Bible Commentaries
Esther 3

Verses 1-13

The Plot of Haman (3:1-6:13)

The stage having been set with the advancement of Esther to a position of privilege and importance, the story now moves to the central issue: the struggle between the would-be persecutors, typified in Haman, and the Jewish people, typified in Mordecai. It is probable that Haman’s typical and symbolic character is indicated by his identification as "the Agagite." The traditional understanding of this term, and the most likely, is that it refers to the Agag who was a king of the Amalekites, whom Saul was commanded to destroy (1 Samuel 15). The identification is fitting in view of the fact that Mordecai is a descendant of "Kish," the father of Saul (Esther 2:5). It should be noted also that the Amalekites were traditional enemies of the Israelites (see, for example, Numbers 24:20). The author of Esther thus exemplified in Haman the type of opposition which the Jews had had to face in the ages past and which they were again facing from some quarter at the time the Book of Esther was written.

This Haman, promoted to the position of premier, or vizier, a position in which he was to be accorded honor and respect from all, is informed that Mordecai, a Jew, refused to join in the universal signs of submission. The text suggests that Haman shared in the ancient, blind antagonism of the Amalekites, for his enmity was directed not only against the one man but against the entire Jewish people, whose destruction he plans.

The date for the execution of Haman’s plot is set by lot, and from the Persian word for "lot" the author of Esther derives the name of the Jewish festival of Purim. The phrase "month after month" probably means that those in charge of such procedure went through the months, one by one, until the lot fell on a particular one, and then the same procedure was followed for the days. Thus the twelfth month, Adar, was selected and "the thirteenth day" (Esther 3:13) for a general slaughter of the Jews, "a certain people" whose "laws are different." Haman’s offer of ten thousand talents is an outright bribe, but the amount is exaggerated, so much so that it is as though the author meant it to be understood as an exaggeration. The king’s remark in (Esther 3:11) does not mean that the money was returned to Haman; it is an indirect way of accepting the bribe. In (Esther 3:15) the author’s literary ability is evident as he contrasts the heartlessness of Haman and the indifference of the king with the concern of the people of Susa, where Jews and non-Jews alike are thrown into consternation by the decree.

Although direct references to God are lacking in the Book of Esther, and although there is throughout the book a seeming disregard for some of the ritual requirements of Judaism, it is yet apparent that a deep religious dimension is presupposed in the background. Thus, in chapter 4 Mordecai’s mourning and Esther’s request for a fast are to be understood as expressions of their religious faithfulness. Esther’s hesitance to assume the role Mordecai urged upon her is natural and also intensifies the drama, for the author thus makes it clear that the queen went into real danger in spite of her fears, rather than without fear (see also Esther 4:16). The anticipation of help "from another quarter" (Esther 4:14, literally "place") is often taken as an oblique reference to God. If this be true it is the single such reference in the book, although here as elsewhere the activity of God is presupposed. At any rate, the focus of the story is upon the heroine, the human agency through whom, by a combination of almost incredible circumstances, the Jews are to be saved. She is the one who had "come to the kingdom for such a time as this."

In the longer Greek version with its more obvious religious concern, prayers by Mordecai and Esther are inserted at this point. Although by this device the orthodoxy of the book and of its chief characters is indicated, it must be admitted that thereby the story loses in dramatic power.

The dramatic element is now developed by a series of incidents. Esther, who had succeeded in gaining an audience with the king, inexplicably postpones making her request, setting first one banquet and then another. Haman, meanwhile, is described — in terms which magnify his prosperity and power — as moving directly to the public execution of Mordecai. (The specification of a gallows fifty cubits high, that is, about seventy-five feet, is another example of deliberate exaggeration by the author.) The suspense finally is brought to a climax as the king belatedly and apparently accidentally comes to recognize Mordecai’s part in saving his life and the fact that the deed has gone unrewarded.

The story at this point begins to turn from tragedy to triumph. First Haman is forced to prescribe royal honors for the one he intends to kill, and Mordecai is given the tokens of royal favor. That this is the beginning of the end is indicated by the remark of Hainan’s advisers that if Mordecai is one of the Jews then Haman will fail in his purpose of destroying him (Esther 6:13). This reversal of their preceding advice (Esther 5:14) may be taken as the dramatic turning point of the book.