Judges 8

Chs. 6–8. Gideon delivers Israel from the Midianites For some years the Midianites had been the terror of Central Palestine. These nomad Arabs from the S.E. desert used to pour into the country during harvest time, and devastate the fertile neighbourhood of Shechem and the plain of Jezreel. At last Gideon, a Manassite belonging to the clan of Abiezer, contrived with a small band of fellow clansmen to rid the land of this intolerable scourge: he inflicted a severe defeat upon the invaders, and put their chiefs to death. As a trophy of the victory he made out of the spoils an ephod, which he set up in the sanctuary of Jehovah at Ophrah, his native village, where he spent the rest of his days with much dignity and influence. The ‘day of Midian’ was long remembered as a notable instance of. Jehovah’s intervention on behalf of Israel: see Isaiah 9:4; Isaiah 10:26, Psalms 83:9-12. The main outlines of the story are clear, but the details raise problems which have not yet been solved. Different traditions have been pieced together; these again have received later additions; and the various elements are interwoven in a manner which renders the literary analysis of these chapters unusually difficult and uncertain. (a) It will be noticed at once that Judges 8:4-21 is not the sequel of the preceding narrative. In Judges 8:4-21 Gideon with 300 men pursues the Midianite kings Zeba and Zalmunna on the E. of the Jordan as far as the edge of the desert, captures them, and slays them with his own hand; on one of their forays they had murdered his brothers at Tabor; the motive of Gideon’s pursuit is to satisfy his personal revenge. In Judges 6:1 to Judges 8:3 Gideon is called by God to deliver Israel from the repeated incursions of the Midianites; he attacks their camp near Mt Gilboa and creates a disastrous panic; the men of Ephraim are summoned to his aid, and they cut off the fugitives at the fords of Jordan; they capture and kill the two princes Oreb and Zeeb. Here the whole action, like the deliverance, is national. In Judges 7:25 b and Judges 8:10 b an editor has tried to harmonize the two accounts.

They do not necessarily contradict one another. It is quite likely that private motives spurred Gideon to place himself at the head of a united resistance, when God called him, and that he took the opportunity to wipe off a score of his own against the common enemy, (b) But Judges 6:1 to Judges 8:3 itself is not a consistent whole. Thus the call of Gideon is described in Judges 6:11-24 and again, altogether differently, in Judges 6:25-32; the summons to the neighbouring tribes is sent out before the battle in Judges 6:35, and after it in Judges 7:23; two traditions seem to be mingled in the account of the attack, Judges 7:15-21, in one of them the trumpets were remembered as a feature of the story, in the other the torches and pitchers. It is difficult to decide whether the antecedents of Jdg 8:4-21 can or cannot be traced in the composite narrative, Judges 6:1 to Judges 8:3. Some critics regard Judges 8:4-21 as an excerpt from a third source and unrelated to what precedes; others attempt to connect it with one of the two accounts of Gideon’s call and his attack upon the camp near Mt Gilboa. On the one hand Judges 8:4-21 does not suggest that a disastrous battle and a desperate flight had just occurred; the Midianite kings are encamped on the edge of the E. desert in careless security; apparently they have returned from a foray in the West, most likely the one in which they killed Gideon’s brothers; they do not suspect any pursuit. But, on the other hand, this episode does imply some previous account of Gideon and of a Midianite invasion; possibly too (but this is more questionable), some tradition of a recent attack upon the Midianites on the W. of Jordan (cf. Judges 8:5). We may therefore connect Judges 6:2-6 (in part), Judges 6:11-24; Judges 6:34, Judges 7:1; Judges 7:16-21 (in part) with Judges 8:4-21, remembering, however, that the connexion with Judges 7:1; Judges 7:16-21 (in part) is less evident. The other narrative, generally allowed to be the later of the two, will then consist of Jdg 6:7-10; Judges 6:25-33; Judges 6:35 a, Judges 6:36-40, Judges 7:9-21 (in part), Judges 7:22 to Judges 8:3. It will be seen that both in the older (Judges 8:4) and in the later narrative (Judges 8:2 f.) Gideon’s force was composed of his own Abiezrites; the number 300 seems to have been a fixed element in the general tradition. The description of the way in which the immense host of volunteers was reduced to this figure, Judges 6:35 f., Judges 7:2-8, must have been added later to the two main narratives. The closing verses, Judges 8:22-35, contain the loose ends of the fragmentary traditions which have been pieced together in the preceding history. The ephod belongs to the archaic stage of religion; Judges 8:24-27 a (to Ophrah) fit in very well as the conclusion of the early narrative, Judges 8:4-21. As it stands, Judges 8:29 is obviously out of place after Judges 8:27, but it would form a suitable sequel to Judges 8:3. The offer and refusal of the kingship, Judges 8:22-23, betray the theocratic bias of a later age. Judges 8:30-32 furnish the transition to the story of Abimelech, and shew signs of a late editorial hand. In Judges 8:27 b, Judges 8:28; Judges 8:33-35, as in Judges 6:1 and here and there in Judges 6:2-6, we recognize the familiar handiwork of the Deuteronomic redactor, who, in his customary manner, provided the whole story with introduction and conclusion, and interpreted it on his own religious principles. The preceding analysis is merely an attempt to account for the way in which the narrative has been put together. The text as we have it contains inconsistent and duplicate versions, which to a certain extent can be distinguished, but it is impossible to trace them apart all the way through.

Judges 8:1

Ch. Judges 8:1-3. Gideon appeases the men of Ephraim

1. the men of Ephraim … did chide with him sharply] A similar outburst of jealousy is recorded in Judges 12:1 f., and in much the same language; but it need not follow that the one passage is merely a reproduction of the other; probably there were plenty of tales about the notorious temper of the great tribe. Thus early in the history Ephraim begins to assert itself. The want of unity among the tribes at this period is evident.

Judges 8:2

2. Gideon, like his father (Judges 6:31), had the ready wit to extricate himself from an awkward situation. For the gleaning of the grapes see Isaiah 17:6, Micah 7:1; the word is used of fruit, not of corn. Ephraim indeed arrived late upon the scene, but they had the glory of capturing the chiefs. Gideon speaks only of Abiezer, his own clansmen; the 300 warriors chosen from different tribes, Judges 7:2-8, belong to another version of the story. Probably Judges 8:3 was followed by Judges 8:29 in the original narrative.

Judges 8:4-21

4–21. The pursuit on the east of Jordan This section is clearly not the continuation of the verses which immediately precede (see p. 68); if its antecedents are to be found in the foregoing narrative at all, we may suppose that after the panic and flight described in Judges 7:16-22, the main body of the Midianites escaped across the Jordan, and with their camels (Judges 8:21; Judges 8:26) easily outstripped their pursuers, insomuch that the men of Succoth and Penuel (Judges 8:6; Judges 8:8), and they themselves (Judges 8:11), believed that they were safely out of Gideon’s reach. On the other hand, it must be admitted that the section itself presupposes a raid into Gideon’s own district, where his brothers were murdered (Judges 8:18), rather than the panic and flight described in Judges 7:16-22; possibly, therefore, we have here a fragment from some independent source. In Judges 8:10 b there seems to be an attempt made to harmonize the narrative with what has gone before.

Judges 8:5

5. Succoth] On the E. of Jordan, in the territory of Gad (Joshua 13:27), near Penuel (cf. Genesis 33:17), and below it (went up Judges 8:8); and Penuel, as we learn from Genesis 32:22; Genesis 32:30 f., lay not far from the ford of Jabbok (Nahr ez-Zerḳ ?β). The question is, were Succoth and Penuel north or south of the Jabbok? On the whole, a position S. of the river satisfies the conditions of the narratives: Penuel near the point where the road coming E. from es-Salṭ ? crosses the road which comes down the Jordan valley from the north (the Ghτr route), i.e. 3 miles due E. of the ford ed-Dβmiyeh; and Succoth to the W. of Penuel, and lower down in the Jordan valley, cf. Psalms 60:6.

See Driver, Expos. Times xiii. 457 ff., Genesis, 300 ff. In the Jerus. Talmud Succoth is identified with Tar‘ηla (now Deir ‘Allβ), N. of the Jabbok (Shebi‘ith ix. 38 d); the identification probably rests only on a guess. Zebah and Zalmunna, the kings of Midian] Contrast Judges 7:25, and cf. Psalms 83:11. The Hebr. pronunciation of these Midianite names is intended to convey a contemptuous meaning, ‘Sacrifice,’ ‘Shadow (i.e. protection, Numbers 14:9) withheld,’ which of course was not the real one. Zalmunna, strictly perhaps Ṣ ?alm-na‘, appears to contain the name of the god Ṣ ?alm, who is mentioned in the Aramaic inscriptions (fifth century b.c.) from Tηma in N. Arabia; in Assyrian also Ṣ ?almu, i.e. ‘the dark’ (a name of the planet Saturn) or ‘the image,’ seems to be used of a divinity1[39]. [39] See NSI., p. 196 f.; KAT.3, p. 475 f.

Judges 8:6

6. the princes of Succoth] i.e. the executive officials of the community, responsible for its government, e.g. Judges 9:30 (‘ruler,’ lit. ‘prince’), or for the conduct of its wars, e.g. Judges 7:25, Judges 8:3. See further on Judges 8:14.

Judges 8:7

7. I will tear] thresh as marg. In the East threshing is done by treading (e.g. Isaiah 28:28), which is what the verb here means; Gideon promises to trample their flesh together with thorns of the desert and briers, i.e. to lay them naked on a bed of thorns and tread them down; so Targ. But the text reads awkwardly; for together with the LXX has a different preposition, with as in Judges 8:16 (‘with them’); this somewhat alters the meaning of Gideon’s threat, see on Judges 8:16. The word rendered briers (so Verss.) occurs only here, and its exact sense is unknown; a plant like the teasel may be intended. Thorny bushes abound in the sub-tropical Ghôr where Succoth lay.

Judges 8:8

8. Penuel] See on Judges 8:5. A place of some importance, for it was fortified by Jeroboam, 1 Kings 12:25; its tower may have commanded the Jabbok ford. An explanation of the name is given in Genesis 32:30. A different explanation is suggested by the name of the promontory S. of Tripolis, on the Syrian coast, which Strabo (p. 642 ed. Mόller) calls Θεοῦπρόσωπον ‘face of God’; some cliff or boulder near the spot looked like a huge face. When I come again in peace] A similar threat of retaliation for an insult is still used by the Arabs in the same district: ‘By God, when I come again in peace, nowhere but in the breast!’ Schumacher, Mittheil. u. Nachr. D.P.V. 1904, 76.

Judges 8:10

10. Karkor] Site unknown, probably near the edge of the Syrian desert. all that were left … drew sword] These words have the appearance of an attempt to bring the present narrative into harmony with the account of the panic and flight in Judges 7:22-25. The exaggerated numbers recall those of Numbers 31 (overthrow of Midian); that drew sword is an expression which often goes with large figures, e.g. Judges 20:2; Judges 20:15; Judges 20:17; Judges 20:46; 2 Samuel 24:9 etc.

Judges 8:11

11. Describes Gideon’s route going E. from Penuel. by the way of them that dwelt in tents is a doubtful rendering of a doubtful text. With slight corrections we may transl. towards the way of the tent-dwellers, i.e. the Bedouin route, such, for instance, as the present Haj road from Damascus to Mecca. The Targ. paraphrases, ‘by the way to the camp of the Arabs who encamp in tents in the desert east of Nobah.’ Strictly by the way of ought to be by the way to a place; hence Moore supposes that the tent-dwellers is a corruption of some place-name. Nobah] has been identified, on the strength of Num 32:42 (Nobah = Kenath), with Ḳ ?anawât on the west of the Ḥ ?aurân mountains; but this is much too far north. Jogbehah (belonging to Gad, Numbers 32:35) has survived in the modern ‘Ajbçhât, a ruined site 6 m. N.N.W. of ‘Ammân.secure] Not expecting an attack; cf. Judges 18:7; Genesis 34:25; Micah 2:8.

Judges 8:12

12. discomfited] Marg. terrified; the combination of careless security and terror occurs again in Ezekiel 30:9. The LXX. A and Lucian suggests a stronger word, such as destroyed, cf. Jos., Ant. Judges 8:6; Judges 8:5; but it is hardly necessary to alter the text. The two kings were the first to fly; Gideon contented himself with capturing them, and letting the rest break away in panic. He did not kill the kings at once; he had promised to shew them to Succoth and Penuel.

Judges 8:13

13. from the ascent of Heres] So LXX. A and Luc., with a slight correction of the text; or upwards to Heres, with further corrections. The word Ḥ ?eres = ‘the sun’ lends itself to various experiments, which are to be seen in the Versions. The general sense of the verse seems to be that Gideon returned from the battle by some different way.

Judges 8:14

14. he described for him] he wrote down (and gave) unto him. The knowledge of writing must have been widely spread even at this early period. Cf. the similar incidents in Judges 1:24 f.; 1 Samuel 30:11-16. the elders] Cf. Judges 8:16; the leading inhabitants and representatives of a district or city, e.g. Judges 11:5-11; they constituted the local authority and transacted public business, e. g. 1 Kings 21:8; 1 Kings 21:11. Elders and princes—the latter perhaps the executive of the local authority—are mentioned together in 2 Kings 10:1; Psalms 105:22; Ezra 10:8; Ezra 10:14.

Judges 8:16

16. and with them he taught] Read, changing one letter, threshed as in Judges 8:7, with LXX. B ἠλόησεν, A κατέξανεν. The Vulgate gives a double rendering: et contrivit cum eis, atque comminuit viros Soccoth. Peshitto and Targ. paraphrase. The meaning seems to be that Gideon dragged thorns and teasels over their prostrate bodies, i.e. carded them; a form of torture well known in antiquity. For ‘threshing’ in this metaphorical sense cf. Amos 1:3, Micah 4:13, Isaiah 41:15.

Judges 8:17

17. Gideon’s revenge strikes us as vindictive. In return for some jeering words he treated these towns, which no doubt contained many of his own countrymen, with a barbarity which is altogether absent from his execution of the Midianite kings, who had murdered his brothers and plundered his home. We must allow for the rough and passionate temper of the age, and for the exasperating lack of patriotism in the two towns; cf. Judges 5:23.

Judges 8:18

18. at Tabor] Mt Tabor is too far north if, as seems probable, Gideon’s clan was settled near Shechem; see on Judges 6:11. There may have been another Tabor near Ophrah. As thou art, so were they] powerful men, cf. Judges 6:12. The chiefs do not hesitate to boast of victims so distinguished.

Judges 8:19

19. the sons of my mother] and not only of the same father; they were therefore specially dear, cf. Genesis 43:29. On Gideon as next of kin fell the duty of avenging his brothers’ blood; cf. 2 Samuel 3:27; 2 Samuel 3:30; 2 Samuel 14:7; 2 Samuel 21:5-6. The execution was a judicial act, even an act of religious obligation.

Judges 8:20

20. Jether his firstborn] Did Gideon wish to bestow an honour upon his son, and humiliate these famous warriors? Or was the youth chosen for ceremonial reasons? Robertson Smith compares the choice of young men as sacrificers in Exodus 24:5, and illustrates from the custom of the Saracens who charged lads with the slaying of their captives; Rel. of Semites, p. 396 n.

Judges 8:21

21. The chiefs reply with undaunted spirit like true sons of the desert: as the man is, so is his strength, i.e. a man has a man’s strength (Moore); but the word so is not expressed in the terse Hebrew. crescents] lit. moons, metal ornaments worn not only by the kings but by their camels, Judges 8:26, and by the women of Jerusalem, Isaiah 3:18. The name is not Israelite, nor is it the ordinary word for ‘moon’; it is related to the old Aramaic name of the moon-god (sahar).

Judges 8:22

22–28. Gideon refuses the kingship: he sets up an ephod: conclusion 22. the men of Israel] Not the 300 of Judges 8:4-21, but the men who formed the army Judges 7:14, Judges 9:55, the Israelites drawn from Ephraim, Manasseh, and the neighbouring tribes Judges 7:23. Thus Judges 8:22-23 are probably not the sequel of Jdg 7:4-21, nor of Jdg 7:1-3, for the Ephraimites shewed anything but a disposition to make Gideon king; so these verses appear to come from a source secondary to the two main documents (see p. 69). The offer of the kingship shews that Gideon’s exploit was more than the avenging of a private wrong (Judges 7:4-21); he had saved his countrymen; as king it would be his duty to save them still.

Judges 8:23

23. I will not rule over you] But ch. 9 implies that Gideon did exercise some kind of supremacy, at any rate in his own district, and his sons claimed to inherit his position, Judges 9:2. These words, then, either mean that Gideon seized the power, but rejected the title, of king; or they represent the view, which apparently came to the front in the closing years of the Northern Kingdom, that earthly kingship was inconsistent with the sovereignty of Jehovah; cf. 1 Samuel 8:7; 1 Samuel 10:19; 1 Samuel 12:12; 1 Samuel 12:17; 1 Samuel 12:19 (E source), Hosea 13:10 f. The latter is the explanation most generally accepted.

Judges 8:24

24. The making of the ephod and the manner in which it is spoken of belong to an early stage of religious thought; Judges 8:24-27 a may, therefore, belong to the early narrative Judges 8:4-21; they have been skilfully connected with Judges 8:22-23. The request shewed Gideon’s disinterestedness and piety. As chief he would have the right to choose some gift for himself before the spoil was divided among his followers; cf. Judges 5:30, 1 Samuel 30:20. The custom prevailed in ancient Arabia; see Robertson Smith, Rel. of Sem., p. 440. earrings] So when worn by men, LXX here, Genesis 35:4, Job 42:11; but nose-rings when worn by women, Genesis 24:47, Isaiah 3:21. Pliny mentions the wearing of earrings by men in the East, Hist. Nat. xi. 50. Ishmaelites] i.e. in a general sense, Bedouin. Strictly, according to Genesis 25:2, Ishmael was the half-brother of Midian; cf. the interchange of the names in Genesis 37:25-36.

Judges 8:26

26. And the weight etc.] 1700 shekels of gold by the heavy standard = nearly 75 lbs. Troy = £3485, or by the light standard = nearly 37½ lbs. Troy = 742 10s. A single ring might weigh half a shekel, Genesis 24:22. beside the crescents … necks] The sentence interrupts the account of the ephod, and looks like a later addition. Pendants (Heb. neṭ ?îfôth from naṭ ?af ‘to drop’) were perhaps single beads or gems attached to the lobe of the ear, cf. Arab. naṭ ?afat ‘a small clear pearl’; the Verss. understood some kind of necklace, so AV. collars; some Jewish interpreters think of small boxes containing fragrant gum (nâṭ ?âf ‘stacte,’ Exodus 30:34), hence AVm. sweet jewels. For chains render necklaces, Son 4:9, Proverbs 1:9, contrast the crescents in Judges 8:21.

Judges 8:27

27. made an ephod thereof] i.e. out of a large amount of precious metal—the gold of the earrings 26a, not of the ornaments in 26b. Gideon dedicated his spoil to Jehovah, cf. 2 Samuel 8:11, Micah 4:13, Moabite St. ll. 12 f., 17 f. (Mesha‘ dedicates his spoil from Israel to Kĕ ?môsh).The ephod we find associated with terâphim in Judges 17:5, Judges 18:14 ff., Hosea 3:4, and in connexion with the Urim and Thummim or sacred lots, 1 Samuel 14:18 cf. 1 Samuel 14:41 LXX; it was carried, not ‘worn,’ by the priest, 1 Samuel 2:28; 1 Samuel 14:3; 1 Samuel 14:18 LXX (see RVm., but render carried), 1 Samuel 22:18 (omit linen with LXX. cod. B, and render carry), 1 Samuel 23:6, 1 Samuel 30:7; we gather, therefore, that it was used in consulting Jehovah to obtain an oracle. But what the ephod was itself is not so clear. It may have been a rich vestment or embroidered loin-cloth, such as we see in Egyptian paintings, which the priest put on when he consulted Jehovah; this may explain the amount of gold which Gideon devoted to its making. In the sanctuary at Nob the ephod stood or hung near the wall, but free from it; and here Gideon set or placed his ephod in the sanctuary at Ophrah.

The root apparently means ‘to sheathe,’ and a derivative is used in Isaiah 30:22 for ‘the plating of thy molten images of gold’; hence many suppose that it must have been an image, but it is very doubtful whether the plating of the image could come to mean the image itself. Different in some way from the oracular ephod was the ephod of linen with which Samuel and David were girt when performing religious functions: a closely fitting garment is what the meaning of the root implies.

A richer development of this was the ephod of the High-Priest described in Exodus 28:6-12 P, shaped like a kind of waistcoat, over which he wore the jewelled pouch or breastplate containing the Urim and Thummim; in its latest development the ephod thus maintained its association with the divine oracle. See esp. Sellin, Orient. Studien Theodor Nöldeke … gewidmet 1906, ii. 701 f. and Benzinger, Hebr. Arch.2, 347 f., 359; Driver, Exodus, p. 312. went a whoring after it] Cf. Judges 8:33 and Judges 2:17 n. In Gideon’s day there was no wide-spread objection to an image in Jehovah’s sanctuary; the prohibition in Exodus 20:4, though it may have been laid down by Moses, was not observed by the people generally. A later age, however, trained in more spiritual conceptions, took offence at Gideon’s action and saw in it the cause of the disaster which befell his family.

Judges 8:28

28. The Deuteronomic editor’s conclusion of the story; cf. Judges 3:30 n. and Judges 3:11 n.

Judges 8:29

29. Originally this verse closed the narrative in Judges 8:1-3, or that in Judges 8:4-21. Judges 8:30-32 form an introduction to the story of Abimelech in ch. 9; some such earlier mention of Abimelech is presupposed by Judges 9:1.

Judges 8:30

30. of his body begotten] Only again in Genesis 46:26 (‘which came out of his loins’) and Exodus 1:5 P, cf. Genesis 35:11 P. The more sons a man had, the greater his importance, cf. Judges 10:4, Judges 12:9.

Judges 8:31

31. his concubine that was in Shechem] A connexion of this kind is illustrated by early Arabian custom: the woman, or ‘female friend’ (ṣ ?adâḳ ?a), did not leave her home, the union was of a temporary character (hence the term, mot‘a marriage) and required no consent from parents or guardians, the children remained with their mother and belonged to her tribe; cf. Judges 9:1; Judges 9:14. Robertson Smith, Kinship and Marriage in early Arabia, p. 69 ff. The narrative seems to imply that the woman was a Canaanite. and he called his name Abimelech] lit. set, an idiom found only in late writings 2 Kings 17:34, Nehemiah 9:7, Daniel 1:7. Abimelech does not mean ‘my father (Gideon) is king,’ but probably ‘Melech (i.e. the divine king) is father.’ See Gray, Hebr. Pr. Names, pp. 75–86.

Judges 8:32

32. in a good old age] Again in Genesis 15:15 JE, Genesis 25:8 P, 1 Chronicles 29:28. Judges 8:33-35 originally followed Judges 8:28, according to the usual scheme. These verses are made up of the customary phrases of the Dtc. editor, with the addition of particulars derived from ch. 9; cf. Judges 2:14; Judges 2:18 f., Judges 3:7; Judges 3:12, Judges 4:1, Judges 6:9 and Judges 9:4; Judges 9:16; Judges 9:19. Most probably, then, these verses were intended to form not an introduction to ch. 9, but a substitute for it. Ch. 9 did not fit into Rd’s scheme, so he laid it aside, and wrote Judges 8:33-35 to take its place. A later editor, however, thought fit to incorporate the discarded chapter, and by way of an introduction he wrote Judges 8:30-32, which, as noticed above, contain several expressions found elsewhere in writings later than the Dtc. age.

Budde was the first to propose this explanation, and it has been generally accepted; Richt. u. Sam. (1890), p. 119 ff.

Judges 8:33

33. made Baal-berith their god] Baal-bĕ ?rîth (Judges 9:4; Judges 9:46) was the Covenant-Baal, the god of the league between himself and his worshippers, or the god who presided over the league between the original Canaanite inhabitants of Shechem and the Israelite new-comers; see Genesis 34 The Dtc. editor generalizes the worship of a half-Canaanite city into a defection of all Israel; similarly in Judges 8:35 he blames Israelites for the ingratitude of the men of Shechem.