by
Damien F. Mackey
“Could it be that the Book of Judith
provides an account of an otherwise obscure episode of the war against
Nebuchadrezzar in the time of King Hezekiah — the war which we have identified
as Artaxerxes III’s second campaign against Egypt?”
Introduction
This is a
question asked by Emmet Sweeney in his article, “Artaxerxes III and Nebuchadrezzar”, most useful
for showing parallels between Nebuchednezzar II ‘the Great’, a real king, and
Artaxerxes III, whose historical existence I have had cause to query.
At the
conclusion of his article, Sweeney makes the following brief mention of the
Book of Judith and its “King of Assyria”, one “Nebuchadrezzar”:
Before moving on, it should be noted that the Book
of Judith, hitherto one of the most enigmatic of traditional Hebrew texts,
takes on an altogether new significance in the light of the reconstruction proposed
here. Judith is said to have lived during the time of a Nebuchadrezzar who is
described as “King of Assyria.” No king of Assyria of this name is said to be
known. Yet this Mesopotamian monarch is involved in events strikingly similar
to those of his namesake who deported the people of Judah. He is said to have
summonsed the peoples of the west, including the Egyptians, to assist him in a
war against the Medes. When this summons is ignored, he sets out, in his
eighteenth year, to punish the traitors, who include Egyptians and Jews (Judith
2). This march to the west recalls the action taken by the other Nebuchadrezzar
in the same region in his sixteenth year. Could it be that the Book of Judith
provides an account of an otherwise obscure episode of the war against
Nebuchadrezzar in the time of King Hezekiah — the war which we have identified
as Artaxerxes III’s second campaign against Egypt?
One striking detail in the Book of Judith seems to
confirm this. We are told that Nebuchadrezzar’s general Holofernes, whom Judith
assassinates, had a eunuch named Bagoas (Judith 12:11). Yet Bagoas was the name
of the trusted eunuch who assassinated Artaxerxes III. Even more to the point,
Artaxerxes III also had a general named Holofernes. According to Diodorus, this
Holofernes was a Cappadocian who accompanied Artaxerxes III in his campaign
against the Egyptians ….
Strange then that the Book of Judith would name as
servants of Nebuchadrezzar two characters with names identical to two servants
of Artaxerxes III!
Sweeney
is not the first to have hopefully proposed a setting for the Judith drama
during the reign of Nebuchednezzar II, greatest of all the neo-Babylonian (Chaldean)
kings.
Unfortunately,
he has here picked just about the worst historical period for the main drama of
Judith - the attempt by the commander-in-chief of a massive Assyrian (note)
army to conquer Jerusalem.
Nebuchednezzar
II was completely successful in his Judaean campaign in which he destroyed
Jerusalem and its Temple and took captive its inhabitants. The Assyrian army of
“Holofernes”, on the other hand, never got past Judith’s town of Bethulia in
northern Israel, opposite Dothan.
And,
thanks to Judith, the invading army was routed and fled, suffering many
casualties.
Artaxerxes
III, we have found, is a ‘ghost’, or historical composite, based primarily upon
Nebuchednezzar II. So Diodorus’s attribution to ‘him’ of officials named
“Bagoas” and “Holofernes” is quite meaningless.
For a
more adequate reconstruction of the Judith drama, see e.g. my:
"Nadin" (Nadab) of Tobit is the
"Holofernes" of Judith
No comments:
Post a Comment