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.
206 GeoFFreY d. MILLer
nation after exile. In highlighting these themes, Judith and Tobit also
hark back to cherished texts from Israel’s past, both explicitly and
allusively. Judith cites or alludes to the Pentateuch multiple times (e.g.
Jdt 9,2 recalling the rape of dinah in Genesis 34, or Jdt 15,14 – 16,17
drawing on the song of Miriam from exod 15,20-21), and Tobit does
the same with the prophetic corpus (e.g. Tob 2,6 quoting Amos 8,10,
or Tob 14,4 referring to the prophecy of Nahum) 19. These books do
not promote new theological outlooks or conventions but remain
deeply rooted in what God has already revealed to Israel.
Nevertheless, a few minor details in these books may have posed a
problem for the rabbis theologically, even if none would justify the ex-
clusion of these texts from the canon. Some scholars draw attention to
the conversion of Achior in the Book of Judith as an impediment to its
canonicity. Achior is an Ammonite, whom deut 23,4 prohibits from en-
tering the Israelite community, and the Jews of Bethulia also deviate
from protocol by neglecting to baptize Achior by immersion and
to offer a sacrifice at the temple on his behalf 20. This procedure was
supposedly practiced in rabbinic Judaism beginning in the second cen-
tury Ce, but as Moore points out, “there are no second temple texts at-
testing to immersion and sacrifice as required rituals of conversion” 21.
Achior’s ethnicity should not be an obstacle either, for the Moabite
ruth is one of Israel’s celebrated heroes, and she converted to Judaism
with no difficulty and with no ritualized ceremony, even though the
same deuteronomic text bars Moabites from joining the community 22.
regarding the Book of Tobit, some scholars call attention to the
marriage contract of Tobiah and Sarah in chap. 7. According to orlin-
sky and zeitlin, the kethubah should be drawn up by the groom rather
than the father-in-law, but the Book of Tobit shows the reverse. raguel
writes the document instead of Tobiah, which reflects Jewish practice
prior to the first century BCe. At that time, Simon ben Shetah revised
several marital customs in order to grant greater legal protection for
19
For a fuller list of intertextual parallels, see on Judith: A. duBArLe, Judith.
Formes et sens des diverses traditions. I. Études (AnBib 24A; rome 1966) 137-
164. on Tobit, see the many essays in Intertextual Studies in Ben Sira and Tobit.
essays in Honor of Alexander A. di Lella, o.F.M. (eds. J. CorLeY – V. SKeMP)
(CBQMS 38; Washington, dC 2005).
20
H. orLINSKY, “Canonization of the Bible and the exclusion of the Apo-
crypha”, Essays in Biblical Culture and Bible Translation (New York 1974) 281;
S. CoHeN, From the Maccabees to the Mishnah (Louisville, KY 22006) 44.
21
Moore, “Why Wasn’t the Book of Judith Included in the Hebrew Bible?”, 64.
22
CrAVeN, Artistry and Faith in the Book of Judith, 117.