The extant translated manuscripts from antiquity appear to contain several historicalanachronisms, which is why the majority of modern scholars consider the book ahistorical. Instead, the book has been re-classified as aparable,theological novel, or even the firsthistorical novel. Although the majority of Catholic scholars and clergy now view the book as fictional, theRoman Catholic Church had traditionally maintained the book'shistoricity, assigning its events to the reign ofKing Manasseh of Judah and that the names were changed in later centuries for an unknown reason.[2] TheJewish Encyclopedia identifiesShechem (modern dayNablus) as "Bethulia", and argues that the name was changed because of the feud between the Jews andSamaritans. If this is the case, it would explain why other names seem anachronistic as well.[3]
It is not clear whether the Book of Judith was originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek, as the oldest existing version is from theSeptuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures. However, due to the large number of Hebraisms in the text, it is generally agreed that the book was written in aSemitic language, probablyHebrew orAramaic, rather thanKoine Greek. When Jerome completed his LatinVulgate translation, he asserted his belief that the book was written "in Chaldean (Aramaic) words".[4] Jerome's Latin translation was based on an Aramaic manuscript and was shorter because he omitted passages that he could not read or understand in the Aramaic that otherwise existed in the Septuagint. The Aramaic manuscript used by Jerome has long since beenlost.
Carey A. Moore argued that the Greek text of Judith was a translation from a Hebrew original, and used many examples of conjectured translation errors, Hebraic idioms, and Hebraic syntax.[5] The extant Hebrew manuscripts are very late and only date back to theMiddle Ages. The two surviving Hebrew manuscripts of Judith are translated from the Greek Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate.[6]
The Hebrew versions name important figures directly, such as theSeleucid kingAntiochus IV Epiphanes, and place the events during theHellenistic period when theMaccabees battled the Seleucid monarchs. However, because the Hebrew manuscripts mention kingdoms that had not existed for hundreds of years by the time of the Seleucids, it is unlikely that these were the original names in the text.[7] In the minority, Helmut Engel and Jeremy Corley argued that Judith was originally composed in Greek that was carefully modeled after Hebrew and pointed out "Septuagintalisms" in the vocabulary and phrasing of the Greek text.[8][9]
While the author was likely Jewish, there is no evidence aside from its inclusion in theSeptuagint that the Book of Judith was ever considered authoritative or a candidate for canonicity by any Jewish group.[10][11] TheMasoretic Text of theHebrew Bible does not contain it; it is not found among theDead Sea Scrolls or any early Rabbinic literature.[11][12] Speculated reasons for its exclusion include the possible lateness of its composition, possible Greek origin, apparent support of theHasmonean dynasty (to which the early rabbinate was opposed), and perhaps the brash and seductive character of Judith herself.[13]
After disappearing from circulation among Jews for over a millennium, however, references to the Book of Judith and the figure of Judith herself resurfaced in the religious literature ofcrypto-Jews who escaped Christian persecution after the capitulation of theCaliphate of Córdoba.[11] The renewed interest took the form of "tales of the heroine, liturgical poems, commentaries on the Talmud, and passages in Jewish legal codes."[11] Although the text does not mentionHanukkah, it became customary for a Hebrewmidrashic variant of the Judith story to be read on theShabbat of Hanukkah as the story of Hanukkah takes place during the time of the Hasmonean dynasty.[14]
That midrash, whose heroine is portrayed as gorging the antagonist on cheese and wine before cutting off his head, may have formed the basis of the minor Jewish tradition to eat dairy products during Hanukkah.[11][15] In that respect,the Jewry of Europe during theMiddle Ages appear to have viewed Judith as theMaccabean-Hasmonean counterpart toQueen Esther, the heroine of the holiday ofPurim.[16][17] The textual reliability of the Book of Judith was also taken for granted, to the extent that biblical commentatorNachmanides (Ramban) quoted several passages from aPeshitta (Syriac version) of Judith in support of his rendering ofDeuteronomy 21:14.[11][18]
Many influentialfathers anddoctors of the Church, includingAugustine,Basil of Caesarea,Tertullian,John Chrysostom,Ambrose,Bede the Venerable andHilary of Poitiers, considered the book sacred scripture both before and after councils that formally declared it part of the biblical canon.[27][28] In a 405 letter,Pope Innocent I declared it part of theChristian canon.[29] In Jerome'sPrologue to Judith,[30][31] he claims that the Book of Judith was "found by theNicene Council to have been counted among the number of the Sacred Scriptures". No such declaration has been found in the Canons of Nicaea, and it is uncertain whether Jerome was referring to the book's use during the council's discussion or spurious canons attributed to that council.[31]
Regardless of Judith's status at Nicaea, the book was also accepted as scripture by the councils ofRome (382),Hippo (393),Carthage (397), andFlorence (1442) and eventually dogmatically defined as canonical by the Roman Catholic Church in 1546 in theCouncil of Trent.[32] However, Rome, Hippo, and Carthage were all local councils (unlike Nicaea, an ecumenical council). The Eastern Orthodox Church also accepts Judith as inspired scripture; this was confirmed in theSynod of Jerusalem in 1672.[33] The canonicity of Judith is typically rejected by Protestants, who accept as the Old Testament only those books that are found in the Jewish canon.[12]Martin Luther viewed the book as an allegory, but listed it as the first of the eight writings in his Apocrypha, which is located between the Old Testament and New Testament of theLuther Bible.[34][35] Though Lutheranism views the Book of Judith as non-canonical, it is deemed edifying for matters of morality, as well as devotional use.[36] InAnglicanism, it has the intermediate authority of the Apocrypha of the Old Testament and is regarded as useful or edifying, but is not to be taken as a basis for establishing doctrine.[36]
Judith and Holofernes, an engraving done byGustave Doré in 1866. Doré also did another engraving from the book:Judith Shows the Head of Holofernes.
The story revolves around Judith, a daring and beautiful widow, who is upset with herJudean countrymen for not trusting God to deliver them from their foreign conquerors. She goes with her loyal maid to the camp of the Assyrian general,Holofernes, with whom she slowly ingratiates herself, promising him information on thepeople of Israel. Gaining his trust, she is allowed access to his tent one night as he lies in a drunken stupor. She decapitates him, then takes his head back to her fearful countrymen. TheAssyrians, having lost their leader, disperse, and Israel is saved.[38] Though she is courted by many, Judith remains unmarried for the rest of her life.
The Book of Judith can be split into two parts or "acts" of approximately equal length. Chapters 1–7 describe the rise of the threat to Israel, led by king Nebuchadnezzar and his general Holofernes, and is concluded as Holofernes' worldwide campaign has converged at the mountain pass where Judith's village,Bethulia, is located.[39] Chapters 8–16 then introduce Judith and depict her heroic actions to save her people. The first part, although at times tedious[according to whom?] in its description of the military developments, develops important themes by alternating battles with reflections and rousing action with rest. In contrast, the second half is devoted mainly to Judith's strength of character and the beheading scene.[39]
The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha identifies a clearchiastic pattern in both "acts", in which the order of events is reversed at a central moment in the narrative (i.e., abcc'b'a').[39]
Judith and her maidservant, Artemisia Gentileschi, Italy, 1619
Part I (1:1–7:23)
A. Campaign against disobedient nations; the people surrender (1:1–2:13)
Similarly, parallels within Part II are noted in comments within theNew American Bible Revised Edition: Judith summons a town meeting in Judith 8:10 in advance of her expedition and is acclaimed by such a meeting in Judith 13:12–13; Uzziah blesses Judith in advance in Judith 8:5 and afterwards in Judith 13:18–20.[40]
It has also been called "an example of the ancient Jewish novel in the Greco-Roman period".[42] Other scholars note that Judith fits within and even incorporates the genre of "salvation traditions" from the Old Testament, particularly the story ofDeborah andJael (Judges 4–5), who seduced and inebriated theCanaanite commanderSisera before hammering a tent-peg into his forehead.[43]
There are also thematic connections to the revenge ofSimeon andLevi on Shechem after the rape ofDinah inGenesis 34.[39]
In the Christian West from thepatristic period on, Judith was invoked in a wide variety of texts as a multi-faceted allegorical figure. As a "Mulier sancta", she personified the Church and manyvirtues –Humility,Justice,Fortitude,Chastity (the opposite of Holofernes'vicesPride,Tyranny,Decadence,Lust) – and she was, like the other heroic women of the Hebrew scriptural tradition, made into a typological prefiguration of the VirginMary.[44][45][46] Her gender made her a natural example of the biblical paradox of "strength in weakness"; she is thus paired withDavid and her beheading of Holofernes paralleled with that ofGoliath – both deeds saved the Covenant People from a militarily superior enemy.[citation needed]
Judith, theprotagonist of the book, introduced in chapter 8 as a God-fearing woman, she is the daughter of Merari, aSimeonite,[47] and widow of a certainManasseh or Manasses, a wealthy farmer. She sends her maid or "waitingwoman"[48] to summon Uzziah so she can challenge his decision to capitulate to the Assyrians if God has not rescued the people of Bethulia within five days, and she uses her charm to become an intimate friend of Holofernes, but beheads him allowing Israel to counter-attack the Assyrians. Judith's maid, not named in the story, remains with her throughout the narrative and is given her freedom as the story ends.[49]
Painting by Trophime Bigot (c. 1579–1650, also known as Master of the Candlelight), depicting Judith and Holofernes.[50] The Walters Art Museum.
Holofernes, theantagonist of the book. He is a dedicated soldier of his king, general-in-chief of his army, whom he wants to see exalted in all lands. He is given the task of destroying the rebels who did not support the king ofNineveh in his resistance against Cheleud and theking of Media, until Israel also becomes a target of his military campaign. Judith's courage and charm occasion his death.
Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Nineveh and Assyria. He is so proud that he wants to affirm his strength as a sort of divine power, although Holofernes, his Turtan (commanding general), goes beyond the king's orders when he calls on the western nations to "worship only Nebuchadnezzar, and ... invoke him as a god".[51] Holofernes is ordered to take revenge on those who refused to ally themselves with Nebuchadnezzar.
Achior, anAmmonite leader at Nebuchadnezzar's court; in chapter 5 he summarises thehistory of Israel and warns the king of Assyria of the power of their God, the "God of heaven",[52] but is mocked. He is protected by the people of Bethulia and isJudaized, andcircumcised on hearing what Judith has accomplished.[53][a]
Bagoas, or Vagao (Vulgate),[56] theeunuch who had charge over Holofernes' personal affairs. His name is Persian for a eunuch.[57][b] He brought in Judith to recline with Holofernes and was the first one who discovered his beheading.
Uzziah orOziah, governor of Bethulia; together withCabri andCarmi, he rules over Judith's city. When the city is besieged by the Assyrians and the water supply dries up, he agrees to the people's call to surrender if God has not rescued them within five days, a decision challenged as "rash" by Judith.[58]
Chapter 9 constitutes Judith's "extended prayer",[59] "loudly proclaimed" in advance of her actions in the following chapters. This runs to 14 verses in English versions, 19 verses in the Vulgate.[60]
Today, it is generally accepted that the Book of Judith'shistoricity is dubious. The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha writes that the book's "fictional nature is evident from its blending of history and fiction, beginning in the very first verse, and is too prevalent thereafter to be considered the result of mere historical mistakes."[39] The names of people are either unknown to history or appear to be anachronistic, and many of the place names are also unknown. Typically, modern Catholic scholars view the book as historical fiction, and this is shown in theNew American Bible translation, published by theU.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.[61] Despite this modern consensus, the Catholic Church long considered the book to be a historical document, and it is included with the other historical books in the Old Testament of Catholic Bibles.[62] The Catholic Church has not officially commented on the matter, althoughPope John Paul II once remarked in 1995: "The Books of Tobit, Judith, and Esther, although dealing with the history of the Chosen People, have the character of allegorical and moral narrative rather than history properly so called."[63] However, some Catholic scholars still hold to the traditional view that Judith is based on a historical event, and their arguments frequently note Judith's lengthy genealogy (the longest given to a woman in the Bible) and the exact numbers of troops given, traits that match with other historical books in the Old Testament.[64][65] Catholic scholarTaylor Marshall wrote about skeptics of the book: "they claim that both Tobit and Judith (and sometimes Jonah) contain so many obvious historical errors that the errors were placed there by God in order to tip off the reader to the books’ fictional quality. ... Tobit is specific and lists historical times and places. To interpret Tobit as inspired fiction seems to fall out of line withPope Pius XII’sDivino Afflante Spiritu which holds that we study Scripture mindful of the genre of a book."[66]
Even some protestant scholars, notably archbishop and historianJames Ussher and Reformed scholarFranciscus Junius, viewed the book of Judith as a historical document. Both men again assign its events to the reign of Manasseh. Ussher wrote in his 1650 bookAnnals of the World: "After Assaridinus or Esarhaddon, Saosduchinus ruled both of the empires of Assyria and Babylon for 20 years. In the book of Judith that was written in the Chaldee language by some Jew living in Babylon, he is called Nabuchodonosor, a name common to all kings of Babylon. However he was called the king of Assyria and is said to have reigned in the great city of Nineveh. The learned Franc. Junius thinks that Saosduchinus is the same person asMerodach-Baladan of the Bible, the grandfather of that Nebucadnetzar and great grandfather of Nebuchadnezzar. Hence he thinks it was Merodach-Baladan who took king Manasseh prisoner to Babylon and released him later." However, Ussher immediately afterwards refutes the identification of the king of Judith with Merodach-Baladan, writing: "The succession of Asar-Adon Merodach, Ben-Merodach and Nebuchadnezzar, first and second, is only based on Anianus, that false Metasthenus. According to Junius, Merodach was not grandfather of Nebuchadnezzar or ratherNabopolassar ofNebuchadnezzar the great. Neither was he at first only a trustee of the king of Assyria and later came to be king both of Assyria and Babylon. 2 Kings 20:12 Nor did he ever succeed Esarhaddon the great in any kingdom of his, since this Mardocempadus or Merodach died 11 years before ever Manasseh became king. Also 42 years after his death, Aassaradinus or Essarchaddon left Saosduchinus to succeed him in both the Assyrian and the Babylonian kingdom as we noted from Ptolemy's Canon, Reg. If Junius, a man of no less modesty than learning, had seen this, no doubt he would have altered his opinion in this point. Therefore I thought it good in this place to have the reader note that from an event that never happened he should not seek to interpret the prophecy of Ezekiel 31:11-18 as Junius distinguishes them."[67]
For this reason, there have been various attempts by both scholars and clergy to understand the characters and events in the Book as either an allegorical representation of actual events, or a historical document that had been altered or translated improperly. The practice of changing names has been observed in documents from theSecond Temple period, such as theDamascus Document, which apparently contains references to an uncertain location referred to by the pseudonym of "Damascus". The writings of the Jewish historianFlavius Josephus also frequently differ from the Biblical record regarding the names of thehigh priests of Israel. Elsewhere in the Bible, there are also names of rulers that are unknown to history, such asDarius the Mede from theBook of Daniel orAhasuerus from theBook of Esther. The large size of the Assyrian army and the large size of the Median walls in the book have also been criticized, but both of these have been attested to elsewhere in the Bible and in secular historical records. The Assyrian army that besieged Jerusalem in2 Kings 19 was said to have been 185,000 strong, a number several tens of thousands larger than the Assyrian army described in the book of Judith. Also, the Greek historianHerodotus described the walls of Babylon to have been similar in size and extravagance to the walls of Ecbatana in the book of Judith.[68] Herodotus's account was corroborated by similar accounts of the scale of the walls of Babylon by the historiansStrabo,[69]Ctesias,[70] andCleitarchus.[71] The identity of the "Nebuchadnezzar" in the book has been debated for thousands of years and various rulers have been proposed by scholars, includingAshurbanipal,Artaxerxes III,Tigranes the Great,Antiochus IV Epiphanes,Cambyses II,Xerxes I, andDarius the Great.[72]
Identification of Nebuchadnezzar with Ashurbanipal
For hundreds of years, the most generally accepted view within the Catholic Church is that the book of Judith occurs during the reign ofAshurbanipal, a notoriously cruel and brutal Assyrian king whose reign was marked by various military campaigns and invasions. Ashurbanipal ruled theNeo-Assyrian Empire from Nineveh in 668 to 627 BCE. The Challoner Douay-Rheims Bible states that the events of the book begin inA.M. 3347, orAnte C. 657, which would be during the reign of Ashurbanipal.[73] This would be the twelfth year of Ashurbanipal's reign, which lines up with the book of Judith beginning in the twelfth year of "Nebuchadnezzar". If the rest of the book occurs in the seventeenth and eighteenth years of Ashurbanipal, the years would be 653 and 652 BCE, corresponding to revolts and military campaigns across Ashurbanipal's empire. The traditional Catholic view that the book dates to the reign of Manasseh corresponds to Ashurbanipal's reign, and Ashurbanipal's records name Manasseh as one of a number of vassals who assisted his campaign against Egypt.[74] The profanation of the temple described inJudith 4:3 might have been that under kingHezekiah (see2 Chronicles 33:18–19), who reigned between c. 715 and 686 BCE. And in that same verse, the return from the dispersion (often assumed to refer to theBabylonian captivity) might refer to the chaos that resulted in people fleeing Jerusalem after Manasseh was taken captive by the Assyrians. The reinforcement of the cities as described inJudith 4:5 matches up with the reinforcement that happened in response to the Assyrians under Manasseh.[75]Judith 4:6 claims that theHigh Priest of Israel was in charge of the country at the time. However, it is generally assumed that the book takes place after Manasseh's return from captivity in Assyria and his subsequent repentance. Nicolaus Serarius, Giovanni Menochio and Thomas Worthington speculated that Manasseh was busy fortifying Jerusalem at the time (which also fits with 2 Chronicles 33) and left the matters of the rest of the Israelites to the high priest. Others, such as Houbigant and Haydock, speculate that the events of the book occurred while Manasseh was still captive inBabylon. Whatever the case, it was a typical policy of the time for the Israelites to follow the high priest if the king could not or would not lead.[76] Manasseh is thought by most scholars to have joined a widespread rebellion against Ashurbanipal that was led by his brother,Šamaš-šuma-ukin.[77] Contemporary sources make reference to the many allies ofChaldea (governed by Šamaš-šuma-ukin), including theKingdom of Judah, which were subjects of Assyria and are mentioned in the Book of Judith as victims of Ashurbanipal's Western campaign.[78] TheEncyclopædia Britannica identified "Judah" as one of the vassal kingdoms in Šamaš-šuma-ukin's rebel coalition against Ashurbanipal.[79] TheCambridge Ancient History also confirms that "several princes ofPalestine" supported Šamaš-šuma-ukin in the revolt against Ashurbanipal, which seemingly confirms Manasseh's involvement in the revolt.[80] This would explain the reinforcement of the cities described in this book and why the Israelites and other western kingdoms rejected "Nebuchadnezzar's" order for conscription, because many of the vassal rulers of the west supported Šamaš-šuma-ukin.
It is of further interest that Šamaš-šuma-ukin's civil war broke out in 652 BCE, the eighteenth year of Ashurbanipal's reign. The book of Judith states that "Nebuchadnezzar" ravaged the western part of the empire in the eighteenth year of his reign. If the events of this book did occur during Ashurbanipal's reign, it is possible that Assyrians did not record it because they were preoccupied with Šamaš-šuma-ukin's revolt, which was not crushed for years to come. Ashurbanipal's successful crushing of Šamaš-šuma-ukin's civil war also prevented the Assyrians from retaking Egypt, which gained independence from Assyria around 655 BCE. Numerous theologians, includingAntoine Augustin Calmet, suspect that the ultimate goal of the western campaign was for the Assyrians to sack Egypt, because Holofernes appeared to be heading directly towards Egypt on his campaign through the west. If Calmet and others are correct in suspecting that Holofernes was intending to sack Egypt, this would give further evidence to the theory that the book is set during the reign of Ashurbanipal, who had previously sackedThebes in 663 BCE. The view that the book of Judith was written during the reigns of Manasseh and Ashurbanipal was held by a great number of Catholic scholars, including Calmet,George Leo Haydock,Thomas Worthington,Richard Challoner,Giovanni Stefano Menochio,Sixtus of Siena,Robert Bellarmine,Charles François Houbigant,Nicolaus Serarius,Pierre Daniel Huet andBernard de Montfaucon. Many of these theologians are cited and quoted by Calmet in his own commentary on Judith, the "Commentaire littéral sur tous les livres de l'ancien et du nouveau testament". Calmet listed all of "the main objections that can be made against the truth of Judith's Story" and spent the rest of his commentary on the book addressing them, stating: "But all this did not bother Catholic writers. There were a large number of them who answered it expertly, and who undertook to show that there is nothing incompatible in this history, neither with Scripture, nor even with profane (secular) history".[81] There were other Catholic writers who held this view as well, such asFulcran Vigouroux, who went even farther, identifying the battle between "Nebuchadnezzar, king of the Assyrians" and "Arphaxad, the king of the Medes" as the battle that occurred between Ashurbanipal andPhraortes.[82] This battle occurred during the seventeenth year of Ashurbanipal's reign, and the book of Judith states that this battle occurred in the seventeenth year of "Nebuchadnezzar's" reign.Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet expressed a similar view regarding this.[83] The scholars used specific examples from the text that line up with Manasseh's reign. As argued by Vigouroux, the two battles mentioned in the Septuagint version of the Book of Judith are a reference to the clash of the two empires in 658–657 and to Phraortes' death in battle in 653, after which Ashurbanipal continued his military actions with a large campaign starting with theBattle of the Ulai River (653 BCE) in the eighteenth year of his reign. The King of the "Elymeans" (Elamites), called "Arioch", is referenced inJudith 1:6. If the twelfth year of "Nebuchadnezzar" is to be identified as the twelfth year of Ashurbanipal, this Arioch would be identified asTeumman, who rebelled against Ashurbanipal on many occasions, eventually being killed at the Battle of the Ulai in 653 BCE,[84] around the time Catholic theologians place "Nebuchadnezzar's" western campaign.
The identification of "Nebuchadnezzar" with Ashurbanipal was so widespread that it was the only identification in English Catholic Bibles for several hundred years. The 1738 Challoner revision of theDouay Rheims Bible and theHaydock Biblical Commentary specifically declare that "Nabuchodonosor" was "known as 'Saosduchin' to profane historians and succeeded 'Asarhaddan' in the kingdom of the Assyrians". This could only have been Ashurbanipal, as he was the successor of Esarhaddon, his father.[85][86] However, while Nebuchadnezzar and Ashurbanipal's campaigns show clear and direct parallels, the main incident of Judith's intervention has not been found in any record aside from this book. An additional difficulty with this theory is that the reasons for the name changes are difficult to understand, unless the text was transmitted without character names before they were by a later copyist or translator, who lived centuries later. Catholic apologistJimmy Akin argues the possibility that the book of Judith is aroman à clef, a historical record with different names for people and places.[87] Ashurbanipal is never referenced by name in the Bible, except perhaps for the corrupt form "Asenappar" in2 Chronicles andEzra 4:10 or the anonymous title "The King of Assyria" in2 Chronicles (33:11), which means his name might have never been recorded by Jewish historians, which could explain the lack of his name in the book of Judith.
According to Antoine Augustin Calmet and Sulpicius Severus, the most common identification of the king in the book among Jewish people in antiquity wasCambyses II. Calmet wrote: "The ancient tradition of the Hebrews, in the time ofEusebius, was that the second Nebuchadnezzar, mentioned in Judith, was Cambyses; and that it was under his reign that this history had happened. This opinion has been widely followed. It is found inSuidas, inBede the Venerable, inRabanus Maurus, inGlycas, inOtto of Freising, inHugh the Cardinal, in Liran, in the Scholastic History, and in various other authors.St. Augustine does not express the name of the prince, and he places the history between Cyrus and Darius. Now between these two princes, there is only Cambyses. But this opinion is untenable for several reasons. First, the capital of Cambyses was not Nineveh, but Babylon. 2nd. Cambyses reigned only seven years and three months, and Nebuchadnezzar did not begin the war against Arphaxad, that in the thirteenth year of his reign. Finally, all the provinces which Holofernes conquers in the Book of Judith, were constantly subjugated to Cambyses, from the beginning of his reign, and always remained subject to him, and Judea in particular obeyed him. And consequently, we cannot understand that of Cambyses."[88] Furthermore, Cambyses could not have done battle against the Medes since the kingdom no longer existed at that time. Cambyses also never reigned in Nineveh, which had been destroyed for almost 100 years at that time. Cambyses was also never “king of the Assyrians”, he was the second king of the Achaemenids, or Persians. For these reasons, the theory that the book was written about Cambyses has largely been abandoned.
Identification of Nebuchadnezzar with Artaxerxes III Ochus
The identity of Nebuchadnezzar was unknown to theChurch Fathers, but some of them attempted an improbable identification withArtaxerxes III Ochus (359–338 BCE), not on the basis of the character of the two rulers, but due to the presence of a "Holofernes" and a "Bagoas" in Ochus' army.[89] Furthermore, the western military campaign described in Judith bears some resemblance to Artaxerxes III’s reconquest of Egypt around 343 B.C. During this campaign, multiple western rulers in Phoenicia, Anatolia and Cyprus declared their independence from Persian rule. Artaxerxes deported some Jews who supported the revolt to Hyrcania, on the south coast of the Caspian Sea. This identification also gained some currency with scholarship in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.[89] According to Antoine Augustin Calmet: "Sulpicius Severus wants it to have happened even later, that is to say, under the reign of Artaxerxes Ochus. This opinion is based principally on the violent and cruel nature of Ochus, and on the name of his eunuch Bagoas, who put him to death."[88] This opinion can be found in Sulpicius Severus's Sacred History, Book Two: "Most persons, however, think that it was Cambyses, the son of Cyrus, on this ground that he, as a conqueror, penetrated into Egypt and Ethiopia. But the sacred history is opposed to this opinion; for Judith is described as having lived in the twelfth year of the king in question. Now, Cambyses did not possess the supreme power for more than eight years. Wherefore, if it is allowable to make a conjecture on a point of history, I should be inclined to believe that her exploits were performed under king Ochus, who came after the second Artaxerxes. ... If these things took place, as we believe, under king Ochus, in the twelfth year of his reign, then from the date of the restoration of Jerusalem up to that war there elapsed two and twenty years. Now Ochus reigned in all twenty-three years. And he was beyond all others cruel, and more than of a barbarous disposition."[90] Unlike Cambyses, Artaxerxes's reign was long enough to fit the events of this book. However, Artaxerxes III's western campaign occurred in the sixteenth year of his reign, not the eighteenth like the Judith claims. In addition, some of the problems with the Cambyses identification still apply to Artaxerxes III, as he could not have possibly fought against a Median king, because the Median Empire was absorbed by Persia in about 550-540 B.C. and Ochus didn’t even start his reign until 359 B.C. For these reasons, this theory has largely been abandoned.
Identification of Nebuchadnezzar with Tigranes the Great
Modern scholars argue in favor of a 2nd–1st century context for the Book of Judith, understanding it as a sort of roman à clef—i.e., a literary fiction whose characters stand for some real historical figure, generally contemporary to the author. In the case of the Book of Judith, Biblical scholar Gabriele Boccaccini[91] identified Nebuchadnezzar withTigranes the Great (140–56 BCE), a powerfulKing of Armenia who, according toJosephus andStrabo, conquered all of the lands identified by the Biblical author in Judith.[92] Under this theory, the story, although fictional, would be set in the time of QueenSalome Alexandra, the only Jewish regnant queen, who reigned over Judea from 76 to 67 BCE.[93]
Like Judith, the Queen had to face the menace of a foreign king who had a tendency to destroy the temples of other religions. Both women were widows whose strategical and diplomatic skills helped in the defeat of the invader.[94] Both stories seem to be set at a time when the temple had recently been rededicated, which is the case afterJudas Maccabee killedNicanor and defeated theSeleucids. The territory of Judean occupation includes the territory ofSamaria, something which was possible in Maccabean times only afterJohn Hyrcanus reconquered those territories. Thus, the presumedSadducee author of Judith would desire to honor the great (Pharisee) Queen who tried to keep both Sadducees andPharisees united against the common menace.[citation needed]
Whilst a number of the places referred to are familiarbiblical or modern place names, there are others which are considered fictional or whose location is not otherwise known. TheologiansAntoine Augustin Calmet,Wilhelm Gesenius andFranz Karl Movers all worked to explain bizarre geographical locations in the book as copyist or translation mistakes. For instance, Movers explained χαλλαίων ("challaion") as referring to χαλδαίων, or "Chaldean".[95][96] A few more of these disputed locations include:
1:5 – the territory of Ragae, possible Rages orRhages, cf.Tobit 1:16[97]
1:6 – the riversEuphrates andTigris are mentioned, as well as the Hydaspes (Jadason in theVulgate). Hydaspes is also the Greek name for theJhelum River in modernIndia andPakistan. However, Calmet identified this river as theKarkheh River, called the "Choaspes" by the Greeks. Calmet claims that the copyists confused the Choaspes with the Hydaspes, and claims that the historianQuintus Curtius Rufus made this exact mistake.
2:21 – the plain of Bectileth,[98] three days' march fromNineveh. Calmet identified this as the "Bagadania plain" inCappadocia that was described byStrabo as being "at the foot of theTaurus Mountains"[99]
4:4 – Kona. Both Calmet and the Bibles of Complute believe that it simply refers to “villages”. Mark 8:27 says that they came to “the villages (κώμας, kômas) ofCaesarea Philippi.” It is possible that among those villages were the Old Testament sites ofBaal-gad andBaal-Hermon. This is also how Johannes Van Der Ploeg translated the passage from the SyriacTrivandrum manuscript.
4:4 – Belmain. The SyriacPeshitta writes the name of this location asAbel-meholah (as well as in 7:3), and this identification was further supported by Calmet. Some have speculated that, because the two verses spell the name differently, that it is a different location, possiblyBelameh.[100][101]
4:4 – Choba. Possibly theHobah mentioned in Genesis 14:15. If it is to be identified withMuqeible, which was referred to as "Muqeibleh" in antiquity, a possible etymology for "Choba".[102]
4:4 –Aesora. The Septuagint calls itAisora,Arasousia,Aisoraa, orAssaron, depending on the manuscript.[103] PossiblyTel Hazor orEn-hazor, both of which are mentioned in thebook of Joshua.
4:4 – The valley of Salem. It could be identified with "Shalem, a city of Shechem" mentioned in Genesis 33:18. This is the modern city ofSalim, located about three miles east of Shechem, and is located at the foot of theJordan Valley.[104]
4:6 and several later references –Bethulia, agated city (Judith 10:6). From the gates of the city, the valley below can be observed (Judith 10:10). Because of the geography described, it is theorized by many, including the Jewish Encyclopedia and Charles Cutler Torrey, to be a pseudonym for Shechem. This would explain why the city's name is derived from "Beth El", or "House of God": the Samaritans built their own schismaticTemple onMount Gerizim.
4:6 – Betomesthaim orBetomasthem. Some translations refer to "the people of Bethulia and Betomesthaim" as a unit, which "faces (singular)Esdraelon opposite the plain near Dothan.[105] TheEncyclopædia Britannica refers to the "Plain of Esdraelon" as the plain between theGalilee hills andSamaria.[106] As such, historian and archaeologistCharles Cutler Torrey identified Betomesthaim as a pseudonym for the city of Samaria. Torrey went further to identify the Hebrew basis for Betomesthaim as “Bayit Mizpah”, which means “house of outlook”. This is plausible, because "Samaria" is the Greek translation of the Hebrew name "Shomron", which means "watch" or "watchman".[107]
7:3 - Belbaim. The SyriacPeshitta writes the name of this location asAbel-meholah (as well as in 4:4), and this identification was further supported by Calmet.
7:3 – Cyalon or Cynamon,[108] also facing Esdraelon. TheEncyclopedia of the Bible notes that "some scholars have felt that this name is a corruption forJokneam".[109][110]
7:18 – Egrebeh, which is near Chubi, beside the Wadi Mochmur. Both Calmet andCharles William Meredith van de Velde identified Egrebeh with Akrabeh, a ruined site in the mountains of Central Palestine, eleven miles southeast of Shechem. Chubi has been identified with Quzah, a village located nearEinabus, five and-a-half miles south of Shechem and five miles west of Agrabeh. The Wady Makfuriyeh is located on the northern slopes of which Akrabeh stands. The Wadi Mochmur as the Wady Makfuriyeh. This identification is supported by the Syriac, which translated the name of the river as "Nachol de-Peor".[111][112]
8:4 – Balamon. The Septuagint states that Manasseh, Judith's husband, was buried in a field between Dothan and Balamon. This detail is not included in theVulgate. Calmet speculated that "Balamon" was "the same city that they have already named several times, sometimes Belmaïm, and sometimes Belma, or Bélem, or Baalmeon". It is possible that "Balamon" is a different location that is to be identified withBaal-meon.
15:4 – Along with Betomesthaim, other places presumably in the vicinity of Bethulia are mentioned: Choba (or Chobai) and Kola. Choba is generally thought to be the "Choba" from 4:4, if that is the case it could beMuqeible. Kola could be identified withGolan, or possiblyCabul. The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible speculates that "Kola" could beHolon. In this verse, theCodex Alexandrinus also lists a place called Bebai, however this is not included in theCodex Vaticanus. Bebai could be identified withHebron orAbel-Maim, an identification supported by the Syriac Trivandrum manuscript.[113]
Although there is no historically recorded "Bethulia", the book of Judith gives an extremely precise location for where the city is located, and there are several possible candidates of ancient towns in that area that are now ruins. It has widely been speculated that, based on location descriptions in the book, that the most plausible historical site for Bethulia isShechem. Shechem is a large city in the hill-country of Samaria, on the direct road fromJezreel to Jerusalem, lying in the path of the enemy, at the head of an important pass and is a few hours south ofGeba. TheJewish Encyclopedia subscribes to the theory, suggesting that it was called by a pseudonym because of the historical animosity between the Jews and Samaritans. The Jewish Encyclopedia claims that Shechem is the only location that meets all the requirements for Bethulia's location, further stating: "The identity of Bethulia with Shechem is thus beyond all question".[3] Charles Cutler Torrey pointed out that the description of water being brought to the city by means of an aqueduct from a spring above the city on the south side is a trait that can only belong to Shechem.[114]
TheCatholic Encyclopedia writes: "The city was situated on a mountain overlooking the plain ofJezrael, orEsdrelon, and commanding narrow passes to the south (Judith 4:6–7; 6:11–13); at the foot of the mountain there was an important spring, and other springs were in the neighborhood (Judith 6:11; 7:3, 7, 12). Moreover, it lay within investing lines which ran throughDothain, or Dothan, now Tell Dothân, to Belthem, or Belma, no doubt the same as the Belamon ofJudith 8:3, and thence toKyamon, or Chelmon, "which lies over against Esdrelon" (Judith 7:3).[115] These data point to a site on the heights west ofJenin (Engannim), between the plains of Esdrelon and Dothan, where Haraiq el-Mallah, Khirbet Sheikh Shibel and el-Bârid lie close together. Such a site best fulfills all requirements for the location of Bethulia.[116]
TheMadaba Map mosaic from the 6th century AD, shows a settlement named "Betylion" (Greek Β[ΗΤ]ΥΛΙΟΝ). Many believe this to be Bethulia, but this is unlikely because it is located much farther south. It instead is located on the Egyptian border with the Gaza Strip, in modern-daySheikh Zuweid.[117]
The character of Judith is larger than life, and she has won a place in Jewish and Christian lore, art, poetry and drama. The etymology of her name meaning "woman ofJudea", suggests that she represents the heroic spirit of theJewish people, and that same spirit, as well as herchastity, have endeared her toChristianity.[39]
Owing to her unwavering religious devotion, she is able to step outside of her widow's role, and dress and act in a sexually provocative manner while clearly remaining true to her ideals in the reader's mind, and her seduction and beheading of the wicked Holofernes while playing this role has been rich fodder for artists of various genres.[39]
The first extant commentary on The Book of Judith is byHrabanus Maurus (9th century). Thenceforth her presence inMedieval literature is robust: in homilies, biblical paraphrases, histories and poetry. AnOld English poetic version is found together withBeowulf (their epics appear both in theNowell Codex). "The opening of the poem is lost (scholars estimate that 100 lines were lost) but the remainder of the poem, as can be seen, the poet reshaped the biblical source and set the poem's narrative to an Anglo–Saxon audience."[118]
In the epic, she is the brave warrior, forceful and active; in the homily she is an exemplar of pious chastity for cloistered nuns. In both cases, her narrative gained relevance from theNorseViking invasions of the period. Within the next three centuries Judith would be treated by such major figures asHeinrich Frauenlob,Dante, andGeoffrey Chaucer.
In medieval Christian art, the predominance of church patronage assured that Judith's patristic valences as "Mulier Sancta" and Virgin Mary prototype would prevail: from the 8th-century frescoes in Santa Maria Antigua in Rome through innumerable later bible miniatures. Gothic cathedrals often featured Judith, most impressively in the series of 40 stained glass panels at theSainte-Chapelle in Paris (1240s).[citation needed]
InRenaissance literature and visual arts, all of these trends were continued, often in updated forms, and developed. The already well established notion of Judith as anexemplum of the courage of local people against tyrannical rule from afar was given new urgency by the Assyrian nationality of Holofernes, which made him an inevitable symbol of the threateningOttoman Turks. TheItalian Renaissance poetLucrezia Tornabuoni chose Judith as one of the five subjects of her poetry on biblical figures.[119]
A similar dynamic was created in the 16th century by the confessional strife of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation. Both Protestants and Catholics draped themselves in the protective mantle of Judith and cast their "heretical" enemies as Holofernes.[120]
In 16th-century France, writers such asGuillaume Du Bartas,Gabrielle de Coignard andAnne de Marquets composed poems on Judith's triumph over Holofernes. Croatian poet and humanistMarko Marulić also wrote an epic on Judith's story in 1501, theJudita. Italian poet and scholarBartolomeo Tortoletti wrote a Latin epic on the Biblical character of Judith (Bartholomaei Tortoletti Iuditha uindex e uindicata, 1628). The Catholic tractA Treatise of Schisme, written in 1578 at Douai by the English Roman Catholic scholarGregory Martin, included a paragraph in which Martin expressed confidence that "the Catholic Hope would triumph, and pious Judith would slay Holofernes". This was interpreted by the English Protestant authorities at the time as incitement to slayQueen Elizabeth I.[citation needed] It served as the grounds for the death sentence passed on printerWilliam Carter who had printed Martin's tract and who was executed in 1584.[citation needed]
Klimt's explicit 1901 version ofJudith I was shocking to viewers and is said to have targeted themes of female sexuality that had previously been more or less taboo.[121]
In 1840,Friedrich Hebbel's playJudith was performed in Berlin. He deliberately departs from the biblical text:
I have no use for the biblical Judith. There, Judith is a widow who lures Holofernes into her web with wiles, when she has his head in her bag she sings and jubilates with all of Israel for three months. That is mean, such a nature is not worthy of her success [...]. My Judith is paralyzed by her deed, frozen by the thought that she might give birth to Holofernes' son; she knows that she has passed her boundaries, that she has, at the very least, done the right thing for the wrong reasons.[123]
The story of Judith has been a favourite of latter-day playwrights; it was brought alive in 1892 byAbraham Goldfaden, who worked in Eastern Europe. The American playwrightThomas Bailey Aldrich'sJudith of Bethulia was first performed in New York, 1905, and was the basis for the 1914 productionJudith of Bethulia by directorD. W. Griffith. A full hour in length, it was one of the earliest feature films made in the United States. English writerArnold Bennett in 1919 tried his hand at dramaturgy withJudith, a faithful reproduction in three acts; it premiered in spring 1919 at Devonshire Park Theatre, Eastbourne.[124] In 1981, the play "Judith among the Lepers" by the Israeli (Hebrew) playwrightMoshe Shamir was performed in Israel. Shamir examines the question why the story of Judith was excluded from the Jewish (Hebrew) Bible and thus banned from Jewish history. In putting her story on stage he tries to reintegrate Judith's story into Jewish history. English playwrightHoward Barker examined the Judith story and its aftermath, first in the scene "The Unforeseen Consequences of a Patriotic Act", as part of his collection of vignettes,The Possibilities. Barker later expanded the scene into a short playJudith.
^The admission of Achior the Ammonite to the House of Israel, "with all the succession of his kindred until this present day",[54] occasions some discussion byThomas Aquinas in hisSumma Theologica, where he notes thatDeuteronomy 23:3 prescribes that "An Ammonite orMoabite shall not enter the assembly of the Lord; even to the tenth generation none of his descendants shall enter the assembly of the Lord forever", but in this case "a dispensation" would have been applied.[55]
^Haydock also notes thatOvid's poemAmores refers to a character called Bagoas, who was entrusted with the task of guarding his mistress.[57]
^abFlint, Peter & VanderKam, James,The Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Their Significance For Understanding the Bible, Judaism, Jesus, and Christianity, Continuum International, 2010, p. 160 (Protestant Canon) and p. 209 (Judith not among Dead Sea Scrolls),[2]
^Sidnie White Crawford,The Book of Esther in Modern Research, pp. 73–74 (T&T Clark Int'l 2003);ISBN082646663X.
^Joel Lurie Grishaver (2001).Hanukkah: The Family Guide to Spiritual Celebration. Jewish Lights Publishing.ISBN1-58023-122-5.
^Noam Zion & Barbara Spectre (eds.).A Different Light: The Hanukkah Book of Celebration. Devora Publishing. p. 241.ISBN1-930143-31-1
^Kevin R. Brine, et al., The Sword of Judith: Judith Studies Across the Disciplines, p. 30 (Open Book Publishers 2010).
^abHerbermann, Charles, ed. (1913)."Book of Judith" .Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.: Canonicity: "..."the Synod of Nicaea is said to have accounted it as Sacred Scripture" (Praef. in Lib.). It is true that no documents about the canon survive in the Canons of Nicaea, and it is uncertain whether St. Jerome is referring to the use made of the book in the discussions of the council, or whether he was misled by some spurious canons attributed to that council"
^Vanhoozer, Kevin J.,Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, Baker Academic, 2005, p. 98[5]
^Nigosian, S.A.,From Ancient Writings to Sacred Texts: The Old Testament and Apocrypha, Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004, p. 29,[6]
^Enslin, Morton Scott (1972).The Book of Judith: Greek Text with an English Translation (Volume 7 of Jewish Apocryphal Literature). Brill Archive. p. 49.ISBN978-9004035959.
^Luther, Martin; Füssel, Stephan (1534).Bible de Luther de 1534, Réimpression Intégral. Taschen. p. 41.ISBN978-3-8228-2470-2.{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
^abGeisler, Norman L.; MacKenzie, Ralph E. (1995).Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and Differences. Baker Publishing Group. p. 171.ISBN978-0-8010-3875-4.Lutherans and Anglicans used it only for ethical / devotional matters but did not consider it authoritative in matters of faith.
^Christiansen, Ellen Juhl (2009). Xeravits, Géza (ed.)."Judith: Defender of Israel Preserver of the Temple" In A Pious Seductress: Studies in the Book of Judith. Walter de Gruyter. p. 75.ISBN978-3110279948.
^abcdefghMichael D. Coogan, ed. (2010).The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha: New Revised Standard Version (4th ed.). Oxford Univ. Press. pp. 31–36.ISBN978-0-19-528961-9.
^Gianfranco Ravasi (2009-02-05)."Giuditta" [Judith].Famiglia Cristiana (in Italian) – via Santi Beati.
^The New Oxford Annotated Bible, 3rd edition (NY: Oxford University Press, 2007), p. 32 AP.[ISBN missing]
^Ida Frolich,Time and Times and Half a Time: Historical Consciousness in the Jewish Literature of the Persian and Hellenistic Eras, pp. 125–126 (Sheffield Academic Press 1996),ISBN1-85075-566-3.
^Roy Gane,The Role of Assyria in the Ancient Near East During the Reign of Manasseh, in Andrews University Seminary Studies, (Spring 1997, Vol. 35, No. 1), pp. 21–32.
^Study note on 2 Chronicles 33:11, in ESV Archaeology Study Bible, ed. John Currid and David Chapman (Wheaton: Crossway, 2018), 643.
^"Ashurbanipal".Encyclopædia Britannica. 2014. Retrieved8 November 2014.
^A Pious Seductress: Studies in the Book of Judith (Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Studies 14), Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, 2012.[ISBN missing][page needed]
^Flavius Josephus,The New Complete Works of Josephus, William Whiston trans., p. 452 (Kregel Pubs. 1999);ISBN0-8254-2924-2
^Dan W. Clanton,The Good, the Bold, and the Beautiful: The Story of Susanna and Its Renaissance Interpretations, p. 41 (T&T Clark Int'l 2006),ISBN0-567-02991-3. Clanton discusses the theory that the Books of Susanna, Greek Esther, and Judith all may be linked in that they may have been "used, if not composed, to serve aspropaganda for the reign of Salome Alexandra."
^ One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in thepublic domain: Bechtel, Florentine Stanislaus (1907). "Bethulia". In Herbermann, Charles (ed.).Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 2. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
^Latin text of Theodosius at "Theodosius de situ Terrae sanctae im ächten Text und der Breviarius de Hierosolyma vervollständigt", J. Gildemeister (editor), published by Adolph Marcus, Bonn (1882), p.17. Accessed 28 June 2019.
^Greenblatt, Stephen (2012).The Norton Anthology of English Literature - The Middle Ages. New York: W.W. Norton and Company. p. 109.ISBN978-0-393-91247-0.
^Stocker, Margarita. (1998).Judith : sexual warrior, women and power in Western culture. New Haven: Yale University Press.ISBN0-300-07365-8.OCLC37836745.
^"Die Judith der Bibel kann ich nicht brauchen. Dort ist Judith eine Wittwe, die den Holofernes durch List und Schlauheit in's Netz lockt; sie freut sich, als sie seinen Kopf im Sack hat und singt und jubelt vor und mit ganz Israel drei Monde lang. Das ist gemein; eine solche Natur ist ihres Erfolgs gar nicht würdig [...]. Meine Judith wird durch ihre That paralysirt; sie erstarrt vor der Möglichkeit, einen Sohn des Holofernes zu gebären; es wird ihr klar, daß sie über die Gränzen hinaus gegangen ist, daß sie mindestens das Rechte aus unrechten Gründen gethan hat" (Tagebücher 2:1872)
.jpg)
.jpg)
