Parallels between Mark 6.14-29 and the Esther traditions.

[Ulan]

The exciting game of Names

Esther

From the link I gave: The identification with Ishtar is done in the Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Megilla, 13a, where Esther's name is explained as the term the gentiles use for the planet Venus (Istahar), and equally in both Targums to Esther 2: 7. There's also a Judaeo-Persian poem that connects the Book of Esther to the planets Jupiter (Marduk) and Venus (Ishtar). Which means that we are not talking about modern speculations here. Esther's Hebrew name in the story (Hadassah) has also been identified with Akkadian "bride", a common epithet of Ishtar.

Which means that this identification is solid. All other name associations are much less so.

All of this doesn't really touch the question in the OP though.

[iskander]

The OP : Parallels between Mark 6.14-29 and the Esther traditions


The first part , Parallels...,was answered by this post,

to Ben,

Then do you see the followers of John the Baptist as cribbing from Esther here?

It's highly possible, maybe probable that those followers were inspired by 'Esther' into concocting their story about JtB's execution.

Cordially, Bernard

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2522&start=10

The second part, the Esther traditions is what "If Achashverosh is Xerxes, is Esther his Wife Amestris? " is exploring.
http://thetorah.com/if-achashverosh-is- ... -amestris/

[iskander]

Esther before the king

Esther laments the loss of Jerusalem

Introduction: A Kinah from a Surprising Source
We are exiled and expelled / from our land
Because of our sin / You cast us away

This rhymed couplet speaks in the collective voice of a nation expressing contrition to God. It sounds like a conventional kinah – that is, a poem of communal lament traditionally recited on the fast of Tisha B’av. But in fact it is attributed to Queen Esther, the heroine of the joyous festival, Purim, and possibly associated with the recitation of the Scroll of Esther. This bewildering state of affairs provides a window into the world of liturgical poetry, which plays an oft overlooked role in the transformative dynamics of biblical books and characters in classical Jewish communal life.

Perhaps nothing illustrates the Second Temple period proclivity for this sort of religiosity better than the transformation of Esther into a pious, supplicating Jewish queen. Indeed, while the Hebrew Scroll of Esther as presented in the Masoretic text famously lacks any overt mention of God and seems devoid of conventional modes of piety, later Greek versions place in her mouth lengthy prayers at key moments in the story.[3] One notable set of embellishments explores the idea that Esther deeply mourned for the loss of Jerusalem.

Connections Between Megillat Esther
and the Destruction of the Temple

A brief teaching in Bavli Megilah 15b also underscores this:
Then the king said to her, “What can be done for you, Queen Esther? For whatever your request, even unto the half of the kingdom, it shall be given to you.” (Est. 5:3) “Half the kingdom,” but not the whole kingdom, and not something which would split the kingdom.[4] What could do that? The building of the Temple.[5]

According to this passage, the one thing the King worried Esther would ask for—the one thing he would deny her— was rebuilding the Temple in Jerusalem. As a result, this midrash suggests that his seemingly generous offer was really an attempt at thwarting the Jewish queen’s deep hope for the reconstruction of the Temple...."

http://thetorah.com/tisha-bav-with-queen-esther/

[Ulan]

The second part, the Esther traditions is what "If Achashverosh is Xerxes, is Esther his Wife Amestris? " is exploring.
http://thetorah.com/if-achashverosh-is- ... -amestris/

You can play those games to no end. An Introduction to the OT for Catholic theologists (Zenger et al.) sees the story as a reinterpretation of Ex17:8-16 (defeat of the Amalektites), with the details following 1Sam 15. This would mean Agag=Haman, Saul=Mordechai and David=Esther. Another influence for Esther is Joseph, another one for Mordecai Daniel. Take this for what it's worth.

"Under no circumstances, this can be a historical tale. Listing details of the unhistorical character of the book is not really needed." Well, that's a clear statement, I guess. Of course, then all the details are listed anyway.

[iskander]

I agree,
I have always found ' weighty ' posts on parallels to be nothing more than ' senseless games without end ' for the " The chattering classes".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chattering_classes

[Ben C. Smith]

The second part, the Esther traditions is what "If Achashverosh is Xerxes, is Esther his Wife Amestris? " is exploring.
http://thetorah.com/if-achashverosh-is- ... -amestris/

You can play those games to no end.

Esther = Amestris? Esther = Ishtar? Maybe both are true in a sense. Maybe the Ishtar derivation comes first (and Mordecai = Marduk), but a suitable historical setting had to be found for the story, and Xerxes' wife provided the impetus.

[Ulan]

The second part, the Esther traditions is what "If Achashverosh is Xerxes, is Esther his Wife Amestris? " is exploring.
http://thetorah.com/if-achashverosh-is- ... -amestris/

You can play those games to no end.

Esther = Amestris? Esther = Ishtar? Maybe both are true in a sense. Maybe the Ishtar derivation comes first (and Mordecai = Marduk), but a suitable historical setting had to be found for the story, and Xerxes' wife provided the impetus.

That's certainly possible, but I don't see the way how. I read through the link, and all I see is a vague suggestion of a connection of the names, and the only other anchor I see is her status as Xerxes' wife and that she is known to Greek writers. This is of course possible if you think the story is a whole cloth invention, but I see it as a somewhat unsatisfactory explanation.

I know that connections to pagan legends are not very much en vogue nowadays. It's a bit sad that even science is very much the subject to fashions. In the 19th century everything was grounded in pagan legends, and nowadays you just get a tired groan if you come with such a suggestion. However, I think that in this specific case, the connection is more than just superficial.

In the article that I pointed to, Mordecai is linked with Marduk in the Enuma Elish not just by the similarity of the name, but also by a (relatively) old Persian-Judean witness, the plot, by themes and motives, and finally by the language in the story. There are chapters in the Book of Esther where Esther is not mentioned, so you can at least correlate these with the story about Marduk's rise to power.

The next step is unfortunately less than clear. Ishtar plays no role in this part of the Enuma Elish, and the only connection that has been suggested is, in my eyes, so weak that I won't mention it. Still, the connection of the name of Esther to Ishtar is strong. I have mentioned the double link of Esther/Hadassah with Ishtar and (relatively) old sources for those from the article, too. There was a suggestion mentioned that Ishtar had to replace the vanquished Tiamat as fertility goddess in a cult environment that was concerned with this, but that's basically pure speculation.

I know that in modern explanations, the connection of the Esther story to the feast of Purim is seen as secondary (tertiary?). The Persian connection is explained by the origin of the feast out of the Eastern diaspora. The name "Purim" is neither Hebrew nor Persian, but seems to be from Assyria. This grounds the connection to Babylonian/Persian New Year's customs, where lots played a role. The current form of the story cannot be older than from Hellenistic times. All in all, I have yet to see a good suggestion how all of these puzzle pieces go together, with "good" being something more than speculation.

However, as to the Amestris connection, I don't quite see what it explains.

[Ben C. Smith]

Still, the connection of the name of Esther to Ishtar is strong.

It seems to me to be the same kind of connection as that between Esther and Amestris: an etymological one.

However, as to the Amestris connection, I don't quite see what it explains.

It would explain why, of all the Persian royal courts from Cyrus to Darius III, that of Xerxes was chosen for the setting of a story about Ishtar and Marduk: Xerxes had a wife whose name quite possibly also derives from Ishtar, or is at least close enough (to Ammi/Ummi-Ishtar) to provoke a folk etymology.

(What you need to realize is that, on such a hypothesis, none of the connections between Esther and Ishtar can tell against another, separate connection between Esther and Amestris. The two connections become completely independent vectors. The Esther/Ishtar connection may be very much stronger, but it does not mitigate against Esther/Amestris.)

[Ulan]

Still, the connection of the name of Esther to Ishtar is strong.

It seems to me to be the same kind of connection as that between Esther and Amestris: an etymological one.

Maybe, but the one between Mordecai and Marduk is far more than that. Which is the reason why I consider this lane of thought as a bit stronger.

It would explain why, of all the Persian royal courts from Cyrus to Darius III, that of Xerxes was chosen for the setting of a story about Ishtar and Marduk: Xerxes had a wife whose name quite possibly also derives from Ishtar, or is at least close enough (to Ammi/Ummi-Ishtar) to provoke a folk etymology.

Well, okay, that's certainly a possibility. Someone must have made the shift of the story focus at some point.

(What you need to realize is that, on such a hypothesis, none of the connections between Esther and Ishtar can tell against another, separate connection between Esther and Amestris. The two connections become completely independent vectors. The Esther/Ishtar connection may be very much stronger, but it does not mitigate against Esther/Amestris.)

I guess that's correct.

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

I am going to suggest that some very late Jewish midrashic materials actually preserve traditions that Mark (or his sources) knew and used in the story of Herod beheading John the Baptist.

Thanks Ben. Very interesting.

Finally, I will suggest that the internal evidence points to a direction of dependence which flows from Jewish tradition to Mark, and not vice versa.

I agree with a lot what you are saying, but I am undecided. I would like to make two little arguments in favor of the other direction.

1)

If the former is the case, then we are saying that Jewish exegetes read Christian texts

I tend to think that Celsus' Jew knew a or the gospels.

2)

5. Head on a platter.

In Mark 6.25 the daughter of Herodias asks for, and in 6.28 receives, John's head on a platter (πίναξ). The word πίναξ appears only here, in the Matthean parallels in Matthew 14.8, 11, and in the unrelated Luke 11.39 in the entire Greek Bible. Aus writes of the Judaic parallels, "The most important rabbinic passages for the Marcan narrative are Est. Rab. 4/9 on Est 1:19, and 4/11 on Est 1:21. The first relates the offer of Memucan before the king in regard to Est 1:19, 'If it pleases the king, let there go forth a royal order': 'He said to him (the king), "My lord the king, say but a word and I will bring in her head on a platter."' .... The second passage in Esther Rabbah comments on Est 1:21, 'This advice pleased the king and the princes, and the king did as Memucan proposed': 'He gave the order. And he brought in her head on a platter.'" As Aus points out a bit later, "the term translated 'platter' in the Vashti account above is the Greek loan word in Hebrew, דִּיסְקוֹס: diskos. .... It should be noted that the Old Latin translates the term for 'platter' in Mark 6:25 and 28, pinax, with the same word: discus. This is the most striking of the parallels to the Jewish midrashic texts.

I think the interpretation in Esther Rabbah is a bit over the top. The book of Esther and the story of Vashti does not need such an interpretation. In Mark the head on the platter fits perfectly, but in Esther it seems a little bit out of context. Therefore it could be easier to imagine that Mark is the source than the other way around.