19:1–30; 21:1–25); idolatry (1:11—3:6; and 17:1—18:31); references to Jebusites (1:21 [×2]; 3:5; and 19:11) and to Jerusalem (1:7, 8, 21 [×2]; and 19:10) 45; “struck . . . with the edge of the sword” (of enemies: 1:8, 25; but of fellow-Israelites: 18:27; 20:37, 4846); corporate weeping at a cultic site before Yahweh (2:4; and 20:23, 26; 21:247); “covenant” (2:1, 2, 20; and 20:2748); links to Moses (1:16, 20; 3:4; and 18:30); and “giving” of “daughters” as “wives” (1:12, 13; 3:6; and 21:1, 7, 18).49 Interestingly, the cultic centers, Jerusalem, Bethel, and Shiloh are mentioned only in the Prologues and Epilogues (Jerusalem: 1:7, 8, 21; 19:10; Shiloh: 18:31; 21:12, 19, 21; and Bethel: 1:22, 23; 2:1 [possibly with a pseudonym, Bokim]; 20:18, 26, 31; 21:2, 19), with the exception of Bethel in Jdg 4:5. All of this indicates careful textual construction, subservient to the theological intent of the narrator/editor/redactor.
In sum, the events in the Prologues and in the Epilogues are “practically two sides of the same coin. While one records Israel’s failure to do what was right, the other records Israel’s success in doing what was wrong, and both resulted in a diminishing of national fortune”—things were going from bad to worse.50
Thematic Parallels: Prologues and Body
Prologue I (1:1—2:5) and II (2:6—3:6) also have substantial links with the Body of Judges (3:7—16:31). The most obvious connection is the paradigm of 2:11–19 that forms the skeleton of each of the subsequent judge narratives: evildoing (2:11); punishment by being given into the hands of enemies for a certain number of years (2:14 [×2]); groaning of the Israelites in distress (2:18); Yahweh’s raising up of judge-deliverers (2:16, 18); Yahweh’s support for those leaders (2:18); deliverance of Israel from the hands of enemies (2:16, 18); and the land’s rest for a number of years and the judge’s death (2:19). This cycle repeats in the story of each succeeding judge (see Pericope 2: Jdg 2:6—3:11).
In Prologue I, the sequence of activities shows two movements: a general geographic and directional trajectory that heads from south to north, based on tribal location, and a second moral and spiritual trajectory that describes the decreasing success of the tribes in their attempts to take over lands allotted to them.51
The geographic structuring in the narrative of Prologue I (Pericope 1: Jdg 1:1—2:5), with a south-to-north organization of tribal activities, is as follows: Judah, Simeon, Benjamin, Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, and Dan (1:2–36). This reflects the arrangement of the judges in the Body, from Othniel (Judah) in the south to Samson (Dan) in the north (see above). But the whole scheme is “too neat to be an accurate reflection of actual historical reality. For historical reality is almost inevitably messy, and therefore does not readily lend itself to orderly schematisation.”52 Besides, the unsuccessful undertakings of Dan to appropriate land actually took place in their original location in the south (Josh 19:40–46); but in Prologue I, they have been placed at the end of the schema, in the north, which is where they ended up quite successfully (Jdg 18:1–31). This idiosyncrasy (but in furtherance of the author’s theological agenda) is visible also in the story of Samson: the sequence of judges from south to north (Judah to Dan) implies Samson’s northern center of operations, but the actual cities in which he was active were in the south—Zorah, Eshtaol, Gaza, Ashkelon (see Pericope 10: Jdg 13:1—14:20 and Pericope 11: Jdg 15:1—16:31). He even had to deal with the southern Judahites (15:10–13). Thus a dischronology is created here, likely to connect Prologue I and Body (Pericopes 10 and 11) to serve a theological agenda—the author was doing something with what he was saying.53
But what primarily links these trajectories in Prologue I to the Body is that the same spiritual route in the former is taken by the narrator in arranging the narratives of the judges in the latter. In Prologue I, from Judah to Dan things go from bad to worse, the result of spiritual failure (2:1–5), a pattern subsequently reflected in the Body—from Othniel to Samson. As the commentary shows, each judge story depicts a situation worse than that of the one it follows. A progressive deterioration of morality and spirituality is evident in the accounts as one proceeds through the Body (adumbrated in 2:19): decreasing faith in Yahweh, increasing self-interest of the judges, diminishing participation of the tribes with each military campaign against oppressing enemies, increasing brutality against fellow-Israelites54, and Yahweh’s mounting frustration with his people’s recalcitrance and recidivism.55 This makes the iterations of each narrative not a cycle, but rather a retrogressing spiral, sliding into an abyss of national disaster in the Epilogues.56 Altogether, there is dissolution.
Thematic Parallels: Epilogues and Body
The events of the Epilogues are characterized by wanton brutality and profligacy. But the echoes between these stories and those in the Body are deliberate. “[B]y showing that the bizarre acts in the epilogue have all found precedents in the lives of the judges, the narrator has managed to cast the judges in a very uncomplimentary light.”57 The judges in the Body are no better than the characters in the Epilogues.
Micah’s and the Danites’ idolatry reflects the sad situation at the end of Gideon’s judgeship (Pericope 7: Jdg 7:23—8:32). Interestingly, dApae (’epod, “ephod”) as a cultic object in its six occurrences in Judges has a uniformly negative connotation. Five of these occur in Epilogue I (Pericope 12: Jdg 17:1—18:31): 17:5; 18:14, 17, 18, 20; the only other instance is in 8:27, of Gideon’s manufacture of this illicit sacral item. The fact that the mentions of ephod are somewhat unnecessary for the story of Micah and the Levite, there being other incriminating cultic objects, makes it likely that dwpa is a deliberate attempt to link the narrative of Epilogue I with the Gideon story.58
The audacious violations of the law and of propriety perpetrated by the Levite in Epilogue I (Pericope 12: Jdg 17:1—18:31) are comparable to Samson’s misdemeanors (Pericope 10: Jdg 13:1—14:20 and Pericope 11: Jdg 15:1—16:31). The former include: wandering away from an appointed Levitical town (17:7, 9); seeking employment away from the main sanctuary (17:8, 9; 18:4); idiosyncratic relationship with patron (17:10–12); engagement in idolatry (18:20); and taking on the title of a priest, though he was not a descendant of Aaron (18:30). Samson’s reckless malpractices include: amorous inclinations towards Philistine women, even marrying one of them (14:1–4, 10–18; 16:1, 4), and then abandoning her (14:19–20); neglect of his Nazirite vow (14:5, 8–9, 10, 19; 15:8, 15; 16:17); and his wanton violence throughout the narrative.59 The Levite of Pericope 12 was associated with the Danites; Samson, of course, was a Danite. Thus both this Levite and the Danite judge succeed in flouting the regulations and stipulations that defined their divine callings.
Even the Danites’ exploits in Epilogue I reflect those of the Danite, Samson, in Pericopes 10 and 11. Both narratives are linked to Zorah and Eshtaol (13:2, 25; 16:31; and 18:2, 8, 11) and Mahaneh-dan (mentioned only twice in Scripture: 13:25 and 18:12); departing Zorah and Eshtaol, both Samson and the Danites “see” either an attractive woman or a secure city (14:1 and 18:7), and attempt to persuade either parents or fellow tribesmen to take action based on this “seeing” (14:2 and 18:9); Samson decides what is “right in my eyes” (14:3), and Epilogue I points out that every
