Charles Ellicott Commentary Judges 12

Gathered themselves together. —Literally, were called. Hence the Vulgate renders it “a sedition arose in Ephraim.” No doubt the phrase arose from the circulation of some warlike summons—whether watchword or token—among the tribe (Judges 7:23–24; Judges 10:17).

Northward. —Mizpeh in Gilead lay to the northeast of the tribe of Ephraim. The Hebrew word is Tsaphonah, rendered Sephenia in some manuscripts of the Septuagint (Cod. A., Kephenia). Hence some suppose that it means “towards Tsaphon,” a town in the Jordan valley not far from Succoth, which the Jews identified with Amathus (Joshua 13:27).

And you did not call us. —The tribe of Ephraim throughout the Book of Judges is represented in a most unenviable light—slothful and acquiescent in time of oppression, and turbulently arrogant when others have taken the initiative and won the victory (Joshua 17:14–18; Judges 8:1). They brought on their own heads the terrible disgrace and humiliation which Jephthah inflicted on them. They resembled Sparta in dilatoriness, and perhaps in courage; but when Athens had won Marathon, Sparta had at least the generosity to congratulate her (Herodotus 5.20).

We will burn your house upon you with fire. — i.e., we will burn you alive in your house. They regarded it as an unpardonable offence that Jephthah should have delivered Israel without recognising their hegemony . The horrible threat shows the wild manners of the times (Judges 14:15; Judges 15:6; Judges 20:48); and if a whole tribe could be guilty of such conduct, it shows how little cause we have for surprise at the much less heinous aberrations of individual men like Gideon and Jephthah and Samson.

I and my people were at great strife with the children of Ammon. —Literally, I was a man of strife, I and my people, and the children of Ammon exceedingly. We have a similar phrase in Jeremiah 15:10. Jephthah adopts the tone of a recognized chief, as he had done to the Ammonites.

And when I called you, ye delivered me not. —Ephraim was not immediately affected by the Ammonite oppression, any more than it had been by the Midianite. The effect of those raids was felt chiefly by Manasseh and by the Eastern tribes. Hence the Ephraimites held themselves selfishly aloof. That we are not told of this previous appeal of the Gileadites to Ephraim illustrates the compression of the narrative. We cannot tell whether it took place before or after the summons of the Gileadites to Jephthah.

I put my life in my hands. —Rather, in the hollow of my hand (caph). (For this phrase, see Psalm 119:109; Job 13:14; 1 Samuel 20:5; 1 Samuel 28:21.) It expresses extreme peril.

The Lord delivered them into my hand. —Here the word for “hand” is yad. Here, as he had done in arguing with the king of the Ammonites (Judges 11:21–24), Jephthah appeals to the decision of Jehovah, as proving that he had done rightly.

Why then have you come up ... ? —For the phrase “come up” see Judges 1:1-16. Jephthah’s answer is as moderate as Gideon’s (Judges 8:2–3), though it does not display the same skillful tact, and refers to topics which could only be irritating. Whether it was made in a conciliatory spirit or not, we cannot tell. Certainly, if Ephraim persisted in aggressive violence after these explanations, they placed themselves so flagrantly in the wrong that civil war became inevitable.

All the men of Gilead. — This probably implies the Eastern tribes generally.

And the men of Gilead struck Ephraim because they said ... — The translation and the meaning here are highly uncertain. It seems to be implied that in spite of Jephthah’s perfectly reasonable answer, the Ephraimites advanced to attack Gilead and goaded the Gileadites to fury by intolerable taunts, which prevented the Gileadites from giving any quarter when they had won the victory.

You Gileadites are fugitives of Ephraim. — If the English Version is correct here, the meaning is, “You people of the eastern half of the tribe of Manasseh are a mere race of runaway slaves, who belong neither to Ephraim nor to Manasseh” (1 Samuel 25:10). It is very possible that fierce jealousies may have sprung up between the Eastern Manassites and their tribal brethren of the West. These jealousies may have mainly originated from the fact that the Eastern Manassites less and less acknowledged the lead of Ephraim but, changing their character and their habits, threw in their lot more and more with the pastoral tribes of Reuben and Gad.

The taunt sounds as if it had sprung from a schism in clanship, a contemptuous disclaimer by Ephraim of any ties with this Eastern half-tribe. Indeed, the taunt may have been true to the extent that very probably anyone who fell into debt or disgrace in Ephraim and Eastern Manasseh might just as likely flee to Western Manasseh as an English defaulter might escape to New York. And if the Ephraimites indulged in such shameful jibes, it might well be considered sufficient to account for the ruthless character of the fighting.

But the rendering of the English Version is very uncertain, and the versions vary in their interpretation of the meaning, punctuation, and even the reading of the passage. On the whole, the best view is to translate the words as follows: The men of Gilead struck Ephraim [not only in the battle, but in the far more fatal pursuit] because they [the men of Gilead] said, You are fugitives of Ephraim (see commentary on Judges 12:5).

Then follows the geographical explanation and historical illustration of the clause. This explanation suggests that it was possible for the Gileadites to inflict this vengeance because of two main factors:

1. Gilead [lies] between Ephraim and [Eastern] Manasseh. [Part, at any rate, of Gilead belonged to Gad, and lies geographically between the district of Eastern Manasseh and the district of Ephraim, as is sufficiently clear since Ephraim has advanced “northwards,” or towards Tsaphon (Judges 12:1), for the attack.]

2. The seizure of the fords then occurred, which led to the total slaughter of all these Ephraimite fugitives.

One slight circumstance that adds probability to this view is that “fugitives” is a term that could hardly be applied to a whole tribe.

Took the passages of Jordan. —Only through these fords could the Ephraimites escape to their own tribe. (Judges 7:24.) But while it was excusable to cut off all escape from a dangerous foreign invader, it showed a terrible exasperation to leave no chance of flight to Israelites in a civil war.

Before the Ephraimites. —Literally, to Ephraim, which perhaps means “towards, or in the direction of, Ephraim” (per quae Ephraim, reversurus erat, Vulgate).

When those Ephraimites which were escaped. —The fact that the Hebrew phrase is exactly the same as in Judges 12:4, fugitives of Ephraim, adds great additional force to the view that we have adopted. If the rendering of the English Version is adopted in Judges 12:4, we can only suppose that there is a bitter retribution implied in the words. The Ephraimites had taunted the Eastern Manassites with being fugitives of Ephraim, and in the next verse they themselves appear to be in another, but fatal, sense fugitives of Ephraim.

Art thou an Ephraimite? —There must have been considerable traffic across the Jordan fords, and the object was to distinguish between Ephraimite fugitives and harmless travellers and merchants.