d. Shamgar and the Philistines (3:31)
d. Shamgar and the Philistines (3:31)
Certain characteristic features of the narratives concerning the judges are missing in connection with Shamgar. There is no mention that Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord, nor is there any direct mention of a Philistine oppression or its duration. The length of the time when the land enjoyed rest is also absent. Another peculiarity is that Ehud, not Shamgar, is mentioned, in 4:1, although the historicity of Shamgar and the chronological order of events is attested by the reference in the Song of Deborah (5:6). The reference to Ehud in 4:1 could be easily explained on the assumption that Shamgar’s isolated exploit was during his lifetime. Certain Greek and other recensions set the Shamgar episode after 16:31, although this appears to be an attempt to connect it with the Philistine menace reflected in the Samson stories rather than an indication of its original position. It has been conjectured by some that the story of Shamgar was not included in the original selection of the exploits of Judges, but was added by a redactor who, wanting to eliminate the usurper Abimelech from the list of twelve judges and yet wanting to retain the number (corresponding to the twelve tribes), inserted this verse concerning Shamgar on the basis of 5:6, supposing him to have been an Israelite hero.7 Such a view is without any real foundation. Moreover, if such inventiveness on the part of editors or redactors be allowed, can the Old Testament, or Old Testament scholarship, ever be taken seriously? Surely a redactor inserting an extra character into the book would take care to conform to the pattern of the book? It seems better to allow the difficulties to remain unresolved rather than to accept an unlikely solution for them. However, the significant omissions may indicate that there was something unusual about Shamgar; he may not have been a judge after the usual pattern but just a warrior who effected this one local stroke of valour against a nation who afterwards became Israel’s principal oppressor. So the original editor may well have included him, and yet excluded him from the regular pattern.
The name of Shamgar is non-Israelite and may have been of Hittite or Hurrian origin. This does not automatically infer that he was a Canaanite, although this is possible; it may witness to the intermingling of the Israelites with the native population. In any case his action benefited Israel. Son of Anath has been taken as a reference to Beth-anath in Galilee, and this would explain the mention of him in the Song of Deborah (5:6) which recounts a victory in which the northern tribes predominated. But sanctuaries of Anath, the Canaanite goddess, were not uncommon at this time. Probably his exploit over the Philistines was performed at an early stage of their settlement on the coastal plain, but the exact circumstances cannot be determined. The weapon of Shamgar, an ox goad, was a formidable one in the hands of a determined man. It was a longhandled (between 8 and 10 feet), pointed instrument tipped with metal, and when freshly sharpened it would have many of the qualities of a spear. The use of such an impromptu weapon is paralleled elsewhere in Judges: Ehud had to make his own weapon (3:16); Samson improvised with the jawbone of an ass (15:16). This, in conjunction with the statement in 5:8, may indicate that the Philistines were already carrying out their policy (1 Sam. 13:19–22) of disarming their subject peoples.