Part 18
The conclusion (19:51) returns to ShiJoh and the tent of meeting. It thus emphasizes again that that is the spiritual centre of the Jand, symbolizing the hand of God in the division of it, as in the giving. Joshua and EJeazar are named once more as jointly responsible for the execution of it (cf. 14:1; cf. Num 26:1—4; 52~6).
(20:1-21:43) Cities of Refuge and Levitical Cities The next two chapters complete the picture of Jand occupation by designating 'cities of refuge' (20:1—9), an(^ leviticaJ cities (21:1—41). These show how two classes of people, who are in some sense dispossessed, are granted the right to Jife and a pJace among the people. The concluding summarizing statement of God's victory over aJJ Israel's enemies (21:43—5) sh°ws that these provisions belong within the theme of Jand possession.
173 JOSHUA
Serving YHWH in the Land (22:1-24:33)
Instead of tribal territory (13:14; 14:3-4) Levi would receive towns and their pasturelands throughout Israel (21:1—3), according to the Pentateuchal rationale that YHWH himself is the Levites' 'inheritance' (Num 18:20; Deut 18:1-2, cf Deut 10:9). This meant in practice that they received shares of the Israelites' sacrifices and offerings (Num 18:9—24). In addition, Num 35 provides for forty-eight Levitical cities, including the six cities of refuge (Num 35:6-7—all noted in Josh 21; w. n, 21, 27, 32, 36, 38; the number forty-eight, w. 4—7, 41, is significant perhaps as a multiple of twelve, the number of the tribes). The Levites now come to Joshua and Eleazar at Shiloh (w. 1-2) to claim their part in the land; the allocation of their cities is thus included in the general apportionment of territory. The function of levitical cities has often been supposed to lie in their possessing sanctuaries, in line with the provision that Levites should have their living from sacrifices. However, there is no evidence of the existence of a sanctuary in most of the towns in this chapter. They may have served merely as residences, and places where Levites could enjoy some personal wealth and status, while performing their priestly duties elsewhere (Deut 18:6—8 can be read in this sense; McConville 1984: 144-7). The tribe of Levi was associated with priesthood from early in Israel's history (Judg 18:3-6). According to Priestly Pentateuchal texts (Num 3—4), it was divided into two groups: priests proper and Levites, or assistants to the priests. The priests were traced to the line of Aaron, and through him to Kohath, one of the sons of Levi. Kohathites who were not of the Aaronite line, together with descendants of Levi's other
(22:1-34) The Altar by the Jordan Joshua now (w. 1-9) takes up the charge addressed to the Transjordanian tribes at the outset of the conquest (1:12—18), which in turn looked back to Deut 3:18—20 (hence the reference here to Moses' command, v. 2). Though they had settled in their lands before their fellow-Israelites had crossed the Jordan, they were obliged to participate with them in the war for the land. They are permitted to return home, with a strongly Deuteronomic exhortation (w. 2-5; cf Deut 10:12-13). Joshua's 'blessing' of them
(v. 6) belongs to the language of peaceful farewell. Shiloh is the place of this parting, which may have had a ceremonial aspect.
The unity of the people is now called into question (w. 1034) when the two and a half tribes, on their return, erect an altar by the Jordan, on the Israelite side of the border between the two lands (w. 10—n). This is interpreted by the Israelites as an act of war, because it is held to challenge the claims of the sanctuary of Shiloh, so closely bound up with the theology of land possession (v. 12).
The case against the two and a half tribes is outlined (w. 13— 20) in terms of holiness requirements—hence the role of Phinehas (son of Eleazar) in the accusation, rather than Joshua. The sin is compared with two other sins in the religious realm (w. 17, 20): the idolatry at Peor in the days of the wilderness wanderings (Num 25), and Achan's transgression of the ban on Jericho (Josh 7). It is all Israel, as a religious assembly or congregation, that pursues the errant tribes (w. 12, 16). The issue, furthermore, is framed in religious terms by raising the question whether the land across the Jordan might be ritually 'unclean', and therefore itself unfit for worship (v. 19).
sons Gershom and Merari, were 'Levites'. These texts are widely regarded as exilic or post-exilic, because the distinctions they make are not evident generally in the historical books of the OT, nor clearly in Deuteronomy. The system is presupposed here, however (w. 4—7). The territorial order adopted roughly follows that of the allocation to the tribes (Judah, Joseph, the rest). Judah's primacy here is not only chronological, but also consists in receiving the sons of Aaron (v. 4). To an audience in the late Judahite monarchy, or in the exilic period, the association of Judah with Aaron would seem natural, for by then the Aaronide priesthood was well established in Jerusalem. Yet there is no express allusion to Jerusalem here, and Shiloh retains its prominence in the context. The account of Aaron's geographical foothold in the south, therefore, seems to be independent of late-monarchic/exilic theologizing.
The Transjordanians, in reply (22:21—9), recognize the unique claims of both YHWH and his altar. The phrase 'The LORD, God of gods' ('el 'elohim YHWH) is a strong affirmation of YHWH's supremacy. To a Canaanite it might literally have meant the supreme god among a number of gods; in the OT it merely means that he is unrivalled. The Transjordanians' argument is that this altar is not itself for sacrifice, but rather, as a copy of the true altar, it symbolizes their participation in the worship that takes place there (v. 270). As such it is a 'witness' (w. 28, 34). This last idea strikes two important Deuteronomic notes, namely the unity of Israel and the preservation of the true faith for future generations (w. 24-8; cf. Deut 6:2, 7).
The events recorded here probably testify to complicated relationships in Israel's early years between the peoples east and west of the Jordan. The focus on Shiloh again suggests a memory from pre-monarchic times (cf. JOSH 18:1). The potential relevance of the narrative to post-exilic times should also be noticed, however, because of the questions that arose then about the status of Jews who chose to live in the Diaspora, away from their restored temple at Jerusalem. For this reason the chapter is often held to have an ancient core, but to have been revised by both Deuteronomic and Priestly writers (Noth 1953: 133-5; Kloppenborg 1981).
In the list of towns in Judah and Simeon (w. 9—12), these two are simply amalgamated (v. 9; see JOSH 19:1-9). Surprisingly, Hebron is assigned to the priests, having previously been granted to Caleb (14:14—15), a fact that is acknowledged here, and explained (v. 12). Debir too (v. 15) had fallen to Caleb (15:15-17). The list may be dated to the early monarchy (with Albright 1945). Some of these towns were not taken till then, and after the division of the monarchy, with Jeroboam's antilevitical measures (i Kings 12:31), Levites will scarcely have been able to hold them.
The summarizing conclusion (21:43-5) is in line wrth II:23» emphasizing promise fulfilment and rest from enemies. There are echoes of Deuteronomy in the language, especially v. 430.
(23:1-16) Joshua's Farewell Address The book of Joshua comes to a close with two distinct ceremonies, each seeming in itself to be a finale. The first, in Josh 23, is a farewell address
JOSHUA 174
especially second millennium Hittite vassal-treaties) and some OT covenants, notably Deuteronomy more or less in its entirety (Baltzer 1971). Josh 24 exhibits the characteristic features: a preamble (v. i), a rehearsal of the historical relationship between the parties (w. 2—13), stipulations and the requirement of loyalty (w. 14—15, 25), formal witnesses (w. 22, 27), depositing a document (w. 26—7), and a statement of consequences (v. 20—here only the bad consequences of disloyalty are recorded, in contrast to Deut 28). YHWH is thus depicted as the suzerain, who requires loyalty from his partner in the context of his commitment to protect them in the land which he grants them. Properly, the present narrative merely resembles the ancient treaty form, being itself a literary construction. However, the use of the form has real significance, in that it records the actual commitment of the people to YHWH rather than to other gods, and their acceptance of this as the basis of their lives.
of Joshua to the gathered tribes in an unnamed place (the logic of the narrative would suggest Shiloh); the second, Josh 24, is a covenant renewal ceremony at Shechem. These are sometimes seen as a duplication, Josh 23 being later than Josh 24, and in certain respects modelled on it. There are, however, important differences between the two chapters.
Joshua's farewell address is linked expressly to the narrative of conquest. It connects (v. i) with the resumptive statements in 11:23 and 21:43-5, and their themes of fulfilment of promise, complete conquest, and rest from war. The opening verse (ib) also repeats verbatim a phrase from 13:1, referring to Joshua's advanced age (see JOSH 13:1). The fact that there is no reference here to the allocation of land (chs. 13-21) and that it is assumed that land remains to be taken, has been thought to argue for the secondariness of Josh 13—21. However, 13:1 also introduced a catalogue of places not yet subdued. Both passages, therefore, simply express the tension between land possession as a fact and as a project that still awaits accomplishment. When chs. 23 and 24 are read together, the distribution of land may simply be assumed here, and the two ceremonies culminate in 24:28: 'Joshua sent the people away to their inheritances' (itself an echo of 22:1—6).
The historical context of the narrative is differently estimated. Some scholars, on the basis of Deuteronomic language and themes (e.g. w. 16-18, 25, 260}, conclude that the whole passage comes from Assyrian (Perlitt 1969: 239-84) or exilic (Nicholson 1986) times. This is not necessary, however. Much of the material draws on themes that belong to Israel's traditions broadly understood: the origins of Israel's ancestors in Mesopotamia and the patriarchal line (w. 2-4, cf. Gen 11:27—12:9), the Exodus from Egypt and the wilderness wanderings (w. 5—9), the conflicts in Transjordan and the Balaam tradition (w. 9-10, cf. Num 22-4), and the conquest itself. While there are Deuteronomic elements here (v. n, the seven nations, cf. Deut 7:1; v. 13, cf. Deut 8:10—n), other features are more individual. An example is the statement that Abraham and his family worshipped other gods 'beyond the River' (v. 2). And the references to the stone as witness and particularly to the oak in the 'sanctuary of the LORD' (w. 26—7) contrast with Deuteronomic prescriptions (Deut 16:21—2), and are signs of antiquity. Deuteronomic language, furthermore, is equivocal as a means of dating texts, since many of its terms are found in ancient treaties (Koopmans 1990: 407; Sperling 1987). Archaeology has found structures both at ancient Shechem and on Mt. Ebal. These have been linked both with this ceremony and with the one described in Josh 8:30-5, though such links cannot be made conclusively.
Following Deuteronomic requirements, the people are to hold fastto the law of Moses (v. 6; cf. Josh 1:7), and indeed love' YHWH himself (v. n, cf. Deut 6:5—the term denotes covenant loyalty). They must not adopt the worship practices of the peoples that still remain among them (w. 7, 16), nor intermarry with them (v. 12; cf. Deut 7:1-5). If they do, YHWH will cease to drive out the nations, and Israel itself will be driven off its newly acquired land (w. 15,16; cf. Deut 30:17—18).
The tension between the ideal and the real is theologized in the speech as a reproach to Israel for imperfect obedience to the command to take the land (Judg 2:2-3). Joshua here expresses the twin possibilities of the covenant: faithfulness and possession, or unfaithfulness and loss. This choice, with its consequences, is most fully spelt out in Deut 28. Joshua goes even further, appearing to imply that the 'curses' of the covenant will certainly come (v. i$b), in a passage reminiscent of Deut 4:25—31; 30:1—5. This might suggest that our passage has the Babylonian exile in view, and must therefore date to a time after it. Unlike Deut 4:30, however, there is no mention here of repentance and return to the land. It is therefore not dependent on them in any simple way, and the allusion to the Babylonian exile is not certain.
Josh 24 obliges the Israelites to enter into a solemn covenant, or better, a covenant renewal (if the Deuteronomic Horeb and Moab covenants are presupposed). The 'historical prologue' recalls YHWH's faithfulness in bringing Israel to their land, and reaffirms his agency in the Holy War. The 'Amorites' (v. 8) are the kings Sihon and Og, who were defeated in the Transjordanian campaign (Num 21:21-35; Deut 2:26—3:17). They are bracketed here with Balak, king of Moab, who hired Balaam the magician to curse Israel, in a vain attempt to stall their progress (Num 22-4; cf. Josh 13:21-2). Here YHWH says that he would not listen to Balaam (v. 10); in Numbers, Balaam knows from the outset that God was determined to bless the people (Num 22:12). The translation 'hornet' (NRSV, v. 12) is based on LXX and early versions, but is obscure, and sometimes rendered 'terror', picking up an important theme in the exodus tradition (cf. Ex 15:14—16; Num 22:3). The whole argument stresses both God's irresistibility, and his commitment to Israel.
(24:1—28) The Covenant at Shechem Unlike the speech in Josh 23, the ceremony in Josh 24 is clearly located in Shechem (v. i). The shift of location from Shiloh is unheralded (hence LXX's reading 'Shiloh', which must be regarded as a late harmonization). Shechem, however, has important roots in the broader narrative of exodus and conquest (Deut 11:29; 27> Josh 8:30-5), which bespeak its strong association with covenant. Other narratives about Shechem support this. In a story from Judges there is reference to a temple of'Baal-berith' (also 'El-berith'), that is, the lord, or god, 'of the covenant' (Judg 9:4, 46). Gen 34 tells of an ancient agreement (covenant?), albeit quickly broken. These texts suggest obliquely that Shechem was known as a place of covenant from early times.
Formal parallels have been observed between ancient NearEastern treaties of both the second and first millennia (but
175 JOSHUA
Cross, F. M. (1973), Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge
The appeal to Israel is a call to exclusive loyalty (w. 14-15). The phrase 'You cannot serve the LORD' is a surprisingly strong assertion that Israel will be unfaithful. It may be taken as a forceful warning not to enter this covenant lightly, or to think that loyalty to YHWH will be easy. As such it fits with Deuteronomy's view that Israel cannot keep covenant (Deut 9:4—7). The warning may be compared with v. 23, in which failure to worship YHWH alone is pictured as a present reality. This also is in line with the general picture of the early generations of Israel, ready to resort to other gods from the beginning (Ex 32; Num 25). Deuteronomy too, at its climax, portrays Israel as unfaithful (Deut 32). The effect here may be rhetorical. Elsewhere the Joshua generation is pictured as faithful (Judg 2:7,10). The outcome in any case is the conclusion of the covenant, and the people go at last to their appointed homes (v. 28).
Mass.: Harvard University Press). Ehrlich, A. B. (1968), Randglossen zur Hebrdischen Bibel, iii. Josua,
Richter, I. u. II. Samuelis (Hildesheim: Georg Olms). Fritz, V. (1994), Das Buch Josua, HAT 1/7 (Tubingen: Mohr). Garstang, J. (1931), The Foundations of Biblical History: Joshua, Judges
(London: Constable). Gerbrandt, G. E. (1986), Kingship According to the Deuteronomistic
History, SBLDS 87 Atlanta: (Scholars Press). Gertz, J. (1994), Die Gerichtsorganisation Israels im deuteronomischen
Gesetz (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht). Gottwald, N. K. (1979) The Tribes ofYahweh: A Sociology of the Religion
of Liberated Israel, 1250-1050 BCE (London: SCM). Halbe, J. (1975), 'Erwagungen zum Ursprung und Wesen des Massot-
festes', ZAW&j: 324-45. Rang, S.-M. (1989), Divine War in the Old Testament, BZAW 177
(Berlin: Mouton, de Gruyter). Kenyon, K. (1979), Archaeology in the Holy Land, 4th edn. (London:
Ernest Benn). Kloppenborg, J. S. (1981), 'Joshua 22: The Priestly Editing of an
(24:29-33) Endings Four short units complete the narrative of the book, and in a sense of the Hexateuch (GenesisJoshua). Joshua and Eleazar were co-responsible for the division of the land. Their deaths are now told, in the outer framing sections of these four units, signalling the end of the era of conquest and settlement, as Moses' death had signalled the end of the period of exodus (Deut 34). Like Moses, Joshua is given the title 'servant of the LORD'. He is buried in the territory that had been given him as a personal inheritance (Josh 19:49-50; cf. Judg 2:8-9).
Ancient Tradition', Biblica, 62: 347—71. Koopmans, W. T. (1990), Joshua 24 as Poetic Narrative, JSOTSup 93
(Sheffield: JSOT). Koorevaar, H. J. (1990), De Opbouw van het Boek Jozua (Heverlee:
Centrum voor Bijbelse Vorming, Belgie VZW). Kraus, H.-J. (1951), 'Gilgal: ein Beitrag zur Kultusgeschichte Israels',
VTi: 181-99. Lemaire, A. (1981), 'Galaad et Makir', VTy. 39-61. Livingston, D. (1970), 'Location of Biblical Bethel and Ai Reconsid-
ered', WTJ33: 20-44. Lohfink, N. (1962), 'Die deuteronomistische Darstellung des Uberg-
The note concerning Israel records that they were faithful during Joshua's lifetime, agreeing with Judg 2:7, but stopping short of the ominous sequel (Judg 2:10). It brings to completion the aspiration in Joshua of a people dwelling peacefully and obediently in a land given in fulfilment of God's promise. The emphasis is on 'service', or worship, of YHWH, echoing the commitment undertaken in the covenant dialogue (w. 14-
angs der Fuhrung Israels von Mose auf Josua', Scholastik, 37:32-44. Long, B. O. (1968), The Problem of Etiological Narrative in the Old
Testament, BZAW 108 (Berlin: A. Topelmann). McCarthy, D. J. (1971), 'The Theology of Leadership in Joshua 1-9',
Biblica, 52:165-75. McConville, J. G. (1984), Law and Theology in Deuteronomy, JSOTSup
33 (Sheffield: JSOT). Mann, T. W. (1977), Divine Presence and Guidance in Israelite Traditions:
22). The record of Joseph's burial connects expressly with Gen 50:24—6. It puts the story of Joshua in a broader context, suggesting that the 'ending' achieved in it relates to the story that began long before with the promises to the patriarchs, the great theme of Genesis. He is buried in Shechem, in the territory of his son Manasseh. This also connects the report with the immediate context.
The Typology of Exaltation (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press). Mayes, A. D. H. (1985), 'Deuteronomy 29, Joshua 9, and the Place of
the Gibeonites in Israel', in N. Lohfink (ed.), Das Deuteronomium:
Entstehung, Gestalt und Botschaft (Leuven: Leuven University Press), 321-5. Milgrom, J. (1976), 'Priestly Terminology and Social Structure of Pre-
Monarchic Israel', JQR 69: 66-76. Mitchell, G. (1993), Together in the Land, JSOTSup 134 (Sheffield:
JSOT). Na'aman, N. (1986), Borders and Districts in Biblical Historiography
Albright, W. F. (1945), The List of Levitical Cities', Louis Ginzberg
(Jerusalem: Simor). Nelson, R. D. (1981), 'Josiah in the Book of Joshua', JBL 100: 531-40. Nicholson, E. W. (1986), God and his People: Covenant and Theology in
Memorial, i (New York: American Academy for Jewish Research). Alt, A. (1925), 'Judas Gaue unter Josia', PJ 21: 100—16; repr. in Kleins
Schriften zur Geschichte des Volkes Israel (Munich: C. H. Beck, 1953), ii. 276-88. Auld, A. G. (1975), 'Judges i and History: A Reconsideration', VT25:
the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon). Noth, M. (1953), Das Buck Josua, HAT 1/7 2nd edn. (Tubingen: Mohr).
(1960), The History of Israel (London: A. and C. Black). (1971), 'Die funf Konige in der Hohle von Makkeda', in H. W. Wolff (ed.), Aufsdtze zur biblischen Landesund Altertumskunde (2 vols.; Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag), i. 281—93. German original, PJ33 (1937), 22-36.
261-85. (1978), 'Cities of Refuge in Israelite Tradition', JSOT10: 26-40. Baltzer, K. (1971), The Covenant Formulary in Old Testament, Jewish and
Early Christian Writings (Oxford: Blackwell). German original, Das Bundesformular: Sein Ursprung and seine Verwendung im Alten Testament, WMANT 4 (Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1960). Earth, C. (1971), 'Die Antwort Israels', in H. W. Wolff (ed.), ProUeme
(1981), The Deuteronomistic History, JSOTSup (Sheffield: JSOT); German original Uberlieferungsgeschichtliche Studien: Die sammelnden und bearbeitenden GeschichtsweAe im Alten Testament (Halle, 1943; 2nd edn. Tubingen, 1957). Otto, E. (1975), Das Mazzotfest in Gilgal, BWANT 107 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer).
biblischer Theologie (Munich: Chr. Kaiser), 44-56. Bright, J. (1981), A History of Israel, 3rd edn. (London: SCM). Clements, R. E. (1989), Deuteronomy (Sheffield: JSOT). Clines, D. J. A. (1976), 'New Year', IDBSup 625-9.
JUDGES 176
Perlitt, L. (1969), Bundestheologie im Alten Testament, WMANT 36
Wagner, S. (1964), 'Die Kundschaftergeschichten im Alten Testa-
(Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag). Polzin, R. (1980), Moses and the Deuteronomist (New York: Seabury). Rainey, A. F. (1971), 'Bethel is Still Beitiri, WTJ 33:175-8. Schafer-Lichtenberger, C. (1995), Josua und Salomo: Eine Studie zur
ment', ZAWj6: 255-69. Westermann, C. (1994), Die Geschichtsbucher des Alten Testaments: Gab
es ein deuteronomistisches GeschichtswerK? (Giitersloh: Chr. Kaiser). Wenham, G. J. (1971), 'The Deuteronomic Theology of the Book of
Autoritdt und Legitimitat des Nachfolgers im Alten Testament, VTSup 58 (Leiden: Brill). Seebass, H. (1984), 'Zur Exegese der Grenzbeschreibungen von Josua
Joshua', JBL 90: 40-8. Whitelam, K. (1996), The Invention of Ancient Israel: The Silencing of
Palestinian History (London: Routledge). Wilson, R. R. (1983), 'Enforcing the Covenant: The Mechanics of Jud-
16,1-17, 13', ZDPVioo: 70-93. Soggin, J. A. (1972), Joshua, OTL (London, SCM). Sperling, S. D. (1987), 'Joshua 24 Re-examined', HUCA 58:119-36. Tengstrom, E. (1976), Die Hexateucherzahlung, CBOTS 7 (Lund: C. W.
icial Authority in Early Israel', in H. B. Huffmon, F. A. Spina, and A. R. W. Green (eds.), The Questfor the Kingdom of God: Studies in Honor of George E. Mendenhall (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns), 59-75. Wright, C. J. H. (1992), 'Family', ABD ii. 761-9. Younger, L. (1990) Ancient Conquest Accounts: A Study in Ancient Near
K. Gleerup). Thompson, T. L. (1992), The Early History of the Israelite People: From
the Written and Archaeological Sources (Leiden: Brill).
Eastern and Biblical History Writing, JSOTSup 98 (Sheffield: JSOT).
10. Judges SUSAN NIDITCH
would-be Israelite king, a Danite founding myth, and a fascinating tale of civil war that describes the ways in which the ideal of pan-Israelite unity conflicts with strong local tribal or clan-related loyalties. Interwoven with the unifying theme concerning Israel's relationship to God are a host of other fascinating issues in Israelite world-view dealing with attitudes to gender, to centralized authority—in particular in the form of monarchy—attitudes to war, and other essential aspects of Israelite self-definition.
A. The Biblical Timeframe. 1. Within the Bible's chronology, that is within the pan-Israelite portrayal of the history of the people, Judges is set in a time before kings ruled in Israel and before ritual actions and spaces were regularized and centralized. Leaders are swashbuckling bandits whose influence lasts only during their lifetimes, and Israelite groups unite to fight enemies as members of a loosely organized confederation. Two important heroes are women, an unusual gender for such roles in the androcentric Israelite tradition preserved in the HB.
C. Relation to Actual History of Israel. 1. Do the stories of Judges reflect the actual events of early Israelite history of the pre-monarchic, pre-tenth-century BCE era, or at least in general capture the flavour and tone of the times? Who are these leaders called 'judges' who rarely serve in a juridical context and act more as military and political liberators (see Judg 4:5 for one exception)? Does the politically decentralized confederation presented in or implied as lying behind many of the narratives reflect the realities of a pre-monarchic form of Israelite self-governance? As is the case with epic traditions of other cultures, it is extremely difficult to match specific events and persons in Judges with detailed facts of Israelite history. It is certainly possible that some elements are rooted in actual experience, now stylized and formulated in the contours of the literary tradition. (For a full discussion of such issues see Boling (1975).) To pose such questions is to enter the vexing problem concerning Israelite origins in the land of Israel. Four major theories have been proposed: the conquest model; the infiltration model; the liberation model; and the pioneer settlement model.
2. Judges presents the period of the 'conquest' when Israelites wrest control of portions of the land from various non-Israelite overlords, defeating and dispossessing rival inhabitants. In contrast, however, to portions of the book of Joshua which portray the conquest as linear, unstoppable, and totalistic, Judges presents the events of a take-over much more haltingly as Israel, a poorly armed resistance force, wins some battles and loses others, has periods of relative success and some significant setbacks, never completely gaining control of the promised land. Indeed Israelite encounters with the enemy seem less like the warfare of conquest than the activities of subversive insurgents, guerrillas. Leaders are often at odds with the people while Israel itself is presented as composed of rather fragmentary groups and individuals that are sometimes at war with one another.
B. The Story. The narrative frame of the book as it now stands largely parallels its theological message. Israel is unable to defeat its foes because of lack of faithfulness to YHWH, patron deity who rescued Israel from the oppression of slavery in Egypt. At intervals, however, YHWH raises up leaders who inspire Israel to renewed faith in him, assuring their capacity to succeed in battle. The tales of Israel's insurgency feature various heroes including Ehud the left-handed man; Deborah, the prophet, and her aide Barak; Jael the female assassin of the Canaanite general Sisera; Gideon, destroyer of the altar of the deity Baal, competing god of the Canaanite enemy; Jephthah whose only daughter becomes a war-vowed sacrifice to YHWH; and Samson the superhero of ancient Israelite tradition. Additional tales include the story of Abimelech, a
2. The conquest model is closely wedded to the version of Israel's arrival in the land found in the biblical book of Joshua. Archaeological finds of the twentieth century seemed to evidence strafing and burning in various locations mentioned in the Bible, destruction that took place in the second half of the second millennium BCE, the period appropriate to the biblical chronology, and thus encouraged many American scholars to find in the Scriptures the outline of actual historical events. They thought it possible to prove in essentials that landhungry Israelites making a transition from nomadic life to a more settled pattern of existence violently supplanted the
177 JUDGES
subterfuge and ambush, practitioners ofthe military ideology oftricksterism (Niditch 1987; 1993: 106—22). One thinks e.g. ofthe hero Ehud's assassination ofthe Moabite king Eglon, who is described literally as a fat calf whose ample girth folds over the assassin's knife, or ofthe heroine JaeJ who poses as a friend ofthe Canaanite general Sisera, Juring him to her tent with offers of succour, onJy to kiJJ him by driving a tent peg through his head as he sleeps. Of course, the portrayal of battles between haves and have-nots couJd aJso reflect the sort of worJd described by Coote and WhiteJam (1987), as highland pioneers feeJ themselves threatened by those in control ofthe lowlands and by various rivals to the territories they have settled.
inhabitants of the land (see Albright 1939; Bright 1981). In this model, the confederation or league served to organize and rally the conquering army.
3. Theories about Israelite nomadism have been strongly challenged in recent years and confidence in the conquest model has waned as the matches between biblical accounts of conquest and archaeological evidence have proven far less than perfect (see Hayes and Miller 1977). More suited to the stories in Judges is the infiltration model that suggests that Israelites gradually moved into the land and that battles with the natives were largely defensive (Alt 1967; Noth 1960). The confederation was a means of unifying various elements of the group that would become Israel for purposes of defensive war. This model too, however, rests upon outmoded notions of Israelite nomadism (Gottwald 1979). Scholars have also become increasingly suspicious about the existence of a formal Israelite league, especially about the existence of a single confederation that consisted of twelve tribes (Mayes 1974).
7. In Judges, Israelite political motives are completely intertwined with religious motives. The hero Gideon's revolt begins with a night-time act of subversion as he overturns the statue of Baal. Samson's exploits are a means by which YHWH shows his power. Deborah is after all a prophet and
Samson a nazirite, one consecrated to God at birth. The national agenda and the Yahwistic agenda are one.
4. The liberation model allows that some of those who would come to constitute the group called Israel came from outside the land of Canaan but that their take-over of the land was aided by large segments ofthe native population. Marxian in orientation, this view of Israelite formation suggests that a group of immigrants, perhaps people who have escaped from Egyptian slavery, becomes the spearhead of an ideologically based revolution of have-nots against haves. The have-nots consist of the immigrants and the native population of Canaan living in a repressive feudal system common among the many petty tyrannies of the ancient Near East. The newcomers and those who share their political goals are united by their belief in YHWH and eventually defeat their better armed, urban rivals (Mendenhall 1973; Gottwald 1979).
D. Judges as Part of a Larger Whole. 1. If these traditional narratives do reflect the social world of Israel's pre-state origins as a people, in its current form the book also serves as an important segment of essential pan-Israelite myth. The process by which a host of traditions about the judges came together as a distinct corpus is difficult to reconstruct, involving a complex interplay between the oral and the written, individuals and the group, the ancient and the more recent. Along the way, what were once disparate traditions came to be an expression ofthe larger group's sense of history and identity. This is not to suggest that the process was superorganic without reference to specific composers set in time and place, but to admit uncertainty about the whos and wherefores.
5. The pioneer settlement model does not look beyond the land for origins, but regards Israelites as native to the land of Canaan, elements that leave the more settled and urban lowland areas to deforest and tame the wilds of the highlands. This movement of pioneers is economically motivated by the collapse of trade in the difficult times ofthe Late Bronze era. The pioneer settlements grow and prosper and their population eventually takes over the lowlands as well (Coote and Whitelam 1987). In contrast to the other models, the pioneer model does not rely on biblical traditions at all in an attempt to reconstruct Israelite history. Rather, scholars employ archaeological data and pertinent ethnographic models from other cultures to build their portrait ofthe origins of ancient Israel.
Scholars generally consider the book of Judges in its current form to be a part of the Deuteronomistic History, a corpus spanning Deuteronomy-2 Kings, whose collection and setting down is attributed to nationalistic and devotedly Yahwistic writers during the time ofthe reforming seventh century BCE Judean king Josiah (see INTROD.OT).
2. Such writers combine the radical monotheism, aniconism, and condemnation of fertility rituals, divination, and child sacrifice found in Deuteronomy with a strongly proDavidic, pro-southern emphasis on centralization of worship in the temple in Jerusalem. The Deuteronomistic History is considered to have undergone revision by ideological offspring of these seventh century reformers, exilic writers responding to the crisis of Babylonian conquest. The theme of YHWH's control of history and the book's strongly nationalistic pride in Israel's military successes appear to suit well the interests of such writers, monarchic and exilic. The varieties of religious expression revealed in the tales and their implicit distrust of kings and political authority, however, seem to point in other directions. Either Judges is not appropriately Deuteronomistic, or one must adjust suggestions about the Deuteronomistic corpus as pro-Josianic propaganda and come to appreciate the various threads in world-view preserved in this book as indeed in other material from Deuteronomy to 2 Kings. It has been suggested that the refrain, Tn those days there was no king in Israel; all the people did what
6. The world-views and the sorts of situation portrayed in Judges suit the liberation model remarkably well—indeed, better than any other portion ofthe Israelite literary tradition. Whereas the various enemies are ruled by kings, their armed force equipped with chariots, their deity housed in a temple, and their women awaiting them in fine houses with latticework windows, the Israelites are the underdogs, their leaders charismatic figures many of whom are marginal in some sense even within their own culture. Jephthah, for example, is an illegitimate son born to a prostitute, Deborah is a woman, an unusual qualification for Israelite military and political leadership, while Samson is a wild man caught between the realms of nature and culture and regarded as somewhat dangerous by his own people even while they admire him. Israelite warriors fight in the name of YHWH by means of
JUDGES 178
as a piece of pro-Judahite propaganda (Brettler 1989). In its current form, the chronicle accommodates and begins to explain the clear differences between views of Israel's early history that were inherited in the tradition.
was right in their own eyes' (Judg 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25), aU°ws pro-monarchic, southern writers to present received traditions as a reflection of olden times, romantic and appealing in some senses, but chaotic and better left in the past. Nevertheless, the subversive and anti-establishment qualities of Judges shine through and together with the lively traditional style of the narratives help to explain the continuing appeal of tales of the judges.
v. i, the opening words of the book betoken a time of transition; Moses' successor Joshua has died and new leadership is necessary. The Israelites, here treated as a whole, request an oracle from God concerning the individual or group that will lead the conquest as a vanguard. Such prebattle requests for divine guidance are usual not only in Israelite war texts but throughout comparable material in the wider ancient Near East (see e.g. 2 Sam 5:19; i Sam 23:2; i Kings 12:22). In such views of war the deity or deities are ultimately involved in the battles of men while war itself is framed and characterized by ritual action (see Rang 1989: 56— 72, 98-107, 215-22). 'Canaanite' and 'Amorite' are traditional designations for the purported natives of the land. For more detailed discussion of terms for people of the land see Boling (1975). w. 2—4, Judah and Simeon are treated as individuals by the singular verbs and pronouns of the language, lending the brief mention of their victories the quality of hero accounts, comparable to tales of the judges, w. 5—7, the story of Judah and Simeon's victories focuses on one cameo scene as is frequent in the war tales of Judges. A conquered king is captured and rendered less than human with the loss of his ability to grip and his capacity to balance easily on two feet. Like the blinding of King Zedekiah by his Babylonian conquerors, such treatment of the enemy indicates how symbols of one's power are as important as the power itself. The enemy leader becomes the spoils of war, a doglike creature confirming the impotence of this and other enemies. He expects no better treatment (v. 7); his words point to the reversal of his own fortunes as a practitioner of this crude war code and are filled with irony and pathos. God has paid Adoni-bezek back. v. 8, this is one of the few uses in Judges of formulaic language implying imposition of the ban, a war ideology that involves the killing of all enemies, frequently by the sword, and often burning of the enemy city or town. Compare conflicting comments concerning the taking of Jerusalem at 1:21 and Josh 15:63. Notice also in the latter the use of the plural, 'people of Judah' (cf. w. 2-4). w. 12-15, mis little piece of the tradition preserved also in Josh 15:15—19 presents a common folk theme concerning an elder rewarding a younger hero with a patrilineal culture's most valuable commodity, a nubile woman, his very own daughter. Heroes are frequently offered such rewards in 'dragon-slaying' and other combat contexts; the battle itself is sometimes presented as the difficult task posed by a powerful future father-in-law to test the mettle of the hero or to eliminate him. So Saul tests David (i Sam 18:17). The interactions between Caleb, lone surviving leader of the generation of the Exodus, Othniel the hero, who also is Caleb's younger brother, and Achsah, Caleb's daughter, portray the young woman as resourceful and capable. She urges her husband to ask for land along with her, a piece of fertile earth being an appropriate extension of the gift of a woman. She herself demands water rights as her father allows and seems to expect. The theme of a hero's reward thus becomes a comment on a daughter's rights as Achsah is the first of a group of powerful women in Judges. Notice also the closely endogamous nature of the marriage.
E. Ethics and the Book of Judges. As with virtually every biblical book, Judges confronts the modern reader with much that seems offensive or repugnant: the bloodthirsty violence of heroes such as Ehud; the sacrifice of a daughter to God by Jepththah; the rape, condoned by her husband, of the woman in Judg 19, her murder, and subsequent dismemberment. How does one engage such texts? One might disassociate oneself from Scripture and conclude that ancient Israelite culture is not our culture, their world-view not ours. A person who does consider himself within a more continuous line of biblical tradition for cultural or religious reasons might attempt to appropriate selectively, appreciating Jephthah's appeal to criteria of just war (11:12-27), the Israelites' condemnation of the evildoing at Gibeah, their heroism in confronting better-armed enemies. In this commentary we attempt to stand at some critical distance from the ancient representations in Judges, nevertheless empathizing with their authors and audiences. We have to imagine a world in which human sacrifice is not unthinkable even while we, like the voices of Deuteronomy and Leviticus, condemn it. We must also consider the possibility that the ancient Israelites were self-critical and unsure: their frequent enquiries of God portrayed in Judges, and their need for, but distrust of, leadership being evidence of inner tensions and self-doubt concerning the nature of human action and the moral underpinnings of received literary traditions.
(1:1—36) Bridging the era of Joshua and the period of the judges, this chapter is a chronicle describing Israel's military progress and lack of progress in the land. The author draws brief sketches of military encounters in economic strokes and includes a few vignettes that may have been described at greater length in the non-preserved tradition. Notice the range of terms used in the first half of the chapter that describe going to war and conquering. The author varies the traditional language producing a certain texture in these verses, but, in describing defeats and inability to conquer, monotonously and repeatedly employs the same phrase, 'did not drive out', creating an aura of dejected resignation. Scholars frequently point to the south to north geographic orientation of the chapter. For a detailed discussion and identification of the particular sites named in the chapter see Boling (1975). Many suggest that Judg i preserves a more accurate view of the period preceding the establishment of the monarchy than Joshua (e.g. Boling), while one scholar eschews questions of historicity, pointing rather to the way in which different literary genres make for different varieties of historiography (Younger 1994). The prominent role played by Judah in this introductory chapter has led one scholar to view the chronicle
179 JUDGES
content at 3:7—10, 12, 15; 4:1; 6:1—10; 10:6—16; 13:1), making sense not only of this period in the biblical chronology but of the subsequent monarchic periods as well. Israel's fortunes depend not upon pragmatic matters such as economic strength, political unity, or military preparedness but rather upon the health of the covenantal relationship with God. Notice the language of interpersonal relationship through which covenant is expressed. Israel 'abandons' YHWH
i: 17, a direct reference to the imposition of the ban (see v. 8). The folk etymology for the name given to the conquered city plays on the term meaning 'devote to destruction' (cf. Num 21:3). v. 19, the first of several 'excuses' offered in Judges to explain defeat and the implicit incompleteness of the portrayal of the conquest found in Joshua. With some historical verisimilitude it suggested that Israelite groups control the hill country, but not the lowlands. Actual chariots of the period would have been made of wood and leather with some iron fittings, but the image of iron chariots expresses well the author's view of his people as underdogs confronting betterarmed, professional military forces, w. 22-6, as is frequent in biblical war portrayals and in actual warring situations, reconnaissance troops are sent to assess the situation before battle (e.g. Num 13; Josh 3). As in the tale of Rahab (Josh 3), a local person is recruited with promises that he and his family will be rewarded or spared if he provides useful information to the Israelites (see also i Sam 30:11—15). The man in this case is treated in the style of ancient genealogies as a city founder (see Gen 4:17). (2:1-6) This brief theophany functions as a connecting link between what precedes and what follows. It is a continuing response to the Israelites' request for divine guidance at 1:1 and an introduction to themes concerning the link between military failure and apostasy developed in more detail in ch. 2 and following, v. i, God's covenantal promise to give Israel the land reaches back to the era of the patriarchs, while his own covenant faithfulness is witnessed by the rescue from Egypt, w. 2-3, the covenant is conditional, however, upon Israel's fealty to YHWH alone. The tone and the concerns of the Deuteronomistic writer emerge strongly. Has Israel failed to drive out the enemy because of military weakness (1:19) or have they chosen to live among the forbidden, idolatrous Other? The writer here seems to understand failures described at 1:28—36 as evidence of the latter. Subsequent political and military problems are punishment for Israel's weaknesses as a covenant partner, w. 4-5, the people's reaction to these dire predictions provide the folk etymology for the place where the angel has appeared.
(w. 12—13) to follow other gods, especially the Canaanite Baal and his consort. YHWH in turn becomes 'angry' and 'incensed' with them (w. 12,14, 20), while they 'lust after' these foreign gods (v. 17). This passage ends with an additional twist on the theme of Israel's incomplete conquest: enemies have been left in the land to test Israel's faithfulness.
(3:1—31) The activities of the first judges, Othniel, Ehud, and Shamgar. w. 1—4, this introductory section lists by name and place Israel's competitors in the land. See Boling (1975), for a discussion of terms and sites, v. 3 provides an additional explanation for the continued presence of such groups in the land promised by YHWH to Israel. The newcomers to the land require some enemies in order to sharpen their agonistic skills. This together with the repeated suggestion that the idolatrous enemy tests Israel's capacity to resist idols
(v. 4; 2:22), the indication that the enemy has better armaments (1:19), and the overriding theme that apostasy guarantees failure, reveal an author attempting to make sense of traditions about Israel's incomplete conquest that challenge the more triumphalist ideology of Joshua, w. 5—6, typically Deuteronomic in outlook, suggest that living in close proximity to those not of one's own people, the uncivilized Other, leads to foreign marriages and cultural contamination (cf. Deut 7:1—6). It is the world-view of a group strongly defining 'us' as 'not them', w. 7-11, the report concerning Othniel (see JUDG 1:11-15), me younger brother and son-in-law of Caleb, traces the conventionalized pattern (see 2:11—31) in language that is largely formulaic.
w. 12-30, within the recurring narrative frame of apostasy, the people's cry to God, the raising of a judge-rescuer, the
successful battle against the enemy, and the lengthy respite from war, comes the beautifully crafted tale of the tricksterhero Ehud. The trickster succeeds through deception and disguise, a marginal person who uses his wits to alter his status at the expense of those holding power over him (see Niditch 1987). v. 15, in this case, the rescuer's ruse is made possible by his left-handedness. In the Hebrew, the term for left-handed is literally 'bound' or 'impaired with regard to the right hand'. To be left-handed is thus to be unusual or marginal, the right being the preferred side in other biblical contexts (see Ex 29:20, 22; Lev 7:32; 8:23, 25; Eccl 10:2). Benjaminites, Ehud's fellow-tribesmen, are described in the tradition as predisposed to left-handedness (see 20:16). This trait makes them especially effective warriors. The effectiveness comes not only from the lefties' capacity to surprise the enemy or to make a defensive posture more difficult. Lefthandedness suggests also the power of a wild man, the ecstatic, and the socially uncontrolled. Notice the play in this verse and below upon terms for and images of ritual sacrifice. Eglon's name plays on the term for 'calf while the 'tribute' to be offered to the king of Moab is also the term for sacrificial
(2:6—23) A theologically grounded view of history is laid out: Israel's military and political fortunes depend upon covenantal faithfulness which in turns appears to depend upon strong leadership, w. 6-10, a brief recapitulation of land-allotting events described in Joshua, an indication that indeed Joshua was the sort of leader who kept the people faithful to God, and notice of his demise and burial, and the death of the generation of the Exodus. Note the ominous comment that another generation replaces them who did not know YHWH or the work he had done for Israel. Such allusions to new young men in power generally signal trouble for Israel in biblical texts (cf. Ex 1:8; i Kings 12:8). w. 11-23, in formulaic language typical of the Deuteronomistic writers, the pattern of Israel's history under the judges is outlined: apostasy; punishment by military defeat and subjugation; the people's distress; the raising of a hero, the judge, who inspires Israel and delivers her; the death of the leader; relapse into apostasy; defeat. Compare the theology and the language in Deut 4:21—31; 6:10—15; 9:4~7> 12:29-32; 28:25, and notice how the framework set out in this chapter unifies Judges as a whole (see e.g. the language and
JUDGES 180
important oracle concerning the need for reform in the time of Josiah (2 Kings 22:14—20); Noadiah mentioned in Neh 6:14; and the wife of Isaiah (8:3). Were women prophets in fact common in ancient Israel, having been deleted or not preserved in the biblical corpus, or were prophetesses rare? One suspects the former given how workaday and mundane are the references to Huldah, Noadiah, and Isaiah's wife, but the current biblical context makes Deborah leap off the page as special and unusual in her mediating and leadership roles. This is how she is understood by the compiler of the traditions in Judges. (See JUDG 4:9.)
offering (Anderson 1987: 74). It is however the 'fatted calf himself who will be slaughtered, v. 16, the typical righthanded man would be expected to wear his sword on the left in order to draw with the right hand. Thus Ehud hides his weapon, w. 19-20, these verses contain language of intimacy. On 'in secret' see Jer 40:15; 37:17; and 38:16; with nuances of enticement see Deut 13:6 and Job 31:27; and with eroticism see 2 Sam 12:12. 'Coming to' may also have erotically intimate connotations (see Ruth 3:4). v. 21, the 'thrust' term also used in Judg 4:21 combined with the short sword that had been worn on the thigh, a male erogenous zone in the HB, and its destination the belly, a term also employed for 'womb' completes the womanization of the enemy whose defeat by an Israelite hero is enriched narratively by a metaphoric mixing of images of sex and slaughter, a trait of epic battle scenes elsewhere in the world (see Vermeule (1979: 101-2, 145-58, 171-3) on classical Greek material and Shulman (1986) on Tamil material), v. 24, what did Eglon's servants assume he was doing in his quarters? The phrase translated 'relieving himself in NRSV literally reads 'pouring out' or 'covering his feet', the feet being a biblical euphemism for the male member. The phrase thus may mean that he was urinating or defecating. In any event, the language suggests intimate activity involving private parts again pointing to Eglon's vulnerability and unmanning. In this context compare the encounter between David and Saul in the cave (i Sam 24:1—7).
The phrase usually translated 'wife of Lappidoth' may be translated 'woman of fire', or 'woman of torches/lightning flashes', in a parallel to Barak whose name means 'lightning'. The latter conveys a more charismatic image than the identification by husband's name. Much has been written on Deborah's role as judge. Key terms in v. 5 portray her as an oracle, critical to Israel's military success because of her capacity to mediate between God and Israel. Such holy men and women are often called upon in traditional cultures to mediate between humans as well and to provide advice in a wide range of areas.
v. 5, Deborah 'sitting' under a tree named for her, and the verb 'go up' that elsewhere in the HB describes those who seek divinely inspired counsel, suggest oracular and prophetic processes involved in rendering various sorts of judgement. See relevant terminology and content in i Sam 9:13,14, 18; 2 Kings 19:14 || Isa 37:14; 2 Kings 22:14; Jer 26:10-11. w. 6-7, Deborah delivers to Barak, the apparent leader of Israelite forces, military instructions received directly from God concerning a confrontation with the army of Jabin, led by Sisera his general. YHWH is the ultimate military commander in the holy wars fought by his people. The promise of victory by divine communication (v. 7) is essential to waging war throughout the ancient Near East (see JUDG 1:1). v. 8, Barak's desire to have Deborah attend the battle certainly highlights her status as a leader, but it is not at all unusual to have the holy person present in a military setting. Indeed, Samuel incorporates roles of priest, prophet, and general, while Elisha refers to Elijah as 'the chariots of Israel and its horsemen' (2 Kings 2:12). v. 9, the 'woman' is Jael whose tale follows, v. n, the Kenites are another of the intriguing but difficult to identify pre-Israelite groups inhabiting the land. Moses' father-inlaw Jethro, a priest of Midian according to traditions in Exodus and Numbers, is called a Kenite in Judg 1:16 and the present text, leading some to attribute sacral dimensions to Jael's tent
v. 31 has a brief reference to another of the Israelite liberating heroes, one that lacks the usual conventional frame in content and language. While some suggest the appellation Anath refers to a place, others suggest that the warrior's name includes that of the Canaanite goddess Anath, herself a warrior and patroness ofwarriors (see Boling 1975: 89). The latter points to the varieties of Israelite religious identity preserved however briefly in the epic traditions of Judges. Shamgar, like
Samson, performs superhuman feats, able to conquer hundreds of the enemy with a mere ox-goad, a symbol of the agrarian roots thattypify many of the heroes of Judges. Indeed an agrarian thread in Israelite identity dominates the book. Has an editor purposefully omitted much of Shamgar's story because the tradition associates this hero with things Canaanite? Has material simply been lost or forgotten? Or, for an ancient Israelite audience, perhaps the mere mention of Shamgar, the ox-goad, and the Philistines metonymically suggested a wide range of relevant and familiar stories, cited here only in brief, but more fully rendered in other contexts not preserved for us, as perhaps also is the case for the briefly described Othniel (w. 9—11).
(Cross 1973: 200). The point here is that Heber has disassociated himself from those Israelite connections and has become a military and political ally of the Canaanite king Jabin. His wife Jael, whose name means 'YHWH is God', has different loyalties from her husband, allowing for the deception in w. 17-22. w. 12-16, the pattern reversing Israel's fortunes is completed with the underdogs' victory as predicted by the prophetess. Only the general Sisera is said to survive, underscoring the epic proportions of YHWH's victory for his people and allowing the bardic author to focus on one dramatic scene involving Sisera and Jael, a cameo that encapsulates central themes and employs favourite recurring literary topoi in Judges, w. 17—22, like Ehud, Jael deceives the enemy into thinking that she can be of service. Sisera needs a place to
(4:1-24) This chapter introduces Deborah the prophet, Barak the Israelite warrior hero, and Jael, a woman warrior who exemplifies the traditional character motif, 'the iron fist in the velvet glove', v. i, notice that the conventional narrative pattern resumes without reference to Shamgar. v. 3, as at 1:19 the enemy is described as having iron chariots, a well-armed oppressive force. Israel does not have the use of iron weaponry until the beginning of the monarchy, v. 4, Deborah, who is introduced at the saviour point in the pattern, after the formulaic cry to God for relief from oppression, is described as a prophet who judges Israel at this time. Other female prophets are alluded to in the HB, such as Huldah who provides an
181 JUDGES
class' (Soggin 1981: 82) while the verb 'grew fat' also means 'ceased'. A translation that allows that villagers cease to prosper better suits the pattern of the song's plot depicting Deborah as rescuer, and better supports the cessation of trade described in v. 6 where the same term for 'cease' is found. The author describes a period of subjugation and disruption until Deborah, an archetypal mother in Israel, goddess-like and powerful, arises, v. 8, the variously interpreted first bicolon may be a proverb that links times of political change or revolution with the exchange of power between deities. Events in the divine realm parallel the changing course of human events: 'When new gods are chosen, war is at the gates.' The second bicolon points to the poorly armed Israelite forces who rely less on the sort of weapons utilized by their feudal enemies than on the power of the Lord, an image well suited to Gottwald's theory about Israelite wars of liberation in the late second millennium BCE (see JUDG 04). w. 10-11, these verses are among the few in extant Israelite literature that may point to the bardic process behind the composition of some biblical works, v. 12, like the Divine Warrior himself, Deborah and Barak are formulaically encouraged into battJe (cf. Isa 51:9; 52:1). w. 13-15, in the procession motif of the mythological pattern that describes the battle with and victory over the forces of chaos, the composer describes the members of an Israelite confederation. Scholars suggest that in the absence of a centralized government, various Israelite tribes or clans would come together for purposes of defence, w. 15-18, this section is usually translated and interpreted to mean that some Israelite groups did not willingly join in battle with their compatriots. Yet the section sits apart from v. 23 in which Meroz is cursed for its lack of support. Providing examples from cognate languages, one scholar suggests that the term translated 'why' in w. 16 and 17 is an emphatic particle that might be translated 'verily' (Cross 1973: 235 n.). In this case, w. 15—18 continue the catalogue of warrior groups with references to their geographic origins and ways of life (cf. Iliad 2:485-759). For example, Reuben dwells among the sheepfolds (v. 16), Gilead tents beyond the Jordan (v. 17). The translations 'tarry' and 'stayed' (NRSV ct al.) for terms that ordinarily mean 'to dwell' are forced, w. 20-1, the battle takes on cosmic and supramundane nuances as even the hosts of heaven, YHWH's army, join the fray and as the onrushing torrent, evocative of the sea in Ex 14-15, sweeps the enemy away. v. 23, Meroz, whose identity is uncertain, was one of those local groups expected to be committed to the Israelite cause. As in all ancient Near-Eastern treaty relationships, the punishment for shirking one's responsibility is a curse, understood to have real and physical power.
hide from Israelite pursuers. Like Eglon, Sisera is rendered vulnerable and impotent, and in this case the assassin is not only one of the underdogs but a woman as well. Jael poses as Sisera's saviour and his seductress, urging him twice to turn aside to her, covering him with a rug (v. 18). He asks for water, but mother-like she gives him milk to drink, setting him at his ease with the wiles of women. He, like the child, drops off to sleep comforted that Jael will protect him from the Israelites (v. 20) whereupon, warrior-like, she strikes him dead. The phrase, 'Comes to him quietly' imports the language of lovers (Ruth 3:7) into an aggressive and agonistic scene. The tent-peg and hammer, accoutrements of settled domesticity, become weapons of the assassin. These exquisite juxtapositions—lover/killer, mother/assassin, tent-dweller/warrior— are drawn with greater detail and nuance in the ancient poem of Judg 5. v. 22, the fulfilment of Deborah's prediction (v. 9). w. 23-4, a reminder that the battle is YHWH's, as the conventionalized pattern is again completed with relief from Israel's oppressors. Now Israel herself bears down upon and destroys her enemies, at least for the time being.
(5:1—31) The victory song attributed to Deborah is one of the oldest extant Israelite literary compositions dating perhaps to the twelfth century BCE, a time roughly contemporaneous with the era it depicts. Like the earlier works of the Canaanites discovered at Ugarit, the composition is characterized by a parallelistic variety of repetition whereby imagery unfolds in a beautifully layered or impressionistic style (Cross 1974), so that the parallel line adds colour, nuance, or contrast to its neighbouring description. The lines in such bicola or tricola are in general roughly parallel in length, while language selected by the composer to create content and the content itself draw upon traditional Israelite media of expression, also employed by others whose work is preserved in the biblical tradition. The song contains three major narrative thrusts: an introduction to the Divine Warrior and an overview of the historical setting for the poem (w. i-n); a catalogue of the participants and their successes or failures (w. 12—23); a telling of the tale of Jael that includes a poignant cameo scene of women in the enemy camp (w. 24-31).
v. i, the victory song is attributed to Deborah and Barak, recalling perhaps the attribution of victory songs to Moses and Miriam in the Exodus story (Ex 15). The victory song is a genre frequently associated with women composers in the Israelite tradition, v. 2, while the translation in NRSV appears to refer to the Samson-like hairstyle of the warriors, others translate the first line of v. 2, 'When they cast off restraint in Israel'
(Boling, 1975: 107; see also Soggin: 1981: 84 for alternatives), v. 3, notice the parallel terms and syntax in the call to hear this song, the formulaic introduction 'hear/give ear' (cf Deut 32:1; Isa 1:2). YHWH, both muse and victor, is the ultimate source and receiver of the song. w. 4-5, God as Divine Warrior (cf. Ex 15:3) is described in his march to battle. Like Marduk, Baal, and Zeus he is a storm god whose rousing disrupts the natural realm. The epithet 'One of Sinai' invokes a wide range of traditional lore concerning God's place of habitation and the dramatic encounter with Israel. Imagery of earthquake also dominates the scene at Sinai (Ex 19:16-24).
w. 24—7, another version of the tale of Jael presented in wonderfully economic style. Notice the way the author builds to the assassin's deception. Sisera asks for water, she gives him milk, or no, is it not cream in a lordly bowl? And then with repetition that underscores the violent turn in the action she is described as one who strikes, crushes, shatters, and pierces, v. 27, the description of Sisera's death is rich in double entendres that play upon themes of eroticism and death. Sisera kneels, a defeated warrior or a would-be lover (cf. Ps 20:9 and Job 31:10)? Is he at her feet (so NRSV) or more literally between her legs, 'feet'being a euphemism for genitals (see Isa 7:20; Deut 28:57;
v. 7, the term translated 'peasantry' in NRSV has also been interpreted to mean 'warriors' (Boling 1975:102) and 'leading
JUDGES 182
consummation of Gideon's offering. YHWH's power is frequently revealed in the fire (see Gen 15:17; Ex 3:1—6; cf. Judg 13:20). Gideon's fearful response is typical of biblical theophanies, and the subsequent building of an altar and folk etymology commemorating the dramatic experience of God place Gideon in a line of Israelite ancestor heroes (see Gen 29:17— 18; 32:30). v. 23, having experienced the power of God through an intermediary, Gideon now receives messages directly from the Lord. w. 25-35, God's charge to Gideon is to commit a bold act of subversion, to cut down the sacred pole or asherah, a symbol ofthe Canaanite deity Baal's indwelling presence, and to overthrow his altar, replacing it with an altar to YHWH. The wood ofthe pole is to provide the fire while the offering is a bull of his father's. Under cover of darkness Gideon and his men thus challenge both the ruling Canaanite establishment and his own people. Will they defend his actions and YHWH or will they submit to the rule of Canaanite culture? Joash, Gideon's father, comes to his support, as a folk etymology for Gideon's new name, 'Let Baal contend against him', completes Gideon's transformation from farmer's son to warrior hero. Now Gideon is filled with the spirit of God (v. 34), such possession being the mark of charismatic leaders such as Samson, Jephthah, and Saul. War is not the purview of cold military professionals, but the very will of YHWH himself whose power infuses and energizes those who fight his battles, w. 36—40, Gideon requests and receives again a sign of YHWH's support. The symbol chosen, a fleece of wool, is drawn from the agricultural world that defines the Israelite community for many ofthe traditions in Judges, while the evidence of God's presence and power involves the deity's capacity to control and alter the normal course of nature. The hero's repeated request for a sign recalls Moses (see JUDG 6:17) and more generally is a favourite biblical motif of the hesitant or insecure hero. Indeed YHWH favours those who are aware of their own weaknesses (see ch. 7).
Ezek 16:25 AV)? The same ambivalences in meaning apply to the terms translated lay' and 'dead' in NRSV (cf i Kings 1:21; 2 Kings 14:22; Ezek 32:29; and Gen 19:32,34, 35; 35:22). The last term ofv. 27 variouslytranslated 'dead', 'laid waste', 'destroyed', mightalsobe translated 'despoiled', cf. Isa 15:1; 23:1; and ^4:30 (see Niditch 1989:47—51). The repetitive cadences ofthe verse, moreover, have the quality of a ritual dance of death. The enemy is atthe same time seduced and slaughtered, the one serving as metaphor for the other, w. 28-30, the author powerfully juxtaposes the scene of Sisera's death at the hands of a woman with a glimpse of another female figure, the hero's mother who anxiously awaits his victorious return from battle. This gifted composer is able to picture the enemy camp with pathos and empathymuchasHomerdepictstheTrojanwomen. Incontrast to Jael, the tent-dwelling woman, the mother of Sisera is an aristocrat peering from a house with lattice-work windows (see 2 Kings 10:30), accompanied by ladies-in-waiting. They assure her in poetic parallelism that her son is late because he and his men are busy dividing up the spoil. Among the spoil are women booty, a term derived from the root literally meaning 'womb' (v. 30). We know, whereas his mother does not, that no Israelite women are to be raped. Ironically in the sexually charged language ofv. 27 it is Sisera himself who has been despoiled at the hands of a warrior woman practising the art of tricksterism.
Tales of Gideon (6:1-8:35)
Chs. 6, 7, and 8 contain stories of Gideon who rescues Israel from the Midianites, and draw upon traditional Israelite topoi such as the theophany and the miracle account while suggesting a more international bardic tradition concerning the exploits of hero warriors. (6:1-40) w. i-io, the introduction to Gideon's history outlines the conventionalized pattern ofthe judge (see JUDG 2:1123; 3:12—30) enriched with a detailed description of Israel's oppression as an agriculturally based community (see w. 3—5). YHWH's response is through a prophet who explains Israel's woes in Deuteronomic terms; Israel has worshipped gods other than YHWH. YHWH is formulaically identified as the rescuer ofthe Exodus (cf. Ex 20:2) and, with the call to Gideon, does send help. v. n, like Saul and many other Israelite heroes, Gideon's roots are in the farming community beset by enemies round about, v. 12, the divine presence—as in tales of Abraham, Jacob, Manoah's wife, and others—involves an intermediary messenger who appears at first to be a human being, v. 13, Gideon responds to the visitor's encouraging formulaic greeting with a complaint typical of Israelite national laments (cf. Ps 74; 77:7—20). God is capable of wonders known from the great myths that mark the foundation ofthe world and the people Israel. Where is he now? See also Abraham's response to divine promises (Gen 15:2). w. 14—15, the charge to or commissioning ofthe hero (cf. Moses: Ex 3:10; Jeremiah: Jer 1:4-5; and Saul: i Sam 9:20) and the hero's humble attempt to refuse (cf. Ex 3:11; Jer 11:6; i Sam 9:21). v. 16, cf. Ex 3:12. v. 17, as is typical in the pattern ofthe theophany, the hero requests a sign, assurance that the commission comes from God or that the words spoken are true (Gen 15:8; Ex4:i; also 3:12-13). w. 19-23, evidence thatthe message to Gideon is backed by divine favour is provided by the fiery
(7:1—25) w. i—8 war, in this case against the Midianites, is not for the glory of Israel but for the glory of God. As in Deut 20:57, the Lord orders the Israelites to limit the size of their fighting force by allowing the fearful to return home (v. 2). Even so, the fighting men are too numerous, for the battle, like the Exodus itself, is to be not proof of Israelite prowess but a miracle account in which success is guaranteed by God the warrior. Thus God devises a method, the test ofthe mode of drinking, to reduce the force to a mere 300 men (v. 8). Only the 'lappers' are allowed to fight. (Cf. 2 Chr 25:7-8 and the humbled stance of Israelite kings in the face of war at 2 Chr 14:9—15; 12:6; 20:12; 16:8.) w. 9—11, reconnaissance before the battle is a common biblical war motif (Num 13; Josh 2). Here the descent into the enemy camp is suggested by YHWH as a means of offering the always humble and hesitant hero Gideon a positive sign before the battle, v. 12, notice the description ofthe enemy in the parallel style of Israelite poets. Each repetition serves to emphasize the enemy's massive strength over against the two Israelite observers and their skeleton army. v. 13, dreams have divinatory significance (cf. Joseph's dreams and his dream interpretations in Gen 37:5—7; 40:8-22; 41:1-36). The interpretation, moreover, like a curse or a blessing has the capacity to bring about that which is predicted. Hence the rabbinic saying, 'All dreams follow the
183 JUDGES
the days when Israel's only king was YHWH and when her leaders recognized their limitations as tools of YHWH. w. 24— 7, the story of Gideon's ephod as here included transforms what may have been an etiology for a local cultic object into a mini golden calf episode. The leader responds to the people's lack of faith as in Ex 32 by requesting they give him gold, out of which he fashions a sacred object. In Ex 28 and 39 the ephod is described as a golden and woven vestment worn by the priest Aaron, one of the various items that allow for mediation between heaven and earth. Here the ephod appears to be more self-standing and iconic and is treated as an idol by the Deuteronomistic writer of v. 28 who interrupts the positive assessment of Gideon with this episode, v. 31, a brief introduction to Abimelech's humble origins (see JUDG 9:1). w. 33—5, the conventionalized pattern of the judges resumes. With the death of the faithful leader, Israel suffers a moral relapse, worshipping Canaanite deities, forgetting YHWH, and abandoning loyalty to the house of Gideon, the hero.
mouth'. The overheard conversation functions as a particular sort of omen akin to the Greek kledon. w. 15—23, the instructions before the battle and the mentioned instruments of war are reminiscent of the battle of Jericho (Josh 6). The shouting, the trumpets, the torches, and the breaking jars lead to the enemy's rout. v. 23, as judge, Gideon calls up members of the Israelite confederation to pursue the Midianites (cf. Judg 5:14— 18). w. 24-5, in a final mop-up operation, Gideon calls up the tribe of Ephraim, whose heroes capture and behead the Midianite captains Oreb and Zeeb. (8:1—35) wI—3> one °f the benefits of making war in this traditional culture is access to booty and to a manly sort of honour. The Ephraimites are interested in their part of the glory and the spoils, and accuse Gideon of leaving them only the dregs (v. i). Gideon responds in a proverb designed to reduce tension and win over one's opponent without violence. In the form of a rhetorical question he states that Ephraim's 'gleaning', that is, what is left after the harvest, is preferable to his (Gideon the Abiezrite's) grape harvest. He thus suggests not only that they have received much in the battle, but also— diplomatically and self-effacingly—that their worth or honour is greater than his own. w. 4-9, Gideon's interactions with the people of Succoth and Penuel are similar to David's encounters with Nabal, husband of Abigail (i Sam 25), and Ahimelech, priest of Nob (i Sam 21). A popular hero who might also be considered 'a Robin Hood type of social bandit' (Hobsbawm 1969) asks for support in the form of food for his fighting men. As in the Nabal episode, the request is denied and threats ensue. The officials of Succoth in fact taunt Gideon (v. 6), implying that his prowess as a fighter is more in tales than in deeds, w. 10—17, Gideon does succeed militarily, captures the Midianite kings Zebah and Zalmunna and makes good his threat to punish those who would doubt him. It is unwise to tangle with a bandit, especially one supported by God, as Nabal finds out.
(9:1—57) The story of the rise and fall of one of Gideon's sons, Abimelech, a would-be king, told from the perspective of an anti-monarchic writer, v. i, Abimelech is the son of a concubine, a secondary wife (see 8:31) whose origins are in Schechem. Such humble roots are not unusual for the judge as social bandit (cf. Jephthah, 11:1-3); Abimelech, however, is not a patriot for God, but a self-server, w. 2-3, Abimelech appeals to his mother's kin for support in his murderous plans for a take-over of political power. The phrase 'he is our brother' not only refers to kinship bonds but also to related political or covenantal ties (cf. i Kings 20:32). w. 4-6, the mercenaries that Abimelech hires with his kinsmen's financial backing are described with derision as literally 'empty' and 'wanton' (cf. Gen 49:4). The simple narration of heinous crimes, unadorned by editorial comment, condemns a system of selecting leadership that was common in the petty tyrannies of the ancient Near East. If any doubt remains about the narrator's view of kingship in the style of Israel's immediate neighbours one need only read the parable that follows, w. 7-21, one son of Gideon survives the slaughter of his brothers and is said to go to the top of Mount Gerizim, appropriately, one of the peaks involved in the ancient ceremony of blessings and curses described in Deut 27-8. There he delivers a masal, an ancient Israelite genre that creates a message by means of implicit comparison, an analogy drawn between a saying, story, or other form and the situation of the listeners. In this masal, the choosing of a human king, Abimelech, is likened to a search for a leader among the trees. Notice the recurring frame language that unifies the masal and builds to the answer as to who will reign. The debate among objects of a particular group or among the members of one body concerning who is the most important or who is to lead is a common folk motif (see Thompson 1955—8: ^42; 1461). In this case, however, the useful trees decline rulership as beneath them. Only the useless and prickly bramble agrees to reign. One might expect the masal to end with v. n and thereby serve as a comment on those who overtly desire power. The author contextualizes this potentially universal masal in terms of the story of Abimelech. That such contextualization was typical of masal use even in oral contexts is possible (cf. e.g. Ezek 17; 2 Sam 12). The message in context appears to suggest that