By: Crawford Howell Toy, Charles C. Torrey
Title.
An Apocryphal book in sixteen chapters. The book receives its title from the name of its principal character, Judith (
= "Jewess"; in the Greek transliteration, 
in Jer. xxxvi. 14, 21, 23).
The Book of Judith is a story written for house-hold reading, While it may properly be classed as didactic, yet it is one of those popular tales in which the chief concern of the writer is with the telling of the story rather than with the pointing of a moral, and in which the wish to interest takes precedence even of the desire to instruct. What gained for the book its high esteem in early times, in both the Jewish and the Christian world, was its intrinsic merit as a story, rather than its religious teaching or its patriotism.
General Character and Contents.
It is, furthermore, a historical novel; that is, its scenes are definitely located as to place and time and connected with important personages of history, with the purpose of adding life to the narrative. This feature it has in common with such stories as those of Ruth, Esther, Daniel, and especially with the Book of Tobit, the work most nearly akin to it. But in Judith the names of persons and localities are introduced in such profusion and with such minuteness of detail as have no parallel in the other old Jewish compositions of this class.
The events of the narrative are represented as taking place on the occasion of the hostile advance of an "Assyrian" army into Palestine. The inhabitants of a certain Jewish city called "Bethulia," (properly "Betylua") can check the advance of the enemy, because their city occupies the narrow and important pass through which is the entrance into Judea (Judith iv. 7 et seq., viii. 21-24). But the Assyrians, instead of attempting to force the pass, blockade the city and cut off its water-supply. In the distress which follows, Judith, a woman of Bethulia, works deliverance for her city—and thus for all Judea and Jerusalem—by bewitching the Assyrian captain, Holofernes, and cutting off his head.
Historical Setting.
The book begins with a date, "the twelfth year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar," and everything moves with the air of a precise account of actual events. But the way in which the narrative at once makes open sport of chronology and history is very striking. Nebuchadnezzar is the king of Assyria, and reigns in Nineveh(!). The Jews, who have "newly returned from the captivity" (iv. 3, v. 19), are in no sense his subjects; indeed, his chief captain has apparently never heard of them (v. 3). Yet the writer of this story was a well-informed man, familiar with foreign geography (i. 6-10, ii. 21-28), and well acquainted with the Hebrew Scriptures (i. 1; ii. 23; v. 6-19; viii. 1, 26; ix. 2 et seq.). It must therefore be concluded either that the principal names of the story are a mere disguise, or that they were chosen with a purely literary purpose, and with the intent to disclaim at the outset any historical verity for the tale. The former supposition is not rendered plausible by any consideration, and fails utterly to account for the peculiarities of the narrative; the latter, on the contrary, gives a satisfactory explanation of all the facts. That is, with the very first words of the tale, "In the twelfth year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, who reigned over the Assyrians in Nineveh," the narrator gives his hearers a solemn wink. They are to understand that this is fiction, not history. It did not take place in this or that definite period of Jewish history, but simply "once upon a time," the real vagueness of the date being transparently disguised in the manner which has become familiar in the folk-tales of other parts of the world.
The City Bethulia.
Both the name and the site of the city in which the scene of the story is laid have been the subject of much debate. It is beyond all question that the narrator in describing Bethulia is describing a real place with which he is personally familiar. The plain requirements of the description are these: a large city in the hill-country of Samaria, on the direct road from Jezreel to Jerusalem, lying in the path of the enemy, at the head of an important pass, a few hours (vi. 11, vii. 1-3) south of Geba. This Geba is the 
of the Talmud, the modern Jeba', two or three hours northeast of Samaria, at the point where the ascent into the mountainous country begins. Between this point and the plain of Jezreel there is nothing resembling a pass. Holofernes, with the division of his army which had just chastised the coast cities (iii. 6 et seq.), was in the van. A considerable body now joined him from the east (Moab, Ammon, Edom, etc.; v. 2, vii. 8). The statement that his vast army "encamped between Geba and Seythopolis" (iii. 10) suits all the conditions perfectly.
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 bill, stood the city (xiv. 11). Rising above it and overlooking it were mountains (vii. 13, 18; xv. 3). The "fountain" from which came thewater-supply of the city (vii. 12 et seq.) is the great spring Ras el-'Ain, in the valley (
The reason for the pseudonym is obvious. Because of the feeling of the Jews toward the Samaritans, the name "Shechem" could not be repeatedly used in a popular tale of this character for the city whose people wrought deliverance for Jerusalem and for the sanctuary of the Jews. The original form of "Betylua" (Greek, 
= "House of God," is not improbable.
Literary and Religious Importance.
Judith is certainly one of the very best extant specimens of old Jewish story-telling, and forms a worthy companion-piece to Tobit, which it surpasses in vividness of style. Its author introduces a considerable variety of material, but all in due proportion; everything is subordinated to the main action, and the interest never flags. The principal scenes are painted very vigorously, and a striking picture is often sketched in a few words (comp. x. 10, 18; xiii. 13; xiv. 6). The poem in the closing chapter is a fine composition, plainly the work of no ordinary writer.
The book has a distinctly religious trend, and is well calculated to inspire both patriotism and piety. For the history of the Jewish religion, however, it contributes little of importance. Views and doctrines which have nothing to do with the progress of the story are not introduced.
Original Language; Versions.
As most students of the book have recognized, it was originally written in Hebrew. The standard Greek version bears the unmistakable marks of a translation from this language. The idioms are those of classical Hebrew; and yet the dialect in which the book is composed is plainly a living one. The diction is fresh and vigorous, and not noticeably reminiscent of the canonical Old Testament.
The wide-spread popularity of the story is attested, as in the case of Tobit, by the existence of a number of separate recensions; these do not, however, diverge very widely from one another. Three Greek forms have been preserved: (1) the standard text, found in most manuscripts (including the principal uncials) and given in all the printed editions; in all probability the recension which most nearly represents the original form of the story; (2) a somewhat corrected and "improved" recension, represented by Codex 58 (Holmes and Parsons) and by the Old Latin and Syriac versions; and (3) a text closely related to the preceding, found in Codices 19 and 108. The Old Latin translation exists in several divergent forms. The Vulgate version was made by Jerome (according to his own testimony hastily and with considerable freedom) from an Aramaic text. It gives the narrative in a form which is both much abridged and plainly secondary.
The several Hebrew versions of Judith are all comparatively recent, and are quite worthless for the criticism of the book. Two of these are given in Jellinek, "B. H." i. 130-141, ii. 12-22; another is published by Gaster in "Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch." xvi. 156-163. These are all free adaptations of the story, very much abridged.
Author and Date.
The author of Judith beyond question lived and wrote in Palestine. He was a Jew, not a Samaritan, and probably dwelt near Shechem. From the manner and frequency of the mention of Dothan (iii. 9 [?]; "Dothaim," iv. 6; vii. 3, 18; viii. 3)—if the Greek text can be trusted—it might perhaps be conjectured that his home was there. From the prominence given in the book to the ceremonial law, many have drawn the conclusion that its author was a Pharisee; but this is hardly a safe conclusion. All that can be inferred with certainty is, that the punctilious performance of rites and ceremonies was popularly recognized at that time as characteristic of the extreme type of "holiness" demanded by the story for its heroine. There is nowhere in the story any hint that its writer would have recommended such punctiliousness as desirable for the Jews in general, any more than the admiring Christian biographers of Simeon Stylites appear to think that it would be well for the people to follow his example. As for the tale invented to deceive Holofernes (xi. 12-16), it is of course not necessary to suppose that even such a saint as Judith would have regarded this transgression of the Law, in a time of distress, as a grievous sin.
Possible Date of Composition.
The tale of Judith, as has already been observed, is not given any genuine historical setting; nor is it likely that its author himself connected it with any particular time. The names, Jewish and Persian, of his principal characters he selected with the freedom which belongs to any popular narrator. There is nothing in the book which gives any direct clew to its date, or any precise indication of the circumstances of the Jews at the time when it was written. The passage iii. 8 is plainly a reminiscence of the measures taken by Antiochus Epiphanes. It may also fairly be urged that the glorification of Shechem in this transparent way is much more easily conceivable after 120 B.C., when John Hyrcanus took and humbled the city, than before that date, when it was a perpetual thorn in the side of the Jews. On the other hand, the character of the Hebrew in which the book is written (see above) favors a comparatively early date. One would probably not be far out of the way in placing it near the beginning of the first century B.C. The book is first quoted by Clement of Rome (Ep. I. ad Corinth., c. 55), near the end of the first century of the common era.
Bibliography:
The principal commentaries are those by Fritzsche, 1853, Ball in the Speaker's Commentary, 1888, and Scholz. 2d ed., 1896;
Löhr translates the book in Kautzsch's Apokryphen;
Nestle contributes helpful notes on the text in his Marginalien und Materialien, 1893;
see also Gaster, in Hastings, Dict. Bible;
Porter, in Cheyne and Black, Encyc. Bibl.
An Old Testament chronicle which takes its name from the valiant woman who by her courage, resourcefulness, and confidence in God saved the city of Bethulia from destruction at the hand of Holofernes, general of Nabuchodonosor, king of Ninive. The present state of the text is very confused. It is highly probable that the Greek version is derived from a Hebrew or Chaldaic original. The two Hebrew versions now extant are different, one of them agreeing with the Greek. Saint Jerome wrote his Vulgate translation with the help of a Chaldaic version, but the admitted carelessness of this work makes it difficult to determine which of the two texts, the Greek or the Chaldaic, is closer to the original. The geographical and historical references in the Book are also a source of much confusion and debate. For instance, Scripture scholars find it difficult to identify the city of Bethulia with any ancient town in the Plain of Esdraelon where the writer of the Book locates it. And again, how could Nabuchodonosor, who became a king 605 BC, have ruled in Ninive, which was destroyed the year before? The blame or many of these inaccuracies has been laid at the feet of careless translators and inaccurate copyists. The confusion has been such as to lead most non-Catholic commentators to reject the Book of Judith as a narrative of facts; for them it is an allegory. On the other hand, Catholic tradition from the earliest times has always considered the Book as historical, and the Council of Trent has defined its character as an inspired writing by placing it among the canonical books of the Old Testament. The chronicle ends with a beautiful hymn of thanksgiving which has found its place in the Wednesday Lauds of the Roman Breviary.
HISTORYNabuchodonosor, King of Nineveh, sends his general Holofernes to subdue the Jews. The latter besieges them in Bethulia, a city on the southern verge of the Plain of Esdrelon. Achior, the Ammonite, who speaks in defense of the Jews, is maltreated by him and sent into the besieged city to await his punishment when Holofernes shall have taken it. Famine undermines the courage of the besieged and they contemplate surrender, but Judith, a widow, upbraids them and says that she will deliver the city. She goes into the camp of the Assyrians and captivates Holofernes by her beauty, and finally takes advantage of the general’s intoxication to cut off his head. She returns inviolate to the city with his head as a trophy, and a sally on the part of the Jews results in the rout of the Assyrians. The book closes with a hymn to the Almighty by Judith to celebrate her victory. THE TEXTThe book exists in distinct Greek and Latin versions, of which the former contains at least eighty-four verses more than the later. St. Jerome (Praef. in Lib.) says that he translated it from the Chaldaic in one night, "magis sensum e sensu, quam ex verbo verbum transferens" (aiming at giving sense for sense rather than adhering closely to the wording). He adds that his codices differed much, and that he expresses in Latin only what he could clearly understand of the Chaldaic.Two Hebrew versions are known at present, a long one practically identical with the Greek text, and a short one which is entirely different; we shall return to the latter when discussing the origin of the book. The Chaldaic, from which St. Jerome made our present Vulgate version, is not recoverable unless it be identified with the longer Hebrew version mentioned above. If this be the case we can gauge the value of St. Jerome’s work by comparing the Vulgate with the Greek text. We at once find that St. Jerome did not exaggerate when he said that he made his translation hurriedly. Thus a comparison between vi, 11, and viii, 9 shows us a certain confusion relative to the names of the elders of Bethulia -- a confusion which does not exist in the Septuagint, where also x, 6, should be compared. Again in iv, 5, the high priest is Eliachim, which name is later changed into Joachim (xv, 9) -- an allowable change but somewhat misleading: the Septuagint is consistent in using the form Joachim. Some of the historical statements in the Septuagint directly conflict with those of the Vulgate; for example, the thirteenth year (Vulg.) of Nabuchodonosor becomes the eighteenth in the Septuagint, which also adds a long address of the king to Holofernes. St. Jerome has also frequently condensed the original-always on the supposition that the Septuagint and the longer Hebrew version do really represent the original. To give but one instance: Septuagint (2:27): "And he came down into the plain of Damascus at the time of the wheat harvest, and burnt up all their fields, their flocks and and their herds he delivered to destruction, their cities he ravaged, and the fruits of their fertile plains he scattered like chaff, and he struck all their young men with the edge of the sword."Vulgate (2:17): "And after these things he went down into the plains in the days of the harvest, and he set all the corn on fire, and he caused all the trees and vineyards to be cut down." With regard to the Septuagint version of the Book of Judith it should be noted that it has come down to us in two recensions: Codex B or Vaticanus on the one hand, and Codex Alexandrinus with Codex Sinaiticus on the other. HISTORICITYCatholics with very few exceptions accept the book of Judith as a narrative of facts, not as an allegory. Even Jahn considers that the genealogy of Judith is inexplicable on the hypothesis that the story is a mere fiction ("Introductio", Vienna, 1814, p. 461). Why carry out the genealogy of a fictitious person through fifteen generations? The Fathers have ever looked upon the book as historical. St. Jerome, who excluded Judith from the Canon, nonetheless accepted the person of the valiant woman as historical (Ep. lxv, 1).Against this traditional view there are, it must be confessed, very serious difficulties, due, as Calmet insists, to the doubtful and disputed condition of the text. The historical and geographical statements in the book, as we now have it, are difficult to understand: thus Nabuchodonosor was apparently never King of Nineveh, for he came to the throne in 605, whereas Nineveh was destroyed certainly not later than 606, and after that the Assyrians ceased to exist as a people; the allusion in i, 6, to Erioch, King of the Elicians, is suspicious; we are reminded of the Arioch of Gen., xiv, i. The Septuagint makes him King of the Elumaens, presumably the Elamites, the character of Nabuchodonosor is hardly that portrayed for us on the monuments: in the India House Inscription, for example, his sentiments are remarkable for the modesty of their tone. On the other hand, we must remember that, as Sayce says, the "Assyrian kings were most brazen-faces liars on their monuments"; the name Vagao, or the Septuagint Bagoas, for the eunuch of Holofernes is suggestive of the Bagoses, who, according to Josephus (Antiquities, XI, vii, 1), polluted the temple and to whom apparently we have a reference in the recently discovered papyri from Assuan; the mixture of Babylonian, Greek, and Persian names in the book should be noted; the genealogy of Judith as given in the Vulgate is a medley: that given in the three principal Greek codices is perhaps better but varies in every one. Still it is an historical genealogy, though ill-conserved; a geographical puzzle is presented by the Vulgate of ii, 12-16; the Septuagint is much superior, and it should be noted that throughout this version, especially in Codex B, we have the most interesting details furnished us (cf. particularly i, 9; ii, 13, 28-9). The Septuagint also gives us information about Achior which is wanting in the Vulgate; it is apparently hinted in vi, 2, 5, that he wa an Ephraimite and a mercenary hired by Moad; Bethulia itself is a mystery: according to the Septuagint it was large, had streets and towers (vii, 22, 32), and withstood a long siege at the hands of a vast army. Its position, too, is stated with minuteness; it stood on the edge of the Plain of Esdrelon and guarded the pass to Jerusalem; yet no trace of the existence of such a place is to be found (unless we accept the theory of Conder, "Handbook", 5th ed., p. 239); the names, Judith (Jewess), Achior (brother of light), and Bethulia (?Bethel, i.e. ?Jerusalem, or perhaps from the Hebrew word meaning "virgin" -- in the shorter Hebrew version Judith is called not "the widow" but "the virgin", i.e. Bethulia), sound rather like symbolic names than those of historical places or persons; in Judith’s speech to Holofernes there is (xi, 12, 15) some apparent confusion between Bethulia and Jerusalem; while the events are referred to the time of Nabuchodonosor, and therefore to the close of the Hebrew monarchy, we seem to have in v, 22, and viii, 18-19, an allusion to the time subsequent to the Restoration; there is no king in Palestine (iv, 5), but only a high priest, Joachim or Eliachim; and in iv, 8; xi, 14; xv, 8 (Sept.), the Sanhedrin is apparently mentioned; the book has a Persian and even a Greek colouring, as is evidenced by the recurrence of such names as Bagoas and Holofernes. These are serious difficulties, and a Catholic student must be prepared to meet them. There are two ways of doing so.(a) According to what we may term "conservative" criticism, these apparent difficulties can every one be harmonized with the view that the book is perfectly historical and deals with facts which actually took place. Thus, the geographical errors may be ascribed to the translators of the original text or to copyists living long after the book was composed, and consequently ignorant of the details referred to. Calmet insists that the Biblical Nabuchodonosor is meant, while in Arphaxad he sees Phraortes whose name, as Vigoroux (Les Livres Saints et La Critique Rationaliste, iv, 4th ed.) shows, could easily have been thus perverted.Vigoroux, however, in accordance with recent Assyrian discoveries, identifies Nabuchodonosor with Assur-bani-pal, the contemporary of Phraortes. This enables him to refer the events to the time of the captivity of Manasses under Assur-bani-pal (2 Chronicles 33:11; cf. Sayce, "Higher Criticism and the Verdict of the Monuments", 4th ed., p. 458). It is further maintained that the campaign conducted by Holofernes is well illustrated in the records of Assur-bani-pal which have come down to us. And these facts will undoubtedly afford an explanation of the apparent allusion to the captivity; it was indeed a Restoration, but that of Manasses, not that under Esdras. The reference, too, to the Sanhedrin is doubtful; the term gerousia is used of the "ancients" in Lev., ix, 3, etc. Lastly, Conder’s identification of Bethulia with Mithilia (loc. cit. supra) is highly probable. Moreover, the writer who described the strategical position in iv, 1-6, knew the geography of Palestine thoroughly. And we are given details about the death of Judith’s husband which (viii, 2-4) can hardly be attributed to art, but are rather indications that Judith represents a really existing heroine. With regard to the state of the text it should be noted that the extraordinary variants presented in the various versions are themselves a proof that the versions were derived from a copy dating from a period long antecedent to the time of its translators (cf. Calmet, "Introd. in Lib. Judith").(b) Some few Catholic writers are not satisfied with Calmet’s solution of the difficulties of the Book of Judith; they deem the errors of translators and of scribes to be no sufficient explanation in this matter. These few Catholics, together with the non-Catholics that do not care to throw the book over entirely into the realm of fiction, assure us that the Book of Judith has a solid historical foundation. Judith is no mythical personage, she and her heroic deed lived in the memory of the people; but the difficulties enumerated above seem to show that the story as we now have it was committed to writing at a period long subsequent to the facts. The history, so it is maintained, is vague; the style of composition, the speeches, etc., remind us of the Books of Machabees. A remarkable knowledge of the Psalter is evinced (cf. 7:19 and Psalm 105:6; 7:21, and Psalm 78:10, 93:2; 9:6, 9, and Psalm 19:8; 9:16, and Psalm 146:10; 13:21, and Psalm 105:1). Some of these psalms must almost certainly be referred to the period of the Second Temple. Again, the High Priest Joachim must presumably be identified with the father of Eliashib, and must therefore have lived in the time of Artaxerxes the Great (464-424 B.C. Cf. Josephus, "Antiquities", XI, vi-vii). We referred above to a shorter Hebrew version of the book; Dr. Gaster, its discoverer, assigns this manuscript to the tenth or eleventh century A.D. (Proceedings of Soc. of Bibl. Archaeol., XVI, pp. 156 sqq.). It is exceedingly brief, some forty lines, and gives us only the gist of the story. Yet it seems to offer a solution to many of the difficulties suggested above. Thus Holofernes, Bethulia, and Achior, all disappear; there is a very natural explanation of the purification in xii, 7; and, most noticeable of all, the enemy is no longer an Assyrian, but Seleucus, and his attack is on Jerusalem, not on Bethulia.If it could be maintained that we have in this manuscript the story in its original form, and that our canonical book is an amplification of it, we should then be in a position to explain the existence of the numerous divergent versions. The mention of Seleucus brings us down to Machabean times, the title of Judith, now no longer the "widow" but the "virgin", may explain the mysterious city; the Machabean colouring of the story becomes intelligible, and the theme is the efficacy of prayer (cf. 6:14-21; 7:4; 2 Maccabees 15:12-16). CANONICITYThe Book of Judith does not exist in the Hebrew Bible, and is consequently excluded from the Protestant Canon of Holy Scripture. But the Church has always maintained its canonicity.St. Jerome, while rejecting in theory those books which he did not find in his Hebrew manuscript, yet consented to translate Judith because "the Synod of Nicaea is said to have accounted it as Sacred Scripture" (Praef. in Lib.). It is true that no such declaration is to be found 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, but it is certain that the Fathers of the earliest times have reckoned Judith among the canonical books; thus St. Paul seems to quote the Greek text of Judith, viii, 14, in I Cor., ii, 10 (cf. also 1 Corinthians 10:10, with Judith 8:25). In the early Christian Church we find it quoted as part of Scripture in the writing of St. Clement of Rome (First Epistle ot the Corinthians, lv), Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Tertullian.----------------------------------- Consult the various Biblical dictionaries and introductions; also Civilta Cattolica (1887). The best summary of the various view and arguments on the question is in GIGOT, Special Introd., I; cf. also especially SCHURER, The Jewish People in the Time of Christ, div. II, vol. III; VIGOUROUX, La Bible et les Decouvertes Modernes, IV (5th ed.), 275-305; BRUENGO, Il Nabucodonosor di Giuditta (Rome, 1888). HUGH POPE Transcribed by Michael T. Barrett Dedicated to Judy Van Horn The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VIIICopyright © 1910 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., CensorImprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
I. NAME
II. CANONICITY
III. CONTENTS
IV. FACT OR FICTION?
V. DATE
1. Probably during the Maccabean Age
2. Other Opinions
(1) Invasion of Pompey
(2) Insurrection under Bar Cochba
VI. ORIGINAL LANGUAGE
VII. VERSIONS
1. Greek
2. Syriac
3. Latin
4. Hebrew
LITERATURE
I. Name.
This apocryphal book is called after the name of its principal character Judith (
II. Canonicity.
Though a tale of Jewish patriotism written originally in Hebrew, this book was never admitted into the Hebrew Canon, and the same applies to the Book of Tobit. But both Judith and Tobit were recognized as canonical by the Council of Carthage (397 AD) and by the Council of Trent (1545 AD). Though, however, all Romanists include these books in their Bible (the Vulgate), Protestant versions of the Bible, with very few exceptions, exclude the whole of the Apocrypha (see APOCRYPHA). In the Septuagint and Vulgate, Tobit and Judith (in that order) follow Nehemiah and precede Esther. In the English Versions of the Bible of the Apocrypha, which unfortunately for its understanding stands alone, 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, Tobit and Judith occupy the first place and in the order named. In his translation of the Apocrypha, Luther, for some unexplained reason, puts Judith at the head of the apocryphal books, Wisdom taking the next place.
III. Contents.
The book opens with an account of the immense power of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Assyria, whose capital was Nineveh. (In the days of the real Nebuchadnezzar, Assyria had ceased to be, and its capital was destroyed.) He calls upon the peoples living in the western country, including Palestine, to help him to subdue a rival king whose power he feared - Arphaxad, king of the Medes (otherwise quite unknown). But as they refused the help he demanded, he first conquered his rival, annexing his territory, and then sent his general Holofernes to subdue the western nations and to punish them for their defiance of his authority. The Assyrian general marched at the head of an army 132,000 strong and soon took possession of the lands North and East of Palestine, demolishing their idols and sanctuaries that Nebuchadnezzar alone might be worshipped as god (Judith 1 through 3). He now directed his forces against the Jews who had recently returned from exile and newly rebuilt and rededicated their temple. Having heard of the ruin of other temples caused by the invading foe, the Jews became greatly alarmed for the safety of their own, and fortified the mountains and villages in the south, providing themselves with food to meet their needs in the event of war. At the urgent request of Joakim (“Eliakim” in the Vulgate (Jerome’s Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) and Peshitta), the inhabitants of Bethulia (so the Latin, English, and other VSS, but
IV. Fact or Fiction?
The majority of theologians down to the 19th century regarded the story of Judith as pure history; but with the exception of O. Wolf (1861) and yon Gumpach, Protestant scholars in recent times are practically agreed that the Book of Judith is a historical novel with a purpose similar to Daniel, Esther and Tobit. Schurer classes it with “parenetic narratives” (paranetische Erzahlung). The Hebrew novel is perhaps the earliest of all novels, but it is always a didactic novel written to enforce some principle or principles. Roman Catholic scholars defend the literal historicity of the book, though they allow that the proper names are more or less disguised. But the book abounds with anachronisms, inconsistencies and impossibilities, and was evidently written for the lesson it teaches: obey God and trust Him, and all will be well. The author had no intention to teach history. Torrey, however, goes too far when he says (see Jewish Encyclopedia, “Book of Judith”) that the writer aimed at nothing more than to write a tale that would amuse. A tone of religious fervor and of intense patriotism runs through the narrative, and no opportunity of enforcing the claims of the Jewish law is lost. Note especially what is taught in the speeches of Achior (Judith 5:12-21) and Judith (8:17-24; compare 11:10), that, trusting in God and keeping His commandments, the nation is invulnerable.
According to the narrative Nebuchadnezzar has been for 12 years king of Assyria and has his capital at Nineveh, though we know he never was or could be king of Assyria. He became king of Babylon in 604 BC, upon the death of his father Nabopolassar, who in 608 had destroyed Assyria. The Jews had but recently returned from exile (Judith 4:3; 5:19), but were independent, and Holofernes knew nothing about them (Judith 5:3). Nebuchadnezzar died in 561 BC and the Jews returned under Cyrus in 538. Bethulia to which Holofernes lay siege was otherwise quite unknown: it is probably a disguised form of
V. Date.
1. Probably During the Maccabean Age:
It is evident that this religious romance was prompted by some severe persecution in which the faith of the Jews was sorely tried, and the writer’s dominant aim is identical with that of the author of Daniel, namely, to encourage those suffering for their religion by giving instances of Divine deliverance in the darkest hour. “Only trust and keep the law; then deliverance will unfailingly come” - that is the teaching. Judith might well have been written during the persecution of the Maccabean age, as was almost certainly the Book of Daniel. We have in this book that zeal for orthodox Judaism which marked the age of the Maccabees, and the same strong belief that the war in which the nation was engaged was a holy one. The high priest is head of the state (see Jth Dan 4:6), as suiting a period when the religious interest is uppermost and politics are merged in religion, though some say wrongly that John Hyrcanus (135-106 BC) was the first to combine priestly and princely dignities. We have another support for a Maccabean date in the fact that Onias was high priest during the siege of Bethulia (Jth Joh 4:6), the name being suggested almost certainly by Onias III, who became high priest in 195 (or 198) BC, and who died in 171 after consistently opposing the Hellenizing policy of the Syrians and their Jewish allies.
That the persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes (175-164 BC) supply as good a background for this book as any other event in Jewish history is the least that can be said; but one may not be dogmatic on the matter, as similar conditions recurred in the nation’s history, and there is no external or internal evidence that fixes the date definitely. The following scholars decide for a date in the Maccabean age: Fritzsche, Ewald, Hilgenfeld, Schurer, Ball, Cornill and Lohr. The author was certainly a resident in Palestine, as his local knowledge and interests show; and from his punctilious regard for the law one may judge that he belonged to the Hasidean (
2. Other Opinions:
(1) Invasion of Pompey.
That it was the invasion of Pompey which gave rise to the book is the opinion held by Gaster. If this were so, Judith and the Psalms of Solomon arose under the pressure of the same circumstances (see Ryle and James, The Psalms of Solomon, XL, and J. Rendel Harris, The Odes and Psalms of Solomon, XIII) But in the Psalms of Solomon the supreme ruler is a king (17:22), not a high priest (Judith 4:6). Besides, anyone who reads the Psalm of Solomon and Judith will feel that in the former he has to do with a different and later age.
(2) Insurrection Under Bar Cochba.
Hitzig (who held that the insurrection under Bar Cochba, 132 AD, is the event referred to), Volkmar and Graetz date this book in the days of the emperor Trajan (or Hadrian?). Volkmar gives himself much trouble in his attempt to prove that the campaigns of Nebuchadnezzar stand really for those of Trajan. But it is a sufficient refutation of this opinion that the book is quoted by Clement of Rome (55), who died in 100 AD, and whose reference to the book shows that it was regarded in his day as authoritative and even as canonical, so that it must have been written long before.
VI. Original Language.
That a Hebrew or (less likely) an Aramaic original once existed is the opinion of almost all modern scholars, and the evidence for this seems conclusive. There are many Hebraisms in the book, e.g.
VII. Versions.
1. Greek:
The Greek text appears in three forms: (1) that of the principal Greek uncials (A, B, agreeing closely), which is followed in printed editions of the Septuagint (Septuagint); (2) that of codices 19, 108 (Lucian’s text), an evident revision of (1); (3) codex 58 which closely resembles (2) and with which the Old Latin and Peshitta agree in most points.
2. Syriac:
There are two extant Syriac VSS, both of them dependent on the Greek text (3) noted above. The Peshitta is given in Walton’s Polyglot and in a critically revised form in Lagarde, Lib. Vet. Test Apocrypha Syriac, 104-26. The so-called Hexaplar Syriac text was made by Paul of Tella in the 6th century.
3. Latin:
(1) The Old Latin seems to have been made from the Greek text, codex 58 (see above). (2) Jerome made his Latin version (with which the Vulgate (Jerome’s Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) is identical) from a lost Chaldee version. That this last is not the original text of the book is certain, because neither Origen nor his Jewish teachers knew anything of a Hebrew or Aramaic text of Judith.
4. Hebrew:
Several late Hebrew versions of the book have been found, no one of them with strong claims to be considered the original text, though Caster (see EB, II, col 2, 642) does make such a claim for the manuscript found, edited and translated by him (see PSBA, XVI, 156-63). The Heb midrashes were made to be read in Jewish homes and vary according to the circumstances of their origin. But they agree in these points: Proper names are often omitted. Jerusalem is the scene of action, the wars being those of the Maccabees. Judith is a Jewish maiden and daughter of Ahitah, according to the Gaster MS, and she belongs apparently to the Maccabean family. It is Nicanor who is beheaded, the occasion being the Feast of Dedication; in the Gaster manuscript it is the king who is killed. Translations of these midrashes may be seen in Jellinck, Beth Hammidrash, I, 130-41; II, 12 f; Lepsius, Zeitschr. fur wiss. Theologie, 1867, 337 ff; Ball, Speaker’s Apocrypha, I, 25 ff; Scholz, Comm.2, Anhange I and II; Gaster, in the work quoted Gaster argues that the much shorter form of the tale in his manuscript is older than the longer version. But if a writer were to expand a short story, he would hardly be likely to invent several proper names and to change others. It is probable that Judith came to be represented as a pure maiden (a virgin) under the influence of the low conception of marriage fostered in the medieval Christian church.
Literature.
For the editions of the Greek text and for commentaries on the Apocrypha, see under APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. But on Judith note in particular the commentaries by Fritzsche and Ball, the latter containing elaborate bibliography. But the following must in addition be mentioned: Scholz, Commentar uber das Buch Judith und uber Bel und Drache, 1896; a 2nd edition has appeared; A.S. Weissmann, Das Buch Judith historisch-kritisch beleuchtet, Wien, 1891; Schurer, GJV4, III, 230-37, with full bibliography; compare HJP, II, iii, 32-37; Pentin, The Apocrypha in English Lit., Judith, 1908; and the relevant articles in the Bible dicts., especially that by F. C. Porter in HDB.