Abstract

History, as they say repeats itself. But the truth is that not every time does history repeat itself dutifully, in the manner of being truthful to its past version. There are changes; to suit the generation’s taste and growth. When certain incidents are repeated in history, the world tends to benefit. Whereas there are some incidents, which, when people remember, pray with fervent supplications that those are not repeated in history. Apart from the repetition of incidents in history, there are some historians and novelists who pick incidents and characters from history and use their deeds to describe some ideas of their own in and for their own generation and posterity. When such things happen, not every writer takes care to write things as they were. Some distort facts knowingly for mean reasons or for their own benefits. Some wrote as they were. There are some who change facts for reasons suitable to the benefit of their story. Yet there are some who change, for which reasons might not be found by the readers. It is the latest category mentioned that we seek diligently to put forth. This paper deals with the incongruities of the characters from the Bible used by David Gemmell in Shield of Thunder. That there is harm in doing so is not evident, as the characters themselves do not always go by the same name and locations. However, it is also equally lucid that there is no mistaking the Biblical characters masquerading in the novels.

The inconsistencies in the activities of the Biblical characters used in the Shield of Thunder of David Gemmell are baffling. Incongruities to a certain limit are permissible for most of the things written based on history, though the same would not apply to the names or years mentioned. The same principle applies to the characters mentioned. A good man / woman cannot be re-termed a bad man / woman. The change of such a thing rewrites history by distorting the facts. This is plainly unacceptable. What the posterity would learn is not the truth, when facts are changed.  

As per the Bible, Gehazi is the servant of Elisha the prophet. Elisha is from Israel. He is a true prophet of the Lord Yahweh. He has a delicate issue brought to him, one that the king of Israel is not able to solve. The king of Syria wants his commander-in-chief, Naaman, to be healed of leprosy. He believes that the king of Israel can heal him. Hence, Naaman comes with his servants and retinue, filled with gifts and a letter to meet the king of Israel. The king of Israel however is appalled at the request of the Syrian king and rents his clothes. It is at this time that Elisha sends word to the Israelite king and asks that Naaman be sent to his house.

Naaman comes to the house of Elisha. However, Elisha does not come out to meet him, but asks him to go and wash in the river Jordan seven times. Naaman does so and is healed of his leprosy. In order to express his gratitude, Naaman comes to Elisha’s house to offer gifts. But Elisha knows that if he accepts the gifts by the Syrian commander Naaman, the glory of the miracle and the credit would fall on him, a mere mortal. Whereas, the miracle is that of Yahweh, the Lord God. Hence, Elisha decides not to accept the gifts by the Syrian commander. In view of all the retinue of the commander and that of the Israelites who have gathered in front of his own house, Elisha tells him that it is the Lord who healed him and sends him away without getting a penny.

This is a great amazement and shock to almost all who witness this. For the gifts brought by the Syrian commander are worth a fortune and no one would usually refuse such an offer. This has the greatest impact on Gehazi, the servant of Elisha. He is not pleased with this. He somehow believes that Elisha has done something wrong in refusing such an offer. He probably has thoughts that he too has been cheated of what is rightfully his. As a servant of Elisha, he most probably has thoughts of being part of the healing process of Naaman. Being thus denied of that is rightfully his, as per his thoughts, he decides to do the unspeakable. Gehazi plans to get some of the gifts that Naaman promises to offer Elisha. However, he too knows that Elisha would nevr approve of this plan. He does this surreptitiously. He knows the route that Naaman takes to Syria. He runs like the devil after the Syrian retinue of Naaman, without informing Elisha.

When the Syrian commander is reported that there is a man running after their retinue, he orders a halt. The convoy comes to a halt. As soon as Gehazi is brought in front of Naaman, he recognises the servant of Elisha. Naaman is so grateful that he gets down from his chariot, an honour not given to everyone. Gehazi unleashes a series of lies and puts the blame on his master Elisha. He tells the Syrian commander that two young prophets have come and that his master Elisha is in need of new clothes for them. Naaman is so relieved that he is able to do something in return that he gives Gehazi two talents of silver instead of the one talent that Gehazi asks for. Furthermore he gives him the set of clothes that he asks and grants him the service of two servants as well.

Gehazi thanks him, receives the gifts and departs with the two servants who come to his house, give him the gifts and then depart for Syria. Elisha knows in his spirit of the deceit done by Gehazi. When the servant comes home, Elisha asks him where he had gone. Gehazi replies that he had not gone anywhere. That is when Elisha tells him that his spirit was with him when he lied to Naaman. Then Elisha curses Gehazi into a leper, the leprosy of Naaman the Syrian, descending on Gehazi.

So Gehazi hurried after Naaman. Seeing that someone was running after him, Naaman alighted from his chariot to wait for him. He asked, “Is everything all right?” Gehazi replied, “Yes, but my master sent me to say, ‘Two young men have just come to me, guild prophets from the hill country of Ephraim. Please give them a talent of silver and two festal garments.’” Naaman said, “I insist! Take two talents,” and he pressed him. He tied up two silver talents in bags and gave them, with two festal garments, to two of his servants, who carried them before Gehazi. When he reached the hill, Gehazi received these things, appropriated them for his house, and sent the men on their way.

He went in and stood by Elisha his master, who asked him, “Where have you been, Gehazi?” He answered, “Your servant has not gone anywhere.” But Elisha said to him: “Was I not present in spirit when someone got down from his chariot to wait for you? Is this a time to take money or to take garments, olive orchards or vineyards, sheep or cattle, male or female servants? The leprosy of Naaman shall cling to you and your descendants forever.” And Gehazi went out, a leper with skin like snow.

(The New American Bible 435)

The deed of a prophet of the Desert Dwellers turning his servant into a leper and also healing a prince of his leprosy by asking him to take bath in the river Jordan is mentioned in the novel. But then there are many differences. The major contrast lies in the core of the matter discussed here; the healing at the river Jordan. There are in fact two contrasts. The first one is that the prophet in the novel does not even believe that what has happened in fact is a miracle. He is very casual in telling Gershom that it is not a miracle. The next shocker comes in the form of the prophet telling Gershom that the Syrian, mentioned in the novel as a Hittite prince, did not have leprosy at all in the first place. This changes the crux of the story.

When there is no leprosy, the seriousness of the situation changes. When that changes, the mental and spiritual impact of the miracle, even though it is denied by the prophet, becomes dull. When posterity comes to know of this, the credibility of the Bible and the history of the Israelites would take a beating. When there is difference of opinion about a particular deed, there tends to rise in support of both the arguments people of many levels. They in turn would come out with justifying claims intended to bolster their beliefs. This act mars the genuineness of any incident and insults the research of historians.

According to the prophet in the novel, the prince had a skin disease that the mud and water of the Jordan washed away from his body. The prophet uses the knowledge that his family had for many generations, that mud, when applied to skin, heals many skin ailments. Although mud does heal such skin sores, this is a clear distraction from the Bible’s narrative. This gives the reader a great shock in the age old belief that they have had, that Syrian the Naaman did not have leprosy at all. When Gershom asks the prophet about the healing incident, the prophet outright replies that he did not heal the commander. A direct refusal from the prophet about one of the greatest miracles ever performed distorts facts. The prophet says that other people believe that he healed and that he himself did not heal the Syrian commander, in this case, a Hittite prince. This is a chilling change from the incident mentioned in the Bible.

“Cthosis told me you once cured a Hittite prince of leprosy.”

“There are those who say that I did,” said the Prophet. “The Hittite prince would be among them. He came to me with his skin white and scaly, pus-filled sores on his body. When he left, his skin was pink and unmarked.”

“Then you did heal him?”

“No. I ordered him to bathe for seven days in the River Jordan.” “So you are saying your god healed him after seven days.”

“My god created the river, so I expect you could say that.” The Prophet leaned forward. “There are many skin diseases, Gershom, and many treatments for them. In summer the Jordan can stink. The water and the mud are noxious. But there is goodness there, within the stench. My family has long known that many skin ailments are healed by scrubbing the body with mud from the Jordan. The Hittite prince did not have leprosy. Merely a skin ailment that the mud and the water washed from him.”

“No miracle, then,” Gershom said, unable to keep the disappointment from his voice.

(The Shield of Thunder 172)

According to the Bible and the history of the Israelites, Moses is one of the greatest leaders of the Israelites. He is the one who authored the first five books of the Bible. He is succeeded by Joshua, a young and enigmatic military leader. He is mentored by Moses right from his childhood and grows up to be the kind of leader that Moses and the other Israelites want him to be. Youngsters of the Israelite camp want to be like Joshua and follow him eagerly into battle. Yahweh, the God of the Israelites speaks to Joshua and gives him instructions on how to lead the Israelites. Furthermore, the timeline of Joshua is immediately after Moses, the time that the Israelites are returning to Canaan, their homeland, from their slavery in Egypt.

Elisha lives many centuries after the death of Moses and Joshua. Elisha is a great prophet. As per the Bible, the servant of Elisha is Gehazi, the man who is turned into a leper for his deceitfulness and disobedience to God. There is no direct connection with the servant of Elisha and Joshua, the Israelite leader. However, there is a stark difference in the characters as written in the novel. The prophet in the novel has a young man who acts as his personal secretary and a bodyguard. He moves with the prophet wherever he goes. He is called Yeshua. He is accompanied in turn by three other young men, all as zealous as him for their cause. They deplore the Egyptian rule and would go any lengths to topple the rule of the Pharaoh. Their eyes are hard, sharp and their demeanour rude, to people of other civilizations and faith. They are typical portrayals of the ancient Israelites.

The deviation here is that the man is called Yeshua. The other exploits such as the military aspects and the name of the man match with that of Joshua of the Bible. Here, in the novel, Yeshua is the epitome of hatred that the Desert Dwellers have for their Egyptian masters. Even in the presence of his master, he draws his sword to kill Gershom. Whereas, Joshua of the Israelites is a leader who cares for the well-being of his people, yet does not hate people of other nationalities. He is certainly not a man who draws his sword on a person who comes to visit his master.

Just as the young man tensed for the attack, a commanding voice rang out. “Yeshua! Sheathe your blade! All of you stand back.”

Gershom saw a tall man standing in the doorway of the small temple, lamplight shining on a beard that was thick and white.

“This man is the enemy, holy one,” Yeshua called out. “It is Ahmose!”

“I know who it is, boy. I have been expecting him. Come through, Ahmose. Yeshua, bring food for our guest.”

(The Shield of Thunder 169)

Yeshua is the Hebrew form of Joshua. When the linguistic parameters of the Hebrew language is taken into account, the names Joshua and Yeshua is Yesous. This is a great contradiction from the character Yeshua, found in the Bible. The Biblical Yeshua can be one or two people. The name Yeshua can refer to Joshua, the right hand man of Moses and the leader who succeeded him. The other possibility is Jesus, the promised Messiah of Israel and the world. The Hebrew origin of both the names is Yeshua. Whoever it was the novelist has woven into the novel, the facts are horribly wrong for Elisha, Joshua and Jesus lived in separate times.

The name “Jesus” in English has a complicated linguistic history that isn’t apparent in modern Bibles.

“Jesus” is an Anglicized form of the Greek name Yesous found in the New Testament. Yesous represents the Hebrew Bible name Yeshua, which occurs as “Jeshua” in English Bibles (Ezra 2:2; Neh 7:7). In Medieval English the “J” was pronounced as a “Y.”

Moses’ right-hand man, Joshua, has three names in the Bible. Originally, it was Hoshea, but Moses changed it to Yehoshua (Num 13:16). During the Babylonian Exile, it was shorted to Yeshua (Neh 8:17).

(Hebrew Streams)

Continual misinterpretations and distortions of truth can lead the truth to be buried forever. It could also cause petty disputes that rage on and on without any solutions coming up the surface. When classics and the Bible are concerned, it would be wise to stay on the beaten path, as it would cause no heartburn. When the religious sentiments and the beliefs of people are cornered or questioned, things take a difficult turn, for all that the people have believed so far is under scanner and their very purpose of life threatened to change.

When incongruities such as those mentioned previously continue to appear in the history of mankind as repetitions, it just may turn aside the truth of what happened initially in the world. Sometimes, change of truth may lead to chaos. For some, it may cause them to stumble from the truth and be misled. When one is misled, the one who causes that is the primary offender. When the very act of being misled causes the victim to travel on a path of uncertainty to doom, the one who causes this in the first place would have crossed the line from which there is no turning back, from destruction.

Bibliography

1. Gemmell, David. The Shield of Thunder. Bantam, 2006.
2. The New American Bible. Benziger, 1970.
3. http://www.hebrew-streams.org/frontstuff/jesus-yeshua.html