Who is Abimelech? — This is obviously contemptuous, like “Who is David? and who is the son of Jesse?” in 1 Samuel 25:10.
Who is Shechem? — The meaning of this clause is very obscure. It can hardly be a contrast between the insignificance of Abimelech and the grandeur of Shechem (Vulg., quœ est Shechem?). Some say that “Shechem” means “Abimelech;” but there is no trace of kings assuming the name of the place over which they rule, nor does the LXX. mend matters much by interpolating the words, “who is the son of Shechem?”
The son of Jerubbaal? — And, therefore, on the father’s side, disconnected both with Ephraimites and Canaanites; and the Baal-fighter’s son has no claim on Baal-worshippers.
And Zebul his officer? — We are not even under the rule of Abimelech, but of his underling.
Serve the men of Hamor. — Here the LXX., Vulg., and other versions adopt a different punctuation and a different reading. But there is no reason to alter the text. The Canaanites were powerful; the Ephraimites had apostatised to their religion; even Abimelech bears a Canaanite name (Genesis 26:1), and owed his power to his Hivite blood. Gaal says in effect. “Why should we serve this son of an upstart alien when we might return to the allegiance of the descendants of our old native prince Hamor, whose son Shechem was the hero eponymos of the city?” (Genesis 33:19; Joshua 24:32).