JOTHAM’S FABLE (Judges 9: 7-15)

 

Submitted by: A. Wilbert S. Dianon, SDB

 

Language, cultural struggle, social organization, author’s worldview, fable in the historical book, previous meaning, new meaning, monarchy issues, image of women,

 

`Jotham’s fable is artistic in LANGUAGE. It is a poetry of satire and parallelism.  Satire is an artistic literature, which is used to attack human folly or vice through irony, derision or wit. The words of the poetry used figurative languages in order to drive a point.

 

The fable mentioned about trees in the forest that asked the olive tree, the fig tree and the vine to be king over them. Unfortunately, these trees declined to the offer as useless and meaningless. But when the trees approached the thorn bush and offered the same opportunity, they got an affirmative response. Unlike the previous trees, the thorn bush accepted willingly.

Olive, fig and vine are very valuable for man’s needs. Dignified as they are, they don’t find the position of a king noble. They see it as useless and a waste of energy. On the other hand, the thorn bush, an insignificant plant sees it otherwise. It wanted to be king over the trees.

 

Irony is applied here: valuable plants did not accept a good offer; a useless plant accepted the splendid position. As it goes on, the poetry stands for that particular event in Israel. The good trees refer to Jerubbaal who was asked to become king over his people. But he declined. On the other hand, Abimelech, a good-for-nothing son of a slave-girl (9:18) proposed himself to the Shechemites as their king. He was symbolized by that insignificant thorn bush. Moreover, the name Abimelech means “My Father (Yahweh) is king”. But he proclaimed himself as one. This is truly a satirical work to describe the folly of Abimelech and those people who accepted him as their king. It was in this motive that the family of their hero Jerubbaal was killed.

 

Secondly, the fable points to a particular parallelism. It serves as connectors between two events in Israel: peace brought by Gideon (Jerubbaal) and the strife sown by Abimelech.  The fable interpreted the reason why. Where Jerubbaal declined to be king (Jg 8: 22-24), his son did all his might to become one (Jg 9: 6).

 

The trees were looking for a leader to be king. Jerubbaal was asked by the men of Israel to rule over them. But he said: It is not I who shall rule over you, nor my sons; Yahweh must be your Lord ( 8: 23). These trees were important for man. Jerubbaal’s reputation is very noble. But the thorn bush, a destructive plant when burned, accepted the offer. Similarly, Abimelech proposed kingship for himself. He destroyed everything later by fire. But the curse of Jotham did not escape both Abimelech and the people. “May fire come out from Abimelech and devour the leading men of Shechem and Beth-millo, and fire come out of the leading men of Shechem and Beth-millo and devour Abimelech (9: 20).

 

Thirdly, this fable foreshadowed the event in Israel when kings wanted the position not for service but for enriching themselves. Consequently, they enslaved and treated the people harshly.

 

Jotham’s fable is POLITICAL in tone.  In fact, the main content of the Book of Judges poses a drama of political scenarios in the life of Israel at that time. History of Israel showed that the Exile they experienced in 722 BC (Northern Kingdom) happened in the reign of Hosea  of Israel (732-724). They were brought to Nineveh and in that year, the Northern Kingdom collapsed. As commented by the author of the Book of Kings: “the Israelites and the kings they had made for themselves, plotted wicked schemes against their God ( 2 Kgs 17: 9)”.  Even in the point of view of the Book of Kings, the monarchy was liability for Israel.

Monarchy bore a bad name; for it would later turn against the Israelite people themselves. The rise of kings in Israel in later times was a disgraceful event in the history of the people. And here comes Abimelech wanted to introduce this monarchy even at this early period of their history. Is it not a folly for his part to do this and to those people who accepted him?

 

CULTURAL bias against the monarchy extended towards the exclusion of Judah and Simeon from other tribes, which formed the Southern Kingdom. As in the Book of Kings, “King Solomon raised a levy throughout Israel for forced labor (1 Kg 5: 27). Solomon was a great builder. He built the Temple in Jerusalem. In doing so, he treated Israel very harshly. In fact, the people made a request to Rehoboam, Solomon’s successor, to lighten the burden Solomon had laid on them (rf. 1 Kg 12: 3-4). But Rehoboam refused to do so, and so the division of the kingdom started (1Kg 12:19).

 

Monarchy, aside from being a form of rebellion against God, bore for them a memory of slavery and hard labor from the House of David. In the song of Deborah and Barak, all the feats of the tribes were mentioned (Jg 5: 14-19) except those of Judah and Simeon.  In addition, all major and minor judges hailed from the North; no one came from the South.  Well, this observation was very understandable taking into consideration that the Book of Judges was of Deuteronomic tradition.

 

 Taking the curse of Jotham into fulfillment, Abimelech indeed died, not by fire but by a millstone.  He was in Thebez besieging a tower when, from the top, a woman threw down a millstone on his head and crushed his skull. He called his armor-bearer at once and said to him: Draw your sword and kill me that no one say of me “A woman killed him” (Jg 9: 53-54). This was a statement full of meaning. It was a shameful fact to be killed by a woman than by a man. And the redactor put it so to signify Abimelech’s death as disgraceful. The author used the role of a woman to prove his point. Structurally, the SOCIAL status of women at that time was second-class. They were of lesser value. Deborah, a brave and wise leader, did not become a lone judge, for she was a woman. A less courageous Barak got the credit of being one (Jg 4: 7-8), instead. Abimelech was a son of a slave-girl. Jephtah was driven out from the family because he was a son of a foreign woman. In Samson’s legend story, women were portrayed as enemy and traitor of Israel (Jg. 14: 15-17; 16: 1-22). Samson even described his Philistine wife as a heifer (Jg 14: 15). In the crime of Gibeah, the duty of hospitality is more important than the dignity of women (Jg 19: 23-25).

 

In Jotham’s fable, more than a wish for a king to enslaved and tax them, they wanted to regain their identity. In other words, the issue on idolatry, which God hampered on them constantly, was the issue of Israel’s identity as the people of God. In the first chapter, the Book recorded that after Joshua’s death, Israel actually were not able to drive out the Canaanites and other people living in the land (Jg. 1: 27-36). There were many reasons why. One of them was the superiority of weapons and skills in warfare ( Jg. 1: 19).

 

In other words, the Israelites lived with these people and assimilated their polytheistic culture. Through this, their identity as people of God always ran the risks of extinction. Here CULTURAL struggle of identity was very evident. While other people depended on their king for protection, Israel had no element of unity. And so they wanted to have a king as symbolized by those trees in the forest. However, they were too callous to understand that theirs is unique from any other. Yahweh their God was their one and only King. One folly of having a king for Israel was, their irreligious kings were the ones started the idol worship. This action aroused the anger of God against them.

 

And lastly, Jotham’s fable is important because it poses for the reader the WORLDVIEW of the redactor or the author of the Book of Judges. It may be a fable amidst historical fact, but it is not out of place in this book. In the point of view of the author, monarchy was useless and was a form of rebellion against Yahweh. In historiography, there is always a tinge of interpretation from the author. History is not merely a recounting of the facts in the past. The author himself has his own way of telling what happened in the past and what his interpretation is. For him, monarchy was the greatest blunder that happened in the history of Israel. Others would say that this fable is independent in its form. The author had inserted this part into the Book. Yet, its role in driving a point is relevant. Through Jotham’s fable, a reader is able to read the mind of the author in writing the Book of Judges.

 

--- end ---