by
Damien F. Mackey
Setting the
Campaign Scene
The massive,
all-conquering Assyrian army, led by “Holofernes”, having brought into
subjection the coastal Mediterranean cities, now turns its sights upon Israel.
Early in
my university thesis:
A Revised History
of the Era of King Hezekiah of Judah
and its Background
I had
anticipated that (Volume One, p. 8): “Some important
geographical revisions will also be proposed in this thesis”.
One
of these pertained to Bethulia”:
“The most significant of these will be:
‘ASHDOD’,
featuring prominently in Sargon II’s records as a fort leading a western
rebellion against him, usually identified with the coastal Philistine city of
that name (the latter now to be now identified with the ‘Ashdudimmu’, or
maritime Ashdod, of the neo-Assyrian records), will be re-identified with the
mighty Judaean fortress of LACHISH.
‘CONDUIT OF
THE UPPER POOL, WHICH IS ON THE HIGHWAY TO THE FULLER’S FIELD’ (cf. 2 Kings
18:17 & Isaiah 7:3; 36:2), now to be identified as a location situated
close to the Mount of olives, rather than right at the walls of Jerusalem
itself.
‘BETHULIA’:
Judith’s home town, to be identified with the northern BETHEL, that Jeroboam II
of Israel had formerly turned into a pagan cult centre (e.g. Amos 7:10-13)”.
Then in Volume Two (“Identification of
Bethulia”, pp. 69-71), I would embrace C. Conder’s identification of Bethulia
with the village of Mithilia (or Mesilieh).
Whilst I am still holding to the first two of
these, I have lately had cause to re-think the location and identification of
Bethulia, about which identification I had written (Volume Two, p. 71): “I
find quite satisfying this site (Mithilia/Meselieh),
which appears to fit Bethulia in regard to
its location, description, name (approximately) and apparent strategic
importance”.
The Book of Judith is, in its present form,
replete with personal and geographical name difficulties, a situation that has
led scholars - particularly in more recent times - to relegate the book to the
level of “pious” or “historical fiction”. As I noted in my Preface (p. x), I
would try to sort things out by locating the drama to a very precise historical
period:
The
full resolution of this complicated matter though, as I see it, will not be
found until Part II, with my
merging of the Book of Judith with the Books of Kings, Chronicles and Isaiah
for the era of Hezekiah (Chapter 2 and
Chapter 3). I have nowhere read where this
particular historical scenario for Judith has been attempted; though, in
retrospect, the C8th BC Hezekian era for the Judith drama, with Sennacherib
ruling in Assyria, now seems to me to be rather obvious.
Be
that as it may, I know of virtually no current historians who even consider the
Book of Judith to be anything other than a ‘pious fiction’, or perhaps
‘historical fiction’, with the emphasis generally on the ‘fiction’ aspect of
this. Thus I feel a strong empathy for the solitary Judith in the midst of
those differently-minded Assyrians (Judith 10:11-13:10).
Earlier in Volume Two (p. 27), I had quoted
C. Moore regarding difficulties that commentators have encountered concerning
the geographical account of the Assyrian campaign:
Moore tells of
some of the problems associated with this particular campaign account: ….
Chaps. 2 and 3
of Judith continue to offer serious errors in fact but of a different kind,
namely, geographical. Holofernes’ entire army marched from Nineveh to northern
Cilicia, a distance of about three hundred miles, in just three
days (2:21), after which they cut their way
through Put and Lud (usually identified by scholars with Libya in Africa, and
Lydia in Asia Minor, respectively …), only to find themselves crossing the Euphrates
River and proceeding west through Mesopotamia (2:24)
before arriving at Cilicia and Japheth, facing Arabia (2:25)!
Either
something is now missing from the itinerary, or the author knew nothing about
Mesopotamian geography ….
Once
Holofernes reached the eastern coastline of the Mediterranean, his itinerary
becomes more believable even though a number of cities and peoples mentioned
are unknown, e.g. Sur and Okina (2:28) and Geba (3:10). Just exactly what route
Holofernes’ army took to get from the coastal cities of Azotus and Ascalon
(2:28) to the place where they could encamp and besiege Bethulia is unknown.
The LXX seems to suggest that Holofernes’ attack on Bethulia came from the
north (cf. 4:6; 8:21; 11:14, 19). …
According
to verse 4:4: “So [the Israelites living in Judaea] sent word to every district
of Samaria, and to Kona, Beth-horon, Belmain, and Jericho, and to Choba and
Aesora, and
the
valley of Salem”. Moore finds this highly problematical also:….
Starting with
chap. 4, the problem shifts from the author’s errors and confusion over
geographical names and locations to the reader’s ignorance and confusion as to
the geographical locations of sites near Bethulia. For instance, of the eight
Israelite places named in 4:4, five are totally unknown, namely, Kona, Belmain,
Choba, Aesora, and the valley of Salem. …
Craven
though, whose purpose will be rather a literary assessment of [the Book of
Judith], has no qualms therefore in dismissing as insignificant the historical
and geographical problems of [the Book of Judith] with which other commentators
of the book have tried to grapple: …. “The Book of Judith simply does not yield
literal or even allegorical data. Instead, its opening details seem to be a
playful manipulation of both historical and geographical facts and inventions”.
Charles
C. Torrey will, on the other hand, in his article back in 1899, “The Site of 'Bethulia'” (JAOS 20,
pp. 160-172), take far more seriously the geographical details. It is this
particular article that actually prompted my re-think of Bethulia. Thus Torrey
wrote, for example (p. 161):
“But in the frequent descriptions
with which the writer gives of the region where the principal action of the
story take place, the geographical and topographical details are introduced in
such number and with such consistency as to show that he is describing
localities with which he was personally familiar. Nor is it difficult to
determine, in general, what region he had in mind. Beyond question, the
discomfiture of the ‘Assyrian’ army is represented as having taken place in the
hill country of Samaria, on the direct road from Jezreel to Jerusalem”.
Two
key places for defence were, apparently, “Bethulia and Betomesthaim” facing Esdraelon (or
Jezreel). For it was to these two towns that the high priest Joakim wrote from Jerusalem (thesis, Volume Two, p. 53):
The High-Priest, Joakim
Instead of a king to stir up the people, as
Hezekiah had done at the commencement of Sennacherib’s invasion (2 Chronicles
32:2-8), for his Third
Campaign, [Judith] 4:6-7 introduces us to: “The high priest, Joakim, who was in Jerusalem
at the time [who] wrote
to the people of
Bethulia and Betomesthaim, which faces Esdraelon opposite the plain near
Dothan, ordering them to seize the mountain passes, since by them Judaea could
be invaded …”.
For more on the high priest, Joakim, see my:
Hezekiah's Chief Official Eliakim
was High Priest
and:
Continuing on now with the “Assyrian Advance on Bethulia” (Volume Two, p.
61), I wrote:
[Judith] 7:1: “The next day Holofernes
ordered his whole army, and all the allies who had joined him, to break camp
and to move against Bethulia, and to seize the passes up into the hill country
and make war on the Israelites”. The Assyrian fighting forces, “170,000
infantry and 12,000 cavalry, not counting the baggage and the foot soldiers
handling it” (v. 2), now numbered that fateful figure of 180,000 plus. …. “When
the Israelites saw their vast numbers, they were greatly terrified and said to
one another, ‘They will now strip clean the whole land; neither the high
mountains nor the valleys nor the hills will bear their weight’.” (v. 4). One
can now fully appreciate the appropriateness of Joel’s ‘locust’ imagery.
[The Book of Judith] provides the reader with
a precise location for the Assyrian army prior to its assault of the fortified
towns of Israel facing Dothan.
- I give firstly the Douay version of it (7:3):
All these [Assyrian footmen and cavalry] prepared themselves
together to fight against the children of Israel. And they came by the hillside
to the top, which looketh toward Dothain [Dothan], from the place which is
called Belma, unto Chelmon, which is over against Esdraelon.
- Next the Greek version, which importantly mentions Bethulia (v. 3):
They encamped in the valley near Bethulia, beside the spring, and
they spread out in breadth over Dothan as far as Balbaim and in length from
Bethulia to Cyamon, which faces Esdraelon.
The combination of the well-known Dothan
(var. Dothain) and Esdraelon in both versions presents no
problem, and fixes the area where the Assyrian army massed. The identification
of Bethulia will be discussed separately, in the next chapter
(section: “Identification of Bethulia”, beginning on p. 69). The only other
geographical elements named are ‘Belma’ (Douay)/ ‘Balbaim’ (Greek); and
‘Chelmon’ (Douay)/ ‘Cyamon’ (Greek). Charles has, not illogically, linked the
first of these names, which he gives as ‘Belmaim’ (var. Abelmain) … with the
‘Belmaim’ listed in 4:4. …. And he tells that, in the Syrian version, this
appears as ‘Abelmeholah’. …. But both this location, and “Cyamon, Syr Kadmûn, VL Chelmona”, he claims to be
“unknown”. ….
Leahy and Simons, on the other hand, have
both ventured identifications for these two locations. And they have each in
fact arrived at the same conclusion for ‘Belbaim’ (‘Belma’) … though Simons
will reject the identification of ‘Cyamon’ (‘Chelmon’) that we shall now see
that Leahy has favoured. Here firstly, then, is Leahy’s account of it, in which
he also connects ‘Belbaim’ with the ‘Balamon’ of 8:3 (pertaining to the burial
place of Judith’s husband, Manasseh): ….
Holofernes had given orders to break up camp and march against
Bethulia. Then, according to the Gk, the army camped in the valley near
Bethulia, and spread itself in breadth in the direction over against Dothan and
on to Belbaim (Balamon of Gk 8:3, Belma of Vg, Jible´am of Jos 17:11, the
modern Khirbet Bel´ame), and in length from Bethulia to Kyamon (Chelmon of Vg,
Jokne´am of Jos 12:22, the modern Tell Qaimun).
Simons will instead prefer for ‘Cyamon’,
modern el-jâmûn.
…. Here is his
geographical
assessment of the final location of the
Assyrian army as given in the Greek version: ….
Judith vii 3b describes the location of BETHULIA more closely. The clause is easily
understandable on the condition that two changes are made, viz. “breadthwise
‘from’ … DOTHAIM
unto BELBAIM and lengthwise from ‘BELBAIM’ (LXX reads “BETHULIA”. However, the besieged city itself cannot have been at the
extremity of the besieging army) unto CYAMON which
is opposite (the plain of) Esdrelon” or in terms of modern geography; from tell
dôtân unto hirbet bel’ameh and from hirbet bel’ameh unto el-jâmûn. The
disposition of Holofernes’ army thus described is perfectly comprehensible, if BETHULIA was situated between the upright sides of a
triangle, the top of which was the twice mentioned site of hirbet bel’ameh,
while its base was a line from tell dôtân to el-jâmûn.
According
to Moore (above), “… of the eight Israelite places named in [Judith] 4:4, five
are totally unknown, namely, Kona, Belmain, Choba, Aesora, and the valley of
Salem”.
But
we have just found that “Belmain”, for instance, may not be “totally unknown”.
Moreover,
there was apparently a northern “Salem” in the region of Shechem (Genesis 33:18
KJV): “And Jacob came to Shalem, a city of Shechem, which is in the land
of Canaan, when he came from Padanaram; and pitched his tent before the city.”
“It
is certainly a remarkable fact, supporting the King James Version, that about 4
miles East of Shechem (Nablus), there is a village bearing the name Salem”.
The
Valley of Salem deserves far closer attention (see next section, ii), because
there is a Psalm, purportedly pertaining to the time of King Hezekiah and the
defeat of the Assyrians, in which there occurs a reference to “Salem”. Even,
according to M. D. Goulder, “a battle at Salem”: “Selah Psalm 76 is
widely seen as a companion to Psalm 75. ... victory in war, and celebrates the
divine deliverance of Israel in a battle
at Salem near Shechem” (The Psalms of Asaph and the Pentateuch:
Studies in the Psalter, III, p. 86).
Salem Important
“So they sent a warning to the whole region of Samaria
and to the towns of Kona, Beth Horon, Belmain, Jericho, Choba, and Aesora, and
to Salem Valley. They
immediately occupied the mountaintops, fortified the villages on the mountains,
and stored up food in preparation for war”.
Judith 4:4-5
Introduction
Previously we noted that “… there
was apparently a northern “Salem” in the region of Shechem (Genesis 33:18 KJV):
“And Jacob came to Shalem, a city of Shechem …” …. It
is certainly a remarkable fact … that about 4 miles East of Shechem (Nablus),
there is a village bearing the name Salem”.
One
really needs to take seriously what may seem at first like insignificant
geographical clues.
Doing
that very thing was what had enabled Dr. Eva Danelius to re-orient the First Campaign of pharaoh Thutmose III
away from the conventional geographical interpretation of it, in the north, in
the Megiddo region, to a more apt geography and topography for it in the region
of Jerusalem (“ Did Thutmose III Despoil the Temple in Jerusalem?”):
“Breasted
identified this defile, the road called "Aruna" in Egyptian records,
with the Wadi 'Ara which connects the Palestine maritime plain with the Valley
of Esdraelon (4). It was this identification which aroused my curiosity, and my
doubt.
If it is
true that "the geography of a country determines the course of its
wars" (44), the frightful defile, and attempts at its crossing by
conquering armies, should have been reported in books of Biblical and/or
post-Biblical history. There is no mention of either. Nor has the Wadi 'Ara
pass ever been considered to be secret, or dangerous”.
This led Dr.
Danelius to a reconstruction of this famous First
Campaign of the pharaoh’s in favour of Dr. I. Velikovsky’s view that it was
the actual biblical event of Shishak king of Egypt’s assault on Jerusalem and
its holy Temple in the 5th year of King Rehoboam of Judah (I Kings
14:25) – but with a far more satisfactory geography for it than Velikovsky’s
awkward attempt to combine the biblical details with the conventional Megiddo
element.
Dr. Danelius
would be able to show that the Aruna road
taken by the Egyptian army fitted the conventional view neither etymologically,
geographically, topologically, nor strategically.
Now I, in my
continuous efforts over the years to make historical and geographical sense of
the Book of Judith, may have taken too casually the reference in Judith 4:4 to
“Salem (Valley)”.
It may turn
out to be just as crucial as was Dr. Danelius’s “Aruna” moment for the
re-interpretation of Thutmose III’s First
Campaign.
Salem or Shalem
The
mysterious “Salem” in the Bible inevitably gets connected with Jerusalem.
SHAVEH, VALLEY OF (shā'vĕ, Heb. shāwēh, a plain).
Also called “the king’s dale”; a place near Salem (i.e., Jerusalem, Ps.76.2), where, after rescuing his nephew Lot, Abraham met the king of
Sodom (Gen.14.17). It is identified by some as the same place where Absalom
erected a memorial to himself (2Sam.18.18).
In
the Psalm referred to here, 76 (Hebrew), or 75 (Douay), the word Shalem (שָׁלֵם) seems to be - in typical Hebrew parallelistic fashion -
juxtaposed with Zion (צִיּוֹן), as if identifying the two (76:3): “In
Salem also is set His tabernacle, and His dwelling-place in Zion”.
But, as we have gleaned from the OT books of Genesis and Judith,
there was apparently also a northern Salem. And indeed some, for example “… the
list of earlier scholars … identified Melchizedek’s Salem with Shechem …” (Studies in the Pentateuch, Volume 41, edited
by John Adney Emerton, p. 53).
The NT
also refers to a place named “Salim”, which some think may have been partly in
the vicinity of Shechem (http://biblehub.com/topical/a/aenon.htm):
“[Aenon]
Springs,
a place near Salim where John baptized (John 3:23). It was probably near the upper
source of the Wady Far'ah, an open valley extending from Mount Ebal to the
Jordan. It is full of springs. A place has been found called `Ainun, four miles
north of the springs”.
M.
D. Goulder had, as noted in Part One (i),
referred to “a battle at Salem” near Shechem, in the north, in relation to:
“Selah Psalm 76 is widely seen as a companion to Psalm 75. ... victory
in war, and celebrates the divine deliverance of Israel in a battle at Salem near Shechem”.
This
- whilst not according entirely with my previous acceptance of Judith’s
“Bethulia” as Mithilia (much closer to Dothan) - does accord very well,
however, with my firm conviction that the Battle of the Book of Judith had
occurred in the north, and not in the south at Jerusalem.
The Douay version
of the Psalm (there numbered as 75) connects it explicitly to King Hezekiah
(“Ezechias”) and “the Assyrians”, which is precisely where I have located it
historically. Thus:
…. God
is known in his church: and exerts his power in protecting it. It alludes to
the slaughter of the Assyrians, in the days of king Ezechias.
[1] Unto the end, in praises, a psalm for Asaph: a
canticle to the Assyrians. [2] In Judea God is known: his name is great in
Israel. [3] And his place is in peace: and his abode in Sion:
[4] There hath he broken the powers of bows, the
shield, the sword, and the battle. [5] Thou enlightenest wonderfully from the
everlasting hills.
[6] All the foolish of heart were troubled. They have
slept their sleep; and all the men of riches have found nothing in their hands.
[7] At thy rebuke, O God of Jacob, they have all
slumbered that mounted on horseback. [8] Thou art terrible, and who shall resist thee? from
that time thy wrath. [9] Thou hast caused judgment to be heard from
heaven: the earth trembled and was still, [10] When God arose in judgment, to save all the meek
of the earth.
[8] "From that time": From the time that thy
wrath shall break out.
[11] For the thought
of man shall give praise to thee: and the remainders of the thought shall keep
holiday to thee. [12] Vow ye, and pay
to the Lord your God: all you that are round about him bring presents. To him
that is terrible, [13] Even to him who
taketh away the spirit of princes: to the terrible with the kings of the earth.
Blown into oblivion
Blown away like autumn leaves, as Lord Byron had
poetically written -
so have the winds of time erased even the memory of
the Assyrian rout.
Introduction
I have often marvelled at how thoroughly has the
memory of the destruction of the Assyrian king Sennacherib’s massive army
disappeared from the records of history. “Like
the leaves of the forest when Autumn hath blown”, as Lord Byron
wrote: “And the eyes of the sleepers waxed
deadly and chill”. And: “Hath melted like snow”.
Apart from the occasional general, only,
references to the fact of the incident, say in Sirach (48:21): “The Lord struck down the camp of the Assyrians, and his angel wiped
them out”, or I Maccabees 7:41: “There Judas prayed, ‘Lord, the Scriptures tell us that when a king sent
messengers to insult you, your angel went out and killed 185,000 of his
soldiers’” (cf. 2 Maccabees 15:22), we have to turn to the classical sources
for any glimpse of the drama.
Herodotus, for instance, pitted the event at
“Pelusium” (the eastern extremity of the Nile Delta), at the time of a pharaoh
“Sethos”. And he attributed the disaster to a plague of mice (2:141):
“
|
when Sanacharib, king of
the Arabians and Assyrians, marched his vast army into Egypt, the warriors
one and all refused to come to his [i.e., the Pharaoh Sethos'] aid. On
this the monarch, greatly distressed, entered into the inner sanctuary, and,
before the image of the god, bewailed the fate which impended over him. As he
wept he fell asleep, and dreamed that the god came and stood at his side,
bidding him be of good cheer, and go boldly forth to meet the Arabian host,
which would do him no hurt, as he himself would send those who should help
him. Sethos, then, relying on the dream, collected such of the Egyptians as
were willing to follow him, who were none of them warriors, but traders,
artisans, and market people; and with these marched to Pelusium, which
commands the entrance into Egypt, and there pitched his camp. As the two
armies lay here opposite one another, there came in the night, a multitude of
field-mice, which devoured all the quivers and bowstrings of the enemy, and
ate the thongs by which they managed their shields. Next morning they
commenced their fight, and great multitudes fell, as they had no arms with
which to defend themselves. There stands to this day in the temple of Vulcan,
a stone statue of Sethos, with a mouse in his hand, and an inscription to
this effect - "Look on me, and learn to reverence the gods."[2]
|
The only detailed account of the incident
(including the all-important geographical data) that I had ever been able to
find, and it is a most substantial one, is that set out in the Book of Judith.
Here we are provided with the why, the when, and the whereabouts of the disaster – all of
it encompassed within a magnificently
readable drama which has rightly become famous.
But there are Judith echoes to be found
everywhere, from BC time through to supposed AD time, as I pointed out in my
article:
World Renowned Judith of
Bethulia
in the “Lindian Chronicle”; in parts of Homer’s The Iliad; Tomyris and Cyrus; Beta
Israel’s Gudit the Semienite, c. 1000 AD (matching Judith the Simeonite).
Whilst I was already aware that Douay Psalm 75 was
considered to refer to King Hezekiah and the Assyrian defeat, I had not picked
up on – until now – that crucial “Salem” (or Shalem) connection between the
Psalm and the “Salem Valley” of Judith 4:4.
‘Salem’ in the Psalm (76, Hebrew) I had considered
to be a parallelism with ‘Zion’ (Jerusalem).
King Sennacherib had, of course, successfully
attacked Jerusalem and its environs during his Third Campaign, which could not,
however, have been the ill-fated Assyrian one that had resulted in the
complete rout of the Gentile army. This is quite apparent from the sequence in
Isaiah 37. According to the prophecy (v. 33): ‘Therefore this
is what the Lord says concerning the king of Assyria …’, all the things that Isaiah
said the “king of Assyria” would not do,
he had already managed to do during
his highly successful Third Campaign (vv.,
33-35):
‘He will not enter this city
or shoot an arrow here.
He will not come before it with
shield
or build a siege ramp against it.
By the way that he came he will
return;
he will not enter this city’,
declares the Lord.
‘I will defend this city and save
it,
for my sake and for the sake of David my servant!’ [,]
for my sake and for the sake of David my servant!’ [,]
this followed immediately by (v. 36): “Then the angel of the Lord went out
and put to death a hundred and eighty-five thousand in the Assyrian camp. When
the people got up the next morning—there were all the dead bodies!”
Psalm 76 (Hebrew) may finally be that missing
connection for which I had been searching, providing that all-important detail
of the location of the battle and rout: viz., “Salem Valley”.
In Byron’s poem there is, happily, no mention of a
disaster in the vicinity of Jerusalem, with only “Galilee” (north) being
referred to:
The Destruction of Sennacherib (1815)
George Gordon Byron
The Assyrian
came down like the wolf on the fold,
And his cohorts were gleaming in purple and gold;
And the sheen of their spears was like stars on the sea,
When the blue wave rolls nightly on deep Galilee.
And his cohorts were gleaming in purple and gold;
And the sheen of their spears was like stars on the sea,
When the blue wave rolls nightly on deep Galilee.
Like the leaves of
the forest when Summer is green,
That host with their banners at sunset were seen:
Like the leaves of the forest when Autumn hath blown,
That host on the morrow lay withered and strown.
That host with their banners at sunset were seen:
Like the leaves of the forest when Autumn hath blown,
That host on the morrow lay withered and strown.
For the Angel
of Death spread his wings on the blast,
And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed;
And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill,
And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still.
And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed;
And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill,
And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still.
And there lay the
steed with his nostril all wide,
But through it there rolled not the breath of his pride:
And the foam of his gasping lay white on the turf,
And cold as the spray of the rock-beating surf.
But through it there rolled not the breath of his pride:
And the foam of his gasping lay white on the turf,
And cold as the spray of the rock-beating surf.
And there lay the
rider distorted and pale,
With the dew on his brow and the rust on his mail;
And the tents were all silent, the banners alone,
The lances unlifted, the trumpet unblown.
With the dew on his brow and the rust on his mail;
And the tents were all silent, the banners alone,
The lances unlifted, the trumpet unblown.
And the widows
of Ashur are loud in their wail,
And the idols are broke in the temple of Baal;
And the might of the Gentile, unsmote by the sword,
Hath melted like snow in the glance of the Lord!
And the idols are broke in the temple of Baal;
And the might of the Gentile, unsmote by the sword,
Hath melted like snow in the glance of the Lord!
Probably not
Mithilia (Mesilieh)
Modern Mithilia,
formerly my choice for the site of Judith’s “Bethulia”,
may not actually
be significant - or strategically important - enough.
In retrospect, I may have been swayed to some
extent in my former choice of Mithilia (or Mesilieh) by the fact that Claude
Reignier Conder, who had thus identified Judith’s site of Bethulia, had
appeared to believe in the reality of the whole thing. For he had written:
“In imagination one might see the stately Judith
walking through the down-trodden corn-fields and shady olive-groves, while on
the rugged hillside above the men of the city “looked after her until she was
gone down the mountain, and till she had passed the valley, and could see her
no more” (Judith x 10)” – C. R. C., ‘Quarterly Statement’, July, 1881.
Those, on the other hand, who had opted for
different sites for “Bethulia”, such as the strong fort of Sanur, for instance,
or for Shechem, did not appear to give the impression of believing that the
Book of Judith was describing a real historical incident.
For instance Charles C. Torrey, who favoured
Shechem for “Bethulia”, would brush off the overall story of Judith in the
following dismissive fashion (“The Site of 'Bethulia'”, JAOS 20, 1899, p. 160):
“The author of the story brings into it an unusual
number of geographical
and topographical details; names of countries, cities, and towns, of valleys and
brooks. With regard to a part of these details, especially
those having to do with countries or places outside of Palestine, it can be
said at once that they are merely literary adornment, and are not to be taken
seriously”.
And,
a bit further on, Torrey will continue in the same vein: “These are all just such
details as we expect to see employed by a story-teller
who, without being very well informed, wishes to make his tale sound like a
chapter of history …”.
But
could the village of Mithilia, Conder’s choice, be significant enough for the
original site?
Admittedly,
it seemed to fit some of the details of the Book of Judith.
Thus
Conder wrote:
“?Meselieh? A small village, with a detached
portion to the north, and placed on a slope, with a hill to the south, and
surrounded by good olive-groves, with an open valley called W鈊y el Melek (“the King’s Valley’) on the
north. The water-supply is from wells, some of which have an ancient
appearance. They are mainly supplied with rain-water. In 1876 I proposed to
identify the village of Meselieh, or Mithilia, south of Jenin, with the
Bethulia of the Book of Judith, supposing the substitution of M for B, of which
there are occasional instances in Syrian nomenclature. The indications of the
site given in the Apocrypha are tolerably distinct. Bethulia stood on a hill,
but not apparently on the top, which is mentioned separately (Judith vi. 12)
There were springs or wells beneath the town (verse 11), and the houses were
above these (verse 13). The city stood in the hill-country not far from the
plain (verse 11), and apparently near Dothan (Judith iv. 6). The army of
Holofernes was visible when encamped near Dothan (Judith vii. 3, 4), by the
spring in the valley near Bethulia (verses 3-7).’The site usually supposed to
represent Bethulia – namely, the strong village of Sanur – does not fulfill
these various requisites; but the topography of the Book of Judith, as a whole,
is so consistent and easily understood, that it seems that Bethulia was an
actual site. Visiting Mithilia on our way to Shechem? we found a small ruinous
village on the slope of the hill. Beneath it are ancient wells, and above it a
rounded hill-top, commanding a tolerably extensive view. The north-east part of
the great plain, Gilboa, Tabor … and Nazareth, are clearly seen. West of these
are neighbouring hillsides Jenin and Wady Bel’ameh (the Belmaim, probably of
the narrative); but further west Carmel appears behind the ridge of Sheikh
Iskander … and part of the plain of ‘Arrabeh, close to Dothan, is seen.
A broad corn-vale, called “The King’s Valley”,
extends north-west from Meselieh toward Dothan, a distance of only 3 miles.
There is a low shed formed by rising ground between two hills, separating this
valley from the Dothain plain; and at the latter site is the spring beside
which, probably, the Assyrian army is supposed by the old Jewish novelist [sic]
to have encamped. …”.
But, against the choice of both Mithilia
(“Mithilīyeh”) and Sanur (“Ṣānūr”), C. Torrey would write rather convincingly (op. cit., pp. 162-163):
“…
the city which the writer of this story [Judith] had in mind lay directly in
the path of Holofernes, at the head of the most important pass in the region,
through which he must necessarily lead his army. There is no escape from this
conclusion.
This
absolutely excludes the two places which have been most frequently thought of
as possible sites of the city, Ṣānūr and Mithilīyeh, both midway between Geba and Genin
[presumably Jenin]. Ṣānūr, though a natural fortress, is perched on a hill west of the
road, and “guards no pass whatsoever” (Robinson, Biblical Researches … iii. 152f.). As for Mithilīyeh,
first suggested by Conder in 1876 (see Survey
of Western Palestine, Memoirs, ii.
156f.), it is even less entitled to consideration, for it lies nearly two miles
east of the caravan track, guarding no pass, and of little or no strategic
importance. Evidently, the attitude, hostile or friendly, of this remote
village would be a matter of indifference to a great invading army on its way
to attack Jerusalem. Its inhabitants, while simply defending themselves at
home, certainly could not have held the fate of Judea in their hands; nor could
it have ever occurred to a writer of such a story as this to represent them as
doing so”.
Shechem
The author
reconsiders his former choice for “Bethulia”, of Mithilia,
now in favour of
the more well-known and strategic city of Shechem.
The Jewish Encyclopedia
(”Judith, Book Of”) tells of the appropriateness of Shechem for Judith
city of “Bethulia”: http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/9073-judith-book-of
“…
Identity
of Bethulia.
As Torrey
first pointed out, in the "Journal of the American Oriental Society,"
xx. 160-172, there is one city, and only one, which perfectly satisfies all the
above-mentioned requirements, namely, Shechem. A great army, with its
baggage-trains, breaking camp at Geba in the morning (vii. 1), would arrive in
the afternoon at the springs in the broad valley (ib. 3) just under
Shechem. This, moreover, is the city which occupies the all-important pass on
this route, the pass by which "was the entrance into Judea" (iv. 7).
Furthermore, each one of the details of topography, which the writer introduces
in great number, finds its unmistakable counterpart in the surroundings of
Shechem. The valley below the city is on the west side (vii. 18; comp. ib.
verses 13, 20). The "fountain of water in the camp" (xii. 7) is the
modern Bait al-Ma, fifteen minutes from Shechem. The ascent to the city was
through a narrowing valley (xiii. 10; comp. x. 10). Whether the words "for
two men at the most" (iv. 7) are an exaggeration for the sake of the
story, or whether they truly describe the old fortifications of the city, it is
impossible to say with certainty. At the head of this ascent, a short distance
back from the brow of the hill, stood the city (xiv. 11). Rising above it and overlooking
it were mountains (vii. 13, 18; xv. 3). The "fountain" from which
came the water-supply of the city (vii. 12 et seq.) is the great spring
Ras el-'Ain, in the valley (ἐν τῷ αὐλῶνι, ib. 17) just above Shechem,
"at the foot" of Mount Gerizim. The abundant water-supply of the
modern city is probably due to a system of ancient underground conduits from
this one spring; see Robinson, "Physical Geography of the Holy Land,"
p. 247, and Guérin, "Samarie," i. 401 et seq. Further
corroborative evidence is given by the account of the blockade of Bethulia in
vii. 13-20. "Ekrebel" is 'Aḳrabah, three hours southeast of Shechem,
on the road to the Jordan; "Chusi" is Ḳuza (so G. A. Smith and
others), two hours south, on the road to Jerusalem. The identity of Bethulia
with Shechem is thus beyond all question. …”.
Against
this, we read in The Book of Judith: Greek Text with an
English Translation, ed. Morton Scott Enslin, p. 80): “Shechem may
well have been known to the author, but if he utilized it as the site of his
Judean Thermopylae, he has allowed himself full liberty in his description. Bethulia
is high on the mountain; Shechem was not”.
Though, on the other hand, we read in Joshua
21:21: “… they
gave them Shechem with her suburbs in
mount Ephraim …”.
And I Kings 12:25: “Then
Jeroboam built Shechem in mount Ephraim …”.
No comments:
Post a Comment