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 …”.
