The reception history of Esther a genderqueer/non-binary reading of the ancient texts and in modern scholarship

The Book of Esther has been regarded by some critics as displaying unusual gender roles for a biblical text, particularly because there appear to be some gender role reversals or gender ambiguities occurring in the text. Modern reception of Esther can be broadly grouped into two categories: characters in the text are interpreted in a cisnormative manner, or some characters are interpreted as being subversive. Both groups of scholarship are problematic for non-binary/genderqueer readers in different ways, and this thesis aims to take a non-binary/genderqueer approach to Esther to assess if this text has the capacity to be read in a manner free from the gender binary. It is the purpose of this thesis to work from the issues raised in contemporary reception and read the ancient versions of Esther that they often reference. The versions studied are the Hebrew Masoretic Text, the Septuagint, the Greek Alpha Text, Josephus’s Paraphrase of Esther in the ‘Judean Antiquities’ and Jerome’s Latin Vulgate. A reception-historical framework and a non-binary/genderqueer lens is used to assess characters’ capacity for non-binary/genderqueer reading in the ancient reception. I also discuss the similarities and differences between versions and their effect on how we can interpret characters’ behaviour. Subsequently, this thesis highlights which characters in which texts can be read as non- binary/genderqueer and which cannot. Then, it is discussed which of the ancient receptions appear to have had the greatest impact on the binary interpretations that are prevalent today. It will be shown that the Masoretic Text has the greatest, consistent capacity for genderqueer/non-binary reading. Conversely, the Greek Additions do not allow for a genderqueer/non-binary interpretation. However, this material seems to have had the greatest impact on modern reception. I explore why this is by looking to the body of Esther scholarship and to cognitive bias theory.