Judges in Recent Research

Abstract

The 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.

Keywords

Book 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) survey 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.

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 commentaries 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 various 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 features, and the reception history of the text. Other commentaries include Frolov (2013a), which is a uniquely form-critical study of Judges; Butler (2009), a commentary 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 commentary 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 gender 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 pertaining 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 exploration of the ‘heroic tradition’ in Judges (2005); Wong’s examination of the ‘compositional strategy’ of the book (2005); and Yoder’s detailed analysis of the way 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 postcolonial 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, colluding 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 entertainment that it shared with the Western’ (2003: 54). Christianson offers a tantalizing 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 inequalities 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 concluding 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 narrative with potential humorous touches, recent commentators have in effect created 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 prevalent 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 symbolic 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 association 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 parallel 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 biblical 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 challenges 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 coming 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 withdrawn 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 figure 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 authority 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 history 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 archaeological questions related to chs. 6–8. For example, Niesiołowski-Spanò attempts to locate Gideon’s hometown, Ophrah, ultimately deciding that: ‘A good candidate 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 ‘manipulation’ 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 uncomfortable 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 illustrating 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 lesson 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 monarchy 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 acceptable 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 parallels 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 features, 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 transvaluative 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 suggests 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 associated with the daughter’s death—Beavis wonders, ‘Perhaps the celebrants saw the story of the Daughter…as an affirmation that women could play an important, 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 insertion 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/ideology: ‘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 portrays Jephthah positively, including that they ‘would not have missed Jephthah’s David-like portrayal, the empathetic comparison to Abraham, or the reference to /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 illustrates 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 dysfunctional 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 children 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 represents 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 narrator’ 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 continued 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 marginal, 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 נַחֲלָה 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 titulature 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 political 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 tradition 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 functioning’ (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 number of recent articles focus on the question of 4QJudg^a 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 relationship 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 investigated 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 gendered 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 portrayal 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 expanding areas of Judges research is found in the development of commentaries, monographs 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 articles, 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 critical 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 narratives 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 discern 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 questions 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 understood and interpreted throughout the many afterlives of the book of Judges.

References

Ackerman

2009 Warrior, Dancer, Seductress, Queen: Women in Judges and Biblical Israel (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press).

Alter

2013 Ancient Israel: The Former Prophets: Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings: A Translation with Commentary (New York: W.W. Norton).

Amit

2004a

‘’Ani Delilah: Ḳorban shel parshanut’, Bet Mikra

178: 1-18.

Amit

2004b

‘Endings—Especially Reversal Endings’, Scriptura

87: 213-26.

Amit

2009. ‘The Book of Judges: Dating and Meaning’, in Gershon

Galil

Geller

Mark

Alan

Millard

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

Amit

2014 ‘Who was Interested in the Book of Judges in the Persian-Hellenistic Periods?’, in Diana

Edelman (ed.), Deuteronomy—Kings as Emerging Authorative Books: A Conversation (Society of Biblical Literature Ancient Near East Monographs, 6; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 103-14.

Angel

2006 ‘The Positive and Negative Traits of Gideon: As Reflected in His Sons Jotham and Abimelech’, JBQ 34.3: 159-67.

2013 ‘Dehumanization of the Woman in Judges 19: Through the Eyes of an Indian Woman’, Religion and Society 58.1-2: 1-18.

Aranoff

2013 ‘The Connection between the Idol of Micah and the Concubine at Gibeah: A Rabbinic View’, JBQ 41.2: 78-80.

10.

Assis

2004a ‘The Choice to Serve God and Assist His People: Rahab and Yael’, Bib 85.1: 82-90.

11.

Assis

2004b

‘“The Hand of a Woman”: Deborah and Yael (Judges 4)’, JHS

5: 1-12.

12.

Assis

2005 Self-Interest or Communal Interest: An Ideology of Leadership in the Gideon, Abimelech, and Jephthah Narratives (Judg. 6–12) (VTSup, 106; Boston: Brill).

13.

Assis

2006 ‘Man, Woman, and God in Judg 4’, SJOT 20.1: 110-24.

14.

Ausloos

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.

15.

Ausloos

2014 ‘Literary Criticism and Textual Criticism in Judg 6:1–14 in Light of 4QJudg[a]’, OTE 27.2: 358-76.

16.

Avioz

2007 ‘The Role and Significance of Jebus in Judges 19’, BZ 51.2: 249-56.

17.

Bakon

2006 ‘Deborah: Judge, Prophetess and Poet’, JBQ 34.2: 110-18.

18.

Bar

2010 ‘The Oak of Weeping’, Bib 91.2: 269-74.

19.

Bar Mymon

. 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.

20.

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.

21.

Bauks

2006 ‘La fille sans nom, la fille de Jephté’, Études théologiques et religieuses 81.1: 81-93.

22.

Bauks

2007 ‘The Theological Implications of Child Sacrifice in and beyond the Biblical Context in Relation to Genesis 22 and Judges 11’, in Finsterbusch

Lange

A.L.

Diethard

K.F. Romheld

Lazar

(eds.), Human Sacrifice in Jewish and Christian Tradition (Numen Books: Studies in the History of Religions; Leiden: Brill) 65-86.

23.

Bauks

2010 ‘Überlegungen zum historischen Ort von Ri 11,29–40: Ein Appendix anthologischen Charakters jenseits deuteronomistischen Geschichtsdenkens?’, in Mommer

Peter

Scherer

Andreas

(eds.), Geschichte Israels und deuteronomistisches Geschichtsdenken: Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag von Winfried Thiel (Münster: Ugarit) 22-42.

24.

Bauks

2011 ‘Jephtas Gelübde und die Unabwendbarkeit seiner Einlösung’, in de Troyer

Lange

(eds.), Qumran Legal Texts between the Hebrew Bible and Its Interpretation (Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology, 61; Leuven: Peeters) 27-40.

25.

Baumgarten

2007 ‘“Remember That Glorious Girl”: Jephthah’s Daughter in Medieval Jewish Culture’, JQR 97.2: 180-209.

26.

Beavis

M.A.

2004 ‘A Daughter in Israel: Celebrating Bat Jephthah (Judg. 11:39d–40)’, FT 13.1: 11-25.

27.

Beavis

M.A.

2010 ‘The Resurrection of Jephthah’s Daughter: Judges 11:34–40 and Mark 5:21–24, 35–43’, CBQ 72.1: 46-62.

28.

Beck

J.A.

2008 ‘Gideon, Dew, and the Narrative-Geographical Shaping of Judges 6:33–40’, BS 165.657: 28-38.

29.

Begg

C.T.

2004

‘The Overture to the Period of the Judges According to Josephus’, Liber Annuus

54: 235-54.

30.

Begg

C.T.

2006a

‘The End of Samson According to Josephus as Compared with the Bible, Pseudo-Philo and Rabbinic Tradition’, Biblische Notizen

131: 47-61.

31.

Begg

C.T.

2006b ‘Israel’s First Judge According to Josephus’, Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift 60.4: 329-36.

32.

Begg

C.T.

2006c ‘The Josephan Judge Jephthah’, SJOT 20.2: 161-88.

33.

Begg

C.T.

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.

34.

Begg

C.T.

2007b

‘Samson’s Birth Narrative According to Josephus’, Jian Dao

28: 1-32.

35.

Begg

C.T.

2007c

‘Samson’s Initial Exploits According to Josephus’, Liber Annuus

57: 317-41.

36.

Begg

C.T.

2008 ‘The Denouement of the Story of Gideon According to Josephus’, Antonianum 83.1: 9-23.

37.

Berman

2005 ‘Medieval Monasticism and the Evolution of Jewish Interpretation to the Story of Jephthah’s Daughter’, JQR 95.2: 228-56.

38.

Berman

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.

39.

Biddle

M.E.

2012 Reading Judges: A Literary and Theological Commentary (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys).

40.

Bloch-Smith

2015 ‘A Stratified Account of Jephthah’s Negotiations and Battle: Judges 11:12–33 from an Archaeological Perspective’, JBL 134.2: 291-311.

41.

Bluedorn

2001 Yahweh versus Baalism: A Theological Reading of the Gideon-Abimelech Narrative (JSOTSup, 329; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press).

42.

Blyth

2014 ‘When Raymond Met Delilah’, Relegere 4.1: 41-63.

43.

Bonfiglio

2013 ‘Choosing Sides in Judges 4–5: Rethinking Representations of Jael’, in Brenner Yee (eds.) 2013: 161-74.

44.

Bookholane

2010a ‘History, Text, and Hermeneutics: A Black Theology Appraisal of Judges 12:1–6. Translations into African Languages’, Scriptura (Online) 105: 481-93.

45.

Bookholane

2010b

‘Reading Judges 12:2 in Dialogue with Maimela’, Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae

36: 115-25.

46.

Bosworth

D.A.

2011 ‘David, Jether, and Child Soldiers’, JSOT 36.2: 185-97.

47.

Bray

J.S.

2006 Sacred Dan: Religious Tradition and Cultic Practice in Judges 17–18 (LHBOTS, 449; New York: T&T Clark).

48.

Brenner

2013 ‘Women Frame the Book of Judges—How and Why?’, in Brenner Yee (eds.) 2013: 125-38.

49.

Brenner

Yee

G.A.

2013 Joshua and Judges (Texts @ Contexts; Minneapolis: Fortress Press).

50.

Brison

2013 ‘Jael, ‘eshet heber the Kenite: A Diviner?’, in Brenner and Yee (eds.) 2013: 139-60.

51.

Bruner

2011 ‘Weeping in the Hills: Hearing Children Dwelling as Outsiders among Us’, RQ 53.2: 81-95.

52.

Butler

Trent C.

2009 Judges (WBC, 8; Nashville: Thomas Nelson).

53.

Campbell

A.F.

2008 Judges: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox).

54.

Caroselli

S.B.

2009 ‘The Dissemination of Jephthah’s Daughter’, in Hawkins

Peter S.

Stahlberg

Lesleigh Cushing

(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.

55.

Castelbajac de

2007 ‘Le cycle de Gédéon ou la condamnation de refus de la royauté’, VT 57.2: 145-61.

56.

Cheon

2003

‘Reconsidering Jephthah’s Story in Asian Perspective’, Journal of Asian and Asian American Theology

6: 30-45.

57.

Chisholm

R.B.

Jr.

2009a ‘Identity Crisis: Assessing Samson’s Birth and Career’, BS 166.662: 147-62.

58.

Chisholm

R.B.

Jr.

2009b

‘What’s Wrong with This Picture?

Stylistic Variation as a Rhetorical Technique in Judges’, JSOT 34.2: 171-82.

59.

Chisholm

R.B.

Jr.

2010a ‘A Note on Judges 13:20–21: Sorting Out the Syntax’, JBQ 38.1: 10-12.

60.

Chisholm

R.B.

Jr.

2010b

‘What Went On in Jael’s Tent?

The Collocation of תכסהו בשמיכהו in Judges 4, 18’, SJOT 24.1: 143-44.

61.

Chisholm

R.B.

Jr.

2011 ‘Ehud: Assessing an Assassin’, BS 168.671: 274-82.

62.

Chisholm

R.B.

Jr.

2013a A Commentary on Judges and Ruth (Grand Rapids: Kregel).

63.

Chisholm

R.B.

Jr.

2013b

‘What Went On in Jael’s Tent?

(Part Two)’, SJOT 27.2: 216-18.

64.

Christianson

E.S.

2003 ‘A Fistful of Shekels: Scrutinizing Ehud’s Entertaining Violence (Judges 3:12–30)’, BI 11.1: 53-78.

65.

Christianson

E.S.

2008 ‘The Big Sleep: Strategic Ambiguity in Judges 4–5 and in Classic Film Noir’, in Shepherd

David

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

66.

Collenberg

Giercke

2007

‘Die Erzählkonzepte der Jiftacherzählung Ri 10,6–12,7’, Biblische Notizen

135: 11-34.

67.

Conway

C.M.

2013

‘The Malleability of Jael in the Dutch Renaissance’, BR

2: 36-56.

68.

Cooper

V.C.

2003 ‘Some Place to Cry: Jephthah’s Daughter and the Double Dilemma of Black Women in America’, in Kirk-Duggan

Cheryl

(ed.), Pregnant Passion: Gender, Sex, and Violence in the Bible (SemeiaSt, 44; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 181-91.

69.

Cottrill

A.C.

2014 ‘A Reading of Ehud and Jael through the Lens of Affect Theory’, BI 22.4-5: 430-49.

70.

Cox

B.D.

Ackerman

2012

‘Micah’s Teraphim’, JHS

12: 1-37.

71.

Craig

2003 ‘Judges in Recent Research’, CBR 1.2: 159-85.

72.

Cross

F.M.

1973 Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge: Harvard University Press).

73.

Cross

F.M.

1988

‘Reuben: First Born of Jacob’, ZAW

100: 46-65.

74.

Crowell

B.L.

2013 ‘Good Girl, Bad Girl: Foreign Women of the Deuteronomistic History in Postcolonial Perspective’, BI 21.1: 1-18.

75.

Davidson

E.T.A.

2008 Intricacy, Design, and Cunning in the Book of Judges (Philadelphia: Xlibris).

76.

Davidson

S.V.

2013 ‘Gazing (at) Native Women: Rahab and Jael in Imperializing and Postcolonial Discourses’, in Boer

Roland

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

77.

DeMaris

R.E.

Leeb

C.S.

2006 ‘Judges—(Dis)honor and Ritual Enactment: The Jephthah Story: Judges 10:16–12:1’, in Esler

Philip Francis

(ed.), Ancient Israel: The Old Testament in its Social Context (Minneapolis: Fortress Press) 177-90.

78.

Derby

2003 ‘Gideon or Jerubaal’, JBQ 31.3: 181-85.

79.

Derks

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.

80.

Dietch

2015 Authority and Violence in the Gideon and Abimelech Narratives: A Sociological and Literary Reading of Judges 6–9 (Hebrew Bible Monographs, 75; The Bible and Social Science, 2; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press).

81.

Doak

B.R.

2011

‘“Some Worthless and Reckless Fellows”: Landlessness and Parasocial Leadership in Judges’, JHS

11: 2-29.

82.

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.

83.

Echols

C.L.

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).

84.

Edelburg

2016 Dismembering the Whole: Composition and Purpose of Judges 19–21 (Ancient Israel and Its Literature, 24; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature Press).

85.

Egger-Wenzel

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.

86.

Embry

2013 ‘Narrative Loss, the (Important) Role of Women, and Community in Judges 19’, in Brenner Yee (eds.) 2013: 257-74.

87.

Endris

2008 ‘Yahweh versus Baal: A Narrative-Critical Reading of the Gideon/Abimelech Narrative’, JSOT 33.2: 173-95.

88.

Eshel

H

. 2003 ‘A Second Fragment of XJudges’, JJS 54.1: 139-41.

89.

Eynikel

2005 ‘Judges 19–21, an “Appendix”: Rape, Murder, War, and Abduction’, Communio Viatorum 47.2: 101-15.

90.

Eynikel

2007 ‘The Angel in Samson’s Birth Narrative: Judg 13’, in Friedrich V. Reiterer, Pancratius C. Beentjes and Nuria Calduch-Benages (eds.), Angels: The Concept of Celestial Beings: Origins, Development, and Reception (Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook 2007; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter) 109-23.

91.

Eynikel

2014

Samson: Hero or Fool?

The Many Faces of Samson (Themes in Biblical Narrative, 17; Boston: Brill).

92.

Faraone

C.A.

Garnand

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.

93.

Farber

2013 ‘Jerubaal, Jacob, and the Battle for Shechem: A Tradition History’, JHS 13: n.p. http://www.jhsonline.org/Articles/article_192.pdf

94.

Feintuch

2006 ‘The Folly of Impetuous Speech: Four Biblical Incidents’, JBQ 34.1: 16-19.

95.

Fleishman

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.

96.

Franke

J.R.

Oden

T.C.

2005 Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1–2 Samuel (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. Old Testament, 4; Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press).

97.

Fritz

2006 ‘The Complex of Traditions in Judges 4 and 5 and the Religion of Pre-state Israel’, in Maeir

Aren M.

De Mazar

Pierre

(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.

98.

Frolov

2008 ‘Joshua’s Double Demise (Josh xxiv 28–31: Judg ii 6–9): Making Sense of a Repetition’, VT 58.3: 315-23.

99.

Frolov

2011

‘How Old is the Song of Deborah?

’, JSOT 36.2: 163-84.

100.

Frolov

2013a Judges (FOTL, 6b; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans).

101.

Frolov

2013b

‘Sleeping with the Enemy: Recent Scholarship on Sexuality in the Book of Judges’, CBR

11: 308-27.

102.

Frolov

2015

‘Sisera Unfastened: On the Meaning of Judges 4:21 aβ–γ’, BN

165: 55-61.

103.

Galpaz-Feller

2006a ‘“Let My Soul Die with the Philistines” (Judges 16:30)’, JSOT 30.3: 315-25.

104.

Galpaz-Feller

2006b Samson: The Hero and the Man (Bern: Peter Lang).

105.

Gillmayr-Bucher

2009 ‘Framework and Discourse in the Book of Judges’, JBL 128.4: 687-702.

106.

Gillmayr-Bucher

2014 ‘Memories Laid to Rest: The Book of Judges in the Persian Period’, in Diana

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.

107.

Gnuse

R.K.

2007

‘Abducted Wives: A Hellenistic Narrative in Judges 21?

’, SJOT 21.2: 228-40.

108.

Goldingay

2011 Joshua, Judges and Ruth for Everyone: A Theological Commentary on the Bible (Old Testament for Everyone; Louisville: Westminster John Knox).

109.

Grätz

2010 ‘Jiftach und seine Tochter’, in Mommer

Peter

Scherer

Andreas

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

110.

Gross

2004 ‘Jiftachs Tochter’, in Lother-Hossfeld

Frank

Schwiehorst-Schoenberg

Ludger

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

111.

Gross

2009 Richter (HThKAT; Freiburg: Herder).

112.

Gross

2010a ‘Michas überfüllte Hauskapelle: Bermerkungen zu Ri 17+18’, in Theodor

Seidl

Ernst

Stephanie

Maria

Häusl

(eds.), Kulte, Priester, Rituale: Beiträge zu Kult und Kultkritik im Alten Testament und Alten Orient: Festschrift für Theodor Seidl zum 65. Geburtstag (ATSAT, 89; St Ottilien: EOS Verlag) 175-94.

113.

Gross

2010b ‘Prophetin und Prophet im Richterbuch’, in Carmen

Diller

Ólason

Kristinn

Ralf

Rothenbusch

(eds.), Studien zu Psalmen und Propheten: Festschrift für Hubert Irsigler (HBS, 64; Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder) 177-91.

114.

Guest

2011 ‘From Gender Reversal to Genderfuck: Reading Jael through a Lesbian Lens’, in Hornsby

Teresa

Stone

Ken

(eds.), Bible Trouble: Queer Reading at the Boundaries of Biblical Scholarship (SemeiaSt, 67; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 9-43.

115.

Guillaume

2004 Waiting for Josiah: The Judges (JSOTSup, 385; New York: T&T Clark).

116.

Gunn

D.M.

2005 Judges (Blackwell Bible Commentaries; London: Blackwell).

117.

Gunn

D.M.

2007 Viewing the Sacrifice of Jephthah’s Daughter’, in Yee

Gale A.

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

118.

Gunn

D.M.

2012 ‘Samson’s Suicide and the Death of Three Thousand Others in Children’s Bible Stories through Two Centuries’, in Vander Stichele

Caroline

Pyper

Hugh S.

(eds.), Text, Image, and Otherness in Children’s Bibles: What is in the Picture? (SemeiaSt, 56; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 241-69.

119.

Hackett

2004 ‘Violence and Women’s Lives in the Book of Judges’, Int 58.4: 356-64.

120.

Haddox

S.E.

2010 ‘“The Lord is with You, You Mighty Warrior”: The Question of Gideon’s Masculinity’, Proceedings 30: 70-87.

121.

Hahn

2011 ‘The Understanding of the Nazirite Vow’, in Grant

Jamie A.

Alison

Wenham

Gordon J.

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

122.

Hallo

W.W.

2004 ‘New Light on the Story of Achsah’, in Kaltner

John

Stulman

Louis

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

123.

Halpern

1983 ‘The Resourceful Israelite Historian: The Song of Deborah and Israelite Historiography’, HTR 76.4: 379-401.

124.

Halton

2009 ‘Samson’s Last Laugh: The Ś/ŠḤQ Pun in Judges 16:25–27’, JBL 128.1: 61-64.

125.

Hamley

2015

‘What’s Wrong with “Playing the Harlot”?

The Meaning of זנה in Judges 19:2’, TynBul 66.1: 41-62.

126.

Heffelfinger

K.M.

2009 ‘“My Father is King”: Chiefly Politics and the Rise and Fall of Abimelech’, JSOT 33.3: 277-92.

127.

Helen

C.S.

2013 ‘Voicing the Silenced: A Re-reading of Judges 19’, Religion and Society 58.1-2: 97-106.

128.

Heller

R.L.

2010 ‘What is Abimelek Doing in Judges?’, in Noll

K.L.

(ed.), Raising Up a Faithful Exegete: Essays in Honor of Richard D. Nelson (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns) 225-35.

129.

Hentschel

2009 ‘Abimelech: Two Sides of the Story (Judges 9)’, in Dobos

Karoly Daniel

Köszeghy

Miklos

(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.

130.

Herzberg

2010 ‘Samson’s Moment of Truth’, BI 18.3: 226-50.

131.

Herzberg

2013 ‘Deborah and Moses’, JSOT 38.1: 15-33.

132.

Hess

Richard S.

2004 ‘The Name Game: Dating the Book of Judges’, BAR 30.6: 38-41.

133.

Holmstedt

R.D.

2014 ‘Analyzing זֶה Grammar and Reading זֶה Texts of Ps 68:9 and Judg 5:5’, JHS 14: n.p. http://www.jhsonline.org/Articles/article_202.pdf

134.

de Hoop

2009 ‘Judges 5 Reconsidered: Which Tribes? What Land? Whose Song?’ in van Ruiten

Jacques

Cornelis de Vos

(eds.), Land of Israel in Bible, History, and Theology: Studies in Honour of Ed Noort (VTSup, 124; Leiden: Brill) 151-66.

135.

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.

136.

Houtman

2003

‘Die Bewertung eines Menschenopfers: die Geschichte von Jefta und seiner Tochter in früher Auslegung’, BN

117: 59-70.

137.

Houtman

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.

138.

Hutton

2006 ‘Mahanaim, Penuel, and Transhumance Routes: Observations on Genesis 32–33 and Judges 8’, JNES 65.3: 161-78.

139.

Ilan

2007 ‘Gender Difference and the Rabbis: Bat Yiftah as Human Sacrifice’, in Karin

Finsterbusch

Lange

Armin

K.F.

Römhold

(eds.), Human Sacrifice in Jewish and Christian Tradition (Numen, 112; Leiden: Brill) 175-89.

140.

Irwin

B.P.

2012 ‘Not Just Any King: Abimelech, the Northern Monarchy, and the Final Form of Judges’, JBL 131.3: 443-54.

141.

Janzen

2005 ‘Why the Deuteronomist Told about the Sacrifice of Jephthah’s Daughter’, JSOT 29.3: 339-57.

142.

Janzen

2012 ‘Gideon’s House as the ’ṭd: A Proposal for Reading Jotham’s Fable’, CBQ 74.3: 465-75.

143.

Jeter

2003 Preaching Judges (St. Louis: Chalice Press).

144.

Kamrada

D.G.

2009 ‘The Sacrifice of Jephthah’s Daughter and the Notion of hērem: A Problematic Narrative against its Biblical Background’, in Dobos

Karoly Daniel

Köszeghy

Miklos

(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.

145.

Kim

U.Y.-H.

2011

‘“Where is the Home for the Man of Luz?

”’, Int 65.3: 250-62.

146.

Kim

U.Y.-H.

2014

‘More to the Eye than Meets the Eye: A Protest against Empire in Samson’s Death?

’, BI 22.1: 1-19.

147.

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

148.

Kozlovic

A.K.

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

149.

Kupitz

Y.S.

Berthelot

2009 ‘Deborah and Delphic Pythia: A New Interpretation of Judges 4:4-5’, in Nissinen

Martti

Carter

Charles E.

(eds.), Images and Prophecy in the Ancient Eastern Mediterranean (FRLANT, 233; Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht) 95-124.

150.

Landy

2006 ‘Judges 1: The City of Writing, the Sacred, and the Fragmentation of the Body’, in Bergen

Wesley J.

Siedlecki

Armin

(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.

151.

Lang

2008 ‘The Three Sins of Samson the Warrior’, in Kottsieper

Ingo

Schmitt

Rüdiger

Wöhrle

(eds.), Berührungspunkte: Studien zur Sozial und Religionsgeschichte Israels und seiner Umwelt: Festschrift für Rainer Albertz zu seinem 65. Geburtstag (AOAT, 350; Münster: Ugarit-Verlag) 179-92.

152.

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.

153.

Lazarewicz-Wyrzykowska

2010 ‘Samson: Masculinity Lost (and Regained?)’, in Creanga

Ovidiu

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

154.

Leuchter

2008 ‘The Cult at Kiriath Yearim: Implications from the Biblical Record’, VT 58.4-5: 526-43.

155.

Leuchter

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.

156.

Levine

B.A.

2009 ‘Religion in the Heroic Spirit: Themes in the Book of Judges’, in Ahn

John J.

Cook

Stephen L.

(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.

157.

Logan

2009 ‘Rehabilitating Jephthah’, JBL 128.4: 665-85.

158.

Luciani

2009 ‘Samson: L’amour rend aveugle’, VT 59.2: 323-26.

159.

Luciani

2010 ‘Jg 13–16: Le narrateur “joue-t-il dans les cheveux” du lecteur, comme Dalila dans les cheveux de Samson?’, in Pasquier

Anne

Marguerat

Daniel

Wénin

André

(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.

160.

Malamat

2004 ‘The Punishment of Succoth and Penuel by Gideon in the Light of Ancient Near Eastern Treaties’, in Chaim

Cohen

Hurvitz

Avi

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 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns) 69-71.

161.

Mathieu

2007

‘Le cycle de Gédéon: Pivot dans la trame du livre des Juges?

’, Theoforum 38.2: 153-84.

162.

Matthews

V.H.

2004 Judges and Ruth (New Cambridge Bible Commentary; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

163.

Mayfield

T.D.

2009 ‘The Accounts of Deborah (Judges 4–5) in Recent Research’, CBR 7.3: 306-35.

164.

Mbuvi

A.B.

2012 ‘Samson’s Body Politic’, BI 20.4-5: 389-406.

165.

McCann

J.C.

2011 Judges (Interpretation; Louisville: Westminster John Knox).

166.

McKinlay

J.E.

2009 ‘Meeting Achsah on Achsah’s Land’, The Bible & Critical Theory 5.3: 1-11.

167.

Merrill

E.H.

2011 ‘The Samson Saga and Spiritual Leadership’, in Firth

David G.

Wegner

Paul D.

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

168.

Michelson

M.A.

2011 Reconciling Violence and Kingship: A Study of Judges and I Samuel (Eugene, OR: Pickwick).

169.

Miles

Johnny E.

2008 ‘“Who Are You Calling ‘Stupid’”? Ethnocentric Humour and Identity Construct in the Colonial Discourse of Judges 3.12–30’, The Bible & Critical Theory 4.1: 1-16.

170.

Miller

2005 Tell It on the Mountain: The Daughter of Jephthah in Judges 11 (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press).

171.

Miller

R.D.

2008 ‘When Pharaohs Ruled: On the Translation of Judges 5:2’, JTS 59.2: 650-54.

172.

Milne

2013 ‘From the Margins to the Margins: Jephthah’s Daughter and Her Father’, in Brenner Yee (eds.) 2013: 209-34.

173.

Mobley

2005 The Empty Men: The Heroic Tradition of Ancient Israel (New York: Doubleday).

174.

Mobley

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).

175.

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.

176.

Moskowitz

2015a

‘Judge Ibzan of Bethlehem: Judah or Zebulun?

Peshat and Derash’, JBQ 43.3: 154-57.

177.

Moskowitz

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

178.

Moster

D.Z.

2014 ‘The Levite of Judges 17–18’, JBL 133.4: 729-37.

179.

Müller

Pakkala

ter Haar Romeny

2014 ‘A Qumran Manuscript as Evidence of an Addition in the Masoretic Text: Judges 6:7-10’, in Evidence

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.

180.

Murphy

K.J.

2014 ‘“A Sword for YHWH and for Gideon!” The Representation of War in Judges 7:16–22’, in Kelle

Brad E.

Ames

Frank Ritchel

Wright

Jacob L.

(eds.), Warfare, Ritual, and Symbol in Biblical and Modern Contexts (Ancient Israel and Its Literature; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature)65-82.

181.

Murphy

K.J.

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

182.

Murphy

K.J.

forthcoming Gideon the Man? (New York: Oxford University Press).

183.

Na’aman

2005 ‘The Danite Campaign Northward (Judges XVII–XVIII) and the Migration of the Phocaeans to Massalia (Strabo IV 1,4)’, VT 55.1: 47-60.

184.

Na’aman

2011 ‘A Hidden Anti-Samaritan Polemic in the Story of Abimelech and Shechem (Judges 9)’, BZ 55.1: 1-20.

185.

Neef

H.-D.

2004 ‘Michas Kult und Jahwes Gebot: Jdc 17,1–18,31: Vom kultischen Pluralismus zur Alleinverehrung JHWHs’, ZAW 116.2: 206-22.

186.

Neef

H.-D.

2009

‘Eglon als “Kälbermann”?

Exegetische Beobachtungen zu Jdc 3:12–30’, VT 59.2: 284-94.

187.

Neef

H.-D.

2012 ‘Josuazeit und Richterzeit: Exegetische Beovachtungen zu Jdc 2,6–10’, ZAW 124.2: 229-43.

188.

Nelson

R.D.

2007a ‘Ideology, Geography, and the List of Minor Judges’, JSOT 31.3: 347-64.

189.

Nelson

R.D.

2007b ‘What is Achsah Doing in Judges?’, in Roetzel

Calvin J.

Foster

Robert L.

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

190.

Nelson

R.D.

2009 ‘Judges: A Public Canon for Public Theology’, WW 29.4: 397-406.

191.

A.H.-S.

2007 ‘Revisiting Judges 19: A Gothic Perspective’, JSOT 32.2: 199-215.

192.

Niditch

2008 Judges: A Commentary (OTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox).

193.

Niditch

2009 ‘Judges, Kingship, and Political Ethics: A Challenge to the Conventional Wisdom’, in Ahn

John J.

Cook

Stephen L.

(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.

194.

Niesiołowski-Spanò

. 2005

‘Where Should One Look for Gideon’s Ophra?

’, Bib 86.4: 478-93.

195.

Novick

2009 ‘He-Emîn in Jud 11,20 and the Semantics of Assent’, ZAW 121.4: 577-83.

196.

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).

197.

Okyere

2012 ‘Culture of Politico-Religious Intrigues (Judges 9:1–21): Implications for Africa’, Ogbomoso Journal of Theology 17.3: 57-75.

198.

Olson

D.T.

2004 ‘Buber, Kingship, and the Book of Judges: A Study of Judges 6–9 and 17–21’, in Batto

Bernard

Roberts

Kathryn

(eds.), David and Zion: Biblical Studies in Honor of J. J. M. Roberts (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns) 199-218.

199.

Ostriker

2009 ‘Fathers and Daughters: The Jephthah Issue and the Scream’, in Rooke

D.W.

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

200.

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.

201.

Paul

S.M.

2008 ‘“Plowing with a Heifer” in Judges 14:18: Tracing a Sexual Euphemism’, in Dolansky

Shawna

(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.

202.

Paul

S.M.

2010 ‘Samson on the Brink of Death’, VT 60.4: 664-65.

203.

Reis

P.T.

2005 ‘Uncovering Jael and Sisera: A New Reading’, SJOT 19.1: 24-47.

204.

Reis

P.T.

2006 ‘The Levite’s Concubine: New Light on a Dark Story’, SJOT 20.1: 125-46.

205.

Reiss

2009 ‘Jephthah’s Daughter’, JBQ 37.1: 57-63.

206.

Reiss

2014 ‘Samson: The Only Nazarite in the Hebrew Bible and His Women!’, SJOT 28.1: 133-46.

207.

Rezetko

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.

208.

Robinson

B.P.

2004 ‘The Story of Jephthah and His Daughter: Then and Now’, Bib 85.3: 331-48.

209.

Römer

1998

‘Why Would the Deuteronomists Tell about the Sacrifice of Jephthah’s Daughter?

’, JSOT 77: 27-38.

210.

Rooke

D.W.

2006 ‘Sex and Death, or, the Death of Sex: Three Versions of Jephthah’s Daughter (Judges 11:29–40)’, in Hempel

Charlotte

Lieu

Judith M.

(eds.), Biblical Traditions in Transmission: Essays in Honour of Michael A. Knibb (JSJSup, 111; Leiden: Brill) 249-71.

211.

Rosenstock

2012 ‘Dionysis in Israel: The Semantics of SHQ in the Hebrew Bible’, JSQ 19.4: 289-310.

212.

Ryan

R.J.

2007 Judges (Readings—A New Biblical Commentary; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press).

213.

Santos

D.A.

2009 ‘Ethically Cultured Interpretations: The Case of Eglon’s Murder (Judges 3)’, in Gershon

Galil

Geller

Mark

Alan

Millard

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

214.

Santos

D.A.

2011

‘Certo tipo ou um tipo certo de ambiguidade?

Uma exegese de Juízes 19’, Fides Reformata 16.2: 9-26.

215.

Sasson

J.M.

2009 ‘Ethically Cultured Interpretations: The Case of Eglon’s Murder (Judges 3)’, in Gershon

Galil

Geller

Mark

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.

216.

Sasson

J.M.

2013 ‘Jephthah: Chutzpah and Overreach in a Hebrew Judge’, in Vanderhooft

David S.

Winitzer

Abraham

(eds.), Literature as Politics, Politics as Literature: Essays on the Ancient Near East in Honor of Peter Machinist (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns) 405-20.

217.

Sasson

J.M.

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

218.

Scherer

A.G.

2003

‘Das Ephod im alten Israel’, UF

35: 589-604.

219.

Scherer

A.G.

2005a ‘Der Rhythmus der Schlacht: Die poetische Sprachgestalt von Jdc 5,19–22’, ZAW 117.4: 529-42.

220.

Scherer

A.G.

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.

221.

Scherer

A.G.

2007 ‘Die “kleinen” Richter und ihre Funktion’, ZAW 119.2: 190-200.

222.

Schipper

2003 ‘Narrative Obscurity of Samson’s HYDH in Judges 14.14 and 18’, JSOT 27.3: 339-53.

223.

Schipper

2011

‘What was Samson Thinking in Judges 16,17 and 16,20?

’, Bib 92.1: 60-69.

224.

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.

225.

Schneider

T.J.

2009 ‘Achsah, the Raped Pîlegeš, and the Book of Judges’, in McCabe

Elizabeth A.

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

226.

Schöpflin

2004 ‘Jotham’s Speech and Fable as Prophetic Comment on Abimelech’s Story: The Genesis of Judges 9’, SJOT 18.1: 3-22.

227.

Schroeder

2007 ‘Dismembering the Adulteress: Sixteenth-Century Commentary on the Narrative of the Levite’s Concubine (Judges 19–21)’, Seminary Ridge Review 9.2: 5-24.

228.

Schroeder

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

229.

Schulte

L.R.

Schneider

T.J.

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.

230.

Shalom-Guy

2007 ‘Li-Sugiyot “ha-par ha-shnay” bi-sifur ma’evako shel Gideon be-pulhan ha-ba‘al (Shoftim 6:25–32)’, Bet Mikra 52.2: 5-21.

231.

Shalom-Guy

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.

232.

Shalom-Guy

2010b ‘Three-Way Intertextuality: Some Reflections of Abimelech’s Death at Thebez in Biblical Narrative’, JSOT 34.4: 419-32.

233.

Shalom-Guy

2011

‘The Call Narratives of Gideon and Moses: Literary Convention or More?

’, JHS 11: 1-19.

234.

Shanks

2012 ‘Privies and Privacy’, BAR 38.2: 64-65.

235.

Sharon

D.M.

2006

‘Echoes of Gideon’s Ephod: An Intertextual Reading’, JANES

30: 89-102.

236.

Simon

D.X.

Jesmine Simon

L.-A.

2011

‘Jephthah—Victimizer and Victim: A Comparison of Jephthah and Characters in Genesis’, JANES

32: 117-31.

237.

Simon

D.X.

Jesmine Simon

L.-A.

2013 ‘“Household” (Dis)loyalties and Violence in Judges 14 and 15: Dignity of Gendered and Religious “Others” in a Dialogical Theological Praxis’, in Juliana

L. Claassens

Spronk

Klaas

(eds.), Fragile Dignity: Intercontextual Conversations on Scriptures, Family, and Violence (SemeiaSt, 72; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 259-72.

238.

Sivan

2013 ‘Sisera and Harosheth-goiim’, JBQ 41.2: 95-103.

239.

Sjöberg

2006 Wrestling with Textual Violence: The Jephthah Narrative in Antiquity and Modernity (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press).

240.

Sjöberg

2007 ‘Jephthah’s Daughter as Object of Desire or Feminist Icon’, BI 15.4-5: 377-94.

241.

Slager

2014 ‘How Many Idols Did Micah Have? (Judges 17.1–18.31)’, Bible Translator 65.3: 337-48.

242.

Smith

M.S.

2009 ‘What is Prologue is Past: Composing Israelite Identity in Judges 5’, in Ahn

John J.

Cook

Stephen L.

(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) 43-58.

243.

Smith

M.S.

2014 ‘Warfare Song as Warrior Ritual’, in Kelle

Brad E.

Ames

Frank Ritchel

Wright

Jacob L.

(eds.), Warfare, Ritual, and Symbol in Biblical and Modern Contexts (Ancient Israel and Its Literature; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature)165-86.

244.

Smith

M.S.

2016

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

78: 256-71.

245.

Smith

M.J.

2005a ‘The Failure of the Family in Judges: Part 1 Jephthah’, BS 162.647: 279-98.

246.

Smith

M.J.

2005b ‘The Failure of the Family in Judges: Part 2 Samson’, BS 162.648: 424-36.

247.

Smith

Mitzi J.

2009

‘Reading the Story of the Levite’s Concubine through the Lens of Modern-Day Sex Trafficking’, ATJ

41: 15-33.

248.

Spronk

2009 ‘From Joshua to Samuel: Some Remarks on the Origin of the Book of Judges’, in van Ruiten

Jacques

de Vos

J. Cornelis

(eds.), Land of Israel in Bible, History, and Theology: Studies in Honour of Ed Noort (VTSup, 124; Leiden: Brill) 137-49.

249.

Stanley

2013 ‘Judges 19: Text of Trauma’, in Brenner Yee (eds.) 2013: 275-90.

250.

Sterman

J.T.

2011 ‘Themes in the Deborah Narrative (Judges 4–5)’, JBQ 39.1: 15-24.

251.

Stone

2009a ‘How a Woman Unmans a King: Gender Reversal and the Woman of Thebez in Judges 9’, in Hawkins

Peter S.

Stahlberg

Lesleigh Cushing

(eds.), From the Margins 1: Women of the Hebrew Bible and their Afterlives (BMW, 18; Sheffield: Sheffield University Press) 71-85.

252.

Stone

2009b ‘What Happens when Achsah Gets Off Her Ass? Queer Reading and Judges 1 11–15’, in Sabbath

Roberta Sterman

(ed.), Sacred Tropes: Tanakh, New Testament, and Qur’an as Literature and Culture (BibInt, 98; Leiden: Brill) 409-20.

253.

Strawn

B.A.

2009 ‘Kĕpîr ’ărāyôt in Judges 14:5’, VT 59.1: 150-58.

254.

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

255.

Szpek

H.M.

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

256.

Tatu

2006 ‘Jotham’s Fable and the Crux Interpretum in Judges IX’, VT 56.1: 105-24.

257.

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 Heskett

Randall

Irwin

Brian

(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.

258.

Terry

D.J.

2010 ‘With the Jawbone of a Donkey: Shame, Violence and Punishment in the Samson Narrative’, in Daschke

Dereck

Kille

Andrew

(eds.), Cry Instead of Justice: The Bible and Cultures of Violence in Psychological Perspective (LHBOTS, 499; London: Bloomsbury/T&T Clark) 42-54.

259.

Trebolle Barrera

J.C

. 2008 ‘A Combined Textual and Literary Criticism Analysis: Editorial Traces in Joshua and Judges’, in Ausloos

Lemmelijn

Vervenne

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

260.

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.

261.

Tsang

2007

‘Violence and Gender: The Ugaritic “Violent Female” Tradition and the Story of Deborah in Judges 4’, Sino-Christian Studies

4: 95-108.

262.

Vainstub

2011 ‘Some Points of Contact between the Biblical Deborah War Traditions and Some Greek Mythologies’, VT 61.2: 324-34.

263.

Vander Stichele

. 2012 ‘Samson’s Hair and Delilah’s Despair: Reanimating Judges 16 for Children’, in Vander Stichele

Caroline

Pyper

Hugh S.

(eds.), Text, Image, and Otherness in Children’s Bibles: What is in the Picture? (SemeiaSt, 56; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature) 291-310.

264.

Victor

R.M.

2013 ‘Delilah—A Forgotten Hero (Judges 16:4-21)’, in Brenner Yee (eds.) 2013: 235-56.

265.

Walton

J.H.

2009 Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1&2 Samuel (Grand Rapids: Zondervan).

266.

Webb

2012 The Book of Judges (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans).

267.

Wilson

B.E.

2006 ‘Pugnacious Precursors and the Bearer of Peace: Jael, Judith, and Mary in Luke 1:42’, CBQ 68.3: 436-56.

268.

Wilson

S.M.

2014 ‘Samson the Man-Child: Failing to Come of Age in the Deuteronomistic History’, JBL 133.1: 43-60.

269.

Wilson

S.M.

2015 Making Men: The Male Coming of Age Theme in the Hebrew Bible (New York: Oxford University Press).

270.

Winbush

R.M.

2011a ‘Not a Mumbling Word’, in Sheerattan-Bisnauth

Patricia

(ed.), Righting Her-Story: Caribbean Women Encounter the Bible Story (Geneva: World Communion of Reformed Churches) 100-13.

271.

Winbush

R.M.

2011b ‘When Home is a Dangerous Place’, in Sheerattan-Bisnauth

Patricia

(ed.), Righting Her-Story: Caribbean Women Encounter the Bible Story (Geneva: World Communion of Reformed Churches) 174-80.

272.

Wong

2005 Compositional Strategy of the Book of Judges: An Inductive, Rhetorical Study (VTSup, 111; Leiden: Brill).

273.

Wong

2006a

‘Ehud and Joab: Separated at Birth?

’, VT 56.3: 399-412.

274.

Wong

2006b ‘Gideon: A New Moses?’, in Robert

Rezetko

Lim

Timothy H.

Brian

W. Aucker

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

275.

Wong

2007 ‘Song of Deborah as Polemic’, Bib 88.1: 1-22.

276.

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.

277.

Wright

J.L.

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

278.

Yamada

F.M.

2009 ‘Of Virtue and of Eating Shorts: Breaking Down the Configuration of Faithful Mother and Wayward Son in Judges and the Simpsons’, in Kirk-Duggan

Cheryl

Pippin

Tina

(eds.), Mother Goose, Mother Jones, Mommie Dearest: Biblical Mothers and their Children (SemeiaSt, 61; Leiden: Brill) 51-66.

279.

Yamada

F.M.

2004 ‘Shibboleth and the Ma(r)king of Culture: Judges 12 and the Monolingualism of the Other’, in Sherwood

Yvonne

(ed.), Derrida’s Bible: Reading a Page of Scripture with a Little Help from Derrida (RCC; New York: Palgrave Macmillan) 119-34.

280.

Yee

G.A.

2013 ‘The Woman Warrior Revisited: Jael, Fa Mulan, and American Orientalism’, in Brenner Yee (eds.) 2013: 175-90.

281.

Yee

(ed.) 2007 Judges and Method: New Approaches in Biblical Studies (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2nd edn).

282.

Yoder

J.C.

2015 Power and Politics in the Book of Judges: Men and Women of Valor (Minneapolis: Fortress).

283.

Yoder

N.H.

2012 ‘The Descent into Fear and Ascent into Trust of Judges 7:9–15’, Lutheran Forum 46.4: 15-18.

284.

Zogbo

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.

285.

Zsengellér

2013 ‘Forgiveness as an Exegetical Solution: A Short Note on Judges 17,1–5’, BN 159.1. https://www.uni-salzburg.at/fileadmin/multimedia/Bibelwissenschaft%20und%20Kirchengeschichte/Bibelwissenschaft/Abstract_159.pdf