On the other hand, the Blessings of Jacob and o/ Moses, with Ezk 48 and such references as Ps 68^ I 80-, show that a strong archaic religious interest was taken in the ancient tribes. One result of this interest was the set of tribal genealogies, Gn 40""" = Nu 20'-" (late strata of P), 1 Ch 2-9, which partly expressed the recollections of ancient politics and geography, and partly served to connect existing families with the primitive tribes. Meyer (Ent.iteh- ung, 160) deduces from the statement in Ezr 2°""*' that certain families could not prove Israelite descent, the conclusion that the rest traced their descent from Judah or Benjamin. The silence as to tribal descent, mentioned above, seems to show that this is an erroneous theory ; and the habit of tracing descent to the ancient tribes and their primitive clans became general only long after the Exile ; families which derived their ancestry from distin- guished men, David, Saul, etc., could of course name their tribe. In other cases, a family would determine its tribe from its home before or even after the Exile, and from similar circumstances. Hence the description of various persons in the Apocrypha and NT as belonging to certain tribes (To 1', Jth 8', 2 Mac 3*, Lk 2^«, Ko 11') can be accepted only in this limited sense.
iii. Ord&r and Grouping. — The accompanying Table will show that the tribes are arranged in twenty diUerent orders, only one of which, that of Nu 2. 7. and 10, recurs. The principles of arrange- ment are^
(1) Tlie relationship to Jacob, and his wives and concubines. Thus : Sons of —
Leah : Reu. , Sim., Levi, Jud., Iss., Zebulun.
Zilpah : Gad, Asher.
Rachel : Joseph, Benjamin.
Bilhah : Dan, Naphtali. This principle, niudilied in some cases by others, determines the order in Gn 29-3o, in the Blessing of Jacob (Gn 49), and in the lists based on the Blessinsr (Gn 46, Ex 1, Nu 1 (two). 2. 7. 10. 13. 26, 1 Ch 2'^ 27).
As the grouping according to wives and concu- bines does not correspond to any known historical situation after the Conquest, it must be based on a tradition of the circumstances of Israel before, or shortly after, that event.
(2) Geographical position. This position influ- ences most of the lists mentioned above, and governs in large measure those in Nu 34, Dt 33, Jos 13 tt"., Jg 5, 1 Ch 2»-8 (partly), 12 ; Rev 7 (partly).
(3) In Dt 27 tradition and geography have some influence, — witness the position of Simeon and Issachar ; but the chief principle seems to be that the tribes regarded for various reasons as more important are chosen to bless, and the less im- portant to curse. The cursing tribes belong to the E. and N. districts, which were carried away cap- tive tir^t.
(4) The list in Ezk 48 is baaed on the geography of the monarcliy modified by the transference of the Eastern tribes to the West of Jordan, and by the ideal necessity for placing the temple about the middle of the country.
In the Table on the preceding pa^e the sons of the various wives, etc., are printed tlius ; —
Sons of Leah, small caps., e.g. IvEO. ; of Zilpah, ordinary type, e.g. Gad ; of llachel, small caps, italic, e.g. Jus. ; Bilhah, italic, e.g. Dan.
iv. Subdivisions of the Tribe. — The tribe was a confederation of mi.'ihpdhn.t (cf. above), UV ' families ' ; and the mislipnlid was a group of households, bnijith or bi-th 'ahh {' father's house').* A common worship of the mishpdha is implied in 1 S 20". Tlie names of some of the mishpdha*
• Also used o( a tribe (Nu 17"), or chieJ division ot » trib«
(Nua-'oco).
TRIBUTE
TEOAS
813
(Hfbronites, Nu 3=^ ; Hezrunitts. Nu SO" ; Sheilie- mites, Nu ■2iy") show that in many cases the mis/i- pahd came to mean the inhabitants of a town or district. Jg 9', however, iuiiilies that in the time of Abiraelech ben Gideon tliere were more than one mi-s/ipdhd in Sliechem. According to tlie oldest form of tlie Gideon narrative (J, Jg 6" S*, see analjsis in PB), Gideon's force consisted of the liylitin^' men of the niis/i/Hl/id Abiezer, wlio amounted in number to three hundred. In E.v \-2'- * the hayith or beth 'abh is spoken of as normally capable of consuming a paschal lamb at one meal. Cf. Family, Goverxment, Israel, Jacob, and articles on the separate tribes, etc.
LmRATCTiB.— See on Family ; also B. Luther, ' Pie Israel- itiKhen Stamnic,' ZATW, 1901, Heft 1, pp. 1-7B ; Coniill, Hint, of the People of Israel, pp. 36-«'2 ; Steueniagel, Die Kin- wiiuUrung der wr. Stuitune in Kanaan, 1001; Ed. Konij;, Snuste Pritizipien der altUut. Kritik geprii^ft, 1902, p. 3.') ff.
W. H. Bennett. TRIBUTE (IN OT). — 1. &?. The rendering 'tribute' for this word is very misleading. Its meaning is collective =yorref/ labourers, labour- gang. One of the most notable of such companii's was the body of task -workers for the public service, consisting of 30,000 men, which Solomon (see above, p. 565°) raised by levy upon the people (1 K 5"'"' 9'»-="; contra-st the statement, in 2 Ch 8"', according to which this levy was imposed onlj' upon the remnant of the aboriginal inhabitants of Canaan). Something of the same kind ap[iears to have been introduced already by David (2 S 20* ' Adoram was over the labour-gang,' cf. 1 Iv 4' 5" 12'"=2 Ch 10"). Another familiar instance is the slave-gangs of Israelites in Egj-pt, with their over- seers (c""i7 Ex 1"). Conquered populations w'ere frequently subjected to forced labour : Dt 20", Jos 16'« 17", Jg l«-3"»». Is 31', La 1'. ' Issachar became a slaving labour-band ' (iji'-i^S Gn 49" [J]). In Pr 12^ it is said that ' slothfulness [a .slothful man] shall be put under taskwork.' In late Hebrew the word D? (by use of the concrete for the abstract) came to mean forced service, serf- dom. In Est 10' it possibly means tribute in sense of forced payment .