About the real origin of Purim, a purely secular jollification,
preceded, after a certain date, by a fast, we know nothing. It is first
mentioned in the Book of Esther, which is so secular that the name of
God is never mentioned in it. Scholars have debated as to the date of
Esther, which Mr. Frazer places in the fourth or third century B.C.;
some, as Kuenen, place it later. Some think it historical, as Mr. Sayce
does; others regard it as a romance, composed to supply an account of
the origin of the feast of Purim, which we never hear of before the
exile.
The account in Esther is well known. Xerxes quarrelled with his
queen, Vashti, and, after a series of experiments in wives, selected
Esther, cousin of an artful Jew named Mordecai. This man discovered,
and through Esther reported, a conspiracy. He later behaved with
insolence to Haman, the Vizier, who settled with Xerxes a kind of
St. Bartholomew's day for all the Jews. But Xerxes was accidentally
reminded of the services done by Mordecai, and asked Haman how a
grateful prince should reward an unnamed servant. Haman suggested the
ride in royal splendour, which Mordecai enjoyed. Haman then erected a
very tall gallows whereon to hang Mordecai. But Esther got news of the
intended massacre, and, as Xerxes had promised to give her any gift she
asked for, she demanded the death of Haman. So Haman was hanged, and
the Jews were allowed to defend themselves. They massacred an enormous
number of their enemies, and henceforth kept Purim, a feast of two
days, on Adar (March) 14 and 15. 'Wherefore they called these days
Purim, after the name of Pur,' and 'pur, that is, the lot, was cast
before Haman for a whole year from Nisan to Adar.'[15]
The word _pur_, 'a lot,' does not occur in Hebrew, says Mr. Frazer.
However, the Assyrian _puhra_ means an assembly, and there was an
assembly of the gods at the feast of Zakmuk. Why the Jews went after
an Assyrian word we may guess; but we also learn that '_pur_ or _bur_
seems to be' (one wants to know if it really _was_) 'an old Assyrian
word for 'stone,' and a stone may be used for a lot,[16] as the Greek
_ψῆφος_, a pebble, also means a vote. Thus either the Assyrian
_puhra_ or _pur_ may have lent a name to the feast of Purim.
I am no friend to etymological conjecture, especially when two
Assyrian words put in rival claims to be, each of them, the origin
of a Jewish word. Mr. Frazer does not, I think, allude to the other
guess, connecting Purim with the Persian feast, Phurdigan (Phurim? or
Purim).[17] We find Purdaghân, Purdiyan, and so forth. This Persian
feast was a drinking bout and time of jollity, so that Hyde very
naturally compares it to Purim and to the old Persian Sacæa, or Sakea,
or _Sakia_, which means 'drinking together,' or 'drinking healths.'[18]
If Sakia means a convivial feast in Persian, it fits very well the
Persian Sacæa, which were a time of jollity. The learned may settle
their etymological guesses among themselves, but we are not obliged,
for want of another conjecture, to fly to old Assyrian for Purim:
still less do we agree that Mr. Frazer has made out a fairly probable
case for holding that 'the Jewish feast (Purim) is derived from the
Babylonian new year festival of Zakmuk.'[19]
No ease at all, I venture to think, is made out. Mr. Frazer's Assyrian
etymologies are met by competing etymologies. Moreover, we know next
to nothing of the Babylonian Zakmuk, but we do know that the Persian
Sacæa, Sakea, or _Sakia_ was, like Purim, a period of hard drinking
and wild licence: which does not resemble a solemn religious festival
of the supreme god, Marduk, or a period of wailing for Tammuz. There
is another coincidence, unnoted, I think, by Mr. Frazer, but already
noted by us. Herodotus, our oldest Greek source for the Persians, tells
us that their chief feast was called _Magophonia_, and celebrated the
_massacre_ of the hostile Magi.[20] Strabo tells us that the Sacæa were
supposed to commemorate a _massacre_ of intoxicated Sacæ. Purim is
held to celebrate a _massacre_ of the foes of the Jews. Can these three
feasts for a massacre coincide by accident? It is not easy to see how
this tradition attached itself to the slaying of a criminal, either as
king's proxy or as representative of Tammuz.