Judg 5 | KD | STEP | Jdg 5:1 The historical introduction (“ Then sang Deborah and Barak the son of Abinoam on that day, saying ”) takes the place of a heading, and does not mean that the song of Deborah and Barak which follows was composed by them jointly, but simply that it was sung by them together, in commemoration of the victory. The poetess or writer of the song, according to Jdg 5:3, Jdg 5:7, and Jdg 5:12, was Deborah. The song itself opens with a summons to praise the Lord for the willing and joyful rising up of His people.

‏ Judges 5

Jdg 5:1

The historical introduction (“Then sang Deborah and Barak the son of Abinoam on that day, saying”) takes the place of a heading, and does not mean that the song of Deborah and Barak which follows was composed by them jointly, but simply that it was sung by them together, in commemoration of the victory. The poetess or writer of the song, according to Jdg 5:3, Jdg 5:7, and Jdg 5:12, was Deborah. The song itself opens with a summons to praise the Lord for the willing and joyful rising up of His people. Jdg 5:2 2 That the strong in Israel showed themselves strong,

That the people willingly offered themselves,

Praise ye the Lord!

The meaning of פּרע and פּרעות is a subject of dispute. According to the Septuagint rendering, and that of Theodot., ἐν τῷ ἄρξασθαι ἀρχηγοὺς ἐν Ἰσραήλ, many give it the meaning to begin or to lead, and endeavour to establish this meaning from an Arabic word signifying to find one’s self at the head of an affair. But this meaning cannot be established in Hebrew. פּרע has no other meaning than to let loose from something, to let a person loose or free (see at Lev 10:6); and in the only other passage where פּרעות occurs (Deu 32:42), it does not refer to a leader, but to the luxuriant growth of the hair as the sign of great strength. Hence in this passage also פּרעות literally means comati, the hairy ones, i.e., those who possessed strength; and פּרע, to manifest or put forth strength. The persons referred to are the champions in the fight, who went before the nation with strength and bravery. The preposition בּ before פּרע indicates the reason for praising God, or rather the object with which the praise of the Lord was connected. וגו בּפרע, literally “in the showing themselves strong.” The meaning is, “for the fact that the strong in Israel put forth strength.” התנדּב, to prove one’s self willing, here to go into the battle of their own free will, without any outward and authoritative command. This introduction transports us in the most striking manner into the time of the judges, when Israel had no king who could summon the nation to war, but everything depended upon the voluntary rising of the strong and the will of the nation at large. The manifestation of this strength and willingness Deborah praises as a gracious gift of the Lord. After this summons to praise the Lord, the first part of the song opens with an appeal to the kings and princes of the earth to hear what Deborah has to proclaim to the praise of God. Jdg 5:3-5 3 Hear, ye kings; give ear, ye princes!

I, to the Lord will I sing,

Will sing praise to the Lord, the God of Israel. 4 Lord, when Thou wentest out from Seir,

When Thou marchedst out of the fields of Edom,

The earth trembled, and the heavens also dropped;

The clouds also dropped water. 5 The mountains shook before the Lord,

Sinai there before the Lord, the God of Israel.

The “kings and princes” are not the rulers in Israel, for Israel had no kings at that time, but the kings and princes of the heathen nations, as in Psa 2:2. These were to discern the mighty acts of Jehovah in Israel, and learn to fear Jehovah as the almighty God. For the song to be sung applies to Him, the God of Israel. זמּר, ψάλλειν, is the technical expression for singing with an instrumental accompaniment (see at Exo 15:2).

To give the Lord the glory for the victory which had been gained through His omnipotent help over the powerful army of Sisera, and to fill the heathen with fear of Jehovah, and the Israelites with love and confidence towards Him, the singer reverts to the terribly glorious manifestation of Jehovah in the olden time, when Israel was accepted as the nation of God (Ex 19). Just as Moses in his blessing (Deu 33:2) referred the tribes of Israel to this mighty act, as the source of all salvation and blessing for Israel, so the prophetess Deborah makes the praise of this glorious manifestation of God the starting-point of her praise of the great grace, which Jehovah as the faithful covenant God had displayed to His people in her own days. The tacit allusion to Moses’ blessing is very unmistakeable. But whereas Moses describes the descent of the Lord upon Sinai (Ex 19), according to its gracious significance in relation to the tribes of Israel, as an objective fact (Jehovah came from Sinai, Deu 33:2), Deborah clothes the remembrance of it in the form of an address to God, to bring out the thought that the help which Israel had just experienced was a renewal of the coming of the Lord to His people. Jehovah’s going out of Seir, and marching out of the fields of Edom, is to be interpreted in the same sense as His rising up from Seir (Deu 33:2). As the descent of the Lord upon Sinai is depicted there as a rising of the sun from the east, so the same descent in a black cloud amidst thunder, lightning, fire, and vapour of smoke (Exo 19:16, Exo 19:18), is represented here with direct allusion to these phenomena as a storm rising up from Seir in the east, in which the Lord advanced to meet His people as they came from the west to Sinai. Before the Lord, who came down upon Sinai in the storm and darkness of the cloud, the earth shook and the heaven dropped, or, as it is afterwards more definitely explained, the clouds dropped with water, emptied themselves of their abundance of water as they do in the case of a storm. The mountains shook (נזלוּ, Niphal of זלל, dropping the reduplication of the ל = נזלּוּ, Isa 63:19; Isa 64:2), even the strong rocky mountain of Sinai, which stood out so distinctly before the eyes of the singer, that she speaks of it as “this Sinai,” pointing to it as though it were locally near. David’s description of the miraculous guidance of Israel through the desert in Psa 68:8-9, is evidently founded upon this passage, though it by no means follows from this that the passage before us also treats of the journey through the desert, as Clericus supposes, or even of the presence of the Lord in the battle with Sisera, and the victory which it secured. But greatly as Israel had been exalted at Sinai by the Lord its God, it had fallen just as deeply into bondage to its oppressors through its own sins, until Deborah arose to help it (Jdg 5:6-8). Jdg 5:6-8 6 In the days of Shamgar, the son of Anath,

In the days of Jael, the paths kept holiday,

And the wanderers of the paths went crooked ways. 7 The towns in Israel kept holiday, they kept holiday,

Until that I, Deborah, arose,

That I arose a mother in Israel 8 They chose new gods;

Then was war at the gates:

Was there a shield seen and a spear

Among forty thousand in Israel?

The deep degradation and disgrace into which Israel had sunk before the appearance of Deborah, through its falling away from the Lord into idolatry, forms the dark reverse of that glorification at Sinai. Although, after Ehud, Shamgar had also brought help to the people against their enemies by a victory over the Philistines (Jdg 3:31), and although Jael, who proved herself a heroine by slaying the fugitive Sisera, was then alive, things had got to such a pitch with Israel, that no one would venture upon the public high roads. There are no good grounds for the conjecture that Jael was a different person from the Jael mentioned in Jdg 4:17., whether a judge who is not further known, as Ewald supposes, or a female judge who stood at the head of the nation in these unhappy times (Bertheau). ארחות חדלוּ, lit., “the paths ceased,” sc., to be paths, or to be trodden by men. נתיבות הלכי, “those who went upon paths,” or beaten ways, i.e., those who were obliged to undertake journeys for the purpose of friendly intercourse or trade, notwithstanding the burden of foreign rule which pressed upon the land; such persons went by “twisted paths,” i.e., by roads and circuitous routes which turned away from the high roads. And the פּרזון, i.e., the cultivated land, with its open towns and villages, and with their inhabitants, was as forsaken and desolate as the public highways. The word perazon has been rendered judge or guidance by modern expositors, after the example of Teller and Gesenius; and in Jdg 5:11 decision or guidance. But this meaning, which has been adopted into all the more recent lexicons, has nothing really to support it, and does not even suit our verse, into which it would introduce the strange contradiction, that at the time when Shamgar and Jael were judges, there were no judges in Israel. In addition to the Septuagint version, which renders the word δυνατοὶ in this verse (i.e., according to the Cod. Vat., for the Col. Al. has φράζων), and then in the most unmeaning way adopts the rendering αὔξησον in Jdg 5:11, from which we may clearly see that the translators did not know the meaning of the word, it is common to adduce an Arabic word which signifies segregavit, discrevit rem ab aliis, though it is impossible to prove that the Arabic word ever had the meaning to judge or to lead. All the old translators, as well as the Rabbins, have based their rendering of the word upon פּרזי, inhabitant of the flat country (Deu 3:5, and 1Sa 6:18), and פּרזות, the open flat country, as distinguished from the towns surrounded by walls (Eze 38:11; Zec 2:8), according to which פּרזון, as the place of meeting, would denote both the cultivated land with its unenclosed towns and villages, and also the population that was settled in the open country in unfortified places-a meaning which also lies at the foundation of the word in Hab 3:14. Accordingly, Luther has rendered the word Bauern (peasants). שׁקּמתּי עד for קמתּי אשׁר עד. The contraction of אשׁר into שׁ, with Dagesh following, and generally pointed with Seghol, but here with Patach on account of the ק, which is closely related to the gutturals, belongs to the popular character of the song, and is therefore also found in the Song of Solomon (Jdg 1:12; Jdg 2:7, Jdg 2:17; Jdg 4:6). It is also met with here and there in simple prose (Jdg 6:17; Jdg 7:12; Jdg 8:26); but it was only in the literature of the time of the captivity and a still later date, that it found its way more and more from the language of ordinary conversation into that of the Scriptures. Deborah describes herself as “a mother in Israel,” on account of her having watched over her people with maternal care, just as Job calls himself a father to the poor who had been supported by him (Job 29:16; cf. Isa 22:21).

Jdg 5:8 describes the cause of the misery into which Israel had fallen. חדשׁים אלהים is the object to יבחר, and the subject is to be found in the previous term Israel. Israel forsook its God and creator, and chose new gods, i.e., gods not worshipped by its fathers (vid., Deu 32:17). Then there was war (לחם, the construct state of לחם, a verbal noun formed from the Piel, and signifying conflict or war) at the gates; i.e., the enemy pressed up to the very gates of the Israelitish towns, and besieged them, and there was not seen a shield or spear among forty thousand in Israel, i.e., there were no warriors found in Israel who ventured to defend the land against the foe. אם indicates a question with a negative reply assumed, as in 1Ki 1:27, etc. Shield and spear (or lance) are mentioned particularly as arms of offence and defence, to signify arms of all kinds. The words are not to be explained from 1Sa 13:22, as signifying that there were no longer any weapons to be found among the Israelites, because the enemy had taken them away (“not seen” is not equivalent to “not found” in 1Sa 13:22); they simply affirm that there were no longer any weapons to be seen, because not one of the 40,000 men in Israel took a weapon in his hand. The number 40,000 is not the number of the men who offered themselves willingly for battle, according to Jdg 5:2 (Bertheau); for apart from the fact that they did not go unarmed into the battle, it is at variance with the statement in Jdg 4:6, Jdg 4:10, that Barak went into the war and smote the enemy with only 10,000 men. It is a round number, i.e., an approximative statement of the number of the warriors who might have smitten the enemy and delivered Israel from bondage, and was probably chosen with a reference to the 40,000 fighting men of the tribes on the east of the Jordan, who went with Joshua to Canaan and helped their brethren to conquer the land (Jos 4:13). Most of the more recent expositors have given a different rendering of Jdg 5:8. Many of them render the first clause according to the Peshito and Vulgate, “God chose something new,” taking Elohim as the subject, and chadashim (new) as the object. But to this it has very properly been objected, that, according to the terms of the song, it was not Elohim but Jehovah who effected the deliverance of Israel, and that the Hebrew for new things is not חדשׁים, but חדשׁות (Isa 42:9; Isa 48:6), or חדשׁה (Isa 43:19; Jer 31:22). On these grounds Ewald and Bertheau render Elohim “judges” (they chose new judges), and appeal to Exo 21:6; Exo 22:7-8, where the authorities who administered justice in the name of God are called Elohim. But these passages are not sufficient by themselves to establish the meaning “judges,” and still less to establish the rendering “new judges” for Elohim chadashim. Moreover, according to both these explanations, the next clause must be understood as relating to the specially courageous conflict which the Israelites in their enthusiasm carried on with Sisera; whereas the further statement, that among 40,000 warriors who offered themselves willingly for battle there was not a shield or a lance to be seen, is irreconcilably at variance with this. For the explanation suggested, namely, that these warriors did not possess the ordinary weapons for a well-conducted engagement, but had nothing but bows and swords, or instead of weapons of any kind had only the staffs and tools of shepherds and husbandmen, is proved to be untenable by the simple fact that there is nothing at all to indicate any contrast between ordinary and extraordinary weapons, and that such a contrast is altogether foreign to the context. Moreover, the fact appealed to, that אז points to a victorious conflict in Jdg 5:13, Jdg 5:19, Jdg 5:22, as well as in Jdg 5:11, is not strong enough to support the view in question, as אז is employed in Jdg 5:19 in connection with the battle of the kings of Canaan, which was not a successful one, but terminated in a defeat.

The singer now turns from the contemplation of the deep degradation of Israel to the glorious change which took place as soon as she appeared: - Jdg 5:9-11 9 My heart inclines to the leaders of Israel;

To those who offered themselves willingly in the nation. Praise ye the Lord! 10 Ye that ride upon white asses;

Ye that sit upon covering,

And that walk in the way, reflect! 11 With the voice of the archers among drawers (of water),

There praise ye the righteous acts of the Lord,

The righteous acts of His villages in Israel.

Then the people of the Lord went down to the gates!

We must supply the subst. verb in connection with ל לבּי, “My heart is (sc., inclined) towards the leaders of Israel,” i.e., feels itself drawn towards them. הוקק for מהוקק (Jdg 5:14), the determining one, i.e., the commander or leader in war: as in Deu 33:21. The leaders and willing ones are first of all to praise the Lord for having crowned their willingness with victory. Jdg 5:13-15 13 Then came down a remnant of nobles of the nation;

Jehovah came down to me among the heroes. 14 Of Ephraim, whose root in Amalek;

Behind thee Benjamin among thy peoples.

From Machir came down leaders,

And from Zebulun marchers with the staff of the conductor. 15 a And princes in Issachar with Deborah,

And Issachar as well as Barak,

Driven into the valley through his feet.

Looking back to the commencement of the battle, the poetess describes the streaming of the brave men of the nation down from the mountains, to fight the enemy with Barak and Deborah in the valley of Jezreel; though the whole nation did not raise as one man against its oppressors, but only a remnant of the noble and brave in the nation, with whom Jehovah went into the battle. In Jdg 5:13 the Masoretic pointing of ירד is connected with the rabbinical idea of the word as the fut. apoc. of רדה: “then (now) will the remnant rule over the glorious,” i.e., the remnant left in Israel over the stately foe; “Jehovah rules for me (or through me) over the heroes in Sisera’s army,” which Luther has also adopted. But, as Schnurr. has maintained, this view is decidedly erroneous, inasmuch as it is altogether irreconcilable with the description which follows of the marching of the tribes of Israel into the battle. ירד is to be understood in the same sense as ירדוּ in Jdg 5:14, and to be pointed as a perfect ירד. ^{▼▼The Cod. Al. of the lxx contains the correct rendering, τότε κατέβη κατάλειμμα. In the Targum also ירד is correctly translated נתת, descendit, although the germs of the rabbinical interpretation are contained in the paraphrase of the whole verse: tunc descendit unus ex exercitu Israel et fregit fortitudinem fortium gentium. Ecce non ex fortitudine manus eorum fuit hoc; sed Dominus fregit ante populum suum fortitudinem virorum osorum eorum.}

“There came down,” sc., from the mountains of the land into the plain of Jezreel, a remnant of nobles. לאדּירים is used instead of a closer subordination through the construct state, to bring out the idea of שׂריד into greater prominence (see Ewald, §292). עם is in apposition to לאדּירים, and not to be connected with the following word יהוה, as it is by some, in opposition to the accents. The thought is rather this: with the nobles or among the brave Jehovah himself went against the foe. לי is a dat. commodi, equivalent to “for my joy.” Jdg 5:17

Gilead, Dan, and Asher took no part at all. By Gilead, the tribes of Gad and half Manasseh are intended. The use of the term הגּלעד to denote the whole of the territory of the Israelites on the east of the Jordan probably gave occasion to this, although גלעד (without the article) does not refer to the land even here, but refers primarily to the grandson of Manasseh, as the representative of his family which dwelt in Gilead. (For further remarks, see at Jdg 5:14.) Dan also did not let the national movement disturb it in its earthly trade and commerce. גּוּר, to keep one’s self in a place, is construed here with the accusative of the place, as in Psa 120:5. The territory of Dan included the port of Joppa (see at Jos 19:46), where the Danites probably carried on a trade with the Phoenicians. Asher also in his land upon the coast did not allow himself to be disturbed from his rest, to join in the common war of its nation. ימּים חוף is used, as in Gen 49:13, for the shore of the Mediterranean Sea. מפרצים, ἁπ. λεγ., literally a rent, and hence applied to a bay, as an incision made in the sea-shore. Jdg 5:18

Zebulun and Naphtali acted quite differently. Zebulun showed itself as a people that despised its life even to death, i.e., that sacrificed its life for the deliverance of its fatherland. Naphtali did the same in its mountain home. The two tribes had raised 10,000 fighting men at Barak’s call (Jdg 4:10), who constituted at any rate the kernel of the Israelitish army.

If we run over the tribes enumerated, it seems strange that the tribes of Judah and Simeon are not mentioned either among those who joined in the battle, or among those who stayed away. The only way in which this can be explained is on the supposition that these two tribes were never summoned by Barak, either because they were so involved in conflict with the Philistines, that they were unable to render any assistance to the northern tribes against their Canaanitish oppressors, as we might infer from Jdg 3:31, or because of some inward disagreement between these tribes and the rest. But even apart from Judah and Simeon, the want of sympathy on the part of the tribes that are reproved is a sufficient proof that the enthusiasm for the cause of the Lord had greatly diminished in the nation, and that the internal unity of the congregation was considerably loosened.

In the next strophe the battle and the victory are described: - Jdg 5:19-21 19 Kings came, ... they fought;

The kings of Canaan fought At Taanach, at the waters of Megiddo.

A piece of silver they did not take. 20 From heaven they fought,

The stars from their courses fought against Sisera. 21 The brook of Kishon swept them away,

The brook of the olden time, the brook Kishon.

Go on, my soul, in strength!

The advance of the foe is described in few words. Kings came on and fought. They were the kings of Canaan, since Jabin, like his ancestor (Jos 11:1.), had formed an alliance with other kings of northern Canaan, who went to the battle under the command of Sisera. The battle took place at Taanach (see at Jos 12:21), by the water of Megiddo, the present Lejun (see at Jos 12:21), i.e., by the brook Kishon (cf. Jdg 4:7). Taanach and Megiddo were not quite five miles apart, and beside and between them there were several brooks which ran into the southern arm of the Kishon, that flowed through the plain to the north of both these towns. The hostile kings went into the battle with the hope of slaying the Israelites and making a rich capture of booty. But their hopes were disappointed. They could not take with them a piece of silver as booty. בּצע, which generally signifies booty or gain, is probably to be taken here in its primary sense of frustum, from בּצע, to cut off or cut in pieces, a “piece of silver,” equivalent to a single piece of valuable booty. Jdg 5:22-24 22 Then did the hoofs of the horses stamp

With the hunting, the hunting of his strong ones. 23 Curse ye Meroz, saith the angel of the Lord;

Curse ye, curse ye the inhabitants thereof!

Because they came not to the help of Jehovah,

To the help of Jehovah among the mighty. 24 Blessed before women be Jael,

The wife of Heber the Kenite,

Blessed before women in the tent!

The war-chariots of the enemy hunted away in the wildest flight (Jdg 5:22). The horses stamped the ground with the continuous hunting or galloping away of the warriors. דהרה, the hunting (cf. דּהר, Nah 3:2). The repetition of the word expresses the continuance or incessant duration of the same thing (see Ewald, §313, a.). אבּירים, strong ones, are not the horses, but the warriors in the war-chariots. The suffix refers to סוּס, which is used collectively. The mighty ones on horses are not, however, merely the Canaanitish princes, such as Sisera, as Ewald maintains, but the warriors generally who hunted away upon their war-chariots. Jdg 5:25-27 25 He asked water, she gave him milk;

She handed him cream in the dish of nobles. 26 She stretched out her hand to the plug,

And her right hand to the workmen’s hammer,

And hammered Sisera, broke his head,

And dashed in pieces and pierced his temples. 27 Between her feet he bowed, he fell, he lay down:

Between her feet he bowed, he fell:

Where he bowed, there he fell down dead.

Assuming that the fact itself is well known, Deborah does not think it necessary to mention Sisera’s name in Jdg 5:25. חמאה, which generally signifies thick curdled milk, is used here as synonymous with חלב, in the sense of good superior milk. ספל is only used here and in Jdg 6:38, and signifies a bowl or vessel for holding liquids (see Arab., Chald, and Talm.; also Bochart, Hieroz, i. pp. 625ff., ed. Ros.). The dish of nobles is a fine costly bowl, such as they are accustomed to hand to noble guests. The whole verse is simply intended to express the thought, that Jael had given to her guest Sisera a friendly reception, and treated him honourably and hospitably, simply in order to make him feel secure. Jdg 5:28-30 28 Through the window there looks out and cries aloud

The mother of Sisera, through the lattice work,

Why does his chariot delay its coming?

Why tarry the steps of his team? 29 The wise of her princesses reply: - But she repeats her words to herself - 30 Surely they are finding and sharing booty:

A maiden, two maidens to the head of a man,

Booty of variegated cloths for Sisera:

Booty of variegated cloths, garments worked in divers colours,

A variegated cloth, two garments worked in divers colours for his neck as booty.

Sisera’s mother looks out with impatience for the return of her son, and cries aloud out of the window, Why is he never coming?-foreboding the disastrous result of the war. תּיבּב, ἁπ. λεγ., signifies to cry; in Aramaean it is used for הריע and רנּן, to denote a loud joyful cry; here it evidently signifies a loud cry of anxiety. For the repeated question, Why does his chariot delay its coming? is evidently expressive of anxiety and alarm. The form אחרוּ, perf. Piel for אחרוּ, may be attributed to the influence of the aleph, which favours the seghol sound, like יחמוּ in Gen 30:39. The combination of מרכּבותיו פּעמי, “steps of his chariots,” cannot be explained, as it is by Bertheau, on the ground that the word פעמי, as a general expression for intermittent movement, might also be applied to the jerking of the wheels in rolling, but simply on the supposition that מרכּבות, as a synonym for רכב, is used for the horses yoked to the chariot in the sense of team, like רכב in 2Sa 8:4; 2Sa 10:18, etc. Jdg 5:31 31 a So shall all Thine enemies perish, O Jehovah!

But let those who love Him be like the rising of the sun in its strength.

This forms the conclusion of the song. כּן, so, refers to the whole of the song: just in the same manner as Sisera and his warriors. The rising of the sun in its strength is a striking image of the exaltation of Israel to a more and more glorious unfolding of its destiny, which Deborah anticipated as the result of this victory. With the last clause, “And the land had rest forty years” (cf. Jdg 3:11, Jdg 3:30; Jdg 8:28), the account of this event is brought to a close. 2. The Times of Gideon and His Family, and of the Judges Tola and Jair - Judges 6-10:5

In this second stage of the period of the judges, which did not extend over an entire century (only ninety-five years), Israel was only punished for its apostasy from the Lord, it is true, with a seven years’ oppression by the Midianites; but the misery which these enemies, who allied themselves with Amalekites and other Arabian hordes, brought upon both land and people, so far surpassed the pressure of the previous chastisements, that the Israelites were obliged to take refuge from the foe in ravines, caves, and strongholds of the mountains. But the more heavily the Lord punished His rebellious nation, the more gloriously did He set forth His nearness to help, and also the way which would lead to a lasting peace, and to true deliverance out of every trouble, in the manner in which He called and fitted Gideon to be its deliverer, and gave him the victory over the innumerable army of the hostile hordes, with only 300 chosen warriors. But the tendency to idolatry and to the worship of Baal had already become so strong in Israel, that even Gideon, that distinguished hero of God, who had been so marvellously called, and who refused the title of king when offered to him from genuine fidelity to the Lord, yielded to the temptation to establish for himself an unlawful worship, in a high-priestly ephod which had been prepared for his use, and thus gave the people an occasion for idolatry. For this reason his house was visited with severe judgments, which burst upon it after his death, under the three years’ reign of his son Abimelech; although, notwithstanding the deep religious and moral depravity which was manifested in the doings of Abimelech, the Lord gave His people rest for forty-five years longer after the death of Abimelech under two judges, before He punished their apostasy with fresh hostile oppressions.

The history of Gideon and his family is related very fully, because the working of the grace and righteousness of the faithful covenant God was so obviously displayed therein, that it contained a rich treasure of instruction and warning for the church of the Lord in all aGes. The account contains such an abundance of special notices of separate events and persons, as can only be explained on the supposition that the author made use of copious records which had been made by contemporaries and eye-witnesses of the events. At the same time, the separate details do not contain any such characteristic marks as will enable us to discover clearly, or determine with any certainty, the nature of the source or sources which the author employed. The only things peculiar to this narrative are the use of the prefix שׁ for אשׁר, not only in reports of the sayings of the persons engaged (Jdg 6:17), but also in the direct narrative of facts (Jdg 7:12; Jdg 8:26), and the formula לבשׁה יהוה רוּח (Jdg 6:34), which only occurs again in 1Ch 12:18; 2Ch 24:20. On the other hand, neither the interchange of ha-Elohim (Jdg 6:36, Jdg 6:39; Jdg 7:14) and Elohim (Jdg 6:40; Jdg 8:3; Jdg 9:7, Jdg 9:9,Jdg 9:13, Jdg 9:23, Jdg 9:56-57) with Jehovah, nor the use of the name Jerubbaal for Gideon (Jdg 6:32; Jdg 7:1; Jdg 8:29; Jdg 9:1-2, Jdg 9:5,Jdg 9:16, Jdg 9:19, Jdg 9:24, Jdg 9:28), nor lastly the absence of the “theocratical pragmatism” in Judg 9, contains any proof of the nature of the source employed, or even of the employment of two different sources, as these peculiarities are founded upon the contents and materials of the narrative itself. ^{▼▼Even Bertheau, who infers from these data that two different sources were employed, admits that ha-Elohim in the mouth of the Midianites (Jdg 7:14) and Elohim in Jotham’s fable, where it is put into the mouth of the trees, prove nothing at all, because here, from the different meanings of the divine names, the author could not have used anything but Elohim. But the same difference is quite as unmistakeable in Jdg 8:3; Jdg 9:7, Jdg 9:23, Jdg 9:56-57, since in these passages, either the antithesis of man and God, or the idea of supernatural causality, made it most natural for the author to use the general name of God even it did not render it absolutely necessary. There remain, therefore, only Jdg 6:20, Jdg 6:36, Jdg 6:39-40, where the use of ha-Elohim and Elohim instead of Jehovah may possibly have originated with the source made use of by the author. On the other hand, the name Jerubbaal, which Gideon received in consequence of the destruction of the altar of Baal (Jdg 6:32), is employed with conscious reference to its origin and meaning, not only in Jdg 7:1; Jdg 8:29, Jdg 8:35, but also throughout Judg 9, as we may see more especially in Jdg 9:16, Jdg 9:19, Jdg 9:28. And lastly, even the peculiarities of Judg 9 - namely, that the names Jehovah and Gideon do not occur there at all, and that many historical circumstances are related apparently without any link of connection, and torn away from some wider context, which might have rendered them intelligible, and without which very much remains obscure, - do not prove that the author drew these incidents from a different source from the rest of the history of Gideon, - such, for example, as a more complete history of the town of Shechem and its rulers in the time of the judges, as Bertheau imagines. For these peculiarities may be explained satisfactorily enough from the intention so clearly expressed in Jdg 8:34-35, and Jdg 9:57, of showing how the ingratitude of the Israelites towards Gideon, especially the wickedness of the Shechemites, who helped to murder Gideon’s sons to gratify Abimelech, was punished by God. And no other peculiarities can be discovered that could possibly establish a diversity of sources.}