7:1–2). Those allotted to Israel—depicted in Judges 1—were to be utterly destroyed. So the notations of “forced labor” are disconcerting. Was this some sort of compromise the Israelites had made with the Canaanites in exchange for their lives? Was there an economic criterion factoring into their (dis)obedience to divine command?
88. Ibid., 128.
89. Olson, “The Book of Judges,” 744.
90. Adoni-bezek is not explicitly called a “king,” but his name (Adoni-bezek = “Lord of Bezek”) suggests he was, as also does the description of his enemies as “seventy kings.” It is likely deliberate that Abimelech is the only one labeled “king” in Judges (9:6), crowned entirely by human initiative with no input from deity whatsoever.
91. The verbs used for “recompense” are different, ~lv, shlm, in 1:7 and bWv, shub, in 9:56–57, but Wong notes that the verbs are used in parallel elsewhere in the OT (Exod 21:34; Deut 32:41; Ezek 33:15; Joel 3:4) (Compositional Strategy, 205, 206). See Pericope 8 (Jdg 8:33—10:5). The interpolation of the Adoni-bezek cameo, that does not seem to fit the rest of the movement of Prologue I, indicates the likelihood that his story was deliberately intended to adumbrate the narrative of Abimelech and depict the latter as worse than his Canaanite counterpart.
92. Note the singular as the verb “he, Judah, went” in Jdg 1:10, 11, whereas plural verbs indicate the subject “sons of Judah” in 1:8, 9.
93. Reconciling these with Josh 10:36–37; 11:21–22 is not easy; there it appears that Joshua wiped out the Anakites in Hebron. Perhaps the Judges 1 account (and perhaps the Joshua 14–15 narratives) is a flashback, included here for theological purposes, rather than chronological completion.
94. “She charmed him [her father] to ask for a field” (1:14). Chisholm observes that “she ‘buttered’ her father up (as daughters are apt to do!)” (Judges and Ruth, 125).
95. There are several other equally zestful women in Judges: Deborah (4:4–14), Jael (4:17–22), and the woman of Thebez (9:53–54).
96. The Kenaz in Jdg 1:13 was another individual—Caleb’s brother.
97. The maintenance of covenantal purity through endogamy was an established tenet of Israelite life (Exod 34:16; Deut 7:3–4; Josh 23:12).
98. Ibid., 45.
99. Ibid., 42–45. In another parallel, Achsah “descends” from a donkey (1:14); the raped concubine “ascends” one (19:28)—these are the only two women in Judges on donkeys. Both women, for different reasons, leave their husbands and go to their fathers. One is blessed; the other raped and murdered. The father of one is benevolent, that of the other is malevolent (see Pericope 13: Jdg 19:1–30).
100. Klein, The Triumph of Irony, 26.
101. In fact, the formulation “do ds,x, unto . . . ” is found only in these two accounts in Joshua and Judges (Josh 2:12 [×2], 14; Jdg 1:24), making the construction of this text in Judges a deliberate allusion to the one in Joshua.
102. Again, there is verbal correspondence in the “sending” away of Rahab and her family after the city was destroyed “with the edge of the sword” (Josh 6:21, 23), and the “sending” away of the anonymous Bethelite and his family after their city was struck “with the edge of the sword” (Jdg 1:25).
103. Wong, Compositional Strategy, 152–53. Table modified from Webb, Judges, 117.
104. Block, Judges, Ruth, 109.
105. The verbs for “drive out” are different: vrn, grsh, in 2:3 and vry, yrsh, in 2:21. But Wong notes that they are synonymous; see Exod 33:2 and Josh 3:10; Josh 24:18 and Jdg 11:23; and Pss 44:3 and 80:9 (Compositional Strategy, 148n22).
106. While it is not certain what Yahwistic covenant is referred to in 2:1, it is likely to have been a promise to the nation to give them the Promised Land (Lev 26:42–44; and see Gen 24:7; 26:3; Exod 13:5, 11; 32:13; 33:1; Deut 6:10, 18). While binding upon Yahweh, the extent of the takeover of the land, how much, when, and in what manner, were all contingent on the behavior of the human partners to the covenant (see Jer 11:4–5, as well as the various iterations of the promises to the patriarchs in Genesis, that see a ratcheting up of the items of fulfillment with obedience, especially in Gen 22:16–18) (see Kuruvilla, Genesis, 261–62).
107. “What is this you have done?” is formulaic in the OT and indicates “a major breach of proper relations between parties” (see Gen 3:13; 12:18; 26:10; 29:25; Exod 14:11; Jdg 8:1; 15:11) (Niditch, Judges, 47).
108. In fact, that place was called “Gilgal” because Yahweh had “rolled away” (llg, gll) the reproach/disgrace of Egypt and changed the fortunes of Israel (Josh 5:9). Was another change of fortunes on the way here?
109. It is possible that Bokim is a pseudonym for Bethel: an “oak of weeping [tWkB', bakuth]” was located near Bethel (Gen 35:8). In fact the LXX at Jdg 2:1 has the angel coming “to Bokim and Bethel, that is, the house of Israel.” In Judges 20–21, the final part of the book (Pericope 14: Jdg 20:1–21:25), weeping takes place at Bethel (20:26). Besides, Gilgal and Bethel are often linked: see Hosea 4:15; Amos 4:4, 15; 5:5. Bethel also has the status of a place of rebuke in prophetic literature (1 Kgs 13:1–3; 2 Kgs 23:15–20; Amos 7:10–17). Though why the real name of the place should be camouflaged in this pericope is unclear; perhaps Bethel in the narrator’s day was a holy city, prompting the writer to soften the blow of indictment. See Block, Judges, Ruth, 112; Spronk, “A Story to Weep About,” 91–92; and Amit, Hidden Polemics, 119–28.
110. Spronk, “A Story to Weep About,” 87. In between these two lachrymal events, there is also weeping in 11:37; 14:16; 20:23, 26.
111. The accusation that Israel had not torn down the altars of the Canaanites (2:2) is rather unexpected; we had not heard any mention of cultic activity in Judges 1. Presumably all this anti-Yahwism was concurrent with the failed conquest.
112. Younger, Judges, Ruth, 74. Yahweh expands the apostasy of the Israelites and the intensity of his
