* Weil, Biblische Legenden der Musselminner (Frankfort, 1845), pp. 245-275.
RACES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 75
which became differentiated as Hebrews, Moabites, and Ammonites, attain the higher grade at the time of their entrance into western lands or shortly thereafter, while the Edomites represent a sub- division which either relapses into the fiercer state —a not uncommon experience—or was, for some reason or other, prevented from taking the step forwards which eventually leads to the agricultural stage, and with this the complete laying aside of nomadic habits. Jacob, described as ‘a tent dweller’ (Gn 25%”), represents the nomad on the road to culture, and is contrasted with Esau the hunter—the Bedawi proper* (i.). A hint of impending change in social conditions is already furnished by the tradition associated with Abra- ham and Isaac of digging wells (Gn 26'4**) for the needs of the extensive herds of sheep and cattle which they acquired (v.14). This being the case, it is not easy to account for the close association of the two groups, Jacob and Esau, representing such different levels of culture, and why there should be, in the case of one of the subdivisions of the Hebrew group, a reversion to the ruder nomadic type. Such, however, is evidently the case, and the Edomites, tracing back their descent to the Esau clan, represent a branch of the Hebrews that remained in a lower stage of culture, while the other steadily advanced till the agricultural stage was reached. ‘The bond between the Israelites and the Edomites appears to have been much closer than that between the Hebrews and any other sub- divisions. The rivalry, too, appears to have been keener. There is not merely hatred between Jacob and Esau, but the former adroitly dispos- sesses the latter, drives him away from his in- heritance back almost to the desert, where he takes up much the same sort of life as that led by the Semites before coming into touch with culture atall. Still, the recollection that Israel and Edom are brothers is preserved in the popular mind in quite a different manner from that in which Ish- mael and Isaac are so spoken of. A late psalmist (Ps 1377) still denounces the treachery of Edom at the time of the downfall of the Southern kingdom as particularly reprehensible, because, as a brother, he should have come to the rescue instead of help- ing to the downfall of Judah. It lies, of course, outside the province of this article to consider the details of the relationship between Israel and Edom. For our purpose it is sufficient to specify in this general way the relationship existing be- tween the Hebrews and the various subdivisions of the Aramzean and Arabic branches of Semites. Two other branches of the Arabic group which appear prominently among the races of the OT are the Amalekites andthe Midianites. The tradition recorded in Gn 36!” traces the AMALEKITES back to Esau. Like the Edomites, they represent the fiercer type of the Bedawin. ‘Their first encounter with the Hebrews takes place during the period when the latter themselves are still in the nomadic stage. The rivalry between the two must have been bitter indeed, since the hatred of the Hebrews towards the Amalekites not only survives to a late period, but is inculeated in the Pentateuch as a religious duty (Dt 25'!), While originally the naine of an Arab tribe settled around Kadesh, the term seems to have come to be applied to roaming bands of marauders in general. It is in this way probably that we are to account for the presence of Amalekites not only at Rephidim (Ex 1786), but as far north as Mt. Ephraim (Jg 12", cf. 54). Indeed the Hebrews are molested by Amalekites as late as the days of Saul (18 151), and it was left for David to drive them
* The Arabic word bedwij signifies the ‘one outside,’ and is therefore the equivalent of the Hebrew phrase ‘man of the field’ (Gn 2527),
76 RACES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
finally back to their desert haunts (1S 30129), The Kenites and Kenizzites settled around Hebron are set down as branches of the Amalekites who joined the federation of the Béné Israel, and this defection must have intensified the hatred of the Amalekites for Israel, and led to atrocities and barbarous treatment of captives on the part of the Amalekites, the recollection of which survived among the Hebrews to a late day.
The application of the name Amalek to Bedawin in general finds a parallel in the still more indefinite manner in which the term Midian is used by some OT writers. That the MIDIANITES also belong to the Arabic group of Semites is sufficiently shown by their settlement around Mt. Sinai, where we first find them (Ex 2-1") described as shepherds. They were evidently regarded as already, in the days of Moses, belonging to the milder class of Bedawin—the nomad on the road to culture ; and yet subsequently, in the period of the Judges, the Midianites are in alliance with the Amalekites (Jg 6). In genuine Bedawin fashion they pounce down upon the Hebrews, who had now become agri- culturists, and rob them of their flocks and belong- ings. At this time they are scarcely to be distin- guished from the Amalekites ; and the two groups become synonymous with the marauding bands of Bedawin, belonging in reality to a vast number of different tribes who constantly threaten the existence of the cultured States of Palestine.