Women at Work in the Deuteronomistic History - International Voices ...

FEMALE SLAVES AND DEPENDENTS | 149
in two of them—Abimelech’s kingship, and the concubine of the Levite—the
text uses “המא” and “שׁגליפ” to create a correlation between their lower status
and their condition of being foreign women. The story of Michal’s confrontation
of David is different, since “המא” is not used by the narrator about one of the
main characters, but by both main characters in their confrontation with each
other.
Using “Son of a Slave” as Insult
Abimelech’s Struggle for Kingship. Here attention will be focused on
Abimelech’s lineage, since that is where the המא appears, rather than on the
whole story of this king. Abimelech’s paternal side is composed of brothers in
the symbolic number of seventy, whom he kills on one stone; and on his
maternal side, Shechemites who comply with his desire to be king and pay
dearly for it. What is the meaning of Jotham’s accusation of the Shechemites for
having chosen the המא־ןב rather than a son of Gideon? It is precisely on this
accusation where attention has to focus.
The story is already prepared by the narrator in 8:29–32; Gideon’s house
with his “seventy sons” is contrasted with the outsider, the שׁגליפ from Shechem
who also bore him a son. Everyone in the story takes for granted this difference
between the seventy and the one. First, Abimelech presents himself to his
kindred in Shechem with the alternative “that all seventy sons of Jerubbaal rule
over you, or that one rules over you?” (9:2). The text presents the same logic in
the Shechemites’ acceptance of Abimelech and in their compliance in the
murder of the seventy. Finally, since Jotham speaks of the seventy sons on one
hand (who are Gideon’s sons) and of the son of the slave on the other—as if
Abimelech was not Gideon’s son—implies that, at least for the “legitimate”
brothers, Abimelech does not count as heir to Gideon. 88 Since Judg 8:31
witnesses to Gideon’s recognition of Abimelech as his son, by renaming him,
the factor that determines his not being considered one of Gideon’s (eligible)
sons has to be related to who is his mother. 89
Robert Boling points out that whenever םשׁ םישׂ is used instead of the more
common ול ארקיו to denote someone’s naming (as in 2 Kgs 17:34, Neh 9:7,
and Dan 1:7), it implies a re-naming. Since naming has a performative power,
re-naming implies a new identity, as all cases pointed out by Boling show. In
Abimelech’s case there is no trace of the name given originally by his mother,
thus only his re-naming by “Gideon the Yahwist” remains. However, since there
are here two different family lineages, that of Gideon and his house, and the
Afterlives, 71–85.
88 Matthews and Benjamin, Social World of Ancient Israel, 67–81.
89 R. Boling, Judges (AB. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1975), 162.