"The Book of Esther as a Source for Achaemenian History"

[StephenGoranson]

By Morteza Arabzadeh Sarbanani
https://www.asor.org/anetoday/2023/06/e ... an-history

[andrewcriddle]

By Morteza Arabzadeh Sarbanani
https://www.asor.org/anetoday/2023/06/e ... an-history

The author of Esther knew a lot about the Persian administration. But it seems doubtful whether it can be used as a source for Persian history other than to corroborate what we know from other sources,

Andrew Criddle

[DCHindley]

By Morteza Arabzadeh Sarbanani
https://www.asor.org/anetoday/2023/06/e ... an-history

The author of Esther knew a lot about the Persian administration. But it seems doubtful whether it can be used as a source for Persian history other than to corroborate what we know from other sources,

Andrew Criddle

Hi Stephen G & Andrew C,

Having read Neusner's volume from Hidstory of the Jews in Babylonia that covers the late Persian & early Parthian period, he described an admixture of Judean ethnic communities ranging in composition from pious laypersons doing the best they could to retain their cultural identity, to others who had assimilated more or less wholesale to Parthian military or political culture. He describes an environment where local cultures were not forced to assimilate to the ruling power's culture, although there was a certain amount of influence.

In Mesopotamia at least, when ethnic Judeans were under Persian and then Parthian control, there were few to no recorded attempts to suppress them. That changed in the 3rd century CE, IIRC, when the Roman Parthian wars caused the Parthian military leaders to suspect ethnic Judeans of Roman sympathies, since their national homeland (Judaea, Samaria, Idumaea & Galilee) was still under Roman control. I think the idea he was suggesting was that ethnic Judeans might be persuaded to aid Roman efforts if the Romans were willing to return the region to Judean control.

But Esther, IIRC, describes a really polarized situation, where ethnic Judeans who were practicing their unique cultural practices, were in severe conflict with "Persian" elites who wanted to utterly destroy them. It is full of statements that appear to be anachronisms.

I'm not suggesting that Esther is describing a conditions of conflict from 3rd century CE Parthian rule projected back to the Persian period, but I can see the storyline's "Persians" as code words for either Greek or Roman rulers.

I am suggesting that we should look to earlier periods where such conditions could have existed, and see if we can identify historical figures that served as the models for the characters in Esther.

The Latin apocalypse of Ezra (4th Ezra in many protestant bibles) and (IIRC) 2 Baruch are believed to project the conditions of post war period (the loss of temple & state after 70 CE) backwards in time to the Babylonian conquest. I can come up with "stabbed in the back" incidents in Judean history of the Roman period, especially around the first rebellion of 66 CE.

I think Agrippa II had to deal with an internal coup staged by an Ituraean of princely lineage - and who held a high position in Agrippa II's joint Jewish-gentile administration. The coup planner was staging a pretext in the early stages of the 1st Judean rebellion (68 CE) to take control of Agrippa II's mixed lineage Tetrarchy (Ituraean/Aramean, Judaean & Parthian trained soldiers of Judean descent in control of government positions). Josephus describes his intent to ethnically cleanse the region of Judaeans sympathetic to the rebellion. Seems ethnic cleansing was not invented in modern times by Nazis. I suppose it could also be happening in Esther. Unfortunately we do not have a lot of information about their spouses or concubines.

The problem I foresee is the way plot elements can be changed in meaning as retold by the storytellers, so nothing will be a 100% match. I am not familiar with the dating of Esther's composition, but there has to be a point where it first became visible on radar that we know it had to be before. Last time I read Esther using a couple study bibles (many years ago) I believe that it was not found among DSS, yet wasn't the story mentioned in Josephus? I'll need to look.

Out of curiosity, what period or which specific historical figures from history might you two think served as the basis of figures described in Esther?

DCH

[mbuckley3]

DCH



Josephus tells the story in Antiquities 11.184 ff, seemingly following a Greek version, not the Hebrew.

In one LXX text type, there is a foot-note at the end of the Book of Esther :

"In the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, Dositheus - who said he was a priest, and Levitas, and Ptolemy his son deposited the preceding Letter of Purim, which they said really exists and had been translated by Lysimachus (son of) Ptolemy, (a member) of the Jerusalem community."

In his classic article 'The Colophon of the Greek book of Esther', Elias Bickerman used his expertise in documentary formulae and procedures to interpret this; including the proof that the monarchs can only be Ptolemy XII Auletes and his sister/wife Cleopatra V. This dates the colophon to 78 - 77 BC.

The implications of the wording led him to venture this opinion : "But precisely the caution of the Alexandrian Jews with regard to the alleged original of Esther proves that the Hebrew Esther was still unknown in Alexandria in 78 - 77 BC. As it is extremely improbable that this book, relating the origins of a festival and the triumph of the Chosen People should remain unnoticed for a long time, we can only conclude that the Hebrew Esther had been published shortly before the Greek translation was made, let us say about 100 BC..."

It should be remembered that the Greek and Hebrew versions of Esther are very different. In his 'Notes on the Greek Book of Esther', Bickerman digs into the details, and sketches the shifting political/social background which accounts (in his reading) for a significant change of tone. Indeed, he posits a specific political purpose for the 'translation' itself. Plausible - Bickerman always beguiles - but , of course, speculative.

[DCHindley]

DCH

Josephus tells the story in Antiquities 11.184 ff, seemingly following a Greek version, not the Hebrew.

In one LXX text type, there is a foot-note at the end of the Book of Esther :

"In the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, Dositheus - who said he was a priest, and Levitas, and Ptolemy his son deposited the preceding Letter of Purim, which they said really exists and had been translated by Lysimachus (son of) Ptolemy, (a member) of the Jerusalem community."

In his classic article 'The Colophon of the Greek book of Esther', Elias Bickerman used his expertise in documentary formulae and procedures to interpret this; including the proof that the monarchs can only be Ptolemy XII Auletes and his sister/wife Cleopatra V. This dates the colophon to 78 - 77 BC.

The implications of the wording led him to venture this opinion : "But precisely the caution of the Alexandrian Jews with regard to the alleged original of Esther proves that the Hebrew Esther was still unknown in Alexandria in 78 - 77 BC. As it is extremely improbable that this book, relating the origins of a festival and the triumph of the Chosen People should remain unnoticed for a long time, we can only conclude that the Hebrew Esther had been published shortly before the Greek translation was made, let us say about 100 BC..."

It should be remembered that the Greek and Hebrew versions of Esther are very different. In his 'Notes on the Greek Book of Esther', Bickerman digs into the details, and sketches the shifting political/social background which accounts (in his reading) for a significant change of tone. Indeed, he posits a specific political purpose for the 'translation' itself. Plausible - Bickerman always beguiles - but , of course, speculative.

Sounds similar to the different contents & orders of the Greek & Hebrew versions of Ezra-Nehemiah/Esdras books. I recall that was mostly differing orders, but some stories were missing or added.

Is this what we have with the Hebrew and Greek versions of Esther? Or are they entirely different works?

DCH

[andrewcriddle]

[

Sounds similar to the different contents & orders of the Greek & Hebrew versions of Ezra-Nehemiah/Esdras books. I recall that was mostly differing orders, but some stories were missing or added.

Is this what we have with the Hebrew and Greek versions of Esther? Or are they entirely different works?

DCH

The Greek version of Esther has various prayers to God added. (There is no explicit mention of God in Hebrew Esther).

Andrew Criddle

[neilgodfrey]

By Morteza Arabzadeh Sarbanani
https://www.asor.org/anetoday/2023/06/e ... an-history

The author of Esther knew a lot about the Persian administration. But it seems doubtful whether it can be used as a source for Persian history other than to corroborate what we know from other sources,

Andrew Criddle

Ah -- I always look for chances to find agreement with Andrew and frame them -- this is one! Let it be known that here is an instance where Andrew and I agree.

(I agree so much I am not sure how such an article passed peer review, actually.)

[StephenGoranson]

Sarbanani argued that "it seems that the author of the Book of Esther had access to sources directly related to the Persian Empire," based, in part, on "the presence of many Old Persian and Aramaic words," but that the book also includes "countless historical errors" in the service of the fictional story.
I thought it might interest some.
Given that neilgodfrey lectures here on proper academic method, I ask him to list, as exemplars, any of his peer reviewed publications, if such exist.