ABIMELECH, KING OF SHECHEM ACCORDING TO JOSEPHUS Introduction No one less than the arch-critic J. Wellhausen himself expressed admiration, if not for the person of the villain Abimelech, then at least for the story about him as told in Judges 91. In this study I purpose to investigate Josephus’ retelling of the Abimelech story in Antiquitates Judaicae (hereafter Ant.) 5,233-2532 in com- parison with its Biblical source as exemplified by the following major witnesses: MT (BHS)3, the Codices Alexandrinus (hereafter A) and Vaticanus (hereafter B)4 and the Lucianic (hereafter L)5 of LXX6, plus Targum Jonathan on the Former Prophets (hereafter TJ)7. I undertake this comparative study with the following questions in mind: Which text-form(s) of Judges 9 did Josephus utilize in com- posing his own Abimelech story? How and why has he modified the data of the source narrative? What is the overall, cumulative effect of his various modifica- tions upon Josephus’ version of the Abimelech episode vis-à-vis the Biblical one? To facilitate my proposed comparison I break down the relevant material into five segments as follows: (1) Abimelech introduced (Ant. 5,233-234 // Judg 8,29–9,6); (2) Jotham’s Address (Ant. 5,235-239 // Judg 9,7-21); (3) the She- chemites vs. Abimelech (Ant. 5,240-242 // Judg 9,22-29); (4) Abimelech’s 1. See his statement, Israelitische und jüdische Geschichte, Berlin, 1894, p. 28: “er (Abimelech) hat … einen Erzähler gefunden, der Sinn für die Energie des Bösen besass”. On the Abimelech story, see in addition to the commentaries: V. FRITZ, Abimelech und Sichem in Jdc IX, in VT 32 (1982) 129-144; E. WÜRTHWEIN, Abimelech und der Untergang Sichems. Studien zu Jdc 9, in ID., Studien zum Deuteronomistischen Geschichtswerk (BZAW, 227), Berlin – New York, 1994, pp. 12-28. 2. I use the text and translation of H.St.J. THACKERAY, et al. (eds.), Josephus (LCL), Cambridge, MA – London, 1926-1965. Ant. 5,233-253 is found in Vol. V where the trans- lation and notes are by R. MARCUS. I have likewise consulted the text and apparatus of Ant. 5,233-253 in B. NIESE, Flavii Iosephi Opera, I, Berlin, 1885. 3. Qumran Cave I yielded fragmentary portions of Judges 9; these have been published by D. BARTHÉLEMY – J.T. MILIK, Qumran Cave I (DJD, 1), Oxford, 1955, pp. 62-64. 4. For A and B I use the double text printed by A. RAHLFS, Septuaginta, I, Stuttgart, 1935. 5. For L I use the text printed by P. DE LAGARDE, Librorum V.T. Canonicorum Graece pars prior, Göttingen, 1883 and the apparatus of A.E. BROOKE – N. MCLEAN – H.St.J. THACKERAY, The Old Testament in Greek According to the Text of Codex Vaticanus, I/IV: Joshua, Judges and Ruth, Cambridge, 1917. The L text in Judges evidences noteworthy affinities with that of the Old Latin; for the text of the latter witness see U. ROBERT, Heptateuchi Partis Posterioris Versio Latina Antiquissima e Codice Lugdunensi, II, Lyon, 1900. 6. On the LXX text of Judges and its MSS groupings, see W.R. BODINE, The Greek Text of Judges: Recensional Developments (HSM, 23), Chico, CA, 1980. 7. For TJ I use the text of A. SPERBER, The Bible in Aramaic, II, Leiden, 1959 and the translation of this by D.J. HARRINGTON – A.J. SALDARINI, Targum Jonathan on the Former Prophets (The Aramaic Bible, 10), Wilmington, DE, 1987. JOSEPHUS, Ant. 5,233-253 147 Vengeance (Ant. 5,243-250 // Judg 9,30-49); and (5) Abimelech’s Death (Ant. 5,251-253 // Judg 9,50-57). I shall now examine each of these parallel seg- ments in turn. 1. Abimelech Introduced Josephus opens his Abimelech narrative (Ant. 5,233-253) with notices on the progeny of the miscreant’s father, Gideon (5,233a) which he draws from Judg 8,30- 318. That progeny consists of seventy sons borne to Gideon by his “many wives” (// 8,30), plus “Abimelechos” (ˆAbimeléxov)9, his son by a “concubine” (pal- lak±v)10 (// 8,31). From the notice of 8,31 Josephus omits – for the moment (but see immediately below) – the specification that she “was in Shechem”. On the other hand, he amplifies the source notice with the explicit designation of Abimelech as a “bastard” (nó‡ov) as well as with the name of his mother, i.e., “Druma” (Droú- mav). In Judges itself (as well as elsewhere in Jewish tradition) Abimelech’s mother remains anonymous. Whence then did Josephus derive the name he gives her? Gen- erally, scholars suggest that the historian’s form “Druma” ultimately goes back, via a process of textual corruption, to the place name “Arumah” (MT emïVra∏, AL ˆArima, B ˆArjma) cited in Judg 9,41 (cf. 9,31) as Abimelech’s later residence11. As noted above, Josephus re-positions the data on Gideon’s progeny (Judg 8,30-31), making these the introduction to his account of Abimelech in 5,233a. Thereafter, he proceeds immediately (5,233b) to relate, in dependence on 9,1a, that Abimelech betook himself to his mother’s family at “Sikima” (Síkima)12; in so doing he passes over the source’s intervening material, i.e., 8,32-3513. Judg 9,1b-3 recounts Abimelech’s speech to his mother’s relatives, urging them to speak on behalf of his single rulership (as opposed to that by his seventy 8. In Judges itself these data stand among the closing notices for Gideon, 8,29-35. Jose- phus places them rather at the opening of his Abimelech story. On the Josephan treatment of Gideon (Ant. 5,211-232), see L.H. FELDMAN, Josephus’ Portrait of Gideon, in Revue des études juives 152 (1993) 5-28. (It might be pointed out here that Josephus does not utilize the Bible’s alternative name for Abimelech’s father, i.e., Jerubbal since he passes over the incident, Judg 6,25-32, which leads to Gideon’s receiving this second name.) 9. This form is Josephus’ declined version of the name as found in ABL, i.e., ˆAbi(e)mélex which itself represents a transliteration of the Hebrew name. 10. This is the same term used by AB to designate Abimelech’s mother. 11. Thus, e.g., A. MEZ, Die Bibel des Josephus untersucht für Buch V–VI der Archäolo- gie, Basel, 1895, pp. 13-15; A. SCHLATTER, Die hebräischen Namen bei Josephus (BFCT, 17/3), Gütersloh, 1913, pp. 21-22, s.v. emïVra∏ (according to Schlatter the name in 5,233 derives from a later glossator); S. RAPPAPORT, Agada und Exegese bei Flavius Josephus, Wien, 1930, pp. 43, 129 n. 199; MARCUS, Josephus (n. 2), VI, p. 107 n. b. A. SCHLALIT, Namenwörterbuch zu Flavius Josephus, Leiden, 1968, p. 40, s.v. DroÕma, on the contrary, does not venture a derivation. 12. This is the form of the city’s name found in AL Judg 9,1; B reads Suxem. To his mention of Abimelech’s coming to Shechem drawn from 9,1a, Josephus adds the chrono- logical indication “after his father’s death” which looks back to his notice on Gideon’s demise at the end of 5,232 (// 8,32). 13. Of this material, Josephus has previously utilized the death and burial notice for Gideon of 8,32 in 5,232b. He makes no use of the appended notices, 8,33-35, on the Israelites’ fall into degeneracy following Gideon’s death. 148 C.T. BEGG brothers) to their fellow Shechemites as well as the former’s group success in winning support for Abimelech given his status as the townsfolk’s “brother”. Josephus, who will subsequently depict Abimelech as seizing power for himself (see below) rather than being elected “king” by the Shechemites (thus 9,6), omits this entire sequence. Instead, he moves directly to the matter of the money given Abimelech as cited in 9,4a14. Whereas, however, in the source it is the She- chemites as a whole who supply Abimelech with money, Josephus – who passes over the mention of this wider group in 9,1b-3 (see above) – identifies Abim- elech’s maternal relatives (alone) as the givers. According to 9,4b Abimelech used the sum given him to hire a retinue of “vain (LXX kenoúv) and reckless (AL ‡ambouménouv, ‘amazed’; B deiloúv, ‘cowardly’) fellows”. Josephus’ text at the end of 5,233 evidences a lacuna which Marcus fills in on the basis of the Biblical notice with the phrase “hired certain miscreants”. The historian goes beyond his source in accentuating the depravity of Abimelech’s hired band, call- ing them “notorious for a multitude of crimes (dià pl±‡ov âdikjmátwn… êpísjmoi)15”. Judg 9,5a narrates the first in a long chain of violent deeds perpetrated by Abimelech: he murders his 70 (half-)brothers at their father’s home in Ophrah. Josephus’ version specifies that Abimelech’s hired band accompanied him to the murder site; thereby it makes more plausible his ability to massacre seventy men. On the other hand, it leaves aside the place name “Ophrah”16 as well as the odd detail about Abimelech’s killing all the seventy “upon one stone”. Judg 9,5b notes that there was one survivor of Abimelech’s murderous initiative, i.e., Jotham, Gideon/Jerubbaal’s youngest son who managed to hide himself. Jose- phus omits the source’s indication about “Jothamos” (ˆIw‡ámou) being his father’s youngest, speaking rather of his “good fortune” in escaping. Judges’ introduction of Abimelech culminates in 9,6 with the notice that the Shechemites made him king “by the oak of the pillar (MT bom, LXX t±v stásewv) at Shechem”.