CHAPTER VI

THE PRIMITIVE PASTORAL LIFE

§ 1. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE NOMADIC STAGE THE earliest records show the Hebrews in the pastoral stage of culture. Abraham and Lot, who moved from pasture to pasture in Palestine and the southern wilderness, were rich in flocks, herds, asses and camels, tents and slaves, and in silver and gold ornaments and costly garments (Gen 13. 2-5; 24. 22, 35, 53). Abraham's family was really a clan, for he had three hundred and eighteen young slaves fit for warfare who had been "born in his own house" (14. 14).

Jacob, when he fled from home as a fugitive, found refuge with his uncle, who was also a pastoral chief. In his service he acquired the wealth of a nomad (32. 5, 13-15) and then returned to Palestine, where he found pasturage for his flocks and herds (37. 12).

The sojourn of the Hebrews in Egypt was one of those temporary residences of the nomad in a settled community, brought about in this case through famine (47. 3, 4); and, in spite of the bondage into which they were brought by the Egyptians, when they went out from their land it was rds (Exod 12. 32-38).

still

sis.

nev

phr

from Egypt had gone back to the nomad whose flocks he tended (Exod e leadership of Israel it was to through the wilderness from and of Canaan to which they sa rich pastoral land, for the milk an honey" (Num 13.

27; Deut 6. 3) is not the description of a land of agriculture, still less of cities, but of pasturage for cattle and of flowers for wild bees.

The uplands of Gilead east of the Jordan offered especially rich pasture land, and the Hebrews who settled on that side of the river continued to be essentially a pastoral people (Num 32. 1-5; Judg 5. 16). Sleek sheep and cattle were called after this region (Deut 32. 14; Amos 4. 1).

The Hebrews of western Palestine continued after they became agriculturists to give large attention to the raising of cattle, sheep, and goats. Pasturage was excellent in the more fertile parts of the land, and even on the rocky hills of Judah the skillful shepherd could find good grazing for his sheep (Psa 23). Flocks and herds were always very important to the Hebrews for purposes of food (Judg 6. 19; 13. 15; 1 Sam 9. 24; 14. 32; 2 Sam 12. 4; 1 Kings 4. 23; Prov 15. 17; Luke 15. 29, 30), as offerings for sacrifice (Num 28; 1 Kings 8. 63), and for their products, milk, butter, and wool (Deut 32. 14; 1 Sam 17. 18; 2 Sam 17. 29; Prov 27. 26f.; 30. 33; Isa 7. 15; 53. 7; 55. 1).

During the pastoral stage of Hebrew life there were some beginnings of a more settled state. A certain amount of grain was probably raised for the needs of the households (Gen 30. 14; 37. 7), and simple trade transactions took place, as we see from the purchase of the burial ground at Machpelah (23. 17f.), the sale of Joseph into slavery (37. 25-28), and the journey of the Hebrews to buy grain in Egypt (42. 2).

The social life of the pastoral stage was very simple. Government was patriarchal, the Clan-Father exercising authority according to the recognized customs that had grown up through the centuries (38. 24). There would not be many sources of friction, though troubles might arise about pasturage (13. 7) and wells (26. 12-22), and, of course, on personal matters (27. 41; 31. If.; 34. 7; 37. 18f.). There would be no real poverty, as the clan has a

solidarity: no one starves unless they all starve (42. 1f.). Thus the great class of problems which arise in more complex life had no existence. And the institution of slavery with its good and bad phases very simply provided for all the enrichment of life that depends on labor. The pastoral stage is a rude and even a harsh condition of society, but with certain fine magnanimities and hospitalities (13. 8; 14. 22f.; 18. 1-8; 20. 14-16; 24; 44. 18-34; 45. 1-15).

§ 2. THE INFLUENCE OF THE NOMADIC STAGE The Hebrews never quite forgot that they belonged to the desert. Indeed, they might well remember it, for every height in the land affords a view of the deep gorge of the Jordan beyond which stretch the uplands whose hinder side is the great wilderness from which they came. And from the Mount of Olives opposite Jerusalem the desert of the Dead Sea looks as if it were just beneath one's feet.

A result of this remembrance was a restiveness under restraint. They could not endure the highly organized government which the long-settled peoples were willing to accept; and this was particularly true of the northern tribes. Thus Solomon's imperialism, to which later Jews looked back as a time of glory, chafed the freedom-loving children of the desert, who at the first opportunity threw off the yoke of his successor.

What portion have we in David?

Neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse:

To your tents, O Israel:

Now see to thine own house, David (1 Kings 12. 16).

The monarchy was always elective in the north, though with a general acceptance of the principle of inheritance. The frequent changes of dynasty indicate how easily the people were moved to enforce their independence.

Attractive as the new life in Canaan was in comparison with the hard conditions of the desert, there were always

those who felt that it was a luxury too dearly bought. Civilization then, as now, was full of corruptions. The religious festivals themselves were times of self-indulgence and debauchery. The life of the city tended to the accentuation of wealth and poverty, and promoted injustice and fraud. To many an earnest soul the nobler times of Israel's life seemed to be in the past, when men lived in tents and had never learned the soft arts of the agricultural and commercial life.

The most outstanding instance of this protest was the group of Rechabites, a sect of nomads who took a perpetual vow that they and their descendants would not plant seed nor live in houses nor in cities, and particularly would eschew the vine, which was esteemed the richest product of the soil (Jer 35. 5-11). They lived among their fellow citizens as an example of the simple life of the desert.

The prophetic protest had in it certain elements of this stern contempt for luxury with its dangerous seductions. Thus Elijah came from that Gilead east of the Jordan, where the pastoral tribes had settled (1 Kings 17. 1). In striking contrast with the luxurious Ahab, he was clad in a rough garment woven of hair, with a leather belt (2 Kings 1. 8), and with a sheepskin for a cloak. Against the king, whose covetousness to enlarge his royal gardens had caused the infamous murder of a just citizen, and against the heathen princess who had instigated the deed, this stern man announced the wrath of God (1 Kings 21).

It would not be correct to say that the prophets were opposed to the agricultural and commercial life that had developed. On the contrary, their brightest pictures are of a future righteous society where the people are to be settled in the good land that God has given them (Jer 31. 1-14; Amos 9. 11-15; Micah 4. 1-4). And yet the ascetic note of the prophets, as when Amos denounces the revelers (6. Iff.), and Isaiah makes his contemptuous enumeration of the finery of the women (3. 16ff.), and Micah sees

reformation only in the destruction of the cities (5. 1off.), until John the Baptist comes out of the desert itself a second Elijah (Mark 1. 1-8), may well have had its origin in the remembrance of the days of the fathers in the wilderness when they were near to God, and when man had not learned to be covetous of luxury and to oppress his neighbor to secure unrighteous ends.

DIRECTIONS FOR STUDY

1. Read Genesis and enumerate the elements of wealth possessed by the various patriarchs.

2. Read Gen 23, and note the characteristics of an ancient bargain. 3. What does Gen 43. 11 indicate as to the acquisition of the fruits of the soil by the nomad?

4. Read Genesis again carefully and, bearing in mind that these narratives are the product of a much later time, consider what social virtues the pastoral stage of life may develop. 5. In what respects is the pastoral stage morally inferior to more developed culture?

6. What contribution does the rough life such as that depicted in Ralph Connor's stories of the western plains make to our modern civilization?

7. How far is the modern reformer justified in holding up for our emulation the simpler and cruder life of earlier days in our history?

8. Is there any prospect of American life growing less complex? If not, what is to be learned from the virtues of simpler social organizations?

9. By what means can the softness which is the product of enervating luxury be offset in a highly civilized society? 10. Is a thoroughly virile civilization compatible with great wealth?