Esther · Chapter 3

V. 1. Agagite-An Amalekite of the royal seed of that nation, whose kings were successively called Agag. All the princes-Gave him the first place and seat, which was next to the king.

Verse 1. Haman-the Agagite] Perhaps he was some descendant of that Agag, king of the Amalekites, spared by Saul, but destroyed by Samuel; and on this ground might have an antipathy to the Jews. Set his seat above all the princes] Made him his prime minister, and put all the officers of state under his direction.

Verse 1. After these things — About five years after, as appears from verse

7. Did Ahasuerus promote Haman the Agagite — An Amalekite, of the seed-royal of that nation, whose kings were successively called Agag. And set his seat above all the princes — Gave him the first place and seat which was next the king.

Verse 1. Haman—the Agagite. All the kings of Amalek received the name of Agag. This man is thought, by most critics, to have been of the seed-royal of that devoted nation, who bitterly hated the Jews. Others think that Agag was some town in Persia, where he was born. Vide Sulp. Hist. Sacr. lib. 51.

HAMAN’S PROMOTION, AND THE EDICT AGAINST THE JEWS, 1-15.

1. Haman the son of Hammedatha — “The name Haman is probably the same which is found in the classical writers under the form of Omanes, and which in ancient Persian would have been Umana, or Umanish, an exact equivalent of the Greek Eumenes. Hammedatha is, perhaps, the same as Madata or Mahadata, (Madates of Q. Curtius,) an old Persian name signifying ‘given by (or to) the moon.’” — Rawlinson. The Agagite — Perhaps a descendant of Agag, the Amalekite. 1 Samuel 15:9, 32. It was no impossible thing for a descendant of the royal family of Amalek to become an officer in the court of Persia. Some, however, suggest that the Agagite is an epithet which Jewish hatred has applied to Haman, with the design of associating him with the hated Amalekite. Set his seat above all the princes — Made him his chief favourite and prime minister. Thus Nebuchadnezzar and Darius honoured Daniel, who was also a foreigner. Daniel 2:48; 6:1-3.

V. 2. But, &c.-Probably the worship required was not only civil, but Divine: which as the kings of Persia arrogated to themselves, so they did sometimes impart this honour to some of their chief favourites, that they should be adored in like manner. And that it was so here, seems more than probable, because it was superfluous, to give an express command to all the kings servants, to pay a civil respect to so great a prince, which of course they used, and therefore a Divine honour must be here intended. And that a Jew should deny this honour, is not strange, seeing the wise Grecians did positively refuse to give this honour to the kings of Persia themselves, even when they were to make their addresses to them: and one Timocrates was put to death by the Athenians for worshipping Darius in that manner.

Verse 2. The king’s servants, that were in the king’s gate] By servants here, certainly a higher class of officers are intended than porters; and Mordecai was one of those officers, and came to the gate with the others who were usually there in attendance to receive the commands of the king. Mordecai bowed not] [rky al lo yichra. “He did not bow down;” nor did him reverence, hwjtvy alw velo yishtachaveh, “nor did he prostrate himself.” I think it most evident, from these two words, that it was not civil reverence merely that Haman expected and Mordecai refused; this sort of respect is found in the word [rk cara, to bow. This sort of reverence Mordecai could not refuse without being guilty of the most inexcusable obstinacy, nor did any part of the Jewish law forbid it. But Haman expected, what the Persian kings frequently received, a species of Divine adoration; and this is implied in the word hjv shachah, which signifies that kind of prostration which implies the highest degree of reverence that can be paid to God or man, lying down flat on the earth, with the hands and feet extended, and the mouth in the dust.

The Targum, says that Haman set up a statue for himself, to which every one was obliged to bow, and to adore Haman himself. The Jews all think that Mordecai refused this prostration because it implied idolatrous adoration. Hence, in the Apocryphal additions to this book, Mordecai is represented praying thus: “Thou knowest that if I have not adored Haman, it was not through pride, nor contempt, nor secret desire of glory; for I felt disposed to kiss the footsteps of his feet (gladly) for the salvation of Israel: but I feared to give to a man that honour which I know belongs only to my God.”

Verse 2. For the king had so commanded concerning him — To bow the knee, and give reverence to all great persons, was a common respect due to them, and there needed not a particular command from the king requiring it to be shown by all his servants to Haman; since, no doubt, they paid it to all princes, and would much more pay it to him who took place of them all, and was his sovereign’s favourite. There was therefore, probably, more implied in the reverence commanded to be paid to him than what proceeded from a mere civil respect. The kings of Persia, we know, required a kind of divine adoration from all who approached them; and, as they arrogated this to themselves, so they sometimes imparted it to their chief friends and favourites, which seems to have been the case with regard to Haman at this time. And if so, we need not wonder that a righteous Jew should deny that honour, or the outward expressions of it, to any man; since the wise and sober Grecians positively refused to give it to their very kings themselves, the people of Athens once passing sentence of death on one Timocrates, a citizen of theirs, for prostrating himself before Darius, though he was then one of the greatest monarchs upon earth. The author of the apocryphal additions to the book of Esther seems to imply that this was the case of Mordecai, whom he introduces praying thus, chap. 13:12, &c. “Thou knowest, O Lord, that it is not in contempt, or pride, nor for any desire of glory, that I did not bow down to proud Haman, for I would willingly kiss his feet for the salvation of Israel; but I did this, that I might not prefer the glory of man to the glory of God, nor adore any one but thee my Lord alone.” See Valer. Max., lib. 6, cap. 3. We may observe further here, that Mordecai should refuse to pay such obeisance, as all others paid to Haman at this time, will appear the less strange, if we consider that Haman being of that nation against which God pronounced a curse, (Exodus 17:14,) Mordecai might think himself, on this account, not obliged to pay him the reverence which he expected; and if the rest of the Jews had the like notion of him, this might be a reason sufficient for his extending his resentment against the whole nation. See Dodd.

Ver. 2. Mordecai bowed not, because, as the Jews say, there was a mixture of divine as well as human homage, paid here to the king’s minister.

2. The king’s servants… bowed — This was but a mark of respect to any officer of high rank, and is a common custom in all courts. Reverenced Haman — The Hebrew involves the idea of prostrate reverence as to a superior being — bowing on the knees, and touching the forehead to the ground. µywjtvm. Septuagint, prosekunoun, fell prostrate, worshipped. Vulgate, Flectebant genua et adorabant — bowed their knees and adored. The Chaldee paraphrase has it that they bowed down to a statue which had been set up in honour of Haman. This at once explains why Mordecai bowed not. Haman required worship like a god, and this would have been idolatry with a Jew. Mordecai is represented in the apocryphal Esther (xiii, 12) as praying: “Thou knowest, Lord, that it was neither in contempt nor pride that I did not bow down to Haman; for I would have been glad, for the salvation of Israel, to kiss the soles of his feet. But I did this that I might not glorify man more than God; neither would I worship any, O God, but thee.”

3. Why transgressest thou? — Mordecai answered this question, as we learn from the next verse, by confessing that he was a Jew, and the rules of his religion would not allow him to offer the semblance of divine honours to a mortal.

V. 4. To see-What the event of it would be. For, &c.-And therefore did not deny this reverence out of pride, but merely out of conscience.

Verse 4. To see whether Mordecai’s matters would stand — Whether he would persist in his refusal, and what the event of it would be; for he had told them that he was a Jew — And therefore did not deny this reverence to Haman out of pride, or any personal grudge against him, much less from a rebellious mind, and contempt of the king’s authority and command, but merely out of conscience, being obliged, as a Jew, to give such honour to God only.

4. He hearkened not unto them — He would not be persuaded from his purpose to remain true to the principles of his religion. His course was dictated, not by obstinacy, but by firmness of religious principle. Herodotus (vii, 136) relates the case of certain Spartans who visited Shushan in the time of Xerxes, and, when ushered into the royal presence, refused to prostrate themselves and worship the king, on the ground that it was contrary to their customs to worship a man. They told Haman — Until they told him, Haman seems not to have noticed that Mordecai did not bow down to him. Whether Mordecai’s matters would stand — Whether the religious scruples of a Jew would be tolerated in opposition to Persian laws and customs.

Verse 5. Then was Haman full of rage — Josephus tells us, that Haman, taking notice of this singularity in Mordecai, asked him what countryman he was, and finding him to be a Jew, broke out into a violent exclamation at his insolence, and in his rage formed the desperate resolution, not only to be revenged on Mordecai, but to destroy the whole race of the Jews; well remembering that his ancestors, the Amalekites, had been formerly driven out of their country, and almost exterminated by the Jews.

HAMAN’S PROMOTION, AND THE EDICT AGAINST THE JEWS, 1-15.

1. Haman the son of Hammedatha — “The name Haman is probably the same which is found in the classical writers under the form of Omanes, and which in ancient Persian would have been Umana, or Umanish, an exact equivalent of the Greek Eumenes. Hammedatha is, perhaps, the same as Madata or Mahadata, (Madates of Q. Curtius,) an old Persian name signifying ‘given by (or to) the moon.’” — Rawlinson. The Agagite — Perhaps a descendant of Agag, the Amalekite. 1 Samuel 15:9, 32. It was no impossible thing for a descendant of the royal family of Amalek to become an officer in the court of Persia. Some, however, suggest that the Agagite is an epithet which Jewish hatred has applied to Haman, with the design of associating him with the hated Amalekite. Set his seat above all the princes — Made him his chief favourite and prime minister. Thus Nebuchadnezzar and Darius honoured Daniel, who was also a foreigner. Daniel 2:48; 6:1-3.

V. 6. Scorn-He thought that vengeance was unsuitable to his quality. Destroy-Which he attempted, from that implacable hatred which, as an Amalekite, he had against them; from his rage against Mordecai; and from Mordecai’s reason of this contempt, because he was a Jew, which as he truly judged, extended itself to all the Jews, and would equally engage them all in the same neglect. And doubtless Haman included those who were returned to their own land: for that was now a province of his kingdom.

Verse 6. And he thought scorn to lay hands on Mordecai alone — He thought that particular vengeance was unsuitable to his quality, and to the greatness of the injury; wherefore Haman sought to destroy all the Jews — Which he attempted from that implacable hatred which, as an Amalekite, he had against them; from his rage against Mordecai; and from Mordecai’s reason of this contempt, because he was a Jew, which, as he truly judged, extended itself to all the Jews, and would equally engage them all in the same neglect. And doubtless Haman included, those who were returned to their own land; for that was now a province of his kingdom.

6. He thought scorn — Literally, it was contemptible in his eyes. To punish Mordecai alone was too little a thing, in his estimation, to reconcile his offended honour. The whole nation or race of Mordecai must perish to make atonement for this his sole offence. Such wholesale massacres were not uncommon in the East. For the offence of the pseudo-Smerdis the Persians sought to destroy all the Magi, and even celebrated the event by a festival called Magophonia — “the slaughter of the Magi.” — Herod., 3:79. Such a tyrant as Xerxes, with such a minister as Haman were just the men to cause such slaughter upon slight provocation.

V. 7. They cast-The diviners cast lots, according to the custom of those people, what day, and what month would be most lucky, not for his success with the king (of which he made no doubt) but for the most effectual extirpation of the Jews. Wherein appears likewise both his implacable malice, and unwearied diligence in seeking vengeance of them with so much trouble to himself; and God’s singular providence in disposing the lot to that time, that the Jews might have space to get the decree reversed.

Verse 7. The first month] That is, of the civil year of the Jews. The month Nisan] Answering to a part of our March and April. The twelfth year of king Ahasuerus] According to the chronology in our Bibles, about five hundred and ten years before Christ. They cast Pur, that is, the lot] This appears to be the Hebrew corruption of the pure Persian word [Persian] pari, which signifies any thing that happens fortuitously. There is an addition here in the Greek text that was probably in the original, and which makes this place very plain. I shall set down the whole verse, and give the Greek in a parenthesis, that it may be read consecutively with what is in the Hebrew: “In the first month, that is, the month Nisan, in the twelfth year of King Ahasuerus, they cast Pur, that is, the lot, before Haman, from day to day, and from month to month.” (wste apolesai en mia hmera to genov Mardocaiou, kai epesen o klhrov eiv thn teserakaidekathn tou mhnov ov estin Adar, “that they might destroy in one day the people of Mordecai; and the lot fell on the fourteenth day of the month Adar.”)

We see plainly intimated by the Hebrew text that they cast lots, or used a species of divination, to find which of the twelve months would be the most favourable for the execution of Haman’s design; and, having found the desired month, then they cast lots, or used divination, to find out which day of the said month would be the lucky day for the accomplishment of the enterprise. But the Hebrew text does not tell us the result of this divination; we are left to guess it out; but the Greek supplies this deficiency, and makes all clear. From it we find that, when they cast for the month, the month Adar was taken; and when they cast for the day, the fourteenth (Heb. thirteenth) of that month was taken.

Some have questioned whether Pur may not have signified also some game of chance, which they played before or with Haman, from day to day, to divert him from his melancholy, till the lucky time came in which he was to have the gratification of slaying all the people who were objects of his enmity; or they cast lots, or played, who should get the property of such and such opulent families. Holinshed, one of our ancient historians, informs us that, previously to the battle of Agincourt, the English army, under Henry V., were so thinned and weakened by disease, and the French army so numerous, that “Frenchmen, in the mean while, as though they had been sure of victory, made great triumphe, for the captaines had determined before how to divide the spoil; and the souldiers, the night before, had plaied the Englishmen at dice.” To this the chorus of Shakspeare alludes:—

“Proud of their numbers, and secure of soul,

The confident and over-lusty French

Do the low-rated English play at dice.

—————The poor condemned English,

Like sacrifices by their watchful fires,

Sit patiently and inly ruminate

The morning’s danger; and their gestures sad,

Investing lank-lean cheeks, and war-worn coats,

Presenteth them unto the gazing moon

So many horrid ghosts.

HEN. V.

Monstrelet, who is an impartial writer, does not mention this. Did Haman and his flatterers intend to divide the spoils of the designed-to-be-massacred Jews in some such manner as this?

Verse 7. They cast Pur, that is, the lot — “Haman, being determined to destroy Mordecai and the Jews, called together his diviners, to find out what day would be most lucky for his putting this design into execution. The way of divination, then in use among the eastern people, was by casting lots; and therefore having tried in this manner, first each month, and then each day in every month, they came to a determination at last, that the thirteenth day of the twelfth month would be most fortunate for the bloody execution. It was in the first month of the year when Haman began to cast lots, and the time for the execution of the Jews was by these lots delayed till the last month of the year; which plainly shows, that though the lot be cast into the lap, yet the whole disposing thereof is from the Lord, Proverbs 16:33. For hereby almost a whole year intervened between the design and its execution, which gave time for Mordecai to acquaint Queen Esther with it, and for her to intercede with the king for the revoking or suspending the decree, and thereby preventing the conspiracy. The reader will find this decree in Joseph. Antiq., lib. 11, cap.

6. Houbigant renders this verse, The lot, which is called Pur, was drawn before Haman from day to day, from month to month, for the twelfth month.” See Poole and Dodd.

Ver. 7. They cast Pur, a Persian word for lot. A lot respecting the scape-goat was proper, that being a case of perfect indifference; but here the design was to throw the blame of massacring an afflicted nation upon fate.

7. The first month… Nisan — Corresponding nearly with our April. It was the first month of the Jewish year, the month of the passover. Exodus 12:2. It was called also Abib. Exodus 13:4; 34:18. They cast Pur — Pur is a Persian word, and, according to our author, signifies the lot. Haman’s diviners cast lots before him in order to determine a favourable or lucky day for carrying out his fierce design against the Jews. “The practice of casting lots,” says Rawlinson, “to obtain a lucky day, remains still in the East, and is probably extremely ancient. Assyrian calendars note lucky and unlucky days as early as the eighth century B.C. Lots were in use both among the oriental and the classical nations from a remote antiquity. From day to day — We are not to understand that they spent a whole year in casting lots. On the first month they cast lots for each day of the month, and for each month of the year, and then, comparing all together, decided which was the most lucky day for their purpose. They fixed upon the thirteenth day of the twelfth month. Verse 13; 8:12; 9:1. To the twelfth month — Literally, from month to month the twelfth. The twelfth month was called Adar, and corresponds nearly with our March. We should not fail to observe the providence that so disposed the lot in this case (Proverbs 16:33) as to defer the execution of Haman’s bloody design for nearly a year, thus affording time for Mordecai and Esther to secure its defeat.

Verse 8. Their laws are diverse from all people] Such they certainly were; for they worshipped the true God according to his own laws; and this was not done by any other people then on the face of the earth.

Verse 8. And Haman said unto King Ahasuerus — After he had found which would be a lucky day for putting his design into execution; There is a certain people scattered abroad — Mean and contemptible, not worthy to be named; and dispersed among the people — Who therefore, if tolerated, may poison all thy subjects with their pernicious principles, and whom thou mayest easily crush, without any great noise or difficulty; in all the provinces of thy kingdom — For though many of their brethren were returned to their own land, yet great numbers of them stayed behind, either because they preferred their ease and worldly advantages before their spiritual profit, or they wanted conveniences or opportunity for removing; and their laws are diverse from all people — They have rites, and customs, and a religion peculiar to themselves; and therefore are justly offensive to all thy subjects, and may either infect them with their notions, or occasion great dissensions and distractions among them; neither keep they the king’s laws — As is manifest by Mordecai’s bold contempt of thy late edict concerning me, which contempt being shown by him as a Jew, the whole nation are involved in his crime, and are prepared to do the same when they have occasion; therefore it is not for the king’s profit to suffer them — To wit, to live in this kingdom. I do not seek herein so much my own revenge as thy service.

8. A certain people scattered abroad — Emphatically such were the Jews at this time. From the fall of Samaria, (2 Kings 17:6,) the tribes of Israel had become more and more dispersed among the people in all the provinces of the East, until their tribe divisions could be now but faintly recognised. Many had returned to Jerusalem, as the Book of Ezra shows, and others returned afterwards, but thousands more continued to dwell in the various countries whither they had become dispersed. Their laws are diverse from all people — The Jews were, unquestionably, “a peculiar people,” and adherence to their customs brought Mordecai and Haman into conflict. Neither keep they the king’s laws — Mordecai’s offence was not the first instance of a Jew’s refusal, from religions scruples, to keep the laws of the heathen kings. Instance the case of Daniel and his companions, (Daniel 1:8; 3:16-18; 6:10,) and compare the charge of the Samaritan chiefs, Ezra 4:12-16.

Verse 9. Let it be written that they may be destroyed] Let it be enacted that they may all be put to death. By this he would throw all the odium off himself, and put it on the king and his counsellors; for he wished the thing to pass into a law, in which he could have but a small share of the blame. I will pay ten thousand talents of silver] He had said before that it was not for the king’s profit to suffer them; but here he is obliged to acknowledge that there will be a loss to the revenue, but that loss he is willing to make up out of his own property.

Ten thousand talents of silver is an immense sum indeed; which, counted by the Babylonish talent, amounts to two millions one hundred and nineteen thousand pounds sterling; but, reckoned by the Jewish talent, it makes more than double that sum.

Those who cavil at the Scriptures would doubtless call this one of the many absurdities which, they say, are so plenteously found in them, supposing it almost impossible for an individual to possess so much wealth. But though they do not believe the Bible, they do not scruple to credit Herodotus, who, lib. vii., says that when Xerxes went into Greece, Pythius the Lydian had two thousand talents of silver, and four millions of gold darics, which sums united make near five millions and a half sterling. Plutarch tells us, in his life of Crassus, that after this Roman general had dedicated the tenth of all he had to Hercules, he entertained the Roman people at ten thousand tables, and distributed to every citizen as much corn as was sufficient for three months; and after all these expenses, he had seven thousand one hundred Roman talents remaining, which is more than a million and a half of English money.

In those days silver and gold were more plentiful than at present, as we may see in the yearly revenue of Solomon, who had of gold from Ophir, at one voyage, four hundred and fifty talents, which make three millions two hundred and forty thousand pounds sterling; and his annual income was six hundred and sixty-six talents of silver, which make four millions seven hundred and ninety-five thousand two hundred pounds English money. In addition to the above I cannot help subjoining the following particulars:—

Crassus, who was mentioned before, had a landed estate valued at one million six hundred and sixty-six thousand six hundred and sixty-six pounds thirteen shillings and four pence.

C. Cœcilius Ridorus, after having lost much in the civil war, left by will effects amounting to one million forty-seven thousand one hundred and sixty pounds.

Lentullus, the augur, is said to have possessed no less than three millions three hundred and thirty-three thousand three hundred and thirty-three pounds six shillings and eight pence.

Apicius was worth more than nine hundred and sixteen thousand six hundred and seventy-one pounds thirteen shillings and four pence; who, after having spent in his kitchen eight hundred and thirty-three thousand three hundred and thirty-three pounds six shillings and eight pence, and finding that he had no more left than eighty-three thousand three hundred and thirty-three pounds six shillings and eight pence, considered it so little for his support, that he judged it best to put an end to his life by poison! The superfluous furniture of M. Scaurus, which was burnt at Tusculum, was valued at no less than eight hundred and thirty-three thousand three hundred and thirty-two pounds thirteen shillings and four pence. Anthony owed, at the ides or March, the sum of three hundred and thirty-three thousand three hundred and thirty-three pounds six shillings and six pence, which he paid before the calends of April. None of these men were in trade, to account for the circulation of such immense sums through their hands. See DICKSON’S Husband. of the Anc.

Verse 9. Let it be written that they may be destroyed — Let a written edict from the king be published for that purpose; and I will pay ten thousand talents of silver — Whether these were Hebrew, or Babylonish, or Grecian talents, we cannot certainly know. But whichsoever they were, it was a vast sum to be paid by a private person, being probably above three millions sterling, and shows how outrageously he was bent on the destruction of the Jews. But undoubtedly Haman expected to get that sum, and much more, by seizing on all their effects. To the hands of those that have the charge of the business — Not of those who should have the charge to kill them, but of those that received the king’s money, as appears by the next words, to bring it into the king’s treasuries.

Ver. 9. I will pay ten thousand talents of silver: £3,415,000, almost three millions and a half of our money. He would part with all his wealth to be avenged of the Jews! It is mysterious to us how an individual could possess so much wealth. He would soothe his conscience by the recollection of what Saul had done to Amalek six hundred and forty years before. 1 Samuel 15.

9. Ten thousand talents of silver — Nearly $1,700,000. Haman doubtless expected to pay this amount from the Jewish spoils. Compare verse 13. Those that have the charge of the business — Namely, the business of superintending, receiving, and depositing the revenues of the kingdom.

Verse 10. The king took his ring] In this ring was no doubt included his privy seal, and he gave this to Haman, that when he had formed such a decree as he thought fit, he might seal it with this ring, which would give it its due force and influence among the rulers of the provinces. The privy seal of many of our sovereigns appears to have been inserted in their rings; and the seals of Eastern potentates were worn in rings upon their fingers. One such seal, once the property of the late Tippoo Sultan, lies before me; the inscription is deeply cut in silver, which is set in a massy carriage of gold. This, as fitted to the finger, he probably kept always on his hand, to be ready to seal despatches, &c., or it might be carried by a confidential officer for the same purpose, as it seems to refer to one of the chief cutcheries, or military officers.

Verse 10. And the king took his ring from his hand, &c. — Without any examination into the condition of the people, he consented to their destruction. So loath are men that love their pleasure to take any pains to distinguish between truth and falsehood. And gave it unto Haman — That he might keep it as a badge of his supreme authority under the king, and that he might use it for the sealing of this decree which was now made, or of any other that might be made hereafter. The Agagite, the Jews’ enemy — Such he was, both by inclination, as he was an Amalekite, and especially by this destructive design and resolution.

Ver. 10. The king took his ring from his hand. This gave Haman a power to seal with the king’s seal, whatever letters he pleased against the Jews: and from the offer which Haman made of ten thousand talents, it is obvious the king had scrupled for awhile to destroy the Jews, on the ground of political damage to his kingdom.

10. Took his ring… and gave it unto Haman — This was done for the purpose of sealing with irrevocable authority the letters which Haman designed (see verse 12) to send to all the rulers of the provinces; “for the writing which is written in the king’s name, and sealed with the king’s ring may no man reverse.” Esther 8:8. Many ancient signet rings have been discovered, some made of gold, others of various kinds of stone. Those made of stone are usually cylindrical. The signet cylinder of Darius Hystaspes bears a trilingual inscription which reads, “Darius the Great King,” and also a picture of the king hunting lions in a palm grove.

V. 11. The silver-Keep it to thy own use; I accept the offer for the deed.

Verse 11. The silver is given to thee — Keep it for thy own use, I do not desire it. I accept thy offer for the deed. So that he gave him power to draw up what decree he pleased, and seal it with the king’s ring; but as for the money, he assured him he would have none of it. What inhumanity was this! to give so many people unheard to death to please a favourite!

11. The silver is given to thee — Instead of bringing the spoil of silver into the royal treasury, Haman is permitted to keep it for himself. Xerxes was the only Persian despot whose favouritism, vanity, and prodigality would readily allow such a loss from his own treasury.

Verse 12. Unto the king’s lieutenants] ynprdvja achashdarpeney. This is in all probability another Persian word, for there is nothing like it in the Hebrew language, nor can it be fairly deduced from any roots in that tongue. The Vulgate translates ad omnes satrapas regis, to all the satraps of the king. It is very likely that this is the true sense of the word, and that the ynprdvja achsadrapani, as it may be pronounced, is the Chaldee or Hebrew corruption of the Persian word [Persian] satraban, the plural of [Persian] satrab, a Persian peer, though the word is now nearly obsolete in the Persian language; for since the conquest of Persia by Mohammedanism, the names of officers are materially changed, as something of Islamism is generally connected with the titles of officers both civil and military, as well as religious.

Verses 12, 13. Then were the king’s scribes called — This he did so speedily, though it was a year before the intended execution, lest the king should change his mind, either through his own clemency, or the persuasion of others. It was, however, not wisely judged to let his design be known so long before it was to take effect; for the Jews might find some way to deliver themselves, or might steal out of the kingdom: but undoubtedly this was so ordered by the overruling providence of God. And to take the spoil of them for a prey — Which was to induce the people to use the greater severity and readiness to execute this edict for their own advantage.

12. The king’s scribes — See note on 2 Samuel 8:17. The thirteenth day — Having fixed on the thirteenth of Adar (verse 13) for the execution of his bloody design, he seems to have purposely selected the corresponding day of the first month for the beginning of his work. Lieutenants — Satraps. See note on Ezra 8:36. Governors — Or prefects. On this word, which is rendered deputies in Esther 8:9 and 9:3, see notes, Ezra 5:3 and 2 Kings 18:24. Rulers — Or princes. The writing… their language — See note on chap. 1:22.

Verse 13. To destroy, so kill, and to cause to perish] To put the whole of them to death in any manner, or by every way and means. Take the spoil of them for a prey.] Thus, whoever killed a Jew had his property for his trouble! And thus the hand of every man was armed against this miserable people. Both in the Greek version and in the Latin the copy of this order is introduced at length, expressing “the king’s desire to have all his dominions in quiet and prosperity; but that he is informed that this cannot be expected, while a certain detestable people are disseminated through all his provinces, who not only are not subject to the laws, but endeavour to change them; and that nothing less than their utter extermination will secure the peace and prosperity of the empire; and therefore he orders that they be all destroyed, both male and female, young and old,” &c.

Verses 12, 13. Then were the king’s scribes called — This he did so speedily, though it was a year before the intended execution, lest the king should change his mind, either through his own clemency, or the persuasion of others. It was, however, not wisely judged to let his design be known so long before it was to take effect; for the Jews might find some way to deliver themselves, or might steal out of the kingdom: but undoubtedly this was so ordered by the overruling providence of God. And to take the spoil of them for a prey — Which was to induce the people to use the greater severity and readiness to execute this edict for their own advantage.

13. Sent by posts — See note on Esther 1:22 for the Persian system of letter carrying. To destroy… in one day — Some have thought that eleven months’ previous notice of such a decree would have frustrated Ha-man’s design, since it would have afforded the Jews opportunity to escape from the dominions of Xerxes. But the procedure was by no means incredible. We know too little of the exact circumstances of the dispersed Jews of that time, and the extent of country through which they were dispersed, to form a positive judgment in the case. Multitudes may have been in such a state of bondage as to make it impossible for any great number of them to escape; and as for others, it may have been expected and desired that some of them would leave the kingdom. But such as Mordecai, whom Haman especially wished to destroy, could not leave the kingdom any more than Nehemiah (compare Nehemiah 2:6; 13:6) without permission from the king. It was also in keeping with Haman’s character to cause all the anguish and horror possible to the Jews in anticipation of the dreadful day of slaughter. Then we must remember, as observed above on verse 7, that a wise Providence so overruled this whole procedure as to bring to naught the plans of the Jews’ enemy, and make his malignant hatred of the Jews the occasion of his ruin.

Verses 14, 15. The copy of the writing to be given in every province — Copies of this original decree of the king were sent into every province, and there ordered to be published, requiring the people to be ready against the day appointed. The posts went out, being hastened by the king’s commandment — Either by this decree made in the king’s name, or by some particular and succeeding command which Haman obtained from the king. And the king and Haman sat down to drink — Haman was afraid, probably, lest the king’s conscience should smite him for what he had done, and he should begin to wish it undone again; to prevent which he engrossed him to himself, and kept him drinking. This cursed method many take to drown their convictions, and harden their own hearts, and the hearts of others, in sin. But the city Shushan was perplexed — Not only the Jews, but a great number of the citizens, either because they were related to them, or engaged with them in worldly concerns; or out of humanity and compassion toward so vast a number of innocent people, appointed as sheep for the slaughter. They might apprehend likewise that, upon the execution of the decree, some sedition or tumult might ensue; that in so great a slaughter it was hard to tell who would escape without being killed or plundered, because those who were employed in this bloody work would be more mindful to enrich themselves than to observe their orders. They might also fear that a public judgment from God would come upon them all for so bloody a decree.

We see in the exaltation of Haman, recorded in this chapter, and in his subsequent fall, that God sometimes permits wicked men to arrive at the highest degree of honour and power, but that he soon brings them low, and exposes them to shame and misery. And we learn by the sequel of this history, that he suffered things to proceed to extremities, only the more effectually to confound Haman; and convince the Jews, in a more surprising manner, of his care and protection. We see also the sin and folly of Ahasuerus, in giving credit too easily to Haman’s suggestion against the Jews, by which credulity he had well nigh occasioned many millions of innocent persons to perish. This shows how dangerous it is to listen to detracters, and that we ought never to credit evil reports till we have first inquired and ascertained the truth of them.

HAMAN’S PROMOTION, AND THE EDICT AGAINST THE JEWS, 1-15.

1. Haman the son of Hammedatha — “The name Haman is probably the same which is found in the classical writers under the form of Omanes, and which in ancient Persian would have been Umana, or Umanish, an exact equivalent of the Greek Eumenes. Hammedatha is, perhaps, the same as Madata or Mahadata, (Madates of Q. Curtius,) an old Persian name signifying ‘given by (or to) the moon.’” — Rawlinson. The Agagite — Perhaps a descendant of Agag, the Amalekite. 1 Samuel 15:9, 32. It was no impossible thing for a descendant of the royal family of Amalek to become an officer in the court of Persia. Some, however, suggest that the Agagite is an epithet which Jewish hatred has applied to Haman, with the design of associating him with the hated Amalekite. Set his seat above all the princes — Made him his chief favourite and prime minister. Thus Nebuchadnezzar and Darius honoured Daniel, who was also a foreigner. Daniel 2:48; 6:1-3.

V. 15. The city-Not only the Jews, but a great number of the citizens, either because they were related to them, or engaged with them in worldly concerns; or out of humanity and compassion toward so vast a number of innocent people, appointed as sheep for the slaughter.

Verse 15. The posts] Literally, the couriers, the hircarrahs, those who carried the public despatches; a species of public functionaries, who have been in use in all nations of the world from the remotest antiquity. The decree was given at Shushan] It was dated from the royal Susa, where the king then was.

The city Shushan was perplexed.] They saw that in a short time, by this wicked measure the whole city would be thrown into confusion; for, although the Jews were the only objects of this decree, yet, as it armed the populace against them, even the Persians could not hope to escape without being spoiled, when a desperate mob had begun to taste of human blood, and enrich themselves with the property of the murdered. Besides, many Persian families had, no doubt, become united by intermarriages with Jewish families, and in such a massacre they would necessarily share the same fate with the Jews. A more impolitic, disgraceful, and cruel measure was never formed by any government; and one would suppose that the king who ordered it must have been an idiot, and the counsellors who advised it must have been madmen. But a despotic government is ever capable of extravagance and cruelty; for as it is the bane of popular freedom and happiness, so is it the disgrace of political wisdom and of all civil institutions. Despotism and tyranny in the state are the most direct curses which insulted justice can well inflict upon a sinful nation. ESTHER

Verses 14, 15. The copy of the writing to be given in every province — Copies of this original decree of the king were sent into every province, and there ordered to be published, requiring the people to be ready against the day appointed. The posts went out, being hastened by the king’s commandment — Either by this decree made in the king’s name, or by some particular and succeeding command which Haman obtained from the king. And the king and Haman sat down to drink — Haman was afraid, probably, lest the king’s conscience should smite him for what he had done, and he should begin to wish it undone again; to prevent which he engrossed him to himself, and kept him drinking. This cursed method many take to drown their convictions, and harden their own hearts, and the hearts of others, in sin. But the city Shushan was perplexed — Not only the Jews, but a great number of the citizens, either because they were related to them, or engaged with them in worldly concerns; or out of humanity and compassion toward so vast a number of innocent people, appointed as sheep for the slaughter. They might apprehend likewise that, upon the execution of the decree, some sedition or tumult might ensue; that in so great a slaughter it was hard to tell who would escape without being killed or plundered, because those who were employed in this bloody work would be more mindful to enrich themselves than to observe their orders. They might also fear that a public judgment from God would come upon them all for so bloody a decree.

We see in the exaltation of Haman, recorded in this chapter, and in his subsequent fall, that God sometimes permits wicked men to arrive at the highest degree of honour and power, but that he soon brings them low, and exposes them to shame and misery. And we learn by the sequel of this history, that he suffered things to proceed to extremities, only the more effectually to confound Haman; and convince the Jews, in a more surprising manner, of his care and protection. We see also the sin and folly of Ahasuerus, in giving credit too easily to Haman’s suggestion against the Jews, by which credulity he had well nigh occasioned many millions of innocent persons to perish. This shows how dangerous it is to listen to detracters, and that we ought never to credit evil reports till we have first inquired and ascertained the truth of them.

15. The king and Haman sat down to drink — Like the most cool and bloodthirsty tyrants. Shushan was perplexed — There were many Jews in Shushan, as we may infer from Esther 9:12, and these would at once be filled with horror and dismay. And with this feeling every thoughtful citizen would naturally sympathize, and wonder what would be the end of such a system of wholesale slaughter. No such massacre could be carried out without incalculable danger to many others besides the Jews.