Difference between revisions of "Chronological and Thematic Order/2"

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 20: Line 20:
 
<point><b>Births of Yaakov's children (Bereshit 29-20)</b><ul>
 
<point><b>Births of Yaakov's children (Bereshit 29-20)</b><ul>
 
<li><b>Placement in Tanakh</b> – <a href="Bereshit29-32-35" data-aht="source">Bereshit 29</a>-<a href="Bereshit30-4-13" data-aht="source">30</a> lists the births of Yaakov's children, beginning with Leah's eldest four sons, moving to the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah, then the other children of Leah, and finally the birth of Yosef. A simple reading of the text implies that the twelve children were born consecutively.</li>
 
<li><b>Placement in Tanakh</b> – <a href="Bereshit29-32-35" data-aht="source">Bereshit 29</a>-<a href="Bereshit30-4-13" data-aht="source">30</a> lists the births of Yaakov's children, beginning with Leah's eldest four sons, moving to the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah, then the other children of Leah, and finally the birth of Yosef. A simple reading of the text implies that the twelve children were born consecutively.</li>
<li><b>Possible chronological place</b> – Several commentators, however, suggest that some of the births must have overlapped.<fn><multilink><a href="LekachTovBereshit29-32" data-aht="source">Lekach Tov</a><a href="LekachTovBereshit29-32" data-aht="source">Bereshit 29:32</a><a href="R. Toviah b. Eliezer (Lekach Tov)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Toviah b. Eliezer</a></multilink> suggests that Bilhah and Zilpah's pregnancies overlapped with those of Leah, while <multilink><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary30-23" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary30-23" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 30:23</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="SefornoBereshit30-8" data-aht="source">Seforno</a><a href="SefornoBereshit30-8" data-aht="source">Bereshit 30:8</a><a href="R. Ovadyah Seforno" data-aht="parshan">About R. Ovadyah Seforno</a></multilink> suggest that it was Bilhah's and Zilpah's pregnancies which overlapped. Ibn Ezra also raises the possibilities that Zevulun and Dinah were twins.</fn></li>
+
<li><b>Possible chronological place</b> – Several commentators, however, suggest that some of the births must have overlapped.<fn><multilink><a href="LekachTovBereshit29-32" data-aht="source">Lekach Tov</a><a href="LekachTovBereshit29-32" data-aht="source">Bereshit 29:32</a><a href="R. Toviah b. Eliezer (Lekach Tov)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Toviah b. Eliezer</a></multilink> suggests that Bilhah and Zilpah's pregnancies overlapped with those of Leah, while <multilink><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary30-23" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary30-23" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 30:23</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="SfornoBereshit30-8" data-aht="source">Sforno</a><a href="SfornoBereshit30-8" data-aht="source">Bereshit 30:8</a><a href="R. Ovadyah Sforno" data-aht="parshan">About R. Ovadyah Sforno</a></multilink> suggest that it was Bilhah's and Zilpah's pregnancies which overlapped. Ibn Ezra also raises the possibilities that Zevulun and Dinah were twins.</fn></li>
 
<li><b> Motivation for positing achronology</b> – As the text appears to leave only seven years for the births and pregnancies,<fn>The chapter implies that Yaakov married Leah after completing his first seven years of labor for Lavan and that Yosef, his twelfth child, was born at the end of his second seven year stint.&#160; This leaves just 7 years for the births and pregnancies.</fn> it would be impossible to fit 12 consecutive full term births into such a small time frame.<fn>Seder Olam Rabbah, who attempts to read the verses as being totally chronological, therefore suggests that each birth was premature and that each pregnancy lasted only seven months.</fn></li>
 
<li><b> Motivation for positing achronology</b> – As the text appears to leave only seven years for the births and pregnancies,<fn>The chapter implies that Yaakov married Leah after completing his first seven years of labor for Lavan and that Yosef, his twelfth child, was born at the end of his second seven year stint.&#160; This leaves just 7 years for the births and pregnancies.</fn> it would be impossible to fit 12 consecutive full term births into such a small time frame.<fn>Seder Olam Rabbah, who attempts to read the verses as being totally chronological, therefore suggests that each birth was premature and that each pregnancy lasted only seven months.</fn></li>
 
<li><b> Reason for displacement</b>&#160;–&#160;Tanakh might prefer to separate the stories of each mother, listing each of their births together and only then moving on to the next mother. See opinions in <a href="The Births and Relative Ages of Yaakov's Children" data-aht="page">The Births and Relative Ages of Yaakov's Children</a> for elaboration and other approaches.</li>
 
<li><b> Reason for displacement</b>&#160;–&#160;Tanakh might prefer to separate the stories of each mother, listing each of their births together and only then moving on to the next mother. See opinions in <a href="The Births and Relative Ages of Yaakov's Children" data-aht="page">The Births and Relative Ages of Yaakov's Children</a> for elaboration and other approaches.</li>
Line 144: Line 144:
 
<li><b>Possible chronological place</b> – <multilink><a href="RashbamBereshit24-22" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamBereshit24-22" data-aht="source">Bereshit 24:22</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink>&#160;suggests that in reality the giving of the jewelry to Rivka took place in the middle of the servant's conversation with her (after asking her who she was but before she invited him to stay).</li>
 
<li><b>Possible chronological place</b> – <multilink><a href="RashbamBereshit24-22" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamBereshit24-22" data-aht="source">Bereshit 24:22</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink>&#160;suggests that in reality the giving of the jewelry to Rivka took place in the middle of the servant's conversation with her (after asking her who she was but before she invited him to stay).</li>
 
<li><b>Motivation for positing achronology</b> – This reading is motivated by the understanding that the servant needed to find a wife specifically from Avraham's family, and, thus, until he knew Rivka's identity he had no reason to give her gifts.<fn>Further support for this reading might come from the servant's retelling in which he states that he gave the jewelry first.</fn> For elaboration, see <a href="Wanted: A Wife for Yitzchak" data-aht="page"> A Wife for Yitzchak</a>.</li>
 
<li><b>Motivation for positing achronology</b> – This reading is motivated by the understanding that the servant needed to find a wife specifically from Avraham's family, and, thus, until he knew Rivka's identity he had no reason to give her gifts.<fn>Further support for this reading might come from the servant's retelling in which he states that he gave the jewelry first.</fn> For elaboration, see <a href="Wanted: A Wife for Yitzchak" data-aht="page"> A Wife for Yitzchak</a>.</li>
<li><b>Reason for displacement</b> –&#160; The narrator mentions the gift beforehand so as not to interrupt the conversation.</li>
+
<li><b>Reason for displacement</b> –&#160; The text mentions the gift beforehand so as not to interrupt the conversation.</li>
 
</ul></point>
 
</ul></point>
 
<point><b>Entry into Rachel's tent (<a href="Bereshit31-33-35" data-aht="source">Bereshit 31:33-35</a>)</b><ul>
 
<point><b>Entry into Rachel's tent (<a href="Bereshit31-33-35" data-aht="source">Bereshit 31:33-35</a>)</b><ul>
Line 234: Line 234:
 
<p>In many cases, the majority and core of a given story is recorded in its proper chronological place and it is just one or two secondary components which are displaced. The displaced unit might be moved from elsewhere to join and thereby complete the central story ("להשלים את הענין") or it might be separated from the main narrative so as not to interrupt the story line ("לא להפסיק את הענין"):</p>
 
<p>In many cases, the majority and core of a given story is recorded in its proper chronological place and it is just one or two secondary components which are displaced. The displaced unit might be moved from elsewhere to join and thereby complete the central story ("להשלים את הענין") or it might be separated from the main narrative so as not to interrupt the story line ("לא להפסיק את הענין"):</p>
 
<opinion name="&quot;להשלים את הענין&quot;">
 
<opinion name="&quot;להשלים את הענין&quot;">
Preludes and Epilogues: "להשלים את הענין"
+
"להשלים את הענין"
<p>A subordinate component of a story might be moved from its proper chronological place so as to complete a central narrative. This might take the form of a prelude before the main story or an epilogue or summation at the end.</p>
+
<p>A subordinate component of a story which took place at an earlier or later time might be moved from its proper chronological place so as to complete a central narrative. This might take the form of a prelude before the main story or an epilogue or summation at the end.</p>
 
<subopinion>Preludes
 
<subopinion>Preludes
 
<p>An event which occurred earlier is displaced to serve as an introduction and/or provide necessary background to a later story.</p>
 
<p>An event which occurred earlier is displaced to serve as an introduction and/or provide necessary background to a later story.</p>
Line 262: Line 262:
 
<li><b>Reason for displacement </b>–&#160; The marriage is mentioned later to properly open the story of Moshe's birth and its aftermath.</li>
 
<li><b>Reason for displacement </b>–&#160; The marriage is mentioned later to properly open the story of Moshe's birth and its aftermath.</li>
 
</ul></point>
 
</ul></point>
<point><b>"וַיֹּאמֶר י״י אֶל מֹשֶׁה עוֹד נֶגַע אֶחָד אָבִיא עַל פַּרְעֹה" (<a href="Shemot11-1-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:1-2</a>)</b><ul>
+
<point><b>"וַיֹּאמֶר י״י אֶל מֹשֶׁה עוֹד נֶגַע אֶחָד אָבִיא עַל פַּרְעֹה" (<a href="Shemot11-1-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:1-3</a>)</b><ul>
 
<li><b>Placement in Tanakh</b> – The verses present Hashem as commanding Moshe regarding the last plague while he was standing in front of Paroh, after the Plague of Darkness.</li>
 
<li><b>Placement in Tanakh</b> – The verses present Hashem as commanding Moshe regarding the last plague while he was standing in front of Paroh, after the Plague of Darkness.</li>
 
<li><b>Possible chronological place</b> – <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-50" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-50" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 12:50</a><a href="IbnEzraDevarim31-1" data-aht="source">Devarim 31:1</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>,<fn>See also&#160;<multilink><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot11-1" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot11-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Beur HaMilot 11:1</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="OrHaChayyimShemot11-1" data-aht="source">Or HaCHayyim</a><a href="OrHaChayyimShemot11-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:1</a><a href="R. Chayyim b. Atar (Or HaChayyim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chayyim b. Atar</a></multilink>.</fn> however, suggests that this statement refers to Hashem's<i> earlier</i> informing of Moshe of the Plague of Firstborns when en route from Midyan in <a href="Shemot4-20-26" data-aht="source">Shemot 4:22-23</a>.<fn>According to him, the verse should be read as if written, "And Hashem <i>had</i> said".<br/><br/></fn></li>
 
<li><b>Possible chronological place</b> – <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-50" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary12-50" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 12:50</a><a href="IbnEzraDevarim31-1" data-aht="source">Devarim 31:1</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>,<fn>See also&#160;<multilink><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot11-1" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemotBeurHaMilot11-1" data-aht="source">Shemot Beur HaMilot 11:1</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="OrHaChayyimShemot11-1" data-aht="source">Or HaCHayyim</a><a href="OrHaChayyimShemot11-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:1</a><a href="R. Chayyim b. Atar (Or HaChayyim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chayyim b. Atar</a></multilink>.</fn> however, suggests that this statement refers to Hashem's<i> earlier</i> informing of Moshe of the Plague of Firstborns when en route from Midyan in <a href="Shemot4-20-26" data-aht="source">Shemot 4:22-23</a>.<fn>According to him, the verse should be read as if written, "And Hashem <i>had</i> said".<br/><br/></fn></li>
Line 341: Line 341:
 
<p>An episode which occurred and was explicitly mentioned earlier in Tanakh is repeated in order to serve as a summary to a unit.</p>
 
<p>An episode which occurred and was explicitly mentioned earlier in Tanakh is repeated in order to serve as a summary to a unit.</p>
 
<point><b>"לֹא יִשְׁמַע אֲלֵיכֶם פַּרְעֹה" (<a href="Shemot11-1-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:9</a>)</b><ul>
 
<point><b>"לֹא יִשְׁמַע אֲלֵיכֶם פַּרְעֹה" (<a href="Shemot11-1-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:9</a>)</b><ul>
<li><b>Placement in Tanakh</b> – In Shemot 11:9, after Moshe warns Paroh of the upcoming Plague of Firstborns, Hashem tells Moshe, "לֹא יִשְׁמַע אֲלֵיכֶם פַּרְעֹה". Afterwards, the narrator states that "Moshe and Aharon performed all these signs"</li>
+
<li><b>Placement in Tanakh</b> – In Shemot 11:9, after Moshe warns Paroh of the upcoming Plague of Firstborns, Hashem tells Moshe, "לֹא יִשְׁמַע אֲלֵיכֶם פַּרְעֹה". Afterwards, the textstates that "Moshe and Aharon performed all these signs".</li>
<li><b>Possible chronological place</b> – <multilink><a href="RashbamShemot11-9" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamShemot11-9" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:9</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink><fn>See also&#160;<multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary11-9" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary30-21" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 30:21</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary11-9" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 11:9</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotShortCommentary17-14" data-aht="source">Shemot First Commentary 17:14</a><a href="IbnEzraBemidbar21-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 21:1</a><a href="IbnEzraDevarim31-1" data-aht="source">Devarim 31:1</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot11-9" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot11-9" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:9</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink>.</fn> asserts that the initial statement is not a warning that Paroh will harden his heart now, after the Plague of Firstborns, but rather a statement referring to what happened in the previous nine plagues.&#160; As such, it is part of the the summary statement of verse 10 which summarizes how Mosh and aharon had performed all teh wonders before Paroh.</li>
+
<li><b>Possible chronological place</b> – <multilink><a href="RashbamShemot11-9" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamShemot11-9" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:9</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink><fn>See also&#160;<multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary11-9" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra</a><a href="IbnEzraBereshitFirstCommentary30-21" data-aht="source">Bereshit First Commentary 30:21</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotSecondCommentary11-9" data-aht="source">Shemot Second Commentary 11:9</a><a href="IbnEzraShemotShortCommentary17-14" data-aht="source">Shemot First Commentary 17:14</a><a href="IbnEzraBemidbar21-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 21:1</a><a href="IbnEzraDevarim31-1" data-aht="source">Devarim 31:1</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot11-9" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot11-9" data-aht="source">Shemot 11:9</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink>.</fn> asserts that the initial statement is not a warning that Paroh will harden his heart now, after the Plague of Firstborns, but rather a statement referring to what happened in the previous nine plagues.&#160; As such, it is part of the the summary statement of verse 10 which summarizes how Moshe and Aharon had performed all the wonders before Paroh.</li>
 
<li><b>Motivation</b> – Rashbam is likely motivated by the fact that after the last plague Paroh does not refuse to let the nation go, but instead actively chases them out.</li>
 
<li><b>Motivation</b> – Rashbam is likely motivated by the fact that after the last plague Paroh does not refuse to let the nation go, but instead actively chases them out.</li>
 
<li><b>Reason for displacement</b> – Though Paroh's earlier refusals have already been shared, the fact is repeated here as a summation (together with verse 10) for all the plagues.</li>
 
<li><b>Reason for displacement</b> – Though Paroh's earlier refusals have already been shared, the fact is repeated here as a summation (together with verse 10) for all the plagues.</li>
Line 355: Line 355:
 
</opinion>
 
</opinion>
 
<opinion name="&quot;לא להפסיק את הענין&quot;">
 
<opinion name="&quot;לא להפסיק את הענין&quot;">
Prologues and Appendices: "לא להפסיק את הענין"
+
"לא להפסיק את הענין"
<p>Secondary narrative components might be moved to form a prologue at the very beginning of a unit or an appendix at the end because setting them in their proper chronological place in the middle of the central unit would otherwise break the flow of the main narrative . The episode or topic which is displaced is either irrelevant to the main theme or message of the unit, of lesser import, or of a different literary character.</p>
+
<p>Secondary narrative components might be displacedto form a prologue at the very beginning of a unit or an appendix at the end because setting them in their proper chronological place in the middle of the central unit would otherwise break the flow of the main narrative . The episode or topic which is displaced is either irrelevant to the main theme or message of the unit, of lesser import, or of a different literary character.</p>
 
<subopinion>Prologues
 
<subopinion>Prologues
 
<p>An event is moved from its correct chronological place later in the text and placed at the very beginning of the unit where it will not disrupt the main topic.</p>
 
<p>An event is moved from its correct chronological place later in the text and placed at the very beginning of the unit where it will not disrupt the main topic.</p>
Line 447: Line 447:
 
<li><b>Possible chronological place</b> – Its proper place would seem to be at the opening of the book, before the census described there which is dated to the second month.</li>
 
<li><b>Possible chronological place</b> – Its proper place would seem to be at the opening of the book, before the census described there which is dated to the second month.</li>
 
<li><b>Motivation for positing achronology</b> - In this case the achronology is explicit in the text.</li>
 
<li><b>Motivation for positing achronology</b> - In this case the achronology is explicit in the text.</li>
<li><b>Reason for displacement</b> –&#160;<multilink><a href="RashiBemidbar9-1" data-aht="source"> Rashi</a><a href="RashiBemidbar9-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9:1</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink> explains the displacement, noting that Hashem did not want to open the book with the a description of the Pesach since this would cast Israel in a negative light. Since this was the only Pesach observed by the nation throughout the forty years, its mention is disparaging.<fn>Cf.&#160;<multilink><a href="SefornoBemidbar9-1" data-aht="source">Seforno</a><a href="SefornoBemidbar9-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9:1</a><a href="R. Ovadyah Seforno" data-aht="parshan">About R. Ovadyah Seforno</a></multilink> who similarly suggests that the goal of the ordering was to cast the nation in a positive light, grouping four of the nation's meritorious actions together.</fn>&#160; See&#160;<a href="Chronology of Bemidbar 1 – 10" data-aht="page">Chronology of Bemidbar 1 – 10</a> for elaboration.</li>
+
<li><b>Reason for displacement</b> –&#160;<multilink><a href="RashiBemidbar9-1" data-aht="source"> Rashi</a><a href="RashiBemidbar9-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9:1</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink> explains the displacement, noting that Hashem did not want to open the book with the a description of the Pesach since this would cast Israel in a negative light. Since this was the only Pesach observed by the nation throughout the forty years, its mention is disparaging.<fn>Cf.&#160;<multilink><a href="SfornoBemidbar9-1" data-aht="source">Sforno</a><a href="SfornoBemidbar9-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 9:1</a><a href="R. Ovadyah Sforno" data-aht="parshan">About R. Ovadyah Sforno</a></multilink> who similarly suggests that the goal of the ordering was to cast the nation in a positive light, grouping four of the nation's meritorious actions together.</fn>&#160; See&#160;<a href="Chronology of Bemidbar 1 – 10" data-aht="page">Chronology of Bemidbar 1 – 10</a> for elaboration.</li>
 
</ul></point>
 
</ul></point>
 
</opinion>
 
</opinion>

Latest revision as of 00:30, 21 July 2024

Chronological and Thematic Order

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Overview

Though the Biblical text sets chronological order as the norm, in several instances it nonetheless veers from the true order of events. In one category of cases, chronology is sacrificed for thematic unity. This is especially evident when Tanakh recounts two stories which overlap in time. Rather than interweaving the two stories, Tanakh will focus on each individually, speaking of the same overall time period from different vantage points. It might distinguish between protagonists, a figure's personal and political role, or differing literary genres. Even when two units do not overlap in time, Tanakh might prefer to arrange certain units thematically, grouping together similar events, related laws or the like.

In other cases, the displacement is somewhat technical and it is only a secondary component of a story which is out of chronological order. A minor detail might be moved from its proper chronological place elsewhere to complete the central narrative (להשלים את הענין), serving either as an introduction in the beginning of a unit or as an epilogue at the end. In other instances, an otherwise intrusive piece of a story is moved away from the core unit to serve either as a prologue or an appendix where it won't interrupt the main storyline (לא להפסיק את הענין).

A third goal of achronology might be to impart homiletical messages.  By juxtaposing material which would otherwise not be linked, lessons regarding proper behavior, Biblical characters, or Hashem's ways can be learned.

Thematic Arrangement: Parallel Units

Tanakh will often prefer thematic ordering over strict chronology, juxtaposing related material even if this means not adhering to a historical timeline. In these instances, both the displaced and chronological components of a unit tend to be of equal import.

Overlapping Stories

A preference for thematic ordering is often evident when components of two independent stories overlap in time. Tanakh will focus on each story individually, recounting them in parallel units, rather than constantly switching back and forth between the two. As such, the same overall time period might be discussed from different vantage points in the textual equivalent of a split screen, with material grouped by varying protagonists, realms of life, literary genre or other factors.

Figures

Tanakh will often focus on one individual protagonist at a time, even if this means compromising on chronological order.

Births of Yaakov's children (Bereshit 29-20)
  • Placement in TanakhBereshit 29-30 lists the births of Yaakov's children, beginning with Leah's eldest four sons, moving to the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah, then the other children of Leah, and finally the birth of Yosef. A simple reading of the text implies that the twelve children were born consecutively.
  • Possible chronological place – Several commentators, however, suggest that some of the births must have overlapped.1
  • Motivation for positing achronology – As the text appears to leave only seven years for the births and pregnancies,2 it would be impossible to fit 12 consecutive full term births into such a small time frame.3
  • Reason for displacement – Tanakh might prefer to separate the stories of each mother, listing each of their births together and only then moving on to the next mother. See opinions in The Births and Relative Ages of Yaakov's Children for elaboration and other approaches.
Yehuda vs. Yosef (Bereshit 37-39)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The story of Yehuda's marriage to Bat-Shua, the births of his children, and the episode with Tamar is recounted in Bereshit 38, after the sale of Yosef and before the stories of Yosef's interactions in Egypt, suggesting that it took place in between the two.
  • Possible chronological placeIbn EzraBereshit First Commentary 38:1About R. Avraham ibn EzraRalbagBereshit Beur HaParashah 38:1About R. Levi b. Gershom and ShadalBereshit 38:1About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto, however, claim that at least the beginning of Chapter 38 took place before the sale, while the rest of the story overlapped with the rest of the Yosef narrative.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – As the Yehuda story stretches over many years, it is impossible for it not to overlap with at least some of the Yosef story. The suggestion that it began before the sale is motivated by Bereshit 46:12 which shares that at the time of the descent to Egypt, Peretz (Tamar and Yehuda's son) had already sired two children. As Yehuda had relations with Tamar only after his own sons were of marriageable age, if Yehuda's marriage to Bat-Shua first took place after the sale of Yosef, this would leave only 22 years for Yehuda to produce three generations worth of progeny - his own sons, Tamar's children, and Peretz's sons!
  • Reason for displacement – Despite the achronology, Tanakh separates the narratives of the two figures, placing the entire Yehuda tale together so as not to have to constantly interweave the two story lines.4 [See The Births and Relative Ages of Yaakov's Children and Purpose of the Yehuda and Tamar Story for more.]
The nation and elders at Revelation (Shemot 19 and 24)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The account of the covenant and ceremony at Sinai  is described in Shemot 24:1-11, suggesting that it took place after receiving the Decalogue and the laws of Parashat Mishpatim (discussed in Shemot 20-23).
  • Possible chronological place – According to the first opinion in Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael19:1021:1About Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Shemot5 and RashiShemot 19:11About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki,6 however, the ceremony took place during the three days of preparations before Revelation discussed in Shemot 19.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – These sources are likely motivated by the many parallels between the two chapters, most notably the nation's announcement in each, "כֹּל אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר ה' נַעֲשֶׂה".‎7
  • Reason for displacement – Despite having overlapped in time, the stories are distinguished because they have distinct foci; while Shemot 19 highlights the role of the nation and laymen, Shemot 24 focuses on the elders.
Bilam and Israel (Bemidbar 22-25)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The story of Bilam and Balak is described in Bemidbar 22-24, while the Sin of Baal Peor is recounted in Bemidbar 25, suggesting that the two episodes were consecutive.
  • Possible chronological place – See, however, Why Was Hashem Angry at Bilam for those who suggest that the two stories overlapped in time.
  • Reason for displacement – Here, too, it is possible that the same time period is discussed from two vantage points, one focusing on what was occurring among Israel's enemies and the other on what was happening in the Israelite camp itself.
Preparation for Inheritance (Bemidbar 26-30)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The census and discussion of future inheritances and related laws (Bemidbar 26-28) follows the stories of Moav and Midyan's attempts to topple Israel (Bemidbar 22-25), suggesting that they occurred afterwards
  • Possible chronological place – It is possible, however, that the two sets of events occurred simultaneously.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – The conquest of Sichon and Og described in Bemidbar 21 had two outcomes: It frightened Moav and Midyan, prompting them to attempt to destroy Israel. It also, though, paved the way for entry into and inheritance of the land,8 leading Israel to begin preparations for both. Both the international response to the defeat of Sichon and Og and the internal Israelite one likely occurred at the same time. The masoretic break in the middle of Bemidbar 26:1 might serve to indicate this simultaneity.
  • Reason for displacement – Torah might have preferred to discuss Israel's external affairs and interactions with enemies separately from internal issues which related to the nation alone.
Yehoshua's spies (Yehoshua 2)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The story of Yehoshua's spies is told in Yehoshua 2, after Yehoshua's directive about preparing to cross the Jordan in Chapter 1 but before the actual crossing in Chapters 3-4.
  • Possible chronological place – Some, though, have suggested that the story must overlap with the events of the first chapter, suggesting that the spies were sent before Yehoshua spoke to the officers about preparing to cross the Jordan.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – In Chapter 1, Yehoshua tells the people that they will be crossing the river in three days time.  If the spies were first sent afterwards, there would not be enough time for them to scout Yericho, hide for three days, and return before the crossing.
  • Reason for displacement – Tanakh prefers not to interweave the two storylines, but rather first tells of Yehoshua's various interactions and then focuses on the two spies.
The Shofetim
  • Placement in Tanakh – The book of Shofetim presents the tenures of each judge as following one another.
  • Possible chronological place – Some, though, have suggested that the stories of the various judges overlapped and that parts of the book are achronological.9
  • Motivation for positing achronology – Shofetim 11:26 leaves three hundred years for the period from the conquest of Sichon until the reign of Yiftach, but if the judges were consecutive, this is not a long enough time span.10
  • Reason for displacement – Despite the achronology involved, Tanakh opts for thematic order, preferring to tell the story of each judge individually.
Shaul and David
  • Placement in Tanakh – Shemuel I 30 speaks of David's return to Ziklag and battle against Amalek, while Chapter 31 speaks of Shaul and the nation's defeat at the hands of the Philistines. At first glance, this would suggesting that the two battles were consecutive.
  • Possible chronological place – The two events, however, likely occurred at the same time.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – Shemuel I 29 ends by sharing that David separated from the Philistines, with David heading to Ziklag and they heading to fight Israel, suggesting that the events of both Chapters 30 and 31 follow directly from Chapter 29.11
  • Reason for displacement – As Tanakh cannot describe both events at once, and prefers not to interweave the various components of each story line by line, it focuses on one protagonist at a time.
Reigns of the Judean and Israelite kings – The book of Melakhim alternates between the reigns of the kings of Yehuda and Yisrael, focusing on only one kingdom at a time, even though this means that certain elements are told out of order. Here, too, Tanakh prefer thematic order over chronological order.
Realms of Life

When a protagonist's interactions in two realms of his life (such as the personal vs. the political realm) overlap, Tanakh will often separate the two strands of the story rather than constantly switching back and forth.

Covenant with Avimelekh (Bereshit 21)
Yitzchak stories (Bereshit 25-26)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Bereshit 25 tells of Yitzchak's marriage, the birth of Yaakov and Esav, and their upbringing, while Bereshit 26 tells of Yitzchak's interactions in Gerar.
  • Possible chronological place – R. WolfBereshit 26:1Shemot 18:1Bemidbar 8:7Bemidbar 20:1About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto suggests that the events of the two chapters likely overlapped, with the first half of Bereshit 26 (the wife-sister story) occurring before the birth and the second half (the covenant with Avimelekh) taking place later on. 
  • Motivation for positing achronology –  It is difficult to understand how Avimelekh would not know of Rivka and Yitzchak's marital status if the two already had children..
  • Reason for displacement – Rather than interweaving the various elements of each story as a strict chronology would dictate, Torah separates the personal and political strands of the Yitzchak narrative.
Yosef in Egypt (Bereshit 42-47)
  • Placement in Tanakh – After narrating the story of Yosef's interactions with his brothers in Bereshit 42-46, Chapter 47 speaks of how the Egyptians themselves fared throughout the famine.
  • Possible chronological place – According to Rashi, Ma'asei Hashem and Netziv, the two stories overlap in time.
  • Motivation for positing achronologyBereshit 47:18 dates the Egyptian's request to be enslaved in return for food to the "שָּׁנָה הַשֵּׁנִית".  These sources assume that this refers to the second year of the famine.14 If so, this is the same time that Yosef revealed himself to the brothers (Bereshit 45:6) and not afterwards as its placement would imply.
  • Reason for displacement – Here, too, Torah portrays the same time period from two perspectives, the personal and political, first focusing on Yosef and his family and then on Yosef and the Egyptians.
Search for a harpist (Shemuel I 16-17)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Shaul's search for and appointment of David as a harpist is described in Shemuel I 16, before the story of the battle with Golyat.
  • Possible chronological place – See, though, Chronology of Shemuel I 16 – 17 for an approach which suggests that the search took place in the middle of the war with the Philistines and not beforehand.15
  • Motivation for positing achronology – This theory is partially motivated by the question of how Shaul has no idea who David is in Shemuel I 17:55-58. If the stories are chronological, Shaul should have already known David very well.16 
  • Reason for displacement – Tanakh tells of each event alone, with Chapter 16 focusing on events relating to the personal life of Shaul, and Chapter 17 focusing on those that relate to Shaul in the national realm.
David's sin and the war with Ammon (Shemuel II 11-12)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The victory against Ammon is described in Shemuel II 12:26-31, suggesting that it occurred after David sins with Batsheva, is punished with the loss of their child, and comforts Batsheva as Shelomo is born.
  • Possible chronological place – It is possible, though, that the war actually overlapped with (and did not follow) the story of the sin and its aftermath.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – The story of the sin spans at least two years, and Yoav had already begun fighting Ammon beforehand.
  • Reason for displacement – The two episodes are told as independent stories with Tanakh focusing on the personal and national spheres separately.
Chizkiyahu's illness (Melakhim II 20)
  • Placement in Tanakh –  Chizkiyahu's illness is discussed in Melakhim II 20 after the story of the salvation from Sancheriv.
  • Possible chronological placeSeder Olam Rabbah23About Seder Olam Rabbah, however, asserts that the illness overlapped with the attack, suggesting that the incident took place three days before the defeat of Assyria.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – This achronology is hinted to in the text.  During Chizkiyahu's illness, Yeshayahu promises the king salvation from Assyria, implying that they had not yet been saved.17  The opening words of the story, "בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם חָלָה חִזְקִיָּהוּ" might further hint that the event described overlapped with the preceding story.
  • Reason for displacement – The story is told achronologically to separate the events relating to Chizkiyahu the person from those relating to Chizkiyahu the king.
Individual vs. Universal

When an incident has both a universal and individual aspect to it, Tanakh will focus on one at a time.

Two stories of Creation – The achronology found in the two accounts of Creation can be explained by positing that Tanakh is telling the same event from two perspectives, starting with the universal and then narrowing in to focus on the creation of Adam. For further discussion, see Two Accounts of Creation.
Literary Genre

Torah often separates material of different genres. Thus, even if a unit of laws was relayed over a period of time and other events occurred simultaneously, Torah might group the legal and narrative material separately. Similarly, when a book contains both prophecies and history, each might be grouped alone even if this creates achronology.

Request for an intermediary at Revelation (Shemot 20:14-17)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The people's request that Moshe act as an intermediary rather than Hashem speaking to them directly appears in Shemot 20:14-16, after the Decalogue.
  • Possible chronological place – R. Yehoshua in Shir HaShirim Rabbah1:2:2About Shir HaShirim Rabbah, however, claims that this request was actually made in the midst of Hashem's relaying of the Decalogue (after the second commandment) and not afterward where it is written.
  • Factors supporting achronology – The switch from first to third person speech in the third commandment might suggest that Moshe acted as an intermediary from that point.
  • Reason for displacement – ChizkuniShemot 20:14About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach explains that the story is recorded out of order so as not to interrupt the Decalogue, thereby allowing the commandments to appear in one continuous list. For further discussion and the implications of this reading, see The Decalogue: Direct From Hashem or Via Moshe.
"הַחֹדֶשׁ הַזֶּה לָכֶם" (Shemot 12:1-3)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The command of "הַחֹדֶשׁ הַזֶּה לָכֶם" opens Shemot 12, suggesting that it was relayed after Moshe warned Paroh of the final plague in Shemot 11.
  • Possible chronological placeChizkuniShemot 12:1About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach, however, claims that the command overlaps with the story of the plagues, and was given a couple of weeks before the announcement regarding the Plague of Firstborns.18
  • Motivation for positing achronology – The verses suggest that the warning to Paroh was given on the same day that the plague was to arrive (as Moshe says, "כַּחֲצֹת הַלַּיְלָה אֲנִי יוֹצֵא בְּתוֹךְ מִצְרָיִם"), while Chapter 12 speaks of the beginning of the month.19
  • Reason for displacement – Chizkuni suggests that the command is recorded only afterwards since Torah wanted to group the narrative of the plagues together and the laws relating to the month of Nissan together.
Moshe's Blessings to the nation (Devarim 32)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Moshe's blessings are recorded in Devarim 32, right after the song of Ha'azinu.
  • Possible chronological place Ibn EzraDevarim 31:1About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, however, claims that they were actually relayed earlier, in Chapter 31, when Moshe tells the nation that he will not be crossing teh Jordan and Yehoshua is to take his place.
  •  Factors supporting achronology – Devarim 33's usage of the past perfect " וְזֹאת הַבְּרָכָה אֲשֶׁר בֵּרַךְ מֹשֶׁה" might indicate achronology.
  • Reason for displacement – It is possible that the text wanted to group poetic material (Ha'azinu and the blessings) together, distinct from the earlier narrative material of chapter 31.
Sefer Yirmeyahu
  • Achronology – The prophecies and events of Sefer Yirmeyahu  are explicitly achronological, switching back and forth between the periods of Yehoyakim and Tzidekyahu.20
  • Reason for displacement – The ordering might be explained if one posits that the book groups prophetic material separately from historical narrative, first recording a series of prophecies and then returning to discuss the parallel, historical narrative.   See Structure – Sefer Yirmeyahu for elaboration.
Speech vs. Action

When an action occurs in the middle of a conversation, or an extended conversation occurs in the midst of a list of several actions, Tanakh might distinguish between the two.

Giving of jewelry (Bereshit 24:22-25)
  • Placement in Tanakh – In Bereshit 24:22-25, we are told that the servant gave Rivka jewelry before inquiring who she was.
  • Possible chronological placeRashbamBereshit 24:22About R. Shemuel b. Meir suggests that in reality the giving of the jewelry to Rivka took place in the middle of the servant's conversation with her (after asking her who she was but before she invited him to stay).
  • Motivation for positing achronology – This reading is motivated by the understanding that the servant needed to find a wife specifically from Avraham's family, and, thus, until he knew Rivka's identity he had no reason to give her gifts.21 For elaboration, see A Wife for Yitzchak.
  • Reason for displacement –  The text mentions the gift beforehand so as not to interrupt the conversation.
Entry into Rachel's tent (Bereshit 31:33-35)
  • Placement in TanakhBereshit 31:33 describes Lavan's search for his terafim.  The opening of the verse, "וַיָּבֹא לָבָן בְּאֹהֶל יַעֲקֹב וּבְאֹהֶל לֵאָה וּבְאֹהֶל שְׁתֵּי הָאֲמָהֹת" implies that Lavan went straight from Leah's tent into that of the maidservants.
  • Possible chronological place – Several commentators,22 however, claim that really Lavan went from Leah's tent into Rachel's tent and only then into the tent of Bilhah and Zilpah.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – The end of the verse reads, "וַיֵּצֵא מֵאֹהֶל לֵאָה וַיָּבֹא בְּאֹהֶל רָחֵל", contradicting the opening, leading these sources to suggest that these words represent the true order.23
  • Reason for displacement – Due to the lengthy exchange between Lavan and Rachel, Tanakh preferred not to interrupt the initial list and left the description of the interaction for the end.

Simultaneous Actions

When a unit contains but one element, the entire unit might not just overlap with but actually occur totally simultaneously with another event.  In such cases, Tanakh does not have a choice but to tell one event before the other.

Giving of jewelry (Bereshit 24:22-25) – Even though Bereshit 24:22-25 suggests that the servant gave Rivka jewelry before inquiring who she was,24 ShadalBereshit 24:22About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto suggests that the two actions were simultaneous - he gave the gifts at the same time that he asked her about her lineage. Tanakh states one action before the other only since it cannot relay both facts at once.
Moshe and Zipporah (Shemot 4:20-26)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Shemot 4 tells of Moshe's leaving Midyan towards Egypt, his receiving of prophecy regarding the Plague of Firstborns, and the incident at the inn.  The text suggests that these were consecutive events.
  • Possible chronological place – R. Saadia, however suggests that really the text is describing two simultaneous events. According to him, Shemot 4:20 describes a splitting of ways, as Moshe sent his wife back to Midyan and he, alone, proceeded to Egypt. The text then continues as a split screen, first recounting the prophecy received by Moshe as he embarked on his mission (verses 21-23), and then relating the simultaneous incident which occurred to Zipporah at the lodge (verses 24-26).
  • Motivation for positing achronology – R. Saadia might be motivated by a desire to remove Moshe from any possible suggestion of wrongdoing at the inn. See Mystery at the Malon for elaboration and how this reading affects one's understanding of the story.
  • Reason for displacement – In cases of simultaneity, Tanakh has no choice but to tell one event after the other.

Non-overlapping Stories

Even when two stories do not overlap in time, Tanakh might prefer thematic unity over a strict chronological recounting. This might be motivated by a desire to group together texts which share similar themes, material of the same literary genre, laws which are relevant to the same time period, or content written by the same author.

Thematically similar units

At times, closely related events might be grouped together, even if this creates achronology.25

Masa U'Merivah (Shemot 17)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The story of Hashem providing water for the nation through the hitting of the rock in Masa U'Merivah is discussed in Shemot 17, among the miracles of the first year in the Wilderness.
  • Possible chronological placeR"Y Bekhor ShorBemidbar 20:8About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor uniquely suggests that the event is identical to the story of Mei Merivah in Bemidbar 20 and actually took place in the fortieth year.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – R"Y Bekhor Shor is motivated by the many similarities between the stories and the fact that Sefer Devarim speaks of them as one, "אשר נסיתו במסה תריבהו על מי מריבה".
  • Reason for displacement – R"Y Bekhor Shor suggests that the story is mentioned not only in Bemidbar where it occurred, but in Shemot as well since the Torah wanted to group the various examples of miraculous sustenance in the Wilderness together.
Covenant of the Pieces (Bereshit 15:7-20)
Blessings and curses (Vayikra 26)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The blessings and curses of Sefer Vayikra close the book, appearing after all the laws regarding sacrifices, purity, holiness etc.
  • Possible chronological place – Despite their placement, though, Ibn Ezra maintains that the blessings and curses were originally part of the covenant of Shemot 24 and relayed then
  • Motivation for positing achronology – In this case, the achronology might be hinted to in the text as the chapters ends with the statement, "אֵלֶּה הַחֻקִּים... אֲשֶׁר נָתַן י"י...  בְּהַר סִינַי". This suggests that the chapter was relayed at Mount Sinai rather than in the Tabernacle, implying that it took place before the Mishkan's construction.
  • Reason for displacement – Ibn Ezra suggests that the blessings and curses were, nonetheless, written only at the end of Sefer Vayikra so as to group together "תנאי הארץ", the various warnings and conditions for living in the Land of Israel.28 [The blessings/curses, thus, also serve as a natural segue into Sefer Bemidbar which opens with the intended entry into the Land.] See Blessings and Curses – Over Which Commandments for more.29
Rebellion of Korach (Bemidbar 16)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Korach's rebellion is described in Bemidbar 16, soon after the story of the spies and their punishment.
  • Possible chronological place – According to Ibn EzraBemidbar 16:1About R. Avraham ibn Ezra,30 however, the rebellion actually occurred earlier, soon after the Levites were chosen to replace the firstborns in the aftermath of the Sin of the Golden Calf.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – This chronology is motivated by an understanding that the rebellion was mainly a reaction to this switch.  See Korach's Rebellion for more.
  • Reason for displacement – It is possible that the story is placed later in Sefer Bemidbar in order to group it with the other rebellions of the book.31
David's offensive wars (Shemuel II 8)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Shemuel II 8 lists David's various wars against external enemies.
  • Possible chronological place – It is possible, though, that not all the battles listed were consecutive and that some might have occurred at other points in David's reign. For example, the battle against Aram Tzova described in Shemuel II 8:3-5 might be identical to that mentioned in Shemuel II 10:6-19.
  • Reason for displacement – Tanakh, nonetheless, groups all the wars together for thematic unity.
Yeshayahu's initiation (Yeshayahu 6)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Yeshayahu 6 describes Yeshayahu's vision of Hashem and his volunteering for Hashem's mission.
  • Possible chronological place and motivation – According to several commentators,32 the vision constitutes Yeshayahu's initiation into prophecy,33 and as such, it should have opened the book.
  • Reason for displacement – It is possible that here, too, thematic order takes precedence over chronological order.34 Chapters 1-5 describe the nation's sins, while Chapter 6 through 12 focus on their punishment. Even though Chapter 6 might have been relayed first, it is grouped with the other prophecies of punishment.35 See Yeshayahu's Mission in Chapter 6 for further discussion.
Legal Sections

Tanakh might separate legal and narrative units, and even within a legal unit, it might group related laws together or differentiate between laws which are relevant only for a specific time period (לשעה) from those which are relevant for all future generations (לדורות).

Yitro's arrival (Shemot 18)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Yitro's arrival, advice and its implementation is described in Shemot 18, before the account of Revelation.
  • Possible chronological placeRashbamShemot 18:13About R. Shemuel b. Meir, however, posits that all of these events occurred after receiving the Decalogue.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – Rashbam is motivated, in part, by the fact that Shemot 19 speaks of the initial arrival of the nation a Mount Sinai, while Shemot 18 presents the nation as already camped there. See Chronology – Shemot 18 for other motivations.
  • Reason for displacement – Rashbam expIains that the unit is placed earlier in order not to break up the continuity of the legal sections of Shemot 20-24 with an unrelated narrative. Tanakh prefers to group laws with laws and narrative with narrative.
The laws of Vayikra 6-7
  • Placement in Tanakh – Vayikra 6-7 discusses the laws of the sacrificial service.  It follows the similar set of laws in Vayikra 1-5.
  • Possible chronological place – According to R. D"Z Hoffmann, despite their location in the text, these laws were not given after the laws of Vayikra 1-5 (which were relayed after the Tabernacle was erected), but rather together with those of Shemot 29 (which were relayed before its construction).
  • Motivation for positing achronology – He deduces this from the summary of the unit which declares, "זֹאת הַתּוֹרָה לָעֹלָה לַמִּנְחָה וְלַחַטָּאת וְלָאָשָׁם וְלַמִּלּוּאִים וּלְזֶבַח הַשְּׁלָמִים. אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה י״י אֶת מֹשֶׁה בְּהַר סִינָי". The verse suggests that the laws were commanded at Mount Sinai rather than in the Ohel Moed, implying that they were given before its construction.
  • Reason for displacement – The laws are displaced to group them with the laws of Parashat Vayikra for both sets of laws are relevant for all future generations, while those of Shemot were pertinent only for the generation of the Wilderness.36  For further discussion, see Relationship Between Vayikra 1-5 and 6-7.
Two Authors

If a book has multiple authors, each author's material might be grouped separately even if this means that some content is relayed achronologically.

David and Golyat (Shemuel I 16-17)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Shaul's search for and appointment of David as a harpist is described in Shemuel I 16:14-23, before the story of the battle with Golyat.
  • Possible chronological placeR. Shemuel b. Chofni GaonBereshit 48:8About R. Shemuel b. Chofni Gaon suggests that the order of the two stories should be reversed, and that really the battle of David and Golyat preceded the story of Shaul's search for a musician.
  • Motivation – One of the motivations for suggesting achronology is the fact that Shaul seems to have no idea who David is in Shemuel I 17:55-58. If the events had occurred in the order in which they are written, Shaul should have already known David as he had already been appointed as a harpist and arms-bearer.
  • Reason for displacement – R"M Leibtag37 explains that the achronology might result from the fact that Sefer Shemuel was written by multiple authors38 whose works were then combined. He suggests that since Shemuel was Shaul's prophet, he wrote Chapters 1-16, which concern the two of them, whereas Gad, David's prophet, wrote the units relating to David, beginning with his rise to power in Chapter 17. This, though, resulted in small sections of overlapping, slightly inconsistent, and achronological content.39 For a full discussion, see Chronology of Shemuel I 16 – 17.

Technical Displacement: Minor Details

In many cases, the majority and core of a given story is recorded in its proper chronological place and it is just one or two secondary components which are displaced. The displaced unit might be moved from elsewhere to join and thereby complete the central story ("להשלים את הענין") or it might be separated from the main narrative so as not to interrupt the story line ("לא להפסיק את הענין"):

"להשלים את הענין"

A subordinate component of a story which took place at an earlier or later time might be moved from its proper chronological place so as to complete a central narrative. This might take the form of a prelude before the main story or an epilogue or summation at the end.

Preludes

An event which occurred earlier is displaced to serve as an introduction and/or provide necessary background to a later story.

Birth of Kayin and Hevel (Bereshit 4:1)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The birth of Kayin and Hevel is mentioned in Bereshit 4:1, after the expulsion from the Garden of Eden.
  • Possible chronological place – R. Yochanan b. Chanina in Bavli Sanhedrin,40 nonetheless, asserts that the birth took place beforehand, while Adam and Chavvah were still in the Garden.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – The anomalous past perfect form, "וְהָאָדָם יָדַע", might be an indicator of achronology.  A second motivation might be polemical in nature.  As Christians suggest that the sin in the Garden of Eden is what led to sexual desire, this position might want to stress that such desire existed even beforehand.
  • Reason for displacement - The birth is mentioned at the opening of Chapter 4 because it is necessary to open the Kayin and Hevel story.
The command of "לֶךְ לְךָ" (Bereshit 12:1)
  • Placement in Tanakh  – Hashem's command to Avraham to leave his family and head to Canaan opens Bereshit 12 and, as such, would appear to be relayed to Avraham only after he had left Ur Kasdim, arrived in Charan, and settled there.41  
  • Possible chronological place –  R. SaadiaCommentary Bereshit 11:31About R. Saadia GaonIbn EzraBereshit Second Commentary 11:32Bereshit First Commentary 12:1About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, and RadakBereshit 12:1About R. David Kimchi, however, suggest that the command's proper chronological place is at the end of Bereshit 11, before Avraham departed from Ur Kasdim.42 
  • Motivation for positing achronology – In the story of the Covenant of the Pieces in Bereshit 15, Hashem tells Avraham, "אֲנִי י״י אֲשֶׁר הוֹצֵאתִיךָ מֵאוּר כַּשְׂדִּים".  This implies that Hashem's command of "לֶךְ לְךָ" was given to Avraham in Ur Kasdim rather than in Charan, and must have taken place before his initial departure described in Bereshit 11:31.43
  • Reason for displacement – Despite it occurring earlier, the command is first mentioned at the beginning of Bereshit 12 to introduce the Avraham narrative and the completion of his journey to Canaan.44  For further discussion, see Avraham's Aliyah.
Sarah conceives (Bereshit 21:1-2)
Marriage of Amram and Yocheved (Shemot 2:1)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Amram and Yocheved's marriage is mentioned in Shemot 2, right before the story of Moshe's birth.
  • Possible chronological place R"Y Bekhor ShorShemot 2:1About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, however, maintains that Amram and Yocheved had married before the decree of Paroh to kill all baby boys discussed in the previous chapter (Shemot 1:22).
  • Motivation for positing achronology – If the marriage had occurred only after the decree, one would have expected that there should have been an attempt to hide not only Moshe, but also Aharon and Miryam, his older siblings. Since no such attempt is mentioned, it is assumed that that the marriage (and the births of Miryam and Aharon) occurred before the decree.
  • Reason for displacement –  The marriage is mentioned later to properly open the story of Moshe's birth and its aftermath.
"וַיֹּאמֶר י״י אֶל מֹשֶׁה עוֹד נֶגַע אֶחָד אָבִיא עַל פַּרְעֹה" (Shemot 11:1-3)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The verses present Hashem as commanding Moshe regarding the last plague while he was standing in front of Paroh, after the Plague of Darkness.
  • Possible chronological placeIbn EzraShemot Second Commentary 12:50Devarim 31:1About R. Avraham ibn Ezra,46 however, suggests that this statement refers to Hashem's earlier informing of Moshe of the Plague of Firstborns when en route from Midyan in Shemot 4:22-23.47
  • Motivation for positing achronologyRalbagShemot Beur HaMilot 11:1About R. Levi b. Gershom explains that if the verse occurred where written this would mean that Moshe received prophecy while in the middle of a conversation, and moreover, that he prophesied while standing in an idolatry-filled palace! 
  • Reason for displacement – The command is repeated here to introduce Moshe's statement to Paroh "כֹּה אָמַר י״י כַּחֲצֹת הַלַּיְלָה אֲנִי יוֹצֵא בְּתוֹךְ מִצְרָיִם. וּמֵת כׇּל בְּכוֹר", to remind the reader that this plague was indeed already announced by Hashem.
Pesach (Bemidbar 9)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Bemidbar 9 opens with a description of the first Pesach brought by the Israelites in the Wilderness, dating this to the first month.  It then proceeds to speak of the petition of the impure who could not participate in the rite.
  • Explicit achronology – In this case, achronology is explicit in the text. Bemidbar 1 opens in the second month, while Bemidbar 9 backtracks to speak of events of the first month.
  • Reason for displacementAbarbanelBemidbar 9About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel suggests that the Pesach of the first month is mentioned in the beginning of Bemidbar 9, not because it occurred there, but only to serve as a prelude to the main story of the unit, Pesach Sheni (brought in the second month). Without the background of the events of the first month, the request of the impure would not make sense to the reader.  For elaboration, see Chronology of Bemidbar 1 – 10.
Ceremony on Har Eival (Yehoshua 8:30-35)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The ceremony on Mount Eival (including the writing on the stones, setting up of the altar, and recital of the blessings and curses) is described in Yehoshua 8, after the battle against the Ai.
  • Possible chronological place – R. D"Z Hoffmann, however, suggests that though most of the ceremony took place where written, the preparation of the stones (8:32), began much earlier,48 immediately after the nation crossed the Jordan. 
  • Motivation for positing achronology – The directive regarding the ceremony in Devarim 27 mandates that the stones be set up on the day that the nation crosses the Jordan ("בַּיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר תַּעַבְרוּ אֶת הַיַּרְדֵּן"), and Yehoshua 8:32 states that Yehoshua did as commanded.  However, if the story is in its proper chronological place, then Yehoshua did not do as commanded.49  R. Hoffmann, thus, suggests that the initial preparation of the stones (the plastering and writing) did indeed begin on the day of the crossing.
  • Reason for displacement – The writing on the stones is mentioned in Yehoshua 8 to fill in the beginning of the main story, providing the details of the preparatory stage of the ceremony.  See When Did the Ceremony on Mt. Eival Occur for elaboration and other approaches regarding the timing of the ceremony.
Shemuel's death (Shemuel I 28:3)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The death of Shemuel is mentioned in Shemuel I 25, before the story of David and Naval, and repeated in Shemuel I 28 before the story of the Ba'alat Ha'Ov.50
  • Possible chronological place – It is assumed that Shemuel died in Shemuel 25, where the death is first mentioned and elaborated upon.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – As the event is mentioned twice, it is obvious that one of the two mentions is out of place. The past perfect form of "וַיָּמׇת שְׁמוּאֵל" in Chapter 28 hints to the reader that the event occurred previously and is only being referenced here.
  • Reason for displacement – The death of Shemuel is repeated in the beginning of the story of the Ba'alat Ha'Ov even though it occurred earlier as necessary background to understand the revival of the prophet later in the story.51
Epilogues

A component of a story which is only to occur later is moved earlier to provide closure to the main unit.

Death notices
  • Achronology –The deaths of the various characters in Sefer Bereshit are recorded already when they fade from the scene,52 rather then in the middle of later narratives when they chronologically occurred.53
  • Reason for the displacement – The achronology is motivated by a desire to provide closure to each protagonist's individual story.54
The manna (Shemot 16:32-35)
  • .Placement in Tanakh – Shemot 16 tells the story of the manna's initial arrival in the first year in the Wilderness, but it also mentions its later preservation near the Ark in the second year or later55 and its being eaten throughout the forty years of wandering.
  • Explicit achronology – Here, the achronology is explicit in the text as it mentions the fortieth year in the Wilderness while the story is dated to the first year.
  • Reason for displacement – The added details are placed here to close the unit.56  [For a spectrum of opinions regarding the specific timing of the events mentioned in the epilogue, see Epilogue to the Manna Story.]
Recording the battle of Amalek (Shemot 17:14)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Right after Amalek is defeated in the nation's first year in the Wilderness, Shemot 17 tells how Hashem commanded Moshe to record the battle for posterity in "the book" and to speak to Yehoshua about wiping out Amalek.
  • Possible chronological place – Despite the placement of the directive,  Ibn EzraShemot First Commentary 17:14About R. Avraham ibn Ezra posits that it was first commanded in the fortieth year.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – Ibn Ezra is motivated by the fact that it is only in the fortieth year that it was known that Yehoshua alone was to head the Conquest and that he would be the one to fight Amalek, and it was only by then that "the book," the Sefer Torah, was extant.57
  • Reason for displacement – The directive is recorded in Shemot only so as to conclude the narrative of the battle.
Yitro's departure (Shemot 18:27)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Yitro's departure back to Midyan is described in Shemot 18, after recounting the story of his advising Moshe and before the account of the Revelation at Sinai.
  • Possible chronological place ShadalBereshit 11:32Bemidbar 8:7Bemidbar 20:1About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto,58 however, posits that Yitro's departure took place only later, in the second year in the Wilderness.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – Shadal identifies "חֹבָב בֶּן רְעוּאֵל הַמִּדְיָנִי חֹתֵן מֹשֶׁה" mentioned in Bemidbar 10 with Yitro (see Yitro – Names), and therefore he identifies the departure described there, in the second year, with what is described in Shemot 18.
  • Reason for displacement –  Yitro's leaving is recorded already in Shemot to complete the main story of Yitro.59 [See Chronology – Shemot 18 for elaboration and for those who maintain that other parts of the story, too, might only be mentioned here to "finish the narrative".]
Incense altar  (Shemot 30:1-10)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The directive to build the Incense Altar is found in Shemot 30, at the end of the discussion regarding the construction of the Tabernacle and its vessels and before the account of the Sin of the Golden Calf.
  • Possible chronological place – Some scholars,60 however, have suggested that the Incense Altar was commanded to be built only after the sin.61 If so, the proper placement of the command would be Shemot 34.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – This position views the Incense Altar as playing an important role in atonement and, thus, suggests that it was first commanded only when Yom HaKippurim was instituted, in the aftermath of the Sin of the Calf.
  • Reason for displacement –The directive is mentioned earlier to close the unit on the vessels of the Mishkan.62
Erecting the Tabernacle (Shemot 40)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The erection of the Tabernacle is described in Shemot 40, where it is explicitly dated to the first of Nissan.
  • Proper chronological place – According to those who maintain that the Days of Consecration of the Mishkan described in Vayikra 8-9 began on the 23rd of Adar,63 the Mishkan's erection should be recounted only afterwards (in Vayikra 10).64
  • Reason for displacement – One might suggest that the Tabernacle's erection is mentioned already in Shemot to serve as an epilogue to the unit of chapters discussing the building of the Mishkan.
Clouds on the Mishkan (Shemot 40:36-38)
  • Placement in Tanakh – After discussing the erection of the Tabernacle in Shemot 40, the final verses of the chapter speak of the Cloud of Glory descending on the Tabernacle and the role to be played by the cloud as an indicator of when to travel.  The verses conclude by pointing out that this was a constant throughout the nation's journeys in the Wilderness (ie. throughout the forty years).
  • Explicit achronology – In stating that the cloud lifted "בְּכׇל מַסְעֵיהֶם", the verse  explicitly points to what will happen in the future.65
  • Reason for displacement – The point is mentioned here as a conclusion to the discussion regarding the Cloud of Glory.
Conquest of Canaanite cities (Bemidbar 21:3)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Bemidbar 21:3 describes the conquest of Canaanite cities by Israel, in fulfillment of their vow after the victory over the King of Arad.
  • Possible chronological placeRambanBemidbar 21:1About R. Moshe b. Nachman suggests that this first took place after Yehoshua's death in the period of Judges, and is identical to the conquest described in Shofetim 1:16-17.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – As both the verses in Bemidbar and in Shofetim speak of conquering the Canaanites and calling the conquered place "חרמה", it seems that they are speaking of the same event.
  • Reason for displacement – The story is mentioned already here, despite the achronology, to complete the story, telling the reader how the nation's vow was fulfilled.
Conquests of Machir (Bemidbar 32:39-42)66
  • Placement in Tanakh – After discussing the petition of Reuven and Gad and Moshe's giving them and half of the tribe of Menashe lands on the eastern bank of the Jordan, Bemidbar 32 describes the conquests of Menashe's descendants in the area.
  • Possible chronological placeRalbagBemidbar 32:39About R. Levi b. Gershom suggests that the conquests really took place during the war against Sichon discussed in Bemidbar 21.67  A student of R. Saadia Gaonפירוש תלמיד רס״ג דברי הימים א ב׳:כ״ב goes even further to suggest that these cities had been conquered by the tribe of Menashe already during the era of Yosef's reign in Egypt.68
  • Motivation for positing achronology – A possible motivation of R. Saadia's student is the fact that the verses mention Machir, Yair, and Novach, the sons and grandsons of Menashe. These figures should no longer be alive if the conquests took place in the fortieth year.
  • Reason for displacement – Despite occurring earlier, the event is mentioned here to complete the story and explain why Menashe, too, got land on the eastern bank of the Jordan.  For further discussion, see Menashe Joins Reuven and Gad.
Summaries

An episode which occurred and was explicitly mentioned earlier in Tanakh is repeated in order to serve as a summary to a unit.

"לֹא יִשְׁמַע אֲלֵיכֶם פַּרְעֹה" (Shemot 11:9)
  • Placement in Tanakh – In Shemot 11:9, after Moshe warns Paroh of the upcoming Plague of Firstborns, Hashem tells Moshe, "לֹא יִשְׁמַע אֲלֵיכֶם פַּרְעֹה". Afterwards, the textstates that "Moshe and Aharon performed all these signs".
  • Possible chronological placeRashbamShemot 11:9About R. Shemuel b. Meir69 asserts that the initial statement is not a warning that Paroh will harden his heart now, after the Plague of Firstborns, but rather a statement referring to what happened in the previous nine plagues.  As such, it is part of the the summary statement of verse 10 which summarizes how Moshe and Aharon had performed all the wonders before Paroh.
  • Motivation – Rashbam is likely motivated by the fact that after the last plague Paroh does not refuse to let the nation go, but instead actively chases them out.
  • Reason for displacement – Though Paroh's earlier refusals have already been shared, the fact is repeated here as a summation (together with verse 10) for all the plagues.
Esav's move to Seir (Bereshit 36:6-8)
  • Placement in TanakhBereshit 36:6-8 describes Esav's uprooting from Canaan and moving to Edom "מִפְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב אָחִיו", suggesting that this first happened only after Yaakov had returned from Charan and settled in Canaan.
  • Possible chronological placeHoil MosheBereshit 32:4About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi, however,  suggests that the move actually took place earlier, while Yaakov was still in Charan.
  • Factors supporting achronology – Hoil Moshe points to the fact that Esav appears to have already been living in Seir in Bereshit 32, where we are told that Yaakov sent messengers to Esav in Seir.
  • Reason for displacement – Despite its having occurred earlier, Esav's move might be mentioned (and elaborated upon) in Bereshit 36 only as part of the closing summary of the Esav story where Torah describes his descendants and land.

"לא להפסיק את הענין"

Secondary narrative components might be displacedto form a prologue at the very beginning of a unit or an appendix at the end because setting them in their proper chronological place in the middle of the central unit would otherwise break the flow of the main narrative . The episode or topic which is displaced is either irrelevant to the main theme or message of the unit, of lesser import, or of a different literary character.

Prologues

An event is moved from its correct chronological place later in the text and placed at the very beginning of the unit where it will not disrupt the main topic.

Censuses and Laws of Bemidbar 1-6
  • Placement in Tanakh – The opening chapters of Bemidbar describes the census of the nation, which is explicitly dated to the second month (Bemidbar 1:1-3). This is followed by several undated legal sections.
  • Possible chronological place and motivation – As Bemidbar 7 and 9 are dated to the first month, and Bemidbar 10 describes the nation's departure from Mount Sinai in  the second month, it would seem that the census occurred between the events of these two chapters and should have been recorded there.
  • Reason for displacement – Placing such an extensive list of numbers there would break up the main narrative of the book. As such, the Torah might have preferred to incorporate the non-narrative material of Chapters 1-6 as a prologue to the book where it would not interrupt the stories of the Wilderness journey. See Chronology of Bemidbar 1 – 10 for elaboration.
Appendices

An episode is moved from its correct chronological place earlier in the narrative and placed at the very end of the unit where it will not disrupt the main topic.

Marriage to Keturah (Bereshit 25:1-6)
  • Placement in Tanakh – Avraham's marriage to Keturah (and the birth of their children) is described at the very end of the Avraham narratives, suggesting that these events took place at the end of his life, after Sarah's death and Yitzchak's marriage.
  • Possible chronological place – Shadal, however, asserts that the marriage occurred before Sarah's death and not where it is mentioned in the text.
  • Motivation – The suggested reordering is motivated by rationalist concerns over the age of Avraham when siring children. Since Avraham's siring of Yitzchak was already considered surprising, the fact that he could bear six more children 40 years later would be even more unnatural!
  • Reason for displacement – Since the story is tangential to the main narrative which focuses on the formation of the Nation of Israel, it is put as an appendix to the Avraham stories rather than in its proper chronological place. [For elaboration and dissenting opinions, see Avraham's Many Wives]
Genealogy lists (Bereshit 25, 36)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The genealogies of Yishmael and Esav are listed as appendices to the Avraham and Yitzchak stories respectively.
  • Possible chronological place – It is likely that some of their of their descendants were born during the lives of their grandparents and in a strict chronological account should have appeared earlier in the narrative.70
  • Motivation for positing achronology – Given that Esav married at the age of forty, eighty years before the death of Yitzchak,71 it would be reasonable to assume that many of his children were born in Yitzchak's lifetime.
  • Reason for displacement – The lists are mentioned only at the end of the entire cycle of stories so as not to interrupt the main narrative which focuses on the chosen rather than rejected lines.72
Laws of the Red Heifer (Bemidbar 19)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The laws of the red heifer appear in Bemidbar 19, after all the rebellions, complaints, and other events of the second year in the Wilderness have been told.
  • Possible chronological placeShadalBemidbar 8:7Bemidbar 20:1About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto, however, suggests that the laws were really given at some point before the purification of the Levites described in Bemidbar 8.
  • Motivation – His suggestion is based on logical conjecture; if the Levites underwent a process of purification, it would make sense that the laws of purification from the dead would have been taught beforehand.
  • Reason for displacement – It is possible that the laws first appear in Bemidbar 19 as an appendix to the stories of the second year so as not interrupt the earlier storyline.
End of Sefer Shofetim (Chapters 17-21)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The stories of the "Idol of Michah" and the "Concubine of Givah" are told in Shofetim 17-21, after the stories of all the Judges, suggesting that they occurred only after the tenure of Shimshon (the last Judge of the book).
  • Possible chronological place – Several commentators,73 however, assume that the two episodes occurred much earlier in Sefer Shofetim.74
  • Motivation for positing achronology – Regarding the idol of Michah, RashiShemot 17:14Shemot 19:11Shemot 21:1Shofetim 17:1About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki notes that the verse states that the idol was "in Shiloh all the days" suggesting that it existed from the very beginning of the Shiloh period (and, thus, that the episode took place in the beginning of Sefer Shofetim). In addition, the story of the Concubine of Givah highlights the role of Pinechas, the grandson of Aharon. If the story is told in its chronological place, this would make him hundreds of years old!
  • Reason for displacement – It is possible that the two stories are set apart and moved to the end of the book since they deviate from the cycle of sin, oppression, return, and salvation that marks the core of the book.
End of Sefer Shemuel
  • Placement in Tanakh – David's song thanking Hashem for saving him from enemies and the feats of his elite warriors are recounted at the end of Sefer Shemuel, in chapters 22-23.
  • Possible chronological place – Some have suggested that these events, nonetheless, took place much earlier in the book.75
  • Motivation – The opening line of the song says that it was composed as praise for David's salvation from Shaul, suggesting that it was composed either during Shaul's lifetime or soon after his death, and the warrior list includes people (such as Uriah the Hittite and Amasa) who are no longer alive at the end of the book.
  • Reason for displacement  Here, too, the displacement might be due to the distinct nature of the material (poetry / list) and unique focus (David's men rather than David) which set them apart from the narrative of the rest of the book.

Homiletical Juxtaposition

Achronology might stem from a desire to relay a message through the juxtaposition of two stories which otherwise would not follow one another. The message might be a lesson in proper behavior, a showcasing of Hashem's attributes, or a means of highlighting (or hiding) a character's strengths or faults.

Proper Behavior

Two nonconsecutive stories might be juxtaposed to teach a lesson in proper behavior.

"וַי״י פָּקַד אֶת שָׂרָה" (Bereshit 21:1)
Parashat Mishpatim
  • Placement in Tanakh – Parashat Mishpatim follows the story of Revelation and the laws regarding the building of altars to God which appear right afterwards..
  • Possible chronological place – The NetzivShemot 21:1Shemot 24:1About R. Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin, however, suggests that the laws were actually relayed before the Decalogue
  • Motivation for positing achronology – The Netziv is motivated by his assumption that Shemot 24 overlaps with the events of Shemot 1976 and as such, that the intervening chapters of Shemot 21-23 also occurred previously.77 
  • Reason for displacement – He suggests that the displacement comes to juxtapose the unit with the announcement "אָבוֹא אֵלֶיךָ וּבֵרַכְתִּיךָ" which appears at the end of the previous chapter (Shemot 20:20) to teach that all who abide by the judicial system (המשפטים) similarly bring blessing to the world. Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Shemot21:1About Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Shemot instead suggests that the unit is juxtaposed with the command to build the altar to teach that one should set up a Sanhedrin (court of law) in the Mikdash.

Hashem's Attributes

Achronology might serve to link stories so as to highlight Hashem's ways and attributes.

Commands regarding the Tabernacle
  • Placement in Tanakh – The directives regarding building the Tabernacle appear in Shemot 25-30, before the story of the Sin of the Golden Calf.
  • Possible chronological placeSifre Devarim1About Sifre Devarim, TanchumaTerumah 8About the Tanchuma, and RashiShemot 31:18About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki , however, claim that the instructions were first given in the wake of (and as a result of) the Sin of the Golden Calf.
  • Motivation for positing achronology – It seems that their understanding of the chronology of the events is directly related to their understanding of the role of the Tabernacle as either a means of atoning for the sin or a sign of forgiveness.
  • Reason for displacement – R. Bachya suggests that the command appears beforehand to teach an important lesson about Hashem's attributes, that He provides a cure even before an illness arises (מקדים תרופה למכה).78  See Purpose of the Mishkan for more.
David's offensive wars
  • Placement in Tanakh – Shemuel II 8 lists David's various wars against external enemies.
  • Possible chronological place – The commentary attributed to R"Y KaraShemuel II 8:1About Attributed to R. Yosef Kara, however, implies that not all of David's wars occurred where written and they might have taken place earlier or later in his reign.
  • Reason for displacement – The list is placed after Chapter 7 in which Hashem promised David, "וַהֲנִיחֹתִי לְךָ מִכׇּל אֹיְבֶיךָ" to highlight how Hashem keeps His promises, as evidenced by the fact that David was indeed able to vanquish his enemies.

Character

Juxtaposing stories that otherwise would not follow one another can help a reader compare and contrast different figures, often highlighting their merits or faults.

Yehuda and Tamar (Bereshit 38)Ibn EzraBereshit First Commentary 38:1About R. Avraham ibn Ezra and RalbagBereshit Beur HaParashah 38:1About R. Levi b. Gershom suggest that the Yehuda story is placed in the middle of the Yosef story, even though parts of it preceded it,79 because Tanakh wanted to juxtapose the story of Yehuda and Tamar with that of Yosef and Mrs. Potiphar and thereby contrast how the two brothers reacted to sexual advances.  While Yosef passed the test, Yehuda did not.
Yitro's arrival (Shemot 18)Ibn EzraShemot First Commentary 18:1Shemot Second Commentary 18:1About R. Avraham ibn Ezra suggests that though the story of Yitro's arrival and advice described in Shemot 18 first occurred in the second year after the construction of the Tabernacle,80 it is purposefully juxtaposed to the story of Amalek's attack to highlight the contrast between Yitro and Amalek. Yitro's goodness is all the more appreciated when seen on the backdrop of the evil Amalek.  See Chronology – Shemot 18 and Yitro & Amalek for further discussion.
Laws of the Red Heifer (Bemidbar 19) – R. Ami in Bavli Moed KatanMoed Katan 28aAbout the Bavli asserts that the laws of the red heifer first appear in Bemidbar 19, rather than before the purification of the Levites in Bemidbar 8 when they were actually relayed,81 so as to juxtapose the laws with Miriam's death (recounted in Bemibdar 20). This teaches that just as the red heifer atones for one's sins, so does the death of the righteous.

Defense of Avot

Achronology might be a means of obscuring a fault or sin of the Avot or nation.

"וַיָּמׇת תֶּרַח בְּחָרָן" (Bereshit 11:32)Bereshit Rabbah39:7About Bereshit Rabbah suggests that Terach's death is mentioned before Avraham leaves Charan, despite it occurring only afterwards,82 to obfuscate the fact that Avraham's departure meant that he could no longer properly honor and care for his father.
Pesach (Bemidbar 9)
  • Placement in Tanakh – The account of the first Pesach in the Wilderness (which took place in the first month) is recounted in Bemidbar 9.
  • Possible chronological place – Its proper place would seem to be at the opening of the book, before the census described there which is dated to the second month.
  • Motivation for positing achronology - In this case the achronology is explicit in the text.
  • Reason for displacement –  RashiBemidbar 9:1About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki explains the displacement, noting that Hashem did not want to open the book with the a description of the Pesach since this would cast Israel in a negative light. Since this was the only Pesach observed by the nation throughout the forty years, its mention is disparaging.83  See Chronology of Bemidbar 1 – 10 for elaboration.