SHUAL (shtt'al), (Heb. shoo-awl').
This word and the term in A. V. for jackal are both somewhat arbitrarily interpreted by the word 'fox ;' although that denomination is not uniformly employed in different texts ( Judg. xv: 4; Nch. iv :3; l's. lxiii :to ; Cant. ii :i5 ; Lam. v : 18 ; Ezek. xiii :4). Fox is thus applied to two or more species, though only strictly applicable in a systematic view to Taaleb, which is the Arabic name of a wild canine, probably the Syrian fox, Vulpes Thaleb, or Toole!). of modern zoologists, and the only genuine species indigenous in Pales tine. Fox is again the translation of alopa.r, in Matt. viii :20; Luke ix :58 ; xiii :32; but here also the word in the original texts may apply generic ally to several species rather than to one only.
None of the explanations which we have seen of the controverted passage in Judg. xv :4, 5, rela tive to the shoo-awl'-yini, foxes, jackals, or other canines, which Samson employed to set fire to the corn of the Philistines, is altogether satisfactory.
First, taking Dr. Kennicott's proposed explanation of the case by reading 'foxes' instead of 'sheaves,' and 'ends' instead of 'tails,' the meaning then would be that Samson merely connected 300 shocks of corn, already reaped, by bands or ends, and thus burned the whole. We admit that this, at first view, appears a rational explanation; but it should be observed that three hundred shocks of corn would not make two stacks, and therefore the result would be quite inadequate, considered as a punishment or act of vengeance upon the Philistine population, then predominant over the greater part of Palestine; and if we take shocks to mean corn-stacks, then it may be asked how, and for what object, were three hundred corn stacks brought together in one place? The task, in that hilly region, would have occupied all the cattle and vehicles for several months ; and then the corn could not have been threshed out with out making the whole population travel repeat edly, in order finally to reload the grain and take it to their threshing floors.
Commentators, following the reading of the Septuagint, have with common consent adopted the interpretation that two foxes were tied to gether by their tails with a firebrand between them. Now this does not appear to have been the practice of the Romans, nor does it occur in the fable of Apthonius. We understand the text to mean that each fox had a separate brand; and most naturally so; for it may be questioned whether two united would run in the same di rection. They would assuredly pull counter to each other, and ultimately fight most fiercely ; whereas, there can be no doubt that every canine would run, with fire attached to its tail, not from choice, but necessity, through standing corn, if the field lay in the direction of the animal's bur row ; for foxes and jackals, when chased, run di rect to their holes, and sportsmen well know the necessity of stopping up those of the fox while the animal is abroad, or there is no chance of a chase. We therefore submit that by the words rendered 'tail to tail' we should understand the end of the firebrand attached to the extremity of the tail. Finally, as the operation of tying three hundred brands to as many fierce and irascible animals could not be effected in one day by a sin gle man, nor produce the result intended if done in one place, it seems more probable that the name of Samson, as the chief director of the act, is em ployed to represent the whole party who 'effected his intentions in different places at the same time, and thereby insured that general conflagration of the harvest which was the signal of open resist ance on the part of Israel to the long-endured oppression of the Philistine people. (See Fox ; DOG; WOLF; SAMSON.) C. H. S.