Chapter 1

1 Ahasuerus maketh royal feasts. 10 Vashti, sent for, refuseth to come. 13 Ahasuerus, by the counsel of Memucan, maketh the decree of men’s sovereignty.

1. Ahasuerus. Heb. ХAchashwerosh, a transliteration of the Persian KhshayaЖrshaЖ. In some Babylonian tablets the spelling is Achshiyarshu. In the consonantal alphabet of the Elephantine papyri the name appears as ChshyХrsh and Chshyrsh. The meaning of the name is not known. In Greek KhshayaЖrshaЖ became Xerxes, and in Latin, Assuerus. The names Xerxes and Ahasuerus are therefore equivalent, the one coming from the Persian through the Greek, and the other through both Hebrew and Latin (see PK 598).

This is. The writer of the book of Esther seems to have known of more than one ruler named Ahasuerus. The Ahasuerus of the book of Esther is not to be confused with the Ahasuerus of Dan. 9:1, who lived half a century earlier. On the Ahasuerus of Ezra 4:6 see Additional Note on Ezra 4.

2. The throne of his kingdom. The Persian monarch resided part of the year at Ecbatana and sometimes visited Persepolis and Babylon, but Shushan (Susa) was at this time the seat of government (see Dan. 8:2; Esther 9:12).

Shushan the palace. Shushan was in the province of Elam (see Dan. 8:2), about 100 mi. (161 km.) north of the present shore line of the Persian Gulf, and a little more than 200 mi. (322 km.) east of Babylon. Originally the capital of Elam, centuries before the time of Esther, the city was situated at the eastern edge of the Tigris valley where the latter rises to meet the Iranian hills. Amid its extensive ruins, which cover an area of more than 3 sq. mi. (4.8 sq. km.), may be seen what remains of the spacious palace in which much of the dramatic narrative of the book of Esther took place. This palace, erected on the site of the former Elamite castle, was originally built by Darius Hystaspes, predecessor of Xerxes. For a brief description of it, see on vs. 5, 6.

3. The third year. This year ran from approximately April 14, 483 b.c., to April 2, 482 b.c. Perhaps the “feast,” which continued for six months, began in the early spring of the year when the rains were past and travel would be easier and more pleasant.

A feast. Or, “banquet.” The word originally meant a “drinking bout.” In view of the fact that Ahasuerus left Shushan a year or two later for his invasion of Greece (see Introduction to Esther), it has been suggested that the princes, governors, and army chiefs were called in from all parts of the realm to participate in planning what all fully expected to be a brilliant and successful campaign. Herodotus (vii. 8) records that Xerxes convened such a council. Perhaps the various officials were summoned in relays over the six months’ period, each for the purpose of discussing with the king his particular responsibility in connection with the campaign. It would be most improbable to find all the officials of the vast empire gathered together thus except for specific political and military discussions.

Princes. Or, “[appointed] officials.”

Servants. That is, his “courtiers.”

Power. Heb. chayil, “host” (Ex. 14:4), “army” (v. 9), “valiant [man]” (1 Sam. 16:18), etc. If one objective of the feast was, as suggested, the laying of plans for the coming Greek campaign, Ahasuerus would certainly include his chief military officers.

Persia and Media. This order, the reverse of that in Daniel (chs. 5:28; 6:8, 12, 15; 8:20), appears repeatedly in the Esther narrative (ch. 1:3, 14, 18, 19) and implies that the account belongs to the time when Persia had replaced Media as the leading partner in the dual empire (see Dan. 7:5; 8:3). In Esther 10:2 the original order is given, perhaps because in “the chronicles” the Median kings came first.

Nobles. From a Persian word adopted into the Hebrew language, meaning “the first [men].”

Princes of the provinces. That is, the governors, or satraps, in charge of conquered territories. History attests the presence of the satraps at a great convocation in Susa prior to the disastrous campaign against Greece.

4. Shewed the riches. Ostentation was characteristic of Xerxes. Vain display marked the huge army with which he invaded Greece. The fabulous wealth of Persia is commented on by contemporary writers of various nationalities. Among the glories of the Persian palace were the walls draped with gold, the marble pillars and rich hangings, a golden plane tree and a golden vine. Excavations at Susa (Shushan) have proved that the writer of Esther was intimately acquainted with the palace and with Persian court customs and regulations, since the descriptions he gives agree to the last detail with the results of archeological investigation. Impressed by this fact, scholars affirm that only someone who knew the royal palace personally, or who knew someone who did, could have given the story its accurate setting.

An hundred and fourscore days. It is not necessary to suppose that the same persons were entertained throughout this whole period. It would hardly be safe for the provincial governors all to leave their provinces at the same time, and to remain away for that length of time. It is probable that Ahasuerus entertained a succession of guests during the six months that the “feast” continued.

5. A feast. Perhaps Ahasuerus’ purpose was to secure the loyalty of the subjects of the capital city during his extended absence in Greece. If so, this was an astute political move. Only males, of course, were included, for Queen Vashti gave a separate banquet for the women (v. 9).

The court of the garden. The ruins of Xerxes’ palace are sufficiently well preserved to make possible a description of some of its parts. The king’s gate in which Mordecai sat, the court where Esther appeared unbidden—these and some other sections of the palace have been located.

The palace are occupied approximately 300 yards on each side. The main gate lay to the south.

To the northeast of the palace proper was the spacious apadaЖna, or throne hall. This immense building, 330 ft. on a side, was probably reached by stairs of gigantic proportions. The flat roof of the central part was supported by 36 slender, fluted columns with carved capitals, and arranged in 6 rows of 6 columns each. The front of the building was perhaps open, whereas the rear and side walls were of brick, faced with enamel friezes. Gold, silver, and precious stones were used lavishly in the decoration of the throne hall. Greek writers tell of a golden plane tree and a golden vine in this court. To the northwest of the palace proper, it is thought, was the “garden,” or park. It was in and about the apadaЖna that many of the incidents related in the book of Esther occurred.

6. White, green, and blue, hangings. Literally, “white cotton and violet [material].” The word rendered “green” in the KJV is from the Sanskrit word for “cotton.” Note that the word “hangings” is supplied. These “hangings,” or awnings, were probably made of white and violet cotton fabric.

Cords of fine linen and purple. Strong “cords” would be required to support the awning if it extended, as some have thought, from the central pillared hall across the mosaic-paved court, a space of nearly 60 ft.

Pillars of marble. The pillars at Shushan were of dark-blue limestone. The Hebrew wordshesh, “marble,” probably refers to this limestone or alabaster rather than to what we usually think of as “marble.”

Pavement. The four Hebrew words translated “red,” “blue,” “white,” and “black” do not denote colors, but the various kinds of stone and other materials in the mosaic pavement. Dark-blue limestone is mentioned as being used in the pavement as well as for the pillars.

7. Vessels of gold. Golden goblets were found in considerable numbers in the Persian camp near Plataea by the victorious Greeks.

Diverse one from another. This detail must have come from an eyewitness, or from one who had received an account of the banquet from an eyewitness.

Royal wine. Or, “wine of the kingdom,” that is, from the royal cellar.

8. According to the law. The king made an edict, it would seem, that each guest should drink as much as he wished to personally, rather than vie with the others in a drinking bout.

9. Vashti the queen. The only wife of Xerxes of whom the Greeks made record was Amestris. Xerxes had married her before ascending the throne, when he became of marriageable age. Herodotus and Ctesias speak of her cruelty and dissolute ways. However it cannot be proved that Amestris and Vashti were the same person. Like Esther (see ch. 2:7), the queen may have been known by more than one name.

10. Chamberlains. Literally, “eunuchs,” who alone would have access to the women’s quarters. The derivation and meaning of the names of these eunuchs are doubtful. Eunuchs were often foreign slaves deliberately mutilated for sale on the Persian market. The Persians considered the number 7 sacred.

11. Bring Vashti. Having displayed the wealth and glory of his kingdom, Ahasuerus’ thoughts finally turned to his beautiful queen. The display of her beauty would, he thought, climax the exhibition.

12. Vashti refused. The reason for the queen’s refusal is not clear. Some have suggested that Ahasuerus intended an immodest display of Vashti’s beauty, but the context provides no clue as to whether this was his purpose. The Jewish targums, however, assume that her motive for refusing to appear was her desire to avoid such a display, Josephus attributes her refusal to what he, mistakenly, thought to be a Persian custom, one that presumably prohibited married women from associating with strangers. Other ancient Jewish writers set forth a variety of imaginary or preposterous explanations, none of which warrant serious consideration.

Ahasuerus’ order specifying that Vashti wear the royal crown (v. 11) implies that he was thinking of her, not merely as a beautiful woman, but also as the first woman of the land. That it was actually good taste for Persian women to appear at the banquet table with strangers is evident from Esther 5:4. Chaldean wives and concubines also joined their husbands in drunken feasting (Dan. 5:2). According to Neh. 2:1–6 the queen of Ahasuerus’ son and successor, Artaxerxes I, accompanied her lord at wine. Several Greek writers confirm the presence of Persian women at feasts. Herodotus, a contemporary of Ahasuerus, speaks of Amestris (see on Esther 1:9) at the king’s birthday feast (ix. 110). There is no reason for thinking that contemporary Persian custom secluded women, and that it would therefore have been improper for Vashti to appear when summoned, in spite of the fact that the men were drinking (see ch. 7:7).

The fact that Vashti held a banquet for the women of Shushan simultaneously with that of Ahasuerus for the men implies cooperation with his policy in promoting popular loyalty to the throne. Nothing in the record gives a clue to the reason for Vashti’s refusal to obey the king’s command.

His anger burned. See on Gen. 4:5.

13. Wise men. That is, the king’s advisers. Angry as he is, Ahasuerus seeks counsel. In the presence of his whole court it would be unseemly for him to vent his passion in violent words and threats. Instead of issuing a hasty order, he proceeds deliberately to consider what steps should be taken. Ahasuerus seems to have relied heavily on his counselors (see chs. 3:8–10; 8:1–8; 9:12–14), and now invites the opinion of his “wise men” as to how to deal with Vashti.

Knew the times. Persons of learning and experience who were acquainted with precedents and knew what would be the proper thing to do on any particular occasion.

The king’s manner. That is, his method of proceeding. Each matter that concerned the king he submitted to learned men for their opinion before making his decision. It was probably a general usage of the Persian monarchy to which the writer here makes reference, rather than the practice of Ahasuerus only.

14. The seven princes. Ezra also credits the Persian monarch with seven special counselors (see Ezra 7:14), who might be considered the king’s cabinet. Herodotus observed that there were seven leading families in Persia whose heads had special privileges.

Saw the king’s face. Among the special privileges of these men, one of the most valued was that of free access to the monarch at all times.

15. According to law. The king did not wish to appear vindictive. Furthermore, the rulers of Persia were in a certain sense limited monarchs (see Esther 1:19; 8:8; cf. Dan. 6:8–16). It is as if the king said, Let us put aside all feeling and simply consider what the law requires. If a queen disobeys the king openly in the face of his court, what, according to proper legal procedure, should be done to her? Back of this emphasis on law was the boast of the Medo-Persian government that Medo-Persian laws were unchangeable.

16. Memucan answered. Memucan is spokesman for the entire group of seven special counselors. In his answer he implies that Persian law provided no penalty for the case at hand. It had not, in fact, contemplated a case of this kind. There was no precedent.

To the king only. On behalf of the seven counselors, Memucan takes the matter away from being simply one of a personal grudge on the part of the king, and raises it to the level of a matter of state. He thus exonerates the king of vindictiveness and provides a basis in common law for dealing with the case.

17. Despise their husbands. Literally, “cause to be despised their lords in their eyes.” Memucan here implies that Vashti had despised Ahasuerus. Whether he refers to Vashti’s motive for not obeying the royal command or simply to the act itself is not clear.

18. The ladies. Heb. sЊaroth, plural of sЊarah, “princess” (see on Gen. 17:15). The “princesses” would speak discourteously to their husbands, the princes. The writer is careful to refer to Persia before Media (see on Esther 1:3).

Too much contempt and wrath. Or, “contempt and wrath in plenty” (RSV), that is, contempt on the part of the wives and wrath on the part of the husbands.

19. A royal commandment. Literally, “a command of the kingdom.” Under ordinary circumstances such a matter as the disgrace of a favorite wife would have been settled in the secrecy of the seraglio, without calling general attention to it. In Memucan’s opinion the publicity of Vashti’s disobedience made it expedient that she be dealt with publicly.

Be written. An edict concerning an individual was hardly a suitable thing to add to a national code of laws, but decrees of a temporary nature were sometimes attached to the code, apparently for the express purpose of giving them force by rendering them unalterable (Dan. 6:8, 9).

Come no more. Vashti was to be banished, not from the palace, but from the king’s presence. This, together with the loss of her favored position as queen, would bring supreme disgrace. Beauty alone could not save her (see on v. 12).

20. The king’s decree. Here the “commandment” of the previous verse is called a “decree.”

For it is great. Or, “vast as it is” (RSV).

21. The king did. Vashti was separated, but not divorced, from the king. The grounds for this action were published throughout the provinces, so that none might misunderstand. Ahasuerus’ care in handling the case suggests the idea that Vashti may have been the daughter of a prominent Persian whose support the king sought to retain, or perhaps the daughter of the prince of one of his subject peoples.

22. For he sent. More exactly, “and he sent.” Besides publishing the decree, Xerxes issued with it a covering letter designed to safeguard the realm against the dangers Memucan had pointed out (see v. 18).