Part 19
w. 13—14, these verses are often cited as proof of Israelite literacy at an early period or as an indication that a later writer portrayed an ordinary young man who happen to pass by as literate. In fact the term translated 'young man' may be used as technical language for a particular variety of government bureaucrat, one who would have access not only to writing but also to the sort of detailed political information that Gideon is pictured to request. Such bureaucrats would have been associated with centralized monarchic governments rather than with the more fluid political situation that Judges claims to portray, but such anachronisms are in fact typical of traditional literatures, w. 18—21, this scene poignantly portrays a particular bardic ideology of war. The foreign kings respect their enemies suggesting they looked like princes (v. 18). Gideon for his part executes the Midianites because of his kinship bonds to those they had killed. Warriors are to face their equals in battle (hence Goliath's disdain for the lad David in i Sam 17:42-3; see also 2 Sam 2:20-3), and the inexperienced son of Gideon is not up to the task. The kings, quoting a proverb, request that the hero leader himself kill them, for such is the appropriate death of a king. w. 22—3 Gideon rejects hereditary kingship though the people press it upon him
(cf. i Sam 8). The attitude behind this scene and the tale of Abimelech that follows is strongly anti-monarchic, glorifying
JUDGES 184
his saving actions and Israel's unfaithfulness in terms familiar from prophetic oracles of the lawsuit form (cf. Hos 7:11— 16), and Israel repents (cf. similar pattern of motifs in Ezra 9, Neh 9, and 2 Chr 20). Finally, as in Ex 2:23-5, YHWH has pity upon Israel and will send a rescuer. Indeed God's pity is invoked by displays of humility and contrition on the part of the people and its leaders (see 2 Chr 20:12; 16:8; 12:6—7). v-
kingship is a reasonable if not desirable form of leadership, but that the system will work well only if there is trust between the leader and the led. As Jotham states in a gloss upon the masal, the situation in Shechem involves an evil coup, actions undertaken without 'good faith' and doomed to failure (w. 1620). Those who are disloyal to Gideon (w. 17—18) will not be capable of loyalty to Abimelech who himself has been proven prone to self-serving violence. Jotham's parable serves as an ominous prediction. As the righteous complaint of a wronged person, this speech act also helps to bring about vengeance through divine intervention.
J7> the phrase 'called to arms' (NRSV), lit. 'were called', is technical language used elsewhere in Judges to suggest military muster of an essentially non-professional fighting force (cf. 4:10; 6:35; 7:23-4). v. 18, the scene is set for the re-entry of the unlikely hero who, as in traditional narrative patterns, is precisely the one who will succeed.
w. 22-49, me story of Abimelech's decline is framed in terms of God's control. It is YHWH who 'sent an evil spirit' between Abimelech and the Shechemites. (For YHWH's control of persons through such means see i Sam 16:14.) Th£
The Story ofjephthah (11:1-12:7)
wresting of political power through violence that is not divinely sanctioned is condemned, w. 25-7, the Shechemite chieftains attempt to undermine the stability of Abimelech's fledgling state through acts of banditry, and soon transfer their affections to a new strongman. They are pictured as drunken louts taunting the status and credentials of Abimelech and loyalists such as Zebul. w. 34—41, Zebul informs Abimelech of Gaal's would-be coup and taunts the challenger to face the king (v. 38). He does and is defeated by Abimelech and Zebul. w. 42-9, Abimelech takes further vengeance on the people of Shechem, a practitioner of the ideology of total 'pacification'. Such acts of killing, burning, and strafing without attention to the military status, age, or gender of those destroyed are sometimes portrayed to be business as usual among the monarchs of the ancient Near East. Even David, the ideal king in some threads in the tradition, engages in brutal, terror-inspiring acts of warfare (see 2 Sam 5:7-8). In the tale of Abimelech is implicit criticism, for the king's violent victory and deadly excesses only foreshadow his own ignominious defeat, w. 50—7, Abimelech continues his tour of vengeance at Thebez, another fortress city. Here as in Shechem the people flock to the tower for protection, and, as at Shechem, Abimelech plans to burn it down (w. 48—9). This time, however, a woman of unknown name or origins throws down an upper millstone, a symbol of the woman's domestic realm, and crushes the skull of this would-be hero. He in fact begs his armour-bearer to kill him quickly lest it be said that a woman slew the hero Abimelech (cf. 2 Sam 11:21). She, like Jael, does render the hero impotent, while the millstone itself is an evocative symbol not only of domesticity but of woman's sexuality as well (cf. Isa 47:2; Job 31:10). w. 56—7, the writer sets the story in context as an example of just deserts, condemning Abimelech's style of assuming political authority and emphasizing both the power of curses and YHWH's control over the affairs of humans.
Jephthah is another of the bandit chiefs who rises to power because of military prowess in the raiding sort of warfare described in Judges. Whereas other 'judges' initially display their anti-establishment orientation in opposition to kings and generals who oppress the Israelites (e.g. Ehud, Gideon), Jephthah's marginality is kin-based as well. He is the son of a prostitute denied rights of inheritance by his father's legitimate children. Such a background, of course, is typical of a host of folk heroes. The tales of Jephthah's exploits provide fascinating insight into aspects of Israelite views of war.
(11:1—40) w. 1—3, the term 'mighty warrior' is applied to Gideon (Judg 6:12), David (i Sam 16:18), and a host of other heroes in the biblical bardic tradition. Like David in retreat from King Saul who has declared him an enemy of the state, Jephthah becomes a 'social bandit'. Surrounded by other uprooted fighting men, such bandits can cause much mischief for the establishment or provide sorely needed protection for their sympathizers, w. 4-11, now faced with the Ammonite threat the leaders of Gilead seek to woo back the hero. They offer him the position of commander, but when he balks they have to increase their offer to the position of chieftain, literally 'head'. The agreement between Jephthah and the elders is sealed with an appeal to YHWH as witness as is appropriate in a covenantal form (v. 10). Interweaving a traditional story about the success of the once marginalized hero is an account about the workings of the political process in non-dynastic societies with fluid patterns of leadership, w. 12—28, this exchange between Jephthah and the king of the Ammonites provides insight into certain Israelite concepts of just war. Employing juridical language (cf. formula in 2 Chr 35:21; 2 Kings 3:13; i Kings 17:18), Jephthah and the king are portrayed as arguing by messenger about land rights and in effect about the direction of a thread in Israel's founding myth. w. 12-13, Jephthah demands to know what cause justifies the Ammonites' military posture against Israel, and the Ammonite king responds that it is a matter of territory. He provides a version of events related in Num 21:21-31 (see an additional version in Deut 2:26-35), but portrays Israel as an unjust aggressor, w. 14—27, in a lengthy response, Jephthah provides a proIsraelite version of the taking of the disputed border territory. The argument has three components: (i) Israel took the land in a defensive war. Had Sihon, king of Heshbon, allowed Israel to pass peacefully through his territory during the Exodus
(10:1—18) w. 1—3, brief notes about the judges Tola and Jair. The larger traditions about these men may have been lost, or an author has purposefully decided to abbreviate, knowing that his audience is aware of the fuller tradition (see f UDG 3:7ii on Othniel and 73:31 on Shamgar). w. 6—17, the conventionalized pattern—death of judge, backsliding, cry for help— resumes, as the passage reviews Israel's major enemies, w. 10-16 is a dialogue between the Israelites and YHWH in which Israel confesses her sins of idolatry, YHWH describes
185 JUDGES
flattened out or covered up by the pan-Israelite myth that dominates the HB.
from Egypt, there would have been no need for war or the accompanying conquest of the disputed area (w. 15—22); (2) YHWH, God of the Israelites, has conquered this land for his people, and peoples are allowed the lands their deities are able to procure for their benefit. Note the reference to Balak (v. 25) who according to tradition seems to accept grudgingly that YHWH has granted Israel certain lands (see Num 22—4, esp. 24:25; also Num 21:10-20 (w. 23-5); (3) Israel has been in possession ofthe disputed territory for some 300 years, so that the statute of limitations on land claims appears to be over
(12:7—13) The notice of Jephthah's demise is followed by a listing of three judges identified by the details that for an Israelite audience may have been metonymic markers of other stories. The reference to the marriages of the thirty (v. 9) and to the sons and donkeys (v. 14) are intriguing hints of tales that have been lost. Several times in Judges, such brief catalogues of leaders serve as a transition from the exploits of a leader whose story is told in detail to an indication of Israel's return to apostasy, to be followed by another substantial slice ofthe tradition (see 10:1-5; 331)-
(w. 26-8).
That the Israelite author feels called upon to portray his hero as appealing to just cause is in itself interesting. The arbiter of the dispute is YHWH whose judgement will be made apparent in the outcome ofthe battle (11:27). War, as in many traditional cultures and accounts, makes manifest divine judgement.
The Epic of Samson (13:1-16:31)
(13:2-24) The Birth of a Hero v. 2, in Israelite tradition, the barrenness of the mother is a virtual guarantee that what follows is the birth story of a hero. So with Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, and Hannah, w. 3-23, the annunciation, a special theophany of which women are the primary recipients. Traditional motifs of this form include the appearance ofthe deity or his emissary, and the announcement ofthe birth (v. 3); special instructions or information for the mother and son (w. 4-6); expression of fear or awe (v. 22). Cf Rebekah (Gen 25:22—3); Hagar (Gen 16:11—12); Sarah and Abraham (Gen 18). Note how the language used in the annunciation concerning Samson is economical, as similar language is used to express similar content, unifying the story and emphasizing key themes, in particular the nazirite identity of Samson (w. 4— 6; 7; 14). w. 4—6, as described in the Priestly text at Num 6:1— 21, nazirite status (lit. consecration, dedication, separation) is a self-imposed and temporary state of holiness that an adult takes upon himself or herself by a vow. The symbolization of nazirite holiness is rich in contrasts between nature and culture. For example, the nazir is not to drink wine and beer that are fermented and transformed from grapes and grain into culture-affirming products of human invention (cf the extension in Num 6:3); he or she is not to cut the hair which must grow in a natural state unaltered by man-made instruments. Samson is to be a nazir by divine direction, even in utcro. The nature/culture dichotomy implicit in nazirite status and the specific motif of hair are central to his characterization and to the story cycle, v. 5, a critical feature ofthe divine message: Samson is to be a saviour, w. 8-24, interesting dimensions involving gender and status emerge in the annunciation scene. The woman is unnamed but she is the one whom the man of God seeks out. She alone receives the important message about the hair (v. 5), and appears to have a down-to-earth good sense that contrasts with her named husband's fretful and repeated enquiries. Unsure and fearful, he believes that the divine being will harm them, but she realizes that he comes in blessing. Cf. w. 8, 12, 16, and 21 with 6—7, 10, 23. In a confirmation of her status in these annunciation events, she is the one who names the boy, 'man of the sun' or 'Sunny' (Samson in Hebrew is simson, sun is semes). Indeed, naming the child is usually the purview ofthe mother (so Hannah (i Sam 1:20); so Eve (Gen 4:1); so the matriarchs), as are other matters concerning the birth and career of her children, v. 18, cf. Gen 33:29. w. 19-21, on God's power revealed in fire see f UDG 6:19-22, Gideon's theophanic
(11:29-40) The Sacrifice of Jephthah's Daughter Some scholars describe Jephthah's vow as rash, evidence perhaps ofthe warrior's madness that manifests the spirit of YHWH within him. Although shocking to modern readers, the sacrificial vow is a feature of an Israelite ideology of war, reflected also in other ancient Near-Eastern cultures. The warriors promise the deity something of value in return for his assistance in war. This particular belief in the efficacy of sacrifice underlies the ideology of the ban, whereby conquered persons are regarded as devoted to the deity; the transfer of these valuable commodities is accomplished by wholesale destruction (see Num 21:2—3;me terminology at Deut 13:16; and Niditch 1993: 28-55). vV-> in Hebrew the term translated 'whoever' in NRSV could also be understood as 'whatever'. Surely the Israelite audience knew ofthe pathos to follow. In fact, the tale of a war vow gone awry becomes the foundation myth for a woman's rite of maturation, v. 34, on women and victory songs see Ex 15:20-1; i Sam 18:6-7; Judg 5:28-30. w. 34-40, implicit in the story of Jephthah's daughter is an analogy drawn between a father's offering his daughter in sacrifice to a male deity and the nubile woman's passage from virginity in her father's household to adult responsibilities of marriage and childbearing in the home of a husband. Each woman is a sacrifice mediating the relationship between the males who control her life and sexuality. Notice the emphasis on the daughter's stage in life (w. 37, 39) and upon that of her companions who form a support group of people undergoing a similar experience. Together they model a rite marking the bittersweet transition to adulthood experienced by all Israelite women (v. 40; see Day 1989).
(12:1—7) As in 8:1—3,me Ephraimites complain that they have not been asked to join in the battle and thereby to enjoy the spoils. The events referred to in w. 2-3 are not part of the recorded tradition, but tales well-known to an Israelite audience may lie behind Jephthah's words. In contrast to the dispute with Gideon, this one ends in inner Israelite war, a battle which the Gileadites win. Notice the reference to regional dialects in w. 5—6. This passage points not only to causes of conflict when decentralized military forces compete for glory and spoils, but also to some ofthe regional flavours and tensions in ancient Israel, differences sometimes
JUDGES 186
extricate the solution to the riddle from her man, threatening to kill her and her family by burning. Indeed fire is a recurring motif in the Samson narrative, a means of expressing the boiling rage of the hero and his enemies.
experience. ¥.25, the term translated 'stir' in NRSV has a more pressing nuance: compel or thrust (on this term repeated in the tales of Samson see Alter 1990). The warrior, a sort ofholy man in his own right, is one possessed by the divine spirit. This war frenzy allows him to burst forth in massive destruction (see also 14:6,19 and cf. 16:20).
Notice the poetic parallelism of the riddle and the solution as formulated. In the Hebrew the words play on 'm' sounds. The answer, moreover, has the same double range of responses as the riddle itself (see Camp and Fontaine 1990), for the solution could be read as another riddle whose answer is 'love' or 'sex'. In turn Samson reacts with a proverb that has a sexual innuendo (ibid.). Ploughing with another man's heifer, in Israelite culture as in others, refers to cuckolding. The Philistines have had their way with Samson's woman by obtaining his secret from her. Knowledge, deception, sexuality, and power intertwine in this story about competition for status, a juxtaposition of motifs that recurs in the Samson cycle, w. 19-20, Samson pays his riddling debt by killing thirty men of Ashkelon and giving the spoils to his riddle opponents. He then withdraws to his own people, but his father-in-law gives Samson's bride to another man, thereby preparing the way for a counter-match in trickery and violence. Indeed tension escalates as the fissure between Philistine and Israelite is shown to be unbridgeable.
Samson and the Philistines: Episode One (14:1-15:8)
The first of several stories in which relations with a woman lead to a power struggle between Samson and the Philistines. Themes of 'us' versus 'them', and symbols of the wild and untamed versus the socialized and cultural emerge in a tale of trickery and counter-trickery as God uses the life of this Israelite culture hero to challenge and defeat the Philistines who 'rule over Israel at this time' (14:4).
(14:1—20) w. 1—4, the issues of Israelite status and the otherness of the Philistines emerge in the parents' disapproving words to Samson concerning his chosen match (14:3; cf. Gen 34:14—15) and in the unequivocally ethnic way in which Samson describes her. Samson is not a son who is swayed by parental wishes; they defer to the strongman, a folk hero in the style of Hercules, one not bound by social convention, v. 5, the killing of the lion with bare hands, an act kept secret (see also v. 9), prepares for the hidden answer to the riddle that follows (v. 14) as the story of ethnic rivalry among exogamous groups continues. The tearing apart of the lion with bare hands also helps to portray Samson as a superhero with power over the forces of the natural world. A pattern is established whereby Samson's overtures to the settled, social world of the Philistines is followed by a superhuman feat emphasizing his qualities as wild man (cf. 15:1,4; 16:1,3; 16:4, 9,12,14). v. 8, the honey in the lion's carcass has the serendipitous quality of spontaneous generation, a source of nourishment appropriate to one who often comports himself in a manner that is beyond the boundaries of cultural convention. On honey and warriors see i Sam 14:27—9.
(15:1—8) v. i, the desire for his woman coincides with the harvest season, a time of fertility—a pairing of themes common in traditional literatures (e.g. Ruth). Samson bears a peace offering, but approaches as if all is forgiven, further revealing his obliviousness to social convention, v. 2, the father controls his daughters' sexuality, a commodity his to exchange. He offers Samson another deal (cf. Saul, i Sam 17:25; 18:17—22), the younger sister, v. 4, Samson's vengeance is described in the fantastic hyperbole appropriate to tales of superheroes, the use of torches somehow attached to the tails of 300 foxes to spread fire among the standing grain, vineyards, and olive groves of the Philistines (on fire, see JUDG 14:10—18). Samson bends nature to destroy what Philistine labour has carved out of nature. In a pattern that recurs in the story cycle, Samson's flirtation with the social world of the Philistines is followed by a violent outburst frequently directed at aspects of Philistine culture (see JUDG 16:3 on city gate and 16:29-30 on the house of Dagon). w. 6-8, violence escalates as the Philistines take vengeance upon Samson's Philistine in-laws (on fire and vengeance see JUDG 14:10-18), and he exacts massive vengeance upon the Philistines, then withdraws to a cave in a beautiful symbolization of his status as wild man. The Philistines' cruel treatment of members of their own group serves to paint them as barbarians; the Israelite author provides a more generous portrait of the Judahites who seek to capture Samson (15:12—13).
w. 10—18, the wedding between Samson and the Timnite woman becomes an occasion for trickery, as a would-be union between groups instead leads to resentment and destruction—ultimately God's plan for the Philistines, oppressors of Israel. The wedding story is framed by a traditional narrative pattern seen in tales of Ehud and Jael whereby the person of marginal or outsider status gains power over those in power through deception. In this setting, Samson is clearly the outsider surrounded by Philistines, and the riddling contest with its wager provides him with a clever means of increasing his status at Philistine expense. Samson hopes not only to win the bet but to show himself more clever than the oppressors of Israel.
Riddling contests, in fact, are frequent at the wedding ceremonies of many traditional cultures, providing a safe means of acting out the animosities that may exist between the members of exogamous groups. In this case, however, neither side plays fair (in epic literatures they rarely do). Whereas the usual or expected answer to the riddle, given the wedding context, is 'love' or 'sex' (see Camp and Fontaine 1990: 140—2), Samson's experience with the lion and the honey provides him with a response that could be known to him alone. In turn, the Philistines coerce Samson's fiancee to
Samson and the Philistines: Episode Two (iy.g-2o)
(15:9—17) A saviour such as Samson is a mixed blessing, although to be sure Israelites are elsewhere portrayed as preferring collaboration with tyranny to revolt (see Ex 2:14; 5:21). The men of Judah, responding to a Philistine counter-raid, wish to hand over the man whom the Philistines seek (for a scene that raises comparable issues in political ethics see 2 Sam 20:14—22). Gingerly, 3,000 Judahites come to Samson with a formulaic accusation of wrongdoing ('What... have
187 JUDGES
entrapment or trickery; counter-trickery or escape. The plot follows this path three times, in the style of traditional folk narration, but in the fourth instance Samson is caught. The victorious and superhuman outburst that follows this tale of deception (see JUDG 15:4) must await the next episode (16:23-30).
you done to us?') and convince Samson to allow himself to be given over to the enemy. Samson the trickster goes quietly, but merely bides his time, bursting forth upon the Philistines with a power fuelled by the divine frenzy. Notice the wonderful imagery used to describe the impotence of the ropes that bind him (v. 14), and again the fire motif. As he kills the lion with bare hands and uses foxes to destroy Philistine property, he uses the jawbone of a donkey, a weapon pulled serendipitously from nature, to kill a thousand men. v. 16, Samson the propounder of riddles and the speaker of proverbs here declares his victory in a war-taunt that plays upon the repetition of sounds and words and two meanings of the root h-m-r, 'donkey' and 'pile up'. In synchronic parallelism the many slain Philistines are called 'heaps and heaps', v. 17, the narrative ends with a folk etymology. The place is called 'Jawbone Height'.
v. 4, the name of Samson's final lover, Delilah (Heb. delild), is of uncertain etymology possibly having to do with 'loose hair' or 'flirtatiousness', but the word plays on the term for 'night' (layeld) as Samson's name derives from the term for 'sun' (semes), v. 5, the Philistine lords or, better, 'tyrants' offer Delilah a fortune in silver if she is able to uncover and divulge to them the source of Samson's strength. The narrative revolves around a folk motif, the secret source of power
(Thompson 1955—8: 01830; 01840). Some heroes' strength or their very life-force resides in their sword or an amulet; the source of Samson's power is integral to his status as nazir, declared even before his birth. The traditional folk motif thus intertwines with particular theological concerns having to do with Samson's relationship to YHWH.
(15:18—20) The great victory over the Philistines concludes with an amusing little vignette that emphasizes both Samson's swaggering ways and his position as a favourite of God. Thirsty after the battle, he speaks in the hyperbole one expects of Samson to YHWH, his protector, asking essentially if God intends to reward the hero of Israel with death by thirst (v. 18). Notice again the epithet 'uncircumcised' applied to the Philistine Other (cf. JUDG 14:3). God responds by splitting open a spring from a rocky hollow (lit. mortar-like place) so that Samson drinks and is revived. In doing so he takes his place with Elijah and Moses, other biblical heroes for whom God opens sources of fertility and nourishment. The story is completed with another place etiology, 'Spring of the Caller'.
w. 6-17, Delilah's question to Samson is repeated four times with nuances, as the formulaic request is elaborated, exerting more and more pressure upon the hero and building to the climax of his revelation (w. 6,10,13,15). Also repeated is
Delilah's test to Samson: 'The Philistines are upon you' (w. 9, 12, 14, 20). While some suggest that Samson is a foolish buffoon to reveal his secret and others that Samson so loved Delilah that he never truly believed she would betray him, the theological interests of this traditional story suggest that Samson is guilty of hubris. He has come to believe that his strength is not contingent upon the symbol of his holy otherness, his consecration to YHWH. The repetition, 'The Philistines are upon you', at v. 20 produces a special pathos, for in contrast to the other times when Samson breaks free, this time, shorn of his hair, he does not realize that YHWH has left him and that he has become vulnerable like other men.
v. 20, this verse is taken by some to mark the end of an earlier version of the Samson epic, to be followed by supplemental tales (Boling 1975: 240-1). The verse might be seen to function as a transition to the story of Samson's fall. He judges for twenty years and then comes Delilah.
Samson and the Philistines: Episode Three (16:1-31)
The passage is unified by the repetition with nuances described above and by the progression of false revelations that lead finally to the truth. These counter-deceptions by Samson each play on the dichotomy between nature and culture so important in the cycle of stories as a whole. Samson first declares that raw bowstrings would hold him (v. 8), these being minimally treated natural materials. Then he claims that new ropes would bind him, ropes being a more processed material (v. 12). Then comes the reference to the quintessential art of women's culture, weaving, as an image of safely tying or taming the locks of Samson's hair intermingles with an evocation of the dangerous and seductive woman, a weaver of webs and plots. Samson's bold mention of the hair in the third deception is followed by the truth: a razor that cuts off the natural wildness of Samson's hair will tame Samson. The hair on one level is a symbol of Samson's particular manliness. His power resides on the border of the cultural and the natural, for Samson the riddler is able to kill lions with bare hands, Samson the trickster withdraws to a cave, darting in and out of the social world of Philistine dominance. It is the hair that binds him to the God whose power is revealed in nature, the God who often prefers the wilderness to the city.
(16:1-3) Tlus brief episode foreshadows the longer Delilah narrative in structure and content, and echoes patterns established earlier. Once again Samson approaches the uncircumcized Other through one of their women, a prostitute, and the encounter ends in his violent departure. The trickster pattern is also found, as the enemy seeks surreptitiously to capture the strongman (v. 2) and as he feigns lack of knowledge of them only to escape in the night by lifting off the very gates of the city in another Herculean display (v. 3). Coming before the encounter with Delilah that brings Samson down, this scene might be seen as contributing to the hubris of the hero and to our own expectations about his invincibility, an attribute that turns out to be false. The appeal of Philistine women might be seen as Samson's tragic flaw (so implicitly Alter 1990). It does seem clear that the Samson tradition as preserved emphasizes a favourite biblical theme, the danger of foreign (and loose) women (Deut 7:3-4; Prov 5:3-6; 7:10-23). This theme would have appealed to nationalist Israelite writers throughout the tradition and certainly to Deuteronomistic writers usually credited with the preservation of the material.
(16:4—22) The story of Samson's downfall that ends with a hint of his last hurrah (v. 22) traces a pattern now familiar from the cycle: encounter with a Philistine woman; attempted
v. 21, powerless and now blind, Samson is made to grind at a mill in the prison. He thus does the work of a fettered beast or
JUDGES 188
(17:7—13) It is likely that early in Israel's history not all priests were Levites. Even the venerable Samuel who trained under the priest Eli of the shrine at Shiloh is given an Ephraimite genealogy in some threads of the tradition (see i Sam 1:1 and cf. i Chr 6:26). These verses suggest, however, that the levitical priest lends special status to a shrine, granting its owner prestige and divine blessing. This passage nicely captures the quality of itineracy attached to Levites in the biblical tradition. Notice the designation 'father' that Micah attaches to the holy man (v. 10) and cf. 2 Kings 6:21; 8:9; 13:14; and Judg 5:7. (18:1—13) vJ> fr°m Levitical itineracy, the narrator turns to Danite wanderings in search of a homeland, as the tales of Micah, the young Levite, and the Danites weave together in a founding myth. w. 2-10, the reconnaissance mission is a frequent motif in Israelite war accounts (cf. Num 13; Josh 2; and}UDG 6:10—14). While spying outthe land in the north, the Danites receive hospitality in Micah's household, v. 3, do the Danites know the Levite from elsewhere (Soggin 1981: 272)? The text may mean that they recognize the priest's southern accent or dialect (Boling 1975: 263). w. 5—6, the request for a sign or an oracle before battle is also a frequent feature of traditional Israelite war accounts and points to the belief in divine control of the wars of humans (see JUDG 4:5, 8; 6:13 on Deborah and Gideon), w. 7—10, the neutrality of the author concerning the Danites' cheerful response to the Laishians' military vulnerability is troubling, but reflects an ideology of expedience in which the use of war to achieve political goals is a given. In contrast to other biblical war texts, the battle is not justified by appeal to a righteous cause, e.g. the sinfulness of the enemy, but like all war succeeds only with divine sanction, v. 12, an etiology for the name of a location in Judah, 'The Camp of Dan'.
the work of women. The 'grind' term, however, has additional sexual connotations in the HB (see Job 31:10; Isa 47:2—3), as euphemism for intercourse. Samson, like Job's wife, now 'grinds for another'. The mighty hero has been feminized, playing Sisera to a Philistine Jael (see on JUDG 4, 5).
(16:23-31) Samson's rehabilitation and his final victory are set appropriately during a Philistine festival in which the adherents of the god Dagon rejoice, thanking their god for helping them to defeat Samson, their enemy. The Philistines' victory prayer is a rhythmic ditty built upon rhyme and poetic parallelism (v. 24). They have Samson brought out that 'he might sport' (my tr.) before them. Humiliation is implied, but the term 'sport' may also have sexual connotations. Feigning weakness, Samson asks the lad who leads him to allow him to support himself by leaning against the pillars of the great house that is filled to the rafters and beyond with Philistines. With a final prayer to God, Samson pulls down the house, killing himself and his enemies. The narrative ends with a declaration of admiration for Samson's final deed (v. 30). In contrast to other threads in the HB, traditions of the judges do not reveal concern with innocent enemies that are killed or the like, but are informed by jingoistic national pride, defining 'us' in terms of'not them'. Samson is buried and commemorated with full honour.
The Founding of Dan (17:1-18:31)
These chapters offer a fascinating Danite founding myth that provides insight into Israelite notions of their ancestors' religious lives, and perhaps also a glimpse of aspects of Israelite popular religion that continue to hold meaning throughout biblical times. Also of interest is the ideology of war that serves as background to the establishment of Dan.
(18:14—26) This passage contributes to the aura of banditry that permeates not only the stories of the judges but also the tales of David's early career. Like David in his encounters with the priest at Nob (i Sam 21:1—9) an(^ with the household of Nabal (i Sam 25:2—38), the Danites propose to help themselves to what they need or desire, and only a brazen fool would attempt to deny them their requests. Armed and dangerous, the Danites, like David, make their intentions seem inevitable and logical, managing in their rather convincing speeches to make it seem as if the robbed party is in the wrong if he protests their actions or attempts to deny them his possessions (see w. 19, 23—5). Notice the wonderfully disingenuous if not self-righteous response of the Danites to Micah, lit. 'What's it to you?' or 'What troubles you that you call up [a force against us]?' (v. 22). The Levite is convinced to join the Danites, while Micah, himself a Laban-like character not above cheating his own mother, knows when he has been bested, v. 18, compare to 17:4, 5, and 18:14 in me HB and see JUDG 17:5 concerning the number of icons commissioned by Micah.
(17:1—6) The tale opens with the confession of a guilty son named Micah. He has stolen his mother's money, but now returns it to her. Like the father of the prodigal son, she harbours no resentment, but praises God for her son's rehabilitation and asks him to dedicate the money to YHWH by making a pesd, a term translated 'idol' in NRSV, but better understood as a carved statue of iconographic significance, and a massekd, a cast metal icon. Such icons were symbols of the deity's indwelling presence and closely identified with the deity (hence Micah's statement to the Danites at 18:24). The son, still a bit of a con artist, uses only a small portion of the endowment (cf. w. 3 and 4), but commissions the statuary. Since only the smelter is mentioned, some suggest that the phrase, 'carved statue and cast statue', refers only to the metal icon (so NRSV translates). Without making a negative value judgement, the narrator describes how Micah completes his home shrine with a divinatory ephod (see JUDG 8:27) and teraphim, movable statuary that several scholars have associated with cults of ancestors (cf. Gen 31:30, 34-5), installing his own son to serve as priest, v. 6, some read this verse and other echoes of it (18:1; 19:1; 21:25) as a pro-Josianic or pro-Davidic writer's comment on the need for strong centralized leadership in the form of monarchy. The statement reflects an author's effort to separate himself in chronology and world-view from what he portrays to be olden times, but is not clearly readable as a negative assessment when compared, for example, with the commentary on Gideon's ephod at 8:27.
(18:27—31) The conquest of Laish by the Danites. While the language of putting to the sword and burning is reminiscent of biblical ban texts in Deuteronomy and Joshua, the ideology behind the conquest is quite different (see on JUDG 18:7-10 and Niditch 1993: 127—8). w. 30—1, variant manuscript traditions read not Manasseh, as in the Hebrew, but Moses (so NRSV). In this way, the hereditary priesthood of Dan is said to
189 JUDGES
(v. 15). One elderly gentleman, however, greets them, and after a brief conversation welcomes them to his home. Notice the formulaic reference to feasting, 'they ate and they drank'
belong to the line of Moses rather than the line of Aaron (v. 30). The translation of pesel, 'idol', in w. 30—1 as in 17:3, 4; 18:14, gives the impression that the narrator strongly disapproves of Micah, the Danites, and the shrine itself, but the language could not be more matter of fact. While special status is accorded implicitly to the rival sanctuary at Shiloh by describing it as the place where 'God's house' was located in premonarchic times, the founding of Dan is treated with good humour and respect.
(cf. 19:4, 6). w. 22-6, this account is a variant of the tale about Lot in Gen 19. In both, visitors find hospitality in the house of an Israelite, but 'base fellows', miscreants (in Gen 19 it is 'the men of Sodom' who become synonymous in Western tradition with miscreants) surround the house and demand that the stranger/s be sent out to them that they might rape them, lit. 'know them', a biblical euphemism for sexual intercourse.
Civil War (19:1-21:25)
v. 22, for ancient Israelites homosexual rape is as quintessential an expression of anti-social behaviour as cannibalism is in the Greek tradition. Strangers in need of succour in the Odyssey find themselves being eaten, whereas Israelite strangers are threatened with rape. A number of threads in the Israelite tradition indicate special disapproval of homosexuality as a form of relationship that blurs neat categories of creation as the Israelites understood them (see e.g. Lev 18:22; 20:13, and Deut 22:5 in context). This negative attitude even to consensual relations between men blends in Gen 19 and Judg 19 with the frequently found theme of the womanization of the enemy Other, as discussed at f UDG 16:19, 21 (Samson) and 4:27 (Sisera). Thus their threat of homosexual rape marks the evildoers as consummately aggressive, prepared to act out in a literal way the metaphor of conquest in war. In Gen 19 the aggressors are Sodomites, but the tale in Judg 19 shocks its audience even more because the enemy is within, Israelites in the Israelite town of Gibeah. w. 23-4, in both versions of the tale, the host attempts to appease the wild men outside by offering them women instead, prized virgin daughters (as also in Gen 19:8) and the man's concubine as well. To modern readers, the offer is as shocking as the threat, if not more so, and seems to suggest a world in which women are valuable, but expendable commodities. The crafter of the tale here, however, is critical of the husband who throws his wife to the vicious mob (v. 25; see discussion at JUDG 19:28; 20:6). w. 25-8, whereas in Gen 19:11 danger is averted by the miraculous intervention of the threatened men who are actually a manifestation of God, here the concubine is cast out to the crowd. The language conveys extreme violence and force not only in describing the actions of the abusive men outside the house, but also in describing the husband's giving his wife over to them. The term translated 'seize' in NRSV is rooted in the term 'strong'. The husband strong-arms the woman; the abuse begins inside the house. With the break of day, the evildoers let the woman go, such anti-social outbursts being the work of night. The narrator juxtaposes the collapse of the victimized woman at the doorway with the husband's crass and brusque orders to her (v. 28), a command requiring only two words in the Hebrew. The wife cannot answer, for she is dead. The portrait of the husband is singularly unsympathetic, as the composer of the story deftly juxtaposes the Levite's criminal disregard for the well-being of his spouse, a member of his own family, with questions about Israelite unity and mutual responsibility.
This gripping story of an ancient Israelite civil war contains three major parts: the rape that leads to the war; the war itself; and the process of reconciliation. Motifs of hospitality and kinship run throughout the whole, as the tales pose essential questions about the nature of group unity and the causes of dissensions and fissure. Women play key roles in the narratives but in contrast to Deborah, Jael, and other strong women of Judges, they are silent characters who join or separate the men who control them in a strongly androcentric and agonistic work. In Judg 19-21, women are doorways leading into and out of war, sources of contention and reconciliation. These chapters serve as an important transition to the early history of the monarchy in i Samuel, for they point to the inevitable tension between kinship or clan loyalties and loyalties to the larger Israelite group, understood as a nation and a whole.
(19:1-31) v. i, like chs. 17-18, this account points to a certain interest in the travels and experiences of Levites who are often those most in need of local support and hospitality, having no patrilineal holdings of their own. The concubine is a second wife, having less status than the first wife, but some rights nevertheless, v. 2, the Hebrew text reads that 'she played the harlot towards him', i.e. was disloyal but not necessarily adulterous. Other MS traditions followed by NRSV read 'she became angry with him'. A misogynistic tradition could more easily understand her leaving the man to return home in terms of the adultery idiom. Whatever the cause for the rupture, this brief allusion to tensions in one couple's relationship foreshadows the more serious disruptions in the larger social family that are to follow, v. 3, after four months the Levite goes after her, hoping to win her back (cf situation and language in Gen 34:3).
w. 3-10, at the home of his father-in-law the Levite receives full hospitality as is proper in traditional cultures, especially between affines. The grand dimensions of the in-law's generosity is emphasized by traditional style repetition at w. 4, 6, 8 and 5,7,8,9. Each time the Levite rises to leave, the host urges him to stay, he accedes, and they feast. Finally, at v. 10 comes the break with the repetition in action and language that signals an important shift in the action and mood (see on Samson and Delilah at JUDG 16:20-1).
w. 11—15, in his journey north from Bethlehem, the Levite ironically refuses his servant's advice to stop in Jebus, a nonIsraelite town, instead suggesting they stay at a town 'of the people Israel'. It is in this town, Gibeah of Benjamin, that the outrage takes place, w. 16—21, instead of meeting with the expected hospitality, the party finds itself ignored in the open square, an ominous adumbration of the troubles to come
w. 29-30, the Levite's grisly actions upon returning home echo in visceral fashion the ritual calling up to military action of members of the Israelite confederacy or league (see i Sam 11:5—8). Whereas the leader would divide a sacrificial animal into pieces and send them to the tribes, the Levite cuts up the
JUDGES 190
composed in oral-traditional style, as the narrator warms to his tale, loses his place a bit, and in the very process manages to reflect the chaos of battle, v. 40, the image of the whole city burning is reminiscent of impositions of the ban (see JUDG 1:8). In this case, however, some Benjaminites survive (v. 47). w. 44, 46, here, as at 20:16, respect is expressed for the warriors of Benjamin. In such bardic accounts, the narrator and the characters of the tales themselves frequently honour those on both sides of the battle (see e.g. JUDG 6:19, 21 above). This stance is not uniform throughout Judges in which the majority of accounts treat the enemies of Israel as the unredeemable Other. See especially attitudes to the Philistines expressed in tales of Samson. Of course, one might expect a more generous depiction of fellow Israelites, v. 48, the language and imagery of the ban is very strong in this verse (see JUDG 20:40), but because some 600 Benjaminites escape, the finale of the battle is not technically a full imposition of the ban. The most consistent feature of the ban ideology as described in Deuteronomy and Joshua is the killing of all human enemies.
human victim in a powerful and troubling symbolization of the soon to be clear fissures in Israel's body politic.
(20:1—48) From the gathering of Israelite fighting forces to the defeat finally of Benjamin, the tribe of Gibeah, this chapter describes the wrenching process of a civil war that pits the ideal of pan-Israelite unity against tribal and kinship-based unity. The war and subsequent events in ch. 20 test the ideology of the ban. Will Israel root out the evil in its own midst as required in Deut 13:12-18 (see the use of the term 'base fellows' in Deut 13:13)? w. 1-2, the narrator presents an orderly idealization of the way in which an Israelite confederation may have worked (see discussion of notions of a league' at JUDG 5 and JUDG 03). w. 3-7, as required in Deut 13:14, an investigation is undertaken before war is declared against alleged miscreants. Note the way in which the composer has the Levite cover up his cowardly sacrifice of his wife, w. 8-n, the emphasis here, as in the opening verses, is upon the unity of the group and their single-mindedness in rooting out the evil in their midst. And yet the apparent unity belies the fact that Benjaminite representatives are not among them
(21:1-25) Tlus passage describes the way in which the Benjaminites are reintegrated into the pan-Israelite community. Paradoxically, the process requires renewed violence against fellow Israelites and the irregular and antisocial stealing of women, men helping themselves to sources of procreation without appeal to proper social mores. As violence against a woman leads into conflict, violence against women leads out of war to a rebuilding of the community. The story-teller appears to justify this renewed violence by appeal to the Benjaminite emergency. Literarily, the final episodes of the story of the civil war do provide an indusio with the beginning, emphasizing again the androcentric bent of the material. One wonders, however, if the narrator is so approving or accepting of the world-views and war views implicit in chs. 19—21.
(see v. 3: Benjamin has heard about the gathering but has not gathered with the other tribes). Moreover, while the Hebrew is difficult at v. 10, it appears to suggest that vengeance is to be meted out to the entire city of Gibeah, because of the evildoers in their midst. Such an action would be consistent with the ban in which evil is understood to be like a contagious humour that spreads beyond the breakers of covenant to their families and townsmen (see Deut 13:15—16; Josh 7:24—5). Nevertheless in contrast to an invocation of the ban against foreigners, an inner Israelite enactment risks destroying the covenant community itself. One could well expect Benjaminites to balk at giving up all of Gibeah. v. 12, a variation on a formulaic expression that makes accusation of wrongdoing (see Gen 3:13; 12:18; 29:25). v. 13, this sentence may mean, 'Hand over the specific people in Gibeah who have done wrong,' or 'Hand over those Gibean scoundrels,' i.e. all people of Gibeah are scoundrels (see JUDG 20:8-11). v. 16, the Benjaminites have a reputation as especially fine warriors, aided by a tendency to left-handedness. Saul is of Benjamin as is Ehud, the left-handed judge.
v. i, no mention of a prohibition against marriage with Benjaminites is found in the gathering at Mizpah (20:1-11), in the decision to go to war, or in the battle itself, v. 2, weeping to YHWH is a frequent motif in Judges (2:4; 20:23, 2^) implying an appeal for advice or assistance in times of great stress, w. 3-4, the juxtaposition of weeping and questioning YHWH, and the offering of sacrifices (cf. 20:26-8) strongly suggests the formal request for an oracle, w. 5—7, does v. 5 suggest that YHWH has offered a way out of the people's dilemma? The absence of a rubric implying divine response may well mean, to the contrary, that Israel falls back upon its own devices, employing an unorthodox version of the ideology of the ban as a means of procuring women for Benjamin. If not answering the call of the confederation is to be considered an act worthy of total destruction (such an act warrants a curse in Judg 5:23, but no call for total destruction), then all associated with the miscreants, including young women, are to be destroyed, guilty by contagion (see JUDG 20:8-11). The notion of wreaking near total destruction upon the one 'of all the tribes' who did not heed the call against Benjamin appears more an excuse to obtain women than a means of imposing divine justice. It is upon this issue that the composer has his characters dwell (see w. i, 5-7). Indeed if not answering the call against miscreants were the issue then the
w. 18, 23, 27-8, on the importance of receiving divine guidance before battle see JUDG 1:1. Notice the frequent emphasis on the presumed kinship bonds between all Israelites (w. 28, 23, 13). The repetitions in content and language betoken a traditional style of narration that beautifully captures and creates the rhythms of the forward and backward progress of the battles, w. 32—4, the break with repetition signals a change in the action, as the Benjaminites who met with initial success finally succumb to the Israelite forces (cf 17:20). w. 35-48, with a comment in v. 36 on the Benjaminites' realization that they are defeated, the battle accounts appear to end, but w. 36—47 provide a more detailed encore of the account of the war's denouement. Noting that w. 31-2 parallel v. 39, that v. 41 repeats the content if not the language of v. 36, and that w. 36—7 appear to be an explanatory commentary on or continuation of w. 33—4, many scholars have suggested that ch. 20 concludes with a conflation of two variant accounts of the end of the war. This is certainly a possibility, although the confusion and expansiveness also characterize some works
igi
JUDGES
600 remaining Benjaminite men would be worthy of death. It is not by chance that no divine command or sanction appears in this account, an indication of a narrator's critical point of view. w. 8-9, a search indicates that the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead did not join the Israelites at Mizpah. Given that the Benjaminite who becomes first king of Israel, Saul, is described as rushing to the rescue of the inhabitants of this town in northern Gilead when they are threatened by the Ammonites (i Sam n) and that they in turn show undying loyalty to him and his sons (i Sam 31:8—13; 2 Sam 2:5—7), one wonders if some ancient tie is believed to bond Jabesh-gilead to the tribe of Benjamin.
Albright, W. F. (1939), "The Israelite Conquest ofthe Land in the Light
of Archaeology', BASOR 74:11-23. Alt, A. (1967), Essays on Old Testament History and Religion (Garden
City, NY: Doubleday), 173-221; German original, Die Landnahme der Israeliten in Paldstina (Leipzig: Reformationsprogramm der Universitat, 1925). Alter, R. (1990), 'Samson Without Folklore', in Niditch (ed.) (1990),
47-56. Anderson, G. A. (1987), Sacrifices and Offerings in Ancient Israel: Studies
in their Social and Political Importance (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall). Boling, R. G. (1975), Judges: Introduction, Translation, and Commentary,
w. 10-12, this partial imposition of the ban suggests parallels with Num 31, a priestly war account. In both narratives, all males are killed but women who have not known a man sexually are spared. The contexts of and world-views behind the war episodes differ. Num 31 reveals a view suggesting that the virgin girl is an unmarked slate differing in identity from sexually active women who have been marked by men, and from men of all ages who carry in their persons the identity of the group. The woman who has not had intercourse is treated as a sort of fresh, fertile ground available for a man's seed. In Num 31, virgin girls are not tainted with Moabite contagion and can become the bearers of Israelite offspring. In Judg 20, a passage not concerned per sc with priestly issues of purity, virgins provide the requisite assurance that Benjaminite children will be the offspring of their legal fathers, an issue of vital importance to a culture grounded in traceable patrilineages. The men of Jabesh-gilead are eliminated to make the virgin girls vulnerable to capture and easily available. In the process of procuring the young women, issues of justice under the ban seem muted, a rationale at best. w. 13-25, the daughters of Jabesh-gilead being inadequate in number to provide women for the surviving Benjaminites, another plan is hatched. Fearing the curse they have placed upon any of their number who willingly help Benjamin as a tribe to survive (v. 18), the Israelites find for the Benjaminites an opportunity to engage in wife-stealing.
AB6A. Brettler, M. (1989), The Book of Judges: Literature as Polities', JBL
103: 395-418. Bright, J. (1981), A History of Israel, 3rd edn. (Philadelphia: Westmin-
ster). Camp, C. V., and Fontaine, C. R. (1990), The Words ofthe Wise and
their Riddles', in Niditch (ed.) (1990), 127-51. Coote, R., and Whitelam, K. W. (1987), The Emergence of Early Israel in
Historical Perspective (Sheffield: Almond). Cross, F. M. (1973), Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press).
(1974), 'Prose and Poetry in the Mythic and Epic Texts from Ugarit', HTR: 1-15. Day, P. L. (1989), 'From the Child Is Born the Woman: The Story of
Jephthah's Daughter', in Day (ed.), Gender and Difference in Ancient Israel (Minneapolis: Fortress), 58—74. Gottwald, N. K. (1979), The Tribes ofYahn>eh:A Sociology ofthe Religion
of Liberated Israel 1250—1050 B.C. (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis). Hayes, J. H., and Miller, J. M. (eds.) (1977), Israelite andjudean History
(Philadelphia: Westminster). Hobsbawm, E. (1969), Bandits (New York: Delacorte). Kang, S.-M. (1989), Divine War in the Old Testament and in the Ancient
Near East (Berlin: de Gruyter). Mayes, A. D. H. (1974), Israel in the Period of the Judges, SET 2/29
(Naperville, 111.: Allenson). Mendenhall, G. E. (1973), The Tenth Generation (Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press). Niditch, S. (1987), Underdogs and Tricksters: A Prelude to Biblical Folk-
lore (San Francisco: Harper & Row).
w. 19—24, like the story of Jephthah's daughter, this tale may well reflect or be the myth used to explain the origins of an ancient Israelite festival involving young women of marriageable age. The association between vineyards, dancing nubile women, festival at an important cultic centre, and wife-stealing may suggest some sort of yearly occasion for betrothals and the reinforcing of aspects of a patrilineal, endogamous culture. As a literary form, the tale shares much with traditional narratives such as the rape of the Sabine women. In the larger Israelite tradition and in the specific war story that the wife-stealing brings to a close, the tale emphasizes that women's sexuality has to do with relations between men (v. 22). In this case as in Gen 34, the normal and proper channels for exchanging women have been disregarded. Ultimately, the tale is a founding myth marking the renewal of the tribe of Benjamin. Such stories of beginnings are often characterized by departures from the workaday norm if only to reinforce them or to grant, in a return to beginnings, a brief chance of participation in an institutionalized form of revolt, v. 25, while some suggest that this formula indicates disapproval, it seems more likely a composer's way of lending the tales an ancient, early, and otherly quality.
(1989), 'Eroticism and Death in the Tale of Jael', in Day (1989), 43-57- (ed.) (1990), Text and Tradition: The Hebrew Bible and Folklore (Atlanta: Scholars Press).
(1993), War in the Hebrew Bible: A Study in the Ethics of Violence (New York: Oxford University Press). Noth, M. (1960), The History of Israel, tr. P. R. Ackroyd, rev. edn. (New
York: Harper & Row); German original, Geschichte Israels, 2nd edn.
(Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1954). Shulman, D. D. (1986), 'Battle as a Metaphor in Tamil Folk and
Classical Traditions,' in Stuart H. Blackburn and A. K. Ramanujan (eds.), Another Harmony: New Essays on the Folklore of India (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press), 105-30. Soggin, A. J. (1981), Judges: A Commentary (Philadelphia: Westmin-
ster). Thompson, S. (1955-8), The Motif-Index of Folk Literature (Bloom-
ington, Ind.: Indiana University Press). Vermeule, E. (1979), Aspects of Death in Early Greek Art and Poetry
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press). Younger, K. L., Jr. (1994), 'Judges i in Its Near Eastern Context', in A.
R. Millard, James K. Hoffmeier, and David W. Baker (eds.), Faith, Tradition, and History: Old Testament Historiography in Its Near Eastem Context (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns), 207-27.
ii. Ruth GRACE I. E M M E R S O N
B. Literary Structure. Of all the OT books Ruth has the highest ratio of dialogue to narrative, hence the immediacy of its appeal. Best described as a short story (novella), it is a skilfully structured interweaving of darkness and light. It begins with death and ends with birth, the transforming of emptiness into fullness. The central chapters 2 and 3 are parallel in structure; beginning and ending with scenes in which only Ruth and Naomi participate, their main focus is on Ruth's encounters with Boaz which bring for her blessings both material and spiritual. Their settings, however, are strongly contrasted; the former takes place in public in the countryside by daylight, the latter in the intimate privacy of a threshing floor by night.
A. Description, Date, and Purpose. 1. At first sight Ruth is a delightfully simple tale of domestic life. It moves from sorrow to joy, from emptiness to fullness, largely through the initiative and resourcefulness of two women. This description, however, masks many intractable questions not only of date and purpose but of relationship to OT law and practice. In the prominence it gives to women, and its unconventional attitude to society, it resembles Esther, although contrasting with this in its overtly religious dimension. Although YHWH's active intervention in human life is acknowledged only twice (1:6; 4:13), the frequent invocation of the Name in blessing affirms that he is in ultimate control. Yet this aspect is deliberately muted; at times God seems not even 'in the shadows' (Campbell 1975), and twice significant events are attributed to chance (2:3; 3:18). Throughout it is a story of faithfulness (hesed) human and divine. Each of the blessings invoked is fulfilled ultimately through human agency.
C. Feminist readings. Although written from a female perspective and illustrative of the courage and resourcefulness of a woman, it is merely speculative to suggest that a woman was its author. Feminist commentators are divided in their appraisal of Ruth's character. For some she is an example of strength and independence, for others she merely subserves a male agenda, for in the end it is a man who makes the decisions and a male child over whom the women rejoice and with whom the future lies.
2. The questions of date and purpose are interrelated. Uncertainty as to the one compounds the problems concerning the other. Arguments can be adduced for both a pre-exilic and a post-exilic date. In neither case are they conclusive and the matter remains unresolved. From a general consensus on linguistic grounds that it belongs to the post-exilic period and, despite its non-polemical tone, may have been a protest against the exclusivism of Ezra and Nehemiah, preference has moved now to a pre-exilic date on the grounds that the alleged Aramaisms are, with few exceptions, open to other explanations. Neither the fact that it is included among the megillot
D. Text. Fragments of four Hebrew MSS of the book of Ruth dating from the last century BCE and the first CE, found in caves 2 and 4 at Qumran, attest only slight variations from theMT.
(1:1-5) Th£ references to time and place (v. i) have a significance beyond the simply chronological and geographical. They point to a time of anarchy (Judg 21:25) fr°m which Ruth's descendant, David, will deliver Israel, and to a foreign land outside the covenant, yet within which God works out his purpose. The contrast between Ruth, this Moabite heroine through whom Israel's future is secured, and the Moabite women who led Israel into idolatry on their journey into the promised land (Num 25:1—3), cannot have escaped either the author or the readers of this narrative. The intimate relationship of Ruth and Boaz, with its promise of a glorious future for Israel under David, redeems the apostasy and degradation of the earlier incident.
(the five scrolls) in the third section of the Hebrew canon, nor comparison with the attitude to foreigners in the book of Jonah, justifies assigning it to a late date. The setting of the story in the period of the Judges, which accounts for its position in the Christian canon, is, however, clearly remote from the author's own time (1:1; 4:7). If the concluding references to David are original they provide a terminus a quo for its written form and open the possibility that it may have had a political purpose in supporting David's claim to the throne, whether in his or in Solomon's time (Hubbard 1988). The acceptance of Moab as an appropriate refuge for a Judahite family, and of Ruth as the wife of a prominent Israelite, suggests a time prior to the growth of the intense hostility represented by Deut 23:3-6. Whatever its original purpose, its position in the Christian canon introduces a note of hope after the negative anarchical tone of the end of Judges and restores woman, and the male—female relationship, to an honourable position after the sordid, misogynist events of Judg 19-21.
From conventional beginnings with its focus on Elimelech and his sons, the narrative quickly becomes a woman's story. Through bereavement and barrenness (v. 5) it appears as a story without a future. But the death of sons at the story's beginning is counterbalanced at the end by a son whose birth holds promise of a future, not only for the family concerned but for the nation (4:14—17).
3. In the HB the position of the book of Ruth varies. When it immediately follows Proverbs Ruth herself is to be seen as an example of the 'capable wife' ('eset hayil) of Prov 31. In Judaism the book of Ruth is associated with the harvest celebration of Pentecost, the biblical Feast of Weeks, and the giving of the law.
(1:6—13) Naomi's initiative marks a new beginning. But the real initiative is YHWH's in showing his care for his people by 'giving them food' (v. 6, in Hebrew an alliterative phrase, latet lahcm lahcm). This is the first of only two references in the
i93
RUTH
story as it unfolds. Boaz is better described here as 'friend' rather than 'kinsman', for modcf (a rare word) is not strictly a kinship term but refers to acquaintance or familiarity (cf. Prov 7:4, 'intimate friend'). The vocalized Hebrew text differs here from the consonantal text which indicates a more common word of comparable meaning (meyudda'; cf. 2 Kings 10:11; Ps 55:14). Boaz is bound to Naomi by friendship with Elimelech, as well as by ties of kinship as members of the same clan (mispaha), an intermediate grouping between the smaller family unit ('father's house') and the larger tribe. The phrase translated 'a prominent rich man' (gibbor hayil) signifies, in some instances, a man of military prowess (Judg 6:12; i Sam 16:18) as well as wealth (2 Kings 15:20). An element of physical prowess is not to be excluded too readily from this portrayal of Boaz (cf. LXX, 'powerful in strength').
whole narrative to YHWH's direct intervention in human life. In both instances he acts to secure the future, first by the provision of food, and second by the conception of a child (see 4:13). The sixfold repetition in this section of the verb 'return, turn back' (sub) indicates a keynote of these verses. With v. 8 the dialogue begins. Naomi's command to her daughters-in-law, 'Go back', is repeated in w. 11—12 in a more peremptory way. The expression 'mother's house' is to be noted. It occurs elsewhere in contexts of love and marriage
(cf Gen 24:28; Song 3:4; 8:2). In general, however, a widow returned to her father's house (Gen 38:11; Lev 22:13), but the death of Ruth's father is not implied (cf. 2:11). Naomi's horizons are restricted to the idea that 'security' (v. 9) is to be found only in marriage, a thought which continues through w. 11—13. It is debatable whether or not the idea of levirate marriage (Lat. levir, 'brother-in-law'; see Deut 25:5-6) is present here. In a strict sense this was the responsibility of a dead man's brother within a tightly knit family unit. Future sons of Naomi's would be but half-brothers to the dead. Her words are better understood as an outburst of hopeless despair and possibly self-pity. The ambivalence of Naomi's character already becomes apparent. Does her instruction to her daughters-in-law arise from genuine concern for their future, or is it a cynical rejection of them in despair? The alternatives turn on the meaning of the ambiguous v. I3b, whether it expresses self-pity, 'it has been far more bitter for me than for you' (NRSV, taking the Hebrew preposition min to indicate comparison), or altruistic concern, 'it is exceedingly bitter to me for your sake' (RSV). YHWH is regarded as the source both of blessing as reward for meritorious action (v. 8), and of catastrophe which, however, is not necessarily regarded as punishment (v. 20). (1:14-18) portrays the depth of Ruth's commitment to Naomi and to YHWH. The terminology of v. 16 is reminiscent of marriage vows (cf. Gen 2:24) and of covenant making (Ex 6:7; Lev 26:12). Ruth's action demands comparison with that of Abraham who left his homeland with promise of a future; Ruth at this moment has no promise and no future. Naomi's silence is significant. Nowhere does she respond to Ruth's devotion. Ruth's allegiance to YHWH is signified by the form of her oath (v. 17). Her use of the name YHWH here, and here only, implies renunciation of Chemosh, god of Moab, and the aligning of herself with Israel.
Ruth had for 10 years been the wife of an Israelite (1:4) yet still she is reckoned an outsider and designated as 'the Moabite' (w. 2, 6). The situation at the beginning of ch. i is reversed. It is Ruth now, not Naomi, who is a widow without family in a foreign country. Thus she claims the right of the poor, enshrined in law, to glean at harvest (Lev 19:9-10). Ruth's arrival on Boaz's land (v. 3; the picture is of unfenced strips of land with various owners) is attributed to chance (miqreh). There is no overt intervention here by YHWH in the course of events (contrast 1:6), yet the frequent invocation of his name in blessing throughout the narrative (2:4; cf. 2:12, 20; 3:10; 4:14) affirms his ultimate responsibility in human affairs. The greeting of v. 4 is a traditional one (see Ps 129:8). The nature of Boaz's question, 'To whom does this young woman belong?' (v. 5), reflects the assumptions of the patriarchal society of the time. The answer identifies Ruth impersonally, not by name but by her foreign origins and her relationship to Naomi.
(2:7) presents two difficulties, in v. ja an apparent disjunction with the following narrative in v. 15; in v. 7b an exegetical problem arising from the ambiguity of the Hebrew. As regards the latter, NRSV 'without resting even for a moment' (following the LXX) is to be compared with REB 'she has hardly had a moment's rest in the shelter' (a more literal rendering of the Heb.; cf. NIV). Either way Ruth's unstinting activity is emphasized. The former relates to her request to glean 'among the sheaves' (v. ja, an advance on v. 2) which fits awkwardly with v. 15 where this is clearly an outstanding privilege accorded to her by Boaz, not a matter of right. Sasson (1989) attempts to resolve this difficulty by understanding v. 7b, 'she has been on her feet from early this morning until now', to refer not to Ruth's untiring gleaning but to her patient waiting for her request to be granted, a privilege outside the competence of the overseer and finally granted by Boaz himself only in v. 15. Two considerations, however, militate against this view: (i) it is unrealistic to assume that a woman in Ruth's needy circumstances would refrain from gleaning in the customary way while requesting permission for an uncertain privilege; (2) it disregards the explicit statement that she 'gleaned in the field behind the reapers' (v. 3). A possible solution consists in emending ba'omanm ('sheaves') in v. 7 to bffdmirim ('swathes'; cf. NEB), thus creating a clear distinction from v. 15. Some prefer to omit v. ja following the Vulgate and Syriac.
(1:19—22) The deficiencies of Naomi's character are exposed. She defines 'full' and 'empty' (v. 21) simply in terms of male relatives. In fact, she left for Moab not 'full' but famine stricken; she returned to Israel not empty but with Ruth's remarkable devotion.
The narrative in this chapter is skilfully structured and powerful in its simplicity. From famine (v. i) it moves to harvest (v. 22), from Moab to Bethlehem. It began with Elimelech; it ends with Naomi's story. There is both pathos and irony. Despite Ruth's extraordinary avowal of loyalty to Naomi and her God, choosing a future without promise or hope, she is ignored by Naomi and the townswomen in Bethlehem. She is still designated a foreigner (v. 22) even though it is with her that the future lies.
(2:1—7) Th£ sequence of events is interrupted by a circumstantial clause (v. i) which supplies details germane to the
RUTH 194
'best clothes' (an interpretative rendering of 'cloak', simld) may suggest deliberate preparation as a bride (v. 3). There is a hint of unconscious irony in Naomi's words, '[Boaz] will tell you what to do' (v. 4). In the event it is Ruth who tells Boaz what to do (v. 9). In Naomi's eyes Ruth is merely passive and unquestioningly obedient; in her dealings with Boaz she proves herself independent and resourceful (cf. 2:11).
(2:8-16) This section is dominated by the first encounter between Ruth and Boaz, the main characters in the narrative. Ruth's status above that of a servant is acknowledged by Boaz in relieving her of the menial task of drawing water (v. 9; the vessels would be either large clay pots or goatskins). Boaz's protection of Ruth (v. 9), T have ordered the young men not to touch you', contains echoes of the divine protection afforded to Sarah (Gen 20:6) and Rebekah (26:11). Ruth's response plays on the verb 'acknowledge' (root n-k-r) and the noun 'foreigner' (nokri), a category of persons distinct from the 'resident alien' (ger) who had legal rights of protection within the community.
(3:6—14) This dramatic scene is couched in tantalizingly obscure language, perhaps deliberately so. It is unclear whether the expression 'uncover his feet' (w. 4, 8) implies sexual intercourse. That a threshing floor with its piles of grain afforded considerable privacy is evident from its use as a haunt of prostitutes (Hos 9:1). Moreover the word 'feet' (raglaim) occurs in some instances as a euphemism for 'genitals'
Boaz alone, in contrast to Naomi, appreciates the cost of Ruth's loyalty to her mother-in-law (v. n). The motif of reward (v. 12) has occurred already in 1:8. The figure of YHWH's protective wings (kanap) derives either from bird imagery (Deut 32:11; Isa 31:5), a figurative description of deities found elsewhere in the ancient Near East, or from the cherubim in the sanctuary, symbolizing YHWH's presence, which provided a place of refuge in times of need (Ps 36:7; 57:1). The combining of YHWH's blessing and Boaz's favour in w. 12-13 is significant. Only YHWH can pay her 'wages in full' (maskurtek selemd; NRSV 'full reward'), but Boaz himself is to be the agent of this blessing for under his 'skirts' (kanap) Ruth will eventually find security (3:9). Behind Ruth's bland words 'you have... spoken kindly' (literally 'to speak to the heart', v. 13) lies a more ambivalent meaning; in some contexts this expression signifies the tender wooing of a lover (Hos 2:14). The narrative is rich in such ambiguities which foreshadow the outcome of the story. The overwhelming generosity and superabundance of Boaz's provision for Ruth (w. 14—16) is reminiscent of YHWH's unstinting provision for his people (Ps 81:10; cf also 1:6). (2:17-23) The picture in v. 17 is of grain beaten out with a stick (cf. Judg 6:11). The weight of an ephah is unknown. Although a surprisingly large quantity to result from gleaning, it was not more than Ruth could carry home—possibly, but by no means certainly, about 25 kilos.