JUDGES
81,
for
Hegesippus
(170)
states
that
Jude's
grandsons
were
small
farmers
in
Palestine,
and
were
brought
before
Domitian
(81-96)
and
contemptuously
dismissed.
4.
External
testimony.
—
In
the
age
of
the
Apostolic
Fathers
the
only
witness
to
Jude
is
the
Didache,
and
that
is
so
faint
as
to
count
for
little.
By
the
beginning
of
the
3rd
cent,
it
was
well
known
in
the
west,
being
included
in
the
Muratorian
Fragment
(c.
200),
commented
upon
by
Clement
of
Alexandria,
and
accepted
by
Origen
and
by
TertulUan.
Eusebius
places
it
among
the
'
dis-puted
'
books,
saying
that
it
had
little
early
recognition.
It
is
absent
from
the
Peshitta
version.
The
quotations
from
apocryphal
writings
hindered
its
acceptance,
but
the
early
silence,
on
the
assumption
of
its
genuineness,
is
to
be
accounted
for
chiefly
by
its
brevity
and
its
com-parative
unimportance.
R.
A.
Falconer.
JUDGES.
—
An
examination
of
Ex
18
shows
that
the
Hebrew
word
for
to
'judge'
means
originally
to
pro-nounce
the
oracle;
thus,
when
we
read
of
Moses
sitting
to
'judge
the
people'
(v."),
a
reference
to
vv.'*-
'*
shows
that
what
is
meant
is
the
giving
of
Divine
de-cisions:
'.
.
.
the
people
come
unto
me
to
inquire
of
God:'
when
they
have
a
matter
they
come
unto
me;
and
I
judge
between
a
man
and
his
neighbour,
and
I
make
them
know
the
statutes
of
God,
and
his
laws'
(of.
vv.'>-
"").
In
the
next
place,
the
same
chapter
shows
the
word
in
process
of
receiving
a
wider
applica-tion;
owing
to
the
increasing
number
of
those
who
come
to
seek
counsel,
only
specially
difficult
cases
are
dealt
with
by
Moses,
while
the
ordinary
ones
are
de-puted
to
the
heads
of
the
families,
etc.,
to
settle
(vv.^s^').
A
'judge'
was
therefore
originally
a
priest
who
pro-nounced
oracles;
then
the
elders
of
the
people
became
judges.
But
at
an
early
period
the
functions
of
the
'judges,'
at
any
rate
the
more
important
of
them,
were
exercised
by
a
chief,
chosen
from
among
the
elders
probably
on
account
of
superior
skill
in
warfare,
—
an
hereditary
succession
would,
however,
naturally
tend
to
arise
—
who
was
to
all
intents
and
purposes
a
king.
So
the
probabiUty
is
that
those
who
are
known
as
the
'judges'
in
popular
parlance
were
in
reahty
kings
in
the
ordinary
sense
of
the
word.
In
connexion
with
this
it
is
interesting
to
note
that
in
somewhat
later
times
than
those
of
the
'judges'
one
of
the
main
duties
of
the
king
was
to
judge,
see
e.g.
2
S
15'-«,
"...
there
is
no
man
deputed
of
the
king
to
hear
thee.
Absalom
said
moreover.
Oh
that
I
were
made
judge
in
the
land.
.
.
.
And-on
this
manner
did
Absalom
to
all
Israel
that
came
to
the
king
for
judgment'
(cf.,
further,
1
K
3',
2
K
15*);
moreover,
'judge'
and
'king'
seem
to
be
used
synonymously
in
Am
2',
Hos
7',
Ps
2'".
The
offer
of
the
kingship
(hereditary)
to
the
'judge'
Gideon
(Jg
S^^i.)
(ully
bears
out
what
has
been
said.
The
fact
probably
is
that
the
Deuteronomic
legislators,
on
theocratic
grounds,
called
those
rulers
'judges
'who
were
actually
kings
in
the
same
sense
as
Saul
was;
fundamentally
there
was
no
difference
between
the
two,
but
nominally
a
difference
was
impUed.
W.
O.
E.
Oesteeley.
JUDGES
(Book
of).—
1.
Name.—
The
Heb.
title
Shdphetlm
('Judges')
is
parallel
to
Melakhlm
('Kings');
both
are
abbreviations,
the
full
title
requiring
in
each
case
the
prefixing
of
'the
Book
of;
this
full
title
is
found
for
Judges
in
the
Syriac
Version,
for
Kings
in,
e.g.,
2
Ch
20"
(where
'of
Israel'
is
added)
24".
Just
as
the
title
'Kings'
denotes
that
the
book
contains
an
account
of
the
doings
of
the
various
kings
who
ruled
over
Israel
and
Judah,
so
the
title
'Judges'
is
given
to
the
book
because
it
describes
the
exploits
of
the
different
champions
who
were
the
chieftains
of
various
sections
of
Israelites
from
the
time
of
the
entry
into
Canaan
up
to
the
time
of
Samuel.
It
may
well
be
questioned
whether
the
title
of
this
book
was
originally
'Judges,'
for
it
is
difficult
to
see
where
the
difference
lies,
fundamentally,
between
the
'judges'
on
the
one
JUDGES
(BOOK
OF)
hand,
and
Joshua
and
Saul
on
the
other;
in
the
case
of
each
the
main
and
central
duty
is
to
act
as
leader
against
the
foes
of
certain
tribes.
The
title
'judge'
is
not
applied
to
three
of
these
chieftains,
namely,
Ehud,
Barak,
and
Gideon,
and
'
seems
not
to
have
been
found
in
the
oldest
of
the
author's
sources'
(Moore,
Judges,
p.
xil.).
In
the
three
divisions
of
which
the
Hebrew
Canon
is
made
up,
the
Book
of
Judges
comes
in
the
first
section
of
the
second
division,
being
reckoned
among
the
'Former
Prophets'
(Joshua,
Judges,
1
and
2
Sam.,
1
and
2
Kings),
the
second
section
of
the
division
comprising
the
prophetical
books
proper.
In
the
LXX
the
Book
of
Ruth
is
sometimes,
in
some
MSS,
included
in
that
of
Judges,
other
MSS
treat
the
Pentateuch
and
Jos.,
Jg.,
Ruth
as
one
whole.
[For
the
meaning
of
the
word
'judges'
see
preceding
article.]
2.
Contents.
—
The
book
opens
with
an
account
of
the
victories
gained
^y
Judah
and
Simeon;
Caleb
appears
as
the
leader-
of
the
tribe
of
Judah,
though
he
is
not
spoken
of
as
one
of
the
judges.
There
follows
then
an
enumeration
of
the
districts
which
the
Israelites
were
unable
to
conquer;
the
reason
for
this
is
revealed
by
the
messenger
of
Jahweh;
it
is
because
they
had
not
obeyed
the
voice
of
Jahweh,
but
had
made
covenants
with
the
people
of
the
land,
and
had
refrained
from
breaking
down
their
altars.
The
people
thereupon
lift
up
their
voices
and
weep
(whence
the
name
of
the
place,
Bochim),
and
sacrifice
to
Jahweh.
The
narrative
then
abruptly
breaks
off.
This
section
(l'-2')
serves
as
a
kind
of
Introduction
to
the
book,
and
certainly
cannot
have
belonged
originally
to
it;
'the
whole
character
of
Jg
11-25
gives
evidence
that
it
was
not
composed
for
the
place,
but
is
an
extract
from
an
older
history
of
the
Israelite
occupation
of
Canaan'
(Moore,
p.
4).
As
this
introduction
must
be
cut
away
as
not
belonging
to
our
book,
a
similar
course
must
be
followed
with
chs.
17-21;
these
form
an
appendix
which
does
not
belong
to
the
book.
It
will
be
best
to
deal
with
the
contents
of
these
five
chapters
before
coming
to
the
book
itself.
The
chapters
contain
two
distinct
narratives,
and
are,
in
their
original
form,
very
ancient;
in
each
narrative
there
occurs
twice
the
redactional
note,
'In
those
days
there
was
no
king
in
Israel'
(17"
18'
19'
21^5),
showing
that
the
period
of
the
Judges
is
implied.
Chs.
17.
18
tell
the
story
of
the
Ephraimite
Micah,
who
made
an
ephod
and
teraphim
for
himself,
and
got
a
Levite
to
be
a
'father
and
a
priest'
to
him;
but
he
is
persuaded
by
600
Danites
to
go
with
them
and
be
their
priest;
they
then
conquer
Laish
and
found
a
sanctuary
there,
in
which
a
graven
image
(which
had
been
taken
from
Micah)
is
set
up.
The
narrative,
therefore,
purports
to
give
an
account
of
the
origin
of
the
sanctuary
of
Dan,
and
it
seems
more
than
probable
that
two
traditions
of
this
have
been
interwoven
in
these
two
chapters.
In
chs.
19-21
the
story
is
told
of
how
a
concubine
of
a
certain
Levite
left
him
and
returned
to
her
father;
the
Levite
goes
after
her
and
brings
her
back.
On
their
return
they
remain
for
a
night
in
Gibeah,
which
belonged
to
the
Benjamites;
here
the
men
of
the
city
so
maltreat
the
concubine
that
she
is
left
dead
on
the
threshold
of
the
house
in
which
her
lord
is
staying;
the
Levite
takes
up
the
dead
body,
brings
it
home,
and,
after
having
cut
it
up,
sends
the
pieces
by
the
hands
of
messengers
throughout
the
borders
of
Israel,
as
a
call
to
avenge
the
outrage.
Thereupon
the
IsraeUtes
assemble,
and
resolve
to
punish
the
Benjamites;
as
a
result,
the
entire
tribe,
with
the
exception
of
six
hundred
men
who
manage
to
escape
to
the
wilderness,
is
annihilated.
Although
six
hundred
men
have
survived,
it
appears
inevitable
that
the
tribe
of
Benjamin
must
die
out,
for
the
Israelites
had
sworn
not
to
let
their
daughters
marry
Benjamites;
this
causes
great
distress
in
Israel.
However,
the
threatened
disaster
of
the
loss
of
a
tribe
is
averted
through
the
Israelites
procuring
four
hundred
maidens
from
Jabesh
in
Gilead,
the
remaining
two
hundred
