“And she covered herself with a veil, and she wrapped herself, and she sat at the opening of eyes…” — Gen. 38:14
The tale of Judah and Tamar has stimulated readers for millennia. The narrative includes grief, family loss, sexual intrigue, the threat of death, chilling suspense, and, underlying it all, deep irony. Irony occurs in a story when a character’s expected action or circumstance is juxtaposed with a different, often opposite action or circumstance. For instance, it would be ironic if a fire station burned down. This is ironic because what we expect — that a fire station would be the most equipped to put out a fire — is met with a different or opposite reality.
The use of irony can serve a number of non-exclusive purposes. These include humor, criticism, or even condemnation. We shall examine the story of Judah and Tamar and note how it uses irony to criticize Judah’s behavior in a quite amusing way. We will first introduce the story, then we will consider the ironic dynamic between its two main characters.
Genesis 38 opens with Judah’s departure from his brothers. After settling in a Canaanite town, Judah married a woman, had three sons, and found a wife named Tamar for his firstborn. Due to the wickedness of Judah’s firstborn, the Lord put him to death, leaving Tamar a childless widow. As was customary at the time for widows without children, Tamar was married off to Judah’s second born in order to bear a child in the name of her deceased husband. However, Judah’s second born was likewise wicked and, as a consequence, he died too.
Fearing the boys’ death was in some way due to Tamar, Judah was reluctant to give her in marriage to his third son. He sent her to her father’s house to live as a widow with the promise to give her in marriage at a later time. That time never came.
The Use of Narrative Irony
“The entrance of Enaim”
Some time later, Judah went on a trip to Timnah to visit his sheep shearers. It is at this point in the narrative that we begin to encounter some highly ironic events. When Tamar heard about her father-in-law’s travels, she does three things. First, she “took off her widow’s clothing” (Gen. 38:14). Why does she take off the clothing that signals her status as a widow? The narrator is silent with regard to motive, leaving the reader to search for Tamar’s intention as the story progresses. At this point we might assume she took off her widow’s clothing because she intends to present herself as marriageable for Judah’s third son. However, we must keep reading to see if this possibility plays out.
Second, Tamar “covered herself with a veil (Heb: ṣāꜥiyp̱)” (Gen. 38:14). The only other story in the Bible to feature a veilis when Rebekah meets her husband Isaac for the first time: “and she took the veil (Heb: ṣāꜥiyp̱) and she covered herself” (Gen. 24:65). This reinforces our previous hypothesis that Tamar is getting ready to meet her new husband. Third, “she wrapped herself up (Heb: ꜥālap̱)” (Gen. 34:14). This is a difficult word which has been variously understood by interpreters as “covering oneself” or, perhaps, “disguising oneself” (see BDB, עָלַף). While covering oneself could simply imply the use of a traveling cloak, the possibility of a disguise should raise questions: Is Tamar preparing herself to meet her new husband, or is she up to something else?
Finally, “she sat at the entrance (Heb: peṯaḥ) of Enaim (Heb: ꜥēynayim)” (Gen. 38:14). The “entrance of Enaim” has been translated both as “an open place” (e.g., KJV, NKJV) and “the gate/opening/entrance of [a place called] Enaim” (e.g., NLT, NIV, ESV, NASB, etc.). However, since Enaim (Heb: ꜥēynayim) means “eyes,” and the Hebrew word “peṯaḥ” means “opening,” the underlying Hebrew phrase can literally be rendered, “she sat at the opening of eyes.”
What is the significance of a place named “the opening of eyes?” The concept of eyes being opened is a common figure of speech for discovery — just think of the hymn Amazing Grace: “I once was blind, but now I see.” So the fact that Tamar would cover herself, maybe even disguise herself, at a place called “the opening of eyes” is highly ironic. We must keep reading to see how this line of irony develops.
“She covered her face”
When Judah came by the “opening of eyes,” he saw his daughter-in-law. Unfortunately for him, he did not recognize her. Rather, “He thought she was a prostitute, since she covered her face” (Gen. 38:15). Here we find a brilliant contrast between action and setting: “covered” vs. “opening;” “face” vs. “eyes.” While Judah might have encountered Tamar at the opening of eyes, Judah’s eyes, thanks to Tamar, were indeed shut.
Since he thought she was a prostitute, Judah propositioned his unrecognizable daughter-in-law for sex. It is left ambiguous whether this was intended by Tamar or if this was a surprise. Regardless, once the offer was made, Tamar took advantage of the blinded Judah. Since Judah’s payment for sex would be delayed, she asked for a pledge in the form of his signet ring, cord, and staff. Once securing the pledge, Tamar let Judah come into her, and she conceived.
“Please Recognize!”
When Judah heard that Tamar was pregnant, he was (ironically) indignant. He then sent for her to be brought out and burned to death. However, as she was brought to her accuser, she made a request that would result in her vindication. She sent a message to Judah saying, “By the man who owns these, I am pregnant … please recognize whose these are, the signet ring, the cord, and the staff” (Gen. 28:25). Immediately, “Judah recognized” that these items belonged to him and that he in fact was the father of Tamar’s unborn child.
Amusingly, the man who previously failed to recognize his daughter-in-law’s identity recognizes the items that lead to both her vindication and his condemnation. But beyond mere amusement, this ironic turn of events is a perfect example of measure-for-measure justice in biblical narrative. We might remember from Genesis 37 that both Judah and his brothers plotted the death of their younger brother, Joseph. In a turn of events, Judah suggested that, rather than kill their brother, they ought to sell him into slavery. Needing an explanation to give their father for their brother’s sudden absence, the brothers spun a story about Joseph being killed by a wild animal. In order to make this believable, they took Joseph’s robe, dipped it in blood, and asked Jacob to “recognize whether it is [Joseph’s] robe or not” (Gen. 37:32). As Judah urged his father to “recognize” the robe of his son, resulting in deception, now Tamar urges Judah to “recognize” his own possessions, resulting in his condemnation.
As we have seen, Genesis 38 is filled with narrative irony. From the location of certain events (Enaim) to the function of clothing in the drama (Tamar’s veil, Judah’s signet ring, etc.), the story, which in many ways strikes a serious tone, is laced with humor aimed at criticizing and, ultimately, condemning Judah. Of the many things we could conclude in light of this brief survey, one fact is inescapable: our God, the divine author of Scripture, has a creative, often ironic, sense of justice.
