IN QUEST OF THE HISTORICAL MORDECAI

by

DAVID J. A. CLINES

Sheffield

I

In the standard works, commentaries, encyclopaedias and monographs, wherever the historicity of the book of is dis- cussed, there is usually to be found some reference to the possible extra-biblical evidence for Mordecai. Here is an extract from a typical encyclopaedia article in The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible: .

Reference must be made to a single undated cuneiform document from the Persian period, found at Borsippa, which refers to a certain Marduka who was a finance officer of some sort in the Persian court at during the reign of . While a connection between such an individual and the Mordecai of the is in no sense established, the possibility of such a historical event as is related in Esther cannot be dismissed out of hand.' I

C. A. Moore, the author of the Anchor Bible commentary on Esther, is a little more positive about the implications of the reference to Marduka. This official, who "served as an accountant on an inspection tour from Susa", could be, he suggests, "the biblical Mordecai because, in all likelihood, Mordecai was an official of the king prior to his being invested in [Est.] 8:2 with the powers previously conferred on ". To Moore, "at first glance all of this seems rather persuasive, if not conclusive". While he is indeed careful to point out the uncertainties that surround the identification of Marduka with Mordecai, he nevertheless con- cludes that

1 B.T. Dahlberg, "Mordecai", The Interpreter's DictionaryD of the Bible 3 (Nashville, 1962), p. 437. 130

since the epigraphic evidence concerning Marduka certainly prevents us from categorically ruling out as pure fiction the Mordecai episodes in the Book of Esther, it is safest for us to conclude that the story of Mo[r]decai may very well have to it a kernel of truth.2 R. Gordis, more boldly, appears to have no reservations whatever about the identification of Mordecai with Marduka. For him, the attestation of the names Marduka and Mrdk3 is "the 4 strongest support thus far for the historical character of the book" .4 He writes: A Persian text dating from the last years of Darius I or the early years of Xerxes I mentions a government official in Susa named Marduka, who served as an inspector on an official tour... [T]he phrase yõšëb b'éšacar hammelekh, "sitting in the king's gate," which is applied to Mordecai repaetedly in the book, indicates his role as a judge or a minor official in the Persian court before his elevation to the viziership. The conclusion to be drawn is obvious: That there were two officials with the same name at the same time 5 in the same place is scarcely likely.5 From E. M. Yamauchi we even gain the impression that the identification of Marduka with Mordecai has now become the con- sensus scholarly view: Marduka is listed as a sipir ("an accountant") who makes an inspec- tion tour of Susa during the last years of Darius or early years of Xerxes. It is Ungnad's conviction that "it is improbable that there were two Mardukas serving as high officials in Susa. " He therefore concludes that this individual is none other than Esther's uncle. This 6 conclusion has been widely accepted.6

2 "Archaeology and the Book of Esther", BA 38 (1975), pp. 62-79 (74). 3 For details of the attestation of the Aramaic form of the name, see G. R. Driver, Aramaic Documentsof the Fifth Century B.C. (abridged and revised edn, Oxford, 1957), pp. 27-8, 56; for some Babylonian attestations, cf. G.G. Cameron, PersepolisTreasury Tablets (Chicago, 1948), p. 84. 4 MegillatEsther. The MasoreticText with Introduction,New Translationand Commen- tary (New York, 1974), p. 6. 5 R. Gordis, "Religion, Wisdom and History in the Book of Esther�A New Solution to an Ancient Crux", JBL 100 (1981), pp. 359-88 (384). The argument is exactly that of A. Ungnad (see nn. 11 and 20). Gordis had already put forward his view of "sitting in the gate" in his "Studies in the Esther Narrative", JBL 95 (1976), pp. 43-58 (47-8). 6 "The Archaeological Background of Esther", BibliothecaSacra 127 (1980), pp. 99-117 (107). In support of his last sentence he cites S. H. Horn (see next foot-