Captivity in Sight (13:15–27)

Queen mother (13:18). The queen mother often exercised considerable power (see sidebar on “The Queen Mother”). With respect to this verse, the queen mother likely refers to Nehushta, the mother of the young King Jehoiachin. This man occupied the throne briefly in 597 B.C., before he was taken into captivity by the Babylonians.

A crown made up of a circlet of the uraeus symbol, the insignia of the kings and queens of ancient Egypt

Werner Forman Archive/Private Collection

Crowns (13:18). The royal crown in Judah was most likely a gold circlet or diadem worn over a turban and adorned with a precious stone or stones.125 In the ancient Near Eastern context many different types of headdress were worn by the kings. A common one in Assyria was a conical-shaped cap that was embroidered and also decorated with precious stones. The Old Babylonian royal headgear was more of rounded cap, whereas the Neo-Babylonian one was a cap that came to a point at the top.126 Egypt used crowns of varying shapes and forms, though all of them symbolized royal authority. In Jeremiah’s context this verse suggests that the time has come when King Jehoiachin (598–597 B.C.) and his mother will have to relinquish the crown.

The Queen Mother

Evidence is lacking as to whether the power and office of the queen mother was strictly defined and institutionalized. Nevertheless we know from many Mesopotamian, Egyptian, and Hittite sources that the role of the queen mother was important. The wife of Zimri-Lim, king of Mari during the second millennium B.C., was influential with respect to administrative details. Likewise, Naqia-Zakutu, wife of Sennacherib, king of Assyria (704–681 B.C.), was instrumental in securing the accession of her son Esarhaddon (681–669 B.C.).A-18 This role seems to have gained power particularly when the son of the queen was named king at an early age and the husband of the queen had already died.

In Judah, we surmise that a queen mother could be removed from “office.” In 1 Kings 15:13 we read that queen mother Maacah was removed by her son Asa, king of Judah, because of her cultic offenses. Clearly this queen mother had high rank and official prerogatives. There is little evidence for such an office in the northern kingdom of Israel, though the names of at least two queen mothers have been preserved: Zeruah (1 Kings 11:26) and Jezebel (9:22).A-19

Relief on a fallen obelisk at Karnak shows Queen Hatshepsut, dressed in the costume of a Pharaoh and depicted as a man, crowned by the god Amun.

Werner Forman Archive

Ethiopian (13:23). An Ethiopian is an inhabitant of Cush, a term that designates an area south of Egypt that corresponds to modern-day Sudan and perhaps Ethiopia. The question asked by the prophet here is obviously a rhetorical question. But a possible answer to the question may be found in an ancient Egyptian text from the fifth century B.C. known as the Instructions of Onchsheshonqy. In this text is a line that reads: “There is no Nubian (Negro) who lays off his skin.”127 The answer to the question, implicit in the formulation of the question, is that it is absolutely impossible for such a thing to happen.

Image from the Tomb of Sebekhotep shows Nubians (Ethiopians) carrying trade goods, including a leopard skin.

Lenka Peacock

Leopard (13:23). This is a parallel question to the previous one. Once again the impossibility of something taking place is phrased by means of a rhetorical question. A similar kind of impossibility is expressed in a text of Aramaic proverbs known as the Words of Ahiqar. These texts come from a Jewish community that lived for a time in Egypt around the fifth century B.C. One of these didactic texts contains a conversation between a leopard and a goat in which the leopard offers to give his skin to the goat so that it can keep warm. The goat replies that the leopard’s real intention is to take away the goat’s skin.128

Skirts over your face that your shame may be seen (13:26). This is a powerful and somewhat violent description of what will happen to Judah. This does not refer to women being taken into captivity, nor does it refer to Judah not being able to see because its face is covered. Rather, the image portrayed here is that Judah has been unfaithful to God. As a result, God will uncover Judah’s nakedness before the enemy and allow the enemy to ravage her. The word “shame” here is a euphemism for private parts.129 God will expose Judah’s private parts, thus rendering her vulnerable to the enemy.