SIMEON AND LEVI: Brothers With Very Different Destinies
The third son of Jacob and Leah was named Levi, which means “joiner”. As we are told in Genesis 29:34, Leah hoped that the birth of a third son to herself and Jacob, whilst his favourite Rachel still remained barren, would be the means of turning Jacob’s affection away from her sister, and join him or bind him more to herself. Unfortunately for poor Leah, this was not the case, and Jacob remained steadfast in his first love. In those days it appears that the mother usually chose the childrens’ names, unlike today when it is often a joint effort, involving much discussion amongst the family! In the case of the patriarchs, the name had a significant meaning, bearing upon the child’s future role or nature.
Levi, and his brother Simeon distinguished themselves during an attack on the Shechemites (Genesis 34:25-26), and demonstrated a capacity to stand alone, which was later used by Levi when the tribe was set apart from the others for special duties and purposes in the nation of Israel.
Jacob/Israel considered them bad sons, probably because they disliked working as a team, and in his blessing in Genesis 49:5 he castigated them as “instruments of cruelty” and in the next verse there are hints that the brothers formed a “secret society” amongst themselves. We can still find such societies today, and the Freemasons have many Israelitish symbols in their ceremonies. Obviously Jacob considered that Simeon and Levi were the black sheep of his family, and probably had had trouble with them as teenagers! Verse 6 seems to imply that their home lives were not up to close scrutiny. As they were part of the plot to have Joseph his favourite killed, it is understandable that Jacob would be somewhat bitter and biased in his opinion of them. However, Jacob did not curse them, but their sin, in Genesis 49:7, and a sentence was passed that they should be separated (“for their own good”, one can imagine Jacob saying!) They were scattered, but allowed to enter the Promised Land.
Simeon was Reuben’s and Levi’s and Judah’s full brother. At his birth, Leah said that the Lord had heard that she was hated, so Simeon means “hearing”. Leah had hopes that the birth of a second son would turn Jacob’s heart to her, but he still loved Rachael best. Jacob said that Simeon and Levi were “instruments of cruelty”, and they were apparently somewhat of a thorn in their father’s flesh. They had killed in revenge for their sister Dinah’s abduction and in Genesis 49:7, Jacob said,
Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce; and their wrath, for it was cruel: I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel.
They had carried their vengeance too far.
This became a fact when the tribes went into captivity, for they did not retain a separate national identity. Some people think that they may have representatives in Wales, because in Welsh and Irish literature we find the name of a tribe, “Semoni”. Semuen, son of Isru (Israel?) was said to be their ancestor. There was also a tribe of Semnones in what is now northern France.
During the years in the Wilderness the tribe numbered 60,000, but by the time of the second census their numbers had gone down to 22,000, pointing to departures into the Mediterranean area with those of the tribe of Dan, “who abode in ships”. Simeon’s banner was a sword or a turreted castle gate. The sword was an emblem which Simeon took over from Levi, and the castle gate may refer to the tribes’ capture of the walled city of Shalem (Genesis 34:25). Traces of Simeon were left amongst the people of the Southern House of Judah, after the split from the Northern House of Israel.
We can find many instances of swords and gates in European heraldry. A castle gate is the coat of arms for the Province of Middelburg in the Netherlands and appears in the arms of several towns. The sword appears in the Royal Arms. Sweden also has a castle gate as the emblem of one of its provinces, and it appears as the arms of Nyborg in Denmark. The sword emblem crops up in Denmark also in the arms of several towns. In Spain the castle emblem is notably on the armorial bearings of Castile, which was obviously named for this reason. The castle and the sword appear in many coats of arms in the British Isles and in those of the Scottish clans. In this way we can follow how members of the tribe of Simeon were “sifted among the nations”.
Levi However, had a special destiny in spite of his mother’s disappointed hopes. He was not made a brigade leader, and his tribe was separate from the others, with a role which combined church and state. The Levites were responsible for the rites and ceremonies of worship, for the enforcement of observances and for the maintenance of tabernacle and temple. However, they were also the civil servants of their time, and the doctors and lawyers, so in spite of their separation from the rest of Israel they still played a very important part. They were not allocated land for their upkeep, but were entitled to the tithes for their living, and “dwelt amongst” but not with their brethren. Thus they were apart, but still joined in their service to the rest of the nation. The offices of priest, lawgiver and healer were hereditary in the tribe.
This being the case, it is difficult to pinpoint the tribal emblem of Levi thousands of years later, seeing that they were not taken captive with the Northern House of Israel. They allied themselves with Judah and Benjamin in the Southern House, and their descendants were still in office to ensure the continuance of the ordinances and observances until Jesus came to make their sacerdotal duties unnecessary by His “One perfect and sufficient sacrifice oblation and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world” (to quote the Book of Common Prayer.)
In view of the fact that the tribe of Levi was scattered amongst all the other tribes, they must have had a distinguishing mark or emblem, even though they had no standard or ensign for a rallying point. They would need to be easily picked out from the other people. The Bible does not specifically mention what the symbol was, but its record of the organisation of the priesthood and the civil servants (See Leviticus) mentions the Breastplate of the High Priest.
This was described in Exodus 28 and 39, and was of pure gold, suspended from the High Priest’s neck by golden chains. It was set with twelve jewels, one for each of the tribes of Israel, so it is reasonable to suppose that this became a symbol of Levi. Although a small remnant of Levi remained in Palestine until Our Lord’s time, it is possible that the bulk of the tribe were “sifted” among the nations after the captivities (Amos 9:9), sticking with the tribes to which they had been attached during the long trek from the Near East to the British Isles and beyond. This being the case, we would look for a representation of the Breastplate in the countries to which both the Northern and Southern Houses were dispersed.
A clue comes from the arms of the Royal Borough of Westminster. As with ancient Israel’s Temple precincts, Westminster is the seat of Government and administration in Britain, together with its Minster which is a centre of national and royal worship. It is unique amongst the country’s cathedrals in that it is a Royal Peculiar, and as such is directly under the royal jurisdiction. Here the monarchs are crowned, not in St. Paul’s or Canterbury Cathedral, both equally eminent cathedrals.
Westminster’s symbol is a portcullis. How does this link up with the breastplate? It is well known that the authorities call this symbol a portcullis, because it resembles the gates to fortifications and castles, and nowadays it is depicted in armorial bearings as having spikes at the bottom to stick firmly into the ground when the portcullis is lowered. However, in older representations of the emblem, there are no spikes, and these appear to be a relatively modern addition. More recent history tells us that the emblem was adopted from the arms of the Beaufort family, and can be no more ancient than the history of the family. Where did the Beauforts obtain their symbol? Presumably it had traditionally been handed down throughout the generations, for although the Beauforts were originally illegitimate offspring of John of Gaunt, he was the son of Edward III and would have inherited the right to the heraldry of the Plantagenet family and their remote ancestors. Margaret Beaufort was an heiress who married a Tudor and was the mother of Henry VII, so her family heraldry would have come to Henry Tudor. The “portcullis” symbol is nowadays considered to be a typical Tudor emblem with the combined red and white roses of York and Lancaster.
The Westminster “portcullis”, significantly, has only twelve openings, which can hardly be said of a real portcullis, and this is remarkable in view of the jewels representing the twelve tribes of Israel. Had it been a portcullis it would have had to be represented heraldically as wooden (heraldry has special symbols and colours for metals and other substances). The heraldic portcullis is represented as being of gold.
In Britain today the portcullis is used as the emblem of the Customs and Excise Service; it is also the badge of Canadian Customs.
The ancient Druids, who were the priests, teachers and civil servants of the Cymru or ancient Celts in Britain, wore a breastplate of very similar design; the Tudors were Welsh, so perhaps Margaret Beaufort’s family emblem coincided with an ancient Druidic symbol, Welsh people having married into the Royal family several times prior to the Beauforts.
The ancient Britons came to these islands from the East in several waves, the first of which was shortly after 2000 BC. The Druidic religion that is depicted for us in ancient British traditions and Triads was in many ways similar to that of ancient Israel. The later stories by Roman authors of their cruelty and human sacrifices should be discounted. These practices may have arisen in later ages amongst the barbarian tribes, but they were not part of the pure Druidic religion. Their laws and knowledge were secret and handed down by word of mouth, but they were highly educated and responsible for colleges which trained young men for many years. When the Romans came here they found many such colleges. It would appear that the nasty rites which the Romans describe were a feature of corrupt Druidism in Europe. The purest form of the religion was preserved here in the British Isles.
When Christianity came to Britain in the first century AD there was a seed bed already prepared by the Druidic faith, and Christianity took root amongst the Britons with no trouble.
Thus was Levi sown among the nations which eventually became the Servant People, and the Levites played their part in preserving the history, traditions and ancient religion of the Israelites
