Why are the leaders of early Israel called 'Judges'? What does this institution refer to and where did it come from? How was it appropriated, transformed, and reconceptualized in the Hebrew Bible? To answer these questions, Julian Chike offers an analysis of new data, a re-evaluation of previous data in light of new data, and, more importantly, a new framework for using second millennium BCE sources from the ancient Near East to rediscover the 'Judge' of Israel in Judah's Bible. Rather than reflecting scribal invention or later borrowing, Chike proposes that the 'Judge' of Israel stands in cultural continuity with an ancient form of leadership called šāpit-um which stems from the Amorite world most clearly depicted in the Mari documents. The findings of this study invite a re-evaluation of compositional and historical claims surrounding Israel's origin stories and stimulate further conversation about Amorite relations to the inhabitants of early Israel.

Why are the leaders of early Israel called 'Judges'? What does this institution refer to and where did it come from? How was it appropriated, transformed, and reconceptualized in the Hebrew Bible? To answer these questions, Julian Chike offers an analysis of new data, a re-evaluation of previous data in light of new data, and, more importantly, a new framework for using second millennium BCE sources from the ancient Near East to rediscover the 'Judge' of Israel in Judah's Bible. Rather than reflecting scribal invention or later borrowing, Chike proposes that the 'Judge' of Israel stands in cultural continuity with an ancient form of leadership called šāpit-um which stems from the Amorite world most clearly depicted in the Mari documents. The findings of this study invite a re-evaluation of compositional and historical claims surrounding Israel's origin stories and stimulate further conversation about Amorite relations to the inhabitants of early Israel.