Name of the Book.-The English name " Judges" corresponds with the Hebrew Shophetim, as with the Greek Kritai, and the Latin Liber judicum. A similar magistracy (suffetes) existed among the Phoenicians. Officers of this title are mentioned in Num. xxv. 5, Deut. i. 16, xvi. 18, &c., but they were only appointed for subordinate civil functions, whereas the judges whose history is recorded in this book were chiefly summoned to their great work by Divine appointment (chaps. iii. 15, iv. 6, vi. 12, &c.), and were deliverers" from foreign bondage (chaps. iii. 9, xviii. 28) rather than civil rulers. (See note on chap. ii. 16.) In fact, the very necessity for their call and their deeds arose from the anarchy which rendered all ordinary functions unavailing against the prevalent corruption and misery. The most remarkable of their number were national heroes rather than civil or religious guides.

Plan.-The Book of Judges falls into five wellmarked sections, namely:

I. GENERAL INTRODUCTION (chaps. i.—ii. 5).—In the note on chap. i. 1 reasons will be given for believing that this section is entirely retrospective. It furnishes a sketch of the imperfect conquest of the land previous to the death of Joshua, in order to show the want of faithfulness and obedience which was the cause of all subsequent troubles. It ends with the solemn reproach addressed by God's messenger to the assembled people at Bochim.

II. SECOND Introduction (chaps. ii. 6—iii. 6).— It is the object of this section to show that the neglect which had begun before the great conqueror passed away continued after his death, and that it was the cause of deep religious degeneracy. The people even sank into idolatry, and provoked the Divine retribution, from which they were delivered by successive judges. In spite of this, they constantly relapsed when the judgment was removed. In this section the moral purpose of the book is most distinctly sketched in outline. It shows that the presence of the Canaanites and the revival of their dominion were alike the cause and the consequence of the troubles of Israel, while, at the same time, God was so far from having utterly forsaken His people that even their sins and sufferings were made to subserve the purposes of their Divine education, and were overruled for their ultimate advantage. chaps. ii. 22, iii. 1—4.)

(See

III. MAIN SECTION OF THE BOOK (chaps. iii. 7— xvi. 31). This section contains notices of the history of twelve judges. The heroic deeds of six of these deliverers are related in detail, and six are mentioned with brief allusion. The episode of Abimelech's usurpation is given at length, partly perhaps-as in the later story of Eli-to point the lesson of the perils which result from imperfect paternal control, but mainly to warn the people of the perilous and abortive character of a royalty unsanctioned by Jehovah (Deut. xvii. 15).

The sub-sections are:

1. The servitude to Cushan-rishathaim, and the judgeship of Othniel (chap. iii. 5—11).

2. The servitude to Eglon, and the deliverance wrought by Ehud (chap. iii. 12-30). Brief reference to Shamgar (chap. iii. 31).

3. The servitude to Jabin, and the deliverance wrought by Deborah and Barak (chaps. iv., v.).

4. The oppression of the Midianites, and the deliverance wrought by Gideon (chaps. vi.-viii.). Episode of Abimelech, the bramble-king (chap. ix.). notices of Tola and Jair (chap. x. 1—5).

Brief

5. The oppression of the Ammonites, and the deliverance wrought by Jephthah (chaps. x. 6-xii. 13), with the sequel of Jephthah's history (chaps. xi. 34—xii. 7). Brief notices of Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon (chap. xii. 8-15).

6. The servitude to the Philistines, and the deeds of Samson (chaps. xiii.-xvi.).

IV. APPENDIX I.-The story of Micah's idolatry; of Jonathan, grandson of Moses; and of the conquest of Laish by the Danites (chaps. xvii., xviii.).

V. APPENDIX II.-The story of the deed of Gibeah, and the vengeance inflicted on Benjamin, with the means taken to save that tribe from extirpation.

It is clear that the Book of Judges is formed on one general plan, because it is intended to illustrate definite moral facts, and to narrate the providence of God as shown continuously in a long series of different events. The arrangement is not strictly chronological, for (as will be seen by the notes on chaps. xvii.-xxi.) the appendices belong to an epoch antecedent to the earliest judge. Nor, again, is the arrangement intended to be geographical, for the earlier notices of the book refer mainly to the south of Palestine; the story of Deborah takes us to the north, and that of Gideon to the central region; that of Jephthah to the west, and that of Samson once more to the south. Three of the chief judges-Othniel, Ehud, Samson-were southrons; two-Barak, Gideon-belong to the north; one-Jephthah-to western Palestine.

Unity. The subordination of all the incidents of the history to the inculcation of definite religious lessons shows that the book, in its present form, was arranged by one person. On the other hand, it is nearly certain that he performed the functions of a compiler rather than those of author. For it seems clear that he not only consulted various sources of information, but that he actually incorporated several documents, such as the words of the Divine messenger at Bochim (chap. ii. 1-5), the song of Deborah (chap. v.), the parable of Jotham (chap. ix. 8 -16), and various traditional fragments of Samson's festive words (chaps. xiv. 14, xv. 16). But further than this, the style points to the conclusion that the body of the book (chaps. iii. 7-xvi. 31) is not by the same author

as the appendices (chaps. xvi., xvii., xviii.-xxi.), and that the author of these two memorable narratives is the same as the author of the preface (chaps. i.—iii. 6). The preface and appendices, referring as they do to the same epoch, present special points of view, and abound in identical phrases, which are not found in the main narrative. Thus Judah (chaps. i., xx. 18) and places in Judah (Bethlehem, Jerusalem) are prominent in these sections, and are hardly alluded to in the rest of the book; the migration of Dan is also touched upon in both these sections (chaps. i. 34, xviii.). The general aspect of society and government is also alike in both sections (chaps. i. 1, 2, ii. 4, xx. 26—28), and both allude to the twelve tribes (chaps. i., xix. 29, xx. 1, xxi. 3). For resemblance of phrases, compare chaps. i. 8, xx. 48; i. 21, xix. 30; i. 12, xxi. 14; i. 1, xx. 23; i. 23, xviii. 2; i. 11, &c., xviii. 29. (See note on chap. i. 1.) In the appendices "judges" are not once mentioned; while the characteristic phrase which occurs again and again, "In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes (chaps. xvii. 6, xviii. 1, xix. 1, xxi. 25), is not once used in the body of the book. On the other hand, the characteristic phrases of the main narrative, “The anger of the Lord was hot against Israel . . . and He sold them into the hands of their enemies" (chaps. ii. 14, iii. 8, iv. 2, x. 7), and "The Spirit of the Lord came upon (chaps. vi. 34, xi. 29, xiv. 6, 19, xv. 14), do not occur in the other parts.*

We are, therefore, naturally led to infer that the main section of the book is a homogeneous narrative, which has, however, been compiled with a free incorporation of older documents; and that the two prefaces and two appendices, which come from a different hand, were added to it, with the Book of Ruth as a third appendix, by some early editor, or perhaps by the author himself. The efforts to trace parallel Jehovistic and Elohistic documents, even in the history of Gideon, much more in other parts of the book, fail to establish any probable result.

Date. The freshness, vividness, and minuteness of the details with which some of the stories of the judges abound show that the writer was in possession of almost contemporaneous records, or had access to very early traditions. There is an Homeric plainness in the description of many of the events, as well as in the clear delineation of the leading characters. The character and the circumstance of each hero are completely different from those of all the rest. Ehud first acts independently, and then arms the people; Barak stands at the head of a confederacy; Gideon at first only invites the aid of his immediate neighbours; Jephthah is a chief of freebooters; Abimelech avails himself of Canaanite jealousies against Israel, and Ephraimite jealousies against Manasseh; Samson only engages in a series of personal adventures. Local traditions and records have evidently been utilised. The style is inimitably graphic in its very simplicity. We smile at the grim humour which alludes to the fatness of Eglon and his Moabites; we hear the shrill accents of the daughter of Caleb; we see the very flash of Ehud's dagger; even the rough jests of Samson, and the trenchant irony of the Danites, and the shadows cast by the troops of Abimelech, and the female vanity of the ladies of Sisera's harem are, with many other minute incidents, immortalised in a few strokes. Again, the picture of the manners prevalent at the epoch described

See Ewald, i. 186, seq.

is such as could not have been delineated so naturally at a later period. In its primitive hospitality, its awful degradation, and its terrible savagery, it recalls some of the earliest annals of the Scripture history. (Comp. chap. vi. 19 with Gen. xviii. 1-8; chap. vi. 21 with Gen. xv. 17; chap. xix. with Gen. xix.; chaps. viii. 16, ix. 38 with Gen. xxxiv., &c.)

But while there can be no doubt as to the antiquity of the documents utilised by the writer, it is not so easy to determine with precision the date at which the book was drawn up in its present form. The phrase "to this day" (chaps. i. 21, xix. 30) shows that some years must have elapsed since the events recorded. That the appendices could not have been written earlier than the reign of Saul is clear from their constant formula: "In that day there was no king in Israel" (chap. xvii. 6, &c.). On the other hand, the absence of any allusion to the exploits of David confirms the decisive inference, suggested by chap. i. 21, that the book existed, in part at any rate, before his days; for in chap. i. 21, as well as in chap. xix. 10-12, Jerusalem is still called Jebus, and is regarded as a city of the Canaanites, and as nominally belonging to Benjamin (chap. i. 21). The attempts to connect chap. i. 27-29 with events in the reign of Solomon (1 Kings iv. 7-19, ix. 16) are entirely futile. On the other hand, the expression in chap. xviii. 30, "until the captivity of the land," would bring the date of the redaction of the book down to a very late period, if that phrase certainly referred to either the Assyrian or the Babylonian captivity. But even if we do not accept the very slight change in two Hebrew letters which will make it mean "to the captivity of the ark (see note on chap. xviii. 30, 31), it seems almost demonstrable that the allusion may be to that Philistine invasion which culminated in the massacre at Shiloh, of which the terrible incidents are preserved for us in Ps. lxxviii. 60–65. In chap. xxi. 12 we find the expression "Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan," and this, too, has been pressed into an indication that the book is not earlier than the time of the exile. It is much more obvious to explain it by way of contrast to Jabeshgilead, which was on the other side of Jordan; or possibly the phrase may point to the circumstance that after the sack and massacre of Shiloh the very site of the place seems to have sunk into an oblivion from which it has never since emerged. But if these phrases are of later origin, the evidences of antiquity which confront us on every page of this book would lead to the conclusion that a few expressions were merely added by way of glosses in the final edition of the sacred canon by Ezra and his school. The expressions and sentiments which are common to the Book of Judges, with the other historical books (see 1 Sam. xiii. 6, 20; 2 Kings ii. 17, viii. 12, xii. 20, xvii. 20, xxi. 15, xxii. 14; and especially comp. chap. ii. 11-23 with 2 Kings xvii. 7-23, and chap. ii. 1-3 with 2 Kings xvii. 35-39), may easily have been borrowed by the later from the earlier writers. The pure Hebrew of the Book of Judges is far too untainted with Chaldaisms and modernisms to allow any probability to the theory of its late authorship. Its many isolated expressions (hapax legomena, chaps. i. 15, iii. 22, iv. 4-19, v. 10-28, xv. 8, xviii. 7) show the use of ancient records, and the Aramaisms which have been pointed out (e.g., the prefix in chaps. v. 7, vi. 17, and expressions in chaps. xvii. 2, xix. 1, &c.), since they occur in those parts which are incontestably the oldest, are now generally admitted to be poetic forms, and forms peculiar to the idiom of Northern Palestine.

The general conclusion, then, as to the date of the