Brian Janeway<\/b><\/p>\n
[\u201cFor sheer melodrama\u2014gruesome murders, sexual exploits, superhuman feats of strength, a bizarre mutilation\u2014no tabloid can offer you more, \u201cSo reads the introduction to the Book of Judges in the Quest Study Bible. Such a juicy enticement to begin the study of Scripture! Hopefully, this study will be motivated by more noble incentives!]<\/i><\/p>\n
The Book of Judges<\/b><\/p>\n
In the book of Judges, we encounter the stories of Israel\u2019s \u201cjudges,\u201d from the root spt,<\/i> meaning \u201cto deliver\u201d or \u201cto save\u201d in this particular context. But the general meaning of the word is multifaceted and encompasses many functions obscured by the simple rendering. They include the actions of \u201cgovern,\u201d \u201cdecide,\u201d \u201crule,\u201d \u201cvindicate,\u201d and \u201cdeliver.\u201d With cognates in both Akkadian and the Mari archives, it is often used in the Old Testament in parallel with dyn<\/i>, implying a predominately legal function of the word \u201cjudgment.\u201d Whereas the root dyn<\/i> is used only 25 times, the use of spt<\/i> is attested in 180 references. (Mafico 1992:104\u201305).<\/p>\n
The Book of Judges contains a series of \u201ccycles\u201d wherein Israel experiences God\u2019s blessing, falls into spiritual complacency and idolatry, suffers at the hands of enemies, repents of its evil ways and is delivered by one of the judges. Rabbinical tradition holds that the prophet Samuel authored Judges. The book itself, however, makes no claims of authorship. It seems likely a prophetic associate of Samuel\u2019s was the actual author based upon certain chronological indicators in the text (\u201cin those days there was no king in Israel.\u201d 17:6, 18:1, 21:25) and its place in the prophetic division of the Hebrew Bible (Baker 1982:638).<\/p>\n
The Time of the Judges<\/b><\/p>\n
The period of Judges is entangled in the discussion over the date of the Exodus and Conquest. Many modern scholars want to compress the events of Judges into an intolerably short period of about 200 years. But a straightforward reading of the text (like 11:26 where Jephthah claims the Israelites had been in the land for 300 years) along with 1 Kings 6:1 (480 years from the time of Solomon) date Judges ca. 1400 BC – ca. 1050 BC (the appointment of Saul), a span of approximately 350 years.<\/p>\n
Plan of late 14th century BC (LB IIA) structures on the southeast slope of the tell at Jericho. The isolated nature of the Middle Building, as well as the date and finds made in the vicinity of the structure match very well the description of Eglon\u2019s palace in Judges 3:12\u201325.<\/b><\/p>\n
Ehud the Left-handed Judge<\/b><\/p>\n
Taken at face value, the Ehud story probably dates to about 1300 BC. A left-handed man of the tribe of Benjamin whom \u201cthe Lord raised up as a deliverer\u201d (v 15), Ehud is only mentioned two other times (1 Chr 7:10; 8:6), both in geneaologies. Thus we have a left-handed, or more precisely right hand bound (\u2018itter<\/i>), hero from the tribe whose name means \u201cson of the right hand\u201d! (Lewis 1979:33). Yet, Benjamin is noted for such warriors. Judges 20:16 speaks of \u201c700 picked troops\u201d who, with their right hands \u2018itter<\/i>, could sling a stone at a hair and not miss (see also 1 Chr 2:12).<\/p>\n
The Israelites had been oppressed by Moabite king Eglon for 18 years when Ehud arrived on the scene, empowered by God. After delivering tribute to Eglon, probably grain or produce in baskets, he returned to give the king a \u201cmessage from God\u201d (v 20). Cundall (1968:77) makes the interesting observation that Ehud used the general word for God, Elohim<\/i> rather than Yawheh,<\/i> the name of Israel\u2019s deity. Perhaps the generic term was something to which even a Moabite king could relate! In private company with Eglon, he revealed his hidden weapon and cooly dispatched the corpulent king. Ehud\u2019s escape was made good by the ignorance of the king\u2019s attendants who sat idly as he blithely exited past them. By the time they realized what had transpired, the Israelites rallied behind their \u201cdeliverer\u201d and routed the Moabites- \u201cabout 10,000 men… all robust and valiant\u201d(v. 29, NASB). After Ehud\u2019s deliverance, the land enjoyed 80 years of peace (Cundall 1968:79; see also 199\u2013200).<\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 14:1 (Winter 2001) p. 16<\/p>\n
View south across the Middle Building, possibly Eglon\u2019s palace, excavated by John Garstang in 1933.<\/b><\/p>\n
Eglon\u2019s Palace at Jericho<\/b><\/p>\n
3:23 would seem to be a rather straight-forward sentence, with misdaron,<\/i> usually rendered \u201cvestibule.\u201d The LXX renders it that way as do most commentators. Gray (1986:252) states that the locative ending indicates a feature outside the \u201ccool upper chamber\u2019 as the place from which Ehud went out. The \u201ccool upper chamber\u201d is the feminine noun aliyya.<\/i> Gray suggests this is a portico, or more likely \u201can outside stairway.\u201d<\/p>\n
Boling (1975:87) translates it \u201cby way of the porch,\u201d (lit. \u201cin the direction of the porch\u201d). In this reading, Ehud would not have exited the same way he came in but somehow went over the side.<\/p>\n
Burney (1970 :73) notes the preformative (m) commonly used to denote the place of the action described by the verb. In modern Hebrew, Assyrian and Aramaic, the root means \u201cto arrange in order or in a rank\u201d.<\/p>\n
The conventional understanding of the \u2018\u201ccool roof chamber\u201d or aliyya,<\/i> is echoed by Martin (1975:49). Eglon was understood to be within a simple construction on the building\u2019s flat roof that served as a \u201csummer palace\u201d allowing circulation of air in the hot Jordan Valley. Yet, it is highly doubtful he went to the roof to escape the withering heat of the Jordan Valley. Respite was much more likely in the lower levels of the building.<\/p>\n
Ehud\u2019s Escape<\/b><\/p>\n
The means of Ehud\u2019s escape has long befuddled scholars. How could he walk right in on an unguarded Eglon and terminate \u201cHis Royal Corpulence\u201d? Why wasn\u2019t Eglon\u2019s Moabite retinue able to foil the devious plot of this \u201cBenjamanite Bond\u201d (\u201cthat\u2019s Bond.. James Bond\u201d)? Archaeology can help illuminate these strange events in the king\u2019s palace.<\/p>\n
Halpern (1988a: 41) offered a plausible reconstruction to this passage. In the ancient Near East, left-handed soldiers had an advantage. Just as with modern left-handed boxers, ancient southpaw warriors presented a problem to conventional battle tactics, mismatching \u201cblade against shield, shield against blade.\u201d By this subterfuge, Ehud passed the guards with his cubit-length sword strapped undetected to his right side.<\/p>\n
However, this does not explain the ease of his escape. The \u2018aliyya<\/i> where Eglon was seated has been variously translated \u201ccool upper chamber,\u201d \u201cportico,\u201d \u2018\u2018outside stairway\u201d and \u201cplatform with pillars.\u201d Yet, the term is best understood as an architectural one: \u201cthe room over.\u201d According to Halpern (1988a: 45), it is always used in this sense. Most often an enclosed, upper story space (1 Kgs 17:19, 23; 2 Kgs 4:10; Jer 22:13) it never indicates more than a single room. The attendants call it a heder,<\/i> or \u201cchamber\u201d in 3:24. Following Stager, he argues this architectural phrase \u2018aliyya hammqera<\/i> (3:20) actually means \u201cthe room over the beams.\u201d A similar idea is expressed in Psalm 104:3, where Yahweh \u201clays the beams of His upper chambers in the waters\u201d (NASB) (see Halpern 1988a: 46; Stager 1985:16).<\/p>\n
In 3:20, Ehud gained an audience with the king and \u201centered unto him,\u201d apparently crossing a threshold into the proposed \u2018aliyya<\/i>, where the king was already seated.<\/p>\n
Aerial view of Jericho, looking south. The trenches and squares visible today are from Kathleen Kenyon\u2019s excavations in the 1950s and the more recent Italian-Palestinian excavation which began in 1997. The area under consideration in this article is just right of the road running along the tell\u2019s left (east) side.<\/b><\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 14:1 (Winter 2001) p. 17<\/p>\n
As Halpern (1988a: 47) noted, the bit hilani<\/i> plan is well attested in both Assyrian and contemporary Iron Age (ca. 1200\u2013500 BC) structures from Syria (Halpern 1988b: 39). While only the first floor of these structures survive, wall thickness and remnants of staircases suggest a second story.<\/p>\n
The floorplan of these buildings had several common features, focusing on two main rooms – a long, pillared portico and an inner throne room parallel to it, with the entrance through the broad side.<\/p>\n
It was common for bit halani<\/i> palaces to contain a throne room with the core elevated, as was Solomon\u2019s (1 Kgs 10:18\u201420; 2 Chr 9:17\u201419). The same was said of Solomon\u2019s Temple, where the \u201cHoly of Holies\u201d stood ten cubits above the floor (1 Kgs 6:2, 20). Inside this throne room Halpern (1988b: 50\u201451) suggested the king\u2019s \u2018aliyya<\/i> was situated. He speculated that the platform was partitioned from the audience hall by a wood screen and not, in essence, a separate room.<\/p>\n
Halpern (1988b: 55) reconstructed the events of Judges 3 as follows: Ehud gained an audience with Eglon (3:19), crossed to where the rotund ruler was seated atop his \u2018aliyya.<\/i> The same crossing over is reversed (3:23) when Ehud escapes the locked \u2018aliyya.<\/i> In 3:24, he exited past the unsuspecting guards. They sat two doors removed from the king in the \u2018aliyya.<\/i> Without this spatial separation, the guards would have suspected foul play upon seeing the closed door of the \u2018aliyya,<\/i> locked by Ehud as he departed.<\/p>\n
Covering His Feet<\/b><\/p>\n
Instead, they thought their monarch was \u201cperforming the offices of nature\u201d (Cundall 1968:78). This phrase is the well-known euphemism for defecation also attested in 1 Samuel 24:3. In the Saul story, the infinite construct is used (hasekh<\/i>) yielding \u201cto relieve.\u201d For the corpulous king Eglon the Hiphil participle is used, meaning, \u201crelieving himself\u201d to indicate an ongoing action, or so they thought! The word comes from the root (s-kh-kh<\/i>) meaning \u201cto overshadow or screen.\u201d The phrase means literally \u201cto cover one\u2019s feet,\u201d with \u201cfeet\u201d functioning as the direct object of the reflexive verb.<\/p>\n
Iron Age palaces throughout the ancient Near East were often built on a plan called bit halani<\/i> in ancient Syro-Palestine. Apparently first appearing in north Syria, the main feature of this palace plan was a portico (colonnaded porch). Based on archaeological evidence at Jericho (the Middle Building excavated by Garstang) and the typical palace plan of the period, Eglon\u2019s palace was probably built on the bit halani<\/i> plan.<\/b><\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 14:1 (Winter 2001) p. 18<\/p>\n
Plan of the ruins of Jericho. A\u2014area excavated by John Garstang where he found evidence for the destruction of Jericho by the Israelites and the \u201cMiddle Building\u201d which may be Eglan\u2019s palace. B\u2014Two 8×8 m squares excavated by Kathleen Kenyon where she found similar evidence for Israel\u2019s destruction (ca. 1400 BC), but misdated it to 1550 BC and attributed it to the Egyptians.<\/b><\/p>\n
Down and Out<\/b><\/p>\n
So how did the stealthy Ehud escape unnoticed? Did he lock himself inside the \u2018aliyya<\/i> or outside it? Halpern (1988a: 57) believes on lexical grounds that Ehud locked himself inside<\/b>. His argument is strengthened by the fact that in verse 23 the verb \u201cto close\u201d from the root (s-gh-r<\/i>) is used in association with the preposition b \u2018dw.<\/i> In every case of the verb \u201cto close\u201d being used with \u201cupon\u201d or \u201cbehind,\u201d the object of the preposition is shut inside the structure in question.<\/p>\n
Commentators have long taken the object of the preposition to be Eglon, but Ehud is the last subject mentioned. He closed the doors of the \u2018aliyya<\/i> from the inside (Halpern 1988a: 57).<\/p>\n
So what of the mistdaron?<\/i> A clue to this feature is given in 3:25. After Ehud\u2019s departure, the courtiers checked on Eglon only to find the doors of the \u2018aliyya<\/i> locked. Assuring themselves the king was only \u201ccovering his feet,\u201d after an unknown period of time, they felt compelled to do something. Burney\u2019s (1970:74) rendering of bosh<\/i> is best, indicating that the attendants waited not \u201cuntil they were utterly at a loss\u201d (RSV), but rather \u201cas long as shame demanded\u201d (\u201cto the point of embarrassment.\u201d NIV).<\/p>\n
The argument is made that misdaron<\/i> should not be linked to the root (sdr<\/i>) to mean \u201cportico, row of pillars\u201d but rather sadira.<\/i> The root means \u201cto be blinded, puzzled\u201d in Hebrew, Targumic, and Arabic. The usage reminds one of the phrase \u201cto cover one\u2019s feet.\u201d The term aptly applies to the area \u201cunder the beams\u201d and means something on the order of \u201cthe hidden place.\u201d The word is mistarim;<\/i> meaning \u201cthe hidden space\u201d beneath the temple floor. It appears that the \u2018aliyya<\/i> contained a toilet as inferred from the courtiers reaction to the locked doors. \u201cWhat the king deposited from above can only have fallen through the floor.\u201d The king\u2019s \u201cthrone\u201d was in fact a commode!<\/p>\n
Indoor toilets are well attested in bit hilani<\/i> palaces. The \u201chidden space\u201d underneath would have been accessed by orderlies through the audience hall. In the absence of any other means of egress from that room, the misdaron<\/i> is the most probable avenue of Ehud\u2019s escape (Halpern 1988a: 58) Halpern (1988a: 40) muses,<\/p>\n
The terms having to do with excrement have caused difficulties; crowded into the space of a few verses is the highest concentration of rare and unique vocabulary in the literature of ancient Israel.<\/p>\n
The continuing theme of scatology is prominent in Jull\u2019s (1998:65) treatment of the term mkerah,<\/i> translated as \u201cthe cool roof chamber\u201d (v 24). It was the doors to this room that the courtiers found locked after Ehud\u2019s departure. Traditionally derived from the root (krr<\/i>), \u201cto cool,\u201d the upper story was not a logical place to escape the blistering heat of Jericho, as noted previously.<\/p>\n
Following Stager and Halpern\u2019s derivation from the root (krh<\/i>). Jull concurs with the translation implying wooden beams. But he takes issue with the rendering \u201croom over the beams.\u201d He thinks it more likely that rooms were named after their function rather than their mode of construction. The same tendency applies in English (bedroom, bathroom, dining room. etc.). He contends that the term mkerah<\/i> actually means \u201ctoilet chamber\u201d and its equivalent in verse 19 is \u201croyal toilet\u201d (Jull 1998:65).<\/p>\n
Jull (1998:67\u201468) cites Deuteronomy 23:10\u201443. where k reh-lay lah<\/i> has been translated too narrowly. Rather than merely \u201cnocturnal emission,\u201d it should encompass other \u201cnocturnal accidents\u201d of bodily fluids. The Mishnah offers a more precise term for \u201cnocturnal emission\u201d- keri.<\/i> He relates the root (krh<\/i>), with at least one derivative referring to toilet activity and another meaning \u201cto meet, happen, or befall.\u201d This is done euphemistically. Just as \u201ccovering one\u2019s feet\u201d masked the private nature of the activity in the Israelite mind, so did the term mkerah<\/i>.<\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 14:1 (Winter 2001) p. 19<\/p>\n
Toilets were very uncommon in the ancient Near East during the Old Testament period. Two stone toilet seats have been found in excavation at the City of David. This one was found in Area G and sat in a small room above a cesspit. The house in which it was found was destroyed in 586 BC. The toilet seat over the cesspit appears to be similar to the misdaron<\/i> in Eglon\u2019s palace.<\/b><\/p>\n
Additional examples exist in the Old Testament. Siah.<\/i> \u201cto dig a hole,\u201d has also been understood euphemistically for defecating. Hence, Elijah\u2019s taunts of the prophets of Baal has God\u2019s prophet indicating that Baal is perhaps too busy relieving himself to hear the cries of his priests (1 Kgs 18:27; Jull 1998:67\u201368)!<\/p>\n
Returning to Judges 3:12\u201330, the mkerah<\/i> is now to be seen as \u201cthe place of happening,\u201d euphemistic for a place of defecation and urination- a toilet. Contra Halpern, Jull considers \u2018aliyya ham kerah<\/i> not to include the entire throne room but merely the private \u201croyal toilet.\u201d This better explains the sense of privacy implied by Ehud\u2019s \u201csecret word\u201d to be given to \u201cHis Corpulency.\u201d Two Iron II \u201ctoilets\u201d have been excavated in the City of David (Halpern 1988b: 41). Both were situated within closed chambers, fitting the proposed understanding of our text and reflecting the Biblical attitude of privacy toward toilet activity (Jull 1998:70).<\/p>\n
What can we now say regarding Ehud\u2019s escape in light of this scatological exegesis? Ehud interrupted Eglon busy on his \u201cthrone.\u201d Aghast at this shocking lack of decorum on the part of the upstart Benjaminite, King Eglon arose from his \u201cperformance of the offices of nature\u201d only to be met with a two-edged sword. This stealthy Semite then escaped the hadar ham kerah<\/i> the only way he knew, through the misdaron,<\/i> that is down the cesspit.<\/p>\n
Bibliography<\/b><\/p>\n
Baker, J.<\/b><\/p>\n
1982 Judges, Book of. Pp. 637\u2013640 in New Bible Dictionary.<\/i> Leicester: InterVarsity.<\/p>\n
Boling, R.<\/b><\/p>\n
1992 Judges, Book of. Pp. 1107\u201317 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary,<\/i> vol. 3, ed. D.N. Freedman. New York: Doubleday.<\/p>\n
1975 Judges.<\/i> The Anchor Bible. Garden City, New York: Doubleday.<\/p>\n
Burney, C.<\/b><\/p>\n
1970 The Book of Judges.<\/i> New York: Kate.<\/p>\n
Cundell, A.<\/b><\/p>\n
1968 Judges: An Introduction and Commentary<\/i>. Leicester: Inter-Varsity.<\/p>\n
Grey, J.<\/b><\/p>\n
1986 Joshua, Judges, and Ruth.<\/i> Grand Rapids: Eerdmens.<\/p>\n
Halpern, B.<\/b><\/p>\n
1998a The First Historians. The Hebrew Bible and History<\/i>. San Francisco: Harper and Row.<\/p>\n
1998b The Assassination of Eglon. Bible Review<\/i> 4:6: 33\u201341, 44.<\/p>\n
Jull, T.<\/b><\/p>\n
1998 Mqrh<\/i> In Judges 3: A Scatological Reading. Journal of the Society of Testament<\/i> 81 :63\u201375.<\/p>\n
Lewis, A.<\/b><\/p>\n
1979 Judges-Ruth.<\/i> Chicago: Moody.<\/p>\n
Mafico, T.<\/b><\/p>\n
1992 Judge, Judging. Pp. 1104\u201306 in The Anchor Bible Dictionary,<\/i> vol. 3, ed. D.N. Freedman. New York: Doubleday.<\/p>\n
Martin, J.<\/b><\/p>\n
1975 The Book of Judges.<\/i> London: Cambridge University Press.<\/p>\n
Stager, L.<\/b><\/p>\n
1985 The Archaeology of the Family in Ancient Israel. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research<\/i> 260:1\u201347.<\/p>\n
BSpade<\/i> 14:1 (Winter 2001) p. 21<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Brian Janeway [\u201cFor sheer melodrama\u2014gruesome murders, sexual exploits, superhuman feats of strength, a bizarre mutilation\u2014no tabloid can offer you more, \u201cSo reads the introduction to the Book of Judges in the Quest Study Bible. Such a juicy enticement to begin the study of Scripture! Hopefully, this study will be motivated by more noble incentives!] The … Continue reading “EHUD\u2019S
\nESCAPE”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15307","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-sermons"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15307","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15307"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15307\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15307"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15307"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/sermons\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15307"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}