Bibliotheca Sacra 157
(July-September 2000): 271-80
[Copyright © 2000 Dallas
Theological Seminary; cited with permission;
digitally prepared for use at
GEOGRAPHY AND THE
NARRATIVE SHAPE
OF NUMBERS 13
J. A. Beck
THE
STORIES OF THE BIBLE are filled with geographical in-
formation. The Scriptures refer often to details
of topogra-
phy, geology, hydrology,
climate, land use, and urbanization.
Noted
biblical geographer George Adam Smith challenges people to
read the Bible with geographical awareness. "In
the Bible, you see
the details which are so characteristic of every
Eastern landscape,
the chaff and rolling thorns blown before the wind,
the dirt cast out
on the streets; the broken vessel by the well; the
forsaken house;
the dusty grave. Let us pay attention to all these, and we shall
surely feel ourselves in the atmosphere and scenery in
which David
fought, and Elisha went and
Malachi saw the Sun of Righteousness
arise with healing in his wings."1
Geography shaped the events of biblical history.
Attention to
"narrative geography" recognizes that biblical writers
used geogra-
phy not only to provide the
setting of events but also to achieve
strategic, literary ends. As Shimon Bar-Efrat has observed, "Places
in the narrative are not merely geographical
facts, but are to be re-
garded as literary elements in
which fundamental significance is
embodied."2
This article addresses the strategic use of
geography in Num-
bers 13, with attention to
what may be called the narrative-
geographical shaping of the story.
Throughout Numbers 13 Moses
used, reused, and nuanced geographical elements in
patterns de-
signed to impact the reader. Geographical references
were noted to
J.
A. Beck is Associate Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament, Concordia Uni-
versity,
1 George Adam Smith, The Historical Geography of the
2 Shimon Bar-Efrat,
The Art of Biblical Narrative (Sheffield:
Almond, 1984), 194.
Tremper Longman III makes a similar observation
(Literary Approaches to Biblical
Interpretation [
272
BIBlIOTHECA
SACRA / July-September 2000
generate expectations, to raise or lower the
tension of the plot, and
to mold the reader's view of the characters.
Moses identified and instructed twelve men to
explore the new
land and report back to him. The report they brought
back (exclu-
sive of Joshua and Caleb)
was negative. The report carefully and
deceitfully used geography to argue that the
Israelites could not
enter the Promised Land. This became a watershed
moment in Is-
rael's history, for it
inspired a rebellion that lasted forty years.
PREPARATION FOR THE
REPORT
LITERARY
NAMING OF THE SPIES
Two
types of naming were used to introduce the spies. They were
characterized first as a group and
then as individuals.
Moses was instructed to send on this mission men who met
specific standards. Each was to be a
"leader" (xyWinA, Num. 13:2). As a
group, they are called "men" (MywinAxE, v. 3)3 and "heads of the sons
of
Genesis
42:9, Joseph accused his brothers of being "military scouts"
(MyliG;ram;) who had come to spy
out the land. When Joshua sent men
into
here by Moses were not these "military
scouts"; they were influen-
tial men whose report could
sway the community.
This more general form of characterization gives
way to a
lengthy list in which the spies are named
individually. In formulaic
fashion the twelve are designated by tribe,
proper name, and pa-
ternal association (13:4-15).
The reason this list was organized this
way remains under discussion.5 But the
fact that these men were
identified in such a list has import for their
characterization.6 It
3 Within Jewish tradition even the
designation MywinAxE suggests that these
were men
of honor. This is the meaning of this designation
in Genesis 34:20; Exodus 17:9;
Judges
8:15-17; 1 Samuel
Chumash with Rashi's Commentary [
Freedman
and Maurice Simon, Midrash Rabbah, Numbers
[
1983], 676).
4 Ronald B. Allen, "Numbers," in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary (Grand
Rap-
ids: Zondervan, 1990),
2:804.
5 Timothy R. Ashley, The Book of Numbers, New International Commentary on
the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 232.
6 Robert Alter has noted that such lists
are often ignored within literary analysis.
In
reality they may be effectively employed as literary devices. "The coldest
cat-
alogue and the driest etiology
may be an effective subsidiary instrument of literary
expression" ("Introduction to the Old
Testament," in The Literary Guide to
the Bible,
ed. Robert Alter and F. Kermode [
Geography and the Narrative Shape of Numbers 13 273
grants them "a sense of importance and
dignity."7 Thus by both
general designation and personal introduction,
the reader is led to
view these men as esteemed and honored leaders of
the com-
munity. Thus the reader
anticipates that the report the twelve
gave will be both persuasive and honorable.
THE
SEARCH DEFINITION
The
reader is further prepared to hear the spies' report by noting
Moses' instructions for the reconnaissance
mission.
In defining that
search Moses pointed out a considerable amount of
geographical
features. He provided the geographical boundaries
of the search,
the season in which the search was conducted, and
the specific geo-
graphical questions the group were to answer.
The search area. The search area is defined both by Moses' di-
rect speech and by the
narrator's summary of the search. In
the reader is allowed to listen in as Moses told
the spies where they
were to go. In 13:2 the reader learns that the spies
would reconnoi-
ter "the
the spies to search the Negeb
(bg,n,) and the hill country (rha), two re-
gions within the
Negeb refers to a limited strip of land extending 10
miles north and
10
miles south of
mountain ridge overlooking the Rift Valley to
near the dunes along
the
Moses was also interested in the hill country.
The word rha in
the Book of Numbers is most often employed in the
proper names
of prominent mountains such as
it is clearly a regional designation, for it is
set in contrast to the
coastal plain and the
the hill country runs from the Negeb
through
into the highlands of Galilee.9
When the narrator described the trip itself, he
spoke of the
search area in a different way. Verse 21 refers to the
trip's south-
ern departure point and its
northern terminating point. The spies
explored the land from the Wilderness of Zin to Lebo-Hamath. The
Wilderness
of Zin is the northern portion of the Wilderness of
Paran, specifically the area around Kadesh-barnea.10
Lebo is asso-
7 Allen, "Numbers," 2:805.
8 Carl Rasmussen, The Zondervan Atlas of the Bible (
1989), 49.
9 Ashley, however, says the Negeb refers only to the hill country of
Book of Numbers, 236).
10 J. Simons, The Geographical and Topographical Texts of the Old Testament
(Leiden: Brill, 1959),
256.
274
BIBLIOTHECA SACRA / July-September
2000
ciated with the Lebweh near one source of the
Beqa' Valley.11 Thus the exploration of
the spies is said to follow
the watershed of the central mountain spine.12
The narrator's language for the search area
differs from the
language Moses used. Why did the narrator not
simply summarize
the search with identical language? Noth says this signals multiple
authorship.13 But within this unified
literary unit a different ex-
planation is to be preferred. The
language of the narrator allows for
the possibility that the spies did not adhere closely
to Moses' in-
structions. The search he asked
for may have been different from
the one he received. Replication of Moses' language
would certainly
have signaled obedience. The shift in language adds
tension to the
plot, thereby urging the reader to look for further
evidence that will
either vindicate or implicate the spies.
One last difference between Moses' description
and the nar-
rator's summary bears
mentioning. Moses did not identify any spe-
cific city he wanted the
spies to visit, but the narrator stated that
they stopped in
Wadi Eshcol just north of
Hebron.14
The search season. In verse 20 the narrator wrote that "the
time was the time of the first-ripe grapes."
While the grape harvest
itself would occur over the summer months, the first
ripe grapes
are harvested in July.15 Since the
entire exploration took forty days
(v.
25), this exploration took place during the summer season.
The search questions. Moses then defined the search itself with
a set of questions (vv. 18-20). Knowing the
search area and the
11 "Many scholars assumed that Lebo-Hamath should be translated as 'the en-
trance to Hamath.' However,
there is really no doubt that Lebo was an important
city on the border of the
(Yohanan Aharoni, The Land of the Bible: A Historical
Geography [
12 Nelson Glueck,
The River
13 Martin Noth
assumes that the different descriptions are associated with dif-
ferent authors. J and E limit
the search to the Negeb and Judah, and P allows the
search to extend to the entire nation (Numbers: A Commentary [
14 Edward Robinson argues for this location
of Wadi Eshcol based on the
name of
one of the four kings from the
Biblical Researches in
lem: Universitas Booksellers, 1970], 1:214). This nineteenth-century
observation
about the location of Eshcols
supported by a fourth-century Christian pilgrim text
(Jerome,
"The Pilgrimage of Holy Paula," in
15 Carl Ritter, The Comparative Geography of
(New
York: Greenwood, 1968), 3:297.
Geography and the Narrative Shape of Numbers 13 275
search season, the geographically informed reader
begins to antici-
pate how the answers to those questions might sound.
First, Moses asked for information on population
density (v.
18).16
The archaeological record for the pre-Israelite period
reveals
what they may have seen. Mazar
notes that the Late Bronze period
(1550-1200 B.C.) testifies
to a declining population in the hill coun-
try.17 Aharoni
offers this summary of the Canaanite period: "The
valleys were intensely settled, with strong and
important kingdoms
on the coastal plain and the Shephelah,
in the Jezreel and Jordan
valleys. Among the hill regions only the most
northern enjoyed a
dense settlement. . . . Most of the hill regions were
only thinly set-
tled, and appreciable areas
were forested with thick scrub that was
a formidable obstacle to settlement and
agriculture. The southern
and highest part of
except for the lateral valleys and the southern
highlands, were not
occupied."18 Given the search
area designated by Moses, the spies
would have encountered land that was sparsely
settled.
The second question Moses asked pertained to the
hydrology of
the land (v. 19). "Is the land in which they
live good or bad?" While
this vocabulary is somewhat general, rabbinic
commentators19 dis-
tinguish it from the subsequent
question about soil fertility (v.
20).20
Moses' inquiry is no doubt related to the oppressive condi-
tions the Israelites
experienced in the Wilderness of Zin. Since that
region receives less than two inches of precipitation
each year, the
Israelites
constantly faced the shortage of water there.
In the Negeb the spies
would have experienced a climate and
16 Rashi sees the
matter of population density at the heart of this verse (A. M. Sil-
bermann, Chumash with Targum Onkelos,
Haphtaroth and Rashi's
Commentary,
vol.
4: Bamidbar
[
tions reflected in this
verse. But in support of one question is the point that the first
pair of words, "strong or weak," is
further explained by the following pair of words,
"few or many." The word "strong" can have a
variety of nuances. It can result from
iron chariots (Josh.
34:12).
Moses was interested in the strength of numbers here. The chiastic ar-
rangement of the adjectives adds
support to this view.
17 Amihai Mazar, Archaeology
and the Land of the Bible 10,000-586 B.C.E. (New
18 Yohanan Aharoni, The Archaeology of the
minster, 1978), 158. Aharoni bases his observation on the El-Amarna
texts.
19 Rashi
understands this use of bOF ("good") to
be associated with hydrology (Sil-
bermann, Chumash with Targum Onkelos,
4:62). Ibn Ezra understands it as a ref-
erence to climate (Jacob Milgrom, Numbers,
JPS Torah Commentary [
Jewish
Publication Society, 1990],102).
20 Charles A. Briggs understands this use
of bOF as a reference to
fertility (The New
Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon [
ciated
Publishers and Authors, 1980], #2296, 3b).
276
BIBLIOTHECA SACRA / July-September
2000
hydrology that was nearly as austere as the
wilderness of their
wanderings. The region is generally an
"environment adverse to
human activity or extensive settlement."21
Rainfall provides the
only water, and it is scant (eight to twelve inches
each year). This
allows for a barley harvest only once every three or
four years.22
By contrast, the climate and hydrology of the
hill country was
much more favorable. "The relative abundance of
rain and scores of
springs in the highlands of
erly showers and mean
handful of springs in the Negeb.”23 The
central mountain range receives between twenty
and forty inches
of rainfall annually.24 Further the
geologic makeup of that region
allows for the preservation of water in numerous
springs.25 Given
their experience in the Wilderness of Zin, one would expect the
spies to report favorably with regard to the water
resources.
A third question Moses asked pertained to urban
construction:
"Do
the inhabitants live in open camps or in fortified cities?" (v. 19,
author's paraphrase). Another look at the
archaeological record
shapes the answer the reader expects the spies to
give. Bright ob-
serves that the hill country was a "patchwork of
petty states, none
of any great size.”26 Mazar adds that the most amazing archaeo-
logical feature of the hill country during this
period is "the almost
total lack of fortifications."27 The
strongholds that existed were
Egyptian
military and administrative ones "along the northern Si-
nai, the northern
ley.”28 Thus one would expect the spies
to report that, in general,
the indigenous population lived in vulnerable, open
settlements.
The agricultural quality of the region was the
subject of Moses'
fourth question (v. 20). The soil of the Negeb is a fine, wind-blown
soil called loess soil.29 "When it rains, the surface of the loess
soil
becomes relatively impermeable, so that instead
of seeping into the
21 Barry J. Beitzel,
The Moody Bible Atlas (Chicago: Moody,
1985), 36.
22 Rasmussen, The Zondervan Atlas of the Bible, 50.
23 Glueck, The River
24 Rasmussen, The Zondervan Atlas of the Bible, 18.
25 Ibid., 19.
26 John Bright, A History of
27 Mazar,
Archaeology and the Land of the Bible,
243.
This was true at
where a Middle Bronze II fortified city was not in
use in Late Bronze or during Iron
(Avi Ofer, "
2:608-9).
28 Ibid., 283.
29 Rasmussen, The Zondervan Atlas of the Bible, 49.
Geography and the Narrative Shape of Numbers 13 277
ground much of the water rapidly runs off into the wadis, creating
miniature badlands' formations."30
The hydrology and geology cre-
ate a poor agricultural environment.
But as the spies moved farther north, they saw
more green. As
nineteenth-century explorer Edward
Robinson moved north of
with shrubs; and these increased as we advanced and
were in-
termingled with evergreens and
prickly oaks, arbutus and other
dwarf trees and bushes."31 During the
Canaanite Period, the hill
country was covered with considerable forests.32
But under those
forests lay an increasing bed of rich, red,
moisture-absorbing soil.33
The
hill country had potential for agricultural development.
Aware of the search area, the search season, and
the search
parameters, the reader begins to expect that Moses'
questions will
be answered in a certain way. The reader does not
expect the spies
to convey much enthusiasm about the Negeb, but one does expect
them to celebrate what they observed in the hill
country. The spies
are expected to speak about a sparsely populated
land, a land with
water resources, unfortified settlements, and rich
agricultural po-
tential. In short, one expects
the spies to return and to say that Is-
rael could easily conquer
the land.
THE SEARCH REPORT
After
forty days the spies returned and offered their report. Just as
Moses
had carefully used geography to frame the nature of the
search, so the spies carefully misused geography to
erode the peo-
ple's enthusiasm. Their
less-than-objective report was simply, "We
can't do it!" They led the Israelites to this
conclusion through care-
ful naming of the land,
through their answers to Moses' questions,
and through unsolicited information they added to
their report.
NAMING
THE LAND
The
sensitive reader will note that the spies referred to the land
with standard language that is carefully chosen and
strategically
30 Ibid.
31 Robinson, Biblical Researches in
1852, 1:212.
32 Aharoni, The Land of the Bible, 27. The significant
deforestation and accompa-
nying erosion of the hill
country did not occur until after it had been cleared for ag-
riculture by the influx of
Israelites (Arie Issar, Water Shall Flow from the Rock;
Hydrology and Climate in
the Lands of the Bible [
33 Beitzel, The Moody Bible Atlas, 44.
278
BIBlIOTHECA
SACRA / July-September 2000
altered for rhetorical impact.
From the beginning the reader is expecting to
hear a positive
report. After all, the spies had gone to the Promised
Land. Within
the Pentateuch the words "
three times before this chapter. This expression is
securely at-
tached to God's promise to the
patriarchs and is typically used with
the expression "which the Lord has promised to
give you."34 This is
the land to which the Lord had sent them. But when
the spies
spoke of this very special land, they made a subtle
but significant
shift in the language they used. It was no longer the
land to which
the Lord sent them; it was "the land to which
you sent us" (v. 27).
The spies also referred to the land as "a
land flowing with milk
and honey" (v. 27). This expression is used
fifteen times in the Pen-
tateuch. It is language by
which God Himself described this land
(Exod. 3:8, 17). In almost every case it
is associated with God's
promise to give
motivated the people in a positive way. But the
spies again made a
strategic shift that diminished the impact of this
phrase. Within
the space of five verses, the land that "flows"
with milk and honey
became the land that "devours" its
inhabitants (v. 32).35
A further note of discord was struck as the
spies described the
breadth of their search. Moses had asked for a
report on the Negeb
and the hill country. But they spoke about the Negeb, the hill coun-
try, the coastal plain, and the Jordan Valley.36
Thus the spies re-
ported on places Moses had not asked about, places
that would
have a significant impact on the answers to Moses'
questions.
Conspicuous by its absence is mention of the
spies' stop in the
city of
and the promise of the land that was given to them
(Gen. 13:18;
23:2,
9; 35:27). But the spies made no mention of it, though it was
the burial place of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
"They averted their
glance from the tombs of the fathers, and they
neglected the prom-
ise of God."37
The spies repeatedly took language that had the
34 Gordon J. Wenham, Numbers: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers
Grove, IL: InterVarsity,
1981), 119.
35 Based on the paralleling of the feminine
singular participles tbazA and tl,k,xo, Philip
J.
Budd understands "devours" as a reference to the land's
infertility (Numbers,
Word
Biblical Commentary [
36 The last two collocations are unique in
the Hebrew Bible but are clearly a refer-
ence to the topographical
zones west of the
the coastal plain, the central mountain spine, and
the
The Moody Bible Atlas, 27). Aharoni
views the last reference as the northern
Valley
(Aharoni, The Land of the Bible,
68).
37 Allen, "Numbers," 2:810.
Geography and the Narrative Shape of Numbers 13 279
power to excite enthusiasm and turned it into
language that gener-
ated doubt.
ANSWERS
TO MOSES' FOUR QUESTIONS
In
their report the spies answered each of Moses' four questions in
some fashion. But the order in which they gave their
answers dif-
fers from the order in which
Moses asked the questions. Since the
most logical way in which to present their report
would have been
to follow the order of Moses' questions, the
reordering of informa-
tion raises questions. Moses
asked about the population density,
hydrology, urbanization, and agricultural quality.
But the spies'
answers were in this order: hydrology,
agricultural potential,
banization, and population
density.
The ten spies first answered Moses' question
about hydrology
(Num.
13:27). Here the spies resorted to abbreviated language that
speaks of the land's rainfall dependence. They simply
agreed that it
is a land that "flows with milk and
honey." The brevity of their an-
swer neglects the water
resources in the hill country.
Then the spies answered Moses' question about
the agricul-
tural potential of the land
by showing the large cluster of grapes
they gathered from the Wadi
Eshcol: "This is its fruit" (v. 27). It
had been a long time since the Israelites had seen
fresh fruit. This
would have been a great incentive to enter the land.
But the spies
did not speak at any length about the cluster of
grapes or the
pomegranates and figs that they had
found. Instead, they pro-
ceeded to answer Moses'
questions about urbanization and popula-
tion density. Rashi presumes that the spies used the large cluster
of grapes to support their argument that the land
was heavily forti-
fied and highly populated.38
In answering Moses' question about the extent of
urbanization,
the spies reported that they encountered cities
that were "fortified
and very large" (v. 28). As noted earlier, the
archaeological record
of the hill country at that time indicates only
small settlements
with almost total lack of fortification. In essence
they were saying
they believed the Israelites could not conquer the
land.
In answering Moses' questions about the
population, the spies
reported, "Amalek
is living in the land of the
tites and the Jebusites and the Amorites are living in the hill coun-
try, and the Canaanites are living by the sea and
by the side of the
place, the spies were suggesting, where there was no
room to re-
38 Rashi
criticizes the selection of "large fruit" as part of the spies'
strategy to dis-
courage the people (Silbermann,
Numbers, Chumash
with Rashi's Commentary, 64).
280
BIBLIOTHECA SACRA / July-September
2000
ceive newcomers. In their
report the spies deceitfully distorted
what they saw. Their answers were designed to lead
one conclusion: "We can't possibly possess the
land!"
A
STRATEGIC ADDITION
The
spies made a strategic addition to the report. The most fre-
quently mentioned item in their
report was the physical size of the
indigenous people. This is noteworthy because Moses
had not asked
about the people's physical size. Interspersed among
the answers to
Moses'
other questions is a recurring reference to the "strength" of
the people who lived in the land they explored.
The spies said the people were
"strong" (zfa, v. 28). Moses had
not used that word in his questions. He did ask,
however, if the
people were qzAHA. The spies affirmed that
the people were "too strong
[qzAHA] for us" (v. 31). The spies also said
that "the descendants of
Anak" were living in the land (v. 28). Later
the spies spoke about
"men of great size" (v. 32). And they added, "There
also we saw the
Nephilim (the sons of Anak
are part of the Nephilim);39
and we be-
came like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we
were in their
sight" (v. 33). This unsolicited information,
which built throughout
the report, led to the conclusion of the majority
of the spies, "We
are not able to go up against the people" (v.
31).
CONCLUSION
The
use, reuse, and nuancing of geographical references
generates
expectations about the spies'
report, influences the tension of the
plot, and molds the reader's view of the spies.
These men who at
the beginning of the chapter were seen as honorable
leaders be-
came untrustworthy manipulators of the truth. They
played with
the name of the land, simply calling it "the
land where you sent
us." They fabricated evidence when answering
Moses' questions.
And
they added uninvited, incendiary information to the report.
The
geography indicates that their report is not what the reader
expects it to be. They convinced the Israelites
that taking the land
was impossible (14:1-4). Ironically the very people
who, along with
the ten spies, thought they could not enter the
Promised Land and
conquer it, did not enter it. They died in the
wilderness (vv. 22-23,
29, 32-37) because of their lack of confidence
in the Lord.
39 This was a class of very tall men,
legendary in size, whose memory lingered long
in the minds of the Hebrews (George Buchanan Gray,
A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on Numbers, International Critical
Commentary [
1903], 141).
This
material is cited with gracious permission from:
www.dts.edu
Please
report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at: