Abravanel introduces the Book of Judges with an important analysis. He probes the authority or
mandate of judges versus kings. Are judges and kings synonymous, having the same roles within the
Jewish body politic? Or, alternatively, are the two high offices different, one from the other?
In typical Abravanel fashion, there isn’t a yes/no answer to the questions he poses. Instead, he shows
how in some ways, judges resemble kings and how in other ways they are dissimilar. All told, Abravanel
lists five ways to show the likeness between judges and kings and five ways reveal unlikeness. For
brevity, this essay will cover Abravanel’s first two items on the “similar side” shared by judges and kings.
Abravanel begins with historical context. Namely, the Book of Judges deals with judges, after the death
of Joshua. The period of the judges continues until Samuel the prophet. Within that four-hundred-year
continuum, judges emerged as the nation’s leaders, Samson being the last of the thirteen judges
covered here.
One common or shared capacity is this. Judges and kings derived their authority from a decision or
appointment by the court. As for the Israelites, they vetted the court’s pick. Moreover, the nation
complied with the judges’ orders. Abravanel’s textual proof, as far as the judges were concerned is:
“And the LORD raised up judges, who saved them out of the hand of those that spoiled them” (judges 2).
A divinely-inspired court recognized and designated judges – “And the LORD raised up judges…”
Abravanel next brings support that the people willingly submitted to judges, this from a verse pertaining
to Gideon: “Then the men of Israel said unto Gideon. Rule over us, both you…” (Judges 8). Another
illustration of the nation’s acceptance of a judge may be found with Jephthah: “And the elders of Gilead
said unto Jephthah: Therefore…go with us, and fight with the children of Ammon, and you shall be our
head…” (Judges 11).
Abravanel continues. He says that without a doubt, the Hebrew judges had been empowered, shall we
say, by the One Above. God implanted within these men a sharp sense of correct counsel and courage.
The nation readily acknowledged their judges’ divine inspiration, as well as their leadership ability.
Indeed, seeing the judges’ take-charge attitude, the Hebrews didn’t question that God hand-picked
them. That is, popular initiative began the process whereby the court officially appointed the judges to
rule.
How did kings get chosen, Abravanel asks? Explicitly, kings had been anointed by prophets, and then
selected by the high court. In addition to the appointment via a prophet and high court, the nation too
played a role in the coronation of a king. Kings Saul, David, and Solomon are cases in point. Again,
Abravanel cites textual proof: “You shall in any wise set him king over you, whom the LORD your God
shall choose…” (Deuteronomy 17). Thus, the designation of a monarch is a national and popular matter.
The Maker’s role is also apparent, not to mention the input of the prophet, by way of dabbing the king
with anointing oil.
A second commonality between judges and kings centers on their military roles; both served as
commanders in chief. As such, they led the troops against foes. Within this category is another joint
function with which judges and kings had been tasked. That is, they sat on the highest judicial tribunal.
Abravanel illustrates how judges fulfilled that role, by bringing a verse about Othniel the son of Kenaz:
“And the spirit of the LORD came upon him, and he judged Israel; and he went out to war…” (Judges 3).
The Book of Judges will go on describe the other judges in a similar fashion, stressing how they took
military charge against Israel’s enemies, in addition to adjudicating. That said, we do find certain judges
(Tola, Jair, Ibzan, Abdon, and Elon) in judicial, but not military, roles. Yet others acted as captains but
didn’t don the judges’ cloak (Gideon and his son Abimelech).
Abravanel explains the phenomenon of the inconsistencies among judges’ functions. Plainly, those who
hadn’t led the Hebrew troops lived in peace time. That freed them up to dispense justice. Conversely,
those judges who lived during tumultuous times were needed at the front, affording them no respite to
judge the nation. Nonetheless, judges wore two hats, in a manner of speaking – military and judicial.
Now, turning to kings, we find that they, too, rode out to battle and sat on the court bench. This, in fact,
is what the Hebrews clamored for. “That we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge
us, and go out before us, and fight our battles” (I Samuel 20).