,
30 tweets,
5 min read
Read on Twitter
THREAD: Some scattered notes on Judges 3 tonight, the aim of which will be to pick out (what I take to be) the odd point of interest rather than to cover the whole text.
3.8-4.1 describes the judgeships of Othniel and Ehud and, afterwards, the acts of Shamgar. Shamgar is not described as a judge, and does not have an Israelite name. I take the sense of וַיֹּשַׁע גַּם־הוּא אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵל to be ‘Even he (a non-Israelite) saved Israel’ (3.31).
Othniel, Ehud, and Shamgar all provide Israel with different measures of relief from their enemies. As such, they are YHWH’s first three choices of weaponry (cp. previous posts).
Shamgar wields a cattle prod, Ehud a short-sword, and Othniel is the son of Kenaz (קְנַז) = ‘whip’ (cp. Syr. /qnaztā/ < Akk. /qinnāzu/).
Note: If קְנַז should be identified with a ‘whip’ (no other etymologies seem v. plausible), then it embodies a sense of irony. The nations were a ‘whip’ in the sides of the Israelites (שֹׁטֵט בְּצִדֵּיכֶם: Josh. 23.13), but Othniel turns the tables on the nations.
Different passages in Judges revolve around particular numbers (discussed later). The number 8 appears to be prominent in our text.
The name ‘Ehud’ (אהוד) appears 8 times and has a gematrial value of 16 (2 x 8), and Ehud is raised up at the end of a rest of 40 (5 x 8) year period of rest. Related to the prominence of 8 is the prominence of the consonants שמן. (The Hebrew for 8 is שמונה.)
Israel suffer for שמונה years (8 years) under Cushan-Rishathaim and שמונה עשרה years (18 years) under Eglon, and are finally granted שמונים years (80 years) rest. The root שמן is also relevant for other reasons:
Eglon, whose name denotes ‘a fatted calf’ (cp. עֵגֶל = ‘calf’, עָגֹל = ‘rotund’), has clearly grown fat (שמן = ‘to grow fat’) over the years, and his fellow Moabites are also described as שָׁמֵן, the sense of which is ‘strong’ (3.29), yet which provides further wordplay on שמן.
3.8. At the outset of new episodes in Israel’s history, an problem often emerges from Babel/Shinar/Mesopotamia. For Abraham, it is Amraphel and his colleagues; for Joshua, a Babylonian cloak; and, for Israel, here in our text, Cushan-Rishathayim.
The name Cushan-Rishathayim (כושן רשעתים) is unusual. כושן may refer to a leather container (from Sum. /kuš/ = ‘leather’??) of some kind (cp. Akk. /kušānu/ = ‘leather bag’, Egyp. /kšn/ = ‘reins, saddle’), which, believe it or not, is a recognised type of ANE name.
Meanwhile, רִשְׁעָתַיִם looks distinctly geographical (cp. בֵּית דִּבְלָתָיִם, רָמָתַיִם, etc.), and may therefore be כושן’s hometown. Particularly relevant as a parallel is Jer. 50.21’s reference to מְרָתַיִם = ‘rebellions’ (?), which appears to denote Babylon.
Ultimately, however, our author wants us to associate רִשְׁעָתַיִם with ‘wicked acts’ (in contrast to צִדְקֹת = ‘righteous acts’: 5.11), which are exactly what Cushan-Rishathayim performs in our text.
That a Mesopotamian town actually bore a name like ‘wicked acts’ seems unlikely, though not impossible. Perhaps, then, the town’s original name was, say, שַׁעֲרַיִם = ‘gates’ (the name of at least two towns in Israel),...
...which our author reworked as רִשְׁעָתַיִם in order to continue our text’s wordplay (?). At any rate, Cushan’s ‘wicked acts’ are dealt with by Othniel (עתניאל) = ‘the strength of God’ (cp. Sab. /ʿtn(ʾ)l/), who is propelled along by ‘the Spirit of YHWH’ (3.10).
The two men most clearly connected with ‘the Spirit’ in the Pentateuch are Joshua (ישע: Num. 27.18, Deut. 34.9) and Caleb (כלב: Num. 14.24). These men are prototypes of successful warriors, and the book of Judges continues their legacy.
The role of the judges is to ‘save’ (ישע cp. the name ‘Joshua’) Israel, while Gideon will later search for companions who lap up water like a dog (כאשר הכלב) because he wants to find men like Caleb (כלב cp. the name ‘Caleb’).
In our text, Othniel is connected to Caleb since he is Caleb’s younger brother, while Ehud (אֵהוּד = ‘Where is the glory/authority?’) is connected with Joshua since the only occurrence of הוד in Scripture describes the ‘authority’ (הוד) bequeathed to Joshua by Moses (Num. 27.20).
The focal-point of our text is Ehud’s slaughter of Eglon and the Moabites, and our author’s account of it contains a number of deliberately ironic details.
The anger of YHWH ‘burns hot’ against the Israelites (3.8) and is placated in the ‘cool’ of Eglon’s chamber. Ehud is said to be a Benjaminite (lit. ‘a son of the right (hand)’: בֶּן־הַיְמִינִי), yet he is evidently a left-hander.
Ehud is a son of Gera (גֵּרָא) = ‘grain’ (cf. Gesenius, Jastrow) yet is nimble and agile; by contrast, Eglon has been fattened by grain tributes (מִנְחָה) and is hence vulnerable to Ehud’s attack.
And Ehud delivers Eglon a דבר סתר (‘secret message’), but the lexeme דבר is extremely versatile, and can plausibly be read as ‘sting’ (cp. Hos. 13.14). Just as the judgeship of Deborah (דבורה) = ‘honey-bee’ has a sting in its tail, so does Ehud’s message.
For notes on other ironies embodied in the names of Israel’s rulers, cf. .
A final thought: The content of our text is oddly reminiscent of the initial events of a different book, namely the book of Samuel.
Just as Eglon is made fat (ברא) by grain tributes (מנחות), so are Eli’s sons (1 Sam. 2.29). Just as Eglon is named after a young animal, so is Eli’s son (חפני = ‘tadpole’).
Just as Eglon’s fall is coincident with the rise of an Israelite named ‘Where is the glory?’ (אהוד), so is the fall of Eli’s sons (איכבוד = ‘Where is the glory?’).
And, just as the Eglon story ends with a grain-fed Moabite ruler fallen on his face (נֹפֵל אַרְצָה) in a room with closed doors, so the outset of Samuel closes with a Philistine ‘grain god’ (דגן = ‘grain’) fallen on his face in a temple with closed doors.
The fall of Eglon hence depicts the judgement of a pagan god, but also depicts the same judgement which will afflict the Israelites if they go the way of the nations.
For more on the Dagon narrative, cf. .
Next up chs. 4-5.
