Judges 19 Reading in Context and Interte

Judges 19: Reading in Context and Intertextuality
Judges 19
Reading in Context and Intertextuality
Rachel Levy
Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 1

Contents
Page
1. Text of Judges 19, the Levite and his concubine 3
2. Introduction 6
3. Narrative 8
4. Rabbi Shlomi Yitzhaki (Rashi)’s commentary 11
5. Modern Feminist Commentaries 15
6. Context 17
7. Intertextuality 21
8. Conclusion 25
9. Bibliography 26

Judges1
Chapter 19
19:1 And it came to pass in those days, when there was no king in Israel, that there was a
certain Levite sojourning on the farther side of the hill-country of Ephraim, who took to him
a concubine out of Beth-lehem in Judah.
19:2 And his concubine played the harlot against him, and went away from him unto her
father's house to Beth-lehem in Judah, and was there the space of four months.
19:3 And her husband arose, and went after her, to speak kindly unto her, to bring her back,
having his servant with him, and a couple of asses; and she brought him into her father's
house; and when the father of the damsel saw him, he rejoiced to meet him.
19:4 And his father-in-law, the damsel's father, retained him; and he abode with him three
days; so they did eat and drink, and lodged there.
19:5 And it came to pass on the fourth day, that they arose early in the morning, and he
rose up to depart; and the damsel's father said unto his son-in-law: ‘Stay thy heart with a
morsel of bread, and afterward ye shall go your way.’
19:6 So they sat down, and did eat and drink, both of them together; and the damsel’s father
said unto the man: ‘Be content, I pray thee, and tarry all night, and let thy heart be merry.’
19:7 And the man rose up to depart; but his father-in-law urged him, and he lodged there
again.
19:8 And he arose early in the morning on the fifth day to depart; and the damsel's father
said: ‘Stay thy heart, I pray thee, and tarry ye until the day declineth’; and they did eat, both
of them.
19:9 And when the man rose up to depart, he, and his concubine, and his servant, his father-
in-law, the damsel's father, said unto him: ‘Behold, now the day draweth toward evening;
tarry, I pray you, all night; behold, the day groweth to an end; lodge here, that thy heart may
be merry; and to-morrow get you early on your way, that thou mayest go home.’
19:10 But the man would not tarry that night, but he rose up and departed, and came over
against Jebus--the same is Jerusalem; and there were with him a couple of asses saddled; his
concubine also was with him.
19:11 When they were by Jebus--the day was far spent--the servant said unto his master:
‘Come, I pray thee, and let us turn aside into this city of the Jebusites, and lodge in it.’
1
JPS Bible Translation, 1917.

19:12 And his master said unto him: ‘We will not turn aside into the city of a foreigner, that
is not of the children of Israel; but we will pass over to Gibeah.’
19:13 And he said unto his servant: ‘Come and let us draw near to one of these places; and
we will lodge in Gibeah, or in Ramah.’
19:14 So they passed on and went their way; and the sun went down upon them near to
Gibeah, which belongeth to Benjamin.
19:15 And they turned aside thither, to go in to lodge in Gibeah; and he went in, and sat him
down in the broad place of the city; for there was no man that took them into his house to
lodge.
19:16 And, behold, there came an old man from his work out of the field at even; now
the man was of the hill-country of Ephraim, and he sojourned in Gibeah; but the men of the
place were Benjamites.
19:17 And he lifted up his eyes, and saw the wayfaring man in the broad place of the city;
and the old man said: 'Whither goest thou? and whence comest thou?'
19:18 And he said unto him: 'We are passing from Beth-lehem in Judah unto the farther
side of the hill-country of Ephraim; from thence am I, and I went to Beth-lehem in Judah, and
I am now going to the house of the Lord; and there is no man that taketh me into his house.
19:19 Yet there is both straw and provender for our asses; and there is bread and wine also
for me, and for thy handmaid, and for the young man that is with thy servants; there is no
want of any thing.'
19:20 And the old man said: ‘Peace be unto thee; howsoever let all thy wants lie upon me;
only lodge not in the broad place.’
19:21 So he brought him into his house, and gave the asses fodder; and they washed their
feet, and did eat and drink.
19:22 As they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain base
fellows, beset the house round about, beating at the door; and they spoke to the master of
the house, the old man, saying: ‘Bring forth the man that came into thy house, that we may
know him.’
19:23 And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, and said unto them: ‘Nay,
my brethren, I pray you, do not so wickedly; seeing that this man is come into my house, do
not this wanton deed.
19:24 Behold, here is my daughter a virgin, and his concubine; I will bring them out now, and
humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you; but unto this man do not
so wanton a thing.’
19:25 But the men would not hearken to him; so the man laid hold on his concubine, and
brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until
the morning; and when the day began to spring, they let her go.
19:26 Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the
man's house where her lord was, till it was light.

19:27 And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out
to go his way; and, behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the
house, with her hands upon the threshold.
19:28 And he said unto her. ‘Up, and let us be going’; but none answered; then he took her
up upon the ass; and the man rose up, and got him unto his place.
19:29 And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine,
and divided her, limb by limb, into twelve pieces, and sent her throughout all the borders of
Israel.
19:30 And it was so, that all that saw it said: ‘Such a thing hath not happened nor been seen
from the day that the children of Israel came up out of the land of Egypt unto this day;
consider it, take counsel, and speak.’

1. Introduction
To the modern reader, the story of Judges 19, the Levite and his concubine, is perhaps one
of the most disturbing narratives found in the Hebrew Bible. In thirty verses we learn about a
marital crisis that ends with the cruel death of a woman and the outbreak of a bloody
civil war. It remains unclear to the reader whether the woman’s death is caused by the
preceding gang rape or by her husband - who cuts her up in twelve pieces when he finds her
at dawn. The twelve pieces he sends to all parts of Israel. This motivates the people of
Israel to fight the tribe of Benjamin, which they hold collectively responsible for the
woman’s death.
When one reads the narrative for the first time, it raises many questions. Why is the woman
approached as an object, and not as a person? Where is her voice in the story? Why did her
husband apparently not hesitate to throw her out to the mob? Why does he seem so
indifferent and insensitive to her when he finds her the next morning? How does he even
know she is dead when he cuts her up in pieces? Why does he have to cut her up in pieces to
begin with? How can he possibly place all responsibility of his wife’s tragic fate on the whole
tribe of Benjamin and instigate a civil war to take revenge on a whole tribe – while
knowing, just as all readers of the story know, that she had not been out there in the mob
without his cooperation?
The traditional Jewish commentaries are remarkably silent about these moral and ethical
issues. They do not raise the questions I raised above. By contrast, contemporary
commentaries on the Hebrew Bible focus primarily on these moral and ethic side of the
story
– the why’s and how’s behind the horrific scenes as well as its numerous gaps. With
the victim being a woman, Judges 19 particularly invited modern Feminist commentators to
re- interpret the story and discuss the role of women and gender issues in general.
In the following paper, I will discuss and analyze the narrative, following which I will analyze
how Rashi and, centuries later, how Feminist commentators looked at chapter 19. Next, I will
present my own theory, which is to read the chapter in its broader Biblical context and also
recognize the various lines of intertextuality between this particular chapter and other
books or portions of books within the Biblical canon.
Very often, particularly modern commentators tend to read this narrative as a single unit. In
my view, Judges 19 is one of those stories that can only be understood when we place it in
the larger Biblical literary context. Not only do I believe it is necessary to read Judges 19 as
an integral part of the ongoing story in the whole Book of Judges; I also think it cannot be
read

without the preceding Book of Joshua or the Book of Samuel following it. Only when we read
the story in its larger contest, the central themes as it were highlight themselves.
With regard to intertextuality, I will focus on the similarities and implicit cross-references
between our narrative and the text of the weekly Torah portion carrying the same name as
the Book of Judges: the portion of Shoftim or Judges (Deuteronomy 16:18-21:9).
Finally: the paper below is intended to present another way of reading and understanding
the narrative of the Levite and his concubine. It is, by no means, the only way to look at the
text.
November 2005

2. Narrative
Judges 19 is one of the last chapters in the Book of Judges. The book counts a total of 21
chapters, each more or less of similar length. The narrative in our chapter follows at the
end of the Book of Judges, but that does not necessarily imply that this narrative takes
place after the stories we read earlier in the same book. As I will explain in further
detail in the chapter on Context, the central line in the book may not be a chronological
report of events, with each chapter representing another time frame, but a thematic
report of events, with each chapter being part of the larger thematic chain. I think it is by
no means certain we are dealing with a historical narrative. That too will be discussed
further down in greater detail.
Judges 19 consists of thirty verses. In the preceding chapters we have seen how various
judges – leaders – have dealt with the socio-political problems of the Israelites and their
neighbouring peoples. In the chapters following this story, a civil war erupts between the
Israelites, or, to be more precise, between all Israelite tribes and the tribe of Benjamin.
It is the narrative of Judges 19, the gang rape of the Levite’s concubine, which leads up to
the civil war. Her abuse and subsequent death trigger the Israelites to fight the whole
tribe of Benjamin who they hold collectively responsible for the tragic events.
The story begins by stating the setting of the narrative: it takes place “when there was no
king in Israel” (verse 1). Next, we meet the main characters: the Levite and his concubine,
after which we learn their personal story. The Levite and his concubine had marital
problems, she therefore returned to her father, and after some time passed, the
Levite came to fetch her. They pass a few days together at her father’s house, and then
return home. It is the journey home where our actual story begins. Unwilling to lodge in
a strange city not belonging to the Israelites, the Levite chooses to lodge in Gibeah.
However, he finds this an unwelcome place. It is not until late that an old man takes him
into his home.
Once there, the people of Gibeah surround the house and demand that the Levite come
out so that they can have sexual relations with him. In an attempt to save the honour of
his guest, the host offers his own daughter and the Levite’s wife. The mob refuses, and at
that point the Levite grabs his concubine and forces her out. His deed works: they
stop harassing the host, no longer demand the Levite, and in stead satisfy themselves
with his concubine. They abuse her all night. The next day, the Levite finds her at his
doorstep – dead or nearly dead. He takes her home and cuts her up into twelve
pieces, and sends

these to all the tribes of Israel as a warning, a reminder, and a request to take
vengeance: “There has nothing happened nor has there been seen anything like this
from the day that the children of Israel came up from the land of Egypt until this
day; concern yourself about it, take counsel, and speak.” With these words, the chapter
closes.
In the following chapter, the Levite assembles the tribes, provides a slightly altered
version of what happened. He twists the narrative a little in his own interest: he says the
mob forced him to throw out his wife, avoiding the fact that he himself initiated her
forced departure from the house. By telling the story this way, he eliminates or at least
diminishes his own involvement and responsibility for what happened. His words
motivate the tribes to wage a civil war that subsequently turns out to be bloody and
disastrous for both sides. It ends with a certain reconciliation: the tribe of Benjamin is
spared from disappearing altogether because the rest of Israel assists the men in
acquiring new brides, enabling them to build new families and guarantee both the
continued existence of Benjamin, but also preserve the twelve-tribe unit of Israel.
Table 1 – Schematic overview of events in Judges 19
Verses Events
1 Historical (socio/political as well as
chronological setting): the era that
Israel does not have a stable,
established
leadership.
2-9 Presentation of main characters, Levite
and concubine, and the events (marital
crisis)
leading up to central events of narrative.
10-21 Journey back from Bethlehem to
mountains of Ephraim, lodging at Gibeah
22-25 Mob surrounds the house, demands the
male guest, receives the concubine and
gang rapes her all night.
26-30 Levite finds his wife, cuts her up and mails
the pieces to all Israelite tribes as a
warning and reminder, and the start of

the
civil war.

The story of the rape of the concubine is one, which, like many Biblical stories, leaves a
number of important gaps. We do not know, for example, the exact nature of the marital
crisis. Did the concubine cheat on her husband? Or did she merely leave him following an
argument? And why does her father try to keep his son-in-law from leaving on the fourth
day?
The most important gaps and subsequent questions come up in the central part of the
narrative. What do the ‘men of wickedness’ (verse 22) actually mean when they want the
Levite to be brought out? What is their purpose? Do they wish to have homosexual
relations with him because they are homosexually oriented? Or do they propose
homosexual relations as a way to violate, degrade and feminize him2? In other words,
what is going on here? Is it a culture clash (the Levite’s heterosexual culture versus the
homosexual culture of the men of Gibeah) or is this an outright act of violence and
degradation? The text is not clear in this respect.
The third important gap occurs upon the woman’s arrival back home. We see her return
to the house after being gang raped – abused but apparently alive – following which she
collapses on the doorstep. The next morning, her husband finds her with her hands on
the threshold, not responding to his words. He picks her up, takes her home, and cuts
her into twelve pieces. But nowhere does the text actually tell us when she dies. Does
she die on the threshold, after her abuse? Or is she merely unconscious and is it her
husband who actually kills her when he cuts her up?
The fourth important gap we encounter at the very end of the story. Why does the Levite
cut up his wife into twelve pieces and involve all of Israel in his misery? What does he
have in mind when he does that?
I will argue, below, that the Levite clearly planned a civil war, and that he knew very well
what he was doing when he sent his concubine’s limbs to the tribes of Israel. I will also
argue that it is one of main reasons we should first and foremost place this
narrative within the larger context of Judges, as well as previous and subsequent Biblical
books.
But before that, let us discuss the way Jewish commentators analyzed and interpreted
Judges 19.
2
See: Ilse Mullner, “Lethal Differences, Sexual Violence as violence against others in
Judges 19”. Mullner argues that the demand by the men of Gibeah to have sexual
relations with the Levite, must be seen as the ultimate way to degrade a man in Biblical
times – by treating a man like woman. She also points to the fact that most likely this
was only possible because the Levite was considered a stranger - among the
Benjaminites in this particular case but also among the Israelites in general; after all the
Levites where the only tribe without land, making them strangers and always left to the
grace and hospitality of others. In the case of this Levite, his status as a stranger has
tragic consequences.

3. Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki’s Commentary
Of the many Jewish commentators I could chose to analyze, I have chosen to take a
closer look at the interpretation of the early Medieval Jewish commentator Rabbi
Shlomo Yizhaki, known by his acronym Rashi (1040-1105). Rashi’s commentary partly
includes a compilation of existing commentaries until his lifetime. His choice to include
this or that interpretation comes forth from his own view about the text at large. So
while he comments the Biblical texts on a word-by-word basis, he clearly places each
narrative within a larger context, both literary as well as theological.
This also becomes clear when we analyze the way he looks at Judges 19. Rashi starts out
by addressing the first gap in the biblical text – the nature of the marital problems. What
really happened between the Levite and his concubine? Did she merely take off to her
father’s home following a quarrel, or did more happen between the two?
Rashi takes a closer look at the problematic two keywords of our verse – ‘Va-tizneh alav’
(19:2), and interprets the word to mean that she actually cheated on her husband.
According to Rashi, the word ‘va-tizneh’ is necessarily associated with ‘going out’ or
‘leaving’, and thereby refers to her actively seeking the love of others. Interestingly, Rashi
refrains from establishing whether she actually had sexual relations with others; he
merely notes she went out to seek them.
In doing so, he takes an interesting, double-layered position. On the one hand he puts
the responsibility for the crisis on the concubine, while on the other hand he mitigates
the meaning of the word ‘va-tizneh’ by interpreting the word as an action of
desire, as opposed to an action of consummated sexual relations.
Rashi does not comment any verse between 3 through 8. This is particularly remarkable
because the narrative gives us exclusive insight into the marital relations at this point:
the man goes after his concubine in an attempt to persuade her to return. Earlier, Rashi
noted how his concubine was actively seeking the love of others outside the marital
home; yet when her husband goes after her, despite everything, to get her back, he
remains silent.
Rashi’s silence is all the more telling, because the Torah strongly condemns extra-marital
relations3. We would have expected Rashi to say this man is a fool, or worse, a violator of
the Torah which explicitly orders a stringent policy when it comes to adultery. Even

3
See, for example, Leviticus 19:10, where the community is commanded to put to death
both the male and female adulterer – with the distinction that in this particular verse
the Torah speaks about an ‘eshet re’ehu’, the legal wife of his fellow man, and not about
a concubine.

though the Torah usually speaks about legally married couples – not a man and his
concubine – when discussing adultery, it is remarkable how Rashi simply refrains from
comment.
It is, in fact, more surprising if we realize that the Levite represents the tribe of special
servants of God, the tribe we most expect to abide God’s commandments.
At the same time, Rashi’s lack of comment on verse 3 perhaps explains why he mitigates
the meaning of the word ‘va-tizneh’ in the preceding verse. After all, had he explained
the word as if the concubine actually committed adultery in the plain, physical, sexual
meaning of the word, then how could we, the readers, even sympathize with the Levite
in the rest of the narrative? After all, what man – particularly in Biblical times – runs after
a concubine who sleeps around and still expects the story to end well? In other words, by
mitigating the meaning of ‘vatizneh’, Rashi enables the reader to continue to identify
with our main character, the Levite.
In verse 12, Rashi finds it necessary to stress the location of the narrative: our main
characters, the Levite and his concubine, have arrived in the land of the tribe Benjamin.
This remark is superfluous: exactly two verses later the Biblical text itself will tell us we
are in the lands of Benjamin. This extra focus on the fact that we are in the land of
Benjamin is clearly not because Rashi wants to provide simple geographical information.
In stead, Rashi seems to sketch the socio-political situation of the narrative leading up to
a civil war. He makes sure we realize the facts: Our main character is the Levite, the tribe
without land, whose people are strangers wherever they go. This Levite originally comes
from the mountains of Ephraim (north) and travels from Judah (the south) through the
lands of Benjamin (located between Ephraim and Judah) back home. Earlier we saw he
feared to lodge with the Jebusites and in stead preferred the Benjaminites, a fellow
Israelite tribe from whom he expected safety and hospitality. Still, the land of Benjamin is
neither his homeland nor that of his concubine, and basically the Levite is nothing but an
unprotected stranger in foreign lands.
Between verse 12 and 22, Rashi only makes small remarks, and, interesting, does not
comment on the fact that the only resident of Gibeah who provided hospitality to our
main character, is in fact someone from his home country – an old man from Ephraim. By
not commenting on this verse, Rashi silently refers us back to the text and the socio-
political circumstances it conveys. First, the narrator shared the Levite’s expectations,
and now we are told what reality looks like. Here he is, in the land of Benjamin, because
he felt more secure there than among the Jebusites. But the only one to provide
hospitality turns out to

be an old man from his homeland of Ephraim. There could not be a bigger
disenchantment.
In verse 22, Rashi addresses another issue I touched upon in the beginning of this paper
– the nature of the demand of the ‘wicked men’. Here, Rashi is unequivocal in his
judgement that the mob demands to have homosexual relations. He also stresses that
the man’s life was in danger, referring to the Levite’s own version of what happened
that night which he will later tell (Judges 20:5).
The biblical text itself does not tell us the man was about to die. We do not know to what
extent he found himself in a life-threatening situation. It is the Levite himself who later
claims he was. By accepting the Levite’s version of the events, Rashi mitigates the
subsequent event of that tragic night: how the Levite throws out his concubine into the
mob. Without actually explicating anything, Rashi tells us here the Levite did so only
when he was forced to do so, and only because his own life was in immediate danger.
His silence on the verses that follow only confirms this reading. The events described in
verses 23-27 mostly repeat and strengthen the picture Rashi has depicted for us: the
situation was impossible and the responsibility for the fate of the concubine does lie
primarily with the man of Gibeah, not with the Levite or his host, who were powerless.
Verse 28 brings us to another gap in the narrative: was the woman dead or alive? Here,
too, Rashi helps the reader to understand clearly who is responsible for the death of the
concubine and who is not. From the fact that she does not answer the Levite, he
concludes she is already dead. While the text does not disclose anything in this respect,
Rashi clearly aims to stress the woman’s death was the exclusive responsibility of the
men of Gibeah, and not something the Levite had any control over or involvement in.
That is, most likely, why Rashi also does not need to comment any further on the closing
verses. The picture is clear to us: a man, a Levite, a stranger from the mountains of
Ephraim, seeks hospitality among his fellow Israelite tribesmen. During the night, those
whom he thought would provide a safe haven for him, turn out to be his enemy. First,
they do not show him any hospitality, and when finally someone - another ‘foreigner’
like him
- in the town does, he is attacked and ends up in a life-threatening situation. Forced to
save himself and his (male) dignity, he throws out his concubine – the concubine he
loved so much that earlier he came to get her back, even though she sought after a new
love. Can we be surprised the man’s dignity and honour is damaged? What else do we
expect from this man but fury, anger, and a wish for vengeance?

Rashi, to sum it up, does all he can to make sure we identify and sympathize with
our main character, the Levite. It is not the concubine or her fate that takes a central
place, or even a minor place, in his story. He is not concerned with the way she is tossed
around – even after being thrown out to the mob, the Levite does not accord her dignity.
He opens the front door and gives her orders: ‘arise and let us go’ (verse 28). There is no
inquiry about her wellbeing, no wondering, no worry, no care, no compassion. The text
provides no emotions from the man regarding his wife.
We only see our main character having feelings over the fact his own (male) dignity was
damaged – by the improper proposition for homosexual relations, and by taking away his
beloved concubine. He takes centre stage – not his feelings for her. It is not her death
that saddens and infuriates him; it is what her death means to him and his reputation,
which infuriates him.
Rashi’s commentary mainly highlights the existing themes in the narrative (i.e. the socio-
political situation). He neither adds, nor diverts the readers attention from the line
already set forth in the biblical text. In this sense, he remains true to his reputation
as a close reader and commentator.

4. Modern Feminist commentaries
The departure point of modern Feminist scholars is completely different from that of Jewish
commentators, particularly Rashi. They do not feel obliged to read the story from within, i.e.
by sticking to the main narrative line, themes, and characters. The basic underlying question
is not: what does the narrator try to convey to his readership, but: how should we look at
the gender roles, and particularly the role of women, in this narrative? Originally, the
narrative forces the reader to identify and sympathise with the Levite, a line that Rashi
reinforces.
Looking at it from this new perspective, we are officially shifting our focus from what is
written and explicated (the events that happened to the Levite and how he experienced
these) to what is only scarcely touched upon (the events that happened to the concubine,
and how she experienced these).
On the one end, this approach creates space and relief: finally we can focus on what we,
modern readers, perceive as the real victim: the concubine. Most moral and ethical issues
that appear in this text remain suppressed as long as we focus on the Levite, can be dealt
with now that we focus on the concubine. Among others, we opens the way to address the
controversial circumstances (was husband an accomplice or a victim himself?) under which
the concubine was thrown into the mob.
On the other hand, by removing ourselves too much from the text, we risk ending up reading
too many things in the text that are not there or which are simply too far-fetched.
Phyllis Trible’s interpretation of the Judges 19 4 is an example of what happens when the
narrative becomes subservient to the scholar’s intention to discuss certain themes. In stead
of the narrative becoming a topic of interpretation, the narrative serves the particular
argument the author wishes to make (“women in Biblical times were always victimized”, in
the case of Trible).
Jones-Warsaw5 embarks on similar, though much more differentiated and more critical path
than Trible. Jones-Warsaw also has a clear opinion of gender roles and the legal and social
position of women in Biblical times – which she presents in the beginning of her article – but
subsequently analyzes the text on a word-by-word level to argue her case. In doing so, she
too encounters the same textual problems and gaps discussed above (e.g. the nature of
marital crisis, why does her husband wait so long before he comes to get her back, what do
we know
4
Phyllis Trible, Texts of Terror: literary Feminist readings of Biblical narratives, 1984.
5
Koala Jones-Warsaw, ‘Toward a Womanist Hermeneutic”. In: A Feminist Companion to
Judges, ed. A. Brenner.

about the relationship between father-in-law and son-in-law, and about the position of the
woman, from the way they address each other and the way the woman, who is the subject
of the narrative, is absent in verses 3-9?). By and large, Jones-Warsaw regards the narrative
as one where the language of power automatically points to positions of power. I.e. when
the concubine goes back to her ‘master’, this indicates and stresses her inferior position
towards her husband, according to Jones-Warsaw. She draws a similar conclusion when the
text refers to the old man from Ephraim as a ‘sojourner’ or ‘resident’ of Gibeah – contrary to
what we earlier saw in Rashi, who contrasted the Benjaminites with the Levite from
Ephraim, and bonded the Levite with the old man based on their common country of origin,
Jones-Warsaw interprets the old man’s foreign status as an indication of the old man’s own
state of powerlessness and unprotectedness in the Benjaminite city.
As Jones-Warsaw herself notes, she diverges from Trible in her attempt to read the story in a
broader context. Reading the Judges 19 as a story on its own account, turning it into a story
of female victimization, is reading only part of this narrative. In the following chapters I will
argue that reading the text as an autonomous unit in fact ignores the most important
themes of this narrative (which are, very decidedly, not the women’s issues).
The need to put Judges 19 in the context of the Book of Judges becomes even more urgent
when we read how Mieke Bal summarizes our narrative. Judges 19, she writes, is ‘the most
horrible story in the Bible of the rejection, gang-rape, murder and dismemberment of a
young woman whose body is subsequently used as writing.’6
While all these events do indeed occur in Judges 19, I strongly object the idea that these are
the central themes of the narrative. In my view, the events that happen to the woman in our
narrative are merely instrumental for the narrator in speaking about a completely different
topic. Whereas Bal’s comparisons between the Biblical story and its various literary and
artistic representations are certainly intriguing, I think she drifts off too far from the Biblical
text itself.
That is not surprising: art does not exist without freedom of expression. As soon as we cross
the boundary from textual hermeneutics to artistic representations of Biblical texts, we
have by definition left the field of close-reading.

6
Mieke Bal, “A body of Writing: Judges 19.” In: A Feminist Companion to Judges, ed. A.
Brenner, p. 209.

5. Context
Along with scholars like Yaira Amit, Ilse Mullner, Carolyn Pressler, and Marc Zvi Brettler, I
think that Judges 19 cannot be read as an autonomous unit. Like Amit, I first of all
connect the chapter to the last two closing chapters. Chapter 19 then becomes the
prelude to something bigger – the onset of a civil war between Israel and the tribe of
Benjamin. The civil war turns out to be a bloody war, with the tribe of Benjamin initially
leading and being victorious, but ultimately ending almost destroyed. It is only when the
war is over that the rest of Israel realizes what has happened. Waking up to the new
reality
– the tribe of Benjamin perhaps dying out – they come to its rescue, albeit that abducting
wives for the tribe remains rather controversial to eyes of the modern reader.
As Amit, Brettler and Mullner correctly note, the civil war in these closing chapters
certainly seems to point towards a polemic against the tribe of Benjamin.
This brings us to a new question: what caused this polemic? Was it really ‘only’ the gang
rape of the concubine that led to the civil war? Or was there more going on?
In order to answer this question, it is important to look for the central themes and
phenomena in the whole Book of Judges. By studying the way the narrator discusses the
tribes and describes inter-tribal relations we may perhaps discover the (other) causes
of the civil war.
If we follow the line set forth by the Book of Judges, we see that all tribes except Asher
and Reuben deliver at least one judge in Israel’s pre-monarchic period. This is clearly not
a coincidence, or a heavenly sign, but a literary choice. The idea that each tribe
contributed equally to the contemporary political leadership, one after another, sounds
too beautiful to be true – and most likely it is.
It would be more realistic to think that, for example, each tribe had its own leaders
throughout the pre-monarchic period, but that the editor of the Book of Judges chose to
include only one Judge of each tribe. The idea behind that editorial choice seems
obvious
– to depict the Israelite people as a single twelve-tribe unit, in which each tribe as an
equal share, and in which no tribe stands above the other.
This is what I referred to in Chapter 1, when I said that perhaps Judges must not be seen,
first and foremost, as a chronological report of events, with each chapter representing a
separate historical time frame.

Instead, each chapter in the book perhaps serves to prove the central theme or message
of the book the writer(s) want(s) to convey to the reader. I would summarize the
theme or

message as: ‘Israel is one, all tribes participate in its leadership, each tribe has its turn in
providing at least one judge.’
Table 2 – the Judges of the Book of Judges and their tribal origin
Judge Tribe
Othniel, son of Kenaz Judah
Ehud, son of Gera Benjamin
Shamgar, son of Anath Levi
Deborah – Barak Ephraim – Naphtali
Gideon, Abimelech Menasseh
Tolah, son of Puah Issachar
Yair the Gileadite, Yephtah the Gileadite Menasseh
Ibzan (Boaz) Judah
Elon Zebulun
Abdon Ephraim
Samson Dan
Nevertheless, when reading all chapters of Judges more closely, we can discern a
differentiation between the importance of the tribes. In fact, only a few tribes are
discussed at length: Menasseh, Ephraim, Judah, Benjamin, and Levi. The setting of most
stories in Judges is the land where these tribes reside, and their towns and villages. In so
far as other tribes and their lands, towns and villages play a role, this role is a minor one.
The other tribes play, so to speak, the second violin. The attention the writer(s) and
editor(s) of Judges give to the five tribes described above, seems to indicate that what
we read is the literature of these tribes, more than a literature of all of Israel.
This is not a phenomenon we encounter for the first time in Judges. In Joshua too the
centre stage is taken by a minority of the tribes. The majority of the tribes come across
primarily in lists and factual records of events.
Looking at the inter-tribal relations from this perspective, we are one step closer to
answer the question why Judges ends with a civil war against Benjamin. The tribes
that receive the most important role in Judges (as well as in Joshua before), are
geographically more or less in the same area – the centre of what is today Israel and
Jordan, extending from the west to the east of the Jordan river. With the Jordan River

functioning as a geographical boarder, the nucleus of all events seems to be west of

the river. To be more precise, the

centre of most events can be located in the country of Judah (south), Benjamin
(centre) and Ephraim (north), with the Levites, the geographically omnipresent tribe,
entering the stage anywhere anytime.
If we now put the Biblical text aside for a moment, and take a good look at the
geographical map, much becomes clear to us. Judah is located towards the more desert-
like (economically poor) south. Ephraim in the north is more fertile, but mountainous,
and therefore not attractive for agriculture. Squeezed in between those to, in the more
fertile, more densely populated (Jebus/Jerusalem), and strategically most interesting
area, we find Benjamin.
Neither the book of Judges, nor the previous Book of Joshua, nor subsequent Biblical
books, deal with the socio-economic consequences for a tribe of being located in a
particular area of the land of Canaan. The relationship between a tribes’ geographical
location for economic development, and consequences it as for political relations with
other tribes, plays no role in the text. This is surprising: it is highly unlikely that factors
like geographic location and socio-economical circumstances in the lands did not
influence intertribal politics.
Most likely, relations between Judah and Ephraim on the one hand, and Benjamin on the
other had not been smoothly for quite some time before the Levite and his concubine
travelled through the land of Benjamin. Benjamin held strategic and economically viable
lands, and it found itself bordered by tribes that did not have the same resources nor the
same strategic advantage.
In my opinion, the story of the rape of the concubine, is, more than a story about the
abuse of a woman. The story figures in the Bible because it enables the (anti-Benjamite)
writer(s) and/or editor(s) of Judges to justify the civil war that followed. One of the ways
they legitimized the war, was by telling us the horrific story of the gang rape; another
way was by writing how all tribes of Israel participated in the civil war. It is not the public
assembly at which the Levite tells his story, which determines that war will begin. All
Biblical readers know a war will start the moment the Levite cuts up his concubine and
sends her limbs to all tribes. From the fact that Saul does the same with an ox (1 Samuel
11:7), we can conclude that apparently this was a way to alarm the people war was on its
way.
Third, the fact that it concerns the wife of a Levite plays a role too. The Levite, not having
land himself, belongs to all of Israel. In a way he represents all of Israel. He is God's
servant more than the common people. Because he does not have an earthly,
geographical

heritage, his status is non-political, impartial, neutral, so to speak. He stands above the
parties – yet the Benjaminites pull him into their conflict with Ephraim and Judah.
The fact that the Levite comes from Ephraim, while his concubine originates from Judah,
is another important argument for my hypothesis that the so-called war from eleven
against one tribe, was in fact a conflict between three (Benjamin, Judah, Ephraim) and
perhaps four (including Levi).
As several modern scholars (see the ones mentioned above) also note, the polemic
against the tribe of Benjamin does not stop when the Book of Judges ends. The first
Israelite king, Saul, is from the tribe of Benjamin too. This makes us wonder – does the
Book of Judges depict Benjamin as a tribe of rapists to prepare us for a king who cannot
possibly become our favourite king? Or is the anointed king doomed to fail because he
originates from Benjamin, a tribe that is morally compromised to begin with?
Either way, it seems clear that reading the story of the concubine as a story of female
misery, is misreading the actual message. The only way we will understand this narrative
best, is if we put it in the larger Biblical context, including the non-written socio-political
context. Tragic as the concubine’s fate may be, the narrative of her fate is there not to
tell us, first and foremost, about her tragic death or the controversial circumstances that
led up to it. Her story only has an instrumental function in recounting the more essential
theme of the Book of Judges. Although the writer has made a meticulous effort to
describe the twelve-tribe unit as cohesive (e.g. by describing how they took turns in
providing a judge), the central theme remains the leadership crisis. The fact that
Benjamin, Judah, Ephraim and Menasseh appear most elaborately in both Joshua and
Judges, point to the fact that most likely these were the most important tribes, who
struggled for power among themselves.
It becomes even more interesting if we look at the heritage of David, the favourite king
and the founder of the Davidic dynasty. In 1 Samuel 16:1, we meet him as
originating from Bethlehem (located in the land of Judah); in 1 Samuel 17:12, David is the
son of a man from Ephraim. The tribal feud between Ephraim/Judah and Benjamin,
which began in the time of Judges, continues through the struggle for power and
popularity between Saul (Benjaminite) and David (Ephraim/Judah). It only ends when
David, i.e. Judah and Ephraim combined, becomes king and turns Jerusalem into his
capital, defeating Benjamin.

6. Intertexuality
There is another way of putting Judges 19 in a broader context. As we noted before, the
narrative is the prelude to a civil war and the closure of the Book of Judges, an era of intense
socio-political unrest and upheaval in Israel. There is no consistent leadership, and even
though each time a new leader appears on stage, he turns out to have (major) imperfections.
He does not to listen to God when he should. He acts in ways that are contradictory to
many of God’s commandments. The same is true for the Israelite people. Judges is a
narrative of reward and punishment: God rewards the Israelite people when they listen to
Him. He delivers the enemies of the Israelite people into their hands and assists them in
establishing themselves in the land of Israel. But time and again they forget about God,
following which they turn to other gods or merely refuse to obey Him. When that happens,
misery and disaster occur – God’s punishment.
In that sense, the book of Judges is the realization of Gods warnings to the Jewish people in
Deuteronomy, particularly the latter part, chapters 16:18-21:9, also known as the portion of
Shoftim or Judges. I do not think it is coincidental that the Masoretic Torah readings
have been divided in such a way that we have portion that is not only entitled ‘Judges’ but
also deals primarily with the issue of Jewish leadership and justice Thematically, this portion
includes many of the themes we later encounter in the Book of Judges.
Table 3 – Schematic overview of themes in Parashat Shoftim (Deuteronomy 16:18-21:9)
Verse Theme
18-21 Justice, the judicial system, leadership
16:22, 17:1 God is the only God
17:2-8 Justice
17:9-13 Status and role of the Judges, the priests
and the Levites; they are the teachers of the
Torah
and a role model for all of Israel

17:13-20 Leadership and Monarchy; the dangers of

a Monarchy and the standards a king should
meet

18:1-8 Status of Levite; they are consecrated to the

service of God and will have no part in the
earthly heritage of Israel – no land. The
commandment to offer hospitality to the
Levite.
18:9 Israel must behave better than the
other
peoples and may not commit the criminal
acts other peoples commit
18:10-22 Other peoples are idolaters; Israel must
serve
God
19:1-10 How to prevent blood vengeance and the
killing of the innocent; the three ‘safe
haven’
cities.
19:11-21 Need for true justice
Chapter 20, 21 Laws of warfare, need for true justice
The text in Deuteronomy is not a story: what we read is almost a speech containing
provisions, warnings, and commandments. Israel is ordered to choose its leaders carefully, to
be critical towards its leaders and to make sure they do not abuse their power. The need of
justice and fair judgements is stressed, regardless of a person’s socio-economic status. Israel
should behave better than other peoples, observe Gods commandments with regard to the
rule of law, and it may also not serve any gods apart from the One God. Bad behaviour must
be eradicated completely from society. Enemies must be fought. The Levite, who has no
heritage in the form of land, is given a special, almost aristocratic status. He serves God and
functions as one of the elite groups leading the people. He is paid for his services by being
provided hospitality and the basic necessities (food).
In short, this section in Deuteronomy provides the theoretical framework of Israelite
society. It describes how society should be organized and how the legal system should
function and maintain that ideal social order.
The portion of Shoftim, Judges, describes, among others, an ideal situation. This is true for all

topics that appear in the text: the social and legal order at large, the role and function –
rights and duties – of the leadership, the people and, finally, their respective interaction.
This sense

of idealism resonates, among others, in pleonastic phrases like ‘tzedek tzedek tirdof’, ‘Justice
justice shall you pursue….’ (Deuteronomy 16:20). The pleonasm here functions to stress the
extraordinary character of the justice the Israelites must pursue. Regular justice does not
suffice; they must strive for ‘righteous justice’, mishpat tzedek.
The Book of Judges, including Judges 19, takes us into the reality of the Israelite society built
in the Land of Israel several centuries later. We jump from theory (Deuteronomy) to practise
(Book of Judges), from ideals to life.
It is important to note here, that although definitely interesting, neither the question
regarding the actual historicity of the Bible, or the dating of Deuteronomy and the Book of
Judges, are relevant for our current literary analysis. What we can restrict ourselves to, is the
question whether or not there exists a literary relationship between the two texts, Judges 19
and the portion of Judges in Deuteronomy.
I would say there is. Practically all themes and issues we encountered in the Deuteronomic
Portion of Judges (plus the chapters immediately following this portion) are addressed in the
Book of Judges. Deuteronomy informs us of the special status of the Levite. It is there that
we learn of his special status: he is given political, religious and social power, but
economically he is made powerless and in that sense delivered to the goodwill of the fellow
Israelite tribes. The opposite happens to the other tribes. Most chances for political, religious
and social leadership are taken way, but their land ownership empowers them economically.
Deuteronomy stresses the need to be critical of one’s leaders but to obey them once
installed as leadership. It describes the effort one must undertake to prevent unnecessary
bloodshed and repeats the requirement to investigate a case before making a judgement, let
alone or act upon it blindly. It orders the Israelites to do all they can to prevent people from
taking revenge; it commands them to create cities serving as ‘safe havens’ for those fleeing
from people who may take revenge.
Judges 19 is a story of revenge and incredible bloodshed, including the bloodshed of
innocent people. The rights of the Levite, described meticulously in Deuteronomy, are
violated grossly by the masses, but the Levite himself violates the regulations of his own
position as well. He does not bother to critically investigate what happened and find the
responsible people. A court or impartial judge does not play a role in the narrative. The
Levite takes justice into his own hands. Immediately after he finds his concubine, he plans to
go to war (compare to Saul in 1 Samuel 11:7), even before having consulted with the other
tribes. And when he does, he slightly alters the story of the events to his own advantage, in
an attempt to increase the chances the people will wage war with him against the whole
tribe of Benjamin. What takes

place later is a collective punishment of Benjamin, without the case being brought before a
court, without witnesses and testimonies heard.
Judges 19, more perhaps so than all previous chapters, describe the disastrous chain of
events that follow one another when Israel does not obey God’s word and refuses to
observe His commandments.
That is, in summary, also the theological message the narrator wishes to transmit. The
Portion of Judges tells us how it should be; the Book of Judges tells us how life unfolds when
Israel does not obey God.

7. Conclusion
In the pages above, I have analyzed the text of Judges 19. I asked myself the question: what
does the narrator try to tell us? Is this a story about the tragic death of a woman? Is this a
story about the miserable position of women in Biblical times? I have looked at the text, and
at the way the Jewish medieval commentator Rashi analyzes it. Rashi is not occupied at all
with the fate of the woman. Her misery, her suffering, hardly plays a role in his
commentary. Instead he focuses on the socio-political situation of the narrative. He
highlights themes already existing in the text itself. Apart from that, he remains silent.
Modern Feminist commentators, by contrast, drift away much further from the story.
They use the story merely as a way to discuss the gender roles and the position of
women in Biblical times. While it opens the way to discuss the many moral and ethical
problems that exist in the narrative, it also takes away the attention from the main narrative
line of the text. Placing the narrative within the broader Biblical context, and acknowledging
the many cases of intertextuality between the Judges 19 and the Portion of Judges in
Deuteronomy, helps us see the story as part of a larger chain. This chain is double-layered.
One layer tells us of the ideal situation, the commandment Israel is given (Deuteronomy).
The other layer tells us how Israel managed to deal with these commandments in reality
(Book of Judges). Deuteronomy and Judges deal with the same themes, ideas,
commandments, and problems; the former is the theory, the latter the practise.
There are, finally, reasons to believe the Book of Judges, presented to us as a book about all
Israel, written for all Israel, is in fact a book from just a minority of the tribes – the most
powerful tribes of Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim, with the Levites, who officially remain
politically neutral because they do not own land, often play an event-triggering role, either
willingly or unwillingly.
Looking at the book from this perspective, our narrative about a marital crisis followed by
the tragic death of a woman, has primarily an instrumental role in legitimating the
subsequent civil war. The socio-economic and political reasons that most likely led up to the
war, remain largely, if not completely, unmentioned in the Biblical text.

8. Bibliography
Amit, Yaira
The Book of Judges: the art of editing. Biblical Interpretation Series, Vol. 38. Brill, 1999
Bal, Mieke (ed)

Anti-Covenant. Counter-Reading Women’s Lives in the Hebrew Bible. The Almond Press,
1989
“The Body of Writing: Judges 19”. In: A Feminist Companion to Judges, ed. A. Brenner,
1993.
Brettler, Marc Zvi

Winding down: The Concubine of Gibeah, 2002, Routledge, London.
Cohen, Menachem (editor)

Mikra’ot Gedolot. A revised and augmented scientific edition of Mikra’ot Gedolot, based on
the Aleppo Codex and Early Medieval MMS, Bar Ilan University Press, 1992.
Cross, Diane Hoequist

The Post-Structuralist Literary Theory of Roland Barthes Applied to Judges 19-21: The Rape
of the Concubine. PhD Dissertation, 1991
Elliger, K and Rudolf, W

Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
Hudson, Don Michael

“Living in a Land of Epithets: Anonymity in Judges 19-21.” In: Journal for the Study of the
Old Testament 62, no. June 1994.
Jones Warsaw, Koala

“Toward a Womanist Hermeneutic: A Reading of Judges 19-21.” In: A Feminist Companion
to Judges, ed. A. Brenner, 1993.

Mullner, Ilse
“Lethal Differences: sexual violence as violence against others in Judges 19.” In: A Feminist
Companion to Judges, ed. A. Brenner, 1993
Pressler, Carolyn
“Sexual Violence and Deuteronomic Law”. In: A Feminist Companion to Deuteronomy, ed.
A. Brenner, 1993
Trible, Phyllis
Texts of Terror: literary feminist readings of Biblical narratives, 1984, Philadelphia Fortress
Press.
Yee, Gale A.
“Ideological Criticism: Judges 17-21 and the Dismembered Body.” In: Judges and Method,
ed. G. Yee, 1995.

Judges 19 Reading in Context and Interte

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Judges 19 Reading in Context and Interte

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Judges 19: Reading in Context and Intertextuality

Reading in Context and Intertextuality

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 1

1. Text of Judges 19, the Levite and his concubine 3

4. Rabbi Shlomi Yitzhaki (Rashi)’s commentary 11

5. Modern Feminist Commentaries 15

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 2

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 3

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 4

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 5

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 7

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 8

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 10

Table 1 – Schematic overview of events in Judges 19

warning and reminder, and the start of

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 12

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 14

3. Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki’s Commentary

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 15

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 16

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 18

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 20

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 21

4. Modern Feminist commentaries

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 23

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 24

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 25

separate historical time frame.

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 27

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 28

functioning as a geographical boarder, the nucleus of all events seems to be west of

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 29

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 31

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 32

Table 3 – Schematic overview of themes in Parashat Shoftim (Deuteronomy 16:18-21:9)

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 33

17:13-20 Leadership and Monarchy; the dangers of

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 34

18:1-8 Status of Levite; they are consecrated to the

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 35

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 36

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 38

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 39

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 40

Bal, Mieke (ed)

Brettler, Marc Zvi

Cohen, Menachem (editor)

Cross, Diane Hoequist

Elliger, K and Rudolf, W

Hudson, Don Michael

Jones Warsaw, Koala

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 41

Rachel Levy - Fall 2005 42

You might also like