Ehud's Assassination of Eglon/2

Ehud's Assassination of Eglon

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Overview

Commentators differ in how they understand how Ehud managed to rally the nation to rebellion before news of the king's assassination reached the Moabites and foiled his plans.  According to Prof. Elitzur, Eglon's murder was mistaken for a natural death, and caused no suspicion.  This gave Ehud ample time to arrange all that he needed.  Josephus, in contrast, places the site of the murder in Yericho, close to the Israelites, reducing the time necessary for Ehud to spread word of the rebellion. Finally, Prof. Garsiel posits that Ehud did not act alone and that the rebellion was actually planned in advance, with rebels in place even before the killing.

Murder Mistaken for Natural Death

Eglon was killed in such a way that it was not obvious that he had been murdered, leading the Moabites to assume that he had died a natural death.  Many hours passed before they understood that there had been an assassination and acted upon it.

Sources:Prof. Y. Elitzur¹

Where was Eglon's palace? According to Prof. Elitzur, the murder took place in Eglon's palace on the eastern side of the Jordan, in Moav proper.  As such, it should have been very difficult for Ehud to to return to Mt. Ephraim, gather the troops, capture the fords, and still take the Moabites by surprise. This leads Prof. Elitzur to suggest that the Moabites must not have recognized that a rebellion was under way until much after Eglon's death.

"וַיִּסְגֹּר הַחֵלֶב בְּעַד הַלַּהַב" – This verse lies at the heart of Prof. Elitzur's theory. The fact that the entire sword was swallowed in Eglon's body, and the flesh closed around the wound, meant that there was no evidence of foul play.  As no blood leaked out, neither Ehud nor Eglon showed signs of an attack. This meant that Ehud was able to leave the palace in full view of the guards without arousing suspicion, and that Eglon's death was not immediately recognized as an assassination.

"וַיֵּצֵא הַפַּרְשְׁדֹנָה" – According to Prof. Elitzur, "הַפַּרְשְׁדֹנָה" refers to Eglon's excrement, or perhaps to part of his intestines.²  The ensuing odor led the servants to originally assume that Eglon was "מֵסִיךְ אֶת רַגְלָיו" (a euphemism for eliminating). Later, upon opening the doors to his chambers, they interpreted it as a sign of some internal intestinal disease which had led to the obese king's death.

"וְהִנֵּה אֲדֹנֵיהֶם נֹפֵל אַרְצָה מֵת" – The language of "מֵת" (dead) rather than "הרוג" (killed) supports the fact that the servants' original impression was that the king had died naturally, not that he had been murdered.

Ehud's sword – Ehud's double edged sword was also crucial to the success of the assassination. In contrast to the sickle shaped swords of the time which were used only for slaying,³ Ehud's straight sword was designed for stabbing and thus appropriate for his goal.⁴  In addition, its sharp edge minimized the amount of bleeding when piercing the skin.  Finally, since it was short, of unique shape, and unexpected, it was more easily concealed upon entry into the palace.

"וְעֶגְלוֹן אִישׁ בָּרִיא מְאֹד" – Eglon's extra fat is highlighted as it was what enabled the dagger to be concealed in his body.  RalbagShofetim 3:12-29Shofetim 3 Toelet 6About R. Levi b. Gershom adds that Eglon's massive weight made it difficult for him to rise from sitting position and the extra effort momentarily distracted him from Ehud, who took the opportunity to strike.⁵  Finally, the obesity (together with the signs of bowel disease) provided a plausible explanation for the death.

"אִישׁ אִטֵּר יַד יְמִינוֹ" – Prof. Elitzur understands this to mean that Ehud, like others from the tribe of Binyamin,⁶ was left-handed.⁷  This, too, proved advantageous as he was in the minority of men who wore their sword on the right and struck with the left, making both his sword and his strike less conspicuous.⁸

"וְאֵהוּד נִמְלַט עַד הִתְמַהְמְהָם" – Prof. Elitzur suggests that upon the death of their king, the Moabites must have begun funeral preparations, costing them even more hours.   Between the original delay and these ceremonies, Ehud had sufficient time not only to escape but also to spearhead the Israelite attack.

Did Ehud act alone? According to Prof. Elitzur, Ehud acted alone hoping that the deed would spur a rebellion, regardless of whether he himself survived.  It is for this reason that he attacked Eglon only after sending away his men.⁹

Hand of God

• Hashem's intervention – According to Prof. Elitzur, not all that happened was planned in advance, and Ehud himself was surprised by the turn of events.  He had not originally intended to have the sword be swallowed in Eglon and was initially horrified to be weaponless.  This seemingly chance episode, however, was really Hashem's hand intervening to make the deed successful.  Prof. Elitzur suggests that this is the main theme of Sefer Shofetim.  Hashem acts through seeming coincidences to save the nation, and it is their challenge to be able to recognize them as Divine intervention.¹⁰
• Human strategy – It is possible, however, to take this same approach and assume that Ehud thought through each action beforehand, and that the chain of events was all part of a planned strategy.¹¹

Proximity of Palace to Israelites

Since the murder took place in the palace in Yericho, it did not take long for Ehud to return to his fellow Israelites and rally them to rebellion.

Sources:JosephusAntiquities of the Jews 5:4:1-3About Josephus

Site of Eglon's palace – Josephus suggests that Eglon's palace (and hence the site of the killing) was not on the eastern side of the Jordan, but in the conquered territory of עִיר הַתְּמָרִים, identified as Yericho.¹²  RadakShofetim 3:13-29About R. David Kimchi points out that the language of "וַוַיִּירְשׁוּ אֶת עִיר הַתְּמָרִים" connotes settlement and not simply conquest, which might support this contention.¹³

"וַיַּקְרֵב אֶת הַמִּנְחָה" – Josephus claims that this was but one of many such presents that Ehud had brought to Eglon as a means of currying favor with the king and his men.

Why were the Moabites not suspicious of Ehud? According to Josephus, since Ehud lived in Yericho¹⁴ and continuously endeared himself to the Eglon through his gifts, he had become a familiar face in the palace.  Moreover, he arrived during the heat of the day,¹⁵ when the guards were less alert.

"דְּבַר אֱ-לֹהִים לִי אֵלֶיךָ " – Josephus maintains that Ehud said this to get the king to stand up, fearing that if he stabbed the king while sitting, he would not be able to inflict a mortal wound.

"וַיָּבֹא גַם הַנִּצָּב אַחַר הַלַּהַב" – Josephus might agree with the possibility brought by RalbagShofetim 3:12-29Shofetim 3 Toelet 6About R. Levi b. Gershom that Ehud intentionally stuck the handle into Eglon's body along with the blade to ensure that the blade reached deep enough to pierce Eglon's internal organs and kill him.

"וַיָּחִילוּ עַד בּוֹשׁ" – Josephus suggests that the guards did not only wait long enough for Eglon to relieve himself (which would have provided Ehud with just a few extra minutes) but until evening, as they assumed that the king had gone to sleep.¹⁶

"וַיִּתְקַע בַּשּׁוֹפָר בְּהַר אֶפְרָיִם" – The servants' delay and the proximity of the palace to the Israelites (some of whom lived in Yericho itself) meant that had Ehud sufficient time to rally them to rebellion, capture the fords of the Jordan and surprise the Moabites.¹⁷

"וְהוּא שָׁב מִן ... הַגִּלְגָּל" – This verse is difficult for this position, as it suggests that Gilgal was en route from the palace to Mt. Ephraim (where Ehud's men were presumably headed), yet Gilgal is not in between Yericho and Mt. Ephraim, but rather southeast of the city.  This position would have to either posit that a different Gilgal is being referred to,¹⁸ or explain why Ehud's men were headed south.

Pre-planned Rebellion

Eglon's assassination was planned meticulously in advance as part of a nation-wide rebellion.  Even before the assassination, a rebel army was in place to attack, and messengers were ready to give word to the rest of the population.

Sources:Prof. M. Garsiel,¹⁹

Where was Eglon's palace? M. Garsiel argues against Josephus, claiming that the murder could not have taken place in Yericho since the Moabite army that was stationed there would have automatically heard of the death almost immediately, not giving Ehud any time at all for a surprise attack.  He thus posits that the assassination must have taken place as far as possible from the Moabite forces, probably in some distant city on the eastern side of the Jordan.  The farther away, the more time the Israelites would have had.²⁰

Did Ehud act alone? M. Garsiel suggests that despite the text's highlighting of Ehud's personal actions, he was not acting alone and the plot was part of a larger conspiracy of rebels.  The rebels had felt that mounting an attack on the Moabite forces in Yericho alone would not be successful as the enemy could count on aid from Moav proper.  They, thus, decided to have Ehud kill the king, which would cause enough confusion to prevent the sending of reinforcements.  In addition, news of his death would both demoralize the Moabites and encourage the subjugated Israelites.

Tribute – M. Garsiel posits that the tribute was especially impressive and was probably accompanied by gifts to the king's servants and guards.  Ehud hoped thereby to buy the hearts of the kings and servants, blinding them to his true intentions.

"וַיְשַׁלַּח אֶת הָעָם נֹשְׂאֵי הַמִּנְחָה" – According to M. Garsiel, after giving the tribute, Ehud sent the other men ahead to Gilgal, while he stayed with the king. The men contacted their fellow rebels, telling them all was going well and to ready themselves. In the meantime, Ehud endeared himself to the king, told him about the God of Israel, and then offered to seek the word of God at the Pesilim in Gilgal and report back to the king.  The king agreed, and even told the guards to expect him back.

"הַפְּסִילִים אֲשֶׁר אֶת הַגִּלְגָּל" – This position might explain that "הַפְּסִילִים" comes from the word idols, and refers to some Temple in Gilgal.  Eglon knew that Gilgal had houses of worship, making Ehud's ruse of seeking out God for Eglon plausible.  In reality, though, Ehud made the trek both so as to retrieve his sword²¹ and to spread word to his compatriots to begin gathering for rebellion.

Why were the Moabites not suspicious of Ehud? Ehud was able to re-enter the place without suspicion since the king was waiting his return.  The quick check did not uncover his unusual sword, unexpectedly sheathed on the right side of his body.

"דְּבַר אֱ-לֹהִים לִי אֵלֶיךָ" – As seen above, this sentence lies at the heart of Ehud's strategy.  It was not merely a ruse to prompt the king to rise and become an easy target.  Rather, getting the king to believe that Ehud would relay to him God's secrets enabled his easy passage into the palace and a private audience with the king.²²

"וְאֵהוּד נִמְלַט עַד הִתְמַהְמְהָם" – Since Ehud was alone, he was able to escape in the time it took for the servants to realize that the locked doors were not Eglon's attempt at privacy.  The rest of the nation was already amassed for battle since they had been given word earlier.  All that was left for Ehud was to issue the trumpet call and rallying cry of "רִדְפוּ אַחֲרַי כִּי נָתַן י"י אֶת אֹיְבֵיכֶם אֶת מוֹאָב בְּיֶדְכֶם".

¹ See his article "פרשת אהוד בן גרא" in "החוג לחקר המקרא בבית הנשיא: עיונים לספר שופטים," (Jerusalem, 1971): 403-413.

² The root "פרש" elsewhere in Torah refers to bodily secretions. See, for example, Shemot 29:14 and Vayikra 4:11.

³ For a picture of such a sword, see here.  It is only sharp on one side, designed for cutting or slaying, but not for piercing.  The phrase "להכות לפי חרב" (to strike by the mouth of the sword)  found so often in descriptions of Biblical battles is an apt depiction of how such a sword was used.

⁴ An image of the type of sword Ehud might have used can be seen here.

⁵ According to this explanation, Ehud said, "I have a the word of God for you" as a ruse to get Eglon to stand up in a show of respect, knowing that doing so would distract him.

⁶ See Shofetim 20:15-16.

⁷ See B. Halperin, "The Assassination of Eglon: The First Locked Room Murder Mystery," Bible Review 4 (1988):32-41, who suggests that actually Ehud (and the other Benjaminites) were not necessarily naturally left-handed, but were rather trained to be ambidextrous, as left handedness was advantageous in combat. He suggests that the word "אִטֵּר" means bound and refers to the training process in which the right hand would be bound so as to strengthen the left. Outside of our phrase, the verb only appears in one other place in Tanakh, Tehillim 69:16, where it seems to mean to close or stop.
In contrast to the above, see Targum YonatanShofetim 3:15About Targum Yonatan (Neviim) which translates "אִטֵּר" as "גמיד יד ימיניה" (a shortened right hand), suggesting that Ehud's arm was deformed.  If true, this too could have contributed to lowering the guard's suspicions.  A disabled person would not appear as threatening.

⁸ See also RalbagShofetim 3:12-29Shofetim 3 Toelet 6About R. Levi b. Gershom who makes this point.

⁹ He posits that Ehud accompanied them to the border of Moav before returning to the palace.  "וְהוּא שָׁב מִן הַפְּסִילִים" means that Ehud returned from the "idols."   With the border guard stood idols of Moabite gods (presumably placed there to watch over the country from invading enemies).

¹⁰ This, of course, is no easy task, and many Israelites attribute the successes to human skills alone, leading to the forgetting of God and the cycle of Sefer Shofetim.

¹¹ See Ben Gurion's response to Prof. Elitzur in החוג לחקר המקרא בבית הנשיא: עיונים לספר שופטים, (Jerusalem, 1971):421-422.  He points out the language of "כִּי לֹא שָׁלַף הַחֶרֶב מִבִּטְנוֹ" rather than "כִּי לֹא [יכול ל] שָׁלַף הַחֶרֶב מִבִּטְנוֹ"  supports the idea that Ehud intentionally did not draw out the sword.

¹² See Devarim 34:3 and Divrei HaYamim II 28:15.

¹³ It is nonetheless difficult to understand why Eglon would build a palace in a newly conquered area rather than in more secure and familiar surroundings in Moav proper.  It is possible that this was but one of several palaces and Eglon wanted to keep an eye on his new subjects to ensure they paid their tribute and the like.

¹⁴ Josephus contends that the city was co-inhabited by both Israelites and Moabites.  Prof. Elitzur suggests that Josephus is influenced by the Greek polis of his day, where Greeks and Jews lived side by side.

¹⁵ Though this is not mentioned anywhere in the text, the fact that Eglon was sitting "בַּעֲלִיַּת הַמְּקֵרָה", commonly translated as a "cooling room" (see, for example, Rashi and R"Y Kara), suggests that it was hot out at the time.

¹⁶ This is consistent with Josephus' suggestion that Ehud arrived midday, during dinnertime.  It is logical that afterwards the king might lie down for an afternoon siesta, especially in the heat of summer.

¹⁷ See, however, the arguments of Prof. Moshe Garsiel against this logic below.

¹⁸ In fact, Gilgal is mentioned several times in Tanakh with geographic markers that appear to differentiate it from the Gilgal east of Yericho, suggesting that there was more than one city with the name.  [See, for example, Devarim 11:30, Yehoshua 15:7, Shemuel I 7:16, and Melakhim II 2:1 and 4:38.] The archaeologist Adam Zertal also raises the possibility that Gilgal is not a proper name of one particular city, but a term which refers to certain ritual gathering sites (all enclosed by a foot shaped wall), several of which have been identified throughout Israel.  For a full discussion, see R. Hawkins, "Israelite Footprints," BAR 42:2 (2016).

¹⁹ See M. Garsiel "הסיפור על אהוד בן גרא בספר שופטים," Beit Mikra 46 (1971): 285-292.

²⁰ See, however, Chaim Re'em, "פשוטו כמשמעו של הסיפור על אהוד בן גרא" who argues that the longer the distance, the less chances that Ehud would escape, let alone have extra time to rally troops.  He points out that all countries had quick signal systems by which to send word, and there was no way that someone who was fleeing, and therefore forced to take back roads and the like, would have had time to reach safety before word was out.

²¹ Though the verses speak of Ehud wearing his sword before entering the palace with the tribute, Garsiel suggests that in reality Ehud had originally left it in Gilgal so as not to chance that it would be found when he was searched upon his first entry into the palace. The verses speak of his wearing it are presented earlier since they comprise an introduction, like mention of Eglon's obesity or Ehud's left handedness.

²² M. Garsiel assumes that Eglon and Ehud spoke alone in his private chambers on the second floor (בַּעֲלִיַּת הַמְּקֵרָה אֲשֶׁר לוֹ לְבַדּוֹ), while the servants remained on the bottom floor.  Eglon's desire that no one hear Ehud's "secrets" ensured that no one could hear his cries either.