The character of the country was fitted to breed a race of hardy warriors rather than peaceful agriculturists. The level of the country was more than 2000 ft. above the sea, and it was studded with many hills. G. A. Smith has thus described it : 'A desolate and fatiguing extent of rocky platforms and ridges, of moorland strewn witn boulders, and fields of shallow soil thickly mixed
BENJAJIIN
BERACAH
273
with Btone, they are a true border, — more fit for the building of barriers than the cultivation of food' (Hist. Geog.p. 290). This had ita influence on the character of the tribe, which ia graphically depicted in the blessing of Jacob: 'B. is a wolf that ravineth : in the morning he shall devour the pre}', and at even he shall divide the spoil ' (Gn 19"). And the character of the land helped B. to play its magnificent part in the warfare against the Philistines. Several important roads ran throDgh it towards Judah and Jems., and these were commanded by its fortresses. Michmash, Greba, Ramab, Adosa, Gibeon, formed ' a line of defence that was valid against the Aijalon and Al ascents, as well as against the level approach from the N.' (Smith, Hist. Geog. p. 291), while Bethel commands the rentes from Gophna and Shechem, and ' s road from the Jordan Valley through the passes of Mt. Ephraim.' From the E. and \V. sides, passes strike up into the heart of the country, those on the £. side being much the more difficult. Through the western passes the Philistines de- livered their attacks against the tribe.
The history of B. is important till the time of Saul only. The tribe took part in the campaign of Deborah and Barak against Sisera (Jg 5'*). The narrative in Jg 19-21 also falls in the period of the Judges, but calls for special discussion. It was in rtonnexion with the Philistine oppression that the ^eatest work of B. was done. The narrative is in parts concise and obscure, so that the exact development of events is hard to follow. But the movement for the deliverance of Israel that proved ultimately successful, seems to have originated in B. The anointing of a king was for the breaking of the Philistine yoke, and he was selected from the tribe of B. Ana it was within B. itself that the movement for freedom began. (See Saul.)
On the death of Saul, his own tribe B. naturally remained faithful to his house. The army of Ishbosheth, commanded by Abner, seems to nave consisted chiefly of Benjamites. In the ferocious coml)at, when twelve men of Abner engaged twelve of Joab's army, the former are S{)oken of as 'twelve for B.' (2 S 2"), and Abner's soldiers are referred to as 'the children of B.' (2"). In the subsequent negotiations between David and Abner, special mention is made of B. apart from the rest of Israel (' and Abner had communication with the elders of Israel . . . And Abner also spake in the ears of B. : and Abner went also to speak in the ears of David in Hebron all that seemed good to Israel and to the whole house of B. ,' 2 S 3"-"). After Ishbosheth had been murdered by two Benjamites, David became king over the whole of Israel. But the hate of him was not dead in B. When he fled from Jems, on the occaj<ion of Absalom's rebellion, it was a Beniamite of the house of Saul, Sliimei, who pursued liim with curses (2 S 16°). And when, through David's unwise partiality for Judah, dis- pute arose between the latter and the other tribes. It was a Beniamite, Shebu, who raised the standard •»f revolt (2 S 19. 20).
H is therefore natural to expect that, when the revolt took place from Kehoboam, B. should throw in its lot with the seceding tribes, and not with Judah. It is, however, stated explicitly in some passages, that B. remained with Judah (1 K 122'- » 2 Ch II"'- '«• » 14' 15»- » etc.). But there are other passages which |)oint another way. Tims in 1 K 12* we read 'there was none that followed the house of David but the trilie of Judah only.' The prophecy of Ahijah is a little ambiguous ; the gannont is rent mto twelve pieces, of which ten are given to Jerolmam with the explanation tliat he is to have ten tribes. But the house of David is to have, not two tribf «, but one (1 K 1 1*''). If Levi is omitted, and Ephraim and Manasseh VOL. L— 18
counted as one tribe, Israel would consist of eleven tribes, and B. would then be reckoned among the ten tribes. The truth ia, probably, that B. as a whole joined the revolt. But owing to its nearness to Judah, and especially to the fact that Jems., the capital city of Judan, was, even if not wholly in B., yet on the border, the S. part of the tribe can hardly have escaped union with Judah. After the overthrow of the N. kingdom, the territory of B. largely fell into the bands of Judah, and many Benjamites are mentioned among those who re- turned from exUv. The Apostle Paul belonged to this tribe.
One incident in the history of the tribe has been left for separate examination. This is the outrage at Gibeah, and aimost entire destruction of B., In consequence of ita support oi the perpetrators (Jg ltt-21). The narrative a« it stands present* insuperable ditiiculties. These are chiefly to be founu in the account of the war with B. (Jg 20). Urael is spolteD of at a 'congregation,' and represented as acting together as one man, unlilce averything else we know of ti~^ period. The size of the army raised (400,000) is quita incrediule, and the incidents of the campaign no less so. B. with 26,700 destroys in two days 40,000 Israelites, but does not lose a single man. On the third day ths whole triba of B. is destroyed, with the exception of 600 men. Ths date given for this is vague ; it is said to have been In ths days of Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron. This chapter presents close points of contact with P in the Hex. Critics are generally agreed that its representations are on that account unliistorical. But it is a matter of dispute whether thie judgment should be passed on the whole story. Some {e.g. Wellhausen) regard it as a pojt-ex. fiction, intended to throw discredit on Saul and his tribe and family. The out- rage takes place in Qibeah, a place specially connected with Saul ; and that it is perpetrated on a Le\ite increases \x» heinous- ness ; while the inhospitable character of the inhabitants comes out, not only in their disgraceful con<luct, but in the fact that the only man who offers entertainment is not a native of the place. Saul's tribe consents to the crime, and refuses to sur- render the authors of it. Jab<;Bh-gilead, which Saul had res- cued from the Ammonit 'i, and whose inhabitants had rescued Saul's body from the Phil., is the only place which did not Join in the holy war against B., and is destroyed for this. The details also recall the conduct of the men of Sodom. It is true that the coincidences with points in Saul's history are ver} strilting. Yet it is ditHcult to resist the conviction that there must be a hist, basis for chs. 19 and 21, and (or so much of ch. 20 as relates the extermination o( a large part of the tribe. That the whole of Israel took part cannot be maintained ; perhaps Judah (20i**), to which the murdered woman belonged, look IJie chief part in Inflicting vengeance. See Moore (./ut^es, in Ice.), who argues forcibly for the view taken here.