Having thus traced the origin of the office to the circumstances of the times and the condition of the people, it only remains to inquire into the nature of the office itself, and the powers and privileges which were connected with it. This is by no means an easy task, as the nature of the record enables us to perceive better what they were not than what they were, what they could not than what they could accomplish.
It is usual to consider them as commencing their career with military exploits to deliver Israel front foreign oppression ; but this is by no means invari ably the case. Eli and Samuel were not military men ; Deborah judged Israel before she planned the war against Jabin ; and of Jair, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon, it is at least uncertain whether they ever held any military command. The command of the army can therefore be scarcely considered the distinguishing characteristic of these men, or military exploits the necessary introduction to the office. In many cases it is true that military achieve ments were the means by which they elevated them selves to the rank of judges ; but in general the appointment may be said to have varied with the exigencies of the times, and with the particular circumstances which, in times of trouble, would draw the public attention to persons who appeared suited, by their gifts or influence, to advise in matters of general concernment, to decide in ques tions arising between tribe and tribe, to administer public affairs, and to appear as their recog,nised head in their intercourse with their neighbours and oppressors. As we find that many of these judges arose during times of oppression, it seems to us that this last circumstance, which has never been taken into account, must have had a remarkable in fluence in the appointment of the judge. Foreigners could not be expected to enter into the peculiarities of the Hebrew constitution, and would expect to receive the proposals, remonstrances, or complaints of the people through some person representing the whole nation, or that part of it to which their inter course applied. The law provided no such officer except in the high-priest ; but as the Hebrews themselves did not recognise the true operation of their theocracy, much less were strangers likely to do so. On the officer they appointed to represent the body of the people, under circumstances which compelled them to deal with foreigners mightier than themselves, would naturally devolve the com mand of the army in war, and the administration of justice in peace. This last was among ancient nations, as it is still in the East, regarded as the first and most important duty of a ruler, and the interference of the judges was probably confined to the cases arising between different tribes, for which the ordinary magistrates would find it difficult to secure due authority to their decisions.
In nearly all the instances recorded, the appoint ment seems to have been by the free unsolicited choice of the people. The election of Jeplithah, wbo was nominated as the fittest man for the exist ing, emergency, probably resembled that which was usually followed on such occasions ; and probably, as in his case, the judge, in accepting the office, took care to make such stipulations as he deemed necessary. The only cases of direct divine appoint ment are those of Gideon and Samson, and the last stood in the peculiar position of having been from before his birth ordained to begin to deliver Israel.' Deborah was called to deliver Israel, but was al ready a judge. Samuel was called by the Lord to be a prophet, but not a judge, which ensued from the high gifts which the people recognised as dwell ing in him ; and as to Eli, the office of judge seems to have devolved naturally, or rather ex onicio, upon him ; and his case seems to be the only one in which the high-priest appears in the character which the theocratical institutions desig,ned for him.
The following clear summary of their duties and privileges is from Jahn (Biblisches Arc/dialogic, th. ii. bd. 1, sec. 22 ; Stowe's translation, ii. 86)
The office of judges or regents was held during life, but it was not hereditary, neither could they appoint their successors. Their authority was limited by the law alone ; and in doubtful cases they were directed to consult the Divine King through the priest by Urim and Thummim (Num. xxvii. 21). They were not obliged in common cases to ask advice of the ordinary rulers ; it was sufficient if these did not remonstrate against the measures of the judge. In important emergencies, however, they convoked a general assembly of the rulers, over which they presided and exerted a powerful influence. They could issue orders, but not enact laws ; they could neither levy taxes nor appoint officers, except perhaps in the armv. Their authority extended only over those tribes by whom they had been elected or acknowledged ; for it is clear that several of the judges presided over sepa rate tribes. There was no income attached to their office, nor was there any income appropriated to them, unless it might be a larger share in the spoils, and those presents which were made them as testi monials of respect (Judges viii. 24). They bore no external marks of dignity, and maintained no retinue of courtiers, though some of them were very opu lent. They were not only simple in their manners, moderate in their desires, and free from avarice and ambition, but noble and magnanimous men, who felt that whatever they did for their country was above all reward, and could not be recom pensed ; who desired merely to promote the public good, and who chose rather to deserve well of their country than to be enriched by its wealth. This exalted patriotism, like everything else connected with politics in the theocratical state of the He brews, was partly of a religious character, and those regents always conducted themselves as the officers of God ; in all their enterprises they relied upon Him, and their only care was, that their country men should acknowledge the authority of Jehovah, their invisible king (Judges viii. 225 sq. ; comp. Heb. xi.) Still they were not without faults, neither are they so represented by their historians ; they relate, on the contrary, with the utmost frank ness, the ,reat sins of which some of them were guilty. They were not merely deliverers of the state from a foreign yoke,- but destroyers of idolatry, foes of pagan vices, promoters of the knowledge of God, of religion, and of morality ; restorers of theocracy in the minds of the Hebrews, and power ful instruments of Divine Providence in the promo tion of the great design of preserving the Hebrew constitution, and, by that means, of rescuing the true religion from destruction.' The same writer, in the ensuing section, gives a clear view of the general condition of the Hebrews in the time of the judges. By comparing the periods during which the Hebrews were oppressed by their enemies, with those in which they were independent and governed by their own constitu tion, it is apparent that the nation in general ex perienced much more prosperity than adversity in the time of the judges. Their dominion continued four hundred and fifty years ; but the whole time of foreign oppression amounts only to one hundred and eleven years, scarcely a fourth part of that period. Even during these one hundred and eleven years, the whole nation was seldom under the yoke at the same time, but for the most part separate tribes only were held in servitude ; nor were their oppressions always very severe ; and all the cala mities terminated in the advantage and glory of the people, so soon as they abolished idolatry and re turned to their King, Jehovah. Neither was the nation in such a state of anarchy at this time as had been generally supposed. There were regular judicial tribunals at which justice could be obtained ; and when there was no supreme regent, the public welfare was provided for by the ordinary rulers' (Ruth iv. ; Judges viii. 22; X. '77 IS ; Xi. I-II; r Sam. iv. ; vii. 1-2).