EM M1^H©IRY or Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2007 with funding from IVIicrosoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/explanatorycommeOOcassrich 'tfc r CLARK'S FOEEIGN THEOLOGICAL LIBRARY. NEW SEEIES. VOL. XXXIV ffiassel's ffiommentatg on ffistj&er. EDINBUKGH: T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEOBGB STREET. 1888. \ PRIITTED BY MOPvP.ISON AND GIBS, FOR T. & T. CLAEK, EDINBURGH. . LONDON, . . ... . HAMILTON, ADAilS, AND CO. DUBLIN, GEORGE HERBERT. NEW YORK, .... SCRIBNER AND WELFORD. AN EXPLAJfATORY COMMENTARY ON B S T H E E, CONSISTING OF THE SECOND TAEGUM TRANSLATED FROM THE ARAMAIC WITH NOTES, MITHRA, THE WINGED BULLS OF PERSEPOLIS, AND ZOROASTER. BY Professor PAULUS CASSEL, D.D., Berlin, AUTHOR OF THE COMMENTARIES ON JUDGES AND RUTH IN lange's 'bibelwerk,' etc. STransIateti BY Eev. AAEON BEKNSTEIN, B.D. EDINBURGH: T. k T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET. 1888. ^ C3 <-'• ^'^ «A TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE. Few words are required to introduce to the reader the learned author of the present work, as he is already known to English theologians by his Commentaries on Judges and Ruth in Lange's Bihelwerk. In Germany the author deservedly enjoys a wide reputation, for his books on religious, social, and scientific subjects are indeed legion, and his ministerial and philanthropic activity is appreciated by all classes, from the emperor to the poorest labouring man. This volume will supply a want long felt, for it elucidates the book of Esther in such a vivid and graphic manner as to make the reader realize the wonderful dealings of God with His chosen and thrice-redeemed people. Herodotus, the Talmud, the Mid- rashim, and other ancient books, as well as modern discoveries, reports of travellers concerning Persian customs and manners, and philological science, have been brought to bear their respec- tive testimonies to the truth of the recorded events. To this book are applicable, to a large extent, the weighty words of the Ven. Archdeacon Farrar in the Exioositor of January 1888, where he says, "When we study a great modern commentary we are indeed heirs of all the ages." And again : " Philology, which is a science still in its infancy, has aided and enriched our modern scholarship." The author has happily combined the topical, exegetical, critical, and the practical methods of exposition, and has offered us instruc- 370088 VI PREFACE. tive and interesting matter on every incident touched upon in the sacred narrative. It is a hona fide historical commentary, and its parallels are striking, giving us an insight into ancient Oriental life, and especially Persian, as no other book of a similar kind does. It is also valuable on account of its apologetical character. The author holds a brief, and as a zealous advocate he pleads Israel's cause before the nations, asks for tolerance and large- hearted charity towards them, shows the injustice of the repeated Haman-like attacks to which they have in the course of their checkered history been subjected, and the wonderful intervention of Providence in their behalf, as well as the punishments which their covenant God meted out to their enemies. In a word, he, like Mordecai, " speaks peace to all his seed," and, more than Mordecai, preaches " peace on earth and good-will towards men." The four Appendices will be found exceedingly interesting and instructive, especially to Biblical students. That of the First Targum will appear for the first time in English. The author used the Amsterdam edition, and amended the text by the light of the \r\7\\i^ nvD nsD, Fiirth 1768, -)nD^? n^JD "iDD, ed. 1698, and the Hebrew version of Mordechai Ventura, Amsterdam 1870, and also the translation of Furstenthal. The Targum is divided into eleven paragraphs as follows : — § 1. Introduction about Ahhashverosh. § 2. The acrostic concerning Solomon. § 3. The description of Solomon's throne. § 4. Solomon and the Queen of Sheba. § 5. The legend about Jeremiah. § 6. The dialogue of Vashti and her death. § 7. The election of Esther as queen. § 8. The accusation of Haman. PEEFACE. VU § 9. The penitence of Mordecai, Esther, and the people. § 10. The fall of Haman. § 11. The great deliverance of the Jews. The author's notes, besides containing a mine of rich material, throw light on every point. By explaining the names of the ancestors of Haman, he indicates the time when the Targum was written, when the Jews were oppressed by the Eomans in the time of Justinian. Such names as Pilate the governor, Felix the vicious brother of Pallas, riorus, Cuspius Fadus, Flaccus, Antipater, Herod, Vitellius, Cestius Gallus, and Eufus, might more properly be called the sons or followers of Haman. He also traces Christian ideas in this Targum as well as antichristian, e.g. in the name Bar Pandira, whereby Christ is designated. On the other hand, Mohan;imedanism is not in the slightest way alluded to, which proves the great antiquity of the Targum. A word with regard to the translation of the book. I have on the whole been faithful to the author, and, as far as the English idiom allowed it, have reproduced the author's style. I am indebted to the Eev. James Neil, M.A., for his kindness in revising the translation, to the Eev. J. H. Bruhl for translating the excursus on Zoroaster, and to the publishers for their patient attention to the whole work. May it prosper on its way, and be blessed by Him who manifested Himself at all times as the Protector and Eedeemer of His people. THE TRANSLATOR. IlfTEODUCTIOK 1. The book of Esther, as we liave it in the Hebrew language in the canon of the Old Testament, is one of the most remarkable and instructive writings of ancient Persia. The information wMch it imparts surpasses in originality even that given by Herodotus ; it is of the same century, but older, and is tinctured with the colour of Persian custom and life more than any other book. It was written in the capital of Persia. It brings the reader into the palace of the king ; — it shows him its throne, with its magnificent surroundings. We obtain from it an insight into the inner life of the royal harem. Indeed, the little book represents a universal harem-history. It makes us better acquainted with King Xerxes, and gives us the original names of his princes and warriors. In spite of its specific Jewish-national motive, it brings us into contact with the political and religious movements that take place in the great empire. !N"owhere else is the weakness of the Persian monarch so clearly exhibited as the outcome of his very possession of tremendous power, and of his considering himself as the visible Mithra. The strife which was epidemic in Oriental States, which the stories of the Seven Wise Men everywhere describe,^ and which was regularly carried on between the viziers of kings and the favourite queens, is here narrated with such a vivid and historical accuracy that has no parallel. First, the queen falls on account of the intrigues of the seven ministers, then the vizier falls on ^ I refer here to the book I lately brought out, Sieben weisen Meister, where the Hebrew and Greek versions in connection with Buddhistic interpretation and Oriental narrative are considered. X BOOK OF ESTHER. account of the beauty of another queen. One recognises the stamp of genuineness in every trait of the narrative; just that which appears strange at first sight proves the fidelity with which contemporary events are narrated. The doubts which modern writers have raised against this book are owing to their deficiency in the historic sense, and to their want of a thorough acquaintance with Oriental affairs. Indeed, national prejudices contributed to the undervaluing of the book. Hamanic sentiment wanted to throw a veil over the picture of the old Haman, and to declare the book a myth. Of course, the whole narrative is the expression of a national triumph over intolerance and tyranny, and betrays a national character, just as the narratives of Herodotus and of others, of the Persian wars, sufficiently manifest traits of Hellenic one- sidedness. It is a memoir written by a Jew to all his people who are scattered in the extensive countries of Persia, in which are recorded the wonderful interpositions of Providence in their deliverance from destruction, which appeared to be certain. It has no other purpose but to narrate this ; it is not called upon to give information about other things ; albeit it gives a picture of Persian court life the like of which is found nowhere else. The king s^-iv^n« or tritJ^n^? is really Xerxes the First, the son of Darius Hystaspes. The name appears to be an appellative, and represents the genuine form, but which was sometimes pronounced by Greeks Kyaxares and sometimes Xerxes. It is a compound of tJ'^^? and ^n — as jamt^'Hi^ is a compound of jQ-ii and ^rii^ ; lam (Durban) ^ means officer, servant, and with Ej^ns it means the first servant (satrap) (comp. Dan. iii. 3), so then we have to explain En1:^^^K as meaning the chief king, or king of kings, ^i (Eakscha), the Latin rex, Xerxes or Xerx, is also a ^epe^ ; for tJ^nx corresponds to Khsha or Xyccx, which certainly contains the signification ^ He appears in the Manichaeic reports as Turbo, and in the narrative of Secundus as Tyrpo. Comp. my Siehen weisen Meister, p. 350. Comp. Archelai et Manetis Disput. p. 44. INTEODUCTION. XI of greatness or priority, t^ns is also found in the name of Artaxerxes, who is named in Ezra iv. 8, 11, 23, vii. 7, «nt^♦L^'^m^< or NDDDnnix. This is composed of Arta and ^m^, and jV 5) has alone the right to sit upon the throne, therefore the thrones which the tyrants of the world usurp are destroyed, and the Solomonic throne also is not restored, so long as the son of David does not take possession of it in spirit and in truth. Ver. 3. "In the third year of his reign." It was in the second year after the death of Darius that Xerxes, as Herodotus reports (vii. 7), had put down the rebellion in Egypt, and so in the third year after his return, he convoked a council of the princes to learn their views, but chiefly to impart his own (Herod, vii. 8). The agreement of this narrative of Herodotus on a secondary point with the verse above, by itself indicates the identity of Xerxes with Ahhashverosh, although our book does not mention the con- clusion of the war against Greece. For the historical matter of the Scripture, especially of the book of Esther, is concise and solid, aiming to come to the point, and presupposing the necessary limits of its report. It does not tell of the Greek campaign,^ because it was known, and also because its main aim was to derive the Israelitish history from things which were not considered of first-rate importance. It is satisfied to narrate that it was in ^ Epli. vi. 12, TTpos Tovg Koaf^oKpotTOpxg tov aKorovg tovtov. Just be- cause the Midrash mostly uses Kosmokrator for earthly great kings is the homily (Wayikra Rabba, § 18, p. 160a) of interest, when it says : " Wlien-I made thee for a Kosmokrator, for a tyrant, over all men, I have neverthe- less given thee no power over those who are called sons of God." The note of Schenkel to Eph. vi. 12 is not correct. 2 Comp. Havernik, Einleitiing^ torn. ii. p. 340 [Eng. trans., Clark, Edinr.]. 16 BOOK OF ESTHER. the third year of Xerxes when the princes and the satraps assembled in the palace, in order to intimate thereby that a great political fact underlay the occurrence. For in order that what is told in the book of Esther should actually happen, there must be according to the purpose of God a special council of the great men of the State. There must be an important political motive, but this is of no consequence to the narrator. It was enough for him to record the general magnitude of the kingdom, because this only throws light upon the coming event. An ordinary banquet could not invest it with a psychological explanation. There was just one campaign to which all were gathered. The Scripture very often tells the events in Israel as apparently separate from the events in the world, and yet they flow through them like a river, which, in passing through a sea, does not mingle its waters, but becomes clearer and clearer, like the Rhine passing through the Lake of Constance. Yet the fine threads which connect the experience of Israel with the great powers of the world are to be found everywhere. We seem to hear in universal history a quiet sound, an echo of the future. Israel's history is not to be separated from the fall of Nineveh, Babylon, and Media. Our book also, instead of saying that there was once a great feast, when this and that happened, quietly but instructively reminds us of the great fact with which Xerxes was occupied at the time during which the sudden and unexpected intrigue was brooding, a fact which at once produced Israel's calamity and redemp- tion. For the historian shows us both the external political condition and the internal party intrigues of the corrupt royal seraihs. " He made, a feast unto all Ids princes and his servants" Herodotus, in reporting the council of war against the Greeks, did not need to tell what was a natural and common occurrence, that there had been a great feast provided for all the chiefs of the country. For his main object, according to CHAP. I. 3. 17 his manner, was to illustrate the directions of the gods, and the dream through which the great event passed. But for the book of Esther, the feast was the great fundamental ground of its historical record. From the royal table issued the narrated catastrophe. A great feast was then in itself, as in modern times, nothing extraordinary in the Persian court. The feast " unto all the princes and servants " would not have a place in universal history, in spite of its being given to the generals and potentates of the universally famous Persian expedition against the Greeks. When it is mentioned here, it is not because of the persons that are enumerated, not for the sake of the guests, but for its own sake. With the significance of the men is joined the great war, which included the germs of a new universal culture ; but with the fact of the feast is connected the domestic occasion out of which proceeded the local, but for Israel the world- wide, events about Esther and Haman. These " princes and servants " of the king are more closely called Parthe- mim (D''DmQ), i.e. the first {fratama, Scr. pratlmraa, comp. Benfey, p. 88), and princes of the provinces (districts, ni:nD). The Midrash has an interesting and instructive comment upon these princes, which certainly, on account of the corruption of the text^ and the general neglect of scientific knowledge, has scarcely ever been considered. The passage reads thus : " E. Eliezer says, Farthemim, these are two legions of the king, for no king is called Augustus until these two nominate him." And who are these ? E. Isaak said they were the '':j<^iddi:ki ^JVDlpl, when these gave ^ This is seen on the same page, where there is given a homiletic defini- tion of the word Paras, i.e. Persia. It is so called because it was twice severed asunder, once in the days of mnn and once in the days of |S2''nx. The first name should be read mi^nnS Jezdegerd, the last new Persian king whom the Arabs vanquished ; and the other is Artaban, the ast Parthian king whom the Sassanides dethroned. By this the age of the book is to be seen. This gloss could only have been written shortly after the fall of the kingdom of the Sassanides, about the end of the seventh century. Of course this cannot be proved to a demonstration, but it gives everywhere the impression of the Roman dominion. B 18 BOOK OF ESTHER. counsel to JSTebuchadnezzar (Titus), and he marched to Jeru- salem and destroyed the temple, then God destroyed them, and appointed others in their place ; and these are, as E. Yehudah ben Shimon in the name of Eliezer says, •'jfe^np-ini '•ji'i^v The explanation of this passage, as given by Sachs {Beitrdfjer zur Spracli- und AUerthumsforsch. i. 113), is a complete mis- understanding, because it is based upon a conjectural emenda- tion of the text instead of upon observing the general thought. This is as follows : The Jewish commentators always proceed from the standpoint that the various experiences of the princes and the kingdoms of the world are to be explained from their relation to Israel. They thus considered, not only the history of Babylon, but also of Eome, which broke up the last remnants of parliamentary independence, de- stroyed Jerusalem and Bethel, and burned the temple. The aim of the contemporaries of the later Eoman emperors was that the Eoman Senate should only be an institution in appearance, and the real power to elect the imperators and to keep them on the throne should be vested in the army. To this the above comment refers. When Titus (who is to be understood under Nebuchadnezzar) destroyed Jerusalem, he did it — so is the tradition (which Benjamin of Tudela ^ could still speak of in the Middle Ages) — by special order of the Senate. For this the State was punished. Hence comes its moral degradation. What the Parthemim were to Ahhashverosh," that exactly were the "jVDipT or rather the "JVn^pl and "•jn^ddijn, viz. the Decurions and Augustani, in Eome.^ The Decurions were considered in the imperial provinces what the Senators were in Eome. By the term Augustani were understood those whom the Greek writers call Augustalioi, ^aaCKiKol, officers of the highest dignity.^ 1 Comp. my Historische Versuche, p. 20. " Even in later times this was the formula : " Et is esset imperator qiiem Senatns elegerat." Spartian, Didius, 5. ^ Comp. Salmasius, Vopisc. Aurelianus, cap. 33. 4 Concerning these, comp. Du Cange, Gloss. Gr. p. 151. Concerning the Augustani in similar and original meaning, Tacit. Ann, xiv. 15. 2 : " Tunc- CHAP. I. 4. 19 They want to say tliat before Titus the prominent men who appointed the emperor were the senators and consuls, but now they are the '•J^'I^S which stands for ^:b3, i-^- Calones/ and ^JN''i1p"i2, which stands for ^JsniDiS, i.e. Praetoriani. The reins of government passed from the hands of the senators into those of the life-guards. The cause of this is now ascribed to the evil counsel of the patricians against Jerusalem. But the eyes of the Jewish teachers ought not to have been closed to the fact that the same could be said of the Jews themselves. They were right when they directed the attention of their people to the history of the nations for an explanation of the judgments of God. The experiences which the Eoman Empire supply on this point are indeed many and awful, only they must not conceal from themselves the cause why they themselves lost their freedom and independence. Formerly they were masters, but now they are servants ; once a nation, but now dispersed. Israel also was once a people of Parthemim — great and free in the doctrine and love of God — until they destroyed their " temple." Ver. 4. " When he showed the riches of his glorious kingdom," He proved the fulness of his royal power, in that he enter- tained the assembled princes for the space of a half-year, 180 days. But this feast is distinguished from the one mentioned in the 5 th verse. The former was the council feast, instituted to deliberate about the great enterprise of the king. It is repeatedly reported by the ancient writers that it was a custom with the Persians to hold consultations about war and other affairs (de apparatu bellorum et seriis rebus, Ammian. Marc.) during meals (Brisson, lib. ii. c. 131). These reports are to be understood to mean that their custom was que primum conscript! sunt equites Romani cognomento Augustanorum aetate ac robore conspicui et pari ingenio procaces, alii in spe potentiae." i Tacit. Hist ii. 87-iii. 33. 20 BOOK OF ESTHER. not like ours, to carry on important business first and then to entertain, but they did both at the same time. The Midrash says (876) the king manifested his greatness by displaying before the guests the trophies of Jerusalem. So likewise Herodotus, for the glorification of his people, represents Mardonius and Xerxes as boasting of their hitherto achieved victories, in order to incite to the war against the Greeks (vii. 9). Clericus is of opinion that all the princes did not remain together during the 180 days of the feast, but that they took their turn, some left when new ones arrived. But this supposition is not necessary. Ver. 5. "And when these days were fulfilled, the king made a feast unto all the people that were present in Shushan" ^ It lasted seven days, and was held in the garden of the palace. After the feastings and the consultations of the princes, at which the king displayed his whole power which he put in motion against the Greeks, there followed a feast specially for the people, which lasted a week.^ There is a ^ In the Vierzig Vezieren, ed. Behrnauer, p. 340, we read : " The king held a great feast, at which high and low sat at table and ate to their satisfaction." 2 Comp. Epische Dichtungen of Firdussi, translated by Schack, p. 203, — "Whereupon they celebrated seven days long, A merry feast with wine and song," When Eustem obtained a victory there was a feast at the court of the Shah, p. 248,— " After this sort, with wine and song, They revelled a week long." P. 133,— " Nigh the castle in Yredsh's gardens. Even in the palatial chambers, Eesounded the mirth of the festive days." P. 47, — " The Shah, after the arrival of the expected, Had the royal garden decorated." Hence the use of trees in the royal rooms (comp. my Kaiser Konigsthmne, \). 83, etc., and Hammer, Gemaldsaal, iv. 265). CHAP. I. 5. 21 passage in the Schahnameh of Firdussi giving also an account of a feast lasting seven days, and according to the old Oriental custom it is held in the delightful groves of a park. Then follows the description, as by the epic poet, of the splendour that was there. There were curtains of white (iin) and of blue (rh^n) karpas, which originally in Sanscr. Xarpdsa meant cotton, but afterwards fine linen also.^ It has been observed^ that Curtius (iii. 3. 19) describes the cap of the Persian kings as having a white and blue stripe. But the same author says afterwards (vi. 6. 4) that the head- dress had white and purple stripes. Perhaps he is correct in both passages. White and blue are the colours of the atmosphere and of the sky (caeruleus)? These curtains {cculaea, vela) were furnished with cords of pn (fine linen) and purple, suspended on silver poles, and tied to marble pillars. It is described that what was then considered as the most costly material was used in the decoration of the garden tents. To this class belonged byssus and purple. Many names of tl\e ancient materials described also their colours. Cords of byssus are white. A Jewish teacher remarks in the Midrash that freemen fasten their garments with cords of byssus (c. 88). That white was in many cases the sign of liberty is well known. Khalid, the Arab, ordered the Taghlebites to wear a black band as a mark of their dependence. Though colours as marks of party distinction are no longer in vogue to the same extent as of old, yet even to-day white is among Mohammedans the mark of the masters of the country (comp. my "Geschichte der Juden," in Ersch unci Gruher, ii. 27, p. 236). A name which should imply the use of silk is not found in 1 ComiD. Lassen, Ind. Alterthumsk. i. 250 and iii. 25. Ritter, v. 436. The Targum, Midrash Esther 88c, has paraphrased n^3n with p:n''''i<, Gr. dipivog, sky-blue. 2 Dunker, Gesch. des Alterth. ii. 608, note. ^ Comp, Philostratus, Life of Apollo, where this tells him of the dome of sapphires upon the royal palace of the Magi : " For this stone is dark- blue, according to the colour of the sky." 22 BOOK OF ESTHER. the book of Esther. The silver poles stand opposite the marble pillars. The former {'^yh^) are movable, the latter are fixed. Both are white ; for not only 5]D3, silver, has its name from the colour of white, but also ^'K^' is white marble, and likewise Egyptian byssus was called so on account of its whiteness. The great residence in which the feast took place was named Shushan, from the white lilies which were cultivated in the garden. The floor was a mosaic pavement of uni (from which came alabaster, alahastrum, Goth. Alabcd- straum, probably with the article hii, as rannbx or tonni'K, to be known among the Greeks and Eomans), of ^\i^, like the pillars of 11 and mno. These two words, as well as Dnn, occur only once here. IT is taken, since Bochart, to be pearl; yet the objection of Gesenius, that the language used here can only refer to stone, has its weight, and therefore it must mean mother-of-pearl, or pearl- stone, as the LXX. translates, mno, according to Fiirst, should be read mpD, from the Chald. "ipD. If so, it must be taken for red marble, which was very much used.^ This explanation is to be preferred, because thus we see the same mingling of colour, white and red, for the floor as for the cords of the tent. Upon this floor stood gold and silver chairs and tables. The description given here is so little exaggerated, tliat even Mardonius had similar magnificence in his camp. The Greeks found after their victory " tents decorated with gold and silver, couches wrought in silver and gold, and other precious things" (Herod, ix. 80). Xerxes had left his own tent to Mardonius, and Pausanias was amazed at the sight of the golden and silver beds and tables, etc. (ix. 82). It is interesting to observe that the gloss of the Greek translation read, instead of mnoi "n% mnoa Til,^ and therefore translated 1 Comp. Lamprid, Elagabal, 24 : " Stravit et saxis . . . porphyreticis plateas in palatio, quas Antonisnianas vocavit, quae saxa usque ad nostraiu niemoriam manserunt sed nuper eruta et execta sunt." 2 The form H for rose, for the first time in the Mishna (comp. my Rose CHAP. I. 7. 23 KVfcXo) poSa ireTTaa-fjieva, roses (poBa) were scattered about, for the custom of decorating with roses was then and afterwards / considered as the greatest festive ornamentation. Firdussi describes, p. 47, — " There stood a golden throne 'mid beds of roses, Where flowers gaily shone in perfumed posies ; The silken carpets, precious stones of splendour, Gleam in the groves where lamps their glories render." ^ The whole description of ver. 6 begins with the word "nn. In the Masoretic text the letter n is longer than usual ; but it would be in vain to try to find a reason for the custom of Bible copyists of making some letters more prominent (see my note on Buth, p. 225), and such peculiarities in the old and well-preserved manuscripts can sometimes only be explained from the casual notes of the copyists. Yer. 7. nnr "^32 niptJ^m — ''And they gave them drink in vessels of gold, the vessels being diverse one from another" Xenophon says of the Persians, that they were proud of possessing a large number of drinking vessels {Cyrop. viii. 8. 18; comp. Athenaeus, lib. xi. p. 465). Accordingly, there were many changes of cups at a royal entertainment in order to display the abundance of possession ; and so it is the custom even now at the festive entertainment of great people. 21 ni^fj^ p"""! — " And the wine of the kingdom was in abun- dance, according to the bounty or hand (tid) of the king, as the great king is." There could be no thought of insufficiency. The expres- sion r^dyo p, " the wine of the kingdom," is striking, for it proves also how the king entertained his guests. l^JDn X"> would be wine of the king ; niai'Dn p*" is royal wine, i.e. such unci Nachtigal, p. 19). The linguistic form, to which poho? also belongs, appears to be found only, after my supposition in the Biblical canon, in the name Ruth (see my Gomm. on Euth, p. 206). 24 BOOK OF ESTHER. as the king himself used. It was not distinguished merely for quantity, but for quality — the best wine, such as befits the feasts of kings. The king himself drank only Syrian (chalybonic) wine (comp. Brisson, i. c. 84). May we not direct our attention to another table, at which also a king sat ? This was in Cana of Galilee. There the wine was insufficient for all the invited guests until the mercy of their Friend supplied them with the royal wine of the first miracle, and turned the old drink into taste of the joy of the new faith. What Ahhashverosh gave for the purpose of intoxi- cation, this King gave for sober reflection upon the grace of God. Ver. 8. DJli^ px ma n^n^J^ni — " And the drinking ivas ac- cording to the law, none coidd compel." The king had strictly commanded every steward to let every man do as he liked in this matter. This order was not for the purpose of teaching the people to be temperate in drink, but rather to enhance their pleasure by leaving them to please themselves without any restraint. The sense of the passage is that it was the custom at court that, in spite of the wine being so costly, the courtiers were to see that every one should have as much of it as he liked to drink.^ For such large drinking companies all restrictions ceased. Every one was to feel at home. The Eoman custom to nominate kings of the table and modimperatores (comp. Ursinus, de Tricliniis Boman. p. 383, etc.) has no parallel here. The Persians were great drinkers. " They drink so much," says Xenophon, "that they cannot stand upright upon their feet, and must be carried out." Every occasion was used by them to get drunk. When Themistocles fled to the King of Persia, ^ The Midrash explains the non-compulsion to have consisted in that every one could drink the wine of his country. But this was a feast especially for the people of Shushan. E. Levi says the Persians used to have a very large cup at their feasts, which every one was obliged to empty, no matter whether he could or not, or whether he died from the effect. This cup the king did not have at his feast (Jalkut Esther 1048), CHAP. I. 9. 25 the latter embraced the opportunity of making a drinking feast (Plut. Themistocl. 28). Eirdussi of the Mohammedan time faithfully represents this ancient custom. When the hero was about to march to the war, we read (p. 151), "Then music resounded, the cups were filled with wiue, and the shah was merry at the feast." Eustem describes it thus (p. 481),— " The cups were handed round to every head, And cheeks of guests have grown, like spring flowers, red." When Kai Chosru gave a feast (p. 511), — " All heroes deep in lust have sunk, And reel from out the palace drunk." i In this revelry in the palace of the garden at Shushan every one could share ; but, says the Mishna, Mordecai and his like-minded companions had no part in it. For the pious, who adore their God, and are penitent as long as they are in exile, such feasts are unsuitable. Yer. 9. n:hi2'n Ticn Di — " Also Vashti the queen made a feast for the wome7i in the royal house.'' It was not unusual for the royal women of the East to hold feasts in their apartments for the court ladies. This we are told by Firdussi of the Princess Menishe, that she had an annual spring-feast with her ladies ; and likewise Sudabe, the wife of the shah, invited her stepson Sijawush to a female feast (p. 389), — " The music rang, and foamed the sparkling wine, The minstrels diamond decked in glittering line, Loud sang." Chardin remarks : " In Persia as well as in the whole 1 Xenophon lets Cyrus accurately describe the condition of a Persian drunken company (Cyrop. i. 3): "You all screamed without under- standing a word. You also said such funny things that caused laughter. Without hearing the singer, you swore that he sang excellently. After you rose up to dance . . . you could not stand erect upon your feet." 26 BOOK OF ESTHER. Orient, the women used to celebrate feasts at the same time with the men, but separate " (comp. Eosenmliller, Morgen- land, note 705). It might appear that the mentioning of the women's feast is unessential to the narrative, inasmuch as the catastrophe proceeded from the revelry of the men, but not of the women. But the notice introduces first the queen in the history, to make known that she was the legitimate queen, because she occupied in the royal house the same position with regard to the women as Ahhashverosh did with regard to the men. We also learn from this that Vashti was equally hilarious at her feast as her husband was at his. The Jewish teachers refer to this in their homilies, when they blame her equally with her husband as a seducer to luxury and vice, so that the women of Israel, too, caught the infection. They apply to Vashti Isa. iii. 12, "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them." There were such four wicked women in the world, Jezebel and Athaliah in Israel, and Semiramis and Vashti among the nations (M. Esther 891)). The name Vashti undoubtedly means in Old Persian, "beautiful woman," and is either an epithet, or stands for the proper name (rj KaWca). The LXX. reproduces it by 'AaTLv. In Aeschylus occurs the name Astaspes {Pers. 22). Ver. 10. ^T2^^ DVa — " On the seventh day, when the heart of the hing was merry with wine^' etc. Eunuchs were always in the monarchies of the Asiatic Orient the most influential courtiers. The chief officer of the army (2 Kings xxv. 19), the chief butler and chief baker (Gen. xl. 2), as well as the chief treasurers, chief guards of the harem, and chamberlains, D''D"iD, i.e. spadones, were chosen from this class. Hammer observes (Gesch. des osman. Beichs, V. 360) that down to modern times, with the exception of the chamberlain, the other court officers were eunuchs. Their names, he says, are usually in the East borrowed from flowers and perfumes (such as hyacinth, tulip, narcissus, musk, CHAP I. 10. 27 amber, camphor) ; but as regards the names of the officers mentioned in ver. 10, the supposition is not perhaps without ground that they denote official designations. We are there- fore in a position the more easily to explain them by intro- ducing the Syro-Chaldaic element, because the Medo-Persian kingdom has surely in this but entered upon the inheritance of the great power of Babylon. Consequently we have in [DinD the Syriac p\-iD, meaning faithful, reliable,-^ a qualification which was considered necessary, particularly to eunuchs. The Syriac translator therefore renders in several passages the word Dno simply by meliiman (see 1 Kings xxii. 9 ; 2 Kings ix. 32). The first-mentioned in our passage was either the chief officer of all, or a cabinet minister. The second is NnT3, hiztha, meaning the treasurer, from kd or nrn, which signifies prey, substance, riches (comp. Dan. xi. 24). n:u"in, hharhona, the chief of the bodyguard, from mn, i-Knn, from which the Greek name Prexaspes easily appears. This is evident from the circumstance of his position among the seven, for he stands near Admetha, whose son Asthapines was a naval captain (Herod, vii. 97). The Greek ;)^ for the ^> we have already found in the name of Xerxes. It remains yet to speak of the name piDD. The i has cer- tainly been introduced by the vocalization of the Masora. But for pDD should be read pDD (comp. Vidafrana and Inta- phemes), or rather p3n, so that through the interchange of D3 with DD the double consonant a was changed for a double D. The name of Ahhaemenes in the cuneiform c 34 BOOK OF ESTHER. Hakhamanish is to be recognised in this. This was the original ancestor of a Persian family, and of a brother and general of Xerxes. This explanation of the names receives its support from the positions in which they stand. First, the elder brother of Xerxes, then the two old and former friends of Darius (Hydarues and Aspathines), then two younger tribal chiefs, and two younger brothers of Xerxes. The question why were just these chosen, and why are Otanes and his son Smerdomenes left out, is answered, because the cabinet consisted only of seven, and those who were entitled to cabinet rank were probably not appointed at the same time, but as a vacancy occurred ; and this was either by special choice of the king, or by other arrangements. Otanes was perhaps not chosen, for the reason that his daughter was the wife of Xerxes (Herod, vii. 61). Ver. 15. " Wliat shall wc do unto the qiieen Vashti according to law .^ " This formal question was put to the seven princes, and it varies from the question put before the council by Xerxes, whether we should undertake the war with Greece or not, in this respect, that the latter was mainly pleaded by Mardonius and was opposed by Artaban ; but the former, although one only pronounced the decision, was in fact agreed to by all. The description of the whole transaction is a most valuable representation of ancient court history. Not only does it teach that there were not wanting good old forms which the king was obliged to use when he desired to place 'important measures before the council of princes ; but it also shows how these forms had lost their intrinsic value when the men and the times had no longer the spirit to animate them. Of what avail are prescribed statutes when there is no heart to beat in them ? A council which is incompetent to refuse to entertain the question whether the queen was right or not in refusing to come to the revelry of her husband already manifests a dependent spirit, which disqualifies it from pro- CHAP. I. 15. 35 nouiicing an impartial judgment. But they do not refer the question back to the king, because the behaviour of the queen gives them the opportunity of intriguing. A spirit of jealousy has always existed in Oriental countries between persons and corporations, who exercised an influence upon the king. Thus far Ahhashverosh appears to have been led by his wife. Therefore the momentary anger which she excited in him was eagerly grasped by them as an occasion for destroying her influence. It was so, too, according to the beautiful story which Firdussi communicates, when Sudabe's intrigues with the king failed, no one rose up in the council to speak for her, — " The princes brought their homage, And shouted : Death disgraceful Be the punishment to the shameful." The instructive stories of the Forty Viziers, properly speak- ing, contain nothing else but the struggle between the queen and the royal councillors as to predominance of their respec- tive influences upon the decision of the king. The same happens in all countries, but especially in the East ; also in •recent times.^ Hammer is of opinion that in the empire of the Osmans, since the time of Soliman the Fair, the iiifluence of the wives was more often directed against the grand vizier. Something of the same kind took place here ; no voice was raised either to defend or to excuse her. The king had placed the sentence in the hands of her enemies, or, at least, of her timid judges. If any wished to defend her, he was deterred by the thought that he would arouse the suspicion of holding doubtful views as to the irrevocable character of the sovereignty of the king. Herodotus gives a fair example of the caution practised by a timidly prudent court of justice which Cambyses convoked, in order to decide the question whether he might marry his sister (iii. 31). The judges found ^ But it did not always result favourably to the viziers. Djemila Cau- dahari had such great influence under Mahmud of Gasna, that Omra Altun Tash could no longer resist it, and was obliged to resign his office. (See Richardson, Treatise of Eastern Nations, German trans, p. 264.) 36 BOOK OF ESTHER. it difficult to say yes or no, but tliey perceived that he wanted an affirmative answer, and that he would consider a negative one as an insult upon his riglit to do as he liked, so they decided that, " Whereas they did not know of any law which allowed such a marriage, on the other hand they knew well that the king was allowed to act as he pleases." Here also it was not entirely without danger to appear as a decided opponent of the queen. The great affection which the king had for her might eventually cause her conduct to appear before him in a different aspect, which would excuse her and be dangerous to the opponent. Memucan (Ahhaemenes) implies this in his speech. He lays emphasis upon the principle involved in the act of Vashti, and makes it, to a certain degree, as a social matter which concerns the State. The king has in this affair not only to consider his own interests, but also the interests of all his subjects. For the queen has not only sinned against him, but by her example she has also excited the whole country. What Vashti had dared to do will be known every- where ; and if this deed is to remain unpunished, then will the rights of the husbands be disregarded all over the country. The wives will refer to the example of Vashti, and repudiate the authority of their husbands, so that p*D, great contempt, and ?ivp, anger, will enter to disturb the family peace.^ Memucan makes liis assault upon the queen in a Machiavelian manner. With great subtlety he tries to conceal this under the pretence of wishing the welfare of the people, which he knows the king has at heart. He gives to the accusation such a turn of apparent impartiality, as to make it difficult for the king, especially after the affair became known abroad, to yield to the queen. And there was none on the council ^According to Mohammedan custom, a woman must appear at the call of her husband, and render obedience and subjection to him, " even should both her hands be occupied at the time with kneading bread ... as the messenger of God had said (peace be upon him). ' And if it were permitted to prostrate oneself before any one but God, I should command the wives to prostrate themselves before their husbands ' " (comp. Vierzig Veziere, ed, Behrnaucr, c. vii. p. 95). CHAP. I. 19. Z% board who had the courage to expose the deceitful machina- tions of Memucan. For it could have been proved that the jqueen by not coming to the banquet was more obedient to her royal spouse than if she had come. But these moral maxims had no place in the heart of any one, perhaps not even in the heart of Vashti herself. It could again have been proved that the power of woman is neither founded nor abrogated by law. It was also certainly known to those who sat together, that Vashti's conduct was neither unheard of, nor that it would result in any extra- ordinary occurrence. Moreover, they knew that the exemplary punishment of Vashti would not at all alter the influence of the beauty and amiability of women over those upon whom they exercise the power of their attractions even in bad things, where the will is not powerful enough to offer resistance. Indeed, it is in allusion to Persian manners that the First Book of Esdras speaks of the highest and greatest power which Zerubbabel ascribes to wives and their husbands. He says (chap. iv. 28) : " Is not the king great in his power ? do not all regions fear to touch him ? Yet did I see him and Apame the king's concubine, the daughter of the admirable Bartacus, sitting at the right hand of the king, and taking the crown from the king's head, and setting it upon her own head ; she also struck the king with her left hand ... ye men, how can it be but that women should be strong, seeing they do thus ? " Ver. 19. Titn snn■^?5' "iC^X — " That Vashti come no more" etc. That tyranny, which does not know even the fear of God, is the greatest folly, our narrative teaches with unsurpassable clearness and simplicity. Excessive vanity demented the king more than the wine did. It lasted longer than his wrath. He neither could see that the doing of Vashti was caused by his own fault, nor the nature of the intrif^ues a^Tjainst her whom he still loved. In his state of excitement he had not the sagacity either to palliate her offence or to detect the snare 38 BOOK OF ESTHER. which was laid against him by his sycophants. The Midrash, in reference to this, rightly calls him a C>2t2 — fool. Memu- can's impudent accusation has for its aim to remove Yashti from the royal palace, and to give her throne to another that is better than she. From the expression n^DD nnion r^rrw^h it must not be supposed that Vashti was not the queen, but one of the women of the harem, who, on account of her beauty, had raised herself to such an influential position. For although it is said that her throne should be given to her companion, another inmate of the harem, who is better, nniD, i.e. more tractable, obliging, and submissive, yet we must remember that this is the language of contempt, in which the vile courtier tries to wreak his private vengeance. Such examples of queens having to quit their thrones to make room for new beauties are not only found in Oriental, but also in European, particularly in modern French histories. But it must be also observed that the autocrat of the ancient great empire apparently asserted his capricious will in a legal manner, whereas the modern sultans, in their arbitrary acts, have even thrown off' the external forms of legality. Chardin relates that one of the favourite wives of the shah had once besought him not to touch her on a certain day on account of her bodily condition, which made it necessary that she should have rest. The shah caused her to be examined, and when it was found that her plea had no foundation iu fact, she was at once burned alive {Voijages, vi. 229). Queen Vashti would not have succumbed if the royal privy councillor had not voted against her. But he used the oppor- tunity to destroy the female influence at court. The same attempt, only in a coarser manner, was made by the viziers to avert the harem influence frovi the Sultan of the Osmans, Ahmed I., at the beginning of the seventeenth century. They told him that these women were witches, and had bewitched his father Solimau, so that he was entirely dependent upon them. Memucan's accusation went deeper, was more refined and flattering to the vanity of the king, inasmuch as it made the CHAP. I. 20. 39 affair of Vashti's disobedience a question of principle. It was re- presented to him that his own position was at stake in the matter. If he yielded to her, he would be the cause of the disobedience of all the women in the country, and something dreadful might happen. But, on the other hand, it was his bounden duty, as he had the supreme power, to issue a decree that the wives must everywhere pay implicit obedience to their husbands. Ver. 20. ^^dh DIiriD V^^^) — "And when the kings decree which he shall make shall he published" Although Memucan's aim was to have Vashti deposed, yet he laid special stress upon tmis. He propounded a general prin- ciple, that disobedience of wives to their husbands was dangerous to the peace of the State. He made it appear that Vashti's deposition must be the natural outcome of this principle, rather than the aim of his advice. Should she even escape unhurt /rom this ordeal, such a decree, when publicly pro- claimed under the sanction of royal prerogative and authority, would, at any rate, have a deterrent effect upon the women of the country. He therefore changed the dangerous and dis- agreeable negative verdict concerning Vashti into a positive royal decree, which should affect the women of the country generally. By this subtle device the king was entrapped into an implicit pledge of removing the queen. His own decree precluded him from saving Vashti, which would have been of direful life - long consequence to his councillors. Through the publication of a royal DJns, official document, a reconciliation of the king with his former favourite became extremely difficult, and the intrigue which probably began already at the feast received thereby its crowning victory. To our ideas it appears almost comical, that a king should send out a circular in which the women are commanded to render due honour to their husbands.^ But it did not appear in this light to the ancient Persians. 1 That this is in harmony with the Oriental mind may be seen in the story of The Thousand and One Nights (xxiv. 68), where it is told that a 40 BOOK OF ESTHER. The power of the great Persian king over his subjects was really universal.^ In fact, there was not a domestic or family right in which he could not interfere. This is evident from the ideal glorification in which Xenophon represents the institutions of Cyrus when developing their application. He says that the Persian laws precluded beforehand the possibility of the citizen thinking of evil {Cyrop. i. 2). Again he reports that Cyrus had forbidden to spit or to sneeze, or even to turn round in public places, as something to be admired {Cyrop. viii. 1. 42). The companions of Cyrus cannot go hunting if Astyages does not command their fathers {Cyrop. i. 4). And, indeed, this was yet copied by the Sultan of the Osmans in 1664, who ordered to give his kiaja 100 switches upon the soles of his feet because he hunted of his own accord (Ham- mer, vi. 148). The decree which the king, on the proposal of Memucan, issued, had not to do with the accomplishment of an actual duty, but with the subjection of the disposition of man to a command. Civil right was not taken from the women, but obedience was enjoined upon them. The husbands did not receive a substantial, but only an ideal privilege. But just for this reason, the subtle plan pleased the adulated vanity of the conceited king. He undertook to accomplish that which could be done by no one. Had it been possible by the application of external special force to restore order among the husbands in the house, it would have been done long ago. The Persian king must have known from his own history and from that of his family how little the greatest force could prevent one becoming subject to the humour of one's beloved in the house. But being dazzled by his fancied and over- rated omnipotence, he adopted this proposal as a means whereby sultan ordered to proclaim everywhere : " It is not proper that any one should follow the advice of women." ^ The whole history about Vashti is certainly based upon a grand poli- tical thought. The Persian monarchy is founded upon the monarchy in the family. What the husband is in the family, that he is in the State. If his rights are disputed in the former, they are at the same time injured in the latter. CHAP. I. 21. 41 to assert his power, and to make everybody feel the terror of his autocratic rule. It is certainly no fable which is told of Xerxes, viz. that when the inundation of the Hellespont had destroyed his bridges, he gave order that it should be bastinaded for disobedience (Herod, vii. 35). But it was more easy for him to beat the sea than to obtain that which his edict commanded, namely, to cause the women to renounce their desire of governing by their own peculiar powers. Only the truth is mightier than the women (as Zerubbabel says) ; and it alone could keep their power wdthin bounds and hallow them. Even the command of the servant of the King of kings, of the Apostle Paul, that women should not speak in the churches, could not exert a compulsory force upon them. Though it is apparently externally obeyed, yet it is only ex- ternally so. Ver. 21. "And the saying pleased the Jcing." The proposal of Memucan was readily sanctioned by him.^ No one among the ministers offered opposition. Vashti lost her influence, probably also her life, although this is not ex- pressly mentioned ; but only that she should not come to the king, and that her royalty (ni3^o) should be given to another. In the empire of the Osmans also, each Chasseki, i.e. female favourite, had her court, her chamberlain (kiaja), the income of a Sandjak, and a gilded equipage, set with precious stones (Hammer, v. 329). But if she had been deprived of all this, and her life had been spared, she was still to be feared by her enemies ; therefore they must have insisted that she should be quickly executed. The enjoyment of the momentary favour of a tyrant has often enough ended sadly. Vashti fell in a war which is frequently carried on in Eastern courts between the women and the eunuchs and the princes.^ That her fall 1 He had not the nobility of character nor the intellect of the young Cyrus, who did not apply force to Aspasia for refusing to act as the other wives, but treated her with gentleness. (Comp. Plutarch, Artaxerxes, 26.) 2 Concerning the penalties which are meted out to the favourites when they have displeased the sultan, Chardin writes {Voyages^ vi. 233) : "Car 42 BOOK OF ESTHEK. did not lead to serious disasters after the king; had sobered down and cahnly reflected upon it, was owing to the fact that he undertook a great campaign, which occupied all his attention. Ver. 22. "And he sent letters into all the hinc/s provinces, into eveonj province according to the luriting thereof ^ and to every people after their language^ It is here emphatically declared that the decree addressed to all the peoples was written both in the distinctive language, |1t^•i3, and in the distinctive alphabet, nriD, of each nation. We learn from this that the Persian Government did not use a particular official language in its proceedings with the people, but addressed them in their own dialects (comp. c. viii. 9). The contents of this decree were, That every man should be lord, "nc>, in his house, and should command, inoi, in his language. Hence the decree was to be in force not only in Persia, but everywhere, and valid not merely in Persian language, but in every language. The Midrash makes a peculiar remark upon this. The decree was written in four principal languages. (1) ryi', Greek (as Hellenic was considered the same as Heathenism. The Talmud says : " Cursed be the man who shall teach his son the wisdom of the Greeks" {Sotah, p. 49Z>), comp. my Mag, Alterth. pp. 196 and 338), for the purpose of singing ; (2) in Persian, for lamentation ; (3) in Hebrew, for holding intercourse with one another; (4) in Latin, the language which is suitable for carrying on war. History has taught, that in all languages, more especially in Hebrew, the voice of lamentation resounded. One might almost say that Hebrew literature has ceased to le Roi ... en degrade les lines, changeant ces Favorites en esclaves, qu'on en voye servir aiix plus has emplois et dans les quartiers reciilez dii Serail ; il en fait dirtier d'autres k coups de verge et de bS,ton, il en fait tuer, 11 en fait m^me brMer les unes et enterrer les autres toutes vives." According to the story of The Thousand and One Nights (xiii. 16), Harun Arrashid had a dark tower in which the favourites were imprisoned when they committed an offence. CHAP. I. 22. 43 exist, since in modern times the Jews think that they need no longer mourn. (M. Esther, p. 91«.) The author of the verdict under which Vashti fell was Memucan, the last mentioned among the privy councillors. The Midrash tries to find out the personal motives which led him to entertain such hostile feelinsjs aj^ainst Vashti. One was, that on a certain occasion she had struck his face with a slipper. Such disgraceful treatment is certainly no rare occurrence in the East.^ The second was, because his wife had not been invited by the queen to the feast. The third was, because he wanted to see his own daughter promoted in the place of Vashti. Whether the reasons given by the Midrash were exactly the same which actuated the hatred of Memucan or not, one thing is certain, that he could not tolerate the petticoat government of Vashti, and that such and similar reasons as are given by the Eabbis have often led to such results. That Herodotus does not mention this event is not to be wondered at, inasmuch as it happened before the cam- paign. Apart from this, it is not to be expected that he should have known everything which took place in the inner circle of the Persian court, and that he should have incor- porated this in his brief reports of the Persian war. There were many writings and administrative measures issued from Shushan, and these were of such a character as to be deposited by all the governors among the acts of administration.^ 1 In the legend The Thousand and One Nights, it is told that a king punished his son by beating him with his slipper on the face (iii. 24, ed. Konig). But the sUpper is specially an instrument of punishment in the hands of the women, as the story represents it in chap. xxiv. p. 40. [In Mohammedan schools in Palestine the teacher often throws a slipper upon a delinquent boy, when he, without crying, puts it on the foot of his master, and kisses his hands. — Trans.] 2 In Athenaeus, lib. xiii. p. 556, we read : "Among the Persians, the queen must tolerate many concubines, because the king, like a master, has the command over his wife." lioi ro &}; Zsa'^c'ryiu oip^cstu tjjj yet/^csTi^s tou £>aoi'kiet. CHAPTER TI. Ver. 1. nbi^n D''"imn -ini< — "After these things, ivhen the wrath of the king Ahhashverosh ivas opacified, he remem- herecl Vashti." This did not happen soon after the feast named in chap, i., but there was an anxious interval between. We see here how exactly even the chronology of our book shows that Xerxes and Ahhashverosh are identical. In the third year of his reign the above event took place, and in the seventli (comp. ver. 16) this which is told here. In this year Xerxes returned from his campaign (480-479), and there- fore only now could the thread of the court history of Shushan be resumed (ver. 16). After the exhaustive fatigues which he went through in that war, he felt the want of the companionship of Vashti, whom lie had really once affectionately loved. Formerly the ambitious desire for war and conquest had eclipsed the feelings of love to the women. Now they arose the more strongly, as in the enjoy- ment of a specially agreeable favourite he might forget many a care. When we read, " he remembered Vashti, and what was decreed against her," still now after three years we may suppose that he somehow connected the misfortunes of his campaign with the wrath and the severity with which he had treated her. ' Herodotus narrates (vii. 46) that Xerxes in the midst of his glory on his march to Greece had said : " In this short life the^e is no man either among these or others so happy, that he should not often and more than once be in such a position as to prefer death to life. For misfortunes come, and diseases rage, which make our life to appear so long, though it is so short." n CHAP. II. 1. 45 When Xerxes gave expression to such thoughts, what would not his courtiers have given if they could have brought Vashti to life ! But there was no one present to do like the vizier of the story of the Forty Viziers (ed. Behrnauer, p. 141), where it is told, — A king had once in his drunken hours pronounced a sentence of death against his favourite friend, but the vizier did not execute the order, but hid the culprit. When the king became sober, he was in great distress of mind, on account of the supposed death of his friend ; then the vizier rejoiced his heart by introducing the friend well and sound. But Vashti was no longer to be got, and the per- plexed courtiers did not know any other way of extricating themselves from the dilemma but to look for another woman, who by her especial charms would captivate the king and would occupy his leisure, as only Vashti could, and since her no one else. They therefore propose to the king to send out officers ^ all over the country to bring every beautiful girl to Shushan. They should be brought to the harem (n^^:r\ n''n), and placed under the supervision of the xjn, viz. of the Aga (Sanscr. dja), the keeper, who would introduce them to the king after they had undergone a due course of preparation (vers. 9, 12). Among so many, there would certainly be one to whom the king would take a fancy, and make her what is called in the court language of the Osmans, a Chasseki, a favourite, in the place of Vashti. The proposal pleased the king, and he issued an order accordingly. One cannot but admire the simple, quiet historical style ofl our narrative. Laying aside all the reports which would only prolong our way of coming to the essential part of the contents of the book, there is nothing omitted which would contribute to the historical and psychological introduction and illustration. How much was necessary to happen before Israel could have ready help in time of need ! AVhat great things, according to external appearance, must precede, in order * D'^T'pS are not common officers, but eunuchs and overseers, who bear here this name, from the charge entrusted to them. 46 BOOK OF ESTHER. to make it possible that a Jewish girl by the influence of her charms should ascend the throne of a Chasseki in the Persian kingdom ! The great conference of all the officers of the State, the dreadful war with Greece, and the unfortunate issue of the same, were they not in the hands of Providence so many stepping-stones in the path of Esther's ascendancy ? In order to replace the loss of the special beauty of Vashti, a woman of equal endowments must be sought for the king, wherever and however it might be ! How many things must subserve to the frustration of Haman's wicked plan ! The wrath of Xerxes against Greece, and his wrath against his wife. Court intrigues against the powerful influences of a wife, and the vain conceit of offended sovereignty. First drunkenness, then homicidal passion, then new excited sensuality, were the sad instruments wliich preceded the redemption of Israel. When the people were delivered, they could well be penitent when they especially considered the way in which Vashti — though not herself guiltless — was one of the main causes of their deliverance. And if deep penitence must have resulted from the reflection that a woman like Vashti had to die a violent death in order that the people of God should live, — what kind of penitence must the thought call forth when we remember that Christ gave His life in order that Israel and the Gentiles might live, and that the apostles of the truth, walking in His footsteps, went through fire and sword in order to save souls ! Israel passed through the conflagration of Jerusalem on their road to conversion. In the court of Nebuchadnezzar originated the prophecy of Daniel. Through the harem went the wonderful intervention of Esther on behalf of her people. The Hebrew word for harem, n^\^:r\ nu (which only occurs in this book), does not correspond to the Arabic haram, meaning sacredness, devotion, but comes rather near to the Turkish Odalik : the Gynaeceum, the house of the women, in contra- distinction to the house of the men. It must not be assumed that the formation of the word implies an immoral motive. CHAP. II. 1. 47 nor that the institution of polygamy was in itself the product of greater depravity of the human heart than the natural i man commonly possesses. The opinion of some, that the harem was the consequence of Oriental despotism, is also erroneous. It arose from the radical views of heathenism, viz. that the passions of the natural man are not to he restrained, but legalized ; and also that the natural right of a husband over his wife is not to be controlled by moral rules, but to be left to his arbitrary will, as an indisputable and constitutional right. With both polygamy and despotism social conditions of time and place were so closely connected, that they survived in their degenerating and baneful influence the principle of heathenism which originated them. "What we find of both, in the history of Israel of the Old Testament, are relics of social customs, which had themselves vanished before the thought of the living and holy God of the Decalogue ; and even these during their continuance appeared in their purest possible form. The repentance of David, the deepest human self-abasement in confession and faith, touches his pleasures in the harem as well as the abuse of his royal power. But repentance and faith towards the pure and holy God are wanting in heathenism. This corrective of the deepest social wisdom was therefore also unknown both to Oriental and occidental heathen States. Hence the kingdom of the countries on the Euphrates and the Tigris had become a despotic caricature ; hence, too, the institution of the harem, and the degrading effects, especially upon women, that were connected with it and proceeded from it, made such progress. There is nothing legendary in the story that is told in the commencement of The Thousand and One Nights, that the caliph believed he had a right to behead his wife any day. The Persian king of antiquity, like the modern shah and sultan, arrogated to himself this historical prerogative. In his privilege to do everything there was a representation of the highest power of the husband over his wife, at least so 48 BOOK OF ESTHER. far as external means allowed. He had the command over the life and death of all the men, so also over the bodies and enjoyment of all the women. Xerxes should send out a commission all over the country in search of beautiful damsels, in order that his longing after a favourite might be satisfied. This was not a sudden outbreak of an unheard-of act of violence. It was nothing else but the expression of a universally recognised right, or rather of a heavy yoke. When Alexander the Great did the same, and caused beauti- ful women from all Asia^ to be brought to his house, he intended also to show therewith that he completely succeeded to the claims of the Persian great king. The harem of the new Persian shah is supplied in the same manner. Chardin gives an instructive representation of the process of fetching and despatching the beauties. In some cases, in modern times, the parents rather like the idea that a daughter of theirs should be demanded for the harem, for they promise themselves to obtain thereby a certain amount of influence and interest at court. Sometimes, it is further said, the king himself goes among the Armenians in search of beautiful wives. It is therefore the custom among these to betroth their daughters when still young, because such are not taken away. But, alas ! sometimes it happened that these searches were used as a means of exercising private spite, hatred, and revenge, and the Armenians (so-called Christians) have de- nounced each other when families had concealed their daughters from the vile inquisitors of the king (Voyage, vi. 242). Married women were mostly spared, not because of want of right, but because virgins were needed.^ Among the Mongolian shahs, it is said that the prince has a statute right to demand the wives of his subjects. On ^ Diodor. xvii. 77 : 1^ UTrccaZu rau x,a.ra, rojy ^Aaixu yvvuiKuv WiKzhiy- 2 In vers. 2 and 3 it is said nblDl mj?3 5?3 shall be sought. ' Chardin says, vi. 226 : " II n'y entre que des vierges. Quand on en sait quelqu'une parfaite en beaute, en quelque endroit que ce soit, on la demande pour le Haram et cela ne se refuse point." CHAP. II. 5. 49 account of this circumstance there was a long war in 1320, because an emir would not give up his wife, Bagdad-Khatun (Desguignes, iii. 303). In the Osman Empire also, under some sultans, such cruelty was carried on to great excess. New slaves used to be sought for Sultan Ibrahim, in order that each Friday he should have a new one brought to him as to a religious solemnity. He fancied he would like a favourite of high stature, and search was consequently made all over Constantinople for such a person ; and, after a good deal of trouble, they found at last an Armenian woman who was tall as a giant. She succeeded in ingratiating her- self into his favour, so that, she became most powerful, and provoked the jealousy of the other women, until, at last, the sultana invited her to an entertainment, where she caused her to be strangled. It was then reported that she died suddenly (Hammer, v. 359). For David also a handsome damsel was sought in all Israel ; but it was in order that she might nurse the old man. After he repented he became master of himself. We read, " she cherished the king, and ministered to him ; but the king knew her not " (1 Kings i. 4). Yer. 5. " There was a certain Jew in Shushan" etc. The history passes now into that of Israel. The narrative of the selection of a virgin for the royal harem is only in- terrupted for the sake of introducing certain persons, in reference to whom all the reports were thus far made. These are two in number, a man and a woman, uncle and niece, guardian and minor. They form the central point of the book. They are the deliverers of Israel. "A certain Jew was in Shushan the castle." The name Yehudi (Jew) came in vogue in Southern Palestine after the separation of the ten tribes under Eehoboam. The kingdom of Judah stood in opposition to the kingdom of Israel. It still continued for a century after that of Israel had passed away, and during this time there was but one Yehudah, or Judea, D 50 BOOK OF ESTHER. in the Holy Land. The conquest and the rule of Nebu- chadnezzar obscured all preceding events. The deeds of Shalmaneser receded to the background. By Nebuchad- nezzar the holy city Jerusalem was conquered, and the inhabitants of the kingdom, who were called Jews (2 Kings xvi. 6, XXV. 25), were by him led into exile. These last, through keeping closely together, in order to maintain the national faith, have made the name Yehudi especially distinguished. The sharp contrast between Judah and Israel was given up in a strange land. To the ten tribes, in the penitent sorrow of the exile, the name of Jerusalem was again a dearly loved and cherished one. The breach caused by the secession of Jeroboam was only repaired in the captivity. While Israel, the ideal Biblical name, only expressed their humiliated position before God, the name Jew became universally known as the designation of every one who manifested the faith of Israel. Therefore all the captives are called Jews in the book of Esther, although it cannot be proved that all of whom it treats belonged to the captivity of Nebuchadnezzar, as there must have been some there who were taken captives by his predecessor Shalmaneser. The districts in which Nebuchadnezzar distributed tlie Jews are not clearly defined. We learn only from Dan. i. 2 that they were taken to Shinar, i.e. to Babylon. Zerubbabel brought back Jews who had lived in Babylon (Ezra i. 11— ii. 1). But such also joined them who had come from Tel- nielach, Telcharsha, Cherub, and Addan, names which define the old Elymais, i.e. Loristan (see my Geschichte der Juden, p. 173). It is well known that not all came back under, the leadership of Zerubbabel. The permission of Cyrus for their return home was evidently not merely an act of kind- ness on his part, but also an act of policy, as we shall see farther on. It was certainly only Jewish colonies of definite districts which emigrated. It was not of the highest import- ance to Cyrus to found there a new mighty State, which might afterwards become independent, but only that these territories CHAP. II. 0. 51 should be settled by weak and thankful colonies who enter- tained anti - Babylonian sentiments. There yet remained behind a multitude, notably in Shushan, from which place, the residence of Daniel and Nehemiah, none seem to have been sent back (Dan. viii. 2 ; Neh. i. 1). The man is called Mordecai. This name does not occur in Israel before the captivity. Another captive who returned with Zerubbabel is so called Ezra ii. 2 ; Neh. vii. 7. It is the name of one who was born in exile. It is according to Persian analogy.^ In the first syllable it corresponds to Mardonius (siD">lD), Mardontes, Mardus ; in the last it is like that of Artachaeus or Artachaes (comp. Herod, vii. 22). One is reminded of some- thing similar in the names of Mardokempad and Mesesimordak in the Canon of Ptolemy. To say that Mordecai the Jew- had his name from the idol Merodach, would not certainly be true ; but the name of the idol is itself derived from the Sanscr. martiya^ Arm. martj Pers. mere? = man, and it does not preclude the supposition that other compounds were used witii this word.^ Moreover, when the name of Mordecai was once currently used, the Jew could bear it with as great indifference to its allusion as the Christian St. Martin could bear his name, which is derived from Mars. At any rate, the derivation of the name — apart from Merodach — from mart, merd =m.QXi, signifying "the manly," is clearer and surer than the one proposed by Oppert, who thinks it is derived from the modern Persian mardic, meaning " soft." But it is remarkable that the name Mor- decai is only given to a native of the captivity ; and this circumstance corroborates the otherwise evident fact, that ^ It was not a happy conjecture of the learned Molinus of Venice (de vita et lipsanis St. Marci Evangelistae, Eomae 1864, p. 10), that the name of Mark the evangelist was originally Mordecai, from wliich the Roman name Marcus was formed. It cannot be established that this was always the case with the name of Marcus, nor why it should be so (comp. Gotting, fjelehr. Nadir. 1865, p. 905). ^ See my article " Mordecai '* in Herzog's Realencyklop. p. 365. 52 BOOK OF ESTIIEE. Mordecai was not one of those who were exiled, as it was curiously enough concluded from ver. 6, where we read : "And his name was Mordecai, the son of Jair, the son of Shimei, the son of Kish, a Benjamite ; who had been carried away from Jerusalem with the captives, which had been carried away with Jechoniah (Jehoiachin), king of Judah, whom jN'ebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried away." The clear and instructive intentions of the historian in the genealogical passage are evident. He points out, through the enumeration of the four generations from Kish to Mordecai, the time which elapsed since the banishment of Jechoniah, which took place before the destruction of the temple. The period of about 115-120 years which since then elapsed to the sixth year of Xerxes are exactly expressed by the four genera- tions. We have also some intimation concerning the period of the narrative, which is assigned to the reign of Xerxes I. That Kish was a Benjamite, is only told for the purpose of distinguishing him from other men with the same name who belonged to the tribe of Levi. One might have thought it impossible that Biblical expositors should commit the mistake of making the information concerning the exile of Jechoniah refer to Mordecai himself, — an idea for which there is neither textual nor historical foundation, but rather both against it. If this had been the case, the author would have placed Ahhashverosh immediately after Nebuchadnezzar ; but this could not be so, according to the narrative in Daniel and Ezra, whoever we may consider Ahhashverosh to be. The author is well acquainted with the fact that a king of Persia, of whom he reports, succeeded Cyrus ; for he puts Persia before Media. If the relation is^j? in ver. 6 refers to Mordecai and not to Nebuchadnezzar, there would have been no reason why the narrator should only mention the three generations Jair, Shimei, and Kish, and, indeed, why he should mention more than Mordecai's father, as he does similarly in ver. 15, where he mentions only Esther's father, Abihhail. The opinion of the Midrash, that by Kish is here to be understood the CHAP. II. 5. 53 jfiither of King Saul, is only hoiniletical trifling, and hardly deserves notice. If that Kish had been meant, King Saul or any other member in the genealogical line as given in 1 Sam. ix. would have been mentioned ; but this is not the case. Again, the opinion that this Mordecai is identical with the one of Ezra ii. 2, who returned to Jerusalem, is also groundless. First, because this one came from Babylon, and not from Shushan. Secondly, the book of Ezra itself reports that Ahhashverosh, whoever he may be, reigned after Cyrus, and therefore Mordecai would have reached an excessively great age if he had been one of those carried into exile by Nebuchadnezzar, as there were about sixty years from the banishment of Jechoniah to the return of the captives with Zerubbabel. We would reach the monstrous conclusion of the Duke of Manchester, and of the German doctors after him, which the Biblical genealogy itself destroys, if the relation "i^t? be arbitrarily connected with ^lordecai, instead of, as it naturally is, with the last name. Above all things, it is necessary to be cautious of theories, for the sake of which all the hitherto received and well-established views are thrown overboard ; whilst, when we follow the simple rendering of the verse as indicated, everything is beautifully harmonious. The Midrash (Esther 92a) makes in its own fanciful way a peculiar and groundless assertion upon the position of the word ya^ his name. It says : When the Scripture speaks of a bad man, the word yo^ stands after his name, as Nabal his name ; when it speaks of a good man, as here of Mordecai, it stands before. "And his name was Mordecai." But iDtJ^I stands before Micah in Judg. xvii. 1; before Doeg, 1 Sam. xxi. 7; before Sheba, "a man of Belial," 2 Sam. xx. 1; and before others who cannot be reckoned among the good. On the other hand, the word stands after Josiah, 1 Kings xiii. 2 ; after Daniel, Dan. x. 1 ; and after the names of the best m,en, and, above all, after the Messiah, Zech. vi. 12, where we read, "Behold the man, Zemach {i.e. Branch) is his name, he shall build the temple of the Lord." 54 BOOK OF ESTHER. The fourth generation from the exile of Jechoniah witnessed the events of which this book treats. Mordecai must still have been in the prime of life. He had a relation Abihhail, who died and left an orphan daughter behind. This girl, Mordecai, of whose wife or children nothing is reported, took to his house, as there was no nearer relative, and he became her nursing father, pt?, from her youth. For the word pi? or n^DS implies nursing of a child from its infancy, as Naomi was the nurse of the child of Kuth from its birth (Ruth iv. 16), and as Moses said to the Lord : " Have I conceived all this people ? have I brought them forth, that Thou shouldest say unto me. Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing father carries the suckling child?" (Num. xi. 12). He cherished her as a father and mother cherish their own child ; and the whole narrative shows that this was not done perfunctorily, but with his whole heart. Ver. 7. nriDS X'-n nonn-nj^ — " Hadassah, that is, Esther." The girl was called in the house of her parents and of Mordecai, Hadassah, i.e. " Myrtle," Myrto, a name which in very ancient times had reference to the connection of beauty with fruitfulness ; hence it was a symbol of Venus, and was therefore appropriately chosen as an epithet to the girl. Jewish women, as among other Eastern nations, have always had names borrowed from flowers. We need only refer to the names of Jewish women which have come down to us from all the Middle Ages, such as Flora, Myrrha, Blumchen, Blume, Rosa, Fiore, etc. (see Zunz, Namen dcr Juden, p. 73, etc.). The Midrash acknowledges this in its comment on the passage. It says, Mordecai's cousin was called Myrtle, like the righteous, because she never faded, but was always blooming both in summer and in winter. They apply to her Isa. Iv. 1 3, where we read : " Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir tree, and instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle tree," understanding, of course, by the thorn and brier Vashti, and by the myrtle Esther (Bab. CHAP. II. 7. 55 Megilla lOh). On the other hand, the Church Father [Jerome] refers this passage to the Apostle Pauh " At that time," says he, " when he preached the gospel in the world, and could say, ' We are a sweet savour of Christ ' (2 Cor. ii. 15), he is rightly called a cypress and myrtle tree" {Comm. ad Jes., ed. Migne, iv. 538). But the prophecy goes beyond the preacher of the truth to the truth itself. The Talmudical word for myrtle is ndj^, as in Syriac. Compare with it the Persian i^DlDDN (see Vullers, i. 601). "iriDx N\i. Esther was the name which the girl received in the harem as a favourite of the king. E. Nehemia (in Megilla loh)^ correctly derives the name from innox, or as the Targum writes it, i<-i^nD''N, after the Greek aarrip, star ; Syr. N"inDS ; Pers. m^no ; Zend, stara. And in Persian it has the special sense of the lustre of Venus, Fortuna {sidus genethliacum), of the morning star (see Vullers, ii. 220), as the Persians call the king, "the morning star of the throne." Such names were customary for the wives and favourites in the East. The Caliph Hisham II. of Spain gave to his beloved Eadhiyet the surname of Fortunate Star (Hammer, Namen der Araher, p. 11). The name of the legitimate wife of Xerxes, Amestris^ (Herod, vii. 61-114, and ix. 169), will likewise be best explained from the compound of Amesha (nt^'DS) and Sitra, mriD, meaning heavenly star. For with Amesha (heavenly, immortal) and Cpenta are also the seven genii designated, which are the gods of the seven planets. Some have thought that they could find the name of Hadassah, myrtle, repro- duced in the name of Atossa, the wife of Darius. The circumstance against this is, that Hadassah is only a Hebrew word. We may rather consider that it has some relation ^ [R. Yehudah says, that the name of Esther is derived from "iDD, to hide, because she did not tell of her origin. — Trans.] 2 Comp. the name of the beautiful Amazon in Hyrcania, Qx'Kriarpis, in Diodor. xvii. 77, in respect to the latter part of the name, and of Amytis (by Ctesias), daughter of Cyaxares, in respect to the first part. 56 BOOK OF ESTHER. with the Persian word I^TIX, light, splendour, fire. "With this word the Persians designated the phoenix on account of its magnificent brilliancy, and by the term "isnn CTii^ they called the red rose and the tulip, as the splendour of spring. Like- wise the name Eoxane/ the beautiful wife of Alexander, is explained to be derived from the Eoshen Pehlvi, njc^sn, meaning " the shining one." The favourite of the Spanish Caliph Abderrahman III. was called ISTureddunja, " the light of the world." A famous woman in the harem of Stamboul was called [N'urbanu, " woman of light ; " another in the Muhamedan India had the name of Nurmahal, " light of the harem." Famous Chassekis of the Osman sultans were called Mahpeiker, " moonlike " (this is a favourite expression of Pirdussi for a girl). Mahfirus, " favourite of the crescent ; " Mihrmah, " sun-moon." Other such peculiar names are as follows: — Parysatis, the mother of Artaxerxes IL, in later form Perisade, " the perichild " or " angel's child ; " the wife of the Caliph Mothaded was named Kothronneda, " dewdrop." An Osman Chasseki of Grecian birth was called Eebia Gulnusch, "rose-drink of spring." Favourite female slaves had such names : Dshanfeda, " offering of soul ; " Sudshbagii, "the one with plaited hair" (Hammer, Gescli, viii. 358); Sheckerbuli, "sugar-plum;" Sheckerpara, "sweet- meat ; " Sheckerchatun, " sugar- woman." This last was a princess at Delhi at the time of Firuzshah. The famous Kosem was called Ssafiye, " the pure." Jewesses also were called so (comp. Weil, Lehen Mohammeds, p. 186), as the names of Eeine, Eeinchen occur among them. We conclude with the names of two wives of Darius, Phaidyme and Parmys. The former may properly be compared with Fatime of later times ; but Parmys is to be taken as the repro- duction of n''in2 has the sense of hurrying to carry out a duty and a privilege. He delivered to Esther prior to all others, even before her turn came to receive them, the necessary materials provided for the women's toilet before they could be introduced to the king ; and he meant the quick despatch of this business as a favour to her ; lor the longer she participated in his nursing care, the more beautiful she would become. We read : " And he speedily gave her things for purification, with her portions." Each newcomer to the harem must first undergo an ablution in order to refresh herself, etc. ; and this custom is also observed in the case of young girls, because the bath is the most essential part, according to Oriental custom, in the process of effecting a good bodily appearance, with wdiich all other adornment is connected. So then the word pnttn has evidently received the meaning of preparing the toilet, and of things generally necessary for making a good ddhut. The portions (niiD) consisted of magnificent dresses and ornaments, which were given to every woman of the harem.^ Not only was Esther privileged in speedily receiving every- thing necessary for her external appearance, but she also ^ The explanation of Clericus on this passage, that by the portions is meant food, is quite erroneous. The women naturally received food at all times. CHAP. 11. 9. 61 received seven selected slaves to wait upon her. In the word ni*5<")n, part. pass. pers. pL, which only occurs in this passage, lies the significance of the selection of the servants which were proper for her. As all who were gathered received their share of servants, the distinction shown to her could not have consisted in the point of time ivhen she received the servants, but in point of their q^iialifications and appearance. They were of the very best sort. Likewise in point of numher, they were seven, the same number of servants as were allotted to the great court ladies. The Targum has a peculiar comment upon the number of servants. In order to show how Esther could, amidst her surroundings, remember which day was the Sabbath, it says that she knew this from the number of her slaves ; for every day she had another to wait upon her, who was called by the name of the day of the week, and thus when the one who ' served on the Sabbath came to wait upon her, she knew that it was the Sabbath day. It is certainly a peculiar Oriental thought which makes a calendar of human beings. The Targum also further gives the names of the seven slaves, and that in a poetical and instructive manner. We have already mentioned that the servants as well as mistresses have poetical names, borrowed from nature. This is imitated in the Targum; but the Jewish teachers themselves had not noticed it before. They took these names from the history of the creation, so that they can only be elucidated from the things that were created in the first week. But this comment gives undoubtedly the appearance of being tinctured with Christian ideas. We begin with Monday, in which the firmament or sky was created. This is in Hebrew j;''P"i. The slave which waited upon Esther on this day was there- fore called xn^ypn, better xn^yp"), meaning something like " Heaven's child." On Tuesday were created the trees, their fruit and all vegetables, and so the name of the slave of the day was xn''3i3:i, from p, NnjJ, " the garden," corresponding to " Garden-flower." 62 BOOK OF ESTHER. On the fourth day, Wednesday, were created the stars of heaven (as they are called in the Targum, Gen, i. 14, pvi:), and therefore the name of the servant of the day was Nnninj, " Starlight." On Thursday were created all creeping things. The Hebrew word ptj' is expressed in the Talmud by tTTn, therefore the attendant of this day is named xn^ti'm, " Butterfly." By the way, through this explanation the reading is established, and the i of Mezahh Ahron, etc., is erroneous. Eemarkable is the name of the slave who attended her on the sixth day, in which the cattle and man were created. It is xn^an^n, the diminutive form of NQ-nn, meaning in Chald. and Syriac the " Lamb " (see Targ. Gen. xxi. 29), "Little lamb." Be it remembered that Friday is designated by a lamb, which certainly is in accord with the Christian remembrance of Him who as the Lamb of God was led to the slaughter on that day. The seventh day is the Sabbath, the day of rest, the quiet time. Therefore the name of the servant is NrT'VJ"), " Quiet." For yjn is rendered " quiet " both by Jewish and Christian commentators in Ps. xxxv. 20 — "the quiet in the land." The servant " Quiet " reminded Esther that it was the Sabbath. The day following the Sabbath, our Lord's day, on which the light was created, Esther had an attendant whose name was ND^n, which is best explained from ij^n, the name of a rare bird, which is taken mostly, though not always rightly, to be the phoenix (see my Schwan, p. L). The phoenix is a symbol of light ; and so we see here, as in connection with Friday, traces of Christian symbolism, in which the lamb of Friday is the risen phoenix of Sunday. But the Aga was not satisfied with the mere giving to Esther her ornaments sooner than to the rest, and the best of servants. He assigned also to her and to her servants the best apartments in the house. The phrase w^:r\ n^n niDi^ n^nnyrriNT n:c'^i can have no other sense than that he changed the place where she had dwelt into a better. But if n^B^^l refers to her person, then it reads, "he wrought a change in her for the best (niL3^) in CHAP. II. 10. 63 reference to the house of the women." We may translate the verb nr^', after the Syriac example in Acts vii. 43, by " transtulit," " he transferred her." Ver. 10. nDy-nx^ iddx nTt^n-t?^ — "Esther had not shoiml her people nor her kindred; for Mordecai had charged her that she should not shoiv it" This prohibition testifies to his wisdom and piety. It becomes now evident why so much stress is laid in ver. 7 on the fact that Esther had lost her parents, and that Mordecai had adopted her as his daughter. If her parents had been alive, such concealment of nationality on her part would have been next to impossible. It would have been difficult for her to hide her origin, and the parental love and her own filial love would have sooner or later betrayed it. But Mordecai, who did not love her less than her own parents, had that good sense and that judgment which are better safeguards to love than vanity and self-pleasing, which are so often mixed up with the better feelings in the hearts of parents. Esther belonged to a people in the kingdom which politically and religiously represented a marked contrast to the ruling people. The accusation which Haman afterwards brought against them had surely occupied the public attention of the con- querors and the priests before. At all events, it must have been useful for Esther to conceal her descent. As she was now exalted to such a high position, her only aim must have been to find favour in the eyes of the king ; and to this end a knowledge of her nationality in the circle of the house of women could in nowise be advantageous to her. Indeed it might rather, sooner or later, imperil both the position of Esther and that of her people. Mordecai, who was at home in Persia, was well acquainted with the conditions of the court and of the capital. How easily could Esther fall into disgrace, as Vashti did, and so herself be the main cause of her people's misfortunes (see Yalkut on the passage) ! So also in the contrary event, as the history has taught, what dangers 64 BOOK OF ESTHER. would ensue to Esther from her nationality being known, if persecutions against the Jews should -arise ! The deliverance which she was later called to achieve succeeded, humanly speaking, only because no one knew that she belonged to Israel. Had it been known, the intrigues for her destruction would have been commenced. Add to this that the king was perhaps favourably disposed to other Jews besides her, whose position had to be taken into consideration; and if it. had been known that she also was a Jewess, envious tongues would have been busy with the charge of preponderating Jewish influence at court. The Midrash says that Mordecai showed his modesty by prohibiting Esther from making her pedigree known. Xhere is truth in this. He certainly thereby renounced claims upon honours and presents which would have fallen to him as her nearest kindred. Chardin says that it is still the custom in modern Persia to give pensions to the family of a lady of the seraglio ; and the more she is esteemed by the king, the greater are the pensions {Voyage, vi. 626, 627). But Mordecai had love for his people and for his [adopted] daughter ; but he had no desire for the acquisition of money and honours. Thus he could the more freely observe what was going on at court. It might be asked, how was it possible that Esther's nationality should remain a sealed secret ? ^ But the secret was in Esther's own hands, and entirely depended upon her discretion as to the time of revealing it. For the arbitrary and domineering spirit with which women are sought and bought in the name of the king is above all the petty differences of nationality, which it does not care to inquire into. Beauty and enjoyment are sought. The person who is admitted into the seraglio needs only to have physical good looks. History, name, parents, and birth 1 Out of this question arose the Talmudical opinion (Megilla 13rt), that we must not read that Mordecai took Esther T\lh for a daughter (ver. 7), but n'^ii', into the house. We are reminded of Bathsheba the wife of Uriah, of whom Nathan said in his sermon on penitence to David, that he had robbed her husband of the one ewe-lamb he had. CHAP. II. 10. 65 are of no account. During the time in which the Turks carried on a prolonged war with Christian nations in Europe, the sultans carried on their vicious amusements with women from Greece, Eussia, Poland, Hungary, and Italy. So was the Sultana Tarslian in the seventeenth century a Pole, Bafifa the powerful concubine of Murad IV. was from Venice, and Kosen the mother of Ibrahim the Vicious was a Greek. That the origin of even such distinguished persons w^ho had left their mark upon history was unknown, is testified by the various reports concerning Churem, the favourite of Soliman I., who was an extraordinary woman. French authors say that she was a peasant woman. Other writers affirm that she was the sister of King Sigismund, so that the latter would be, of course, Soliman's brother - in - law. Others again say that she was a native of Siena in Italy, a daughter of Nani Marsigli, and had been kidnapped by robbers. If so, through her the Pope Alexander became related to the sultan. But as she is usually called a Eussian, she must have come from Galicia. Count Ezewuski asserted that she was the daughter of a poor pope (priest) of Eohatyn, a small town in Galicia ^ (comp. Hammer, Osm. Gcsch. iii. 672, 673, and 736). The Oriental legend tells that even slaves sometimes kept their origin a profound secret. A sultan said once that he did not want a favourite of unknown origin, for he feared that lie would have bad children by her (The Thousand and One Nights, xix. p. 97). The maidens were delivered to the Aga without a name and without a history, only as so many bodies, and not even as a modern flock of camels, which possess a history, biography, and photography. The Aga had before him a multitude of beautiful faces ; and he cared nothing as to which nation they belonged. When it came to his knowledge, it was through the women themselves, who sought 1 The Mid rash speaks of such experience and life at court when it remarks that Ahhasliverosh did not want to ascertain the origin of Esther, because various nations have severally claimed her as belonging to them. £ 66 BOOK OF ESTHER. lo gain some advantage for their relations. It therefore sufficed that Mordecai should forbid Esther herself to tell of her origin, as the information would not come from other quarters. For as soon as she was in the seraglio all access to her ceased, and Mordecai was silent. Ver. 11. "And Mordecai walked every day hefore the court of the women's liouse^^ etc. But though he asked Esther to deny any knowledge of him, yet his anxious paternal care for her did not cease. As an apparent stranger, it was perhaps the more easy for him to make inquiries about her welfare and proceedings ; and so he was daily to be seen in the neighbourhood of the court. The Midrash thinks that he was anxious lest she should be enchanted, a belief which to this day still exists in the East. Ver. 12. "Now vjhen the turn of evei^y maiden loas come!' We have here an exact description of the events that took place in the inner circle of the house of women. But this is not for the purpose of telling us an anecdote from the secrets of the harem. It is thereby emphatically intimated how wonder- ful the providences were by which Esther reached her happy goal. We learn from Herodotus (iii. 69) that Phaedyme, in order to investigate whether there were certain marks upon the body of the false Smerdis, had to wait till her turn came to be called to the king ; for, he adds, " the Persians let their wives come to them by turns " (eV irepirpoirfi 'yap Brj yvva2K6<; (f>OLT6ovo-t Tolat Heparjo-t). This successive turn was not a slight interval ; it lasted, it is said, a twelvemonth, — a year then, in which every newly -received woman had time to prepare herself for the day of meeting the king. — Now such turns were daily occurrences, consequently the number of court women must have been about 360. In this matter also we see how closely our book agrees with the otherwise known notices of classical writers, and how much liglit it CHAP. IT. 12. 67 throws upon them. Curtius narrates (and is confirmed by Plutarch) that Darius had 360 women with him (iii. 3. 24). When Dicaearch says in Athenaeus (lib. xiii. 557) that there were only 350, the notice in our book leads us to give more credence to the report of Curtius. It is a characteristic feature of the great King of Persia that he has the liberty of having every day in the year another woman to wait upon him. This Diodorus expressly says when he narrates of Alexander the Great, that he had entirely adopted the luxurious habits of a Persian ruler. His words are : " He led with him concubines, like Darius, who were not less in number than the days of the year " ^ (" ovk eXctTTOf ? TrkiiOei tcjv Kara tov iviavTov r)fjL€p(oi^," xvii. 77). These were to the number of 360, as Curtius expressly states (vi. 6. 8, Pellices ccc. et Ix. totidem, quot Dario fuerant, regiam implebant). Yet the avarice and luxury of the princes in later times was not satisfied even with this number. The Osman sultan Murad III. had 40 favourites and 500 female slaves; but 400 appears to be the round number with the Persian shahs, as is evident from the narrative of Chardin {Voyage, vi. 243). These twelve months were spent by the women in going through a course of preparation by the application of the means then usual of embellishing their bodies, and all this for one single occasion. There was never a greater caricature of monarchical and manly power, never a more legal degradation and disgrace of woman, than was manifested in the institution of the harem. Certainly it was a question of life with the selected women whether they would be raised as special favourites and queens or not. They therefore must ^ For their year was 360 days (comp. Ideler, Handh. der Chronologie^ ii. 514). Abimassr, a governor of Diarbekr, had for the number of new calendar 365 female slaves, in order to have one a day (Hammer, Gemdldesaal^ v. p. 40). This throws light upon what is told of tlie Emperor Commodus (Lainprid, c. 5) : " Hac igitur lege vivens ipse cum trecentis concubinis . . . trecentisque aliis puberibus exoletis qjiios aequo ex plebe et nobilitate coUegerat." L 68 BOOK OF ESTHER. have considered the regulation which required a whole year of personal preparation before meeting the king as a special act of indulgence which his refined taste dictated. It was his pleasure to see a rivalry among the women, and therefore full liberty was given them to this effect. Everything of luxury and pleasure was placed at their disposal ; but this was not in consideration for themselves personally, but only in reference to the eventual enjoyment of the king, just as a landlord decorates a house with fine gilded paper, not for the sake of the walls, but for his own pleasure. We have no exact information in reference to the toilet of the women which was given them during the year. That there was a definite order in this respect is evident from what we read, that six months were spent in the application of oil of myrrh, and six months in the use of sweet odours and other purifications. ion p^ ; "1^ is, as is well known, fivppa, o-fivpva, tlie fragrant resin of halsamodendron myrrha, which was esteemed very precious in olden times. Famous ointments were made of it. The Arabs, says Athenaeus (lib. xv. p. 688), generally call ointments myrrh, because they are produced from it. Here, without doubt, the precious ointment is meant which in the time of Pliny (Rist. Nat. xiii. 3) was called " royal ointment," because it was used by the kings of the Parthians. It consists of a number of ingredients, among which is myrrh, as in the anointing oil of the Scriptures (Ex. xxx. 25). It. Hhiya-bar Abba explains it correctly by nDDD (Meg. 13a), viz. (jTaKTi) ; and in Athenaeus also we find that myrrha, called stakte, is a kind of ointment. They understand by stakte the drops of oil issuing from fresh myrrh. The explanation of It. Yehudah, that it means |i:pD?DX, is not so correct, as ekaiov ofMcfxiKLVov {6/jL(j)dKLov) IS oil of uuripc olives. To this very day the Orientals like tlie perfume of very fragrant ointments and pomades as well as of other odours (D^D'ki'n). " In the East one lives and is refreshed," says Chardin (iv. 158), "by perfumes, instead of feeling, as in our countries, overcome by them." Eastern stories vividly describe the pleasures of the baths and ciiAr. II. 13. 69 the embrocations, and of the use of rose-water and other fragrant essences, ointments, and odorous combs, in connection with the course that people go through for improving and adorning their external appearance.^ Ver. 1 3. mj;3n nmi — " Then i7i this wise came the inaiden unto the king!' This verse is very instructive. Every maiden that was called to appear before the king had the liberty to use any means which, in her estimation, might conduce to her pleasing him. " Whatsoever she desired was given her to go with her out of the house of the women unto the king's house." By the term &v\aKaL (iii. 140), without whom no one could enter the castle (iii. 72). The name fjon '^'\'2W was not unfamiliar to CHAP. II. 21. 81 the narrator, as it often occurs in the history of Israel when they had reached the zenith of glory (2 Kings xii. 1 0, xxii. 4, XXV. 18 ; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 9 ; Jer. xxxv. 4, lii. 24). Moreover, it is said that Xerxes was at last actually killed by conspirators. Artaban, the commander of his cavalry, conspired with Mithridates, his confidential chamberlain, who admitted him into the bedroom of the king during the night, and so he stabbed the king with his dagger while he was asleep (Diodor. xi. 69. 1). But this time he escaped assassi- nation. It is emphatically told that the conspirators were watchers of the threshold, the guard at the entrance of the gate. From this it appears probable that Mordecai, who was loitering about the gate, and unnoticed by them, overheard their treacherous conversation. Josephus thinks that a Jewish slave was one of them, by the name of Barnabazus, who betrayed them to Mordecai. The Jewish commentators are of opinion that Mordecai understood their language, inas- much as he spoke seventy languages ; and the proof they give of this is, that another man in Ezra ii. 2 is called Mordecai, whose name stands near the name Bilshan, which they take as an adjective meaning linguist. The language they spoke was the language of Tarshish, "^^dhld. How they come to this strange idea can easily be guessed. The name of one of the conspirators was l^nn, which reminded of ^^^m, which is sometimes explained as standing for Tarsus in Cilicia. But it is curious to note that with this Mordecai the Ben- jamite, according to the Eabbis, a Barnabas stands in con- fidential and fraternal relationship, and he is conversant with the language of Tarsus, like the Apostle Paul, who also had a Barnabas for an intimate friend and companion ! The LXX. does not even mention the traitors by name, but simply speaks of them as commanders of the body-guard (ap^Lo-co/juaro- (f>v\aK€<;). Josephus used a manuscript which read Enn instead of tnn, for he calls him Theodestes. Mordecai dis- covered the plot by his wisdom and by his observation, which his love to Esther inspired. Was he not sitting day by day 82 BOOK OF ESTHER. in the square before the palatial gate for tlie very purpose of being vigilant, and yet to be unobserved ? And when he was quite certain (ynvi) that the king's life was in danger, so that he could substantiate his accusation, and that this would not fall upon the head of Esther, he at once acquainted her with the fact. Evidently he must have kept up a continual correspondence with her, as appears from V. 20, and so the queen revealed it to Ahhashverosh. A searching investigation was immediately made, the accusation was proved, and both eunuchs were hanged on the gallows. Upon this mode of execution we shall speak farther on. The incident was a wonderful interposition of the great Eedeemer of Israel, who thus already made known His name. Without this, Esther might perhaps have fallen a victim through the instrumentality of a new rival. But now she had saved the king's life. She had told him that it was Mordecai from whom she had learned the secret of the conspiracy, and he had his name duly registered in the archives ; but to reward him, he had momentarily forgotten,^ and Esther, acting on the advice of her friend, was silent on the point. He would have been exalted to high rank, had she said that he was her uncle and foster-father. But she obeyed, and said nothing. The instruments have been prepared for the hour of danger and of deliverance. The Midrash adorns the above fact with many quaint sayings ; but there are some valuable thoufTjhts amonix them. According to it, the conspirators wanted to poison the king by putting a snake into his cup of wine or coffee. When they saw that this plan was discovered, they indeed hastily removed the snake ; but when the investigation of the affair was made, lo, in order to save Mordecai's head, there the snake was again in the cup. The story of the 1 Even in the history of Germany it occuiTed, as Archenholz narrates {Histm^y of the Seven Years' War, 7th ed. p. 462), that the court preacher Gerlach had warned Frederick II. against the treachery of Warkotsch, and saved his life ; but his fidehty was not acknowledged nor rewarded, CHAP. 11. 21. 83 snake in the cup^ is borrowed by the Midrash from the experience and notions of the time. King Xerxes was not exactly a John, wlio, according to the Lord's promise to all His disciples, might drink from a cup in which a snake had full play, without being hurt. The Midrash further says of the wonderful providence of God, that the king's anger against bis servants was like that of Pharaoh against his in order that Joseph might be set free from prison ; and that the anger of the servants against the king happened in order that Mordecai might become instrumental in the deliverance of Israel. In answer to the question whether Mordecai was right in his intervention to save the life of such a king, the Midrash says : Jacob blessed Pharaoh, Joseph interpreted the king's dream, and Daniel pro- phesied to Nebuchadnezzar. The pious of Israel have always been obedient to the existing authorities, and have always done what they could for their welfare. This ex- hibition of loyalty, as in the case of Joseph and Daniel, so also here, became the means of the salvation of those who showed it. The king had certainly not appreciated the spirit and the sentiments of Esther. He was accustomed to his wives esteeming his life of the highest consequence. When Darius recovered from sickness, through the instru- mentality of the clever Greek physician Demokedes, he sent him to the house of the women, in order that they might see him who saved his life ; and they gave him rich presents (Herod, iii. 130). For the life of these w^omen was, after the death of their king, very sad and miserable. The report of Athenaeus, that the Persian king was guarded by 3 women, has no other sense except that to none was his life so precious as to them. Ahhashverosh, indeed, rejoiced that Esther saved his life, and she gained in his estimation, and ^ The narrative of the noble Omar Ben- Abdul- Aziz has taken hold of the Oriental legends, which tell that he was poisoned by a treacherous servant, and from the poison he became green like as grass (comp. Tutinameh, iibers. v. Rosen, ii. 139). 84 BOOK OF ESTHER. secured her position against possible rivals. But the tyrannical selfishness of an Oriental mighty king is neither diminished nor refined by such catastrophes. They are to him usual acts and occurrences that are bound up with government. Holding unlimited power over the lives of thousands, his heart is not softened nor his wisdom increased by an exhibition of dutiful love. He had not, indeed, for- gotten to condemn the conspirators, but the reward due to the deliverer, and the warning lesson which the hostile assault was intended to teach him, these he had forgotten. This is evident from the narrative farther on, when it reaches its tragic height. Through extraordinary interventions, that which was prevented from happening helped to prevent other things from happening. The failure of the attempt to murder the king, and his omission to reward Mordecai, were factors in the frustration of the plan which hatred and caprice had formed. But it also proves that the preparatory steps taken by the king, as recorded in chap, iii., although they were intended to prevent similar catastrophes, yet they did not proceed from a sense of dereliction of duty and love on his part, but were entirely based upon his right of exercising his arbitrary will. CHAPTEE III. Ver. 1. " After these things." The narrator in our book has not undertaken the task of giving a complete history of Ahhashverosh. His chief object is to report the circumstances which were connected with the drama of the danger and of the deliverance of Israel. True, he gives the exact dates in which the recorded events happened, but at the same time we must remember that he does not write annals of the Persian court. He rather very ably places those events in succession after each other which have any ethical tendency or bearing upon the history, in spite of the intervals of time which lie between them. The disaster which Haman seeks to bring upon Israel is to him the hinge upon which his history turns. All these things, he implies, must necessarily have happened, in order that the plan of an angry man should be frustrated. Instead of giving us diffusive reflections, he lets the facts speak for themselves. He does not speak of the miracles which these successive occurrences reveal, but he makes it clear that Haman only becomes powerful just at that moment when the exaltation of Esther to the position of queen, and when the saving of the king's life through Mordecai had taken place, and not before. " Haman the son of Rammedatha the Agagite." The narrator reports his elevation by the king after the preceding events had taken place, but omits to indicate the ground for this elevation. Kegarded superficially, there seems to be no connection between these events and his promotion, nevertheless they form the historical basis or the ladder upon 86 BOOK OF ESTHER. \vhicli he climbed up to his high position. There is a well- known Persian tradition, that in the reign of King Vistagpa, later Gustasp, the religion of the Avesta was introduced into Persia (Spiegel, Avesta, i, 42, 43). Although it has been questioned whether this Vistagpa is the same as Hystaspes, the father of Darius, yet the identity of the names may be established from the fact that the house of Darius was particularly zealous for the doctrine of the Zarathustra. It is remarkable enough that we do not meet with the name Hystaspes, except in the case of the father and the son of Darius. This king says of himself, in the inscription of Bisutun, according to Benfey, p. 12, as follows: "I have again restored the temple, and the worship of the protector of the kingdom and of the gods." Xerxes also, if the few notices we have are an indication, was closely connected with, and influenced by, this religious cultus. A magus by the name of Osthanes (see Pliny, 30. 1) accompanied him on his war expedition, and was commissioned to propagate Persian doctrines, and an Iranian priest had even ordered the destruc- tion of the temples and the images in the hostile countries. In the elevation of Haman we must therefore see an approval of, and participation in, his religious zeal. The whole activity of Haman betrays religious sentiments, and his name has a religious sound. Haman (pn) is to be derived from the wonderfully holy Haoma, or Hom, who was thought to be a spirit as well as a sacrificial potion, possessing life-giving power (Spiegel, Avesta, ii. 75). The significance of Hom in the Persian sacrificial service was at all times known (Omomi in Plutarch) ; and as it was connected especially with priestly functions, we may infer from this that one who bore a name which was derived from Hom, was endowed with priestly qualities. In fact the name pn, Gr. Omanes (like Otanes, Azanes, Hystanes), does not occur in the classics as a name of any Persian, and only the inscription of Bisutun (Benfey, p. 14) contains the following passage: "A man named CHAP. III. 1. 87 Martiya, son of Chicliikrish, who lived in Kliuganaka, a Persian city, rose in the Susian kingdom, and said : ' I am Umanish, king of Susiana.' " Though it is doubtful whether the letter " u " is in the name of Umanish, but the context shows that the name is similar to Haman. It says that a man in Shushan (where Haman lived) arrogated to himself the royal title of Umanish. And it is precisely of such a person, that we may presume he was actuated by religious motives. What enhances the probability of the identity of Haman with this person is the name of his father, i^mon, Homdata [as in Pherendates], "the gift of Hom." The appellation of Hom was then, like the functions of the priests, hereditary in the family. We may also assume that the third epithet of Haman which sounds as a family name, Agagite (^jjn), is closely connected with it. The Jewish commentators have, forsooth, woven a good deal of fantastical interpreta- tion around this name, but which in no other point comes near to the historical truth save in this, that they give to the hatred of Haman against the Jews a religious colour. But their saying that Haman was a descendant of Agag, the king of Amalek (1 Sam. xv. 8), who descended from Esau, Jacob's brother and enemy, — and hence his hatred of the Jews was hereditary, — cannot be proved from history, although their pointing out an historical contrast in Haman, as we have already shown, is certainly correct. The Midrash goes even so far as to give a whole list of names which form the genealogy of Haman up to Esau, but in spite of the corrup- tion of the text, it can be seen that the names mostly arose from the Piabbinical views of the morality of this generation. First, names are given which denote " bad qualities ; " then figure as the ancestors of Haman those persecutors of the Jews in the Herodian-Pioman era, who are of Idumean and heathen origin.^ The genealogy of the Targum is for this reason ^ The passage in the corrupt text, Amst. ed., compared with another, is as follows (a similar genealogy in Herod, vii. 204, viii. 131) : — «« BOOK OF ESTHEE. remarkable, because we get thereby a clue to the time when it was written ; but it does not contribute anything to eluci- date the epithet Agagite in connection with Haman. In our opinion, it is quite improbable that Haman should be a descendant of Amalek/ Tor the son of a certain Hamedatha, a man whose name was derived from Haoma, must be of pure Medo- Persian descent. If the narrator had wanted to say that Haman was really an Amalekite, he would have at once written Amalek instead of Agagi. Agag was indeed a king of Amalek, but what is told of him in the Book of Samuel cannot stamp him as a type of Haman, as he rather suffered than executed judgment. One cannot also assert that the narrator, in calling him Agagite, w^anted to represent him as the ethnical as well as the political persecutor of his people, as Amalek was, for "11 DnoTi^N^ in {al ipi^D) jpybn^ in («?. pxn) nyo* "in Diia^ in d^d^^^ p^iDV in ^pDiD in j:ix -m xnri in xnt^DiQ "in "i:ii ' nn i:t^ "in nn^in .i!^y"j nnmn Ta"''^N"i xnrn^ -m To read ^DID^D ^D'^Dvb '^DT^Q ^nyS ^ DISS'S ^Dns^D^N, "It^S^Dit^ ''\i2- The translation according to the corrected text is : Haman the son of Ham- datha of Agagi, son of Stench, son of Robbery, son of Pilath, son of Lysias, son of Florus, son of Fadus, son of Flaccus, son of Antipater, son of Herod, son of Refuse, son of Decay, son of Parmashta, son of Waizata, son of Agag, son of the Red One (Rufiis), son of Amalek, of the wliore of Eliphaz, son of Esau. These are, with the exception of Lysias, a Syrian general, entirely names of Roman persecutors of the Jews ; and Antipater and Herod, who were Idumeans, and therefore sons of Esau, have a place in the ignoble roll because of their similarity of character with the rest (comp. Targum, ed. Amsterdam, 58d). * The Midrash, as is usual with hostile parties, tries its best to stain Haman's pedigree. It declares him to be a descendant of a prostitute, as the nickname bastard is common in the East. However, Hammer tells us (Namen der Araher, p. 50) that the expression is not a nickname among the Turks, but rather a term in praise of natural gifts [so also among the Jews. — Tr.]. Yet it is not always so, for when used by Ibrahim, the Osman sultan, it was certainly not an expression of praise (Hammer, 58d). That Agagi represents the ethical hostility of Haman may be seen from the analogy of the LXX. on ix. 21, when it calls him 'M»ksI&>u, inasmuch as the hostility of the Syrians, in the time of the Maccabean persecution, was designated by Macedonian names. The garrison of the castle, whose expulsion was for a long time commemorated by a feast, was also called Macedonian (Joseph. Ant. xii. 5. 4). CHAP. III. 1. 89 this would have been unique in Scripture. In that case, he would have explicitly named Amalek. Apart from this, it did not even occur to the interpreters to ask whether, accord- ing to 1 Sam. XV. and 1 Chron. iv. 43, which record the destruction of the whole race of Amalek, there could still be any one descended from him. But Haman does not even feel and act like an Amalekite, for he does not begin to persecute the Jews before the independent bearing of Mordecai excites his indignation. If the narrator had wanted to designate by the appellative Agagite an enemy of the Jews, he need not have added in ver. 10 the words Dnin\n "iilV, '' the Jews' enemy." There can therefore be no doubt that the word Agagite has received the prevalent notion from the punctuation of the Masoretes. The similarity of the letters of '':i:ix with the name of the Amalekite king led them to tliis punctuation, so that by way of jest they might transfer the character of the ancient enemy of the Jews to Haman. But this change in the punctuation is the more interesting, as in all probability an honourable title was changed by it into a polemical one. For Haman bears this appellation in the first mention of him. If it is not a nickname given to him by the Jews and reproduced by the narrator, then it must be a Persian name, which is somewhat connected with the purport of the father's and the son's names. It is very probable that in ''JJ&5 is to be found the New Persian njt^lJ, Guageh, which means a man of authority and dignity, and therefore is also used as a title of honour (Vullers, Lex. i. 735). But it has also the sense of a comrade or companion, one who belongs to the same corporation, which is perhaps more characteristic, as we shall afterwards show. The LXX. reads Bovyalo