Esther · Chapter 1

V. 1. Ahasuerus-Many suppose this to be Darius Hystapas, for his kingdom was thus vast, and he subdued India, as Herodotus reports: and one of his wives was called Atossa, differing little from Hadassah, which is Esther’s other name, Esther 2:7. Provinces-So seven new provinces were added to those hundred and twenty mentioned, Daniel 6:1.

Verse 1. Now it came to pass] The Ahasuerus of the Romans, the Artaxerxes of the Greeks and Ardsheer of the Persians, are the same. Some think that this Ahasuerus was Darius, the son of Hystaspes; but Prideaux and others maintain that he was Artaxerxes Longimanus. Reigned from India even unto Ethiopia] This is nearly the same account that is given by Xenophon. How great and glorious the kingdom of Cyrus was beyond all the kingdoms of Asia, was evident from this: JWrisqh men prws ew th Eruqra qalatth, prov arkton de tw Euxeinw pontw, prov esperan de Kuprw kai Aiguptw, prov meshmbrian de

Aiqiopia. “It was bounded on the east by the Red Sea; on the north by the Euxine Sea; on the west by Cyprus and Egypt; and on the south by Ethiopia.”-CYROP. lib. viii., p. 241, edit. Steph. 1581.

Verse 1. In the days of Ahasuerus — Many suppose this king to have been Darius Hystaspes, for his kingdom was thus vast, and he subdued India, as Herodotus reports: and one of his wives was called Atossa, differing little from Hadassah, which is Esther’s other name, Esther 2:7. But the most likely opinion, and that which is approved by Josephus, the Septuagint, and the apocryphal additions to the book of Esther, is, that this Ahasuerus of the Scripture was Artaxerxes Longimanus, as he is called by the heathen writers. One thing is certain, that he was one of the Persian kings, and a successor of Cyrus the Great, for there was no such large empire in those parts, under one king, before Cyrus’s time.

Verse 1. From India even to Ethiopia. Darius the Mede appointed one hundred and twenty governors. Hence it appears that this Ahasuérus, the Xerxes Longimanus of Herodotus, had enlarged his conquests, and made the Ganges and the Nile his boundaries.

THE ROYAL FEAST AT SHUSHAN, 1-9.

1. This is Ahasuerus — Our author is careful to distinguish this Ahasuerus from other monarchs of the same name who are mentioned in the Hebrew books. We read of a Median Ahasuerus in Daniel 9:1, and in Ezra 4:6 Cambyses, son of Cyrus, bears the same name. Neither of these, however, reigned from India even unto Ethiopia, that is, from the Indus to the Upper Nile. But as three different Persian kings reigned over this extent of country, we conclude that the name Ahasuerus was not, as some have imagined, a title common to all the kings of Persia. Only one of these three wide-ruling sovereigns was known as Ahasuerus, and him we identify with Xerxes, the son and successor of Darius Hystaspis. For the argument by which this opinion is supported, see Introduction. The word India (wdh, Hoddu) occurs in the Bible only here and in Esther 8:9, and designates the country bordering on the river Indus, but not including, as now, the whole peninsula of Hindostan. Ethiopia — Hebrew, Gush; the name of an indefinite extent of country bordering on the south of Egypt, and watered by the branches of the Upper Nile. Herodotus mentions (vii, 9) both Indians and Ethiopians as subjects of Xerxes. A hundred and seven and twenty provinces — These provinces were subdivisions of the Persian empire, according to races or tribes inhabiting different localities. They are not to be confounded with satrapies, for one satrapy might include many provinces. Darius Hystaspis divided the empire into twenty satrapies, (Herod., 3:89,) each of which comprised a number of nations or tribes. The Jewish community at Jerusalem formed a province, (Ezra 2:1; Nehemiah 1:3,) but it was under a governor of the region west of the Euphrates. See note on Ezra 5:3. Darius the Mede set over his Babylonian kingdom one hundred and twenty “princes,” (Daniel 6:2,) but these were not the same as the Persian satraps, who resembled rather the “three presidents of whom Daniel was first,” while the “princes” were probably more like the rulers of provinces in the later Persian empire.

V. 2. Sat-Was settled in the peaceable possession of it. Shushan-The chief or royal city. Shushan might be the proper name of the palace, which thence was given to the whole city. Here the kings of Persia used to keep their courts in winter, as at Exbatana in summer.

Verse 2. Sat on the throne of his kingdom] Having subdued all his enemies, and brought universal peace to his empire. See the commencement of the introduction.

Shushan the palace] The ancient city of Susa, now called [Persian] Shuster by the Persians. This, with Ecbatana and Babylon, was a residence of the Persian kings. The word hrybh habbirah, which we render the palace, should be rendered the city, en Sousoiv th polei, as in the Septuagint.

Verse 2. When Ahasuerus sat on the throne of his kingdom — Was settled in the quiet possession of it, enjoying peace and tranquillity throughout his large dominions; which was in Shushan the palace — “Which, after the conquest of the Medes, was made by Cyrus, and the rest of the Persian kings, the royal seat, that they might not be too far from Babylon. It stood upon the river Ulai, and was a place of such renown, that Strabo calls it, “a city most worthy to be praised,” informing us, that the whole country about it was amazingly fruitful, producing a hundred and sometimes two hundred fold. Darius Hystaspes enlarged and beautified it with a most magnificent palace, which Aristotle calls “a wonderful royal palace, shining with gold, amber, and ivory.” — Dodd. See Prideaux, and Calmet’s Dict. on the word Shushan.

Ver. 2. Sat on the throne. He seems to have been employed till now in some conquest, which made him the terror both of the Grecian and the eastern world. Consequently this was a grand coronation, or a military fête, which continued six months. Here he displayed all his wealth and spoil, which surpassed conception for abundance.

2. Sat on the throne of his kingdom — That is, was quietly and firmly settled in his dominions; an oriental mode of representing an absolute monarch in possession of royal authority and power. The Asiatic kings are thus represented on the monuments, and Xerxes is said to have watched the battles of Thermopylae and Salamis while seated on a throne. Shushan the palace — See note on Nehemiah 1:1.

Verse 3. Made a feast unto all his princes and his servants — By his servants are meant his subjects, who were called servants in the eastern countries. And it was the manner of the Roman emperors, sometimes to feast all the people of Rome, as well as the senate. The power of Persia and Media — The mighty men, the chief officers of state, and commanders of all his forces; whom, by this splendid entertainment, he endeavoured to oblige, and assure to himself. What the occasion of this feast was, is variously conjectured. Some think it was begun on his birth-day; but the next words seem to inform us, that it was to show his magnificent greatness to all his subjects; for in those countries they delighted much in making great feasts, as we read afterward that Alexander, when he was there, entertained four hundred captains, or great commanders, who all sat in silver chairs, &c.

3. The third year of his reign — This coincides with the time just after his reduction of Egypt, when, according to Herodotus, (vii, 7, 8,) Xerxes convoked a great assembly of the principal Persians, the chiefs of the empire, to deliberate on his expedition against Greece. This coincidence is no light argument for identifying Ahasuerus with Xerxes. Made a feast — Among the Persians and other oriental nations it was a custom for kings and generals to give a grand banquet after a victory, or upon a great state occasion. So in the Book of Judith, (i, 16,) Nebuchadnezzar returns from a great victory and feasts his army one hundred and twenty days. So Cyrus feasted the Persians when he wished to unite them in revolt from the power of Media. (Herod., 1:126.) Belshazzar feasted a thousand nobles, (Daniel 5:1,) and, according to Quintus Curtius, ten thousand men were present at one of Alexander’s festivals. All his princes and his servants — That is, all the rulers of the one hundred and twenty-seven provinces, and other officers, civil and military, who held positions of honour and power under the king. These are further defined as the power of Persia and Media, the elite of the empire, as represented in the nobles and princes of the provinces. The nobles were of a rank superior to the princes, or rulers of provinces. They were, next to the king, the great magnates of the empire, the first men of the nation. The word rendered nobles, (µymtrp,) is of Persian origin, and signifies first. No ordinary occasion was this great banquet of Ahasuerus, when before him were assembled these representatives of his power. The repeated mention in this chapter (comp. verses 14, 18, 19) of Persia and Media, always naming Persia first, shows that at the time of this feast Persia had supremacy over the Medes. Compare the opposite usage in Daniel 5:28; 6:8; 12:15; 8:20; when the Median power was yet in the ascendency.

V. 4. Many days-Making every day a magnificent feast, either for all his princes, or for some of them, who might come to the feast successively, as the king ordered them to do. The Persian feasts are much celebrated in authors, for their length and luxury.

Verse 4. The riches of his glorious kingdom] Luxury was the characteristic of the Eastern monarchs, and particularly of the Persians. In their feasts, which were superb and of long continuance, they made a general exhibition of their wealth, grandeur, &c., and received the highest encomiums from their poets and flatterers. Their ostentation on such occasions passed into a proverb: hence Horace:—

Persicos odi, puer, apparatus:

Displicent nexæ philyra coronæ;

Mitte sectari, rosa quo locorum

Sera moretur.

I tell thee, boy, that I detest

The grandeur of a Persian feast;

Nor for me the linden’s rind

Shall the flowery chaplet bind.

Then search not where the curious rose

Beyond his season loitering grows.

FRANCIS.

Verse 4. Many days, even a hundred and fourscore days — Making every day a magnificent feast either for all his princes, or for some of them, who might come to the feast successively, as the king ordered them to do. The Persian feasts are much celebrated in authors for their length and luxury.

4. When he showed — Literally, in his showing; that is, while he showed or descanted on his wealth and power. The riches of his glorious kingdom and the honour of his excellent majesty are not to be understood of the wealth and magnificence displayed at the royal banquet, but rather the extent and vast resources of his empire, as exhibited by the number and dignity of his guests. If his object in assembling these great officers of his realm was to deliberate on the invasion of Greece, we see a reason for this showing of his vast wealth and power. He would thus convince his princes of his abundant ability to conquer Greece. A hundred and fourscore days — We are not to understand, as some have done, that the royal feast continued all these six months. The great banquet was given, as the next verse shows, after these days had expired. But many a feast of less note might have been held during the one hundred and eighty days. Ctesias relates that the king of Persia furnished provisions daily for twenty-five thousand men. We need not suppose, however, that all the princes of the empire were absent from their homes and entertained for six months at Shushan; but rather, as Rawlinson suggests, “we may conclude that the time was extended in order to allow of the different persons making their appearance at the court successively.” Xerxes is said to have been four years in mustering his forces and making preparations for his expedition against the Greeks, (Herod., 7:20,) and he might well have spent the half of one year in consulting with his nobles, forming plans, and estimating the character and extent of his resources.

Verse 5. A feast unto all the people] The first was a feast for the nobles in general; this, for the people of the city at large. In the court of the garden] As the company was very numerous that was to be received, no apartments in the palace could be capable of containing them; therefore the court of the garden was chosen.

Verse 5. Made a feast unto all the people in Shushan — Not only to the inhabitants of Shushan, but to all that were then present in the city out of all parts of his dominions. In the court of the garden of the king’s palace — In the entrance of the royal palace. The Persian gardens were exceedingly large and pleasant.

5. When these days were expired — That is, at the end of the one hundred and eighty days. Unto all the people that were present in Shushan — Literally, as the margin, all that were found at Shushan. Probably not all the princes of the empire were to be found at the palace at the same time, but such of them as were found there at the time indicated were honoured with this magnificent banquet. But this feast was not for the princes only, but for all the people, irrespective of rank, for the writer is careful to say that it was made both unto great and small. Some have supposed two banquets, one lasting one hundred and eighty, and the other seven days, the former for the princes and nobles, the latter for the inhabitants of Shushan. But this supposition is unnecessary. No doubt the one hundred and eighty days, as remarked above, were enlivened by many a feast, at which only nobles and princes were present; but this grand feast, which lasted seven days, was an occasion of general revelry, in which princes and people alike participated. The court of the garden of the king’s palace — Oriental palaces had a park or garden connected with them, adorned with trees and fountains. The court of such garden was either the great hall that opened immediately upon it or the garden itself. Loftus identifies this court with the great colonnade, of which we have given a cut on page 436. He remarks: “It stands on an elevation in the centre of the mound, the remainder of which we may well imagine to have been occupied, after the Persian fashion, with a garden and fountains. Thus the colonnade would represent the ‘court of the garden of the king’s palace,’ with its ‘pillars of marble.’ I am even inclined to believe that the expression ‘Shushan the palace,’ applies especially to this portion of the existing ruins in contradistinction to the citadel and the city of Shushan.” But according to Fergusson, “the feast took place, not in the interior of any hall, but out of doors, in tents erected in one of the courts of the palace, such as we may easily fancy existed in front of either the eastern or western porches of the great central building.” Comp. note on Esther 5:1. 6. White, green, and blue — White and blue, or violet, seem to have been royal colours in Persia. Comp. Esther 8:15. The great hall of marble pillars was adorned with hangings of various colours and materials, which were fastened in festoon-like form to the pillars, and served probably both for ornament and awning. It is difficult to identify precisely the various colours and substances mentioned in this verse. Keil renders the whole verse thus: White stuff, variegated and purple hangings, fastened with cords of byssus and purple to silver rings and marble pillars; couches of gold and silver upon a pavement of malachite and marble,

mother-of-pearl and tortoise-shell. “The description,” he remarks, “consists of mere allusions to, or exclamations at, the splendour of the preparations. In the first half of the verse the hangings of the room, in the second the couches for the guests, are noticed.” These couches (which were placed upon the tessellated pavement of the court, and on which the guests reclined at the banquet) were probably not of solid gold and silver, but either “covered with cloth woven of gold and silver thread,” (Keil,) or else mounted and beautifully set with plates of these precious metals. Herodotus (ix, 80-82) makes mention of the vast quantities of gold and silver vessels of various kinds, together with gold and silver couches and tables, and various coloured awnings, (parapetasmata,) which Xerxes carried with him on his expedition to Greece. Strabo (xv, 3, 19) says of the Persians, “their couches, drinking cups, and other articles are so brilliantly ornamented that they gleam with gold and silver.” Other ancient writers also mention the immense wealth of Persia.

V. 6. Beds-For in those eastern countries, they did not then sit at tables as we do, but rested or leaned upon beds or couches.

Verse 6. White, green, and blue hangings] It was customary, on such occasions, not only to hang the place about with elegant curtains of the above colours, as Dr. Shaw and others have remarked, but also to have a canopy of rich stuffs suspended on cords from side to side of the place in which they feasted. And such courts were ordinarily paved with different coloured marbles, or with tiles painted, as above specified. And this was the origin of the Musive or Mosaic work, well known among the Asiatics, and borrowed from them by the Greeks and the Romans.

The beds of gold and silver mentioned here were the couches covered with gold and silver cloth, on which the guests reclined.

Verse 6. Where were white, green, and blue hangings — Set up like tents. The beds were of gold and silver — On which they sat, or rather lay, at their meat. The beds themselves, it is probable, were of the softest wool; but the bedsteads were of gold and silver, that is, studded with gold and silver, or overlaid with plates of them, as the fashion then was. Upon a pavement of red, and blue, and white, and black marble — The Hebrew words babat and shesh, and dar, and sochereth, signify several sorts of marble, as Bochart hath proved beyond contradiction.

THE ROYAL FEAST AT SHUSHAN, 1-9.

1. This is Ahasuerus — Our author is careful to distinguish this Ahasuerus from other monarchs of the same name who are mentioned in the Hebrew books. We read of a Median Ahasuerus in Daniel 9:1, and in Ezra 4:6 Cambyses, son of Cyrus, bears the same name. Neither of these, however, reigned from India even unto Ethiopia, that is, from the Indus to the Upper Nile. But as three different Persian kings reigned over this extent of country, we conclude that the name Ahasuerus was not, as some have imagined, a title common to all the kings of Persia. Only one of these three wide-ruling sovereigns was known as Ahasuerus, and him we identify with Xerxes, the son and successor of Darius Hystaspis. For the argument by which this opinion is supported, see Introduction. The word India (wdh, Hoddu) occurs in the Bible only here and in Esther 8:9, and designates the country bordering on the river Indus, but not including, as now, the whole peninsula of Hindostan. Ethiopia — Hebrew, Gush; the name of an indefinite extent of country bordering on the south of Egypt, and watered by the branches of the Upper Nile. Herodotus mentions (vii, 9) both Indians and Ethiopians as subjects of Xerxes. A hundred and seven and twenty provinces — These provinces were subdivisions of the Persian empire, according to races or tribes inhabiting different localities. They are not to be confounded with satrapies, for one satrapy might include many provinces. Darius Hystaspis divided the empire into twenty satrapies, (Herod., 3:89,) each of which comprised a number of nations or tribes. The Jewish community at Jerusalem formed a province, (Ezra 2:1; Nehemiah 1:3,) but it was under a governor of the region west of the Euphrates. See note on Ezra 5:3. Darius the Mede set over his Babylonian kingdom one hundred and twenty “princes,” (Daniel 6:2,) but these were not the same as the Persian satraps, who resembled rather the “three presidents of whom Daniel was first,” while the “princes” were probably more like the rulers of provinces in the later Persian empire.

Verse 7. Vessels being diverse] They had different services of plate.

7. The vessels being diverse — Literally, vessels from vessels differing, that is, in size, shape, colour, and material. Royal wine — Such as only king’s were wont to use. According to Strabo the special drink of the Persian kings was Chalybonian wine from Syria. According to the state of the king — According to all the other exhibitions of his royal bounty. Compare 1 Kings 10:13.

V. 8. The law-According to this law which the king had now made, that none should compel another to drink more than he pleased. How does this Heathen prince shame many, that are called Christians, who think they do not make their friends welcome, unless they make them drunk, and under pretence of sending the health round, send the sin round, and death with it!

Verse 8. None did compel: for so the king had appointed] Every person drank what he pleased; he was not obliged to take more than he had reason to think would do him good.

Among the Greeks, each guest was obliged to keep the round, or leave the company: hence the proverb H piqi, h apiqi; Drink or begone. To this Horace refers, but gives more license:— Pasco libatis dapibus; prout cuique libido est. Siccat inæquales calices conviva, solutus Legibus insanis: seu quis capit acria fortis Pocula; seu modicis humescit ætius.

HORAT. Sat. lib. ii., s. vi., ver. 67. 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.

FRANCIS.

At the Roman feasts there was a person chosen by the cast of dice, who was the Arbiter bibendi, and prescribed rules to the company, which all were obliged to observe. References to this custom may be seen in the same poet. ODAR. lib. i., Od. iv., ver. 18:— Non regna vini sortiere talis.

And in lib. ii., Od. vii., ver. 25:—

Quem Venus arbitrum

Dicet bibendi?

Mr. Herbert, in his excellent poem, The Church Porch, has five verses on this vile custom and its rule:—

Drink not the third glass, which thou canst not tame When once it is within thee, but before Mayst rule it as thou list; and pour the shame, Which it would pour on thee, upon the floor. It is most just to throw that on the ground, Which would throw me there if I keep the round. He that is drunken may his mother kill, Big with his sister; he hath lost the reins; Is outlawed by himself. All kinds of ill Did with his liquor slide into his veins. The drunkard forfeits man; and doth divest All worldly right, save what he hath by beast. Nothing too severe can be said on this destructive practice.

Verse 8. The drinking was according to the law — The Persians were at first, before they came to have such a great dominion, sober and temperate; but afterward they fell into the manner and luxury of the Medes and Lydians, and excited one another at their feasts to drinking. But upon this occasion the king ordered that there should be nothing of this sort, but every one should drink what he chose, without being challenged to go further, which was agreeable to some ancient law of the Persians, that none should compel another to drink more than he pleased. How does this heathen prince shame many that are called Christians, who think they do not make their friends welcome, unless they make them drunk; and, under pretence of sending the health round, send the sin round, and death with it!

8. The drinking… according to the law — That is, according to a specific decree of the king, which decree was, that there should be no compulsion in the matter of drinking at this feast. This is seen further on in the words, for so the king had appointed to all the officers of his house. He gave orders that his guests should be allowed to drink much or little, or not at all, according to every man’s pleasure. “He respected their national habits,” says Wordsworth, “and did not forget that some of the mountaineer Persian tribes, which retained the simplicity and strictness of their ancient customs, were famous for their temperance.” (XENOPHON, Cyrop., 1:2, 16; AMMIAN. MARCELLINUS, xxiii, 6.) Large quantities of wine were usually drank at Persian festivals, and it is supposed that the custom of pledging guests commonly prevailed to such an extent as to compel many to drink against their will.

V. 9. Women-While the king entertained the men. For this was the common custom of the Persians, that men and women did not feast together.

Verse 9. Also Vashti the queen] [Persian] Vashti is a mere Persian word; and signifies a beautiful or excellent woman.

Made a feast for the women] The king, having subdued all his enemies, left no competitor for the kingdom; and being thus quietly and firmly seated on the throne, made this a time of general festivity. As the women of the East never mingle with the men in public, Vashti made a feast for the Persian ladies by themselves; and while the men were in the court of the garden, the women were in the royal house.

Verse 9. Also Vashti the queen made a feast for the women — While the king entertained the men. For this was the common custom of the Persians, that men and women did not feast together. In the royal house — Not in the open air, as the men were, but more privately, as was fit for women.

Ver. 9. Vashti. Perhaps a surname given her for her beauty, which was inferior to her virtue. The ladies about her were high in rank, but alas, in a moment their queen was thrown from her throne, without either help or hope.

9. Vashti the queen — Rawlinson is inclined to identify this queen with Amestris, and supposes that her divorce and disgrace, recorded in this chapter, may have been only temporary, and that she was restored to her former dignity again in the latter part of Xerxes’ reign. More probably, however, she was not the queen-consort, but a favourite concubine, whom the king delighted to honour. As he lavished royal honours on a favourite officer, (Esther 6:11,) so might he allow a favourite of his harem to make and preside at a feast for the women in the royal house. The Greek writers state that it was a custom of the Persians to introduce their wives and concubines at great feasts, but, when drunken and riotous, they sent their legitimate wives away, and called in the concubines and singing girls.

Verse 10. He commanded Mehuman] All these are doubtless Persian names; but so disguised by passing through a Hebrew medium, that some of them can scarcely be known. [Persian] Mehuman signifies a stranger or guest. We shall find other names and words in this book, the Persian etymology of which may be easily traced.

Ver. 10. The seven chamberlains. The Chaldaic reads “satraps.” The Vulgate reads, “eunuchs.” They are all Persic names, though perhaps changed a little in the Hebrew.

DIVORCE OF VASHTI, 10-22.

10. On the seventh day — The last day of the feast. Compare verse 5. Merry with wine — “The Persians are much addicted to wine,” writes Herodotus, (i, 133.) “They are accustomed to debate the most important affairs when intoxicated, but they reconsider such deliberation the next day, when they are sober, and if they approve it when sober also, they adopt it; if not, they reject it, and whatever they have first resolved on when sober, they reconsider when intoxicated.” This feast of Ahasuerus seems to have increased in riot and drunken revelry as the days passed. The seven chamberlains — Rather, eunuchs, who had principal charge of the royal harem. Their number corresponded to that of the princes, verse 14.

Verse 11. To bring Vashti the queen] The Targum adds naked. For she was fair to look on.] Hence she had her name [Persian] Vashti, which signifies beautiful. See Esther 1:9.

11. The crown royal — “The crown royal, or ordinary headdress of a Persian king, was a stiff cap, probably of felt or cloth, ornamented with a blue and white band or ribbon — which was the diadem proper. The character of the queen’s crown is unknown.” — Rawlinson. This mention of the crown royal does not prove Vashti to have been the principal and legitimate wife of Ahasuerus, for, as shown above, (see note on verse 9,) a favourite concubine may have been thus honoured.

V. 12. Refused-Being favoured in this refusal by the law of Persia, which was to keep mens wives, and especially queens, from the view of other men.

Verse 12. Vashti refused to come] And much should she be commended for it. What woman, possessing even a common share of prudence and modesty, could consent to expose herself to the view of such a group of drunken Bacchanalians? Her courage was equal to her modesty: she would resist the royal mandate, rather than violate the rules of chaste decorum. Her contempt of worldly grandeur, when brought in competition with what every modest woman holds dear and sacred, is worthy of observation. She well knew that this act of disobedience would cost her her crown, if not her life also: but she was regardless of both, as she conceived her virtue and honour were at stake.

Her humility was greatly evidenced in this refusal. She was beautiful; and might have shown herself to great advantage, and have had a fine opportunity of gratifying her vanity, if she had any: but she refused to come.

Hail, noble woman! be thou a pattern to all thy sex on every similar occasion! Surely, every thing considered, we have few women like Vashti; for some of the highest of the land will dress and deck themselves with the utmost splendour, even to the selvedge of their fortunes, to exhibit themselves at balls, plays, galas, operas, and public assemblies of all kinds, (nearly half naked,) that they may be seen and admired of men, and even, to the endless reproach and broad suspicion of their honour and chastity, figure away in masquerades! Vashti must be considered at the top of her sex:—

Rara avis in terris, nigroque simillima cygno.

A black swan is not half so rare a bird.

Verse 12. The queen Vashti refused to come — Being favoured in this refusal by the law of Persia, which was, to keep men’s wives, and especially queens, from the view of other men. His anger burned in him — It was the more immoderate, because his blood was heated with wine, which made his passion too strong for his reason. Otherwise he would not have thought it decent for the queen, nor safe for himself, to have her beauty, which was very great, exposed in this unusual manner, and would have thought she had acted prudently in refusing.

Ver. 12. Vashti refused to come. She relied on the law of custom to hide herself from the eyes of men; so far she was virtuous. Yet the pleasure of the monarch was the greatest of all the Persian laws.

12. Vashti refused to come — Assuming the dignity and boldness of a queen, she refused to be treated as an ordinary concubine, and to suffer her person to be immodestly exposed to the promiscuous crowd of half drunken revellers. “The summons,” remarks Tyrwhitt, “probably found her with a crowd of female guests before her. She might have been loth at another time to obey; but while they looked on, it was a severer trial to be required to abdicate her dignity, and, confessing her royal state his bounty, to cast, as it were, her crown before his footstool.” Only such a king as Xerxes would have made such a demand upon a favourite concubine, but it is perfectly in keeping with his character.

V. 13. The times-The histories of former times, what princes have done in such cases as this was.

Verse 13. To the wise men] Probably the lawyers.

Verse 13. Which knew the times — The histories of former times, what princes had done in such cases as this was, and were well skilled in the laws and customs of their country, and were therefore able to give the king counsel in all extraordinary and perplexed cases. Inasmuch, however, as the Persian kings did nothing without their magi, or wise men, who were great pretenders to astrology, some have supposed that men of this sort were now called in, to know whether it was a proper time to do what the king had in his mind.

13. The wise men, which knew the times — Men versed in the laws and customs of their age and of former times, and, therefore, capable of giving proper counsel on any matters of law or precedent. So was the king’s manner — The regard of the Persians and Medes for their laws is proverbial, and the kings were always careful to consult the wise men, who knew law and judgment, before they proceeded to enact or execute any great or unusual measure.

V. 14. Saw-Who had constant freedom of access to the king, and familiar converse with him: which is thus expressed, because the Persian kings were very seldom seen by their subjects. Sat-Who were his chief counsellors and officers.

Verse 14. And the next unto him-the seven princes] Probably, the privy counsellors of the king. Which saw the king’s face-were at all times admitted to the royal presence.

Verse 14. Which saw the king’s face — Who had constant freedom of access to the king, and opportunities of familiar converse with him; which is thus expressed, because the Persian kings were very seldom seen by their subjects. Who sat the first in the kingdom — Who were his chief counsellors and officers.

14. The seven princes — These seven, whose names are here given, are among the wise men whom he consulted. They were his most intimate counsellors, and the very highest nobles of the empire. See the note on Ezra 7:14. In the name Admatha we may, perhaps, recognise Artabanus, the uncle of Xerxes, (Herod., 7:10,) and in Marsena, his famous general Mardonius.

15. What shall we do… according to law — They are sometimes great sticklers for law who often, in their personal conduct, seem to know no law.

Verse 16. Vashti-hath not done wrong to the king only] This reasoning or arguing was inconsequent and false. Vashti had not generally disobeyed the king, therefore she could be no precedent for the general conduct of the Persian women. She disobeyed only in one particular; and this, to serve a purpose, Memucan draws into a general consequence; and the rest came to the conclusion which he drew, being either too drunk to be able to discern right from wrong, or too intent on reducing the women to a state of vassalage, to neglect the present favourable opportunity.

Verse 16. Vashti the queen hath done wrong to all the princes, &c. — By giving their wives an example and encouragement to contemn and disobey their husbands. It is a crime of a high nature, and therefore deserves an exemplary punishment.

16. Memucan answered — In this address of Memucan we have a genuine specimen of an ingenious Persian courtier. We cannot but admire the skill by which he merges the king’s cause into that of all the princes and husbands of the empire.

DIVORCE OF VASHTI, 10-22.

10. On the seventh day — The last day of the feast. Compare verse 5. Merry with wine — “The Persians are much addicted to wine,” writes Herodotus, (i, 133.) “They are accustomed to debate the most important affairs when intoxicated, but they reconsider such deliberation the next day, when they are sober, and if they approve it when sober also, they adopt it; if not, they reject it, and whatever they have first resolved on when sober, they reconsider when intoxicated.” This feast of Ahasuerus seems to have increased in riot and drunken revelry as the days passed. The seven chamberlains — Rather, eunuchs, who had principal charge of the royal harem. Their number corresponded to that of the princes, verse 14.

V. 18. Contempt-Contempt in the wives, and thereupon wrath in the husbands; and consequently strife in families.

Verse 18. The ladies of Persia] twrc saroth, the princesses; but the meaning is very well expressed by our term ladies.

Verse 18. Thus shall there arise too much contempt and wrath — Contempt in the wives, and thereupon wrath in the husbands, and consequently strife in families, which may produce great and general mischiefs.

18. Ladies — Princesses; those who were with their husbands at the court of Ahasuerus, or at Shushan, where they would at once (this day) hear of Vashti’s deed, that is, both her act and words, and be emboldened to say to their lords what Vashti had said to the king. Contempt and wrath — Contempt on the part of wives for their husbands, and consequent wrath or anger (compare verse 12) on the part of the affronted husbands. This verse should be rendered thus: And this day will the princesses of Persia and Media, who have heard of the word of the queen, say (like words) to all the princes of the king, and (there will be) enough contempt and wrath.

Verse 19. That it be not altered] Let it be inserted among the permanent laws, and made a part of the constitution of the empire. Perhaps the Persians affected such a degree of wisdom in the construction of their laws, that they never could be amended, and should never be repeated. And this we may understand to be the ground of the saying, The laws of the Medes and Persians, that change not.

Verse 19. If it please the king — Which this cunning politician knew it would do. That it be not altered — Which caution was necessary for his own security, lest the king’s anger should cool, and the queen should recover her former state, and the king’s favour, in which case this lord would, most likely, have fallen under his displeasure: but the order being once registered as a law of the kingdom, the king could not alter his decree without disgracing himself.

19. That it be not altered — Literally, and it shall not pass away; that is, it shall remain as a precedent, and be a permanent law for such matters in the empire. On the proverbial inviolability of the laws of the Medes and Persians, compare the marginal references. It originated, probably, in a desire to enhance in the national mind the sacredness of law, and also to forestall capricious and hasty changes in administration. But it was a defective and pernicious principle, making no provision against the capricious enactment of rash and harmful laws, and then allowing no repeal nor modification of them. Practically, however, it was often evaded, and the monarch found some way to make it lawful to do as he pleased. Her royal estate — The queenly privileges and honours with which the king had been pleased to distinguish her. Unto another — Hebrew, her female companion. This expression indicates that she herself was but a concubine, for the monarch’s legitimate marriage with one who was to be principal wife, and who, according to Persian law, (Herod., 3:84,) could be taken only from one of the seven princely families of the empire, would hardly be spoken of in this way.

Verses 20, 21. All the wives shall give to their husbands honour, &c. — None will dare to disobey, when they hear that the greatness of the queen could not preserve her from such a heavy punishment. The saying pleased the king and the princes — Partly because their own authority and interest were concerned in it; and especially by the singular providence of God, who designed to bring about his own great work by this small occasion.

20. Both to great and small — The royal example and decree would thus furnish custom and law for all ranks and classes of people in the empire.

Verses 20, 21. All the wives shall give to their husbands honour, &c. — None will dare to disobey, when they hear that the greatness of the queen could not preserve her from such a heavy punishment. The saying pleased the king and the princes — Partly because their own authority and interest were concerned in it; and especially by the singular providence of God, who designed to bring about his own great work by this small occasion.

DIVORCE OF VASHTI, 10-22.

10. On the seventh day — The last day of the feast. Compare verse 5. Merry with wine — “The Persians are much addicted to wine,” writes Herodotus, (i, 133.) “They are accustomed to debate the most important affairs when intoxicated, but they reconsider such deliberation the next day, when they are sober, and if they approve it when sober also, they adopt it; if not, they reject it, and whatever they have first resolved on when sober, they reconsider when intoxicated.” This feast of Ahasuerus seems to have increased in riot and drunken revelry as the days passed. The seven chamberlains — Rather, eunuchs, who had principal charge of the royal harem. Their number corresponded to that of the princes, verse 14.

Verse 22. That every man should bear rule in his own house] Both God’s law and common sense taught this from the foundation of the world. And is it possible that this did not obtain in the Persian empire, previously to this edict? The twentieth verse has another clause, That all wives shall give to their husbands honour, both to great and small. This also was universally understood. This law did nothing. I suppose the parade of enactment was only made to deprive honest Vashti of her crown. The Targum adds, “That each woman should speak the language of her husband.” If she were even a foreigner, she should be obliged to learn and speak the language of the king. Perhaps there might be some common sense in this, as it would oblige the foreigner to devote much time to study and improvement; and, consequently, to make her a better woman, and a better wife. But there is no proof that this was a part of the decree. But there are so many additions to this book in the principal versions, that we know not what might have made a part of it originally. ESTHER

Verse 22. That it should be published according to the language of every people — That all sorts of persons, not men only, but women also, might understand it, and therefore be inexcusable if they did not comply with it.

Ver. 22. That every man should bear rule in his own house. Very just; but he must not expose his wife, almost naked, to an intoxicated court. He becomes a tyrant who rules above the laws.

22. He sent letters — Herodotus (viii, 98) thus describes the Persian system of letter carrying: “There is nothing mortal that proceeds faster than these messengers. They detail and arrange so many men and horses as there are days’ journeys, a horse and a man being appointed for each day’s journey, and neither snow, nor rain, nor heat, nor night prevents them from finishing their allotted race as soon as possible. The first racer delivers his message to the second, and the second to the third, and so on.” Every province according to the writing thereof — That is, according to its written alphabetical character in use in each province. To every people after their language — According to their vernacular dialect. The same alphabetical character might be used, as is still common, for several different languages. The bilingual and trilingual inscriptions of Persia and other oriental lands are standing evidences and illustrations of the ancient practice of writing public documents in various characters and languages. That every man should bear rule in his own house — No doubt the king’s letters contained much more than this, but we have here only the general purport of the royal decree. Rawlinson remarks that “the undue influence of women in domestic, and even in public, matters is a feature of the ancient Persian monarchy. Herodotus (vii, 8) tells us that Atossa completely ruled Darius. Xerxes himself was, in his later years, shamefully subject to Amestris. (Ibid., 9:111.) The example of the court would naturally infect the people. The decree would, therefore, seem to have been not so much an idle and superfluous act as an ineffectual protest against a real and growing evil.” (Com. in loco.) If the decree itself be considered unnecessary and absurd, let it be remembered that this was not the only absurd thing which Xerxes did. And that it should be published — Our version is here faulty. The latter part of the verse should be rendered, That every man rule in his own house, and speak according to the language of his own people. That is, not only should every man be lord in his family, but he should require his own native language to be used by his wife and children. Multitudes throughout the empire married foreign wives, and the use of different languages in the same household may have often led to other troubles besides those mentioned in Nehemiah 13:24. Foreign wives were therefore required to learn the language of their husbands, in order that the husband’s pre-eminence and authority in his own house might be the better maintained. Some critics have sought to emend the text, so as to make it read, speak all that suited him; but this reading is purely conjectural, sustained by no parallel, and yields but a trivial thought.