Esther 1

Introduction

The Book of Esther is certainly one of the most amazing books in the whole Bible. Theologian J. G. McConville of Trinity College in England comments: “…to say that the story of Esther is well told is an understatement. It is by any standards a brilliantly written story, to be savored – even chuckled over.” [1] Esther has the distinction of being the only book in the Bible where the name of God is never mentioned. But neither is prayer, worship or the temple mentioned. [2] Since the name of God is not mentioned, Jews are prone to take great liberties as they do spoofs and parodies of the book during their Purim celebrations.

The Book of Esther has many other distinctions. “The book is more of a purely historical book than any other book in scripture.” [3] The great Jewish scholar Maimonides (1135-1204) thought that the Book of Esther was the most important book after the Pentateuch or law. [4] The book is better known by the Jews than any other part of the Old Testament. There are also more manuscript copies of Esther than any other book in the Old Testament. [5] No doubt, part of this notoriety stems from its many readings and plays during the festival. We might note however that Esther was not found among the Qumran scrolls. Nineteenth-century American theologian, Albert Barnes says: “It has, moreover, always been regarded by the Jews as an authentic account of the great deliverance which they celebrate annually by the feast of Purim.” [6]

We do not know who wrote the Book of Esther, although Mordecai has always been considered a likely candidate. Whoever wrote it had a thorough knowledge of Persia at that time. He also had plenty of access to government records. The book probably had to be written after the reign of Xerxes or Ahasuerus (486-465 BC). If Mordecai was indeed the author, it would have had to be written sometime fairly soon after the king’s reign.

“The purpose of the Book of Esther is twofold: (1) to demonstrate God’s providential care of his people, even those outside the land of Israel, and (2) to commend the observance of the Feast of Purim by relating how it originated (9:24-28).” [7] Of course, the book was written for Jews both ancient and modern. The place of writing was likely the capital city of Susa.

The obvious theme of the book is the constant providence of God whether known or unknown by people. It strictly focuses on God’s special providence toward the Jewish people, whether they be in or out of the will of God. The American poet James Russell Lowell (1820-1891) put this providence in beautiful lines in his poem, The Present Crisis:

Truth forever on the scaffold,

Wrong forever on the throne,

Yet that scaffold sways the future,

and, behind the dim unknown,

Standeth God within the shadow,

keeping watch above his own. [8]

McConville sums up by saying: “…The story can become, therefore, a powerful statement about the reality of God in a world from which he appears to be absent.” [9]

This is what happened during the time of Xerxes, the Xerxes who ruled over 127 provinces stretching from India to Cush: Esther 1:1

King Xerxes I, known in the Bible as Ahasuerus, reigned over the vast Persian Empire from 486 to 465 BC. His kingdom was the largest the world had ever seen, stretching from India to Cush. The land description today would be from modern Pakistan to Northern Sudan. [1] History tells us that he ruled over some 20 satrapies, which were divided into 127 provinces. This vast territory covered 60 nations as we would know them today. [2] His territory included many nationalities and ethnic groups.

“At that time King Xerxes reigned from his royal throne in the citadel of Susa, and in the third year of his reign he gave a banquet for all his nobles and officials. The military leaders of Persia and Media, the princes, and the nobles of the provinces were present” (1:2-3). Susa, or Shushan in Hebrew was located in today’s western Iran. It had a climate so warm that it was used as the capital only in the cooler months. [3]

In the third year of his reign (483 BC) he gave a very elaborate banquet that stretched over a long period of six months and must have cost millions of dollars. Of course, a banquet lasting that long would almost be an absurdity. Warren Wiersbe, pastor, religious broadcaster and commentator gives us an idea of what might really have happened: “It is more likely that, over a period of six months, Ahasuerus brought the officers to Shushan on a rotating schedule…[then] the king would bring them all together for the seven-day feast so they could confer collectively.” [4]

It is interesting to commentators that the military officers were present. Texas professor Bob Utley says: “We know from history that Xerxes gave a great feast to plan his military campaign against Greece (cf. Herodotus, Hist. 7.19).” [5] His father Darius I had led a vast campaign to conquer Greece but was disastrously defeated at the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC. Undoubtedly, Xerxes wished to avenge that shameful defeat. Bible professors Pfeiffer & Harrison say: “During the 180 days Xerxes discussed war plans with his subordinates and overawed them with the opulence and grandeur of his court.” [6]

By taking a quick look forward we can say that his plans came to nothing. Xerxes himself would be present to observe his gigantic fleet destroyed by the Greeks at Salamis in 480 BC. That great battle put an end to Persian expansion westward and it is called the largest sea battle of the ancient world. How true the words of Proverbs 16:18: “Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall.”

So, the great banquet was really a war meeting. James Burton Coffman, twentieth-century Churches of Christ commentator, describes it: “During this period all of the mighty princes of his extensive dominion were summoned to appear, probably in successive assignments, to be entertained and to see the king’s exhibition of his power and riches, and also, most likely, to receive his assignment to them regarding the troops each would supply for that immense army which he gathered together for the invasion. Our text does not elaborate on this, but we learn much about it from Herodotus.” [7]

“For a full 180 days he displayed the vast wealth of his kingdom and the splendor and glory of his majesty” (1:4). The ancient Greek Historian Herodotus was much impressed with the wealth and affluence of the Persian kings. [8] Of course, wealth and affluence were characteristics of eastern monarchs in general. The period of 180 days was an unusually long time to display his wealth. We can be sure now that the king had something else up his sleeve and that was the invasion of Greece. We can understand how upset the king would later become when his queen would refuse to cooperate with his plan.

“When these days were over, the king gave a banquet, lasting seven days, in the enclosed garden of the king’s palace, for all the people from the least to the greatest who were in the citadel of Susa” (1:5). As we see, the king had some sort of rotating banquet for six months and now he brought his important leaders together for one last bash lasting seven days. Barnes mentions that later Persian monarchs sometimes entertained as many as 15,000 at their tables. [9]

“The garden had hangings of white and blue linen, fastened with cords of white linen and purple material to silver rings on marble pillars. There were couches of gold and silver on a mosaic pavement of porphyry, marble, mother-of-pearl and other costly stones” (1:6). Barnes notes that white and blue (or perhaps violet) were the royal colors in Persia. [10] Expensive hangings were everywhere. Jamieson fills us in on the customs of that era. He says, “The fashion, in the houses of the great, on festive occasions, was to decorate the chambers from the middle of the wall downward with damask or velvet hangings of variegated colors suspended on hooks…” [11] James Freeman adds, “…in this hot and windy climate they may have served as shade canopies or walls (cf. James M. Freeman, Manners and Customs of the Bible, pp. 201-202).” [12]

Here we have mentioned that there were even couches of gold and silver. He wanted all those present to understand that he could afford a war. “Herodotus related an incident that occurred during Xerxes’ retreat from Greece when the king left his tent in one of the abandoned camps. The Greeks were astounded to find gold and silver couches in the tent.” [13] We learn that there was also “ mosaic pavement of porphyry, marble, mother-of-pearl and other costly stones.” Everywhere there was eye-popping opulence. David Guzik, pastor and biblical writer points out that archaeologists have now discovered the ruins of the palace where these events happened. [14]

“Wine was served in goblets of gold, each one different from the other, and the royal wine was abundant, in keeping with the king’s liberality. By the king’s command each guest was allowed to drink with no restrictions, for the king instructed all the wine stewards to serve each man what he wished” (1:7-8). McConville notes: “…hints of its lavishness have been provided by archaeologists, who have unearthed, among other things, golden goblets reminiscent of those in verse 7.” [15] Dr. Max Anders of Western Seminary says, “The Hebrew term for these feasts can be translated “drinking bouts.” [16] Normally the guests would drink when the king drank or else, they would drink when the toastmaster indicated. During this feast the king allowed guests to drink whenever they wanted and however much or little they wanted. These lines by the poet Francis express it all well:

There, every guest may drink and fill

As much or little as he will;

Exempted from the Bedlam rules

Of roaring prodigals and fools.

Whether, in merry mood or whim,

He fills his goblet to the brim;

Or, better pleased to let it pass,

Is cheerful with a moderate glass. [17]

Trouble In Paradise

Queen Vashti also gave a banquet for the women in the royal palace of King Xerxes. Esther 1:9

D. Guthrie of London Bible College comments: “One unsolved problem concerns the name of Xerxes’ queen. According to Herodotus she was Amestris, the daughter of a Persian general, and she was already married to Xerxes by the time events recorded in Esther began.” [18] Adam Clarke, the early British Methodist theologian, believes that Vashti was a Persian word that signified “beautiful” or “excellent.” [19] Utley notes how some scholars think that both Amestris and Vashti are attempts to translate the same Persian name. [20]

By any stretch of the imagination, this banquet had to be quite large. Guthrie says: “We know from the book itself that custom did not prevent wives from dining with their husbands. The large numbers probably made necessary a separate feast for the women guests.” [21] Anders comments about the banquet: “Aristocratic Persian women were known to keep pace with their male counterparts in exhibitions of wealth, pomp, and drinking.” [22]

“On the seventh day, when King Xerxes was in high spirits from wine, he commanded the seven eunuchs who served him – Mehuman, Biztha, Harbona, Bigtha, Abagtha, Zethar and Karkas – to bring before him Queen Vashti, wearing her royal crown, in order to display her beauty to the people and nobles, for she was lovely to look at” (1:10-11). To put it simply, the king was a drunken mess. In his inebriated state, he commanded his seven eunuchs who had charge of the royal harem to bring forth his lovely queen and display her. Only a drunken man or one completely out of his mind would consider making such a request.

The Bible says a lot about drunkenness (Prov. 20:1; 21:17; 23:20-21, 29-35; 31:4-5; Isa. 5:11; Lk. 21:34; Rom. 13:13-14; 1 Cor. 5:11; Eph. 5:18; 1 Pet. 4:3-5). Wiersbe quotes a Japanese proverb that says: “First the man takes a drink, then the drink takes a drink, and then the drink takes the man.” [23] The great F. B. Meyer says of the king: “He had command over 127 provinces, but he could not rule his own spirit…” [24]

“But when the attendants delivered the king’s command, Queen Vashti refused to come. Then the king became furious and burned with anger” (1:12). The queen, despite her own obvious drinking, seemed to maintain her wits. She would not be put on display before hundreds and perhaps thousands of drunken, lecherous men. Jamieson says: “…according to Persian customs, the queen, even more than the wives of other men, was secluded from the public gaze.” [25] In order to display her beauty, she would have had to come unveiled, which was a violation of custom. In older times some rabbis thought that the king wanted Vashti to appear only wearing her crown, or to appear naked. [26] To complicate matters more, her son, who would become King Artaxerxes I was born that year and she apparently would have had to appear pregnant. [27] Clarke says of her: “Hail, noble woman! be thou a pattern to all thy sex on every similar occasion!…Vashti must be considered at the top of her sex.” [28]

We can only imagine the hushed chatter that was going on among the guests. They might have been saying things like this: “If he couldn’t command his own wife, how could he ever command the Persian armies?” [29]

The Unwise Wise Men

Since it was customary for the king to consult experts in matters of law and justice, he spoke with the wise men who understood the times and were closest to the king – Karshena, Shethar, Admatha, Tarshish, Meres, Marsena and Memukan, the seven nobles of Persia and Media who had special access to the king and were highest in the kingdom. Esther 1:13-14

The Greek historian Herodotus tells us that Persian kings had a group of judges. These were appointed for life and it was their job to advise the kings on all matters of law. [30] The judges probably came from some special families who were close to the king (cf. Ezr. 7:14). Barnes says: “There were seven families of the first rank in Persia, from which alone the king could take his wives. Their chiefs were entitled to have free access to the monarch’s person.” [31]

“‘According to law, what must be done to Queen Vashti?’ he asked. ‘She has not obeyed the command of King Xerxes that the eunuchs have taken to her’” (1:15). The king surely needed some advisers, but he needed some good ones. He is portrayed in history as an unreasonable and foolish man. Guzik says, “… On one occasion, Ahasuerus executed the builders of a bridge because an ocean storm destroyed it; then he commanded that the water and waves be whipped and chained to punish the sea.” [32] We can also sense that what was mainly involved here was Vashti’s open attack upon Persia’s male supremacy.

“Then Memukan replied in the presence of the king and the nobles, ‘Queen Vashti has done wrong, not only against the king but also against all the nobles and the peoples of all the provinces of King Xerxes. For the queen’s conduct will become known to all the women, and so they will despise their husbands and say, “King Xerxes commanded Queen Vashti to be brought before him, but she would not come”’” (1:16-17). Pfeiffer & Harrison say that Memukan, “…seized the opportunity to transform a private affair into a public and national crisis, doubtless because of a previous conflict between the queen and the princes.” [33] We might even suspect that the wise Memukan was himself a “hen-pecked” husband and was taking this opportunity to get that problem corrected.

“This very day the Persian and Median women of the nobility who have heard about the queen’s conduct will respond to all the king’s nobles in the same way. There will be no end of disrespect and discord. Therefore, if it pleases the king, let him issue a royal decree and let it be written in the laws of Persia and Media, which cannot be repealed, that Vashti is never again to enter the presence of King Xerxes. Also let the king give her royal position to someone else who is better than she” (1:18-19). The wise men were probably quite concerned that Vashti might return to power and punish them for their advice. [34] In fact, she did return to power as the queen mother when her son Artaxerxes later became king. We encounter again the very strange Persian understanding that once a law is passed it cannot be repealed (cf. Esth. 8:8; Dan. 6:8,12,15). We will later see a lot of legal gymnastics as this weird law had to be dealt with.

“Then when the king’s edict is proclaimed throughout all his vast realm, all the women will respect their husbands, from the least to the greatest” (1:20). It would do well for us to try and understand the Christian position on this subject in our day when women’s liberation has risen up to exert itself. In Ephesians 5:22, the Bible says: “Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord.” There is a prescribed order to things in the world. God made it that way. When we see a flock of geese or ducks there is always a leader. The same is true when we see a school of fish. There is one person who is the leader of a country; one general who is the leader of an army; one pastor who is the leader of a church and one person who is the leader of a family. In the case of the family that person is the husband.

Paul makes it clear that the wife is to submit to the husband and his spiritual headship (cf. Col. 3:18; Tit. 2:5; 1 Pet. 3:1). This submission has nothing to do with inferiority, lack of talent or intelligence on the part of the wife. But rather it has to do with mission. There is a spiritual mission to marriage and this mission is involved with bringing glory to God. For this mission to succeed there must be “submission.” [35]

Submission does not mean that the man can boss the woman around. My old pastor used to say that “Authority is like soap. The more you use it the less you have.” Barnes says “where commands begin in this relation, happiness usually ends; and the moment a husband requires a wife to do anything, it is usually a signal of departing or departed affection and peace.” [36] We see in the Ephesian passage mentioned that submission is first to be to the Lord. We can go on to say that submission is also to be a “one another” thing as it is also seen in Ephesians 5:21. Generally, the wife might submit to the husband’s mechanical abilities as he repairs the car. While the husband might submit to the wife’s motherly abilities as she nurses the baby or prepares the meal. There must be great respect one for the other.

“The king and his nobles were pleased with this advice, so the king did as Memukan proposed. He sent dispatches to all parts of the kingdom, to each province in its own script and to each people in their own language, proclaiming that every man should be ruler over his own household, using his native tongue” (1:21-22). History tells us that the Persians were noted for their good roads and a rapid postal system (cf. 3:12-15; 8:9-14). [37] So the king’s decision was spread far and wide in his vast kingdom. Many of his subjects could understand Aramaic but for those who could not, special consideration was given and the decree was translated into their particular dialects. Guthrie says: “Aramaic was widely understood and was used for state business from Egypt to India.” [38]

Some translations like the NIV read that the man’s native language should be spoken in his house (ESV. NAS, NET, NKJ, RSV). In the later time of Nehemiah, and because of the many mixed marriages, children of these marriages were speaking the language of Ashdod and that of other Gentile peoples. Yet, these children could not speak the Hebrew language (Neh. 13:24).

As our story continues, Vashti was consigned to the harem and would no longer see the king. The saga of Esther would have to wait until the great war with Greece was finished (480 BC). Then the king would begin to long for his queen. Lovely Esther would come upon the scene around the year 478 BC.

Footnotes

1. J. G. McConville, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1985), p. 154.

2. Charles F. Pfeiffer & Everett F. Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1979), p. 447.

3. Albert Barnes, Barnes’ Notes on the Whole Bible, Commentary on Esther. 1870, Intro. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/bnb/esther-1.html.

4. Mervin Breneman, Ezra, Nehemiah & Esther, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1993), p. 292.

5. D. Guthrie, J. A. Motyer, A. M. Stibbs & D. J. Wiseman, eds., The New Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1979), p. 412.

6. Barnes, Barnes’ Notes on the Whole Bible, Commentary on Esther, Intro.

7. Breneman, Ezra, Nehemiah & Esther, The New American Commentary, p. 289.

8. Poets Organization. https://poets.org/poem/present-crisis

9. McConville, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther, p. 153.

Chapter 1

1. Max Anders, g. ed. Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Holman Old Testament Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2005), p. 286.

2. Barnes, Barnes’ Notes on the Whole Bible, Commentary on Esther, v. 1:1.

3. Bob Utley, Free Bible Commentary, Esther, v. 1:2. http://www.freebiblecommentary.org/old_testament_studies/vol08ot/vol08cot_01.html

4. Warren W. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, OT (Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 2007), p. 796.

5. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, Esther, v. 1:3.

6. Pfeiffer & Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 448-449.

7. James Burton Coffman, Coffman’s Commentaries on the Bible, Commentary on Esther (Abilene, TX: Abilene Christian University Press, 1983-1999, v. 1:1. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/bcc/esther-1.html.

8. Breneman, Ezra, Nehemiah & Esther, The New American Commentary, p. 305.

9. Barnes, Barnes’ Notes on the Whole Bible, Commentary on Esther, v. 1:5.

10. Ibid., v. 1:6.

11. Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, & David Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, Commentary on Esther, 1871-8, v. 1:6 https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/jfb/esther-1.html.

12. Quoted in Utley, Free Bible Commentary, Esther, v. 1:6.

13. Breneman, Ezra, Nehemiah & Esther, The New American Commentary, p. 306.

14. David Guzik, Enduring Word Bible Commentary, Esther, v. 1:2 https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/esther-1/

15. McConville, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther, p. 155.

16. Anders, g. ed. Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Holman Old Testament Commentary, p. 287.

17. Adam Clarke, The Adam Clarke Commentary, Commentary on Esther, 1832,

18. Guthrie, et. al., The New Bible Commentary, p. 413.

19. Clarke, The Adam Clarke Commentary, Commentary on Esther, v. 1:9.

20. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, Esther, v. 1:9.

21. Guthrie, et. al., The New Bible Commentary, p. 415.

22. Anders, g. ed. Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Holman Old Testament Commentary, p. 287.

23. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, OT, p. 797.

24. Frederick Brotherton Meyer, F. B. Meyer’s “Through the Bible Commentary,” Commentary on Esther, 1914, vs. 1:1-22. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/fbm/esther-1.html.

25. Jamieson, Fausset, & Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, Commentary on Esther, vs. 1:10-12.

26. Breneman, Ezra, Nehemiah & Esther, The New American Commentary, p. 307.

27. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, Esther, v. 1:11.

28. Clarke, The Adam Clarke Commentary, Commentary on Esther, v. 1:12.

29. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, Esther, v. 1:13.

30. Barnes, Barnes’ Notes on the Whole Bible, Commentary on Esther, v. 1:14.

31. Guzik, Enduring Word Bible Commentary, Esther, vs. 1:13-22.

32. Pfeiffer & Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 449.

33. Ibid.

34. David Guzik, Commentaries on the Bible, Ephesians, v. 5:22.

35. Albert Barnes, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, Commentary on Ephesians, v. 5:22. www.studylight.org.

36. Pfeiffer & Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 449.

37. Guthrie, et. al., The New Bible Commentary, p. 415.