Geoffrey D. Miller, «Canonicity and Gender Roles: Tobit and Judith as Test Cases», Vol. 97 (2016) 199-221
Clues from rabbinic literature suggest that several factors were at play in establishing the early Jewish canon, including the dating, theology, and language of disputed texts. Another vital yet overlooked criterion is adherence to patriarchy, and a careful analysis of the Books of Judith and Tobit illustrates how these texts failed to meet rabbinic standards for gender roles. Most notably, the countercultural figures of Judith and Anna would have scandalized the rabbis by their encroachment on traditionally male spheres of activity, their freedom of movement inside and outside the home, and their ability to chastise male characters without repercussions.
CANoNICITY ANd GeNder roLeS 207
the bride, including the drafting of marriage contracts by the husband-
to-be rather than her father 23. However, to insist that a second-century
work reflects a first-century practice is anachronistic 24, and to dismiss
an otherwise theologically sound book on a technicality seems foolish.
Furthermore, orlinsky and zeitlin both cite Šabb.14b in support of
their claims, but the same tractate shows a division among the schools
of Shammai and Hillel on marital customs (Šabb. 20b). Again, this
aspect of the story may have bothered some rabbis, but it would not
have warranted its exclusion from the canon.
If anything, the theological tenor of the books of Judith and Tobit
is strong, especially in comparison to esther 25. Both have a more pro-
nounced religious focus than esther or Song of Songs, and apart from
the very minor items listed above, none threatens the theological
status quo. By contrast, esther tacitly condones intermarriage with
Gentiles, which is repeatedly denounced in post-exilic literature (e.g.
ezra 9–10; Neh 13,23-30), although this aspect of the story is never
discussed by the rabbis. Admittedly, Judith pushes the boundaries
of Israel’s cultural norms, but the narrative is careful to show that
Judith neither marries Holofernes nor engages in sexual intercourse
with him. Tobit dutifully reiterates the Pentateuchal prohibition
against exogamy (e.g. Tob 1,9; 4,12-13), yet somehow Tobit and
Judith were denied admittance into the canon while esther was
allowed in. Curiously, rabbinic debates over esther seem more
concerned about adding yet another feast to the calendar (Purim) than
the potential scandal caused by exogamous marriage. even though the-
ological consistency was very important to the rabbis when evaluating
disputed texts, it was not their driving concern.
II. rabbinic Views on Women
The criteria identified by modern scholars are useful for recon-
structing the canonization process in antiquity but fail to paint the en-
tire picture. A fuller portrait would include an examination of rabbinic
attitudes toward women and their proper role in society, for many of
23
So orLINSKY, “The Canonization of the Bible”, 284; S. zeITLIN, The Rise
and Fall of the Judean State (Philadelphia, PA 1962) I, 417.
24
Moore, Tobit, 51.
25
Moore, “Why Wasn’t the Book of Judith Included in the Hebrew Bible?”
64; r. LITTMAN, Tobit. The Book of Tobit in Codex Sinaiticus (Septuagint Com-
mentary Series; Leiden 2008) xxvi.