formula (xii. 7), but is prefaced by a detailed introduction to the
oppression of Israel (x. 6 sqq.). By the inclusion of the Philistines
among the oppressors, and of Judah, Benjamin and Ephraim
among the oppressed (x. 7, 9), it appears to have in view not merely
the story of Samson, a hero of local interest, but the early chapters
in 1 Samuel. This introduction is of composite origin (as also ii. 6–21;
Josh. xxiii.–xxiv. 25), but a satisfactory analysis seems impossible.
As it stands, it has literary connexions with the late narrative in
1 Sam. (vii. seq., xii.), and appears to form the preface to that
period of history which ended with Samuel’s great victory and the
institution of the monarchy. But this belongs to a later scheme (see
Samuel), and the introduction in its earlier form must have been the
prelude to earlier narratives.[1] The story of Jephthah’s fight with
Ammon is linked to the preceding introduction by x. 17 seq.; for the
framework see x. 6 (above), xii. 7. Chapter xi. 12–28 (cf. Num. xx. seq.)
is applicable only to Moab, vv. 29 and 32 are variants, and Jephthah’s
home is placed variously in Tob. (xi. 3) and Mizpeh (v. 34).
In xi. 1–10 the outlaw stipulates that he shall be chief of Gilead
if successful, but in vv. 12–28 a ruler speaks on behalf of Israel.
Both Moab and Ammon had good reason to be hostile to Gilead
(Num. xxi.), but the scene of the victory points rather to the former
(v. 33, possibly conflate). There is a general resemblance between
the victories of Gideon and Jephthah, which is emphasized by the
close relation between viii. 1–3 and xii. 1–6, the explanation of which
in its present context is difficult. See further Jephthah.
The old stories of Samson the Danite have been scarcely touched by the redaction (xiii. 1; xv. 20; xvi. 31b, where he is a “judge”); only xiii. appears to be rather later (v. 5 represents him as a forerunner of Samuel and Saul), and gives a rather different impression of the hero of the folk-tales. The cycle illustrates some interesting customs and is in every way valuable as a specimen of popular narrative. See Samson.
Grouped among these narratives are the five so-called “minor judges” (x. 1–5; xii. 8–15). By the addition of Shamgar (iii. 31) the number is made to agree with the six more important names. They are not represented as having any immediate religious importance; they really lie outside of the chronological scheme, and their history is plainly not related from such lively and detailed reminiscence as gives charm to the longer episodes of the book. The notices are drawn up in set phraseology, and some of the names, in harmony with a characteristic feature of early Hebrew history, are those of personified families of communities rather than of families.[2]
3. The third and last section of the book embraces chapters xvii.–xxi., and consists of two narratives independent of one another and of the main stock of the book, with which they are not brought into any chronological connexion. They appear to owe their position to the latest redactor (akin to the latest stratum in the Hexateuch) who has heavily worked over xix–xxi., and put the book into its present form by the addition of i.–ii. 5, ix. and possibly of v.[3]
The first narrative, that of Micah and the Danites, is of the highest interest both as a record of the state of religion and for the picture it gives of the way in which one clan passed from the condition of an invading band into settled possession of land and city. Its interest (xvii. seq.) lies in the foundation of the Ephraimite sanctuary by Micah as also in that of Dan. There are some repetitions in the account, but there is not enough evidence to restore two complete stories. The history of the Levite and the Benjamites is of quite another character, and presupposes a degree of unity of feeling and action among the tribes of Israel which it is not easy to reconcile with the rest of the book. In its present form this episode appears to be not very ancient; it resembles Ruth in giving a good deal of curious archaeological detail (the feast at Shiloh) in a form which suggests that the usages referred to were already obsolete when the narrative was composed. It appears to consist of an old story which has been heavily revised to form an edifying piece of exposition. The older parts are preserved in xix.: the account of the Levite of Mt Ephraim whose concubine from Bethlehem in Judah was outraged, not by the non-Israelite Jebusites of Jerusalem, but by the Benjamites of Gibeah; there are traces of another source in vv. 6–8, 10, 13, 15. The older portions of xx. seq. include: the vengeance taken by Israel (e.g. xx. 3–8, 14, 19, 29, 36–41, 47), and the reconstruction of the tribe by intermarriage with the women of Shiloh (xxi. 1, 15, 17–19, 21–23). The post-exilic expansions (found chiefly in xx., xxi. 2–14, 16, 24 seq.) describe the punishment of Benjamin by the religious assembly and the massacre of Jabesh-Gilead for its refusal to join Israel, four hundred virgins of the Gileadites being saved for Benjamin. How much old tradition underlies these stories is questionable. It is very doubtful whether Hosea’s allusion to the depravity of Gibeah (ix. 9; x. 9) is to be referred hither, but it is noteworthy that whilst Gibeah and Jabesh-Gilead, which appear here in a bad light, are known to be associated with Saul, the sufferer is a Levite of Bethlehem, the traditional home of David. The account of the great fight in xx. is reminiscent of Joshua’s battle at Ai (Josh. vii.–viii.).
Historical Value.—The book of Judges consists of a number of narratives collected by Deuteronomic editors; to the same circles are due accounts of the invasions of Palestine and settlement in Joshua, and of the foundation of the monarchy in 1 Samuel. The connexion has been broken by the later insertion of matter (not necessarily of late date itself), and the whole was finally formed into a distinct book by a post-exilic hand. The dates of the older stories preserved in ii. 6–xvi. 6 are quite unknown. If they are trustworthy for the period to which they are relegated (approximately 14th–12th cent. B.C.) they are presumably of very great antiquity, but if they belong to the sources J and E of the Hexateuch (at least some four or five centuries later) their value is seriously weakened. On the other hand, the belief that the monarchy had been preceded by national “judges” may have led to the formation of the collection. It is evident that there was more than one period in Israelite history in which one or other of these stories of local heroes would be equally suitable. They reflect tribal rivalry and jealousy (cf. Isa. ix. 21, and the successors of Jeroboam 2), attacks by nomads and wars with Ammon and Moab; conflicts between newly settled Israelites and indigenous Canaanites have been suspected in the story of Abimelech, and it is not impossible that the post-Deuteronomic writer who inserted ch. ix. so understood the record. A striking exception to the lack of unity among the tribes is afforded by the account of the defeat of Sisera, and here the old poem represents a combined effort to throw off the yoke of a foreign oppressor, while the later prose version approximates the standpoint of Josh. xi. 1–15, with its defeat of the Canaanites. The general stand-point of the stories (esp. Judg. v.) is that of central Palestine; the exceptions are Othniel and Samson—the latter interrupting the introduction in x., and its sequel, the former now entirely due to the Deuteronomic editor. Of the narratives which precede and follow, ch. i. represents central Palestine separated by Canaanite cities from tribes to the south and north; it is the situation recognized in Judg. xix. 10–12, as well as in passages imbedded in the latest portions of the book of Joshua, though it is in contradiction to the older traditions of Joshua himself. Chapters xvii. seq. (like the preceding story of Samson) deal with Danites, but the migration can hardly be earlier than David’s time; and xix.–xxi., by describing the extermination of Benjamin, form a link between the presence of the tribe in the late narratives of the exodus and its new prominence in the traditions of Saul (q.v.). As an historical source, therefore, the value of Judges will depend largely upon the question whether the Deuteronomic editor (about 600 B.C. at the earliest) would have access to trustworthy documents relating to a period some six or seven centuries previously. See further Jews, §§ 6, 8; and Samuel, Books of.
Literature.—Biblical scholars are in agreement regarding the preliminary literary questions of the book, but there is divergence of opinion on points of detail, and on the precise growth of the book (e.g. the twofold Deuteronomic redaction). See further W. R. Smith, Ency. Brit. 9th ed. (upon which the present article is based); G. F. Moore, International Critical Comm. (1895); Ency. Bib., art. “Judges”; K. Budde, Kurzer Handcommentar (1897); Lagrange, Livres des juges (1903); G. W. Thatcher (Century Bible); also S. R. Driver, Lit. of Old Testament (1909); Moore, in the Sacred Books of Old Testament (1898); C. F. Kent, The Student’s Old Testament, vol. i. (1904). (S. A. C.)
JUDGMENT, in law, a term used to describe (1) the adjudication by a court of justice upon a controversy submitted to it inter partes (post litem contestatam) and determining the rights
of the parties and the relief to be awarded by the court as between them; (2) the formal document issuing from the court
- ↑ It may be conjectured that the introduction originally formed the prelude to the rise of Saul: the intervening narratives, though not necessarily of late origin themselves, having been subsequently inserted. See S. A. Cook, Crit. Notes O. T. Hist., p. 127 seq.
- ↑ Tola and Puah (x. 1) are clans of Issachar (Gen. xlvi. 13), for Jair (v. 3), see Num. xxxii. 41, and for Elon (xii. 11), see Gen. xlvi. 14. See Genealogy: Biblical.
- ↑ To the same post-exilic hand may also be ascribed the introduction of the “minor judges” (so several critics), and smaller additions here and there (ch. i. 1 opening words, vv. 4, 8 seq. [contrast 21] 18; viii. 30–32: xi. 2, &c.).
