Bible Commentaries
Esther

eight or thirty-nine years after the dedication, or 478 B.C.

The author is unknown, but unquestionably he was a Jew, possibly Ezra or Mordecai, but probably neither of them. The style is against Ezra as author, while the high praise of Mordecai is against Mordecai as author and, besides there are no first personal pronouns in the book referring to the author. It was evidently written by a Jew contemporary with Mordecai. Some say Joakim, the high priest, wrote it, but this is hardly probable, since he does not seem to have had a knowledge of the Persian court sufficient for such a task. The date is about 450 B.C.

There is a great deal of difference in the way the book of Esther is regarded by scholars and others. Many Gentiles have but little use for it, because it is such a Jewish book. Ewald, a great German critic, says that it is like coming down from heaven to earth to read Esther. Luther said he wished the book had never been written – it is so Judaizing. So you see this book is variously estimated. The Jews value it highly. They maintain that the book of Esther will last when the prophets have perished. They always read it with great joy and say its place in the canon of the Holy Scriptures is unquestioned. But in many editions of the Bible it was not included; it was not considered worthy of a place. But by a large majority of the scholars it is included in the canon, as rightfully belonging to the Holy Scriptures.

The book was undoubtedly written to give a historical basis or ground for the Feast of Purim. This feast was observed for centuries before Christ in the month of March. The book was written by a Jewish patriot to give the occasion of this feast. This book has some peculiarities. The name of God is not once mentioned. There is no mention of prayer in it. There is not even a reference to Jerusalem nor the Temple. But it must be remembered that it is a national book; written for national purposes and from a national motive. It is intensely Jewish, referring to a tragic incident in their history, recounting the marvelous way in which they escaped from a great crisis. There are two allusions in the book to facts in previous Jewish history, viz: Mordecai’s captivity (Esther 2:6) and the dispersion of the Jews in all the provinces (Esther 3:8).

The book is real history. The arguments against the historicity of book are as follows:

1. According to the history of Herodotus, and that is our chief authority for the history of this period, especially Persian history, the queen of Ahasuerus at this time was Amastris, whom he married many years before the events found in the book of Esther could have happened, and she never was put away, but maintained a great influence over him and largely shaped the course of his life. She was a Persian woman of very bad personal traits: unscrupulous and crafty, controlling the king in many matters. She was entirely different from what Esther is pictured as being. Our reply to that argument will come up in a later reply to it.

2. The law of the land compelled the Persian monarchy to marry in the families of his own relatives, or five of the noblest Persian favorites. Thus it would have been impossible for a Jewish woman to have been made the queen.

3. Esther is regarded as the queen in this book. But she could only have been the chief favorite in the royal harem. This is probably the only position in which we can place her and be in harmony with the facts.

4. It is argued that the book clearly indicates that Haman knew the race of Mordecai, but not that of Esther. How could he be ignorant of the race?

5. The appalling massacre of their enemies by the Jews, seventy-five thousand at one time, seems incredible. It looks like the fancy picture of a novelist. The reasonable thing is to deny that seventy-five thousand citizens of the Persian Empire could be killed or butchered in such a way.

6. It is highly improbable that the massacre should have been deferred for eleven months after it was decreed. Lots were cast, and according to the lot Haman fixed the date of the decree which he had secured from the king. It is neither improbable nor by any means impossible, but perfectly true.

7. The story is so well knit together as to resemble a fairy tale. But cannot God arrange his providences as well as a writer could arrange them? Is God’s mind inferior to a novelist’s?

8. The religious element is in the background, and scarcely referred to either directly or indirectly. It is true that God is not directly referred to, nor is prayer mentioned, but God is implied, and there may be a reason for the silence in the matter of religion. The writer may have found it better to conceal the element of the Jewish religion than to reveal the power behind the throne.

9. Its moral tone is unworthy of Scripture. The best characters in the book are represented as ruthlessly demanding this massacre and then demanding its repetition, not satisfied with the butchery of five hundred people in one city alone, only satisfied when three hundred more were put to death. Such is at variance with the Scripture, and seems to be unworthy of a place in the canon, they say.

Now the arguments in favor of the historicity of the book are as follows:

1. It is true to the Persian manners and customs, even down to the minutest details. It is true to the life, times, and customs of the Persian people. No man could have written this book unless he was familiar with the Persian life in all of its details. So at once it is evident that it cannot be fiction.

2. The character of Xerxes, or Ahasuerus, is correctly pictured. Point by point this king can be matched with the picture and record of Herodotus, the great historian. The man who wrote this book must have known this king, or he never could have written the book as we have it.

3. The existence of the Feast of Purim itself must have some historical occasion and is a mighty argument for the historicity of the book. Critics have tried to account for this feast which has existed now for twenty-three or twenty-four hundred years in other ways, but have utterly failed. The only way to account for the feast is to accept the feast as actual history.

4. The great council in the third year in the reign of Ahasuerus mentioned in the first of the book of Esther, that is, the feast actually occurred and was called together to plan an expedition against Greece. That expedition he carried out as secular history plainly records. Then were fought the battles of Thermopylae and Marathon on the land, and the sea contest at Salamis, when the hosts of Persia were scattered like chaff before the Greek patriots. It is a historic fact that this great assembly came together in the third year of the reign of Ahasuerus.

5. There is no historical discrepancy in the book. The most critical of the German critics has failed to point out a single incident which contradicts history.

6. It makes its appeals to the chronicles of the kings of Persia, as found in the last chapter. The writer would not have dared to do that writing as he did in the land of Persia, if his record had not been true and he had not authority for what he wrote.

7. It tacitly, though not openly, recognizes a providence in history, and was written to record the divine providence in relation to God’s chosen people. Much scripture is written for the very purpose of recording God’s dealings with his people in their preservation, and the incidents of their natural existence. Why should not one book then be written with this great event as its real background?

8. The ruthless demand of Mordecai and Esther for the massacre of their enemies must be studied in the light of their age and the circumstances that had been forced upon them.

9. God’s providences may produce as good and as well knit a story as the imagination of a novelist. To deny that is really to deny the workings of divine providence, or to deny that God is as great as man.

The classic name of Ahasuerus is Xerxes, the boundaries of whose empire were India and Ethiopia. The places of the scenes of the book are Shushan, the palace of the Persian king, and the provinces.

We may now pursue our study of the book itself by taking up the story chapter by chapter as follows:

Chapter 1: In the palace of Artaxerxes there is a great feast, lasting 180 days; his magnificence is displayed. A second great feast is made for the people of Shushan. There are revelling and drinking till the men are all drunken. The king is intoxicated. He commands to bring his wife, Vashti, for his drunken lords to look at, that he might display her beauty. The refusal of the queen to come and be insulted, the anger of the king, the advice of one of his counsellors, the issuing of the decree that all women, throughout the Persian Empire should ever after obey their husbands – about as foolish a decree as any man ever made.

Chapter 2: A new queen is sought. A bevy of beautiful girls is brought one by one before the king. Among them is Esther, a Jewess, brought up by Mordecai. She succeeds in pleasing the king and becomes queen. A great feast is made in honor of her. About that time a plot is discovered by Mordecai in which two of the king’s chamberlains plan to assassinate the king. Mordecai reveals the plot.

Chapter 3: The promotion of Haman, the Agagite, to be prime minister. Mordecai, the Jew, refuses to bow down to him. Haman is angered and mortified. He will not be content with putting to death one Jew, but asks the king on promise of payment of a large sum of money for permission to put to death the entire Jewish nation, on the condition that he replace his loss out of the money of those he killed. The decree is granted. The lot is cast to decide the day. The edict goes forth that on that day eleven months hence all the Jews are to be put to death.

Chapter 4: The grief of the Jews. Mordecai commands Esther to intercede on their behalf before the king. She asks him to fast three days on her behalf. The answer to Mordecai, "Do not think that thou thyself shall escape their massacre?"

Chapter 5: Esther appears before the king, taking her life in her own hands, for it might mean death to appear before the king unbidden. She is accepted. This incident is to Esther like the experience of Nehemiah in the reign of Artaxerxes, the son of this same king. Everything seemed to depend upon the whim of this childish king. She invites him to a banquet. She knows how to get on the best side of him. She asks Haman to be with them also. Haman hears the news that he is to banquet with the king and his queen, and he is very much elated. He tells his wife about it, then complains about this man, Mordecai, who will not bow the knee to him. His wife says, "Get ready a gallows fifty cubits high and hang Mordecai on it." He follows his wife’s advice and prepares the gallows.

Chapter 6: Incidents leading up to the honoring of Mordecai. The state records are read. The story is told how the king’s life had been spared by a man named Mordecai. He asks the question, "Has this man been honored? He saved my life." Answer, "No." While he is thinking about this, Haman comes in. The king asks him, "What shall I do to the one I desire to highly honor?" Haman, thinking it is himself that the king desires to honor, gives this suggestion: "Put the king’s robe on him and a chain about his neck, and have the chief man in the kingdom lead his beast through the streets of the city." He said that, thinking that he was to be thus honored himself. "All right," said the king, "You go and do that to Mordecai," and he had to do it. There was no escape from the king’s command. Then he went home like a sulky boy because he had been whipped. As soon as he reaches home, word comes that he is to go to the banquet.

Chapter 7: The banquet passed off without incident. Persians were very fond of drinking and banquets. The king wanted to know what Esther demanded. She wanted time to get him in a good humor, so she asked that he come to another banquet. At this the king declared that he was ready to grant her request even to half of the kingdom. Now the time had come. She began to beg for her life and for the life of her people. We may imagine how the king felt when he learned that his favorite queen was to be killed. See how she works him up. Yes, she was to be killed, for the decree did not exclude even her. "Who is going to kill my very idol, my favorite queen?" "Why, this wicked Haman is going to do it." This is another psychological moment. Haman begins to beg and to plead with Esther for his life; he even climbed up on the couch where she is reclining. The king thinks that he is even trying to add insult to injury, and so his rage knows no bounds. The servants say that he has made a gallows fifty cubits high on which to hang Mordecai. The king commands them to take the wretch and hang him on it.

Chapter 8: Mordecai is promoted to Haman’s place and becomes chief minister. Esther begs that the decree against the Jews be revoked, but the law of the Medes and Persians changes not. The only thing that can be done is to issue another decree, so the king asks her what she will have. She and Mordecai have talked it over and she is ready for that request. She asks that the Jews have the privilege of slaying their enemies. There was no other way out of it. This shows Mordecai’s shrewdness and ability. There was great rejoicing among the Jews at this turn of affairs.

Chapter 9: The day arrives. The Jews are prepared. The nobles help the Jews because a Jew is prime minister. The nobles knew on which side their bread was buttered. So they help the Jews and altogether, seventy-five thousand of the people are slain; five hundred in Shushan the palace alone. Esther and Mordecai make another request. Esther wants the massacre repeated. She wanted another day of butchery. I do not know why. The king grants it. There is great rejoicing among the Jews. This occurred on the fourteenth and fifteenth days of the month of Adar, or our month of March. Mordecai and Esther fix this day in which all the Jews shall celebrate this great event. She has the edict issued under the seal of Mordecai the prime minister, and so the feast is established. That is how this feast originated. Every year on the fifteenth of March, all the Jews celebrate it. They do not celebrate it in a very religious fashion now. Still they regard it as a great day.

Chapter 10: This chapter speaks of the greatness of Mordecai, as the prime minister of the Persian king.

Now let us look at the chief characters of the book, as follows:

1. Ahasuerus: There is no question but that this Ahasuerus is the Xerxes of history, and is an exemplification of despotism. He was an absolute monarch, a despot. In him we see the outworkings of despotism. Caligula of the Roman Empire was a despot, and his despotism drove him mad. It is despotism that made this king, Xerxes, ridiculous in the eyes of the world. He was the slave of his ministers and servants. He knew nothing but what they told him. He was absolutely dependent upon them, for all of his information. He was like a child in his silly notions. His servants and nobles deceived and tricked him, and he was so suspicious of them that he was a very slave to his slaves. He was afraid of them, and they knew that if he suspicioned them, he would kill them, and so he was afraid of them, and they were afraid of him. He was the slave also of his passions. He spent his time drinking, eating, banqueting and satisfying his gluttony and lust. He was not much above the beast. Because the Hellespont wrecked his ships, he ordered it to be flogged. He was the slave of his whims and fancies, the slave of his temper and his feelings. He knew no control but his own will, the tool and the plaything of the favorite of his harem, willing to ruthlessly murder thousands of his own subject to satisfy his favorite queen. We must, however, say for him that he recognized the services of Mordecai in saving his life, and honored him. But he did this because it was called to his attention, and not because he sought it out or remembered it.

2. Vashti: She has been honored above many women in history. She is recognized as one who would forfeit her position and crown rather than to sacrifice her honor and her pride. She refused to obey the king at the risk of her own life. But she maintained her dignity and self-respect. She was valorous and womanly. She was having a feast with the women, and it is thought by some that she may have refused to do the king’s bidding because she had taken a little too much wine, hence was not much disposed to be ordered, but I rather think this is not true. She was a rare gem in the midst of that corrupt Persian Court.

3. Haman: This man’s name is a synonym for vanity and fulsome pride, ruthlessness and savagery, deceit, cruelty, and all that is ignoble. He is the incarnation of insane conceit. Honors made a fool of him. Now pride in itself is not such a bad thing. A man may have pride of the right sort and really be helped by it. But a man with this kind of pride wants everything in the universe to be his slave. Even preachers may have this disease. They sometimes think that everybody and everything ought to bow down to them. Because Mordecai would not bow his knee to Haman his vanity was hurt. When a man thus allows his vanity to rule him, he sees everything out of proportion. Haman could not be satisfied with the murder of Mordecai, but he must do the big thing and kill the nation. Vanity is insatiable, and often causes wars. It was this man’s vanity that led to his downfall.

4. Mordecai: He is one of the great characters of the book. He was a Jew and a poor one, but he was loyal to the king, under whose government he lived. The Jews have become citizens of nearly every nation in the world. Here we have a Jew the prime minister of the empire. One of the greatest prime ministers that Great Britain ever had was a Jew. Mordecai was faithful to his king. He was elevated to be prime minister, but it did not give him the "big head." When he was led through the streets he did not feel puffed up. He had sense enough to know that that sort of thing would not last long. Here is a man who waited and worked. We do well to learn that lesson – working and waiting and doing your best will bring its reward, in due time. God always has a place ready for the man who works and waits and does his best.

5. Esther: She was brought up in the family of Mordecai and trained by him. She was trained well beyond any doubt. She was beautiful but not spoiled by her beauty. She was able to use her beauty in the right way. Though she was the favorite of the king and was successful with him, it did not spoil her. She remained loyal to her uncle and did not forget him. Neither did she lose her religion when she became a queen in the most wicked court of her times. There is no mention that there was prayer connected with the three days fast, but doubtless there was. She takes her life in her own hands for her people. She knew how to manage the king. She outwitted the cunning Haman. She was severe. She was one of the greatest heroines of history, and she has been called by many the saviour of her people. She was beautiful, talented, brave, shrewd, and a womanly woman, yea, one of the greatest of women.

QUESTIONS

1. At what point in the history of Israel does the book of Esther come in?

2. Who wrote the book and when?

3. What of the canonicity of the book?

4. What was the purpose of the book?

5. What are the peculiarities of the book?

6. What two allusions in the book to facts in previous Jewish history?

7. Is the book real history and what arguments prove and confirm?

8. What was the classic name of the Persian king who married Esther and what were the boundaries of his empire.

9. What was the place of the scenes of the book?

10. Give the story of the book, chapter by chapter.

11. Give a character sketch of Ahasuerus, Vashti, Haman, Mordecai, and Esther, respectively.

12. What great lessons of the book and at what points in the story is God’s hand most plainly seen?