Part One: Setting the Campaign Scene
by
Damien F. Mackey
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 (2007):
A Revised History of the Era of King Hezekiah of Judah
and its Background
AMAIC_Final_Thesis_2009.pdf
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) ….
‘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. R. Conder’s identification of Bethulia with the village of Mithilia (or Mesilieh).
Whilst I am still holding to only the first of these, I have had cause to re-think the location and identification of Bethulia, about which 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 e.g. my article:
Hezekiah's Chief Official Eliakim was High Priest
https://www.academia.edu/31701765/Hezekiahs_Chief_Official_Eliakim_was_High_Priest
and:
https://www.academia.edu/31701911/Hezekiahs_Chief_Official_Eliakim_was_High_Priest._Part_Two_Eliakim_points_to_Saint_Peter
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”.
http://biblehub.com/topical/s/shalem.htm
The Valley of Salem deserves far closer attention (see next section), 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
Previously I had 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.
Salem or Shalem
The mysterious “Salem” in the Bible inevitably gets connected with Jerusalem.
For example (https://www.biblicaltraining.org/library/valley-shaveh):
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, 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.
Ramses II and Salem
Rohl goes even further than that, and - whilst rightly rejecting Champollion’s
old identification of the 22nd dynasty’s pharaoh Shoshenq I with the biblical
“Shishak king of Egypt” … proceeds to identify Ramses II as “Shishak”.
Given the strategic importance of “Salem” in the environs of Shechem during the massive Assyrian invasion of Syro-Palestine, as discussed in Part One with reference to Judith 4, then I must reconsider my former acceptance of the view of some that the pharaoh Ramses II, when conquering the “city of Shalem”, was actually attacking Jerusalem itself.
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”.
That Shalem was Jerusalem, though, is the view argued by, for instance, Dr. David Rohl in his book, A Test of Time. The Bible: - From Myth to History (Century, London 1995).
Rohl goes even further than that, and - whilst rightly rejecting Champollion’s old identification of the 22nd dynasty’s pharaoh Shoshenq I with the biblical “Shishak king of Egypt”, who sacked the Temple of Yahweh after the death of king Solomon - proceeds to identify Ramses II as “Shishak”.
And Peter van der Veen will firmly back up Rohl on this:
http://www.bga.nl/en/discussion/engveen.html
VII. Did Ramesses II conquer Jerusalem?
In my view, the city of Shalem conquered by Ramesses II in his Year 8 cannot be identified with any other city in Palestine other than Jerusalem ('city of Shalem'). The inscription on the north pylon of the Ramesseum probably does not list the cities in geographical sequence but rather as highlights of the campaign. Ramesses did indeed take the cities of Merom, Kerep, etc, but this does not mean that he could not have taken a city in the south on his way back to Egypt or during his expedition against Moab. ….
[End of quote]
My own view is that pharaoh Ramses II was by no means “Shishak”, but was Thutmose III of the Eighteenth Egyptian Dynasty. See e.g. my article:
The Shishak Redemption
(5) The Shishak Redemption | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu
So, I now think that Dr. Rohl was not only wrong about his choice of pharaoh for “Shishak”, but possibly also for his identification of the “Shalem” in the Egyptian records with the city of Jerusalem.
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.
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 e.g. in my article:
Ancient tales inspired by Judith of Bethulia
(5) Ancient tales inspired by Judith of Bethulia | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu
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):
Judith the Simeonite and Judith the Semienite
(5) Judith the Simeonite and Judith the Semienite | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu
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!’ [,]
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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!
Part Two:
Not Mithilia (Mesilieh) but Shechem
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”.
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 …”.
‘O Lord, the God of my ancestor Simeon, remember how you armed Simeon with a sword to take revenge on those foreigners who seized Dinah, who was a virgin, tore off
her clothes, and defiled her; they stripped her naked and shamed her; they raped her
and disgraced her, even though you had forbidden this’.
Judith 9:2
Since Judith here recalls an unsavoury incident that had occurred at the city of Shechem, then this would add force to the location of her town of ‘Bethulia’ as Shechem.
That the rape of Dinah had occurred at Shechem is apparent from the geographical lead-in of Genesis 33:18-20:
After Jacob came from Paddan Aram, he arrived safely at the city of Shechem in Canaan and camped within sight of the city. For a hundred pieces of silver, he bought from the sons of Hamor, the father of Shechem, the plot of ground where he pitched his tent. There he set up an altar and called it El Elohe Israel.
The pagan Canaanite, Shechem, who defiled the virgin, turns out to be somewhat more honourable than, later, David’s eldest son, Amnon, who, having raped his half-sister, Tamar, then abandons her as “a desolate woman”. See my article:
The vicissitudinous life of Solomon's pulchritudinous wife
(2) The vicissitudinous life of Solomon's pulchritudinous wife | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu
But none of that ‘honourableness’ is about to impress the vengeful brothers Simeon and Levi. In the following Genesis 34:1-31 account of the incident one will notice a stark contrast between Jacob’s reaction to it and that of Simeon and Levi – and how different is Jacob’s estimation of Simeon (and Levi) when compared to Judith’s glowing account of her ancestor:
Dinah and the Shechemites
Now Dinah, the daughter Leah had borne to Jacob, went out to visit the women of the land. When Shechem son of Hamor the Hivite, the ruler of that area, saw her, he took her and raped her. His heart was drawn to Dinah daughter of Jacob; he loved the young woman and spoke tenderly to her. And Shechem said to his father Hamor, ‘Get me this girl as my wife’.
When Jacob heard that his daughter Dinah had been defiled, his sons were in the fields with his livestock; so he did nothing about it until they came home.
Then Shechem’s father Hamor went out to talk with Jacob. Meanwhile, Jacob’s sons had come in from the fields as soon as they heard what had happened. They were shocked and furious, because Shechem had done an outrageous thing in Israel by sleeping with Jacob’s daughter—a thing that should not be done.
But Hamor said to them, ‘My son Shechem has his heart set on your daughter. Please give her to him as his wife. Intermarry with us; give us your daughters and take our daughters for yourselves. You can settle among us; the land is open to you. Live in it, trade in it, and acquire property in it’.
Then Shechem said to Dinah’s father and brothers, ‘Let me find favor in your eyes, and I will give you whatever you ask. Make the price for the bride and the gift I am to bring as great as you like, and I’ll pay whatever you ask me. Only give me the young woman as my wife’.
Because their sister Dinah had been defiled, Jacob’s sons replied deceitfully as they spoke to Shechem and his father Hamor. They said to them, ‘We can’t do such a thing; we can’t give our sister to a man who is not circumcised. That would be a disgrace to us. We will enter into an agreement with you on one condition only: that you become like us by circumcising all your males. Then we will give you our daughters and take your daughters for ourselves. We’ll settle among you and become one people with you. But if you will not agree to be circumcised, we’ll take our sister and go’.
Their proposal seemed good to Hamor and his son Shechem. The young man, who was the most honored of all his father’s family, lost no time in doing what they said, because he was delighted with Jacob’s daughter. So Hamor and his son Shechem went to the gate of their city to speak to the men of their city. ‘These men are friendly toward us’, they said. ‘Let them live in our land and trade in it; the land has plenty of room for them. We can marry their daughters and they can marry ours. But the men will agree to live with us as one people only on the condition that our males be circumcised, as they themselves are. Won’t their livestock, their property and all their other animals become ours? So let us agree to their terms, and they will settle among us’.
All the men who went out of the city gate agreed with Hamor and his son Shechem, and every male in the city was circumcised.
Three days later, while all of them were still in pain, two of Jacob’s sons, Simeon and Levi, Dinah’s brothers, took their swords and attacked the unsuspecting city, killing every male. They put Hamor and his son Shechem to the sword and took Dinah from Shechem’s house and left. The sons of Jacob came upon the dead bodies and looted the city where their sister had been defiled. They seized their flocks and herds and donkeys and everything else of theirs in the city and out in the fields. They carried off all their wealth and all their women and children, taking as plunder everything in the houses.
Then Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, ‘You have brought trouble on me by making me obnoxious to the Canaanites and Perizzites, the people living in this land. We are few in number, and if they join forces against me and attack me, I and my household will be destroyed’.
But they replied, ‘Should he have treated our sister like a prostitute?’
Later, a dying Jacob will ‘curse the anger’ of the fiery pair of brothers (49:5-7):
‘Simeon and Levi are brothers—
their swords are weapons of violence.
Let me not enter their council,
let me not join their assembly,
for they have killed men in their anger
and hamstrung oxen as they pleased.
Cursed be their anger, so fierce,
and their fury, so cruel!
I will scatter them in Jacob
and disperse them in Israel’.
No such negative sentiment as this will arise from Judith, however. Had not God himself “armed Simeon with a sword to take revenge on those foreigners who seized Dinah …”?
And now Judith will reverse the ancient crime of the pagan Shechem by personally overcoming the god-less “Holofernes” who wishes to take sexual advantage of her.
She, like Simeon, will be ‘armed with a sword’ to accomplish the deed (Judith 13:14-16):
Judith shouted,
‘Praise God, give him praise! Praise God, who has not held back his mercy from the people of Israel. Tonight he has used me to destroy our enemies’.
She then took the head out of the food bag and showed it to the people.
‘Here’, she said, ‘is the head of Holofernes, the general of the Assyrian army, and here is the mosquito net from his bed, where he lay in a drunken stupor. The Lord used a woman to kill him. As the Lord lives, I swear that Holofernes never touched me, although my beauty deceived him and brought him to his ruin. I was not defiled or disgraced; the Lord took care of me through it all’.
In this heroic action, Judith - as the faithful have long recognised - prefigures the Virgin Mary: https://icxcmary.wordpress.com/2011/09/18/esther-judith-mary/
Another Old Testament heroine is Judith. The way she prefigures Mary is somewhat different. As we know from Genesis, God put enmity between the woman and the serpent, who represent Mary and the devil, respectively, and through the power of her Son, the Woman would crush the serpent’s head. Well, Judith is an image of this mystery, for she saved her people by cutting off the head of the evil and tyrannical general, Holofernes. Judith, like Esther and like Mary, was exceedingly beautiful and devout, and was held in high honor by her people. When their faith wavered in the face of the threats and power of the enemy, she counseled them to trust in God, and not put Him to the test by placing a limit on how long they would wait for Him before they would surrender to their enemies. For God would deliver them at the proper time by the hand of a woman.
After Judith had killed the enemy leader and returned victorious to her people, they sang to her (and this is used in the Latin Rite on certain feasts of Our Lady): “You are the exaltation of Jerusalem; you are the great glory of Israel; you are the great pride of our nation! You have done all this single-handedly; you have done great good to Israel, and God is well pleased with it. May the Almighty Lord bless you forever! … The Lord Almighty has foiled them by the hand of a woman!” (Jdt. 15:9-10; 16:6). Our Lady is the Woman at whose hand (or rather, under whose foot) God has foiled the designs of our evil enemy, the devil. God has chosen her to bring the Savior into the world and to stand with Him and to wield the power He has given her to protect us from evil and to neutralize its power and influence in our lives.
There is much more that can be said about Old Testament prefigurings of the Mother of God, but let this suffice for now. Let us realize that just as the mystery of Christ was known in Heaven for all eternity, the mystery of his Mother was known as well—for how could there be an incarnate Son considered in isolation from the one who gave flesh to Him? So the mystery of both Mother and Son was intimated in the stories of salvation history, until their complete revelation in the fullness of time—and the ever-deepening understanding of these divine mysteries in the ongoing life of the Church, until the Lord returns in glory.
