Difference between revisions of "The Spies in Art/0"

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Original Author: Neima Novetsky)
 
(7 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
 
<h1>The Spies in Art</h1>
 
<h1>The Spies in Art</h1>
 
 
<!--
 
<p style="text-align:center"><a class="pdfleft" href="Media/4Bemidbar/13/Spies Art All.pdf">Click to view/print a PDF version of this topic.</a></p>
 
-->
 
 
 
<div class="overview">
 
<div class="overview">
 
<h2>Introduction</h2>
 
<h2>Introduction</h2>
Line 27: Line 23:
 
<subcategory name="">To Whom Did the Spies Report?
 
<subcategory name="">To Whom Did the Spies Report?
 
<p>While Doré has the spies approaching and displaying their finds to the entire nation, Lanfranco instead has them returning specifically to Moshe.  To whom did the spies report according to the Biblical text?  At first glance the verses seem to support Doré's rendering, as <a href="Bemidbar13" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 13:26</a> presents the spies speaking to both the leaders and the congregation.  The very next verse, though, states "וַיְסַפְּרוּ לוֹ" (they told him) in the singular, suggesting that they spoke only to Moshe.<fn>In addition, the repetition of the term "וְאֶת כׇּל הָעֵדָה" after the previously stated "וַיָּשִׁיבוּ אֹתָם דָּבָר" in verse 26, raises the possibility that perhaps there was two stages and the spies spoke first to the leaders and only afterwards to the rest of the nation.  Alternatively, the men might have aimed their words at Moshe and Aharon but were overheard by others.</fn></p>
 
<p>While Doré has the spies approaching and displaying their finds to the entire nation, Lanfranco instead has them returning specifically to Moshe.  To whom did the spies report according to the Biblical text?  At first glance the verses seem to support Doré's rendering, as <a href="Bemidbar13" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 13:26</a> presents the spies speaking to both the leaders and the congregation.  The very next verse, though, states "וַיְסַפְּרוּ לוֹ" (they told him) in the singular, suggesting that they spoke only to Moshe.<fn>In addition, the repetition of the term "וְאֶת כׇּל הָעֵדָה" after the previously stated "וַיָּשִׁיבוּ אֹתָם דָּבָר" in verse 26, raises the possibility that perhaps there was two stages and the spies spoke first to the leaders and only afterwards to the rest of the nation.  Alternatively, the men might have aimed their words at Moshe and Aharon but were overheard by others.</fn></p>
<p>The two possibilities relate to several other questions as well. What was the purpose of the spies' mission?  Was it military in nature, in which case one would have expected a private debriefing, or was it a scouting mission meant to encourage the nation, necessitating a more public report? See <a href="$">Spies or Scouts</a> for elaboration.  Even if one takes the latter possibility, one must question the logic of sharing a negative report with the masses. Did the spies purposefully share their negativity with the nation,<fn>See <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar13-27" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBemidbar13-27" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 13:27,32</a><a href="Ramban" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Nachmanides</a></multilink> who portrays the spies as actively seeking to convince the nation not to fight.</fn> or was this simply a tactical error on their or Moshe's part?</p>
+
<p>The two possibilities relate to several other questions as well. What was the purpose of the spies' mission?  Was it military in nature, in which case one would have expected a private debriefing, or was it a scouting mission meant to encourage the nation, necessitating a more public report? See <a href="$">Spies or Scouts</a> for elaboration.  Even if one takes the latter possibility, one must question the logic of sharing a negative report with the masses. Did the spies purposefully share their negativity with the nation,<fn>See <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar13-27" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBemidbar13-27" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 13:27,32</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Nachmanides</a></multilink> who portrays the spies as actively seeking to convince the nation not to fight.</fn> or was this simply a tactical error on their or Moshe's part?</p>
 
 
 
</subcategory>
 
</subcategory>
  
 
<subcategory name="">Triumphant or Disillusioned?
 
<subcategory name="">Triumphant or Disillusioned?
<p>Doré's exultant spies contrast sharply with the fatigued and frightened messengers of Lanfranco's image. What were the spies feeling when they returned, excitement or dismay?  When did they become convinced that they were incapable of conquering the land –– already in Canaan, or only once they began to describe their visit and heard the murmurings of the nation?<fn>It is only after the text states that Caleb "quieted the nation", that the spies actually say that they won't be able to inherit the land and begin to slander it.</fn> Finally, at what point did their words stop constituting a legitimate report and turn into slander and sin?<fn>Commentators differ in their assessment of the spies' speech and which aspects were problematic. See, for example, <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar13-27" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBemidbar13-27" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 13:27,32</a><a href="Ramban" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Nachmanides</a></multilink>, who suggests that the words "אֶפֶס כִּי עַז הָעָם" constituted a turning point, but that the spies were punished for their slander of <a href="Bemidbar13" data-aht="source">verse 32</a>.</fn> To learn more, see <a href="$">Sin of the Spies</a>.</p>
+
<p>Doré's exultant spies contrast sharply with the fatigued and frightened messengers of Lanfranco's image. What were the spies feeling when they returned, excitement or dismay?  When did they become convinced that they were incapable of conquering the land –– already in Canaan, or only once they began to describe their visit and heard the murmurings of the nation?<fn>It is only after the text states that Caleb "quieted the nation", that the spies actually say that they won't be able to inherit the land and begin to slander it.</fn> Finally, at what point did their words stop constituting a legitimate report and turn into slander and sin?<fn>Commentators differ in their assessment of the spies' speech and which aspects were problematic. See, for example, <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar13-27" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBemidbar13-27" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 13:27,32</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Nachmanides</a></multilink>, who suggests that the words "אֶפֶס כִּי עַז הָעָם" constituted a turning point, but that the spies were punished for their slander of <a href="Bemidbar13" data-aht="source">verse 32</a>.</fn> To learn more, see <a href="$">Sin of the Spies</a>.</p>
 
</subcategory>
 
</subcategory>
  
 
<subcategory name="">"וַיִּשָּׂאֻהוּ בַמּוֹט בִּשְׁנָיִם"
 
<subcategory name="">"וַיִּשָּׂאֻהוּ בַמּוֹט בִּשְׁנָיִם"
<p>While Lanfranco paints two men carrying the cluster of grapes, Doré portrays two different pairs of men each carrying their own rod.  Was there one pole of grapes or two? The text is ambiguous as the phrase "וַיִּשָּׂאֻהוּ בַמּוֹט בִּשְׁנָיִם" can be understood to mean either that two men were together carrying one pole,<fn>See, for instance, <multilink><a href="RalbagBemidbar13-23" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagBemidbar13-23" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 13:23</a><a href="Ralbag" data-aht="parshan">About About R. Levi b. Gershon</a></multilink> who explains the verse this way.</fn> or that there were two separate poles.<fn>See the discussion in <multilink><a href="BavliSotah34a" data-aht="source">Bavli Sotah</a><a href="BavliSotah34a" data-aht="source">34a</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>.</fn></p>   
+
<p>While Lanfranco paints two men carrying the cluster of grapes, Doré portrays two different pairs of men each carrying their own rod.  Was there one pole of grapes or two? The text is ambiguous as the phrase "וַיִּשָּׂאֻהוּ בַמּוֹט בִּשְׁנָיִם" can be understood to mean either that two men were together carrying one pole,<fn>See, for instance, <multilink><a href="RalbagBemidbar13-23" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagBemidbar13-23" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 13:23</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> who explains the verse this way.</fn> or that there were two separate poles.<fn>See the discussion in <multilink><a href="BavliSotah34a" data-aht="source">Bavli Sotah</a><a href="BavliSotah34a" data-aht="source">34a</a><a href="Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>.</fn></p>   
 
</subcategory>
 
</subcategory>
  
<subcategory name="">How Big Were the Fruit?
+
<subcategory name="">How Large Were the Fruit?
 
<p>While both artists depict huge clusters of grapes, the other fruit that they portray are rather normal in size. This would seem to accord with the Biblical narrative which suggests that the grapes were so large that they necessitated two men to carry them while the other fruit did not require any special arrangements. This makes one wonder how big grapes were vis-a-vis other fruit in the time of Tanakh, and how to understand this larger than natural size. One can either suggest that nature has changed over the centuries, or that the grapes themselves were similar to those found today and the pole was only necessary due to quantity and not size.</p>
 
<p>While both artists depict huge clusters of grapes, the other fruit that they portray are rather normal in size. This would seem to accord with the Biblical narrative which suggests that the grapes were so large that they necessitated two men to carry them while the other fruit did not require any special arrangements. This makes one wonder how big grapes were vis-a-vis other fruit in the time of Tanakh, and how to understand this larger than natural size. One can either suggest that nature has changed over the centuries, or that the grapes themselves were similar to those found today and the pole was only necessary due to quantity and not size.</p>
 
</subcategory>
 
</subcategory>

Latest revision as of 01:58, 27 November 2016

The Spies in Art

Introduction

Bemidbar 13-14 and much of Devarim 1 are devoted to the story of the twelve spies. The two images shown here, Doré's engraving1 and Lanfranco's painting,2 both depict the men returning from their mission, carrying the fruits of the land. The renderings differ both in the cast of characters portrayed and in how those figures are depicted, allowing for varied understandings of the spies' report and intentions.

Contrasting Images

Doré

Doré's engraving focuses on the returning spies. In the center, two of the scouts stand on a mound triumphantly raising their huge cluster of grapes to show the nation. Behind them, another pair carry a second bundle of grapes on a rod between them, and three others follow, showing off other assorted fruits. In the background the masses of Israelites await their arrival.

Lanfranco

In contrast to Doré, Lanfranco chooses to highlight just a few characters. Three of the spies, Moshe, and an unidentified man are painted close to the foreground, large and muscular, while the other spies are alluded to by a couple of heads that peep out from behind. The scouts look weary and somewhat tense as they display their oversized fruits to Moshe. The leader, in turn, stands majestically with one arm raised and the other holding what looks more like a scepter than a staff.

Relationship to the Biblical Text

The artists' choices reflect certain ambiguities in the Biblical text and different possible interpretive stances:

To Whom Did the Spies Report?

While Doré has the spies approaching and displaying their finds to the entire nation, Lanfranco instead has them returning specifically to Moshe. To whom did the spies report according to the Biblical text? At first glance the verses seem to support Doré's rendering, as Bemidbar 13:26 presents the spies speaking to both the leaders and the congregation. The very next verse, though, states "וַיְסַפְּרוּ לוֹ" (they told him) in the singular, suggesting that they spoke only to Moshe.3

The two possibilities relate to several other questions as well. What was the purpose of the spies' mission? Was it military in nature, in which case one would have expected a private debriefing, or was it a scouting mission meant to encourage the nation, necessitating a more public report? See Spies or Scouts for elaboration. Even if one takes the latter possibility, one must question the logic of sharing a negative report with the masses. Did the spies purposefully share their negativity with the nation,4 or was this simply a tactical error on their or Moshe's part?

Triumphant or Disillusioned?

Doré's exultant spies contrast sharply with the fatigued and frightened messengers of Lanfranco's image. What were the spies feeling when they returned, excitement or dismay? When did they become convinced that they were incapable of conquering the land –– already in Canaan, or only once they began to describe their visit and heard the murmurings of the nation?5 Finally, at what point did their words stop constituting a legitimate report and turn into slander and sin?6 To learn more, see Sin of the Spies.

"וַיִּשָּׂאֻהוּ בַמּוֹט בִּשְׁנָיִם"

While Lanfranco paints two men carrying the cluster of grapes, Doré portrays two different pairs of men each carrying their own rod. Was there one pole of grapes or two? The text is ambiguous as the phrase "וַיִּשָּׂאֻהוּ בַמּוֹט בִּשְׁנָיִם" can be understood to mean either that two men were together carrying one pole,7 or that there were two separate poles.8

How Large Were the Fruit?

While both artists depict huge clusters of grapes, the other fruit that they portray are rather normal in size. This would seem to accord with the Biblical narrative which suggests that the grapes were so large that they necessitated two men to carry them while the other fruit did not require any special arrangements. This makes one wonder how big grapes were vis-a-vis other fruit in the time of Tanakh, and how to understand this larger than natural size. One can either suggest that nature has changed over the centuries, or that the grapes themselves were similar to those found today and the pole was only necessary due to quantity and not size.