Cornelius a Lapide
Table of Contents
Introduction
This book does not exist in the Canon of Sacred Scripture among the Hebrews, but it does among Christians. The First Council of Nicaea counts it among the Canonical books of Sacred Scripture, as St. Jerome reports in his prologue. The Third Council of Carthage did the same, chapter XLVII, as did the Council of Florence and the Council of Trent. See Bellarmine, book I, On the Word of God, chapter XII. Hence Josephus, being a Hebrew, does not mention Judith, just as he does not mention Tobit. It exists in Greek as well as in Latin. Whether the Greek text here, as in Tobit, is from the translation of the Seventy Interpreters is debated. Certainly St. Jerome mentions neither his nor their work. It seems to have been originally written in the Chaldean language, just as the book of Tobit. Hence St. Jerome in his prologue asserts that he translated it from the Chaldean, and adds: "Receive Judith the widow, an example of chastity, and with triumphal praise declare her with perpetual acclamations. For He gave her as a model not only for women but also for men, and He who is the rewarder of her chastity bestowed upon her such virtue that she conquered the one unconquered by all men, and overcame the one who was insuperable." The author seems to have been Joachim the High Priest, a contemporary of Judith, and indeed her director, as the Hebrews think, and from them Sixtus of Siena, book VIII, Heresy XI, although nothing certain can be asserted on this matter, as St. Isidore says, book VI of Origins, chapter II.
The argument of the book is the victory of Judith over Holofernes and the Assyrians, through which is allegorically represented the victory of the Blessed Virgin over the devil, says our Canisius from Fulbert of Chartres, book I of Martialis, chapter II; tropologically, the triumph of the faithful soul over the flesh and vices, says Rabanus. Finally, the book has three parts. The first describes the danger of the Jews from chapter I to VIII; the second, their liberation through Judith from chapter VIII to chapter XV, verse 9; the third, what followed afterwards from chapter XV to the end.
You will ask when the history of Judith took place. Many think it probable that it occurred before the Babylonian captivity, under Manasseh king of Judah: namely after Manasseh with his Jews was released from Babylonian imprisonment and returned to Jerusalem and his kingdom; for at that time among the Medes the most powerful was Dejoces, who built Ecbatana. Nineveh had not yet been destroyed, nor had Jerusalem; and from the time of Manasseh there was perpetual peace for the Jews, until the end of the reign of Josiah. So think Bellarmine at the cited place, Serarius, Salianus, Genebrardus, Pererius on chapter I of Daniel. Cano, book XI On the Places, chapter VI, Christopher a Castro on Hosea II, verse 20. Therefore the Nebuchadnezzar here who sent Holofernes whom Judith killed, was a relative, or son, as Serarius holds, or son-in-law of Esarhaddon son of Sennacherib, who accordingly succeeded Esarhaddon in the kingdom of Nineveh; or he was certainly Merodach Baladan king of Babylon, say Bellarmine and Salianus, who having conquered Esarhaddon reigned in Nineveh, and contending with Arphaxad, that is Dejoces king of the Medes, overcame him, and thence aspiring to world monarchy, sent Holofernes to subjugate the other nations to himself.
Others on the contrary think that the history of Judith took place after the return of the Jews from the Babylonian captivity, and they bring many strong arguments for this view: first, because in this history it is asserted that the High Priest at that time was Joachim; but no one by this name was High Priest except Joachim son of Jesus son of Josedec, after the return from Babylon; for Jesus was High Priest under Cyrus, Cambyses and Darius, Joachim under Xerxes, Eliashib under Artaxerxes, as is clear from Nehemiah XIII, verses 4, 6, 7, and Sirach XLI, 14, joined with Haggai 1, 1 and following, and from Josephus, book X of Antiquities, chapter XI, where from public records he composed a catalog of the High Priests.
You will object: in the fourth book of Kings, chapter XVIII, verse 17, and in Isaiah XXII, in the time of King Hezekiah, Eliakim (who is the same as Joachim) son of Hilkiah is named as prefect of the house, and is numbered among the chief priests. I reply: this Eliakim was not the High Priest, nor was Hilkiah his father; but he was one of the chief priests, or of the princes of the priests, to whom the care of the temple and its gates was committed, as is clear from Scripture and from Josephus, from whom it is evident that only one Hilkiah was High Priest, not in the time of Hezekiah, but much later in the time of Josiah, of whom in IV Kings XXIII, 4.
Second, because with the times of Xerxes the things that are said in chapter V about the recent return of the Jews from captivity fit perfectly. Likewise, that in chapter VI, the Jews are not said to have kings, but leaders of the people Ozias and Charmi; for if these things had happened under Manasseh, certainly Judith would have discussed this deed of hers with King Manasseh, not with the High Priest Joachim, Ozias and Charmi, nor would Joachim have sent soldiers to occupy the mountain passes, but Manasseh would have. Again, under Manasseh, Bethulia was deserted by the Israelites who had been carried off to Assyria, and was inhabited by Cutheans. Moreover, with the age of Xerxes agrees what is said in chapter V, verse 27, that the nobles of Holofernes say of the sons of Israel that they are now unarmed, unwarlike, and inexperienced in war, and therefore defend themselves with mountains and precipices, as is said in chapter VII, 8, and what is added in the last chapter about the long peace that followed this victory of Judith. So think Sanchez here, Torniellus and Ribera on chapter II of Nahum, Lyranus, Dionysius, Hugo here, indeed St. Augustine, book XVIII of The City of God, chapter XXVI, Eusebius in his Chronicle at the year of the world 4674, Bede, On the Six Ages of the World, Berosus Annianus, and the Hebrews generally, as the Alexandrian Chronicle reports, likewise Suidas under the word Holofernes, and Africanus in Suidas. 5, and chapter VIII, verse 1, or chapter IX, verse 2.
Finally, this opinion is almost proven by what is said in chapter V, 22 and following, that under this time Jerusalem was deserted, and the temple was overthrown and leveled to the ground. For this did not happen under Manasseh, but under Zedekiah in the Babylonian captivity.
From what has been said, it is clear that the Nebuchadnezzar who sent Holofernes was not Darius Hystaspes, as Gerard Mercator holds in his chronology; nor Artaxerxes Ochus, as Severus Sulpitius holds; nor Cambyses son of Cyrus, who impeded the construction of the temple begun under Cyrus, I Esdras IV, because the Jews had killed his commander Holofernes, says Berosus Annianus, and St. Augustine hints at this, book XVIII of The City of God, XXVI, and Eusebius: for Cambyses reigned only seven years, but Nebuchadnezzar sent Holofernes in the twelfth year of his reign. Rather he was either Xerxes, as Sanchez thinks, who was called Nebuchadnezzar on account of a similar pride and arrogance: hence the Jews sang to Judith his conqueror, chapter XVI, 12: "The Persians shuddered at her constancy, and the Medes at her boldness." Or rather he was a prefect among the princes of Xerxes, who governed Nineveh in his stead, as I said. For he seems to have been Babylonian by origin; for this is indicated by his name Nebuchadnezzar, which is Babylonian. Arphaxad, however, was a prefect, or king of Media tributary to Xerxes; but when Xerxes was defeated by the Greeks, both rebelled against Xerxes, and each made himself absolute king of his province. For in the same way Artabanus rebelled against the same Xerxes, and perhaps he himself is Arphaxad. Hear Justin, book III at the beginning: "Xerxes, he says, King of the Persians, formerly the terror of nations, having waged war unsuccessfully in Greece, began to be despised even by his own people. Indeed Artabanus his prefect, as the king's majesty declined daily, was led to hope for the kingdom."
In a similar way Arbaces, appointed by Sardanapalus as prefect of Media, rebelled against that effeminate man, saying he could not obey one who preferred to be a woman rather than a man: therefore he besieged him and forced him to his own self-immolation, as I said above.
Hence there is a conjecture that the reason why Xerxes was so benevolent toward the Jews, as Josephus writes, book XI, chapter V, so much so that his son Artaxerxes in the seventh year of his reign sent Esdras, and in the twentieth year Nehemiah, to restore Jerusalem with the most generous and ample authority; the reason, I say, for this benevolence was that Xerxes saw that this Nebuchadnezzar, his enemy and rival for empire, had recently been overthrown by the Jews.
You will object: In the time of Xerxes, Nineveh was desolated: for it had already been destroyed by the Great Nebuchadnezzar in the fifth year after the destruction of Jerusalem, as I said on the last chapter of Tobit. I reply that Nineveh was rebuilt shortly after its destruction; because it was a most ancient and most noble city, and this was by permission of the kings of Babylon or Persia, as it is established from history concerning Babylon, Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, etc. Other objections I will resolve in chapter IV, verse
Furthermore, Judith was of the tribe of Simeon, as she herself asserts in chapter IX, verse 2; she dwelt in Bethulia, which is in the tribe of Zebulun; she lived 105 years, as is clear from the end of the book. She was a matron noble both in birth and beauty, a widow in status, flourishing in age, rich in resources, outstanding in piety, whose remarkable beauty vied with equal virtue, whom therefore God chose for this heroic deed and the liberation of Israel. Bellarmine thinks that when she killed Holofernes, she was 40 years old, Serarius 45, Torniellus 53, Gretserus 40, Salianus 33. Hear St. Jerome, epistle 10 to Furia: "We read of Judith the widow, worn out by fasting and made squalid by garments of mourning, who did not mourn a dead husband, but by the squalor of her body sought the coming of the Bridegroom. I see a hand armed with a sword, a bloodstained right hand; I recognize the head of Holofernes, brought back from the midst of the enemy. A woman conquers men, and chastity cuts off lust; and suddenly changing her garb, she returns to her victorious squalor, purer than all the adornments of the world."
Furthermore, the Fathers bestow outstanding praises on Judith. Clement of Alexandria calls her "consummate, or perfect among women," book IV of the Stromata, chapter VI. Origen, homily 9 on Judith: "Magnificent, and the noblest of all women." Ambrose, book III of On Duties, chapter XIII: "A wonderful woman." St. Fulgentius, epistle II, chapter XIV: he repeatedly calls her "a holy widow," "illustrious by birth, rich in resources, young in age, wonderful in appearance, a despiser of riches, rejecting delights, trampling the incentives of the flesh, and clothed with power from on high." St. Ambrose, book On Widows: "Holy Judith, strengthened by prolonged sorrows and daily fasting."
St. Augustine, sermon On the Seasons 228: "the most holy Judith, through whose prayers heaven was opened, who forged victorious weapons by the art of prayer." And below: "Behold, prayer preserved the chastity of a glorious woman." St. Chrysostom, homily 9 from various works: "the most holy Judith, who while she concealed her fasting with the joy of her countenance, carried off triumph and victory over the enemy." Tertullian, book On Monogamy, chapter XVII: "Nor Judith, he says, daughter of Meraris, nor so many other holy women."