Chapter One

The piety of Tobit and the trials sent upon him

1–9. Introduction to the narrative of the book about Tobit: the genealogy of Tobit, the faithfulness of this Israelite to the one lawful Jerusalem worship during the universal religious separation and fall of the ten Israelite tribes from the house of David. 10–14. The piety and charity of Tobit in Assyrian captivity under the favor of King Shalmaneser (Enemsesar). 15–20. Flight and misfortunes of Tobit under the cruel Sennacherib. 21–22. Return of Tobit to Nineveh under Esarhaddon (Sacherdanus).

Tobit 1:1. A record of Tobit, son of Tobiel, son of Ananiel, son of Aduel, son of Gabel, of the tribe of Asiel, of the tribe of Naphtali, Tobit 1:2. who in the days of the Assyrian King Shalmaneser was taken captive from Thisbe, which is on the right side of the Kedis of Naphtali, in Galilee, above Asher. I, Tobit, walked all the days of my life in the paths of truth and righteousness Tobit 1:3. and did much charity to my brothers and to my people, who came with me into the land of Assyria, to Nineveh. 1–3. Superscription of the book, indicating its principal subject. The name “Tobit,” without doubt, identical in origin and meaning with the name “Tobias,” Hebrew Tobiyahu, Tobiya (2 Chr 17:8; Neh 4:3; Zech 6:10), from the Hebrew means: “the goodness of Jehovah,” “Jehovah is good,” and the like; in its present form represents a Hellenized form of the Hebrew name (similar to Elisabet in Hebrew Elisheva). The long genealogy of Tobit in ascending line may indicate the nobility of the family of Tobit in the tribe of Naphtali (in the Vulgate the genealogy of Tobit is omitted). The expression “record of the words” of Tobit, Slavonic “book of words” of T., LXX βίβλος λόγων Τωβίτ, in modern times is usually understood in the sense of genitive object “a narrative about Tobit,” but this expression is entirely admissible also in the sense of genitive subject: “a narrative by Tobit,” a written work of T.: the evidence for the latter understanding is provided both by the consistently maintained form of the narrative in the first person to III 6 verse, and by the direct testimony of the book that Tobit and Tobias, according to the command of the Angel, not only orally praised God for all his blessings but also were to write down everything that happened (LXX: γράψατε, Vulg. scribite XII:20 cf. verse and Tob 13:1), which, without doubt, was accomplished by them, so that to Tobit and Tobias might belong, at least, some of the initial records that formed the basis of the content of the book (cf. in Prof. Drozdov, pp. 250–257). The place of Tobit’s former residence in Palestine is determined by the expression “from Thisbe, which is on the right side of the Kedis of Naphtali in Galilee above Asher” (verse 2). The Thisbe mentioned here, or, according to the Sinaiticus manuscript of the LXX, Thibe in the tribe of Naphtali (in the Vulgate the name Thisbe is omitted), consequently, in the north of Palestine—the later Galilee and to the west of the Jordan should be distinguished from Tishbe, the birthplace of the prophet Elijah (1 Kgs 17:1)—a city on the eastern side of the Jordan in Gilead (cf. Onomast, 517): perhaps precisely to prevent confusion between these two cities or in view of the obscurity of that Thisbe in which Tobit lived before his deportation to captivity, the location of the latter city is determined (verse 2) very thoroughly: it lay on the right side, i.e., to the south (in determining the position of lands and places the Hebrews took the east as their starting point, so that the eastern side was considered the front, the western the back, the southern the right, and the northern the left), from the Kedis of Naphtali in Galilee above Asher, έκ δεξιών Κυδίων (Κοδίως) τής Νεφθαλείμ έν τη Γαλιλαία υπεράνω Ασήρ. Under the name Kedis here is understood the city, which in the Hebrew text of the Bible is called Qedesch, in the LXX Ka δής, or Κέδες, in Josephus Κεδέση, Κέδαδα, Κύδισα), namely, as distinct from cities of this name in the tribe of Judah (Josh 15:23) and Issachar (1 Chr 6:72), here Kedis or Kedesh is called a Galilean city belonging to the tribe of Naphtali. It was one of the chief and most ancient cities of northern Palestine or Galilee: is mentioned already in the Tel-Amarna letters and Egyptian inscriptions: was the capital of one of the Canaanite kings defeated by Joshua (Josh 12:22), then became a lot of Naphtali (Josh 19:37), was given to the Levites (1 Chr 6:72) and became a city of refuge for involuntary manslayers (Josh 20:7: in both of these places it is named “Kedesh in Galilee”), was the birthplace of Barak (Judg 4:6); was laid waste along with other adjoining cities under the Israeli king Pekah by Tiglath-Pileser, king of Assyria (2 Kgs 15:29), but afterward was settled after the captivity and is mentioned in the era of the Maccabees (1 Macc 11:63). According to Josephus, K. lies in Upper Galilee (northern or heathen Galilee, Isa 9:1; 1 Macc 5:15), between the region of Tyre and Galilee (Antiquities V, 1, 24, XVIII, 5, 6), representing a boundary fortress of the Tyrians (Jewish War, IV, 2, 3). See Onomast, 583; in Prof. Drozdov, pp. 417–418; Commented Bible, vol. II, pp. 327 and 516. Now at the place of Kedesh, to the northwest of Lake Semakhonitensis or Lake Huleh—the ancient Lake Merom—there is a small village Kades with many ancient sarcophagi. Robinson, Palast. III, 622. Buhl, Geogr. d. alt. Palast., 8, 235. Under Asher (verse 2) commentators usually understand the city of Hazor, taken by Joshua upon the death of its king Jabin (Josh 11:1 ff. Book Judg 4:2), then belonging to the tribe of Naphtali (Josh. XIX:36–37); it was fortified by Solomon 1 Kgs 9:15, afterward together with Kedesh was taken by Tiglath-Pileser (2 Kgs 15:29). According to Josephus (Antiquities V, 5, 1), it lay on Lake Semakhonitensis (Merom), now—the hill Tell-el-Harawi with remains of ancient structures. See Onomast. 167; Prof. Olesnitsky, Holy Land, vol. II, p. 479; Prof. Drozdov, pp. 419–421; Commented Bible, vol. II, p. 324. Some commentators, on the basis of the Vulgate reading: post viam, quae ducit ad occidenten (in the Sinaiticus Codex this corresponds to: οπίσω δυσμών ηλίου, by analogy with Deut 11:30), not unreasonably perceive here a determination of the location of Thisbe near a road, or on the west of the road, running through Upper Galilee in a direction from east to west, i.e., from the Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea (one such road ran from Akko in a northern direction through the mountains of Naphtali to Caesarea Philippi, another ran near Kedesh, Hazor, and Thisbe). See in Prof. Drozdov, p. 424. The captivity of Tobit with his countrymen is attributed in the Book of Tobit to the Assyrian king Shalmaneser (according to the texts of LXX and Slavic Russian) or Shalmaneser (according to the Vulgate, Chaldean, Hebrew Munster): the latter fully agrees with the testimony of 2 Kgs 17:3-6 about the destruction of the Kingdom of Israel and the captivity of its inhabitants by Shalmaneser (ordinarily called Shalmaneser IV), so that the carrying away of Tobit into captivity falls on the time of the complete destruction of Samaria and the Kingdom of Israel under its last king Hoshea, or in the 6th year of the reign of Hezekiah. Both 4 Kings and the Book of Tobit here literally diverge from the testimony of Assyrian records, according to which the final conquest of Samaria and the resettlement of the Israelites in Assyria was accomplished not by Shalmaneser but by Sargon, but this apparent contradiction is easily resolved partly by the consideration that one of these kings—namely Sargon—merely completed what was begun by the other—Shalmaneser—in the siege of Samaria and the captivity of the Israelites, and partly—by the possibility that these two names belong to one and the same Assyrian king (see in Prof. Drozdov, pp. 432–440; cf. Commented Bible, vol. II, p. 519). The testimony in question of the Book of Tobit likewise does not contradict the testimony of 2 Kgs 15:29, according to which the predecessor of Shalmaneser IV—Tiglath-Pileser III under the Israeli king Pekah and Ahaz, among other things, “took Hazor, and Gilead, and all Galilee, the whole land of Naphtali, and carried them away to Assyria,” since in this case there might have been a partial deportation of the inhabitants from the territory of the tribe of Naphtali. The place of residence of Tobit and some of his countrymen in Assyria was, according to the Book of Tobit, Nineveh (Tob 1:3). This testimony, contrary to the opinion of some researchers of the Book of Tobit, is easily compatible with the testimony of 2 Kgs 17:6 about the territory of the settlement of the Israelites in Assyrian captivity,—and this all the more because, according to the Book of Tobit, as according to 4 Kings, the Israeli settlers were also in the cities of Media: Rages or Rages (Tob 5:1) and Ecbatana (Tob 3:7). 2b-3 (LXX verse 3). The distinctive property and basic virtue of Tobit was his lifelong faithfulness to the ways of truth, αληθείας, i.e., the faith and worship of the fathers, and righteousness, δικαιοσύνης—active love and charity toward poor countrymen, for which in captivity there were very many occasions (cf. verse 17).

Tobit 1:4. When I lived in my country, in the land of Israel, being yet a youth, then all the tribe of Naphtali, my father, was in rebellion from the house of Jerusalem, which was chosen from all the tribes of Israel, that they might offer sacrifices there, where the temple of the dwelling of the Most High is sanctified and firmly established for all generations. Tobit 1:5. As all the rebelling tribes were making sacrifice to Baal, and the calf, so also the house of my father Naphtali. Tobit 1:6. But I alone often went to Jerusalem on the feasts, as prescribed to all Israel by an everlasting ordinance, with the first fruits and tithes of the produce of the earth and the first fruits of the fleece of sheep, Tobit 1:7. and I gave these to the priests, sons of Aaron, for the altar: a tithe of all the fruits I gave to the sons of the Levites serving in Jerusalem; a different tithe I sold, and each year I went and expended it in Jerusalem; Tobit 1:8. and a third I gave to those to whom it was due, as Deborah, the mother of my father, commanded me when I was left an orphan after my father. 4–8. The faithfulness of Tobit to the pure faith of the fathers and the lawfully ordained worship was expressed in his youth, while he was in his native land, in the fact that, in the midst of the universal dominance in the Israeli kingdom of the worship of the calves introduced by Jeroboam I (verse 5, see 1 Kgs 12:19, see Commented Bible, vol. II), and amid the universal turning away of the Israelites from Jerusalem, as a religious-political center,—Tobit alone, with but few others, constantly visited the Jerusalem temple, zealously performing there the sacrifices and theocratic offerings established by the law (verses 4, 6–8, cf. Exod 22:29; Deut 16:16-17). The possibility for Tobit to make these pilgrimage journeys in the last days of the existence of the Israeli kingdom is confirmed by the report of 2 Chr 30 chapter, that at the call of the Judean king Hezekiah to celebrate the Passover in Jerusalem, some inhabitants of the Israeli kingdom came there, to which the last king of Israel Hoshea made no opposition (2 Kgs 17:1-2, see Commented Bible, vol. II, cf. in Prof. Drozdov, pp. 430–431). In distinction from the texts of the LXX and others, the Vulgate relates about Tobit in the third person, not in the first, as the other texts. In the accepted Greek, Slavic-Russian texts there is a twofold historical-archaeological inaccuracy in verses 5–8. In the Israeli kingdom they offered sacrifices, according to verse 5, τή Βαάλ τή δαμάλει, Slavonic: to the Baal calf, Russian synodal: to Baal, the calf. But nowhere in the Bible is mention made of the worship of Baal-calf, and such a worship never existed among them: it is evident that two different religious cults have been confused into one: the worship of the golden calves introduced by Jeroboam I (1 Kgs 12:28 ff.), and the worship of Baal, which developed in the Israeli kingdom from the time of Ahab (1 Kgs 16:31 ff., see Commented Bible, vol. II). In reality here, in Tobit 1:5, the state (since the time of Jeroboam!) worship of the Israeli kingdom is meant—the worship of the calves; in the Sinaiticus Codex of the LXX in verse 5 stands the correct expression: τώ μόσχώ Chaldean as calves, in the Vulgate with explanatory expansion: ad vitulos aureos, quos Ieroboam fecerat, rex Israel. Likewise, the accepted text of the LXX, Slavic-Russian in verses 6, 8 poorly transmits the prescriptions of the law, which offerings Tobit performed in Jerusalem. Thus here, in verse 6, completely different theocratic duties are incorrectly combined into one: 1) a tithe of cattle, δεκάται τών κτηνών (Lev 27:32-33 and 2) first fruits of the fleece of sheep, πρωτοκουραί τών προβάτων (Deut 18:4). In verse 7 about the so-called second tithe (τήν δευτέραν δεκάτην) in the accepted Greek text it is said indefinitely (it was brought 4 times in the course of a sabbatical cycle). In verse 8 the so-called tithe of the poor, given to the poor in every third year instead of the second tithe, is transformed, according to the accepted text of the LXX, Slavic-Russian, into a third tithe, which the Hebrews did not have at all (probably, the giving of the tithe of the poor in the 3rd year gave occasion to call it a third tithe), and its purpose is expressed generally: δίδουν, οίς καθήκει, Slavonic: I gave to those to whom it belonged, Russian: “I gave to those to whom it was due, as Deborah commanded me.” All these inaccuracies in the designation of the theocratic offerings established by law and given by Tobit are avoided by the text of the Sinaiticus manuscript, and the Vulgate entirely omits all these details of a ritual nature (Jerome limits himself only to the general remark: haec et his similia), as well as the mention found in the other texts of Tobit’s pious grandmother Deborah (verse 8).

Tobit 1:9. When I came of age, I took for a wife Anna from our paternal lineage and had a son Tobias. Tobit 1:10. When I was taken captive to Nineveh, all my brothers and kinfolk ate from the food of the gentiles, Tobit 1:11. but I kept my soul pure and did not eat, Tobit 1:12. for I remembered God with all my soul. 9–12. The marriage of Tobit with Anna and the birth of a son occurred, it seems, already in Assyrian captivity (according to the Vulgate, on the contrary, Tobit was carried into captivity already with his wife and son: igitur, cum per captivitatem devenisset cum uxore sua et filio in civitatem Niniven cum omni tribu sua), since in his native land Tobit was only in childhood (verse 4). In the Vulgate, verse 9, there is an addition that Tobit, according to the Vulgate—Tobias—gave his own name also to his son Tobias: nomen suum imponens ei,—and another addition about the religious-moral education of the son by the father: quem ab infantia timere Deum docuit et abstinere ab omni peccato. The piety of Tobit in captivity, like later that of Daniel (Dan 1:8), Judith (Jdt 10:5), Eleazar and the Maccabees (2 Macc 7, ch.), was expressed (verses 10–12) first of all in abstinence from pagan food, έκ των άρτων των εθνών,—in accordance with the important significance of the dietary laws in the legislation of Moses (Lev 11, Deut 14 chs.; cf. Lev 7:23; Deut 15 and others). Nineveh (Jonah 3 ch. Onomast. 748)—the capital of Assyria, lay on the left, eastern bank of the Tigris, opposite Mosul: now on its ruins lie the villages of Kuyunjik and Nebi Yunus.

Tobit 1:13. And the Most High granted me mercy and favor with Shalmaneser, and I was his purveyor; Tobit 1:14. and I went to Media, and left in safekeeping with Gabael, the brother of Gabriel, in Rages of Media, ten talents of silver. Tobit 1:15. And when Shalmaneser died, his son Sennacherib reigned in his place, whose ways were not steady, and I could no longer go to Media. Tobit 1:16. In the days of Shalmaneser I did much charity to my brothers: Tobit 1:17. I gave bread to the hungry, and garments to the naked, and if I saw any of my tribe dead and cast out beyond the wall of Nineveh, I buried him. Tobit 1:18. And I secretly buried also those whom King Sennacherib slew, when he was turned back in his flight from Judea. For he killed many in his wrath. And the king sought their bodies, but found them not. Tobit 1:19. And one of the Ninevites went and informed the king about me, that I buried the dead; then I hid myself. And when I learned that the king sought me to put me to death, I fled from the city in fear. Tobit 1:20. And all my substance was plundered, and nothing was left to me except Anna, my wife, and Tobias, my son. 13–20. The favor of God toward the pious Tobit was expressed in the merciful treatment by King Shalmaneser—Shalmaneser, who made Tobit his “purveyor,” LXX: αγοραστής, Slavonic: merchant; this occupation gave Tobit the opportunity to acquire some wealth and to entrust a certain amount to some Gabael in Rages of Media. In the Vulgate, this account is replaced by a remark more in keeping with the moral tendency of that translation, that the Assyrian king granted Tobit the freedom to go wherever he wished and to do whatever he pleased; dedit illi potestatem quocumque vellet ire, habens libertatem quaecumqe facere voluisset. But the thought of the Greek text, as more simple and natural, deserves decided preference before the obviously artificial construction of the Vulgate, the fact that in the Book of Tobit, I:14; IV:1; V:5 and others, the Median city of Rages is presented as existing at the time of the Assyrian dominion, gave rise to some scholars (Jahn, Bertholdt, and others) to deny the historical authenticity of the book—on the grounds that, according to the testimony of Strabo (Geograph. XI, 13, 6), the city was built much later, and precisely by Seleucus Nicator. But in reality, Rages-Ecbatana existed in deep antiquity, according to some for a thousand years before our era, as is testified by mentions of this city in the Avesta (Spigel Fr. Avesta, I Bd. 565) and in Medo-Persian traditions and cuneiform inscriptions (cf Rilter. C. Die Erdkunde von Asien. Bd. VI. I Abtl. s.s. 29 ff. 601, 604), and the testimony of Strabo, as well as the similar testimony of Pliny the Elder (Nat. Hist. liv. VI, c. 14) about the construction of Rages-Ecbatana by Seleucus should be understood in the sense of a report about the restoration, renovation of the city, which had long existed. See in Prof. Drozdov, pp. 404, 447–450. The Vulgate alters the thought of the Greek text in verses 15–17 in accordance with the moral tendency of the translation: about the ten talents acquired by Tobit here (verse 16) it is noted that they were received by Tobit as a reward from the king, quibus honoratus fuerat a rege (hence not through commercial enterprises). The leaving of this sum by Tobit with Gabael in the Vulgate is turned into an act of charity by Tobit toward Gabael, who is named as needy (egentem, verse 17). Likewise, to the journeys of Tobit to Media is given in the Vulgate through the remark that Tobit went to his countrymen, giving them salutary instruction (monita salutis, verse 15). But in reality, as is testified by other passages of the Book of Tobit, verses 13 and following of the first chapter depict the social and material position of Tobit in captivity and, in relation with other data of this kind contained in the Book of Tobit itself, this position appears, on the whole, quite favorable. Only with the accession to the Assyrian throne of the famous figure known from 2 Kgs 18-19; Isa 36-37; 2 Chr 32 Sennacherib (Hebrew Sancherib) did the position of Tobit, as well as in general that of the captive Israelites in Assyria, deteriorate. Tobit apparently lost his position as a court purveyor and could no longer go to Media, while his countrymen underwent persecution from Sennacherib, who, apparently, after his flight from Judea (2 Kgs 19:35-36; 2 Chr 32:21; Isa 37:36-37) vented his spite on the captive Israelites and killed many of them “in his wrath” (verse 18). (Cf. Commented Bible, vol II, p. 525). Tobit could not now go to Media (verse 15), probably as a result of political complications in that country—the beginning of the unification of the Median tribes for the purpose of overthrowing the Assyrian yoke, so that access to Media for peaceful relations was closed (verse 15). Special hatred and persecution from Sennacherib were brought upon Tobit by the fact that he, while ordinarily doing charity to his countrymen (verses 16–17a), did not fear to perform an act of charity even toward the executed Hebrews, burying the slain (17b-18). From the execution threatening Tobit he saved himself by flight from Nineveh, in which all his property was plundered (verses 19–20).

Tobit 1:21. But not fifty days passed when two of his sons killed him and fled to the mountains of Ararat. And in his place his son Esarhaddon reigned, who appointed Achiacharus son of Aniel, my brother’s son, over all the accounting office of his kingdom and all its household administration. Tobit 1:22. And Achiacharus interceded for me, and I returned to Nineveh. And Achiacharus was cupbearer and keeper of the signet ring and steward and treasurer; and Esarhaddon appointed him second to himself; for he was the son of my brother. 21–22. The forced flight of Tobit from Nineveh lasted only about fifty days (these fifty days elapsed precisely from the day of Tobit’s departure from Nineveh, and not from the moment of Sennacherib’s return from his Palestinian campaign, as, for example, Koenig, Kohler, Reuss maintain, seeing in such an indication of time a contradiction to history from the moment of the unsuccessful campaign of Sennacherib until his violent death, in reality, however, neither can there be any contradiction of this sort) as if in punishment for Sennacherib’s cruelty toward the captive Israelites and, in particular, toward Tobit, this king was killed by two of his sons (verse 21, see 2 Kgs 19:37; Isa 37:33), who fled to the mountains of Ararat. This testimony of the Book of Tobit, entirely consistent with the testimony of 2 Kgs 19 chapter and Isaiah XXXVII chapter, is at variance, seemingly, with external data—in Berossus, Abydaenus, in the Babylonian chronicle and in the inscription of the Babylonian king Nabonidus—according to which Sennacherib was killed by only one son, but this disagreement in no way has the character of a contradiction, and is easily resolved by careful analysis of the external testimonies (see in Prof. Drozdov, pp. 467–173). After Sennacherib his son Sarhedon (the 3rd son of Sennacherib, after his assassins Adrammelech and Sharezer, called by Arrian Axerdes), ordinarily known under the name Esarhaddon or Esarhaddon. During the reign of this ruler of Assyria, known for his magnanimity and gentleness, Tobit again returned to Nineveh, thanks to the intercession of his nephew Achiacharus, to whom Esarhaddon restored that high position at court which he held under Sennacherib, but in the latter days of that king lost as a result of the intrigues of his nephew Nadan or Aman (XIV:10). The offices entrusted to Achiacharus were important in the arrangement of the life of the Assyrian kings, he was a) chief cupbearer, οινοχόος b) keeper of the king’s ring or royal seal (with which state documents were sealed), ό επί τού δακτυλίου; c) steward, διοικηεής, i.e., probably, not only in the sense of a modern minister of the court, but also as administrator of the country—like a minister of internal affairs (cf. 1 Kgs 4; Commented Bible, vol. II) and d) chief treasurer, εκλογιστής—like a minister of finance (cf. in Prof. Drozdov, pp 475–479). Although the history of Achiacharus enters the Book of Tobit purely episodically (Tob 1:21-22), yet some researchers (e.g., Harris, Cosquin) are inclined to see in the narrative about Achiacharus the first source for the entire content of the Book of Tobit and to refer both one and the other to the realm of fiction. But in reality the narrative about Achiacharus, belonging to the class of so-called wandering tales, existed and exists under different names and in various versions among many peoples, precisely in the languages: Syriac, Arabic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Greek, Slavic-Russian, and Romanian, all the details of the narrative about Achiacharus coincide with the indications in the Book of Tobit about Achiacharus: about his position as an official under Sennacherib (Tob 1:21-22); about his charity to Tobit (Tob 2:10), and about his rescue from the nets of death set for him by Nadan or Aman (XIV:10), although the name of Tobit is not mentioned in any recension of the narrative about Achiacharus. The ideological similarity of this narrative to the Book of Tobit, of course, does not necessitate the assumption of mutual dependence of these two works: both could independently arise from a common source-tradition. But in favor of the fact that Achiacharus was not an invented but a historical person, speaks both the position of Achiacharus under the historically known Assyrian kings Sennacherib and Esarhaddon, the non-mention of the name Achiacharus in the Assyrian canon of eponyms can be explained by his having another, Assyrian name, A., and the widespread fame of Achiacharus as a wise man or philosopher in the East and the West (see in Prof. Drozdov, pp. 337–344). Thanks to Achiacharus, Tobit was able to improve his material means and live in comfort, as is evident from verse 1 of chapter II.