“And the children of Israel again did evil
in the sight of the Lord, when Ehud was dead. And the Lord sold them into the
hand of Jabin king of Canaan, that reigned in Hazor; the captain of whose host
was Sisera, which dwelt in Harosheth of the Gentiles” (Jud.
4:1,2).
Canaanite oppression
This familiar apostasy of Israel soon brought
upon itself due retribution, appropriately enough, from an enemy who had been
defeated earlier. Joshua 11 recounts the destruction at the waters of Merom of a
Canaanitish confederacy headed by a Jabin, king of Hazor. Modernists speculate
that this narrative in Judges is a more detailed account of the same victory,
but apart from the mention of Jabin there is no similarity at
all.
One generation saw the power of Germany twice
rise from the ashes within a few years. So there is no need to marvel that the
city destroyed by Joshua (11:11) should become strong enough once again within
two or three generations to turn the tables on these Israelitish invaders.
Doubtless this oppression by Jabin and Sisera had a strong element of revenge
about it.
The coincidence of names presents little
difficulty. Jabin means “The Intelligent”, and may be taken to be a
dynastic title comparable with Pharaoh, Abimelech, Hiram, and
Benhadad.
Again, it has seemed incredible to some that
Jabin should be king of the whole of Canaan, but evidently (as in Joshua 11) he
was the leader of a confederacy of Canaanitish tribes. This is suggested in
Deborah’s Song: “The kings came and fought, then fought the kings of
Canaan in Taanach.”
Sisera — the name is said to be Hittite in
form — was evidently a leading administrative official in this oppression,
comparable to Sennacherib’s Rabshakeh in later days.
This oppression was of cruel intensity, backed by
considerable military force, for Sisera “had 900 chariots of iron”.
The oppression seems to have taken two forms. Firstly, the organisation of slave
labour on a large scale in “Harosheth of the Gentiles” — the
name means ‘workmanship’ (s.w. Exod. 31:5), and the place is
situated in the middle of what was a great timber district. Apparently, too,
press gangs operated, for “in the days of Jael, the highways were
unoccupied, and the travellers walked through byways.”
Deliverance by women —
why?
But more serious still are the indications that
the brunt of this oppression fell upon the women. Only here in all the Old
Testament is deliverance wrought by the hand of women — Deborah, “a
mother in Israel” (5:7); and Jael, in her own tent. Other details are
significant: “Blessed of women shall the wife of Heber the Kenite be,
blessed shall she be by women in the tent” (5:24RVm); and the words of
Sisera’s mother as she speculates on the reason for the long delay in the
return of her son from the battle: “Have they not sped? have they not
divided the prey? to every man a damsel or two” (5:30). Most
significantly, the word “damsel” here is literally
“womb”!
The resolution and venom with which Jael
destroyed Sisera would thus be readily accounted for; but there is more to it,
even, than that, as will be seen by and by.
Appropriately, then God raised up Deborah of the
tribe of Ephraim — or maybe, Issachar (4:5; 5:15). For a time she
exercised authority over the people in the remote hill-country of Ephraim where
the domination of those chariots of iron was not so readily
imposed.
Then began the patient organisation of all save
the southernmost tribes, for a concerted rebellion that would free them all,
both the men and the women from this grievous yoke of bondage.
Barak
The first step was to call Barak of
Kedesh-naphtali to rally the tribes of the north whilst Deborah worked through
other willing agents in the central region.
Barak’s reaction on being thus commissioned
throws an interesting light on his character: “If thou wilt go with me,
then I will go: but if thou wilt not go with me, then I will not go”
(4:8).
Here is good and sufficient reason for
Barak’s inclusion in the list of heroes in Hebrews 11 who wrought
“by faith”. By these, his only recorded words (in 5:1 the verb is
feminine singular; so the song was Deborah’s in the first instance), he
demonstrates his possession of the first of all necessary characteristics of the
child of God — utter lack of confidence in himself, but implicit
confidence in the leader appointed by God, however ill-judged such a leader
might be by the world.
Perhaps if his faith had been stronger he would
have led the rebellion without the help of Deborah, secure in the knowledge that
since the inspired prophetess had blessed his mission it was bound to
prosper.
This would explain the form of Deborah’s
reply: “And she said, I will surely go with thee: notwithstanding the
journey that thou takest shall not be for thine honour; for the Lord shall sell
Sisera into the hand of a woman.”
God’s weaponry
The prophecy is, of course, of Jael’s grim
deed, and not of Deborah’s part in the promised deliverance.
Shamgar’s ox-goad, and Gideon’s three hundred, and Samson’s
jawbone, and David’s pebble, and Paul, the Lord’s earthen vessel (2
Cor. 4:7) whose bodily presence (they said) was weak and speech contemptible
— all these were to be matched by an unlooked-for act of emancipation
through a poor weak woman threatened with something worse than
death.
And Barak was content. He did not seek his own
glory.
Careless reading of the narrative is apt to give
the impression that this uprising was conceived and executed in a day or two.
Yet attention to the details of Deborah’s song, difficult though they may
be, reveals a picture of patient organisation of an underground resistance
movement, the perfecting of which must have been the work of months. How was it
accomplished?
First, “they chose new gods”, i.e.,
new leaders (e.g., Exod. 21:6; 22:8; 23:20,21; 1 Sam. 2:25; Psa. 82:1,66; John
10:34; etc.). “My heart is toward the governors of Israel, that offered
themselves willingly among the people” (5:8,9). Quietly and patiently the
minds of the people were prepared for the day of action: “Tell of it, ye
that ride on white asses, ye that sit in judgement, and walk by the
way.”
A review of military resources showed a complete
lack of the sinews of war: “Was there a shield or spear seen among forty
thousand in Israel?” The men of Sisera had seen to that! Only the
traditional weapons of primitive peoples were left to them. Nevertheless,
patiently and surreptitiously the will of the people was prepared for the day
when a blow must be struck for freedom. Small groups of people would gather for
earnest talk by the wells and in the market-places and at the gates of the
towns. There would be constant quiet but impassioned emphasis on the deliverance
wrought by God through Ehud the bold, and on themarvels achieved under the
leadership of Joshua. Were those glorious days gone for ever? “Because of
the voice of the archers in the place of the drawing of water, there shall they
rehearse the righteous acts of the Lord, even the righteous acts of his rule in
Israel.”
Then came D-day. The call went out for concerted
action: “Awake, awake, Deborah: awake, awake, utter a song: arise, Barak,
and lead thy captivity captive, thou son of Ahinoam. The people of the Lord came
down for me against the mighty” (5:12,13, using RV and
RVm).
Mustering of the tribes
A geographical detail calls for examination here.
“Barak called Zebulun and Naphtali to Kedesh” (4:10). If this is the
Kedesh usually marked on the maps as Kedesh-naphtali, several difficulties
arise. For it means that Barak chose as his rallying place a spot only four
miles from Jabin’s capital and quite 40 miles from Mt. Tabor, the centre
appointed him by Deborah. The attempt to organise thousands of fighting men so
close to the enemy and so far from the centre of action would have been both
impossible, and sheer idiocy, if it had been possible.
To all this there is a simple solution. The name
Kedesh (= holy place) is one of the commonest in Palestine. At least four others
of the same name are known, one of these also being in Naphtali, as the
narrative requires (4:6). It is situated on high ground immediately to the
southwest of the sea of Galilee, and thus answers also far more appropriately to
the name “Kedesh in Galilee in mount Naphtali” (Josh. 20:7) than the
other which is fully 20 miles from Galilee. The identification is due to Conder
who in his day probably knew the topography of ancient Palestine in greater
detail than any of modern times. The maps are almost all of them wrong in making
Kedesh-naphtali away to the north; and thereby many a student has been misled.
Yet the only reason for the more commonly accepted identification is a heap of
ruins in a valley, with the Arabic name Kades. On the other hand, the site
proposed by Conder is within a few miles of Mount Tabor and would be eminently
suitable as a rendezvous for the northern tribes.
Whilst Barak was mustering his men at a point on
the northern edge of the plain of Jezreel, Deborah’s other associates were
similarly gathering the central tribes to a point near Megiddo (5:19) on the
southern edge of the plain. Evidently the plan was to attempt a pincer movement
on the armoured forces of Sisera in the level country (5:19).
The response to the appeals for combined action
varied enormously. Ephraim, Zebulun, Naphtali and Issachar were wholehearted in
their support. Benjamin, too, influenced doubtless by the inspired and inspiring
presence of Deborah on the very borders of his territory, also rallied to the
cause.
But what of the others? “Asher sat still at
the haven of the sea, and abode by his creeks”, cut off from the rest by
the strongholds of the enemy.
Reuben hesitated, and did nothing: “By the
watercourses of Reuben there were great resolves of heart. Why satest thou among
the sheepfolds?…to hear the pipings for the flocks? By the watercourses of
Reuben there were great searchings of heart.” There was probably good
reason for this hesitance too. For on Reuben’s borders were Moab and
Ammon, rapacious, relentless foes, ever eager for cattle-rustling and raiding of
villages. How could Reuben leave his territory wide open to the enemy! It was
faith that was lacking. “He that observeth the wind shall not sow; and he
that regardeth the clouds shall not reap.”
Ephraim had equal cause for doubt, for in their
very midst were ancient implacable Amorite foes. Nevertheless, “out of
Ephraim came down they whose root is in Amalek” (cp. 12:15). The
Ephraimites mustered manfully for the only occasion in all the nation’s
history in which they appear in a good light.
“Gilead abode beyond Jordan.” The
Manassites there would surely come to the aid of their fellow-tribesmen. But no!
The deep cleft of Jordan made the distance seem great, and so whilst there was
doubtless much sympathy, there was no practical help.
“And Dan, why did he remain in
ships?” There was little excuse here, surely, for the coastal plain gave
Dan easy access to the centre of operations. Yet maybe the growing strength of
the Philistines coming in from Crete was sufficient deterrent to the furnishing
of active support. Once again it was faith that was lacking. “He that is
not for us is against us.”
However, in spite of these discouragements
through internal weakness, the faithful tribes mustered — ten thousand
with Barak and Deborah, moving south to Tabor, and thirty thousand near Megiddo,
led by “the princes of Issachar”.
Heber — friend or secret
agent?
But there is another figure, separate and
distinct from all the rest, near that excited gathering in Kedesh. The Kenites
from the time of Moses had been in close alliance with Israel. They were a race
of wanderers, rarely settling anywhere for long. Very probably they were the
tool and weapon makers of their time, for the name Kenite means
“smith”, and is to be linked with Tubal-cain (Gen. 4:22,24) the
first Krupp.
Heber the Kenite had travelled far afield beyond
the terrain usually frequented by his tribe, either because of or with a view to
alliance with Jabin and his henchmen. The narrative is emphatic that not only
was their peace between Jabin and Heber (4:17), but also an intimate friendship
existed with Sisera. The details of Sisera’s flight require such a
conclusion, for “Sisera fled away…to the tent of Jael”, as though
he sought sanctuary there of set purpose and not be accident. Further, Jael
recognised him immediately and spoke as one not unknown by him. “Turn in,
my lord, turn in to me”, and this he was glad to do without hesitation.
The strange rapprochement between this Kenite and
Israel’s hated oppressor calls for explanation. It may be that he was
being employed by Sisera in the manufacture of weapons and of armour for his
chariots. But the juxtaposition of two verses suggests something further.
Immediately after the mention of Heber come the words: “And they told
Sisera that Barak the son of Abinoam was gone up to mount Tabor.” It seems
to hint that the news of Barak’s uprising came to Sisera from Heber. In
other words, Heber may have been acting as spy and fifth columnist for Sisera
whilst outwardly maintaining the traditional friendship with
Israel.
Theophany
So the battle was joined. As Sisera’s army
with its hundreds of chariots came along the plain of Jezreel, Deborah gave the
word for advance against them. Barak’s reason for requiring Deborah to
accompany him was this: “For I know not the day in which the Lord prospers
the angel with me” (LXX). The words of Deborah seem to make reference to
this: “Up, for this is the day in which the Lord hath delivered
Sisera into thine hand: is not the Lord gone out before thee?” This
last phrase might mean “Do not I know that the Lord has gone out before
thee?” but far more likely it signifies: “Canst thou not see
that the Lord has gone out before thee?”, as though appealing to some
visible sign that there was no mistaking.
What the sign was can be inferred from the
details in Deborah’s song. “Lord, when thou wentest out of Seir,
when thou marchest out of the field of Edom, and the heavens dropped, the clouds
also dropped water” (5:4); i.e., the crossing of Jordan had been marked by
earthquake and storm. The presence of the Lord, then, had been signified by
these phenomena of nature. There could be little point in alluding to the fact,
except to draw attention to similar happenings during Barak’s triumph.
Such theophany through storm and tempest is not infrequent in Scripture. It was
the same at the Red Sea (Exod. 15:8,10 and Psa. 77:15-20, especially v. 18) and
in the conquest of Canaan (Deut. 9:3); it was the same more than once in
David’s experience (2 Sam. 5:20; Psa. 18:6-15); it was the same also when
the angel of the Lord went forth and smote Sennacherib’s army (Isa.
30:30-33); and it will be the same yet again when the Lord for the last time
brings deliverance to Zion (Zech. 14:3; Psa. 83:13-15; Matt.
24:30).
Consequently Deborah’s words would, in
effect, mean this: ‘See the black storm clouds gathering over the plain.
Now is your opportunity. Here is a clear sign that the angel of the Lord is
delivering the enemy into your hand.’ “They fought from heaven; the
stars in their courses fought against Sisera” (5:20).
The battle
Thus there came about a mighty victory in the
plain of Megiddo, which has not been without its parallels in later history, the
most recent being when, in 1917, General Allenby gained a great victory over the
Turks in somewhat similar circumstances.
The storm apparently turned the whole plain into
a morass, so that the fear-inspired chariots of iron became only a military
liability. Hopelessly bogged down, they became worse than useless against the
determined, lightly-armed footmen under Barak. “Then did the horse hoofs
stamp by reason of the pransings, the pransings of their strong ones.” The
words call up a vivid picture of horses plunging and struggling, of drivers
using the whip furiously as they cursed in their impotence.
Yet it should not be assumed that it was merely
the good fortune of the natural circumstances which brought Barak victory. That
this storm came by Divine Providence cannot be doubted. But in addition to that,
there is the plain statement: “The Lord discomfited Sisera, and all
his chariots, and all his host, with the edge of the sword before
Barak.” Sisera had a considerable army besides his chariots, and without
the angel of the Lord Israel could still have been overcome.
The Canaanitish forces were caught between the
two armies of Israelites “in Taanach by the waters of Megiddo”.
Completely routed there, the mass of fugitives fled in hopeless disorder back
towards their headquarters at Harosheth. In all other directions were hostile
Israelites. Near Harosheth is the main ford of the river Kishon at a point where
it passes through a gap between the northern hills and the mount Carmel massif.
The crossing of this ford — normally a trivial matter — was made
formidable almost to the point of impossibility by the swollen state of the
Kishon, now a roaring torrent after the storm. “The river Kishon swept
them away.”
The flight of Sisera
Meantime Sisera had become cut off from the main
body of his forces. Abandoning his useless chariot stuck in the mud, he took to
his heels and fled for safety to the high ground to the south.
To imagine Sisera as fleeing on foot to the tents
of Heber pitched at Kadesh near Galilee is to introduce an interpretation in the
last degree improbable. Would a man fleeing for sanctuary from his enemies in
battle decide on a place twenty or more miles away, and in a direction that
would take him right into the arms of one of the enemy
contingents?
It is far more likely that when Barak’s
army mustered and moved south, Heber also struck his tents and moved in the same
direction. If he were not only Sisera’s friend but also his spy, this
would be the obvious thing to do. So there is nothing intrinsically improbable
about Heber’s tents being now pitched only a mile or two from the scene of
battle.
Sisera’s flight took him through or hard by
a hamlet called Meroz, the inhabitants of which recognised him as one of the foe
but who through fear or indifference did nothing to impede or capture him.
“Curse ye Meroz, said the angel of the Lord, curse ye bitterly the
inhabitants thereof; because they came not to the help of the Lord, to the help
of the Lord against the mighty” (5:23).
That curse was no histrionic gesture but a
terribly grim reality, for Meroz is now unidentifiable. Nor is there other
mention of it in Scripture. It has been blotted out of the Book of
Life.
By contrast, “blessed of women shall Jael
the wife of Heber the Kenite be.” Sisera drew near, caked with sweat and
mud, aching and weary from fight and flight. Heber was away from his encampment,
probably watching the battle. But Jael recognised Sisera as a one-time honoured
guest and hence as one to whom help and hospitality were now due. “Turn
in, my lord, turn in to me; fear not.” There was no hypocrisy in the
invitation. And Sisera gladly accepted.
Jael in danger
He threw himself down on the floor of the tent
and rested. By and by Jael covered him with a rug, and would have gone. But the
woman in her loneliness and comeliness attracted him and he made excuse to
detain her. “He asked for water, and she gave him milk; she brought forth
butter in a lordly dish.”
Again she covered him with the rug, but still he
detained her with another excuse: “Stand in the door of the tent, and it
shall be, when any man doth come and inquire of thee, and say, Is there any man
here? that thou shalt say, No” (4:20).
But this was only the beginning of the attention.
Very soon Jael realised the precarious nature of her plight, undefended in the
presence of this villain. All at once it was evident that he was set on taking
advantage of her loneliness. So, frantically wrenching herself free from his
clutches, she snatched up a hammer — one of her husband’s tools
— and swung it wildly as he came at her. The blow went home and he
tottered drunkenly, then crumpled up and lay still. “At her feet he bowed,
he fell, he lay down: at her feet he bowed, he fell: where he bowed, there he
fell down dead” (5:27).
Those acquainted with Bible idiom will observe
the literal translation in the margin: ‘between her feet’, and will
recall the significance that this has in other places. The savage resentment and
apparently barbarous ferocity behind Jael’s next action are thus more
readily understood. Sisera was only stunned. At any moment he might come round.
In frenzy and panic she took an iron tent-peg, and drove it with desperate force
through his temple (see Notes on this). So distraught was she, that long after
his brain was pierced she went on hammering, hammering, and only came to herself
when the tent-peg was driven well into the hard ground beneath. “So he
died!”
Recovering somewhat her composure Jael was about
the leave the tent when she heard approaching footsteps. She recognised Barak at
a glance. “Come, and I will show thee the man whom thou
seekest.”
Thus the Lord “sold Sisera into the hand of
a woman”.
Differences in the record
It is an exciting story whichever way it is read.
The foregoing reconstruction of the death of Sisera calls for further comment.
Its justification is the double narrative of Judges 4 and 5. Chapter 4 sets out
only a very brief factual account of that momentous day. Deborah’s song in
ch. 5 covers the same ground in poetic form, giving in more detail certain
aspects of the struggle for freedom.
The two accounts of the death of Sisera are not
easily harmonised.
The view commonly held and based entirely on the
narrative of ch. 4 (AV) is that Jael first lulled Sisera into a heavy sleep by
means of the draught of buttermilk (is buttermilk really narcotic?); then she
approached on tiptoe and drove the tent-peg through his head as he lay on the
ground.
There are difficulties galore about this view of
the story. In the first place what man (not to say, what woman) could achieve
the degree of success with hammer and tent-peg which Jael had? For the first,
all-important blow would have to be delivered with the nail held in mid-air and
not resting firmly and securely on the place it was to enter.
Then, too, what is to be done with such details
in ch. 5 as these?” “At her feet he bowed, he fell, he lay: at her
feet he bowed, he fell”; and “with the hammer she smote
Sisera”, as well as the details mentioned earlier which led generations of
Jewish scholars to infer that Jael was provoked to this violence by the violence
that was attempted against her.
This Jewish interpretation, confidently accepted
here, is certainly far more in keeping with woman’s nature than the
alternative which represents Jael as cold-bloodedly inviting Sisera into her
tent with the express intention of hammering a nail through his
temples.
Many of those who have sought to maintain the
usual interpretation have been driven by this difficulty into supposing that
Jael’s blood-curdling deed was the direct result of divine inspiration and
direction. But this is pure invention. The narrative shows no sign whatever of
this.
On the other hand, if the RV of 4:21 be accepted,
there is nothing which conflicts with the reconstruction just offered:
“She went softly unto him, and smote the pin into his temples, and it
pierced through into the ground; for he was in a deep sleep; so he swooned and
died.” If the “deep sleep” be taken to be the unconsciousness
after the first blow from the hammer (cp. “so he swooned”), the
accounts are harmonised.
The only alternatives are either to agree that
the two chapters are inconsistent (which God forbid), or to write off the song
of Deborah as being so poetic that it has no sense in it.
Notes
|
1.
|
When Ehud was dead. It is a tribute to his
character that declension came in again only after his death:
2:18,19.
|
|
2.
|
Sold them, as though they were
unprofitable servants.
|
|
|
Sisera, Marosheth. It is distinctly
remarkable, and mysterious, that these names come together in Ezra
2:52,53.
|
|
3.
|
Nine hundred chariots. This seems to be a
very big number, but in an inscription about a victory at Megiddo (B.C. 1468)
over an Asiatic coalition, Thothmes III claims to have taken 924 chariots as
part of the plunder.
|
|
4.
|
Deborah….prophetess: This name means:
‘the woman of the Word’. The mistaken meaning “bee”
derives from the idea of an insect which talks as it goes.
|
|
7.
|
I will draw unto thee; i.e., the Lord (v.
6) would do this.
|
|
10.
|
Ten thousand in the northern army, and
30,000 in the southern army; 5:8.
|
|
17.
|
To the tent. So he knew where it was,
although lately moved from Zaanaim (v. 11).
|
|
19.
|
Milk. Was the Rechabite tradition already
established among the Kenites?
|
|
21.
|
Tent-pin (RV), of iron, says Josephus. His
correct inference, no doubt, from Heber being a Kenite smith.
|
|
|
Softly. The Hebrew text has an asterisk
against the word, implying that there is something strange about it. A change of
one letter (which does not alter the pronunciation) turns it into: “on
fire” or “in a frenzy”.
|
|
|
For he was fast asleep and weary. This is
a translation dictated by the translator’s mental concept of what actually
happened. Instead: he was cast into a deep sleep (s.w. Dan. 8:18; 10:9; Psa.
76:6), and he fainted (s.w. 8:15; Isa. 40:28-31; LXX: was darkened, i.e.,
knocked unconscious), and he died. This reading now fits all the other
details.
|
|
22.
|
Lay dead. Literally: fallen, dead; LXX:
cast down (i.e., not lying down when he was first smitten).
|