Angela Hunt. Judah’s Wife. Bethany House, 2018. See here to buy the book.
Judah’s Wife is Book 2 of Angela Hunt’s The Silent Years
series, which is about the years between the events of the Old
Testament and the events of the New Testament. Whereas Book 1 was about
Cleopatra, Book 2 is about the Maccabean revolt. The “Judah” of the
title is Judah the Maccabee, who led the revolt against the Seleucid
occupiers of Jerusalem.
Here are some thoughts:
A. Leah in the book is the wife of Judah. For a long time, she is
upset with Judah’s participation in the war. She grew up under an
abusive father, so she detested violence. She comes to embrace that
Judah is fighting for God and the people of Israel, but she had some
initial concerns that seemed to be legitimate yet ultimately
unaddressed: Judah’s gratuitous slaughter of people and the exultation
that he had in warfare.
B. The book itself was rather conflicted in how it handled the
Maccabees’ violence. On the one hand, it sought to downplay it or to
justify it. In I Maccabees 2:24, the pious priest Mattathias, filled
with zeal for God, kills a Jew who is about to sacrifice on a pagan
altar. In Hunt’s retelling, that was an accident. And, when Judah is
killing Hellenes, he says that he is doing so in self-defense. On the
other hand, there are times when the book is honest about the religious
motivations for the Maccabees’ violence.
C. The book could have been clearer in the beginning about who the
Hasidim were. At the beginning, it seemed to imply that the Hasidim
were those devoted to the Law of Moses, which would presumably include
the Maccabees. Later, the Hasidim are portrayed as a specific religious
group of people, who are distinct from the Maccabees and even disagree
with Hasmonean policy. The portrayal of them as a specific group is
more consistent with I Maccabees.
D. The Hasidim disagree with Judah’s attempt to form an alliance
with the Romans, believing that he should trust in God alone. As far as
I can recall, that is not a theme in I-II Maccabees. But it did
enhance the book. The Hebrew Bible itself, particularly in the Book of
Isaiah, addresses the dilemma of trusting God for security as opposed to
making alliances, so it would not be surprising if Judah the Maccabee
wrestled with this issue. Moreover, this theme added a foreboding
element to the book, as the Romans would be the future occupiers of
Israel. It reminded me of the end of Star Wars: The Phantom Menace: this looks like a reasonable policy, but are we sure this will end up well?
E. The portrayal of Leah’s father was somewhat contradictory, or so
it seemed. On the one hand, at the beginning of the book, he was
portrayed as a devout Jew who attended synagogue and observed the
Sabbath. On the other hand, he was depicted as a Hellene, one who
admired the Greeks and sought to curry their favor. Maybe his
religiosity at the beginning was his way of gaining influence with his
fellow Jews.
F. Some issues were resolved, and some were not. One woman gained a
sense of her purpose. The other struggled to believe in God—-even
though she despised the Hellenes—-and, from my recollection, her faith
struggle was never resolved.
G. Overall, the Hellenes were depicted negatively. The book may
have been better had it explored their position a little more. Some
scholars have speculated that some of the Hellenes actually sought to
reconcile Hellenistic culture with their understanding of biblical
religion (i.e., follow Abraham rather than the Torah, which came later,
or treat Zeus as another manifestation of the one true God). There was
one positive Gentile character, who had a wry admiration for the Jews.
He was refreshing, yet the book made somewhat of a stretch when it
depicted him being willing to stick his neck out for the Jews, or to
take risks with his own life on their behalf.
H. Related to (G.), the book would have been better had it included
the story of II Maccabees 12:40-45, in which Jewish soldiers fighting on
the side of the Maccabees are carrying idols with them. Judah suspects
that this is the reason that they fell in battle, and he prays for God
to forgive them so they can enter a good afterlife. This raises
profound theological issues, and it highlights the complex motives of
people involved in the conflict.
I. The book ended on a sad, yet hopeful, note. The Books of
Maccabees themselves are sad, because the Maccabean protagonists die
violently. Hunt, to her credit, does not shy away from that. Whereas
the end of the Cleopatra novel had a Breaking Bad series finale feel, the end of Judah’s Wife had an ending of Braveheart feel.
J. Hunt does not include the Hanukkah tradition about the lights
that burned for eight nights because it is unhistorical. At the same
time, she seems to presume that I Maccabees is more historical than II
Maccabees, yet she uses stories from II Maccabees. The story of
Antiochus on his deathbed being willing to become a Jew (II Maccabees
9:17) is seen by many scholars as wishful thinking on the part of the
author, and its historicity is doubted because there are different
stories in I-II Maccabees about how Antiochus died (I Maccabees 1:8-16;
II Maccabees 1:13-16; 9:5-27); then there is Daniel 11:45, which, if one
accepts that is about Antiochus, presents another scenario of his
death. To her credit, Hunt admitted that she sometimes drew from
unhistorical stories to enhance the book.
K. Hunt states in the appendix that I-II Maccabees is non-canonical
and uninspired. She would have done better to have noted that there are
Christian communities that deem the books to be canonical.
Overall, the book is well-written. The search for purpose was an
inspiring aspect of this book, as was the portrayal of Judah as a
reluctant hero who boldly stepped forward for his people.
I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher. My review is honest.