As he continues his exposition to GenB on the plains of Moab, Moses now recalls the conquest of the Transjordan lands, beginning with those of Sihon, to whom an overture of peace had been offered and rejected.
In attempting to understant this unit in its proper context, a decision needs to be made regarding the nature of 3:8-11 (NIV):
8So at that time we took from these two kings of the Amorites the territory east of the Jordan, from the Arnon Gorge as far as Mount Hermon. 9 (Hermon is called Sirion by the Sidonians; the Amorites call it Senir.) 10 We took all the towns on the plateau, and all Gilead, and all Bashan as far as Salecah and Edrei, towns of Og's kingdom in Bashan. 11(Only Og king of Bashan was left of the remnant of the Rephaites. His bed was made of iron and was more than thirteen feet long and six feet wide. It is still in Rabbah of the Ammonites.)
Ancient Hebrew literary conventions did not possess apparatus for indicating change of speakers in the written text. As a result such changes of speakers have to be discerned based on context. On this basis most English translations assume 3:8 & 10 to be Moses's summary of the lands taken, and 3:9 & 11 to be the parenthetical remarks of a later editor (they are set within brackets).1 It seems to read fine as it is. Except that, at a more detailed level of exegesis, and especially when the reading is done on the basis of the Hebrew text, v8 does not read quite well if coming from Moses. The little bit of grit that is the cause of this has to do with the phrase "the territory east of the Jordan" (NIV). The territory was in fact east of the Jordan, but that is not what the Hebrew word (be'eber) says. Be'eber is a directionless preposition and, as indicated by most other English translations, is more precisely translated "on the other side" (KJV) or "beyond" (RSV, NASB, NRS, ESV) the Jordan. Since Moses was recollecting the events on the eastern side of the Jordan (and he was to die there), the conquered territory was on the same side as he was. Be'eber is not likely a prepostion he would have used. NKJ is the only one to recognize this but emends the word and translates the land to "this side of the Jordan" (italic mine). To speak of the conquered lands as be'eber, however, makes complete sense if they were the words of the narrator who lived west of the Jordan. Our proposal here is to read this paragraph of four verses as coming entirely from the narrator. This proposal changes not doctrine, to be sure, but it provides for a more robust exegesis.
On the basis of these observations, therefore, 2:32-3:11 may be seen as composed of two war reports by Moses and a parenthetical but concluding remark by the narrator:
a. Moses' Report of the Conquest of Sihon's Territories, 2:32-37.
b. Moses' Report of the Conquest of Og's Territories, 3:1-7.
c. Narrator's Closing Comment, 3:8-11.
Low Chai Hok
©Alberith, rev., 2021