northeast through the Negev, and entered the central hilly section coming to Hevron and Wadi Eshkol. On this "second" journey, the spies would not have ventured too far north due to the need to return, and hence they would have been in Wadi Eshkol at the end of their trip. This suggested itinerary also explains how the spies could report on four different geographic areas, the Negev, the hilly section, the Jordan River and the coast, 13:29.
The middle and end of 13:22 record that Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai, the Anakites (giants) lived in Hevron and that Hevron was built seven years before Zoan of Egypt. Why is this information concerning the age of Hevron recorded in the Torah? Rashbam (on 13:22 also see Rashi) explains that the people would have recognized Zoan as an important city, and hence by stating that Hevron was older that Zoan, the Torah was showing that Hevron was an even more important city. While this is possible, is seven years such a significant amount of time to increase a city's prestige, and in general it is unclear if a city's age necessarily makes a city more important.
Maybe the note about the age of Hevron is connected to the middle of the verse that the spies saw giants in Hevron. My understanding of the term giant is a big person (Shaquille O'Neal?), but not a mythical humongous figure.
The ten bad spies referred to these "giants" as nephilim, 13:33, in order to dissuade the people from going to Israel. The only other occasion when the nephilim are referred to in the Torah is in Bereshit 6:4, which refers to some distinctive men as nephilim. The nephilim had acquired a legendary and even mythical status, that they were thought to be real giants. The ten bad spies claimed that the "giants" that they saw were from the nephilim, which heightened the people's fear of entering of the land of Israel.
Accordingly, maybe the note about the age of Hevron is to repudiate the claim of the spies concerning the "giants" of Hevron. The people knew about Zoan and they knew that the city was not that ancient, and hence by stating that Hevron was built seven years prior to Zoan, the people would know that Hevron was also not that ancient. This implies that the residents of the city were not the nephilim, ancient people. Thus, the information concerning when Hevron was founded was to inform the people that just as Zoan was a regular city, so was Hevron, and so too the inhabitants of Hevron were regular people.
Bibliography:
Hertz, J. H. (1872-1946), 1960, The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, second edition, London: Soncino Press.
Moskovitz, Yehiel Tzvi, 1988, Commentary on the book of Bemidbar, Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook.
No comments:
Post a Comment