Tattenai and Haman paralleled

“… the plot structure itself draws a comparison between Tattenai and Haman, backing the view expressed in Rashi that Tattenai was indeed an enemy of the Jews”. Zvi Ron Zvi Ron has proposed that the situation of Tattenai, the “governor of the province of Beyond the River” in Ezra 6, is paralleled in the drama of Haman in the Book of Esther: https://jbqnew.jewishbible.org/assets/Uploads/474/jbq_474_rontattenaiZ.pdf PP. 256-258 TATTENAI AND HAMAN TARGUM RISHON There is an unusual reference to Tattenai in the Geonic era work Targum Rishon to the Book of Esther. …. When Zeresh, the wife of Haman, is introduced in Esther 5:10, Targum Rishon writes that Zeresh was “the daughter of Tattenai, governor of the province of Beyond the River.” This is an idea that does not appear anywhere else in Rabbinic literature, even in Targum Sheni to Esther which generally contains more aggadic material than Targum Rishon. …. It is not immediately clear what is the point of connecting Zeresh to Tattenai. The book Magen David, a 17th commentary on the Targum Rishon, explains that Haman had multiple wives but Zeresh was singled out for mention because she came from an important family, the family of Tattenai. …. However, a close reading of the Tattenai narrative reveals why the Targum made a connection with Zeresh. Taking the traditional approach that Tattenai was an adversary of the Jews who wanted to halt the construction of the Second Temple, the story of Tattenai can be summarized as follows: 1. Tattenai, a government official, tried to cause harm to the Jews. 2. He turned to the Persian king for support. 3. A forgotten incident is recalled (the permission given by Cyrus). 4. Instead of receiving this support, the exact opposite result is achieved (to assist the Jews with the building of the Second Temple). In terms of the plot structure, this “Persian backfire” story bears similarity to the story of Haman, (1) a government official who wants to kill Mordecai and (2) enlists King Ahasuerus to write a decree against the Jews. When Ahasuerus cannot sleep he is (3) reminded of how Mordecai saved his life. Ultimately Haman’s plan fails and (4) the exact opposite result is achieved, Haman must honor Mordecai and he is ultimately hanged on the wooden beam he had intended to hang Mordecai from. This basic plot structure is also seen in Daniel chapter 6. There (1) government officials try to get Daniel in trouble with the king (Daniel 6:6). They (2) trick Darius into writing a decree that outlaws prayer (Daniel 6: 14). Daniel is rescued from death in the lion’s [sic] den, and (4) the king orders the officials to be put to death in the lion’s den (Daniel 6:25). In the Daniel story there is no element of the “forgotten incident”, however there is an element of the king having a sleepless night (Daniel 6:19) as in Esther 6:1. Additionally, there is a reverse parallel in that Daniel is in trouble for bowing in prayer (Daniel 6:11) and Mordecai is in trouble for refusing to bow (Esther 3:2). The Tattenai/Haman parallel is particularly strong as both narratives not only contain a “forgotten incident” element, they even use a similar term regarding it, the sefer zichronot (book of records, literally “book of memories”) in Esther 6:1 and the decree of Cyrus, called a dichrona (memorandum, an Aramaic term parallel to the Hebrew zichron) in Ezra 6:2. Additionally, the punishment Darius issues for interfering with the building of the Temple, I also issue an order that whoever alters this decree shall have a beam removed from his house, and he shall be impaled on it and his house confiscated (Ezra 6:11), recalls the punishment of Haman, So they impaled Haman on the beam (Esther 7:10) and Mordecai was put in charge of Haman’s property (Esther 8:2). Furthermore, as in the punishment stated by Darius, the beam that Haman was impaled on was from his house (Esther 7:9). Note that “impaling was a Persian practice…generally reserved for the most serious crimes, especially sedition,” … adding an additional irony to the Tattenai reversal. While initially Tattenai accused the Jews of possible rebellion, Darius responds that failure to support the construction of the Temple will in fact make him accountable for treason! The Targum was sensitive to this parallel between Tattenai and Haman, and so further connected the narratives by making Zeresh the daughter of Tattenai. When we read, There Haman told his wife Zeresh and all his friends everything that had befallen him. His advisers and his wife Zeresh said to him: 'If Mordecai, before whom you have begun to fall, is of Jewish stock, you will not overcome him, you will fall before him to your ruin' (Esther 6:13), the question arises, how was Zeresh so sure that Haman would not be able to succeed against a Jew? The answer provided by the Targum is that she knew this from her own experience, seeing her father fail against the Jews at the time of the rebuilding of the Temple. …. Mackey’s comment: In my estimation, Haman had already been executed before Darius’s response to Tattenai. Zvi Ron continues: From this perspective, the plot structure itself draws a comparison between Tattenai and Haman, backing the view expressed in Rashi that Tattenai was indeed an enemy of the Jews. CONCLUSION Despite the fact that in the Tattenai narrative “the officials give the impression of being about their regular business, reporting on possibly significant developments in the territory under their jurisdiction, and having no axe to grind in local disputes between Judeans and Samaritans” and that the language used “is not charged with any antagonism,”… as noted by Malbim, we have seen that the plot structure of the episode links Tattenai to Haman, an idea reflected in Targum Rishon, and leads to the understanding that Tattenai is indeed to be counted among the many adversaries of the Jews.