Sreuve qn'on assigna d'avance, par le sort, aux ilKrentes tribus, le territoire que chacune devait conqu6rir ' ; cf. the words of Budde on Jg 18' ' es ist Dan wohl ein Gebiet zugefallen, aber es hat sich nichtdarin behaupten konnen, und dass dieses nicht blosse Theorie ist, beweisen die danitischen Keste in den siidlichen Wohnsitzen, die uns in der Samsongeschichte begegnen.' A positive repre- sentation that Canaan was thas divided is also implied in other passages of Jg 1. Finally, the 'older' narrative contained in Jg 1 is pro- nounced to be also the ' historically more credible ' (Budde, p. 2). But is it, in point of fact, probable that the tribes of Israel, which under Joshua's lead crossed the Jordan, should not have attacked with their whole force the common foe, in order to inflict upon him some decided defeats? To what end, then, is the narrative (Nu 32='"'-, Dt o'S'-", Jos !"-'« 22i«) invented of how the tribes of Reu- ben, etc., which had their settlements east of the Jordan, crossed this river with the other Israelites, and did not return until the opposition of the western Canaanites was — essentially — broken? Joshua led the host only until the conquest of Jericho (Jos'; so Budde, p. 1). Did he, then, withdraw from the leadership of Israel ? This is ' historically credible.' But if this was really the case, why will Budde (p. II) substitute 'and Joshua was with them ' for the traditional ' and Jahweh was with them ' ? (Jg l*"). And if the ex- istence of Joshua was assumed in the narrative of Jg 1, would he have been mentioned in tlxis passim fashion ?
The truth lies in the middle position, and this true relation of things is exhibited in Jos and Jg ; in spite of the foundation-laying victories gained under the lead of Joshua over Uie inhabitants of Canaan, some centuries were still needed to make the Israelites complete masters of Canaan ( Jg V- '' etc.).
(6) The need for external or political conflict was coupled with the task of spiritual self-assertion on the part of Israel against the genius of the Canaan- itish nation. The period that followed the migra- tion to Canaan was for the Hebrews the time of the severest struggle of ideas. For it was then that the danger was greatest that Israel should lose tlie consciousness of her uniqueness, seeing that many tribes with other conceptions and ideas dwelt in her midst. (Cf. on this contrast, e.g. Pietsch- mann, Gesch. der Phon. p. 292 f. ; Niebuhr, Gesch. des ebr. Zeitalters, p. 317 ff. ; Winckler, Gesch. /sr.p. 133'; Wildeboer, JaAwerfjcTWi e» Volksreligie in Israel, 1898, p. 10 If. But when Piepenbrmg {Hist. etc. 1898, p. 96) remarks, ' au moment oh les Hebreux s'emparferent de la Palestine, les Cananiens leur 6taient bien supdrieurs sous le rai)port de la culture,' he must be thinking merely of outward culture, such as the art of building titles, the art of war, etc.).
During this period the great matter was to
defend the heritage of religious ideai and mora] principles to which Israel had fallen heir (sea above, 6 d, fi, S). The men who were then called to deliver the people belonged to the category of true souls by whom the most important preroga- tives of the Jahweh religion weie maiutainod. Then did Gideon defend the monolatry of Jalnvuh against the adoration of the Canaanite Baal (6""). The same hero kept unimpaired the principle (8^) that Israel was under the rule only of a heavenly king (Jahweh, Ex 15"). He pre-eminently exhibits the characteristic which ben-Sirach attributes to the judges when he says, koI oI Kpiral. ckocttos t^J aCrrou 6v6fiari, 6ao)v ovk i^fTropvevffe ij /cap5/o, Kal Sffot ovK dweffTpdtpTjiTav 6,n& Kup/ou, (trj t6 p^v-q^buvvov airrC^p iv eii\(rfiaii, k.t.\. (Sir 46"''). Then was the con- science of the nation of Israel sulBciently awake to stir them up to energy when danger th.eatened that the Canaanite immorality (Gn 9''- *" ig*"- 34-", Lv 18'^ etc.) might gain a footing in Israel (Jg ig*" 20"").
True, indeed, all the acts of the Isra«l of those days cannot bear to be tried by the standard of an enlightened humanity, or the ideal of evangelical Christianity. We shudder at the cutting oil' of thumbs and great toes (Jg 1'). But not only were the Athenians once guilty of the same con- duct towards ^ginetan prisoners (.Lilian, Var. Hist. ii. 9), but even the Christian Abyssinians of our own day are given to this terrible practice (cf. Flad, Zwolf Jahre in Abessinien, etc.). Moreover, in the pre-Christian history of Divine revelation, stages of progress are not wanting ; cf. e.g. on the history of prophecy (1 S 9°), or the Divine name (Ex 6='-, 1 S P, Is l\ Hos 2'^), or the idea of retaliation (Ex 20', Jer 31^, Ezk 18'-"). Although then a Deborah had not advanced to the stage of an Isaiah, and although a Samson (cf. on the Nazirites, Am 2'-) did not stand upon the same plane as the Sermon on the Mount (Jg 16^ com- pjired with Mt S**), yet the Bk. of Jg stands, not without right, in the series of the nUbi'im (DikdtlkS, § 70, etc.). This book Ls a monument of that Divine Providence which sustained the people of Israel, so that they maintained their national existence, and during a time of the strongest temptations kept safe their religious - moral ideals, which had a most important end to serve in pointing to the perfect religion and morality.