Mixed marriage in Ezra 9-10: The Disappearance of Ezra as a mimic man for the Persian Empire

In this paper, as I follow scholars’ socio-economic perspectives on Ezra 9-10, I will explore the mixed marriage issue in light of the post-colonial theory, especially Homi Bhabha’s post-colonial theory. I will argue that Ezra as a mimic man followed the Persian Empire’s political policy. The Empire prohibited intermarriage between the returnees and those who had not been in exile. However, Ezra was persecuted because of his coercive dissolution of marriage. In his commentary, Ezra-Nehemiah, Joseph Blenkinsopp assumes that Ezra was recalled by the Persian Empire since Ezra’s decision of dissolution of marriage caused political unrest in Yehud. However, he does not clarify how Ezra’s intermarriage prohibition is supported by the Persian Empire. Given the fact that Udjahorresnet, the Egyptian priest and special advisor to the Persian Empire on Egyptian affairs, banished the foreigners who had settled in the sanctuary of Neith in the third year of Darius, Ezra must have followed the prohibition of intermarriage by the Persian Empire. If I apply Homi Bhabha’s concept to Ezra’s political status, Ezra as a mimic man reveals his hybrids: he is part Pro-Persian and part Jewish elite. In an attempt to resolve the conflicts between the group of returnees and those who were not in exile, especially in regard to property disputes, the Persian Empire sent the Pro-Persian Ezra. However, by interpreting the Deuteronomic law in an extreme way, Ezra decided to separate the existing families. According to Ancient Near Eastern Law, a husband should return his wife’s dowry after their divorce. On account of this, Ezra must have stirred up considerable social controversy. In other words, Ezra’s hybridity functions as a menace to the Persian Empire.