A Pious Seductress (Studies in the Book of Judith) || Tigranes the Great as “Nebuchadnezzar” in the Book of Judith

Tigranes the Great as “Nebuchadnezzar”in the Book of JudithGABRIELE BOCCACCINI

1. Introduction

Contemporary research on the book of Judith1 has come to agree onthree major conclusions:

(1) First, the final composition of the work took place in the Hasmonean age and the work as a whole bears the impress of the historyand ideology of the period. The friendly attitude of the Samaritans (cf.Jud 4:4 8; 15:3 5) suggests as the terminus post quem the year 107 BCEwhen John Hyrcanus I annexed all the territory of Samaria. The terminus ante quem is more obviously given by the year 63 BCE, when Judeawas conquered by Pompey and lost its independence.

(2) Second, the document lacks any trace of virulent sectarianism;the author shows an “irenic attitude toward all Jews,”2 a spirit of national unity. This may suggest, as Bruce Metzger wrote, that the document’s aim was to respond to “a time of war” or “national emergencywhen the Jewish religion and independence were at stake.”3

(3) Finally, the book with all its manifest anachronisms is an obvious work of fiction. Its characters are composite characters; a vast rangeof literary and historical traditions from different sources and differentepochs conflated to create an original narrative, which echoes similar“rescue stories” and legends about heroic females in ancient Jewishliterature.4

There are, however, some elements that complicate the picture andpuzzle the interpreter. This fictional book opens with some chronological and geographical details that appear too precise to be merely thework of imagination. The story describes a series of events beginning in“the twelfth year” when a king of Assyria, named “Nebuchadnezzar,”

1 MOORE, Judith; OTZEN, Tobit and Judith.2 MOORE, Judith, 80.3 METZGER, Introduction, 52, 42.4 WILLS, Jewish Novel.

Brought to you by | Brown University Rockefeller LibraryAuthenticated | 128.148.252.35

Download Date | 6/9/14 11:22 PM

56 G. Boccaccini

launched a military campaign against a king of Media. After five years,in “the seventeenth year,” he defeated his eastern enemy and looted thecity of Ecbatana. The following year (“the eighteenth year”) he beganhis campaign against the people of the West, Syria and Cilicia. Finally,he rapidly moved from the North to the South along the costal Mediterranean cities. The king and his army brought death and destructionto all who resisted. Judea and Egypt were the next targets.

These chronological and geographical details have led scholars tobelieve that the book could preserve reminiscences of some ancientevents and characters whose names were skillfully disguised. While“Judith” was generally taken as a symbol or personification of the Jewish people, “Nebuchadnezzar” was often identified with historical figures, such as Ashurbanipal of Assyria; Artaxerxes III, or Artaxerxes IIIOchus, of Persia (the latter had in fact generals named Holofernes andBogoas); Antiochus IV Epiphanes, or Demetrius I Soter of Syria. Allthese kings may indeed have contributed to the composite fictionalfigure of Judith’s “Nebuchadnezzar.” The problem however remainsopen, since none of the military campaigns of these kings followedexactly the path described in the book of Judith. Surprisingly enough,the events of the Hasmonean period have not been submitted to thesame scrutiny. It is like that in the frenzy of searching the distant past,scholars had forgotten to look at the most obvious connections withevents contemporary to the actual composition of the document.

In the Hasmonean period, there was indeed in Israel a “widow”who was celebrated for her piety as well as for her political and military skill and stood up for her people in a time of war. Her name wasnot “Judith,” but Queen Salome Alexandra, the widow of king Alexander Jannaeus.

And at the time of Queen Salome Alexandra, there was “a kingwho ruled over the Assyrians,” attacked the king of “Media,” lootedEcbatana, and then moved west against Syria and Cilicia and finallysouth to Phoenicia and Israel, which he directly threatened in 69 BCE.The name of this king was not “Nebuchadnezzar,” but Tigranes theGreat, the Armenian king who for a while seemed to rival with Romeand the Parthians.

2. The Jewish Queen and the Armenian King

The Jewish Queen Salome Alexandra is a well established historicalcharacter, not a character however that has enjoyed much success inscholarly research or popular culture. In the Jewish War and in the



Tigranes the Great as “Nebuchadnezzar” 57

Jewish Antiquities, Flavius Josephus provides a detailed account of herkingdom as he does with the other Hasmonean rulers. Yet, the scandalof a ruler who so unexpectedly and so effectively reversed the traditional female role of powerlessness condemned her for centuries to adestiny of oblivion. Only in contemporary times, after a long period ofsilence and deliberate “silencing,”5 the character of Salome Alexandrahas known some renewed interest. In 1892 rabbi Henry Zirndorf devoted a chapter to the forgotten Queen in his collection of biographiesof “Jewish Women.”6 A few works of fiction, notably, the opera Aleksandrah (1959) by Menahem Avidom and the drama Alexandra of Judea(2003) by Lauiri Donahue, have followed, taking Salome as their protagonist. Scholarly studies however have generally limited themselvesto brief paraphrases of Josephus’ account, labeling her reign as shortand uneventful. In 1973 the revised edition of Schurer’s monumentalintroduction to the Second Temple period had very little to say—“nopolitical events of any importance occurred during her reign.”7

The recent work of Tal Ilan8 has in part corrected the trend, drawing attention on the uniqueness of Salome’s experience as the only female ruler in ancient Israel. Yet, Salome remains a largely forgotten andmarginal character in Biblical and Judaic Studies.

Like Salome, Tigranes the Great is a well established historicalcharacter, not a character however that has enjoyed much success inscholarly research or popular culture. His figure is virtually unknownin the field of Biblical and Judaic Studies. Josephus, who in the JewishWar had been quite dismissive of the event, in the Jewish Antiquitiesdescribed the Armenian invasion of Palestine in vivid terms as a mostfrightening menace that almost destroyed the Hasmonean kingdom:

BJ I 116: Salome Alexandra also prevailed with Tigranes, king of Armenia,who lay with his troops about Ptolemais, and besieged Cleopatra, byagreements and presents, to go away. Accordingly, Tigranes soon arosefrom the siege, by reason of those domestic tumults, which happened uponLucullus’s expedition into Armenia.AJ XIII 419 421: About this time news was brought that Tigranes, the kingof Armenia, had made an irruption into Syria with five hundred thousandsoldiers, and was coming against Judea. This news, as may well be supposed, terrified the queen (=Salome Alexandra) and the nation. Accordingly, they sent him many and very valuable presents, as also ambassa

5 ILAN, Silencing the Queen.6 ZIRNDORF, Some Jewish Women.7 SCHÜRER/VERMES, Alexandra, 229 232.8 ILAN, Integrating.



58 G. Boccaccini

dors, and that as he was besieging Ptolemais; for Selene the queen, thesame that was also called Cleopatra, ruled then over Syria, who had persuaded the inhabitants to exclude Tigranes. So the Jewish ambassadors interceded with him, and entreated him that he would determine nothingthat was severe about their queen or nation. He commended them for therespects they paid him at so great a distance, and gave them good hopes ofhis favor. But as soon as Ptolemais was taken, news came to Tigranes, thatLucullus, in his pursuit of Mithridates, could not light upon him, who wasfled into Iberia, but was laying waste Armenia, and besieging its cities.Now when Tigranes knew this, he returned home.

In spite of Josephus’ dramatic testimony, the memory of Tigranes, andthe memory of the direct threat he posed to Israel in 69 BCE, wereobliterated by more urgent theological concerns. The ancient Rabbinictradition was so occupied in singing the praises of the philo PharisaicQueen Alexandra, to downplay any trouble she may have experienced,while giving all credits to the Pharisees for everything she had accomplished. The presence of Tigranes disturbed the constructed myth of apeaceful kingdom, ruled by the Pharisees and blessed by God; anymemories of the scare the Armenian king provoked were carefully removed.

No greater fortune Tigranes enjoyed in Western Christian culture.The character knew a brief period of revival and popularity only at theturn of the eighteenth century. Tigranes was the protagonist of Il Tigrane, re d’Armenia (Tigranes, King of Armenia), an Italian libretto writtenby Francesco Silvani in 1691 and revised by Carlo Goldoni in 1741.Between 1691 and 1766, the libretto was set to music by more than 20composers, including Tomaso Albinoni, Antonio Vivaldi, AdolphHasse, Christoph Willibald Gluck, Niccolò Piccinni, and others. Thefictional story, however, focused entirely on the love relationship between the Armenian king and his wife Cleopatra, the daughter of Mithridates, and did not contain any reference to the military campaign ofTigranes in Phoenicia and Judea.9

The only modern scholarly monograph on Tigranes the Great accessible to the West, by Armenian historian Hakob Manandyan, alsofocused exclusively on the relationship between Tigranes and Rome,

9 Contrary to what is often claimed, Il Tigrane; ovvero, L’egual impegno d’amore e di fede(Teatro San Bartolomeo, Naples, 1715) by Alessandro Scarlatti (with libretto ofDomenico Lalli [pseud. for Sebastiano Biancardi]) does not deal with the same subject but with the sixth century BCE Armenian King Tigranes. It is the same librettothat was set to music by Tomaso Albinoni, under the title L’amor di figlio non conosciuto (Teatro Sant’Angelo, Venice 1715)




with no specific reference to his campaign in Israel.10 Armenia was andremained a distant and mysterious land, with no obvious connectionswith Biblical and Jewish history. As the result, even in the most detailed contemporary introductions to Second Temple Judaism, Tigranesis little more than a footnote, as if his invasion was little more than anannoyance to Queen Alexandra’s kingdom.

3. Judith/Salome vs. Nebuchadnezzar/Tigranes

Until very recent times, interpreters saw no connection whatsoeverbetween the narratives in the book of Judith and either Salome or Tigranes. It was Solomon Zeitlin who in 1972 first established a link between “Judith” and Salome Alexandra.11 Like Judith, Salome was apious and courageous widow, who had authority on the High Priestand the sanhedrin. She was renowned for her military skill, and at theend of her successful reign she also retired, living in her own estate. Inline with contemporary scholarship, however, Zeitlin also did not seeany connection between Salome’s biography and the fictional story ofJudith: “No act of Alexandra is to be seen as prompting the story.”12The identification of Judith with Salome was taken up more recently byTal Ilan,13 but has never gained central stage. At most, in scholarly introductions, Salome is occasionally added to the list of the many femalefigures (Yael, Deborah, Esther, Delilah) whose traits may have concurred to the creation of the fabricate character of Judith.

In 2005 an article by Samuele Rocca14 suggested that the book of Judith not only referred specifically to the historical character of Salomebut also reflected events and controversies generated in Israel by themilitary invasion of Tigranes the Great. After drawing attention to themany similarities between Judith and Salome, Rocca noticed that theactive presence of the “Gileadites” in the Jewish army (Jud 15:5) conclusively pointed at her reign as the time of composition of the book.

10 MANANDYAN, Tigran. The book was translated into Russian (Tigran vtoroi i Rim,Yerevan 1943), and French (Tigrane II & Rome, Lisbon 1963), and only in recentyears into English (Tigranes II and Rome, Costa Mesa 2007).

11 ENSLIN/ZEITLIN, Book of Judith, 181.12 Ibid.13 ILAN, Integrating, 136 137, 150 151.14 ROCCA, Book of Judith, 85 98.



60 G. Boccaccini

It was King Alexander Jannai, the husband of Queen Salome Alexandra,who conquered Gilad (Josephus, Antiquities XIII, 396). Thus the Book ofJudith has to be contemporary to the reign of Queen Salome Alexandra!15

Going back to Josephus’ Antiquities, Rocca argued that the time of Salome was far from being the golden (and uneventful) age described inRabbinic sources and modern scholarship. The “quasi war” with Tigranes provoked a profound internal crisis between Pharisees andSadducees, which was somehow brilliantly (and luckily) managed bythe Queen.

Rocca listed the many and striking parallels between the militarycampaign of Tigranes and that of “Nebuchadnezzar” in the book ofJudith. The author of the fictional work shows indeed a remarkableknowledge of the political, geographical and military situation of thetime; even the description of Nebuchadnezzar’s army is a detailed andrealistic picture of the Armenian army. Secondary characters, such asthe High Priest “Joachim” and the convert “Achior,” also appears toallude to real people—Salome’s son Hyrcanus II and Salome’s generalAntipater, respectively. All these details can hardly be accidental; theyconcur to define a picture consistent with the time of Salome Alexandraand Tigranes, providing clear evidence of the original setting in whichthe book of Judith was composed.

4. The military campaign of Tigranes the Greatand the book of Judith

Reading the book of Judith against the historical background of Salome’s reign and Tigranes’ invasion reserves indeed even greater surprises. By combining the data of Judith with all extant historical sources(Jewish and Greek Roman), a clearer picture emerges. Even the chronological framework of the book of Judith, marked by the years of thereign of “Nebuchadnezzar,” seems to correspond exactly to the years ofthe reign of Tigranes.

Under Tigranes’ leadership, Armenia became for a short time thestrongest empire in the Middle East and a menace to Roman power inthe region. At its height, the Armenian Empire included the regions ofMedia, Assyria, Cappadocia, Cilicia, Syria, and Phoenicia; in 69 BCE, atthe time of Queen Salome Alexandra, the Armenian army was at theverge of invading Palestine and Egypt.

15 ROCCA, Book of Judith, 90.




The beginnings of Tigranes’ rule, however, were very difficult. Inhis youth he lived hostage at the court of the Parthian King Mithridatesthe Great. Only around 95 BCE he bought back his freedom by handingover “seventy valleys” to the Parthians. He rapidly built up an alliancewith another ambitious and powerful neighbor, the King Mithridates ofPontus and married his daughter Cleopatra. The Armenian expansionbegan.

The story of Judith starts “in the twelfth year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, who ruled over the Assyrians” (Jud 1:1). Tigranes had infact taken advantage of the weakness of the Parthian empire in the lastyears of the reign of King Mithridates II of Parthia, to expand his influence in the region. The former hostage king was now ready to takerevenge of his captors. “In those days Arphaxad ruled over the Medesin Ectabana… and king Nebuchadnezzar made war against King Arphaxad” (Jud 1:1.5). The “Median” King was King Orodes I of Parthia,who around 89 BCE had sized power. By this time Tigranes’ empireincluded the ancient territories of Assyria.

Five years later, “in the seventeenth year… [Nebuchadnezzar] defeated Arphaxad in battle… and came to Ectabana” (Jud 1:13). That theArmenian army looted the territory of Ectabana, the capital of the Parthian empire, is attested by the geographer Isodore of Charax. In hisParthian Stations, he mentioned the nearby “Adrapana, the royal residence of those who ruled in Ecbatana, and which Tigranes the Armenian destroyed” (Mansiones Parthicae 6). We are in the year 84 BCE.

“In the eighteenth year,” i.e. 83 BCE, the year after Tigranes successfully concluded his military campaign in the East, the Armeniansmoved westwards, conquering the Seleucid Empire, Syria and Cilicia ina series of military campaigns. The invasion of the Armenian army isdescribed in the first chapters of the book of Judith as a punitive expedition against “every one who had not obeyed his [i.e. Tigranes] command” (Jud 2:3). The list includes Cilicia, Damascus, Lebanon, Antilebanon, and also Judea and Egypt.

In the meantime, Tigranes had moved the capital of his empirefrom Artashat in Armenia to the newly founded city of Tigranocerta,which he populated by deporting inhabitants from the conqueredlands. Tigranes then pushed south conquering Damascus. In 69 BCE hereached and besieged the seacoast city of Ptolemais (Acca), the lastSeleucid stronghold at the border with the Hasmonean kingdom. Thepopulations of the region quickly submitted to the invader. The inhabitants of Judea were “greatly terrified” (Jud 4:2).

At this moment of crisis, the pious widow “Judith” intervened. AsJosephus says, Salome Alexandra “won” the Armenian King with her



62 G. Boccaccini

gifts. It does not matter that she did it by making de facto Israel a vassalkingdom of the Armenians, and receiving only vague promises in return. These are exactly the events (including the [apparent] submissionof Judith to the enemy) that constitute the prologue to the story of Judith. Only a “miracle” could stop the invaders.

When the fall of Ptolemais opened Tigranes the path to the conquest of Judea and Egypt, the Romans decided that it was time forthem to intervene. Tigranes’ conquests had entered in conflict withtheir interests in the region or better, the Armenian king had accomplished the mission that the Romans had been very glad to see himaccomplish—the total defeat and annihilation of what remained of theSeleucid empire and army.

The causus belli was easily found. Tigranes’ father in law and alley,Mithridates of Pontus, had been defeated by the Romans and hadsought asylum in Armenia. Tigranes refused to deliver him. Rome declared war and the general Lucullus attacked the Armenian capitalTigranocerta. Suddenly the invincible Tigranes was forced to withdrawhis garrisons from Syria. It was the “miracle” that the book of Judithattributed to the piety (and plot) of a courageous widow.

We know the rest of the story from classical sources. The campaigns of the Roman general Lucullus largely reduced Tigranes’ powerin the region. In the words of Strabo,

Lucullus, who had commanded in the war against Mithridates, surprisedhim, thus engaged, and dismissed the inhabitants to their respectivehomes. The buildings which were half finished he demolished, and left asmall village remaining. He drove Tigranes both out of Syria and Phoenicia(Geography XI.xiv.16).

The empire Tigranes had created, quickly collapsed; the new capitalhad to be abandoned. Tigranes took refuge to the mountains of Armenia, yet still undefeated, in spite of the attempts by Lucullus to chasehim. Tigranes ultimately surrendered to Pompey in 66 BCE, receivingin exchange permission to rule Armenia as an ally of Rome, until hisdeath in 55/54 BCE. In the words of Appianus,

Pompey pardoned him for the past... He required that Tigranes should atonce give up the territory that he had gained by war. Accordingly he gaveup the whole of Syria from the Euphrates to the sea; for he held that and apart of Cilicia, which he had taken from [the Seleucid king] Antiochus [XEusebes], surnamed Pius (History of Rome 105).




5. Back to Armenian Sources

The striking parallels between the book of Judith and ancient Jewishand Greek Roman sources are already sufficient to substantiate theclaim that the book of Judith alluded to the military campaign of Tigranes. But how did it happen that the Armenian King became to beknown as the “Nebuchadnezzar of Assyria”? Tigranes’ empire could ofcourse be legitimately compared to that of the ancient “Nebuchadnezzar,” but can we single out some more specific elements that promptedsuch identification? There is much more to be learned from ancientsources, if the horizons of research are not limited to Josephus andGreek Roman sources, but enlarged also to include Armenian sources.

Contrary to what happened among Christians and Jews in theWest, the Armenians never ceased to celebrate Tigranes in the arts andpopular culture as a hero of national pride. With the renewed independence of the Armenian Republic in 1991, the figure of Tigranes hasgained, if possible, even more relevance. In 1991 the play Agony of Tigranes the Great (1991) staged at Yerevan by actor Vartan Garniki, basedon a patriotic poem of Hovhannes Shiraz, was celebrated as one of alandmarks in the re awakening of Armenian national pride. To Tigranes the Great the new State has dedicated a monumental statue atYerevan, a golden coin (1999), and a stamp (2007).

Armenian tradition has some surprising elements to offer to Biblicaland Judaic Studies. The fifth century writer, Moses of Khoren (MovsesKhorenatsi), is the father of Armenian history. His ancient chroniclecontains some significant insights on the relationship between Armenians and Jews, between Tigranes and Queen Alexandra, as seen fromthe Armenian point of view:

[Tigranes] built temples, and in front of the temples he set up altars, ordering all the princes to offer sacrifices and worship. To this the men of theBarartuni family [a Jewish family according to Armenian sources] did notagree, and he cut off the tongue of one of them, called Asud, for dishonoring the images, but he did not torment [them] in any other way, for theyagreed on eat [meat] from the king’s sacrifices and also pork, although theythemselves did not sacrifice or worship. Therefore he deprived them of thecommand of the army, but he did not take away the office of aspect withthe right of crowning. … Immediately thereafter [Tigranes] attacked Palestine to seek vengeance from Cleopatra [daughter] of Ptolemy for the crimesher son Dionysius against his own father. He took many captives fromamong the Jews and besieged the city of Ptolemais. But the queen of theJews, Alexandra—also known as Messalina—who was the wife of Alexander (Jannaeus), son of John (Hyrcanus), son of Simon the brother of Judas



64 G. Boccaccini

Maccabaeus, and who at that time held the throne of the Jews, by givinghim many presents turned him back. For he heard a report that a certainbrigand called Vaykun [=Lucullus] was causing a tumult in Armenia, holding the inaccessible mountain that up to now is called Vaykunik after thename of the brigand.16

Ancient Armenian tradition (as reported by Moses of Khoren) confirmsthe general framework provided by Roman and Jewish sources. WhenTigranes besieged Ptolemais, Queen Alexandria submitted to Tigranes“by giving him many presents,” until the Armenian king had to withdraw “due to the tumult caused by a brigand called Vaykun” (which iswhat the Roman general Lucullus was named and labeled from theArmenian point of view).

Even more important are the original details that the Armeniantradition adds to the narrative. Tigranes pursued a religious policy thatthe Jews could not accept, as it represented a direct threat to their religious laws. The Jews of Armenia had to submit and accepted to eat theking’s sacrifices (including pork); it would have been more difficult forthe heirs of the Maccabees to do the same.

From Moses of Kohren we also learn that many Jews were amongthe captives taken by the King, a practice that is confirmed by all ancient sources. The 5th century Armenian historian Faustus of Byzantium(Historia iv 55) also states that during his domination of Syria, Tigranestransported a large number of Jews to Armenia.17

These details (religious intolerance, deportations) not only substantiate the fact (reported by the book of Judith and Josephus) that theJews had many good reasons for being terrified at the arrival of Tigranes, but also fully unveil what was already apparent in classicalsources—Tigranes was inspired more by the model of kingship provided by the ancient Babylonian Kings that by the later Persian andHellenistic kings. Plutarch betrays all the outrage of the Greek philosopher before the barbarian and old fashioned behavior of the Armenianking:

Now the sway of the Armenians was intolerably grievous to the Greeks.Above all else, the spirit of the king [i.e. Tigranes] himself had becomepompous and haughty in the midst of his great prosperity. All the thingswhich men most covet and admire, he not only had in his possession, butactually thought that they existed for his sake… Many were the kings whowaited upon him, and four, whom he always had about him like atten

16 SARGSYAN, Movses Khorenatsi.17 See NEUSNER, Armenian Jewry, 339ff.




dants or body guards, would run on foot by their master s side when herode out, clad in short blouses, and when he sat transacting business,would stand by with their arms crossed. This attitude was thought to bethe plainest confession of servitude, as if they had sold their freedom andoffered their persons to their master disposed for suffering rather than forservice (Vita Luculli xxi 3 5).

After reading Armenian (and Greek) sources it is no wonder that Tigranes could be understood as a new Nebuchadnezzar. As Nebuchadnezzar, Tigranes liked to be surrounded (and served) by the capturedkings. As Nebuchadnezzar, Tigranes pursued a policy of religious intolerance. As Nebuchadnezzar, Tigranes deported large masses ofpopulation.

In the eyes of the Jews, even more terrifying than the historical Nebuchanezzar, was the literary Nebuchadnezzar that they knew not onlyby their ancient religious writings but also, and more vividly, by theBook of Daniel, which in Maccabean times had revived the memory ofNebuchadnezzar as symbol of the evil king. It was Nebuchadnezzarwho besieged Jerusalem, looted the Temple, deported the Jewish Kingas hostage to Babylon and even took Jewish children to make themservants at his court (Daniel 1). It was Nebuchadnezzar who set up an“image of gold” and commanded “peoples, nations and men of everylanguage… to fall down and worship it,” condemning the faithful Jewsto the furnace of fire (Daniel 3). It was Nebuchadnezzar who in hispride challenged God until he was severely punished (Daniel 4).

When in the book of Judith we read thatNebuchadnezzar had been commissioned to destroy all the gods of heland, so that all nations should worship Nebuchadnezzar alone, and thatall their dialects and tribes should call upon him as a god (Jud 3:8),

the connection with the stories of Daniel could not have been mademore explicit. It is no surprise that in the eyes of Jews Tigranes had toappear as Nebuchadnezzar redivivus. It did not matter that Tigranes didnot actually rule over Babylon; as his reign did include Assyria, he wasthe “Nebuchdnezzar of Assyria.”

The identification between Tigranes and Nebuchadnezzar is morethan a scholarly inference; amazingly, it has remained alive in Armenian oral memory and consciousness until the present. In the literarybiography that in 1940 the Armenian author Herant K. Armen dedicated to Tigranes, we read a vivid description of the dramatic encounter between the Armenians and the Jews, the “new Nebuchanezzar”and the “trembling Jewish ambassadors” sent by “Queen Alexandra ofJerusalem:”



66 G. Boccaccini

As the king’s forces poured into southern Phoenicia, Jews were alarmed atthe proximity of such vast hosts to Judea. Queen Alexandra of Jerusalem,and the Jewish leaders already visioned Armenian cuirassiers riding intothe sacred city, and once more the recollection of Babylonian captivity intensified their present panic. The undimmed prestige of Tigranes as a conqueror, who moved peoples, among them Jews from Syria, to populate hisnative territories, made him appear as a new Nebuchadnezzar, while theprospect of singing the songs of Zion on the banks of Euphrates and Tigristo satisfy the disdainful curiosity of their enslavers terrified them. For“how shall we sing the Lord’s songs in a strange land!” Trembling Jewishambassadors met Tigranes in Phoenicia, they “ interceded with him, andentreated him he would determine nothing that was severe about theirqueen and nation.” Tigranes alleviated their fears and assured then of hispeaceful intentions toward Judea.18

Twenty centuries after the composition of the book of Judith, and withno reference whatsoever to that literary work, an Armenian author foundnatural to repeat what generations of readers of the book of Judith in theWest and in the East (including Armenia) can no longer perceive—theJews of the time saw in Tigranes the new Nebuchadnezzar and madehim protagonist of a dramatic confrontation with the woman, SalomeAlexandra, who then ruled as their Queen and to whom they gave aname, Judith, representing their own national identity.

6. Conclusion

Armenian sources, both ancient (Moses of Choren, Faustus of Byzantium) and modern (Herant K. Armen), offer an extraordinary and totally neglected contribution to the study of the book of Judith. Theysupport the conclusion that the book of Judith not only was written atthe time of Queen Salome Alexandra, but also reflects the climate ofterror and relief experienced with the invasion of Tigranes the Greatand his “miraculous” withdrawal from the region, exactly in the moment in which the victory over Cleopatra and the conquest of Ptolemaishad opened him the door to Palestine (and Egypt). Armenian sourcesin particular shed light on the reasons that made the Jews look at Tigranes as the “new Nebuchadnezzar,” and ever preserve the memoryof such identification.

It becomes now possible also to be more specific about the purposesof the fictional work of Judith. The goal was not only to celebrate the

18 ARMEN, Tigran the Great, 150.




happy ending of a very critical situation but also to restore the reputation of Queen Salome Alexandra, who had publicly submitted to Tigranes. The book accomplished its goals by giving the “official version”of what happened, providing legitimization to the behavior of QueenAlexandra. After all, her decision not to fight but to “bribe” the kingand gain time, had paid off. Her willingness to “get into bed,” so tospeak, with the enemy had won political freedom for her kingdom andspared the Jews from the impending catastrophe.

It was enough to introduce the fictional figure of Holofernes andthe narrative of the expedition of the courageous widow in the enemycamp, which repeats the story of Yael and Sisera in the book of Judges.What was an act of surrender and desperation from Queen Salome’spart could now be presented as the trick of a brave woman who in coldblood pretended to be submissive only in order to stab the enemy inthe back. The fortunate survival of Queen Alexandra and her peoplebefore the mighty Armenian King Tigranes could be celebrated as themiraculous victory of a pious woman over the new Nebuchadnezzar.

That there had been some criticism and embarrassment is apparentalso in the fictional retelling. Before going to the enemy camp “Judith”asked her people not to agree with her but rather to trust her withoutquestioning. “Only, do not try to find out what I am doing; for I willnot tell you until I have finished what I am about to do” (Jud 8:34). Thehappy ending, regardless of what “really” happened, was sufficient tosilence any criticism. The Queen could now openly reveal what her realintentions were since the beginning; it was a plot and as such had toremain secret. Those who criticized the Queen’ behavior were wrong;they did not know her real goals. She did not surrender; she only pretended to surrender.

The book of Judith also defends the Queen from her critics, amongthem Josephus, about her sharing of power and early retirement. Thebook presents as an act of virtue and restraint a decision that inJosephus’ words was made by the Queen only under the pressure ofher ambitious son Aristobulos, “not knowing what to do consistent toher dignity” (AJ XIII 417). But of course the book of Judith could notknow what Josephus more than one century later knew too well, that is,that the unsolved conflicts between her two sons would led to catastrophe and the end of the Hasmonean State:

She valued the present more than the future… she left the kingdom without any to guide it. And even after her death she caused the palace to befilled with misfortunes and disturbances which arose from the publicmeasures taken during her lifetime (AJ XIII 430).



68 G. Boccaccini

The book of Judith mentions specifically the death of Judith and herfuneral arrangements: “Before she died she distributed her property toall those who were next of kin to her husband Manasseh, and to herown nearest kindred” (Jud 16:24), and praises the successful ending ofher kingdom: “No one ever again spread terror among the Israelitesduring the lifetime of Judith” (Jud 16:25a). This is exactly whatJosephus says in his final eulogy of the Queen: “She kept the Israelitesin peace” (AJ XIII 432). It seems therefore likely to infer that the book ofJudith was written after the death of the Queen. It must not have happened much later however, since the text is vague and incorrect aboutthe future. Contrary to the wishful ending, Israel would not remain safefrom foreign intervention “for a long time after her death.” The struggle between Hyrcanus II and Aristobulos soon became an internationalaffair, involving the Nabateans and the Romans. Only a few years laterin 63 BCE Judea fell into the hand of the Romans.

But this does not seem to concern the author of the book. What certainly ought to have been then a matter of concern, was the fact that theArmenian King Tigranes, although defeated by Lucullus in the battle ofTigranocerta in the Fall 69 BCE, was still around as the leader of a powerful country and the commander in chief of a powerful army, until hissubmission to Pompey in 66, and even afterward as an ally of the Romans. Fifty years after the beginning of the Maccabean revolt, 1 Maccabees had no problem naming king Antiochus Epiphanes, to whom thebook of Daniel written when the king was still alive could only symbolically allude. Likewise, the author of the book of Judith deemed wiser notto mention Tigranes directly but to disguise the story as a narrative aboutthe ancient (and now harmless) villain “Nebuchadnezzar.”

Having lost (almost immediately) its original purpose with the endof the Hasmonean rule, the novel lost its patrons too. In their rejectionof anything that was produced by the Hasmoneans, the Qumran community ignored the document and so did the Rabbis who would exaltQueen Salome Alexandra as a friend of the Pharisees but could certainly not be attracted by the Hasmonean ideology of the book of Judithand certainly were not interested in recording anything that couldmake her kingdom something less than a perfect time of “peace andprosperity.” Even the Hasmonean Josephus would give the book nocredibility as a historical source and no relevance as the eulogy of aQueen he largely blamed for the fall of the Hasmonean kingdom. Thebook of Judith survived as one of the many ancient stories of sufferingand deliverance, popular especially in the Greek diaspora, togetherwith Tobit, Esther, or 3 Maccabees, and as such was inherited by Christians (including the Armenians). Separated from its original context,




the novel took a life of its own, and what a glorious life it was! FromDonatello, Botticelli and Caravaggio to Mozart and Klimt, Judith wascelebrated in European art and music as a champion of courage anddefiance.19

The book of Judith was born as an historical account in disguise, asort of funerary eulogy (and apology) of Queen Alexandra celebratingher “victory” over the Armenian king Tigranes the Great. It was handled down to future generations as a well crafted work of fiction thatstill puzzles and fascinates its readers more than two millennia after itscomposition. It now returns to us as an unexpected, yet powerful pieceof historical evidence of the forgotten encounter between Armeniansand Jews in antiquity.

Bibliography

ARMEN, Herant K., Tigran the Great, Detroit 1940.ENSLIN, Morton S. / ZEITLIN, Solomon, The Book of Judith, Leiden 1972.ILAN, Tal, Integrating Jewish Women into Second Temple History, Tübingen

1999.ILAN, Tal, Silencing the Queen: The Literary Histories of Shelamzion and Other

Jewish Women, Tübingen 2006.MANANDYAN, Hakob, Tigran B. yev Hrome, Yerevan 1940.METZGER, Bruce M., An Introduction to the Apocrypha, New York 1957.MOORE, Carey A., Judith, Garden City 1985.NEUSNER, Jacob, Armenian Jewry before 300, in: A History of the Jews in Baby

lonia, Leiden 1965 1970, 2. volume.OTZEN, Benedikt, Tobit and Judith, Sheffield 2002.ROCCA, Samuele, The Book of Judith and Queen Sholomzion and King Tigranes

of Armenia: A Sadducee Appraisal: Materia giudaica 10.1 (2005) 85 98.SARGSYAN, Gagik Kh. (ed.), Movses Khorenatsi: History of Armenia. Annotated

translation and commentary by Stepan Malkhasyants, Yerevan 1997.SCHÜRER, Emil / VERMES, Geza, Alexandra, in: The History of the Jewish People

in the Age of Jesus Christ, Edinburgh 1973 1987, 1: 229 232.STOCKER, Margarita, Judith, Sexual Warrior: Women and Power in Western

Culture, New Haven 1998.WILLS, Lawrence M., The Jewish Novel in the Ancient World, Ithaca 1995.ZIRNDORF, Henry, Some Jewish Women, Philadelphia 1892.

19 STOCKER, Judith.



Documents

A Pious Seductress (Studies in the Book of Judith) || Tigranes the Great as “Nebuchadnezzar” in the Book of Judith