Currents in Biblical Research Judges in Recent … · ‘period of the judges’), the tendency to treat chs. 4 and 5 separately from one another, and growth in feminist readings

https://doi.org/10.1177/1476993X17692689

Currents in Biblical Research2017, Vol. 15(2) 179 –213

© The Author(s) 2017Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.navDOI: 10.1177/1476993X16659798

journals.sagepub.com/home/cbi

Judges in Recent Research

Kelly J. MurphyCentral Michigan University, USA

AbstractThe book of Judges continues to inspire research and interpretation, from an ongoing focus on traditional research methods such as historical criticism and redaction criticism, to newer approaches like cultural criticism and postcolonial readings. This article surveys recent research on the book of Judges since 2003 by separating the discussion into two sections: the first section traces current research on the overall book of Judges as well as specific characters and/or passages, while the second section notes two growing areas of research; namely, reception history and gender studies.

KeywordsBook of Judges, Deuteronomistic history, reception history, feminist studies, gender studies, Achsah, Deborah, Yael, Gideon, Jephthah, Samson, Levite’s concubine

Introduction

Hebrews 11.32 reads, ‘For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah ...’ In his 2005 commentary, Gunn lamented, ‘Time would also fail me to tell of Judges’ reception over two millennia’ (p. 1). Like Gunn and the author of Hebrews before him, this article also mourns that there is neither adequate space nor time to examine fully all of the recent research on the book of Judges, with recent here defined not by two millennia but rather only since Craig’s (2003) sur-vey of scholarship on the book. Instead, what follows will attempt to highlight the main contours and questions that shape explorations of the strange, sometimes funny, and often violent book of Judges. Accordingly, the ensuing pages open by tracing research on the overall book of Judges, beginning with commentaries and general monographs and then moving on to areas of research related to specific characters and/or passages. Subsequently, the second and final section notes two growing areas of research on Judges; namely, gender studies and reception history.

Corresponding author:Kelly J. Murphy, Central Michigan University, 1200 S Franklin St, Mt Pleasant, MI 48859, USA.Email: [email protected]

Article

https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/journals-permissions

https://journals.sagepub.com/home/cbi

http://cmich.edu

http://doi.org/10.1177/1476993X16659798

180 Currents in Biblical Research 15(2)

Reading the Book of Judges: Commentaries and Monographs

Since Craig’s (2003) survey of research on the book of Judges, a treasure trove of commentaries has appeared. As was the case in 2003, these commentar-ies approach the book from a number of angles. On one hand, Gross’s (2009) German commentary on the book places itself in the long trajectory of redaction-critical studies of the book that identifies earlier stories that were revised by various ‘Deuteronomistic’ and other later redactors. Gross’s work is prodigious, spanning some 896 pages, and includes attention to redaction-critical questions, literary features of the text, and reflections on the reception history of the vari-ous stories. On the other hand, a number of commentaries have appeared in English. Most recently, Sasson’s Judges 1–12 (2014) is an updated Anchor Bible commentary, the first of two volumes, which focuses on a range of issues in the book of Judges, from ancient Near Eastern background, literary and textual fea-tures, and the reception history of the text. Other commentaries include Frolov (2013a), which is a uniquely form-critical study of Judges; Butler (2009), a com-mentary that also provides summaries of many previous works on the book; Niditch (2008), which traces ‘three major voices’ throughout the book of Judges while also attending to the texture in Judges (pp. 8-18); Gunn (2005), which largely focuses on the reception history of the book; and Matthews (2004), which concentrates on social, historical, and theological questions related to life as depicted in Judges. In addition, this list of commentaries could be expanded to include Chisholm (2013a); Biddle (2012); Webb (2012); McCann (2011); Goldingay (2011); Walton (2009); Campbell (2008); and Ryan (2007).

Beyond the standard commentaries, Alter produced a new translation of Judges alongside a commentary (2013), while Franke and Oden’s volume provides com-mentary on Joshua, Judges, Ruth and 1–2 Samuel from the early Christian fathers (2005). Yee edited an updated edition of her Judges and Method (2007), which includes revised versions of the original chapters as well as new chapters on gen-der criticism, cultural criticism and postcolonial criticism. Additionally, Brenner and Yee’s Joshua and Judges is a volume of collected essays that approaches various texts from the contexts of interpreters, including ‘social factors (such as location, economic situation, gender, age, class, ethnicity, color, and things per-taining to personal biography) and…ideological factors (such as faith, beliefs, practiced norms, and personal politics)’ (2013: x). Some of these essays will be discussed below. A number of other monographs consider the book of Judges as a whole, including Davidson’s Intricacy, Design, and Cunning in the Book of Judges (2008); Guillame’s Waiting for Josiah: The Judges (2004); Michelson’s study of violence and kingship in Judges and Samuel (2011); Mobley’s explora-tion of the ‘heroic tradition’ in Judges (2005); Wong’s examination of the ‘com-positional strategy’ of the book (2005); and Yoder’s detailed analysis of the way

Murphy: Judges in Recent Research 181

that power and politics function in the stories of men and women of valor (2015). Other monographs have a more narrow focus, such as Assis’s (2005) study of how leadership is portrayed in the stories of Gideon, Abimelech and Jephthah. Though space does not permit a thorough evaluation of each commentary and/or monograph, readers will find that the number of methodological approaches used by these works and the intended audiences for which these volumes were written are comprehensive.

A Walk through the Book of Judges: Recent Readings of Major Characters

‘Give Me a Present’: Beginnings

‘That the book of Judges almost begins and certainly ends with women figures is a given fact and an indication of their importance in it’, writes Brenner (2013: 128). The first of the many key women who appear in the pages of the book of Judges is Achsah, daughter of Caleb and bride of Othniel, the first of the so-called judges. Recent years have seen a number of studies that focus on Achsah. For example, Fleishman explores the legal background of Achsah’s demand for better land and her father’s acquiescence to that demand in light of ancient Near Eastern and early Jewish laws regarding dowries, ultimately arguing that Achsah, ‘an opinionated woman…with long-ranging economic insight’, worked within her legal rights, as did Caleb when he granted his daughter the land (2006: 372). For Hackett, the story of Achsah stands out in a ‘violent book’, where ‘there is hardly a single narrative that is not concerned with violence of some sort’ (2004: 356). Hackett sees Achsah as ‘the excuse for heroic acts in battle’, but she also notes that Achsah ‘is not simply a pawn, as she demonstrates when she asks for and receives a dowry of land that is more attractive than what she and Othniel would otherwise have’ (2004: 363-64). Other readings of the Achsah story in Judg. 1.11-15 bring new methodologies to the text, including McKinlay’s gendered and post-colonial reading, which traces the unsettling aspects of the story, noting that the land Achsah gains ‘is land taken in conquest’ (2009: 2). In contrast to Hackett’s reading, McKinlay (p. 8) states, ‘Achsah is a pawn, three over. She is a trophy pawn, used by Caleb within the story plot. She is the disturbing Kenizzite, collud-ing with the Israelite imperium, used by Israel’s Deuteronomistic writers. Forever located in Scripture, she is the pawn of an imperial hegemony…’.

The Problematic Assassin: Ehud

Chisholm writes, ‘The assassin Ehud has generated extensive controversy among interpreters’, who are left to decide whether Ehud should be praised or shamed for his role in the death of King Eglon (2011: 274). For example, Christianson


reflects on Ehud’s violence, particularly by comparing the ‘rhetoric of entertain-ment that it shared with the Western’ (2003: 54). Christianson offers a tantaliz-ing list of the social commentary at work in the Ehud narrative, including the idea that ‘Just as the Westerns use all kinds of “baddies” to satirize identifiable social forces, perhaps the production of this satire was driven by social inequali-ties and disempowerment’ (p. 77). Yet, while Christianson focuses on the ways that violence in the Ehud story might function as social satire, Wong turns to an examination and comparison of the Ehud and Joab stories, arguing that Ehud’s assassination of King Eglon of Moab and Joab’s assassinations of Abner (2 Sam. 3.27) and Amasa (2 Sam. 20.8-10) have resemblances in plot and language: all three stories use deception in the assassination of the victims, with the use of swords and single blows to the stomach also uniting them (2006a: 400-401). For Wong, ‘one can infer that there must have been aspects of Ehud’s assassination that were also viewed negatively’, including the use of deception (p. 410). In short, ‘there is room for disquietude when it comes to Ehud’s use of deception’ (p. 410). In contrast, Chisholm (2011: 282) defends Ehud from a number of readings that find fault with the Benjaminite (including Wong’s), ultimately con-cluding that the narrator in the book of Judges ‘presented Ehud in a thoroughly positive light and linked him with Othniel to form a paradigmatic tandem’—the only two men in the book of Judges who are called ‘deliverers’. Cottrill (2014) continues to think about violence in the Ehud story, alongside the story of Jael and Sisera, through the use of affect theory, which helps to show how violent images work on readers. Neef’s (2009) reading of Judg. 3.12-30 turns to Eglon’s name, arguing against the idea that it need be understood in a negative light in the sense of a ‘Kälbermann’, but focusing instead on how the story is a hero saga that examines Ehud’s ability to defeat Eglon with the help of Yhwh, who works behind the scenes. Sasson returns to the question of whether or not Ehud’s story should be viewed as satire, and after a thorough review of the reception history of the passage, he concludes, ‘By treating Ehud as satire rather than, say, a nar-rative with potential humorous touches, recent commentators have in effect cre-ated a new perception of the story, one that conflates ancient Israel’s reaction to it with that of their own’ (2009: 591).

A Prophet and a Poem: Deborah

In 2009, Mayfield published ‘The Accounts of Deborah (Judges 4–5) in Recent Research’, covering scholarship on Judges 4–5 from 1990–2009. Mayfield noted several trends: a shift away from historical-critical methodological approaches to more literary approaches (although attempts at dating Judges 5 remained prev-alent along with interest in the historicity behind the texts as they relate to the ‘period of the judges’), the tendency to treat chs. 4 and 5 separately from one another, and growth in feminist readings of the texts that witnessed a plethora


of voices and opinions on both Deborah and Yael, often including contradictory interpretations of these figures (pp. 327-28). Since the publication of Mayfield’s article, interest in chs. 4 and 5 of the book of Judges endures, in many ways still focusing on the trends Mayfield identified in previous scholarship.

For example, articles exploring the question of how to date the song in Judges 5 continue to appear. Frolov challenges the overwhelming consensus that Judg. 5.2-31a is a text that ‘“may be one of the most ancient works of the Hebrew Bible”’ (2011: 163; citing Niditch 2008: 76), instead dating it to ‘between c. 700 and c. 450 bce’ (p. 183). Frolov bases his argument on a number of factors, including morphological and syntactical clues (pp. 166-70), lexical clues (pp. 170-73), intertextual connections (pp. 173-74), and the socio-historical horizon of the poem (pp. 174-79). Frolov argues that the song is ‘broadly compatible with the Deuteronomic/Deuteronomistic worldview and agenda’, suggesting a much later origin than is usually proffered for the song (p. 184; see also pp. 181-83).

Leuchter focuses on the strange appearance of chariots in Judg. 5.28, which he notes have failed alongside Sisera on the battlefield (2010: 257). Leuchter questions why the chariot is highlighted in a poem that he views as highly sym-bolic and mythopoetic. Leuchter notes the historical reality of the Bronze and early Iron Age, which saw Canaanite cooperation with Egyptian hegemony, and explains the odd reference to the chariot in this verse by positing that ‘The poet behind the Song of Deborah draws attention to the chariot and its deep associa-tion with Egyptian campaigns in characterizing the Kulturkampf between Israel and the Canaanite forces’ (p. 266).

While Leuchter looks backward to the historical realities of Egypt and Canaan in the Bronze Age and early Iron Age in order to explain the presence of chariots in Judg. 5.28, Vainstub (2011) looks forward to Greek mythology in an attempt to understand the figures of Deborah and Yael. He explores similarities between the meaning behind the names of Deborah and Yael and two female prophets in extant Greek myths from Crete. Deborah (“bee”) is similar to the name of the main prophet at Delphi, Melissa (‘bee’). Yael (‘mountain goat’/‘ibex’) finds a par-allel in stories about Melissa’s sister, called Amaltheia, ‘who is a goat living in a mountain’ (p. 328). According to Vainstub, the parallel pairs—Deborah and Yael, Melissa and Amaltheia—‘are too much for being a mere coincidence’ (p. 329). Moreover, he also points to the fact that in both stories—biblical and Greek—there is ‘a fugitive fleeing for his life’ who ‘takes refuge amidst the “mountain goat”, and she gives him milk’ (p. 329). Yet the similarities end there; in the bib-lical account, famously, Yael kills Sisera, but ‘in most of the Greek versions the refugee is none other than the god Zeus (Iove) fleeing from his father’s ire, and Amaltheia hides and suckles him’ (p. 329). Nevertheless, according to Vainstub, the vessel in both the biblical and Greek accounts is stressed as being one of plenty: he translates the enigmatic Hebrew phrase from 5.25 as ‘bowl of (milk’s) plenty’, and the Greek stories refer to a horn—sometimes even the ‘inexhaustible


“horn of plenty” or cornucopia’ (p. 331). The conclusion: ‘the parallels discussed in this study ought to be added to the vast and growing evidence of Eastern-influenced motifs in Greek mythology, even though the ways, direction, and time of contact and influence fall over the scope of this paper’ (p. 331).

In two separate articles, Wright (2011a, 2011b) examines Judges 5 and chal-lenges some of the old consensuses regarding these passages, reading them instead with an eye toward the politics of war commemoration. First, Wright focuses on Judg. 5.15b-17, particularly the interpretations of Cross (1973, 1988) and Halpern (1983) that explain these verses as ‘acclamations and tributes’ for tribes that participated in the war effort described in the poem (Wright 2011b: 507). Yet the problem of reading vv. 15b-17 as indicating participation in war is created by the presence of v. 23, in which only Meroz is censored for ‘not com-ing to the help of Yhwh’. Accordingly, Wright proposes a reading of vv. 15b-17 that sees these verses ‘as expressions of disapprobation for the failure of Reuben, Gilead, Dan and Asher to participate in battle’ (p. 519). Wright also points to similar war commemoration accounts that include censure for non-participation in the Aegean world, including the ‘Catalogue of Ships’ from the Iliad, which includes those ‘who stayed behind by their ships’ instead of coming to war (pp. 518-19). With these facts, Wright argues for Judg. 5.15b-17 as a list of those who did not participate. In his subsequent article, Wright (2011a) examines the problem of v. 23: why is only Meroz censured for lack of participation, but not Reuben, Gilead, Dan and Asher as well? To explain this, Wright argues for an expansion of the song of Deborah—namely, ‘assuming that at least part of the song in Jud 5 is old, we might expect that readers introduced new perspectives to it over the course of its literary transmission’ (2011a: 517). According to Wright, chs. 4 and 5 originally shared only a reference to a battle in the Jezreel Valley, and ch. 5 originally consisted of only a victory hymn. Later, the victory hymn was expanded on the basis of the prose account now found in ch. 4. Why, then, expand the victory hymn and make it parallel with ch. 4? Per Wright, such a move: (a) elevates Yhwh while diminishing the role that Barak plays (2011a: 527); (b) places emphasis on ‘the unity of Israel under Yhwh in wartime’ in the song unlike the prose account (p. 527); and (c) makes Jael’s role in the poem ‘illustrate how belonging in ancient Israel was negotiated in some circles via memories of wartime contributions and sacrifices’ (p. 529). In short, the song—reworked and now in its final form—becomes ‘a war monument’ that ‘served the space in which a nation negotiated belonging long after belligerents had with-drawn from the battlefield’ (p. 534).

For Herzberg, ‘the story of Deborah has much in common with the story of the Israelites crossing the Reed Sea in Exodus 14–15’ (2013: 16). Yet, as Herzberg notes, Deborah is more regularly compared with Miriam than with Moses (p. 17). Herzberg traces a number of literary similarities between the fig-ure of Moses and the figure of Deborah, including that both operate as judges


(pp. 17-18), as prophets (pp. 19-20), and as military leaders (pp. 20-23). Yet ‘the battle that most connects Moses with Deborah, though, might not be considered a battle at all: the parting of the Reed Sea’ (p. 23). Here Herzberg notes that in Exod. 14.24-25, God threw the Egyptian army into a panic, and subsequently the Egyptian chariot wheels lock in the mud, while in Judg. 4.15 Yhwh threw Sisera and his army into a panic, a fact that Herzberg connects with the ensuing ‘out of season rainstorm’ in Judg. 5.4, 20-21 that the deity brings (pp. 23-24). Herzberg also notes that ‘the songs of Moses and Deborah appear to be among the oldest compositions in the Bible’ (p. 26), and ‘both songs are generally held to be older than the prose narratives that precede them’ (p. 27). Herzberg adds ‘the idea that Deborah parallels Moses’ and is, in fact, ‘in a different and higher category than her fellow judges because, unlike them, she renders judgment and is a prophet’ (p. 32). Deborah has also been the focus of several reception history studies, detailed below.

A number of articles also focus exclusively on the figure of Jael, including three pieces from Brenner and Yee’s Joshua and Judges (2013). Each article focuses on a different contextual reading of Jael’s story. Brison (2013) sees Jael as a cultic intermediary (see pp. 156-58 especially). Bonfiglio (2013) traces the different portrayals of Jael in Judges 4 and 5, noting that in ch. 4 Jael is a heroine for Israel, while in ch. 5 she is a heroine among women more broadly. Using postcolonial theory, Bonfiglio traces how in Judges 4 Jael becomes a ‘model minority’ (p. 170), while in Judges 5 she is a model of agency and resistance for women (p. 171). Yee (2013) examines the parallels between Jael and Fa Mulan, especially the intertextual overlaps where each is portrayed as a warrior with ethnically ambiguous backgrounds and occupying the gendered space between male and female.

The Least in His Family and His Sons: Gideon, Jether, Joram and Abimelech

Gideon—also known as Jerubbaal—and his sons Jotham and Abimelech are the focus of a number of new studies. For example, Dietch’s (2015) work on Judges 6–9 combines sociological and literary lenses to examine questions of author-ity and violence in the stories of Gideon and Abimelech, noting how ‘The story celebrates the wordsmith’s ability to protest, assuage, and precipitate violence; to resurrect and question the past; to obliterate or highlight distinctions; and even to debate with the deity’ (p. 191). In a monograph, Murphy (forthcoming) examines Judges 6–8 from primarily two methodological lenses, namely, redaction his-tory and masculinity studies, in order to examine how Gideon’s status as gibbôr in the different strata of the text reflects distinct expectations about hegemonic masculinity in various periods in ancient Israel’s history. Her study is further supplemented by focusing on the reception history of Judges 6–8, especially in


how various communities read the Gideon narrative based on the gender norms of their own contexts.

Additionally, a number of articles examine various historical and/or archaeo-logical questions related to chs. 6–8. For example, Niesiołowski-Spanò attempts to locate Gideon’s hometown, Ophrah, ultimately deciding that: ‘A good candi-date for a city of such an important hero, a judge of royal charisma, is modern Ramat-Rahel’ (2005: 493). Other historically and/or archaeologically focused articles include Malamat’s (2004) reading of the Succoth and Penuel story from Judges 8 in light of ancient Near Eastern Treaties, Schmitz’s (2008) reading of dedicatory formulae and Judg. 7.18, 20, and Scherer’s (2003) exploration of the way that ‘ephod’ appears in ancient Israel and the larger ancient Near East, which sheds light on the ephod in the Gideon narrative. Additionally, Sharon (2006) focuses on many intertextual links between the story of the ephod in Judges 8 and other biblical texts.

Other articles on Gideon have focused on peculiarities within the story. For instance, Beck asks, ‘Why would Gideon have requested the manipulation of dew rather than some other sign?’ (2008: 28). Using a synchronic approach that he calls ‘narrative-geographical analysis’ (p. 30), Beck argues that the ‘manipu-lation’ of dew in 6.36-40 ‘would be a powerful way for the real deity to stand up and be counted since both Baal and the Lord had claimed the right to provide this moisture so critical to survival in the land…’ (p. 38). Derby focuses on Gideon’s two names, suggesting that the two names resulted from the uncom-fortable fact that Gideon’s birth name was Jerubbaal, leading the embarrassed author of Judges to devise ‘the name Gideon to be used only in telling this story and nowhere else in the Bible’ (2003: 184). Murphy (2014) explores the strange presence of the ‘sword’ in the battle scene found in Judg. 7.16-22, arguing that it is a later addition to an earlier battle account that featured only jars, torches and horns.

Others concentrate on evaluating Gideon—both on his own and in light of his sons’ actions. Haddox (2010) examines Gideon’s actions in light of ancient Israelite concepts about masculinity, noting that from a final form perspective, the more ‘manly’ Gideon acts, the more he disobeys Yhwh. Scherer argues against Bluedorn’s (2001) suggestion that Gideon was selfish, instead illustrat-ing how ‘Gideon is honestly longing for guidance. He needs to be assured of his divine mission, without denying Yhwh’s sovereignty’ (2005b: 272). Angel traces out the conflicting ideas concerning monarchy in the Gideon narrative through Jotham and Abimelech, writing, ‘Jotham represents one aspect of Gideon—the pure, religious, anti-monarchy leader who defended his nation and encouraged the people to serve God… Abimelech, in contrast, inherited Gideon’s desire for power…’ (2006: 164). Both Shalom-Guy (2011) and Wong (2006b) examine the similarities between the stories of Moses and Gideon; Shalom-Guy concludes that the Gideon narrative knew and used the call narrative of Moses, while Wong


notes that although the text might be setting Gideon up to be seen as a ‘new Moses’, Gideon ultimately fails.

A number of other studies focus in particular on Judges 9 and the figures of Jotham and/or Abimelech. Oeste (2011) uses a multi-disciplinary approach (narrative analysis, rhetorical analysis and social scientific analysis) to read and analyze Judges 9: is it ultimately pro-monarchy or anti-monarchy? He concludes that though Abimelech’s role is not considered legitimate, the overarching les-son of the book is one in favor of centralized monarchy. Janzen unravels the puzzle of Jotham’s fable, suggesting that there is a key to unlocking it: ‘once we see Gideon and his house as the אטד (‘bramble, thornbush’), Jotham’s fable fits both its context and the way that Jotham tries to apply it to this context through his moral’ (2012: 475). Others attempt to make sense of the presence of the Abimelech narrative in the book of Judges, especially vis-à-vis attitudes toward monarchy and kingship. According to Irwin, ‘Standing at the center of the book of Judges, the Abimelech narrative disposes of the idea that there might be a royal alternative to the leadership of the Davidic dynasty. The northern monar-chy initiated by Jeroboam I was a model for ruin, not peace and stability’ (2012: 453). Other studies on Jotham, Abimelech and/or Judges 8 are many, including Bar Mymon (2013), Farber (2013), Na’aman (2011) and Heffelfinger (2009).

Vows and Violence: Jephthah and Jephthah’s Daughter

Recent research on Judg. 10.6–12.7 focuses primarily on the (in)famous story of Jephthah’s vow and the resulting sacrifice of Jephthah’s unnamed daughter, though monographs by Mobley (2005) and Assis (2005) both devote chapters to analyzing the broader narrative concerning Jephthah. Additionally, an article by Bloch-Smith (2015) examines the story of Jephthah and the Ammonites in 11.12-33 by surveying the archaeological evidence. Otherwise, research on the story of the vow and sacrifice has tended to coalesce around four main topics: (1) how to understand the vow/sacrifice in light of literary connections with other texts and legends (biblical and extra-biblical); (2) why the story of the sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter might have been included in the book of Judges; (3) how to use such a text; and (4) the reception history of the narrative (see below).

A number of studies focus on how to understand and read the vow/sacrifice in light of literary connections with other texts. For example, Monroe reads Judges 11, Judges 19 and Numbers 25 together ‘to explore the sacrificial dynamics at work in each text’ (2013: 33), arguing that these three narratives ‘point to the idea that at least within the parameters of narrative, the most readily imaginable form of human sacrifice was that of a woman, whose life and body constituted accept-able offerings to Yhwh’ (p. 52). For Monroe, ‘the willing, female martyr, a well-attested trope in Christian and Greek texts of the Hellenistic period, was already being engaged by an array of Israelite scribes in the process of narrativizing


emergent Jewish identity’ (p. 33). Beavis (2010) also explores the relationship between the story of Jephthah’s daughter and other biblical texts—in particular, the story of the raising of Jarius’s daughter in Mk 5.21-24, 35-43 (and paral-lels in Lk. 8.40-42, 49-56; Mt. 9.18-19, 23-26). Beavis notes that the stories of Jepthath’s daughter and the story of Jairus’s daughter share a number of fea-tures, including a unique focus on a father and a valued daughter whose death looms near, two fathers who are military leaders, and similarity in language, incidents and plot between the lxx of Judg. 11.34-40 and the narrative in Mark (p. 62). In short, ‘the story of Jairus’ daughter is…an example of a transvalu-ative hypertext that both articulates values different from its hypotext (Judg. 11.34-40) and replaces the values of the source text with its own’ (p. 62). In a 2004 article, Beavis compares Jephthah’s daughter and the Greek heroine Iphegenia, who, like Jephthah’s daughter, is a virgin sacrificed by her father for ‘the public good’, and who, like the unnamed daughter of Judges 11, is also the recipient of ‘ceremonial recognition’ (p. 20). Beavis traces the similarities between Greek sacrificial virgins and the story of Jephthah’s daughter and sug-gests that the story might be ‘the foundation legend of a heroine cult’ (p. 23). If this is the case—and devotees of the cult returned each year to the place associ-ated with the daughter’s death—Beavis wonders, ‘Perhaps the celebrants saw the story of the Daughter…as an affirmation that women could play an impor-tant, even decisive, role in the life of the nation, and in the warfare that was so much a part of their lives’ (p. 25).

Continuing earlier discussions in biblical studies, a number of scholars reflect, in various ways, on why the story of Jephthah’s vow and the sacrifice of his daughter are included in the book of Judges in the first place and how it should be evaluated accordingly. Janzen (2005) (in partial response to Römer’s 1998 article, ‘Why Would the Deuteronomists Tell about the Sacrifice of Jephthah’s Daughter?’) argues against the idea that the story was a later Hellenistic inser-tion influenced by the story of Iphegenia and inserted into an earlier tradition about the so-called judge Jephthah. Instead, Janzen suggests that the story of Jephthah’s daughter fits into the overarching Deuteronomistic theology/ideol-ogy: ‘the Deuteronomist tells the story of the sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter to show, yet again, that foreign sacrifice and foreign morality accompany each other for Israel’ (p. 354). The story is yet ‘one more step in the decline of Israel in Judges’ (p. 355). Like Janzen, Smith (2005a) also sees Jephthah as a failure: ‘If the judges are pictures of Israel at the time, then Jephthah pictures the self-destruction of the nation, from the family level on up’ (pp. 297-98). For Smith, the themes of marriage and family need to be examined, and the story of Jephthah functions to illustrate how ‘what happened in his own family in the episode with his daughter reflects what happened in the larger family of the nation at the end of the story’ (p. 298). In contrast to Janzen and Smith’s negative reading of Jephthah, particularly vis-à-vis the fulfillment of the sacrifice, Logan focuses on


how an ancient audience would not have missed the ways that the narrator por-trays Jephthah positively, including that they ‘would not have missed Jephthah’s David-like portrayal, the empathetic comparison to Abraham, or the reference to rk( /Achor’ (2009: 683). Logan argues, ‘Whether we moderns agree or disagree with what Jephthah did, the author told the ancient audience that Jephthah was trapped—by Western Semitic custom, by Israelite war vow tradition, by Priestly votive law, and by the strict law of herem. Jephthah and his daughter should be remembered, he contends, because they performed as custom demanded of its royals despite the enormous personal cost’ (p. 683).

A third trajectory in research on Judges 11, and, again, particularly on the vow and sacrifice, asks ‘What do we do with this story now that we have it?’ Robinson argues that Jephthah is an anti-hero, yet the story remains pertinent for contemporary readers: it reminds readers that ‘God uses human beings not only when they are being faithful and dutiful, but also when they are deficient and sinful’ and it is also a ‘dire warning against rash oath making’ (2004: 347). Milne (2013) focuses on the role of Judges 11 in her own career, particularly as it relates to marginalization. She conducted a research project related to whether feminist biblical studies is transformational or not; the project was ‘a feminist qualitative study of how ordinary readers construct meaning when they read the story in Judges 11’ (p. 213). At the conclusion, Milne noted the disappointing results of the study: ‘There was no awareness of any feminist studies of this text in the response of any of the readers. Nor was there any evidence to suggest a conscious application of a feminist critique of patriarchal social structures or gender ideology. None of the readers made gender a central category in their interpretation of the story’ (p. 231). For Milne, the case study of Judges 11 illus-trates how if feminist methodology ‘is to have a transformational effect on the way the biblical tradition influences the lives of women and if it is to play a role in building a truly equitable society, it appears we will have to work harder to take our research out of the academy and into the streets’ (p. 232). In another example, Bruner notes of Judges 11, ‘Although this text is multivalent, a better reading does not find a foolish vow, an evil father, a saucy daughter, or a dys-functional family at the root of this tragedy. Instead, a community with a flawed character is the primary cause’ (2011: 82). For Bruner, the portrayal of a flawed community is a call to hospitality for present-day readers, particularly for chil-dren who might need help in contemporary communities (pp. 93-95).

Finally, a plethora of studies related to Judges 11 and the reception history of the text have appeared in recent years. These will be explored in more detail below.

Hero or Bumbling Buffoon?: Samson

The story of Samson, long a favorite in both academic study and in popular culture, continues to be investigated from a number of angles. Several studies


focus on the figure of Samson and his story overall, including Mobley’s (2006) monograph Samson and the Liminal Hero in the Ancient Near East. Mobley traces how liminality functions in the Samson narrative, particularly in the ways that Samson moves across the boundaries of field and house, agitation and rest, and male and female domains (2006: 37-108). Other monographs on Samson include Galpaz-Feller (2006b) and Eynikel (2014). Outside of book-length studies, scholars explore how best to understand Samson, who has been portrayed over the years as both hero and tragically flawed, as both intelligent and comically dumb, and as both willing and forced into his ambiguous status as a nazirite. For example, Chisholm asks, ‘Who was Samson’s father and when was Samson conceived? What was Samson’s understanding of his role in life? What was the nature of Samson’s Nazirite calling?’ (2009a: 147). He argues against angelic impregnation for Samson’s mother, though ‘the narrator does exploit the idiomatic expression “come to” to emphasize that God was the one who enabled Samson’s mother to conceive’ (p. 162). He also argues that the text gives no indication that Samson ‘understood himself to be Israel’s deliverer’ (p. 162), and that it is largely unclear whether or not Samson broke the Nazirite rules (or even which ones applied to him in the first place) (p. 162). For Mbuvi, reading the Samson narrative means understanding how ‘the theopolitical takes center stage’ in the book of Judges, and that ‘Samson lives out this military and ideological struggle in his very person’ (2012: 389-90). The figure of Samson is one of both judge and ‘embodiment of Israel’—he both leads Israel and rep-resents the nation. Mbuvi writes, ‘By dramatizing Israel’s ambivalence toward Yhwh and conflicting attitudes toward the inhabitants of the land, the Samson story manages to probe more deeply into the complexities of the situation and present a more nuanced and powerful picture than the summary of the book’ (p. 405). Wilson also explores the character of Samson, applying Mobley’s ideas of liminality to yet another aspect of the Samson story; namely, ‘Among the many borders that Samson is unable to cross permanently is that separating boyhood and manhood. Samson, in other words, is a perpetual man-child’ (2014: 44). Like Mbuvi, Wilson sees Samson as an embodiment of Israel, noting ‘Just as Samson the man-child is unable to become a man once and for all, Israel in Judges also is caught in a cycle that prevents its religious and political maturation’ (p. 60).

In contrast to many of the readings above, which see Samson as tragically flawed if not outright ‘stupid or loutish’, Herzberg blames an ‘unreliable nar-rator’ for Samson’s seemingly negative portrayal (2010: 227). In particular, Herzberg focuses on how and why Samson finally acquiesced to Delilah’s demands to know his secret, asking, ‘How would we explain Samson’s action if we were not told it was caused by nagging?’ (p. 227). For Herzberg, Samson is a complicated and intelligent character (a poet, a trickster and a hero). Like other readers, Herzberg wonders whether Samson was bound to follow all the nazirite restrictions—and raises ‘the question of how Samson feels about his status as


nazirite from birth’ (p. 230). Samson reveals his secret to Delilah in order ‘to test, or end, restrictions that have become unbearable’ (p. 248)—to find out if his strength is his own or only God’s. A similar question stands behind Schipper’s article, ‘What was Samson Thinking in Judges 16,17 and 16,20?’ (2011). These two verses appear to contradict one another (did Samson tell Delilah his ‘whole heart’ or not?), and Schipper explains this problem by postulating that Samson wanted to give up his strength, which Schipper sees as coming with a ‘significant downside’—namely, the inability to sleep peacefully (p. 63).

Several other articles on Samson also focus exclusively on certain passages or verses, including Schipper’s (2003) examination of the riddle in 14.14, 18, Paul (2008, 2010) on Judg. 14.18 and 16.16-17, Strawn (2009) on 14.5, and Halton (2009) on the pun in 16.25-27.

Unsurprisingly, Delilah—the infamous ‘nagger’ of Judges 16—has also con-tinued to fascinate readers of Judges. In addition to several reception history studies (see below), Delilah is the focus of a cross-cultural narrative reading by Victor (2013). Victor understands Delilah as a ‘forgotten hero’ (p. 250); namely, a forgotten Philistine hero. Delilah’s status as forgotten hero is compared with a story found in the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, both Indian epics written in Sanskrit (pp. 250-51). Both ‘narrate a story of an unnamed woman who is prepared to sacrifice her life for the welfare of her country’. Victor concludes, ‘Just like Delilah the Philistine, the unnamed courtesan of the Indian epics who risked her life for the well-being of her country and people was forgotten for generations’ (p. 253).

Characters and Cults: Judges 17–18

Though Judges 17–18 often does not receive as much scholarly attention as other parts of the book of Judges, recent research has included some focus on these two chapters. In particular, the neglected figures of the Levite and Micah’s mother have received more attention, and various historical and archaeological examinations of the possible origins of the cult site have also been proffered. Szpek (2007a) focuses on the figure of Micah’s mother, whose role ‘is not mar-ginal, peripheral or incidental to the narrative, rather her actions contribute to a negative impression of the “mother-son” relationship and of the cultus in the book of Judges, as well as foreshadow future perspectives on the introduction of idolatry in the Deuteronomic history’ (2007a: n.p.). Moster (2014) looks at the Levite from Judges 17–19 from a literary standpoint, particularly how the Levite is characterized. Despite that the Levite is unnamed, Moster argues that he is ‘a character with a number of well-developed traits’ (p. 736) who changes over time (p. 737).

In addition to character studies, others have focused on what we might know about the historical realties behind Judges 17–18. For example, Bray examines


these chapters with a focus on recovering historical information on the sanctuary, concluding, ‘The Danite story may be seen as a crystallization of the historical process by which the Levites became priests’ (2006: 150). Cox and Ackerman ‘find in Judges 18 an aggressive account of the Danites’ efforts to conquer a נחלה that was not theirs and to which, according to the logic of the text, they had little grant’ (2012: 35). Why steal Micah’s teraphim? Even if fraudulent, they ‘were something the Danite clans, in order to lay claim to new land in Laish, would feel the need to possess’ (p. 36). Faraone, Garnand and López-Ruiz (2005) also focus on Micah’s mother, in particular on the curse she utters, its similarities with a Punic curse from Carthage, and their similarities with Greek and Latin curses against thieves. They postulate, ‘it should be clear that the parallels between the Canaanite and Greco-Roman curses are compelling, and the evidence of titula-ture points to Canaanite influence, even if future evidence or argument should compel us to abandon the relative chronologies of the texts presented here’ (p. 186).

There Was No King in Israel: Judges 19–21

Scholars continue to question the best way to read and make sense of the final chapters of the book of Judges, both in terms of their literary development and the sheer amount of violence found in them. This is perhaps best described by the title of Eynikel’s 2005 article ‘Judges 19–21, an “Appendix”: Rape, Murder, War, and Abduction’. Edenburg’s (2016) Dismembering the Whole: Composition and Purpose of Judges 19–21 is a monograph-length treatment of these chapters, which argues for understanding these passages as Babylonian and Persian politi-cal polemic. Additionally, many recent articles on the final three chapters of the book have focused on how these difficult texts might be read and used in light of newer methodological approaches, with most studies focusing on the story of the unnamed woman from Judges 19. For example, Szpek (2007b: n.p.) surveys the narrative structure and vocabulary of Judges 19 with an eye toward Amit’s (2004b) postexilic dating of the text, identifying a number of biblical allusions that connect the story with others from Genesis, Joshua and Judges. Szpek looks back to the composition of Judges 19 as a postexilic tale crafted as a ‘horrific and effective metaphor of warning’ and not a ‘historical text of terror’.

Two essays in Brenner and Yee’s (2013) edited volume Joshua and Judges also wrestle with the difficult text of Judges 19. First, Embry (2013) explores how the text is largely ignored in his own confessional and institutional setting, ‘a Christian liberal arts University associated with a Pentecostal-Holiness tradi-tion from North America, the Assemblies of God (AG)’ (p. 257). Noting how by ignoring difficult texts such as Judges 19 ‘the community creates (is creating) a “canon with a canon”’, Embry traces out the ‘potential effects of effacing this story for a contemporary, covenantal community’ (p. 267). This includes creating


a ‘disabled narrative—that is, one in which the entire narrative is no longer func-tioning’ (p. 268), and thereby eliminating ‘an important method of reflection on its own potential and capacity for evil’ (p. 268). Moreover, Embry notes that by creating such a ‘canon within a canon’, particularly in the case of Judges 19, it is noteworthy that the ignored text is one that ‘narrates the abuse of the female figure, and argues clearly that this is a problem’ (p. 269). Part of the lesson of Judges, Embry notes, is that ‘women should not be marginalized’ and that ‘when they are abused, this abuse becomes a signal of the abominable state of affairs of society’ (p. 270). For Embry, ‘Judges 19 therefore functions as a warning that this type of behavior is possible within the covenantal community’ (p. 270); after all, ‘When a community loses, or forces out, this possibility through effacing this story in practice, either intentionally or unintentionally, does it run the risk of finding itself in Gibeah of Benjamin, hearing knocking on the door or, worse yet, knocking on the door itself?’ (p. 271). In the same volume, Stanley (2013) reads Judges 19 through a ‘psychological lens’ (p. 275), especially by focusing on the way that the text embodies trauma. Using narrative psychology (‘how humans deal with experiences through the construction and telling of stories’ [p. 280]), Stanley examines the use of distortion, dissociation and repetition in ch. 19 as clues that this is ‘traumatic narrative’ (p. 283), and especially then how in telling traumatic stories, healing can occur (pp. 288-89). After all, the chapter ends, as Stanley notes, with a warning, ‘Consider it, take counsel, and speak out’—this is a ‘call here for a communal response to trauma’ (pp. 288-89) and a text that ‘recognizes the power of constructing a traumatic narrative’ (p. 289).

Other Issues

Again, time and space fail to allow sufficient description of the many areas of research involving the book of Judges, so a few examples must suffice. A num-ber of recent articles focus on the question of 4QJudga or the Judges scrolls from Qumran more broadly, including M.S. Smith (2016), Ausloos (2014), Müller, Pakkala and Haar Romeny (2014), and Rezetko (2013). Questions about the rela-tionship between the book of Judges and the larger so-called ‘Deuteronomistic History’ continue to abound (Ausloos 2008), as do questions regarding the period during which the book of Judges was edited (Amit 2009, 2014; Gillmayr-Bucher 2014). Levine (2009) and Murphy (2015) both explore the question of the ‘spirit of Yhwh’ in the book of Judges. A number of scholars have investi-gated what role the ‘minor judges’ play in the overall narrative, including Nelson (2007a) and Scherer (2007). The question of monarchy and kingship is also a topic of continued significance, as seen in Niditch (2009) and Olson (2004), as are readings concerned with narrative features in the book (e.g., endings in Amit 2004b, intertextuality in Shalom-Guy 2010b). Moreover, scholars are reinvigorating work on Judges continuing to bring new or largely neglected methodologies to the


interpretive table. For example, affect theory (Cottrill 2014) and postcolonial theory (Bonfiglio 2013; Davidson 2013; McKinlay 2009; Miles 2008), as well as cultural and ethnic readings (Victor 2013; Yee 2013; Gunn 2007; Cooper 2003). Finally, and in particular, two avenues of research on the book of Judges merit special attention: gender studies and reception history.

New and/or Expanding Areas of Research on the Book of Judges

Gender Studies

Feminist studies of the book of Judges had long been underway when Craig completed his 2003 article, and Craig highlights their increasing prominence and importance for understanding the book of Judges. Since then, however, approaches to the book of Judges increasingly include gender studies more broadly. A few examples will illustrate the contours of this area of research. For example, Stone offers two gender readings of Judges (2009a, 2009b). In his queer reading of the Achsah story, he explores how ‘the relations between reading and gender are more complex, unstable, and perhaps even “queer,” than accounts of biblical interpretation often allow’ (2009b: 410). Other gen-dered readings include Guest’s (2011) lesbian reading of the story of Jael, and Derks’s (2015) use of queer theory to examine the Samson narrative. These and other gendered readings offer critical insights into how we as readers approach the texts of Judges. Additionally, a number of studies also examine the por-trayal of masculinity in the book of Judges, including Haddox (2010), Bar Mymon (2013), Murphy (2015, forthcoming), and Wilson (2014, 2015). Such readings serve as significant reminders that the male figures of Judges were shaped by the gender norms and gendered expectations of both the periods in which Judges was composed and/or edited and by the different interpretative communities that used the text throughout history. Furthermore, Schroeder’s Deborah’s Daughters: Gender Politics and Biblical Interpretation (2014) is an excellent example of how scholarship on Judges now often combines a variety of approaches. Her work explores the ‘disruptive potential’ of Judges 4–5 (p. 3), and in it she traces the way that Deborah has been understood and used in gender debates throughout the centuries, from early Judaism and Christianity to the Middle Ages, the early nineteenth century, and the contemporary world. The question of whether Deborah offers precedent for women as leaders (in a variety of capacities) echoes throughout each period that Schroeder examines, and she writes, ‘yet the persistence of similar questions speaks not only to the enduring nature of gender debates through the millennia, but also the power of a biblical character to capture the imaginations of generations of readers’ (p. 258).


Reception History

As Schroeder’s work nicely demonstrates, one of the most exciting and expand-ing areas of Judges research is found in the development of commentaries, mon-ographs and articles that include and/or focus on the reception history of the texts and on the power of these texts to continue to capture imaginations across time and contexts. Several recent commentaries focus on the reception history of the texts, including Gunn’s Judges (2005), sections of Sasson’s commentary (2014), and portions of Gross’s monumental Richter (2009). In a series of arti-cles, Begg (2004, 2006a, 2006b, 2006c, 2007a, 2007b, 2007c, 2008) examines the way that Josephus used the book of Judges, editing and modifying as needed. Other articles focus exclusively on rabbinic interpretations of various stories from the book of Judges. For example, Aranoff (2013: 80) examines how various Talmudic passages, the Zohar, and Rashi’s commentary on Judges connect the otherwise seemingly unrelated story of the idol of Micah and the story of Gibeah by claiming that the defeat of the Israelites in the battle against the Benjaminites in Judges 20 is a result of their acceptance of Micah’s idol. Jephthah’s daughter is the focus of many reception histories, from how she was perceived in Judaism during the medieval period (Baumgarten 2007) to how she appears in monastic accounts from the same time (Berman 2005). The stories surrounding Samson are likewise popular, with studies tracing how he shows up in children’s toys (Murphy 2015), in movies (Kozlovic 2006, 2010), and in children’s cartoons (Gunn 2012). These studies are important on several levels, not least of which is that they often serve to connect somewhat obscure biblical scholarship to larger societal ideas about/uses of the Bible. Moreover, many reception criti-cal studies—like Schroeder’s (2014) monograph on Deborah—unite diverse approaches to the text (historical, reception history and gender studies) in a way that opens the world and stories of Judges up to new and innovative questions.

Conclusions

From the sometimes comical stories of Ehud and Eglon to the troubling narra-tives of Jephthah’s daughter or the Levite’s concubine, scholarship on the book of Judges flourishes, and approaches to the book of Judges continue to vary. Traditional questions about how to date the text, what we might be able to dis-cern about the world of pre-monarchic Israel from these stories, and what we might know about the authors and/or editors who shaped them remain prevalent avenues of research, but new, innovative and exemplary approaches and ques-tions about the texts are also being utilized and asked. The previous pages do not do justice to the range of methods that scholars use to wrestle with the texts of Judges, and there is no doubt that in the future scholars will continue to lament,


‘For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah…’ (Heb. 11.32). Doubtless, though, future readers and interpreters will insist on unraveling not only the stories of the famous men of Judges, but also the stories of Deborah and Delilah, the other unnamed men and women of the book that have been too often ignored, and the voluminous ways all of these narratives have been under-stood and interpreted throughout the many afterlives of the book of Judges.

Bibliography

Ackerman, S. 2009 Warrior, Dancer, Seductress, Queen: Women in Judges and Biblical Israel

(New Haven, CT: Yale University Press).Alter, R. 2013 Ancient Israel: The Former Prophets: Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings: A

Translation with Commentary (New York: W.W. Norton).Amit, Y. 2004a ‘’Ani Delilah: Korban shel parshanut’, Bet Mikra 178: 1-18. 2004b ‘Endings—Especially Reversal Endings’, Scriptura 87: 213-26. 2009. ‘The Book of Judges: Dating and Meaning’, in Gershon Galil, Mark Geller

and Alan Millard (eds.), Homeland and Exile: Biblical and Ancient Near East-ern Studies in Honour of Bustenay Oded (VTSup, 130; Leiden: Brill) 297-322.

2014 ‘Who was Interested in the Book of Judges in the Persian-Hellenistic Peri-ods?’, in Diana V. Edelman (ed.), Deuteronomy—Kings as Emerging Autho-rative Books: A Conversation (Society of Biblical Literature Ancient Near East Monographs, 6; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 103-14.

Angel, H. 2006 ‘The Positive and Negative Traits of Gideon: As Reflected in His Sons

Jotham and Abimelech’, JBQ 34.3: 159-67.Ao, I. 2013 ‘Dehumanization of the Woman in Judges 19: Through the Eyes of an Indian

Woman’, Religion and Society 58.1-2: 1-18.Aranoff, G. 2013 ‘The Connection between the Idol of Micah and the Concubine at Gibeah: A

Rabbinic View’, JBQ 41.2: 78-80.Assis, E. 2004a ‘The Choice to Serve God and Assist His People: Rahab and Yael’, Bib 85.1:

82-90. 2004b ‘“The Hand of a Woman”: Deborah and Yael (Judges 4)’, JHS 5: 1-12. 2005 Self-Interest or Communal Interest: An Ideology of Leadership in the Gideon,

Abimelech, and Jephthah Narratives (Judg. 6–12) (VTSup, 106; Boston: Brill).

2006 ‘Man, Woman, and God in Judg 4’, SJOT 20.1: 110-24.Ausloos, H. 2008 ‘The “Angel of YHWH” in Exod. xxiii 20–33 and Judg. ii 1–5: A Clue to the

“Deuteronom(ist)ic” Puzzle?’, VT 58.1: 1-12. 2014 ‘Literary Criticism and Textual Criticism in Judg 6:1–14 in Light of

4QJudg[a]’, OTE 27.2: 358-76.


Avioz, M. 2007 ‘The Role and Significance of Jebus in Judges 19’, BZ 51.2: 249-56.Bakon, S. 2006 ‘Deborah: Judge, Prophetess and Poet’, JBQ 34.2: 110-18.Bar, S. 2010 ‘The Oak of Weeping’, Bib 91.2: 269-74.Bar Mymon, M. 2013 ‘This Season You’ll Be Wearing God: On the Manning of Israel and the

Undressing of the Israelites (Judges 6:1-8:32)’, in Brenner and Yee (eds.) 2013: 191-208.

Basser, H.W. 2005 ‘History of Interpretation of Judges 5:4–5 with Special Attention to Rabbi

Yosef Kara’, Revue des études juives 164.1-2: 9-32.Bauks, M. 2006 ‘La fille sans nom, la fille de Jephté’, Études théologiques et religieuses 81.1:

81-93. 2007 ‘The Theological Implications of Child Sacrifice in and beyond the Bibli-

cal Context in Relation to Genesis 22 and Judges 11’, in K. Finsterbusch, A.L. Lange, K.F. Diethard Romheld and L. Lazar (eds.), Human Sacrifice in Jewish and Christian Tradition (Numen Books: Studies in the History of Religions; Leiden: Brill) 65-86.

2010 ‘Überlegungen zum historischen Ort von Ri 11,29–40: Ein Appendix anthol-ogischen Charakters jenseits deuteronomistischen Geschichtsdenkens?’, in Peter Mommer and Andreas Scherer (eds.), Geschichte Israels und deuteron-omistisches Geschichtsdenken: Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag von Winfried Thiel (Münster: Ugarit) 22-42.

2011 ‘Jephtas Gelübde und die Unabwendbarkeit seiner Einlösung’, in K. de Troyer and A. Lange (eds.), Qumran Legal Texts between the Hebrew Bible and Its Interpretation (Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology, 61; Leuven: Peeters) 27-40.

Baumgarten, E. 2007 ‘“Remember That Glorious Girl”: Jephthah’s Daughter in Medieval Jewish

Culture’, JQR 97.2: 180-209.Beavis, M.A. 2004 ‘A Daughter in Israel: Celebrating Bat Jephthah (Judg. 11:39d–40)’, FT 13.1:

11-25. 2010 ‘The Resurrection of Jephthah’s Daughter: Judges 11:34–40 and Mark 5:21–

24, 35–43’, CBQ 72.1: 46-62.Beck, J.A. 2008 ‘Gideon, Dew, and the Narrative-Geographical Shaping of Judges 6:33–40’,

BS 165.657: 28-38.Begg, C.T. 2004 ‘The Overture to the Period of the Judges According to Josephus’, Liber Ann-

uus 54: 235-54. 2006a ‘The End of Samson According to Josephus as Compared with the Bible,

Pseudo-Philo and Rabbinic Tradition’, Biblische Notizen 131: 47-61. 2006b ‘Israel’s First Judge According to Josephus’, Nederlands Theologisch Tijd-

schrift 60.4: 329-36.


2006c ‘The Josephan Judge Jephthah’, SJOT 20.2: 161-88. 2007a ‘The Minor Judges According to Josephus in Comparison with the Bible,

Pseudo-Philo and the “Samaritan Chronicle No. II”’, Biblische Notizen 133: 9-22.

2007b ‘Samson’s Birth Narrative According to Josephus’, Jian Dao 28: 1-32. 2007c ‘Samson’s Initial Exploits According to Josephus’, Liber Annuus 57: 317-41. 2008 ‘The Denouement of the Story of Gideon According to Josephus’, Antonia-

num 83.1: 9-23.Berman, J. 2005 ‘Medieval Monasticism and the Evolution of Jewish Interpretation to the

Story of Jephthah’s Daughter’, JQR 95.2: 228-56. 2015 ‘The Legal Blend in Biblical Narrative (Joshua 20:1–9, Judges 6:25–31, 1

Samuel 15:2, 28:3–25, 2 Kings 4:1–7, Jeremiah 34:12–17, Nehemiah 5:1–12)’, JBL 134.1: 105-25.

Biddle, M.E. 2012 Reading Judges: A Literary and Theological Commentary (Macon, GA:

Smyth & Helwys).Bloch-Smith, E. 2015 ‘A Stratified Account of Jephthah’s Negotiations and Battle: Judges 11:12–

33 from an Archaeological Perspective’, JBL 134.2: 291-311.Bluedorn, W. 2001 Yahweh versus Baalism: A Theological Reading of the Gideon-Abimelech

Narrative (JSOTSup, 329; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press).Blyth, C. 2014 ‘When Raymond Met Delilah’, Relegere 4.1: 41-63.Bonfiglio, R. 2013 ‘Choosing Sides in Judges 4–5: Rethinking Representations of Jael’, in

Brenner and Yee (eds.) 2013: 161-74.Bookholane, L. 2010a ‘History, Text, and Hermeneutics: A Black Theology Appraisal of Judges

12:1–6. Translations into African Languages’, Scriptura (Online) 105: 481-93.

2010b ‘Reading Judges 12:2 in Dialogue with Maimela’, Studia Historiae Ecclesi-asticae 36: 115-25.

Bosworth, D.A. 2011 ‘David, Jether, and Child Soldiers’, JSOT 36.2: 185-97.Bray, J.S. 2006 Sacred Dan: Religious Tradition and Cultic Practice in Judges 17–18

(LHBOTS, 449; New York: T&T Clark).Brenner, A. 2013 ‘Women Frame the Book of Judges—How and Why?’, in Brenner and Yee

(eds.) 2013: 125-38.Brenner, A., and G.A. Yee 2013 Joshua and Judges (Texts @ Contexts; Minneapolis: Fortress Press).Brison, O. 2013 ‘Jael, ‘eshet heber the Kenite: A Diviner?’, in Brenner and Yee (eds.) 2013:

139-60.


Bruner, R. 2011 ‘Weeping in the Hills: Hearing Children Dwelling as Outsiders among Us’,

RQ 53.2: 81-95.Butler, Trent C. 2009 Judges (WBC, 8; Nashville: Thomas Nelson).Campbell, A.F. 2008 Judges: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox).Caroselli, S.B. 2009 ‘The Dissemination of Jephthah’s Daughter’, in Peter S. Hawkins and

Lesleigh Cushing Stahlberg (eds.), From the Margins 1: Women of the Hebrew Bible and their Afterlives (Bible in the Modern World, 18; Sheffield: Sheffield University Press) 86-101.

Castelbajac, I. de. 2007 ‘Le cycle de Gédéon ou la condamnation de refus de la royauté’, VT 57.2:

145-61.Cheon, S. 2003 ‘Reconsidering Jephthah’s Story in Asian Perspective’, Journal of Asian and

Asian American Theology 6: 30-45.Chisholm, R.B. Jr. 2009a ‘Identity Crisis: Assessing Samson’s Birth and Career’, BS 166.662: 147-62. 2009b ‘What’s Wrong with This Picture? Stylistic Variation as a Rhetorical Tech-

nique in Judges’, JSOT 34.2: 171-82. 2010a ‘A Note on Judges 13:20–21: Sorting Out the Syntax’, JBQ 38.1: 10-12. 2010b ‘What Went On in Jael’s Tent? The Collocation of תכסהו בשמיכהו in Judges 4,

18’, SJOT 24.1: 143-44. 2011 ‘Ehud: Assessing an Assassin’, BS 168.671: 274-82. 2013a A Commentary on Judges and Ruth (Grand Rapids: Kregel). 2013b ‘What Went On in Jael’s Tent? (Part Two)’, SJOT 27.2: 216-18.Christianson, E.S. 2003 ‘A Fistful of Shekels: Scrutinizing Ehud’s Entertaining Violence (Judges

3:12–30)’, BI 11.1: 53-78. 2008 ‘The Big Sleep: Strategic Ambiguity in Judges 4–5 and in Classic Film Noir’,

in David Shepherd (ed.), Images of the Word: Hollywood’s Bible and Beyond (SemeiaSt, 54; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 39-60.

Collenberg, I., and A. Giercke 2007 ‘Die Erzählkonzepte der Jiftacherzählung Ri 10,6–12,7’, Biblische Notizen

135: 11-34.Conway, C.M. 2013 ‘The Malleability of Jael in the Dutch Renaissance’, BR 2: 36-56.Cooper, V.C. 2003 ‘Some Place to Cry: Jephthah’s Daughter and the Double Dilemma of Black

Women in America’, in Cheryl Kirk-Duggan (ed.), Pregnant Passion: Gen-der, Sex, and Violence in the Bible (SemeiaSt, 44; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 181-91.

Cottrill, A.C. 2014 ‘A Reading of Ehud and Jael through the Lens of Affect Theory’, BI 22.4-5:

430-49.


Cox, B.D., and S. Ackerman 2012 ‘Micah’s Teraphim’, JHS 12: 1-37.Craig, K. 2003 ‘Judges in Recent Research’, CBR 1.2: 159-85.Cross, F.M. 1973 Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge: Harvard University Press). 1988 ‘Reuben: First Born of Jacob’, ZAW 100: 46-65.Crowell, B.L. 2013 ‘Good Girl, Bad Girl: Foreign Women of the Deuteronomistic History in

Postcolonial Perspective’, BI 21.1: 1-18.Davidson, E.T.A. 2008 Intricacy, Design, and Cunning in the Book of Judges (Philadelphia: Xlibris).Davidson, S.V. 2013 ‘Gazing (at) Native Women: Rahab and Jael in Imperializing and Postco-

lonial Discourses’, in Roland Boer (ed.), Postcolonialism and the Hebrew Bible: The Next Step (SemeiaSt, 70; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 69-92.

DeMaris, R.E., and C.S. Leeb 2006 ‘Judges—(Dis)honor and Ritual Enactment: The Jephthah Story: Judges

10:16–12:1’, in Philip Francis Esler (ed.), Ancient Israel: The Old Testament in its Social Context (Minneapolis: Fortress Press) 177-90.

Derby, J. 2003 ‘Gideon or Jerubaal’, JBQ 31.3: 181-85.Derks, M. 2015 ‘“If I Be Shaven, Then My Strength Will Go from Me”: A Queer Reading of

the Samson Narrative’, BI 23.4-5: 553-73.Dietch, L. 2015 Authority and Violence in the Gideon and Abimelech Narratives: A Socio-

logical and Literary Reading of Judges 6–9 (Hebrew Bible Monographs, 75; The Bible and Social Science, 2; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press).

Doak, B.R. 2011 ‘“Some Worthless and Reckless Fellows”: Landlessness and Parasocial

Leadership in Judges’, JHS 11: 2-29.Echols, C.L. 2005 ‘The Eclipse of God in the Song of Deborah (Judges 5): The Role of Yhwh in

the Light of Heroic Poetry’, TynBul 56.2: 149-52. 2008 ‘Tell Me O Muse’: The Song of Deborah (Judges 5) in the Light of Heroic

Poetry (T&T Clark Library of Biblical Studies; LHBOTS, 487; New York: T&T Clark).

Edelburg, C. 2016 Dismembering the Whole: Composition and Purpose of Judges 19–21

(Ancient Israel and Its Literature, 24; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature Press).

Egger-Wenzel, R. 2006 ‘Jiftachs Tochter (Ri 11,29–40)—die Töchter von Schilo (Ri 21,19–25):

Ursprung und Ausführung einer kultischen Feier durch Frauen?’, Biblische Notizen 129: 5-16.


Embry, B. 2013 ‘Narrative Loss, the (Important) Role of Women, and Community in Judges

19’, in Brenner and Yee (eds.) 2013: 257-74.Endris, V. 2008 ‘Yahweh versus Baal: A Narrative-Critical Reading of the Gideon/Abimel-

ech Narrative’, JSOT 33.2: 173-95.Eshel, H. 2003 ‘A Second Fragment of XJudges’, JJS 54.1: 139-41.Eynikel, E. 2005 ‘Judges 19–21, an “Appendix”: Rape, Murder, War, and Abduction’, Com-

munio Viatorum 47.2: 101-15. 2007 ‘The Angel in Samson’s Birth Narrative: Judg 13’, in Friedrich V. Reiterer,

Pancratius C. Beentjes and Nuria Calduch-Benages (eds.), Angels: The Con-cept of Celestial Beings: Origins, Development, and Reception (Deuteroca-nonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook 2007; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter) 109-23.

2014 Samson: Hero or Fool? The Many Faces of Samson (Themes in Biblical Nar-rative, 17; Boston: Brill).

Faraone, C.A., B. Garnand and C. López-Ruiz 2005 ‘Micah’s Mother (Judg.17:1–4) and a Curse from Carthage (KAI 89):

Canaanite Precedents for Greek and Latin Curses against Thieves?’, JNES 64.3: 161-86.

Farber, Z. 2013 ‘Jerubaal, Jacob, and the Battle for Shechem: A Tradition History’, JHS 13:

n.p. http://www.jhsonline.org/Articles/article_192.pdfFeintuch, Y. 2006 ‘The Folly of Impetuous Speech: Four Biblical Incidents’, JBQ 34.1: 16-19.Fleishman, J. 2006 ‘A Daughter’s Demand and a Father’s Compliance: The Legal Background to

Achsah’s Claim and Caleb’s Agreement (Joshua 15,16–19; Judges 1,12–15)’, ZAW 118.3: 354-73.

Franke, J.R., and T.C. Oden 2005 Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1–2 Samuel (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scrip-

ture. Old Testament, 4; Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press).Fritz, V. 2006 ‘The Complex of Traditions in Judges 4 and 5 and the Religion of Pre-state

Israel’, in Aren M. Maeir and Pierre De Mazar (eds.), ‘I Will Speak the Riddles of Ancient Times’: Archaeological and Historical Studies in Honor of Amihai Mazar on the Occasion of His Sixtieth Birthday (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns) 689-98.

Frolov, S. 2008 ‘Joshua’s Double Demise (Josh xxiv 28–31: Judg ii 6–9): Making Sense of a

Repetition’, VT 58.3: 315-23. 2011 ‘How Old is the Song of Deborah?’, JSOT 36.2: 163-84. 2013a Judges (FOTL, 6b; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans). 2013b ‘Sleeping with the Enemy: Recent Scholarship on Sexuality in the Book of

Judges’, CBR 11: 308-27.


Frolov, S., and A. Frolov 2015 ‘Sisera Unfastened: On the Meaning of Judges 4:21 aβ–γ’, BN 165: 55-61.Galpaz-Feller, P. 2006a ‘“Let My Soul Die with the Philistines” (Judges 16:30)’, JSOT 30.3: 315-25. 2006b Samson: The Hero and the Man (Bern: Peter Lang).Gillmayr-Bucher, S. 2009 ‘Framework and Discourse in the Book of Judges’, JBL 128.4: 687-702. 2014 ‘Memories Laid to Rest: The Book of Judges in the Persian Period’, in Diana

V. Edelman (ed.), Deuteronomy—Kings as Emerging Authorative Books: A Conversation (Society of Biblical Literature Ancient Near East Monographs, 6; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 115-32.

Gnuse, R.K. 2007 ‘Abducted Wives: A Hellenistic Narrative in Judges 21?’, SJOT 21.2: 228-

40.Goldingay, J. 2011 Joshua, Judges and Ruth for Everyone: A Theological Commentary on the

Bible (Old Testament for Everyone; Louisville: Westminster John Knox).Grätz, S. 2010 ‘Jiftach und seine Tochter’, in Peter Mommer and Andreas Scherer (eds.),

Geschichte Israels und deuteronomistisches Geschichtsdenken. Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag von Winfried Thiel (AOAT, 380; Münster: Ugarit-Ver-lag) 119-34.

Gross, W. 2004 ‘Jiftachs Tochter’, in Frank Lother-Hossfeld and Ludger Schwiehorst-Schoen-

berg (eds.), Das Manna fällt auch heute noch: Beiträge zur Geschichte und Theologie des Alten/Ersten Testaments: Festschrift fur Erich Zenger (HBS, 44; Freiburg: Herder) 273-93.

2009 Richter (HThKAT; Freiburg: Herder). 2010a ‘Michas überfüllte Hauskapelle: Bermerkungen zu Ri 17+18’, in Theodor

Seidl, Stephanie Ernst and Maria Häusl (eds.), Kulte, Priester, Rituale: Beiträge zu Kult und Kultkritik im Alten Testament und Alten Orient: Fest-schrift fur Theodor Seidl zum 65. Geburtstag (ATSAT, 89; St Ottilien: EOS Verlag) 175-94.

2010b ‘Prophetin und Prophet im Richterbuch’, in Carmen Diller, Kristinn Ólason and Ralf Rothenbusch (eds.), Studien zu Psalmen und Propheten: Festschrift fur Hubert Irsigler (HBS, 64; Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder) 177-91.

Guest, D. 2011 ‘From Gender Reversal to Genderfuck: Reading Jael through a Lesbian

Lens’, in Teresa Hornsby and Ken Stone (eds.), Bible Trouble: Queer Read-ing at the Boundaries of Biblical Scholarship (SemeiaSt, 67; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 9-43.

Guillaume, P. 2004 Waiting for Josiah: The Judges (JSOTSup, 385; New York: T&T Clark).Gunn, D.M. 2005 Judges (Blackwell Bible Commentaries; London: Blackwell). 2007 Viewing the Sacrifice of Jephthah’s Daughter’, in Gale A. Yee (ed.), Judges

and Method: New Approaches in Biblical Studies (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2nd edn), pp. 202-236.


2012 ‘Samson’s Suicide and the Death of Three Thousand Others in Children’s Bible Stories through Two Centuries’, in Caroline Vander Stichele and Hugh S. Pyper (eds.), Text, Image, and Otherness in Children’s Bibles: What is in the Picture? (SemeiaSt, 56; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Litera-ture) 241-69.

Hackett, J. 2004 ‘Violence and Women’s Lives in the Book of Judges’, Int 58.4: 356-64.Haddox, S.E. 2010 ‘“The Lord is with You, You Mighty Warrior”: The Question of Gideon’s

Masculinity’, Proceedings 30: 70-87.Hahn, C. 2011 ‘The Understanding of the Nazirite Vow’, in Jamie A. Grant, Alison Lo and

Gordon J. Wenham (eds.), God of Faithfulness: Essays in Honour of J. Gor-don McConville on his 60th Birthday (LHBOTS, 538; T&T Clark Library of Biblical Studies; New York: T&T Clark) 46-60.

Hallo, W.W. 2004 ‘New Light on the Story of Achsah’, in John Kaltner and Louis Stulman

(eds.), Inspired Speech: Prophecy in the Ancient Near East: Essays in Honor of Herbert B. Huffmon (JSOTSup; London: T&T Clark) 330-35.

Halpern, B.1983 ‘The Resourceful Israelite Historian: The Song of Deborah and Israelite Historiogra-

phy’, HTR 76.4: 379-401.Halton, C. 2009 ‘Samson’s Last Laugh: The S/ŠHQ Pun in Judges 16:25–27’, JBL 128.1:

61-64.Hamley, I.2015 ‘What’s Wrong with “Playing the Harlot”? The Meaning of זנה in Judges 19:2’, TynBul

66.1: 41-62.Heffelfinger, K.M. 2009 ‘“My Father is King”: Chiefly Politics and the Rise and Fall of Abimelech’,

JSOT 33.3: 277-92.Helen, C.S. 2013 ‘Voicing the Silenced: A Re-reading of Judges 19’, Religion and Society

58.1-2: 97-106.Heller, R.L. 2010 ‘What is Abimelek Doing in Judges?’, in K.L. Noll (ed.), Raising Up a Faith-

ful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson (Winona Lake, IN: Eisen-brauns) 225-35.

Hentschel, G. 2009 ‘Abimelech: Two Sides of the Story (Judges 9)’, in Karoly Daniel Dobos and

Miklos Köszeghy (eds.), With Wisdom as a Robe: Qumran and Other Jewish Studies in Honour of Ida Fröhlich (Hebrew Bible Monographs, 21; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press) 41-56.

Herzberg, B. 2010 ‘Samson’s Moment of Truth’, BI 18.3: 226-50. 2013 ‘Deborah and Moses’, JSOT 38.1: 15-33.Hess, Richard S. 2004 ‘The Name Game: Dating the Book of Judges’, BAR 30.6: 38-41.


Holmstedt, R.D. 2014 ‘Analyzing זה Grammar and Reading זה Texts of Ps 68:9 and Judg 5:5’, JHS

14: n.p. http://www.jhsonline.org/Articles/article_202.pdfHoop, R. de. 2009 ‘Judges 5 Reconsidered: Which Tribes? What Land? Whose Song?’ in

Jacques van Ruiten and J. Cornelis de Vos (eds.), Land of Israel in Bible, History, and Theology: Studies in Honour of Ed Noort (VTSup, 124; Leiden: Brill) 151-66.

Hornkohl, A.D. 2009 ‘Resolving the Crux of Judges 7:5b–7: A Critique of Two Traditional

Approaches and the Reproposal of a Third’, HS 50: 67-84.Houtman, C. 2003 ‘Die Bewertung eines Menschenopfers: die Geschichte von Jefta und seiner

Tochter in früher Auslegung’, BN 117: 59-70. 2005 ‘Rewriting a Dramatic Old Testament Story: The Story of Jephthah and His

Daughter in Some Examples of Christian Devotional Literature’, BI 13.2: 167-90.

Hutton, J. 2006 ‘Mahanaim, Penuel, and Transhumance Routes: Observations on Genesis

32–33 and Judges 8’, JNES 65.3: 161-78.Ilan, T. 2007 ‘Gender Difference and the Rabbis: Bat Yiftah as Human Sacrifice’, in Karin

Finsterbusch, Armin Lange and K.F. Römhold (eds.), Human Sacrifice in Jewish and Christian Tradition (Numen, 112; Leiden: Brill) 175-89.

Irwin, B.P. 2012 ‘Not Just Any King: Abimelech, the Northern Monarchy, and the Final Form

of Judges’, JBL 131.3: 443-54.Janzen, D. 2005 ‘Why the Deuteronomist Told about the Sacrifice of Jephthah’s Daughter’,

JSOT 29.3: 339-57. 2012 ‘Gideon’s House as the ’td: A Proposal for Reading Jotham’s Fable’, CBQ

74.3: 465-75.Jeter, J. 2003 Preaching Judges (St. Louis: Chalice Press).Kamrada, D.G. 2009 ‘The Sacrifice of Jephthah’s Daughter and the Notion of herem: A Problem-

atic Narrative against its Biblical Background’, in Karoly Daniel Dobos and Miklos Köszeghy (eds.), With Wisdom as a Robe: Qumran and Other Jewish Studies in Honour of Ida Fröhlich (Hebrew Bible Monographs, 21; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press) 57-85.

Kim, U.Y.-H. 2011 ‘“Where is the Home for the Man of Luz?”’, Int 65.3: 250-62. 2014 ‘More to the Eye than Meets the Eye: A Protest against Empire in Samson’s

Death?’, BI 22.1: 1-19.Kozlovic, A.K. 2006 ‘Constructing the Motherliness of Manoah’s Wife in Cecil B. DeMille’s

Samson and Delilah (1949)’, Women in Judaism 4.1: n.p. http://wjudaism.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/wjudaism/issue/view/40


2010 ‘The Construction of Samson’s Three Lovers in Cecil B. DeMille’s Tech-nicolor Testament, Samson and Delilah (1949)’, Women in Judaism 7.1: n.p. http://wjudaism.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/wjudaism/issue/view/1131

Kupitz, Y.S., and K. Berthelot 2009 ‘Deborah and Delphic Pythia: A New Interpretation of Judges 4:4-5’, in Mar-

tti Nissinen and Charles E. Carter (eds.), Images and Prophecy in the Ancient Eastern Mediterranean (FRLANT, 233; Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Rupre-cht) 95-124.

Landy, F. 2006 ‘Judges 1: The City of Writing, the Sacred, and the Fragmentation of the

Body’, in Wesley J. Bergen and Armin Siedlecki (eds.), Voyages in Uncharted Waters: Essays in the Theory and Practice of Biblical Interpretation in Honor of David Jobling (HBM, 13; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press) 37-50.

Lang, B. 2008 ‘The Three Sins of Samson the Warrior’, in Ingo Kottsieper, Rüdiger Schmitt

and J. Wöhrle (eds.), Beruhrungspunkte: Studien zur Sozial und Religionsge-schichte Israels und seiner Umwelt: Festschrift fur Rainer Albertz zu seinem 65. Geburtstag (AOAT, 350; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag) 179-92.

Lawrie, D.G. 2007 ‘Figuring It and Figuring It Out: The Historical Imagination at Work in and

on Judges 19–21’, Scriptura 96: 425-40.Lazarewicz-Wyrzykowska, E. 2010 ‘Samson: Masculinity Lost (and Regained?)’, in Ovidiu Creanga (ed.), Men

and Masculinity in the Hebrew Bible and Beyond (Bible in the Modern World, 33; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press) 171-88.

Leuchter, M. 2008 ‘The Cult at Kiriath Yearim: Implications from the Biblical Record’, VT

58.4-5: 526-43. 2010 ‘“Why Tarry the Wheels of His Chariot?” (Judg 5,28): Canaanite Chariots

and Echoes of Egypt in the Song of Deborah’, Bib 91.2: 256-68.Levine, B.A. 2009 ‘Religion in the Heroic Spirit: Themes in the Book of Judges’, in John J. Ahn

and Stephen L. Cook (eds.), Thus Says the Lord: Essays on the Former and Latter Prophets in Honor of Robert R. Wilson (LHBOTS, 502; T&T Clark Library of Biblical Studies; New York: T&T Clark) 27-42.

Logan, A. 2009 ‘Rehabilitating Jephthah’, JBL 128.4: 665-85.Luciani, D. 2009 ‘Samson: L’amour rend aveugle’, VT 59.2: 323-26. 2010 ‘Jg 13–16: Le narrateur “joue-t-il dans les cheveux” du lecteur, comme Dalila

dans les cheveux de Samson?’, in Anne Pasquier, Daniel Marguerat and André Wénin (eds.), L’intrigue dans le récit biblique: Quatrième colloque international du RRENAB, Université Laval, Québec, 29 mai-1er juin 2008 (BETL, 237; Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters) 181-98.

Malamat, A. 2004 ‘The Punishment of Succoth and Penuel by Gideon in the Light of Ancient

Near Eastern Treaties’, in Chaim Cohen, Avi Hurvitz and Shalom M. Paul (eds.), Sefer Moshe: The Moshe Weinfeld Jubilee Volume: Studies in the


Bible and the Ancient Near East, Qumran, and Post-Biblical Judaism (Win-ona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns) 69-71.

Mathieu, Y. 2007 ‘Le cycle de Gédéon: Pivot dans la trame du livre des Juges?’, Theoforum

38.2: 153-84.Matthews, V.H. 2004 Judges and Ruth (New Cambridge Bible Commentary; Cambridge: Cam-

bridge University Press).Mayfield, T.D. 2009 ‘The Accounts of Deborah (Judges 4–5) in Recent Research’, CBR 7.3: 306-35.Mbuvi, A.B. 2012 ‘Samson’s Body Politic’, BI 20.4-5: 389-406.McCann, J.C. 2011 Judges (Interpretation; Louisville: Westminster John Knox).McKinlay, J.E. 2009 ‘Meeting Achsah on Achsah’s Land’, The Bible & Critical Theory 5.3: 1-11.Merrill, E.H. 2011 ‘The Samson Saga and Spiritual Leadership’, in David G. Firth and Paul D.

Wegner (eds.), Presence, Power, and Promise: The Role of the Spirit of God in the Old Testament (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic) 281-93.

Michelson, M.A. 2011 Reconciling Violence and Kingship: A Study of Judges and I Samuel (Eugene,

OR: Pickwick).Miles, Johnny E. 2008 ‘“Who Are You Calling ‘Stupid’”? Ethnocentric Humour and Identity Con-

struct in the Colonial Discourse of Judges 3.12–30’, The Bible & Critical Theory 4.1: 1-16.

Miller, B. 2005 Tell It on the Mountain: The Daughter of Jephthah in Judges 11 (Colleg-

eville, MN: Liturgical Press).Miller, R.D. II 2008 ‘When Pharaohs Ruled: On the Translation of Judges 5:2’, JTS 59.2: 650-54.Milne, P. 2013 ‘From the Margins to the Margins: Jephthah’s Daughter and Her Father’, in

Brenner and Yee (eds.) 2013: 209-34.Mobley, G. 2005 The Empty Men: The Heroic Tradition of Ancient Israel (New York: Double-

day). 2006 Samson and the Liminal Hero in the Ancient Near East (The Library of

Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies, 453; New York: T&T Clark). Monroe, L.A.S. 2013 ‘Disembodied Women: Sacrificial Language and the Deaths of Bat-Jephthah,

Cozbi, and the Bethlehemite Concubine’, CBQ 75.1: 32-52.Moskowitz, N. 2015a ‘Judge Ibzan of Bethlehem: Judah or Zebulun? Peshat and Derash’, JBQ

43.3: 154-57. 2015b ‘Tola the Judge: A New Midrashic Analysis’, JBQ 43.1: 17-21.


Moster, D.Z. 2014 ‘The Levite of Judges 17–18’, JBL 133.4: 729-37.Müller, R., J. Pakkala and B. ter Haar Romeny 2014 ‘A Qumran Manuscript as Evidence of an Addition in the Masoretic Text:

Judges 6:7-10’, in Evidence of Editing: Growth and Change of Texts in the Hebrew Bible (Society of Biblical Literature Resources for Biblical Study, 75; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 59-68.

Murphy, K.J. 2014 ‘“A Sword for YHWH and for Gideon!” The Representation of War in

Judges 7:16–22’, in Brad E. Kelle, Frank Ritchel Ames and Jacob L. Wright (eds.), Warfare, Ritual, and Symbol in Biblical and Modern Con-texts (Ancient Israel and Its Literature; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Litera-ture) 65-82.

2015 ‘Masculinity, Moral Agency, and Memory: The Spirit of the Deity in Judges, Samuel, and Beyond’, JBR 2.2: 175-96.

forthcoming Gideon the Man? (New York: Oxford University Press).Na’aman, N. 2005 ‘The Danite Campaign Northward (Judges XVII–XVIII) and the Migra-

tion of the Phocaeans to Massalia (Strabo IV 1,4)’, VT 55.1: 47-60. 2011 ‘A Hidden Anti-Samaritan Polemic in the Story of Abimelech and Shechem

(Judges 9)’, BZ 55.1: 1-20.Neef, H.-D. 2004 ‘Michas Kult und Jahwes Gebot: Jdc 17,1–18,31: Vom kultischen Plural-

ismus zur Alleinverehrung JHWHs’, ZAW 116.2: 206-22. 2009 ‘Eglon als “Kälbermann”? Exegetische Beobachtungen zu Jdc 3:12–30’,

VT 59.2: 284-94. 2012 ‘Josuazeit und Richterzeit: Exegetische Beovachtungen zu Jdc 2,6–10’,

ZAW 124.2: 229-43.Nelson, R.D. 2007a ‘Ideology, Geography, and the List of Minor Judges’, JSOT 31.3: 347-64. 2007b ‘What is Achsah Doing in Judges?’, in Calvin J. Roetzel and Robert L.

Foster (eds.), Impartial God: Essays in Biblical Studies in Honor of Jou-ette M. Bassler (New Testament Monographs, 22; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press) 12-22.

2009 ‘Judges: A Public Canon for Public Theology’, WW 29.4: 397-406.Ng, A.H.-S. 2007 ‘Revisiting Judges 19: A Gothic Perspective’, JSOT 32.2: 199-215.Niditch, S. 2008 Judges: A Commentary (OTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox). 2009 ‘Judges, Kingship, and Political Ethics: A Challenge to the Conventional

Wisdom’, in John J. Ahn and Stephen L. Cook (eds.), Thus Says the Lord: Essays on the Former and Latter Prophets in Honor of Robert R Wilson (LHBOTS, 502; T&T Clark Library of Biblical Studies; New York: T&T Clark) 59-70.

Niesiołowski-Spanò, Ł. 2005 ‘Where Should One Look for Gideon’s Ophra?’, Bib 86.4: 478-93.Novick, T. 2009 ‘He-Emîn in Jud 11,20 and the Semantics of Assent’, ZAW 121.4: 577-83.


Oeste, G.K. 2011 Legitimacy, Illegitimacy, and the Right to Rule: Windows on Abimelech’s

Rise and Demise in Judges 9 (LHBOTS, 546; T&T Clark Library of Biblical Studies; New York: T&T Clark).

Okyere, K. 2012 ‘Culture of Politico-Religious Intrigues (Judges 9:1–21): Implications for

Africa’, Ogbomoso Journal of Theology 17.3: 57-75.Olson, D.T. 2004 ‘Buber, Kingship, and the Book of Judges: A Study of Judges 6–9 and 17–21’,

in Bernard Batto and Kathryn Roberts (eds.), David and Zion: Biblical Stud-ies in Honor of J. J. M. Roberts (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns) 199-218.

Ostriker, A. 2009 ‘Fathers and Daughters: The Jephthah Issue and the Scream’, in D.W. Rooke

(ed.), Embroidered Garments: Priests and Gender in Biblical Israel (HBM, 25; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press) 151-59.

Parker, J.F. 2015 ‘Re-membering the Dismembered: Piecing Together Meaning from Stories of

Women and Body Parts in Ancient Near Eastern Literature’, BI 23.2: 174-90.Paul, S.M. 2008 ‘“Plowing with a Heifer” in Judges 14:18: Tracing a Sexual Euphemism’,

in Shawna Dolansky (ed.), Sacred History, Sacred Literature: Essays on Ancient Israel, the Bible, and Religion in Honor of R. E. Friedman on His Sixtieth Birthday (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns) 163-67.

2010 ‘Samson on the Brink of Death’, VT 60.4: 664-65.Reis, P.T. 2005 ‘Uncovering Jael and Sisera: A New Reading’, SJOT 19.1: 24-47. 2006 ‘The Levite’s Concubine: New Light on a Dark Story’, SJOT 20.1: 125-46.Reiss, M. 2009 ‘Jephthah’s Daughter’, JBQ 37.1: 57-63. 2014 ‘Samson: The Only Nazarite in the Hebrew Bible and His Women!’, SJOT

28.1: 133-46.Rezetko, R. 2013 ‘The Qumran Scrolls of the Book of Judges: Literary Formation, Textual

Criticism and Historical Linguistics’, JHS 13: n.p. http://www.jhsonline.org/Articles/article_182.pdf.

Robinson, B.P. 2004 ‘The Story of Jephthah and His Daughter: Then and Now’, Bib 85.3: 331-48.Römer, T. 1998 ‘Why Would the Deuteronomists Tell about the Sacrifice of Jephthah’s

Daughter?’, JSOT 77: 27-38.Rooke, D.W. 2006 ‘Sex and Death, or, the Death of Sex: Three Versions of Jephthah’s Daughter

(Judges 11:29–40)’, in Charlotte Hempel and Judith M. Lieu (eds.), Biblical Traditions in Transmission: Essays in Honour of Michael A. Knibb (JSJSup, 111; Leiden: Brill) 249-71.

Rosenstock, B. 2012 ‘Dionysis in Israel: The Semantics of SHQ in the Hebrew Bible’, JSQ 19.4:

289-310.

http://www.jhsonline.org/Articles/article_182.pdf


Ryan, R.J. 2007 Judges (Readings—A New Biblical Commentary; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoe-

nix Press).Santos, D.A. 2009 ‘Ethically Cultured Interpretations: The Case of Eglon’s Murder (Judges 3)’,

in Gershon Galil, Mark Geller and Alan Millard (eds.), Homeland and Exile: Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honour of Bustenay Oded (VTSup, 130; Leiden: Brill) 571-95.

2011 ‘Certo tipo ou um tipo certo de ambiguidade? Uma exegese de Juízes 19’, Fides Reformata 16.2: 9-26.

Sasson, J.M. 2009 ‘Ethically Cultured Interpretations: The Case of Eglon’s Murder (Judges 3)’,

in Gershon Galil, Mark Geller and Alan Millard (eds.), Homeland and Exile: Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honour of Bustenay Oded (VTSup, 130; Leiden: Brill, 2009), pp. 571-95.

2013 ‘Jephthah: Chutzpah and Overreach in a Hebrew Judge’, in David S. Vander-hooft and Abraham Winitzer (eds.), Literature as Politics, Politics as Litera-ture: Essays on the Ancient Near East in Honor of Peter Machinist (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns) 405-20.

2014 Judges 1–12: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB; New Haven: Yale University Press).

Scherer, A.G. 2003 ‘Das Ephod im alten Israel’, UF 35: 589-604. 2005a ‘Der Rhythmus der Schlacht: Die poetische Sprachgestalt von Jdc 5,19–22’,

ZAW 117.4: 529-42. 2005b ‘Gideon—ein Anti-Held? Ein Beitrag zur Auseinandersetzung mit dem

sog. “flawed-hero approach” am Beispiel von Jdc. VI 36–40’, VT 55.2: 269-73.

2007 ‘Die “kleinen” Richter und ihre Funktion’, ZAW 119.2: 190-200.Schipper, J. 2003 ‘Narrative Obscurity of Samson’s HYDH in Judges 14.14 and 18’, JSOT

27.3: 339-53. 2011 ‘What was Samson Thinking in Judges 16,17 and 16,20?’, Bib 92.1: 60-69.Schmitz, P.C. 2008 ‘Deity and Royalty in Dedicatory Formulae: The Ekron Store-Jar Inscription

Viewed in the Light of Judges 7:18, 20 and the Inscribed Gold Medallion from the Douïmès Necropolis at Carthage (KAI 73)’, Maarav 15.2: 165-73.

Schneider, T.J. 2009 ‘Achsah, the Raped Pîlegeš, and the Book of Judges’, in Elizabeth A. McCabe

(ed.), Women in the Biblical World: A Survey of Old and New Testament Per-spectives, Volume 1 (Lanham: University Press of America) 43-57.

Schöpflin, K. 2004 ‘Jotham’s Speech and Fable as Prophetic Comment on Abimelech’s Story:

The Genesis of Judges 9’, SJOT 18.1: 3-22.Schroeder, J. 2007 ‘Dismembering the Adulteress: Sixteenth-Century Commentary on the Nar-

rative of the Levite’s Concubine (Judges 19–21)’, Seminary Ridge Review 9.2: 5-24.


2014 Deborah’s Daughters: Gender Politics and Biblical Interpretation (New York: Oxford University Press).

Schulte, L.R., and T.J. Schneider 2008 ‘The Absence of the Deity in Rape Scenes of the Hebrew Bible’, in Ingolf

U. Dalferth (ed.), Presence and Absence of God: Claremont Studies in the Philosophy of Religion Conference 2008 (RPT, 42; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck) 21-33.

Shalom-Guy, H. 2007 ‘Li-Sugiyot “ha-par ha-shnay” bi-sifur ma’evako shel Gideon be-pulhan ha-

ba‘al (Shoftim 6:25–32)’, Bet Mikra 52.2: 5-21. 2010a ‘Mah ben ha-sipurim ‘al mot Sha’ul be-sefer Shemu’el le-ven sipur moto shel

Avimelekh?’, Bet Mikra 55.2: 81-97. 2010b ‘Three-Way Intertextuality: Some Reflections of Abimelech’s Death at The-

bez in Biblical Narrative’, JSOT 34.4: 419-32. 2011 ‘The Call Narratives of Gideon and Moses: Literary Convention or More?’,

JHS 11: 1-19.Shanks, H. 2012 ‘Privies and Privacy’, BAR 38.2: 64-65.Sharon, D.M. 2006 ‘Echoes of Gideon’s Ephod: An Intertextual Reading’, JANES 30: 89-102.Simon, D.X., and L.-A. Jesmine Simon 2011 ‘Jephthah—Victimizer and Victim: A Comparison of Jephthah and Charac-

ters in Genesis’, JANES 32: 117-31. 2013 ‘“Household” (Dis)loyalties and Violence in Judges 14 and 15: Dignity of

Gendered and Religious “Others” in a Dialogical Theological Praxis’, in L. Juliana Claassens and Klaas Spronk (eds.), Fragile Dignity: Intercontextual Conversations on Scriptures, Family, and Violence (SemeiaSt, 72; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 259-72.

Sivan, G. 2013 ‘Sisera and Harosheth-goiim’, JBQ 41.2: 95-103.Sjöberg, M. 2006 Wrestling with Textual Violence: The Jephthah Narrative in Antiquity and

Modernity (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press). 2007 ‘Jephthah’s Daughter as Object of Desire or Feminist Icon’, BI 15.4-5: 377-94.Slager, D. 2014 ‘How Many Idols Did Micah Have? (Judges 17.1–18.31)’, Bible Translator

65.3: 337-48.Smith, M.S. 2009 ‘What is Prologue is Past: Composing Israelite Identity in Judges 5’, in John

J. Ahn and Stephen L. Cook (eds.), Thus Says the Lord: Essays on the For-mer and Latter Prophets in Honor of Robert R. Wilson (LHBOTS, 502; T&T Clark Library of Biblical Studies; New York: T&T Clark) 43-58.

2014 ‘Warfare Song as Warrior Ritual’, in Brad E. Kelle, Frank Ritchel Ames and Jacob L. Wright (eds.), Warfare, Ritual, and Symbol in Biblical and Modern Contexts (Ancient Israel and Its Literature; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Lit-erature) 165-86.

2016 ‘“Midrash” in the Book of Judges: The Cases of Judges 3:31 and 6:7-10’, CBQ 78: 256-71.


Smith, M.J. 2005a ‘The Failure of the Family in Judges: Part 1 Jephthah’, BS 162.647: 279-98. 2005b ‘The Failure of the Family in Judges: Part 2 Samson’, BS 162.648: 424-36.Smith, Mitzi J. 2009 ‘Reading the Story of the Levite’s Concubine through the Lens of Modern-

Day Sex Trafficking’, ATJ 41: 15-33.Spronk, K. 2009 ‘From Joshua to Samuel: Some Remarks on the Origin of the Book of Judges’,

in Jacques van Ruiten and J. Cornelis de Vos (eds.), Land of Israel in Bible, History, and Theology: Studies in Honour of Ed Noort (VTSup, 124; Leiden: Brill) 137-49.

Stanley, J. 2013 ‘Judges 19: Text of Trauma’, in Brenner and Yee (eds.) 2013: 275-90.Sterman, J.T. 2011 ‘Themes in the Deborah Narrative (Judges 4–5)’, JBQ 39.1: 15-24.Stone, K. 2009a ‘How a Woman Unmans a King: Gender Reversal and the Woman of Thebez

in Judges 9’, in Peter S. Hawkins and Lesleigh Cushing Stahlberg (eds.), From the Margins 1: Women of the Hebrew Bible and their Afterlives (BMW, 18; Sheffield: Sheffield University Press) 71-85.

2009b ‘What Happens when Achsah Gets Off Her Ass? Queer Reading and Judges 1 11–15’, in Roberta Sterman Sabbath (ed.), Sacred Tropes: Tanakh, New Testament, and Qur’an as Literature and Culture (BibInt, 98; Leiden: Brill) 409-20.

Strawn, B.A. 2009 ‘Kepîr ’arayôt in Judges 14:5’, VT 59.1: 150-58.Szpek, H.M. 2007a ‘“Do Not Reject Your Mother’s Teaching?!” The Function of Micah’s

Mother in Judges 17’, Women in Judaism 4.2: n.p. http://wjudaism.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/wjudaism/issue/view/204

2007b ‘The Levite’s Concubine: The Story that Never Was’, Women in Judaism 5.1: n.p. http://wjudaism.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/wjudaism/issue/view/208

Tatu, S. 2006 ‘Jotham’s Fable and the Crux Interpretum in Judges IX’, VT 56.1: 105-24.Taylor, M.A. 2010 ‘“Cold Dead Hands upon Our Threshold”: Josephine Butler’s Reading of

the Story of the Levite’s Concubine, Judges 19–21’, in Randall Heskett and Brian Irwin (eds.), Bible as a Human Witness to Divine Revelation: Hearing the Word of God through Historically Dissimilar Traditions (LHBOTS, 469; T&T Clark Library of Biblical Studies; New York: T&T Clark) 259-73.

Terry, D.J. 2010 ‘With the Jawbone of a Donkey: Shame, Violence and Punishment in the

Samson Narrative’, in Dereck Daschke and Andrew Kille (eds.), Cry Instead of Justice: The Bible and Cultures of Violence in Psychological Perspective (LHBOTS, 499; London: Bloomsbury/T&T Clark) 42-54.

Trebolle Barrera, J.C. 2008 ‘A Combined Textual and Literary Criticism Analysis: Editorial Traces in

Joshua and Judges’, in H. Ausloos, B. Lemmelijn and M. Vervenne (eds.),


Florilegium Lovaniense: Studies in Septuagint and Textual Criticism in Hon-our of Florentino García Martínez (BETL, 224; Leuven: Peeters) 437-63.

Tsan, T.-S. 2007 ‘The “Vulnerable” God in the Old Testament: Judg 10:6–16 in the Context of

the Book of Judges’, Taiwan Journal of Theology 29: 35-59.Tsang, S. 2007 ‘Violence and Gender: The Ugaritic “Violent Female” Tradition and the

Story of Deborah in Judges 4’, Sino-Christian Studies 4: 95-108.Vainstub, D. 2011 ‘Some Points of Contact between the Biblical Deborah War Traditions and

Some Greek Mythologies’, VT 61.2: 324-34.Vander Stichele, C. 2012 ‘Samson’s Hair and Delilah’s Despair: Reanimating Judges 16 for Children’,

in Caroline Vander Stichele and Hugh S. Pyper (eds.), Text, Image, and Oth-erness in Children’s Bibles: What is in the Picture? (SemeiaSt, 56; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 291-310.

Victor, R.M. 2013 ‘Delilah—A Forgotten Hero (Judges 16:4-21)’, in Brenner and Yee (eds.)

2013: 235-56.Walton, J.H. 2009 Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1&2 Samuel (Grand Rapids: Zondervan).Webb, B. 2012 The Book of Judges (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans).Wilson, B.E. 2006 ‘Pugnacious Precursors and the Bearer of Peace: Jael, Judith, and Mary in

Luke 1:42’, CBQ 68.3: 436-56.Wilson, S.M. 2014 ‘Samson the Man-Child: Failing to Come of Age in the Deuteronomistic His-

tory’, JBL 133.1: 43-60. 2015 Making Men: The Male Coming of Age Theme in the Hebrew Bible (New

York: Oxford University Press).Winbush, R.M. 2011a ‘Not a Mumbling Word’, in Patricia Sheerattan-Bisnauth (ed.), Righting Her-

Story: Caribbean Women Encounter the Bible Story (Geneva: World Com-munion of Reformed Churches) 100-13.

2011b ‘When Home is a Dangerous Place’, in Patricia Sheerattan-Bisnauth (ed.), Righting Her-Story: Caribbean Women Encounter the Bible Story (Geneva: World Communion of Reformed Churches) 174-80.

Wong, G. 2005 Compositional Strategy of the Book of Judges: An Inductive, Rhetorical Study

(VTSup, 111; Leiden: Brill). 2006a ‘Ehud and Joab: Separated at Birth?’, VT 56.3: 399-412. 2006b ‘Gideon: A New Moses?’, in Robert Rezetko, Timothy H. Lim and W. Brian

Aucker (eds.), Reflection and Refraction: Studies in Biblical Historiography in Honour of A. Graeme Auld (VTSup, 113; Leiden: Brill) 529-45.

2007 ‘Song of Deborah as Polemic’, Bib 88.1: 1-22.Wright, J.L. 2011a ‘Deborah’s War Memorial: The Composition of Judges 4–5 and the Politics

of War Commemoration’, ZAW 123.4: 516-34.


2011b ‘War Commemoration and the Interpretation of Judges 5:15b–17’, VT 61.3: 505-21.

Yamada, F.M. 2009 ‘Of Virtue and of Eating Shorts: Breaking Down the Configuration of Faith-

ful Mother and Wayward Son in Judges and the Simpsons’, in Cheryl Kirk-Duggan and Tina Pippin (eds.), Mother Goose, Mother Jones, Mommie Dearest: Biblical Mothers and their Children (SemeiaSt, 61; Leiden: Brill) 51-66.

2004 ‘Shibboleth and the Ma(r)king of Culture: Judges 12 and the Monolingualism of the Other’, in Yvonne Sherwood (ed.), Derrida’s Bible: Reading a Page of Scripture with a Little Help from Derrida (RCC; New York: Palgrave Mac-millan) 119-34.

Yee, G.A. 2013 ‘The Woman Warrior Revisited: Jael, Fa Mulan, and American Orientalism’,

in Brenner and Yee (eds.) 2013: 175-90.Yee, G. (ed.) 2007 Judges and Method: New Approaches in Biblical Studies (Minneapolis: For-

tress, 2nd edn).Yoder, J.C. 2015 Power and Politics in the Book of Judges: Men and Women of Valor (Min-

neapolis: Fortress).Yoder, N.H. 2012 ‘The Descent into Fear and Ascent into Trust of Judges 7:9–15’, Lutheran

Forum 46.4: 15-18.Zogbo, L. 2013 ‘How Could Something So Right be So Wrong? OT References to the Left

and Right Hand: Implications for Translation in Africa’, BT 64.1: 36-53.Zsengellér, J. 2013 ‘Forgiveness as an Exegetical Solution: A Short Note on Judges 17,1–5’,

BN 159.1. https://www.uni-salzburg.at/fileadmin/multimedia/Bibelwissen-schaft%20und%20Kirchengeschichte/Bibelwissenschaft/Abstract_159.pdf

Documents

Currents in Biblical Research Judges in Recent … · ‘period of the judges’), the tendency to treat chs. 4 and 5 separately from one another, and growth in feminist readings