Realia:שְׂלָו – Fish or Fowl/0

שְׂלָו – Fish or Fowl

Exegetical Approaches

שְׂלָו

Part of Speech	Noun
Occurrences	4 (in 3 texts)
Possible Identifications	Common quail Fish
Related Words

Overview

Almost all scholars identify the "שְׂלָו" with the common quail, a bird from the pheasant family. Every fall and spring, on their route between Europe and Africa, quail migrate over the sea, landing in the Sinai desert. They arrive exhausted and are easy prey for hunters. Some quail have been found to be poisonous, causing paralysis and even death. The miracle of the "שְׂלָו" in Shemot and the accompanying plague described in Bemidbar can thus be understood on the backdrop of the quail's natural migration patterns and characteristics. However, there is also a minority opinion which posits that the "שְׂלָו" is a fish, and there are several features of the Biblical account which might support such an identification.

Biblical Occurrences

The "שְׂלָו" is mentioned in only two stories in Torah, and these episodes are referenced in two additional places in Tehillim.¹

• Shemot 16:12-13 – When the nation requests food in the desert, Hashem provides them with both manna and "שְׂלָו".
• Bemidbar 11:18-34 – When the nation complains about the manna, Hashem brings them "שְׂלָו" as a punishment, and many people die upon eating the "שְׂלָו".
• Tehillim 78:26-31 – In reviewing many of the nation's sins, the Psalm recounts the events of Bemidbar 11. The term "שְׂלָו" is not used, but rather "עוֹף כָּנָף".
• Tehillim 105:40 – This Psalm briefly mentions the story of Shemot 16 in the context of its historical survey.

Rabbinic Sources

• Bavli YomaYoma 75bAbout the Bavli states that there are four species of "סליו":‎ שיכלי,‎ קיבלי,‎ פסיוני, and שליו.‎²

Identification Options

1. Common Quail

Common Quail

Modern Hebrew	שליו
Scientific	Coturnix coturnix
Picture	by Guérin Nicolas

Tehillim 78:27 appears to imply that the "שְׂלָו" was a bird, and most commentators³ agree that the "שְׂלָו" mentioned in the Torah should be identified with the common quail.⁴ This identification is based on early translations, a continuous tradition of hunting and eating quail, and characteristics of the quail which match the Biblical description:

Translations

• Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)Shemot 16:13About Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan) translates "שְׂלָו" as פִּיסְיוֹנִין (the pheasant family of which quail are a part).⁵
• The LXX translates it as ortygometra. This is a related species, known in Hebrew as מלכישליו (king of the selav), as it is slightly bigger than the regular quail and often joins the migrating quail pack.

Traditions

• There is a continuous history of eating and hunting quail, dating back thousands of years.
• Egyptian tomb paintings feature scenes of hunting quail, which is known in Egyptian as salva.⁶
• Quail is considered kosher as there is a continuous tradition of its identity and being eaten.⁷

Relationship to the Biblical Account

There are many points of contact between what we know about the common quail and the description of the "שְׂלָו" in Bemidbar 11:18-34 and Tehillim 78:26-31.

"וְרוּחַ נָסַע מֵאֵת ה'" – The quail often wait for a favorable wind to help them fly across the sea.

"וַיָּגָז שַׂלְוִים" – The meaning of the root גוז is unclear.⁸ The Sifre BemidbarBemidbar 97About Sifre Bemidbar assumes it is related to the root גזז which means to shear,⁹ and it thus understands the phrase to mean that the quail landed like "גיזי צמר", woolen balls. This fits the landing patterns of the quail. They do not alight all at once but rather arrive in many small groups of 20-30, which might appear like woolen balls.¹⁰

"מִן הַיָּם" and the timing – As the verse does not identify the sea (יַם) from which the "שְׂלָו" came, it could refer to either the quail's spring migration from the heart of Africa when they come from the direction of Yam Suf,¹¹ or to their fall journey from Europe over the Mediterranean Sea.¹² However, neither modern migrating season overlaps with Iyyar, the month in which the quail arrived both in Shemot and Bemidbar.¹³

"וַיִּטֹּשׁ עַל הַמַּחֲנֶה" and the geography – The description of the "שְׂלָו" being rained on the camp, matches the reality of the exhausted quail which drop to the shore, often hardly moving, after their long flight. However, the episode in Bemidbar took place, not along the coast, but rather in the middle of the Sinai.¹⁴

"כְּדֶרֶךְ יוֹם כֹּה וּכְדֶרֶךְ יוֹם כֹּה" – Millions of quail used to land on the coast of Israel,¹⁵ matching this description. Tehillim 78:27, "וַיַּמְטֵר עֲלֵיהֶם כֶּעָפָר שְׁאֵר וּכְחוֹל יַמִּים עוֹף כָּנָף" similarly emphasizes their vast numbers.

"וּכְאַמָּתַיִם עַל פְּנֵי הָאָרֶץ" – According to several sources¹⁶ this verse does not mean that the birds were piled two cubits high but rather that they hovered two cubits above the ground, making it easier to catch them. This corresponds to the known flying habits of quail.

"וַיָּקָם הָעָם כָּל הַיּוֹם הַהוּא" – According to this verse, the nation collected the "שְׂלָו" during the "entire" day and into the night, suggesting that it landed in the morning. The account in Shemot, in contrast, has the "שְׂלָו" arriving in the evening ("וַיְהִי בָעֶרֶב וַתַּעַל הַשְּׂלָו"). In nature, quail usually cross the sea at night and arrive on the shore in the morning, as per the description in Bemidbar.

"וַיַּאַסְפוּ אֶת הַשְּׂלָו" – The quail's fatigue from its journey makes it relatively easy to catch and gather.

"וַיִּשְׁטְחוּ לָהֶם שָׁטוֹחַ סְבִיבוֹת הַמַּחֲנֶה" – This verse might refer to the drying (and preserving) of the quail in the sun, a common practice in ancient times.¹⁷

"וַיַּךְ ה' בָּעָם מַכָּה רַבָּה" – As early as the 4th century BCE there is evidence that some quail are poisonous.¹⁸ Although there is disagreement as to the cause of this, one theory is that toxins accumulate in the bird during the long flight and dissipate only several days thereafter.¹⁹ This would explain why the Israelites who "desired" meat and ate it immediately upon its landing would have been affected.²⁰

"עַד חֹדֶשׁ יָמִים" – It is unclear from this verse whether the "שְׂלָו" continued to arrive throughout the month, or if enough fowl landed at one time to last for a month. As the birds tend to migrate over a two-three month span, either is possible.

Occasional treat or daily occurrence? The nation's complaint about lacking meat in Bemidbar 11 would seemingly indicate that the "שְׂלָו" of Shemot 16 was a one-off occurrence rather than being a part of the nation's regular diet like the manna.²¹ As the "שְׂלָו" in Shemot 16 and Bemidbar 11 arrived at almost the same exact time of the year, this phenomenon could be readily explained by seasonal migration patterns. For more on the relationship between the stories in Shemot and Bemidbar and the dispute between the commentators on the frequency of the quail's arrival, see Selav – Shemot and Bemidbar.

Natural or supernatural – In light of the scientific data available to us regarding the quail, it is reasonable to say that Hashem employed natural phenomena in bringing the "שְׂלָו". This is, in fact, the position of RambanShemot 16:6Shemot 16:12Bemidbar 11:23About R. Moshe Nachmanides.²² Nevertheless, there are significant aspects of the "שְׂלָו" episodes which appear to at least border on the miraculous. These include: the arrival of the "שְׂלָו" in Iyyar, their descent upon the middle of the Sinai desert, the vast quantities which came, and Moshe's ability to predict the exact time of their coming.²³ For more, see Miracles – Natural and Supernatural.

2. Fish

A minority opinion maintains that the "שְׂלָו" were a type of fish rather than birds. This approach is taken by a 14th century work called ספר מאור האפלה‎²⁴ and is expanded on by R. Michael Dushinsky.²⁵

Relationship to the Biblical Account

While this identification is not supported by the verse in Tehillim 78:27 which speaks of Hashem raining down fowl, it does illuminate several noteworthy features of the Biblical account.

The Israelite complaint – The "שְׂלָו" arrives in Bemidbar 11 in response to the Children of Israel's yearning for the fish they used to eat in Egypt ("זָכַרְנוּ אֶת הַדָּגָה").‎²⁶ Meat from their own livestock and poultry was presumably available to the Israelites in the wilderness even before the miracle of the "שְׂלָו".

"וַתַּעַל" – The verb "וַתַּעַל" (Shemot 16:13) might aptly describe fish ascending from the water, rather than birds descending from the heavens.²⁷

"וַיָּגָז שַׂלְוִים מִן הַיָּם" – The description of the "שְׂלָו" being cast out from the sea fits well if they were fish.²⁸

"וַיַּאַסְפוּ אֶת הַשְּׂלָו" – The Torah says that the "שְׂלָו" were merely gathered,²⁹ and gives no indication that they were slaughtered. This would work well if they were fish which do not need to be slaughtered, but not if they were poultry which require an entire process of slaughtering and salting in order to be permitted.³⁰

Natural or supernatural – According to this, the miracle occurred in a very supernatural manner.

¹ In Tehillim 78, the "שְׂלָו" is not mentioned by name but it is clearly implied.

² There is disagreement as to the identification of some of these species.

³ See Y. Braslavy, נס השליו במדבר in הידעת את הארץ , vol. II:.339-347, part of which is available online. Yosef Braslavy (1896-1972) was a scholar who illuminated the relationship between the geography, flora, and fauna of the Land of Israel and the Biblical text. Much of his research can be found in his multi-volume series, הידעת את הארץ and in his work, מידע הארץ למקרא. This article relies heavily on his scholarship. See also M. Raanan, ויאספו את השליו, who synthesizes much of the earlier research on the "שְׂלָו".

⁴ The quail is a small bird from the pheasant family, generally weighing around 100 grams. It is brown with streaks of white or yellow, has a short beak and legs, and, like other migratory birds, has relatively long wings. Its diet includes seeds, insects and vegetables. Quails fly south from Europe to Africa in the fall, and make their return trip northward in the spring. Before their flight across the Mediterranean they build up fats, and they then cross the Sea in one night, arriving exhausted on the coast of Israel and Sinai. Upon landing, they tend to hover close to the ground, and are easily caught with nets.

⁵ See also Bavli YomaYoma 75bAbout the Bavli.

⁶ See A. Paz, "ויגז שלוים מן הים – נס חד פעמי או אירוע שגרתי" in טבע וארץ 298, September 1987. Paz brings other attestations as well.

⁷ See M. Raanan's article cited above.

⁸ See also Tehillim 100:10.

⁹ See also Ibn Ezra Bemidbar 11:31 who compares the word to the similar form, ויחם, in Melakhim II 4:34 where the doubling of the root is also lost. Alternatively, the root simply means "to bring"; see Rashi Bemidbar 11:31.

¹⁰ See Braslavy.

¹¹ See JosephusAntiquities 3:1:5About Josephus, who says that the quails came from the Arabian Gulf, and see also Hoil MosheBemidbar 11:29About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi.

¹² This is the possibility preferred by Braslavy, who contends that the definite article "הַיָּם" is used to refer to the much larger and well known Mediterranean Sea (הים הגדול). However, given the context of the Israelites' itinerary around Yam Suf, it is possible that this is the sea referred to in this verse.

¹³ Braslavy notes that this was a miraculous aspect of the events. See also the discussion below.

¹⁴ This is also noted by Braslavy, but see the accounts of multitudes of quail arriving in non-coastal areas cited by Paz.

¹⁵ In recent decades, their numbers have dropped due to hunting and habitat loss.

¹⁶ See Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)Bemidbar 11:31About Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan), Mekhilta DeRashbiShemot 16:13About Mekhilta DeRashbi and Sifre BemidbarBemidbar 97About Sifre Bemidbar.

¹⁷ See the sources cited by Braslavy.

¹⁸ Aristotle (On Plants 820:6-7) and others point to the quail as an example of an animal which can eat something which is poisonous to man but not be affected themselves. In modern times, quail poisoning is known as coturnism (from the scientific name for the bird, coturnix coturnix). A. Paz (cited above) describes a modern poisoning episode that occurred in 1980 when quail, seeking refuge from a storm during their trek across the sea, landed on a boat. The unfortunate sailors who ate from them felt the consequences within a few hours, suffering breathing difficulties and paralysis, with some even dying.

¹⁹ Others have proposed that it is caused by the quail's consumption of certain poisonous seeds, and see AbarbanelBemidbar 11About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel who adopts this theory.

²⁰ In Shemot there is no description of the consumption of the "שְׂלָו", so it is possible either that the nation waited before eating it, or that this group of birds was non-toxic. Alternatively, see R. Yaacov Medan [in his article, "איפה ואיפה – עיון בפרשיות נדודי ישראל במדבר", Megadim 17 (1992): 85 (see also note 86)] who suggests that the epidemic in the second year was caused by the massive overloading of digestive systems that were accustomed to subsisting on the manna, while in the first year the nation exercised self-restraint and ate moderately.

²¹ See, however, RashiArakhin 15bAbout R. Shelomo Yitzchaki who (at least according to TosafotArakhin 15b s.v. התאווAbout Ba'alei HaTosafot's understanding) suggests that the "שְׂלָו" arrived continuously, and that the nation complained again in Bemidbar because they desired even greater quantities of meat. See also R. Saadia GaonCommentary Shemot 16:19-26About R. Saadia Gaon, RambanShemot 16:12About R. Moshe Nachmanides, and R. BachyaShemot 16:13About R. Bachya b. Asher.

²² See also R. BachyaShemot 16:13About R. Bachya b. Asher, following in Ramban's footsteps, and Hoil MosheBemidbar 11:29About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi and R. D"Z HoffmannShemot 16:13About R. D"Z Hoffmann who reference modern accounts of quail migrations. Braslavy suggests that Ramban was familiar with the quail's migratory patterns to the coast of Israel. However, there is no indication from the manuscripts of the commentary that these remarks of Ramban were added after he immigrated to Israel.

²³ These aspects are all pointed out by Braslavy.

²⁴ This is a Midrashic work compiled in Yemen in 1329 by R. Netanel b. Yeshayah. See also the Lekach TovBemidbar 11:31About R. Toviah b. Eliezer who says that the "שְׂלָו" had a fin like fish, and R. Yosef Rozin in Tzafenat Paneach Bemidbar 11:31 who says that the "שְׂלָו" was an "עוף של מים" and thus did not require ritual slaughter (see below).

²⁵ M. Dushinsky, "ההיה השלו מין דג", HaMaayan 52:4 (5772): 47-49 cites this interpretation in the name of his uncle R. Yerachmiel Dushinsky.

²⁶ In fact, R. Dushinsky suggests that the Israelites, while in Egypt, may have never even eaten meat from sheep or cows as these were worshipped.

²⁷ However, it is possible that the root עלה is used here because the birds were coming from over the sea (see Bemidbar 11:31). See also "וַיַּעַל הָאַרְבֶּה עַל כָּל אֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם" in Shemot 10:12,14 in which the root עלה is used to describe the visitation / invasion of a swarm of locust.

²⁸ This is particularly true if "וַיָּגָז" is derived from the root גזז and refers to a process of detachment from a source of vitality.

²⁹ Note that "וַיַּאַסְפוּ" is the same verb used a few verses earlier regarding fish when Moshe says "אִם אֶת כָּל דְּגֵי הַיָּם יֵאָסֵף לָהֶם", and stands in contrast to the verb שחט which he uses for livestock "הֲצֹאן וּבָקָר יִשָּׁחֵט לָהֶם". Interestingly, the Bavli Chulin 27b learns from Moshe's language that fish do not require ritual slaughter, and it then proceeds to ask why the "שְׂלָו" should have required slaughter given that the language is the same. If the "שְׂלָו", however, were fish, they indeed would not have needed to be slaughtered.

³⁰ Cf. R. Yehoshua b. Korcha in Bavli Yoma 75b who attempts to solve this problem by reversing the letters of the word "שָׁטוֹחַ" and transforming it into "שחוט".