Matfeh as ' tribe' is found in P in the Hexateuch, in Chron. ; and in 1 K 71-* 8i, where Benzinger regards the clauses in which malteh stands as late additions, in & the 7»fl^ft'/i-c]ause is absent from LXXB. Shebtie( is common in D, is found in JE, and very occasionally in P (possibly only in redactioiial passages), and occurs throughout the OT from JE to Chronicles. Giesebrecht (/.ATW, l&Sl, p. '242) maintained that the name and thing expressed by shebhet died out before the Exile, and matfeh was used for it after the E.xile. This position is controverted bv Driver, yo«m. Philol. xi. 1882, p. 213 f. The decision depends partly on the %iew taken as to the text, etc., of individual passages ; current views on these points seem to admit the opinion that(l) shebhet accnn in post-exilic literature onlv in passages borrowed from pre-exilic works, or as a literary archaism, its use having been revived through a study of the earlier literature ; and that (2) there is no certain instance of the use of matteh for ' tribe ' before the Exile.— The use of Aram, words corres]>onding to shibliet in the sense of ' tribe' may be dvic to the influence of the OT.— On the tenns for the sub- divisions of the tribe, viz. mishpdhd and beth 'dbh, see Familt and below.
ii. Origin, Nature, and Historij of the Tribe as a Social Onjanizntion. —The articles on individtial tribes show that there are two chief theories of their origin. First, tlie biblical statements as to the patriarchs are understood as persotuil liistory, and the tribe is regarded as having arisen chiefly by the natural increa.se of the descendants of a son or grandson of Jacob. The descendants of each son kept together as a social group, in which, however, foreign slaves, wives, etc., were some- times included. The second theory, now more
generally held, regards much that is said of the patriarchs and their children as tribal history j)ld in a personal form ; cf. liENJAMIN, i. 27'2'' ; JuDAll, ii. 792''. According to this view tlie tribes did not all arise aa subdivisions of Israel, but Israel was formed, in a measure, by the aggregation of some of the earlier tribes. The process by which the complete set of tribes was formed began before the Conquest, and was continued afterwards. Israel as it invaded Palestine was a loose confederation of kindred tribes. These tribes liad themselves been formed by the aggregation of smaller bodies or niishpdltas, which were groups of families. We have few data as to the tribal system in the nomadic period ; but it would be similar to that of the nomadic Ai'abs. The unifying forces in the tribe, clan, etc., were the blood-bond, and the tribal or family cult. The blood-bond was jjartly real, partly theoretical ; it could be established by mutual agreement and religious ceremonies. The cliief duties of members of a tribe were to act together in war, and to protect one another by blood-revenge. The tribes and their subdivisions were fluid organizations liable to combination, sub- division, loss by secessions, and gain by accessions. Cf. W. R. Smith, Kinship, etc. 1-5S, 171 ; iJ6'3Stf.
In the Conquest, Israel fought by tribes and subdivisions of tribes ; sometimes the tribes com- bined (Jg P 4. 5), sometimes they acted separately (Jg l--"-). In the settlement the natural tendency would be for each family, clan, and tribe to settle together in the same district (Jos 14'- '■' 18'°).
It is, however, quite uncertain how far the tribes which we find in Canaan under the monarchy correspond to tribes which existed before the Conquest. Even where there was a real connexion, the name may have been changed. Thus, as tlie sons of concubines. Gad and Asher (ZUpah), Dan and Naphtali (Billiah), are regarded as additions to Israel after the Conquest. Tlie stories of the late birth of Benjamin and of the recognition of Epliraim and Manasseh (Gn 48^"-- J E) have been understood to mean that these three tribes were formed by the subdivision of Joseph after the Conquest. These views are partly confirmed by the fact that some of these tribjil names are apparently names of places in Palestine : Asher (Aseru) appears as the name of a district or people in Galilee in inscriptions of Seti I. and Ramses II. ; Benjamin is ' son of the right hand ' or ' south,' i.e. the southern district of Joseph ; and Ephraini, from its form (cf. Mizraini, etc.), should be a place- name meaning 'a fruitful land.' The discovery of Joseph-cl (':) and Jacob-el (see JACOB, ii. p. 526') in a list of i)laces in Palestine conquered by Thothmes III., B.C. 1481-1449, has led to the sug gestion that the tribe of Joseph assumed tha. name after its settlement in Canaan. On the other hand, the comparative lack of territory, and the insignificance of Reuben, Simeon, and Levi in historic times, point to the antiquity of these tribal names (but cf. Levi).
Possibly in early times the tribes of Israel were known as Rachel and Leah, and at some time, before or after the Conquest, these broke up into divisions, which eventually became the twelve tribes.
After the Conquest the tribes became essentially territorial, though no doubt the theory of the blood-bond survived. Similarly the mishpdifil came to mean the town, or quarter of a town, or village, or district. Hence the tribal name denoted a district, and the trilie included not onlj' the Israelite invaders, but also in time the natives whom they absorbed, or by whom they were absorbed. These tribal districts had no fi.xed or couliniuius political organization, and they varied in number or extent. The real political units