Commentari biblici

Now it came to pass in the days of Ahasuerus,.... Who he was is not easy to say; almost all the kings of Persia are so named by one or another writer. He cannot be the Ahasuerus in Daniel 9:1, he was Astyages, the father of Cyaxares or Darius the Mede; but this must be one who had his royal palace in Shushan, which was never the royal city of the Medes, but of the Persians only; nor does he seem to be the Ahasuerus in Ezra 4:6, who is thought to be Cambyses, the son and successor of Cyrus; since, according to the canon of Ptolemy, he reigned but eight years, whereas this Ahasuerus at least reigned twelve, Esther 3:7, though indeed some account for it by his reigning in his father's lifetime; besides, Cambyses was always an enemy to the Jews, as this was not; and yet this way go many of the Jewish writers (n) and so a very learned man, Nicolaus Abram (o); according to Bishop Usher (p), this was Darius Hystaspis, who certainly was a friend to the Jewish nation; but he is rather the Artaxerxes of Ezra and Nehemiah; and so says the Midrash (q). Dr. Prideaux (r) thinks Ahasuerus was Artaxerxes Longimanus, which is the sense of Josephus (s), and who is thought by many to be the Artaxerxes in the foresaid books. Capellus (t) is of opinion, that Darius Ochus is meant, to which Bishop Patrick inclines; but I rather think, with Vitringa (u) and others (w), that Xerxes is the Ahasuerus that was the husband of Esther here spoken of; so the Arabic writers (x); and as he was the son and successor of Darius Hystaspis, if he is meant by Artaxerxes in the preceding books, the history of which is carried to the thirty second year of his reign, Nehemiah 13:6 and who reigned but four years more; this book of Esther stands in right order of time to carry on the history of the Jewish affairs in the Persian monarchy; and Mr. Broughton (y) owns, that the name of Xerxes, in Greek, agrees with Achasuerus in Hebrew; and in Esther 10:1 his name is Achashresh, which, with the Greeks, is Axeres or Xerxes (z):

this is Ahasuerus, which reigned from India even unto Ethiopia; properly so called; the Ethiopians had been subdued by Cambyses the son and successor of Cyrus (a), and the Indians by Darius Hystaspis the father of Xerxes (b); and both, with other great nations, were retained in subjection to him (c); and many of both, as well as of other nations, were with him in his expedition into Greece (d):

over an hundred and twenty and seven provinces; there were now seven provinces more under his jurisdiction than were in the times of Darius the Mede, Daniel 6:1.

(n) Targum & Jarchi in loc. Seder Olam Rabba, c. 29. Zuta, p. 108. (o) Pharus Vet. Test. l. 11. c. 12. p. 305. (p) Annal. Vet. Test. p. 160. so Broughton, Works, p. 38, 259, 581. (q) Midrash Esther, fol. 86. 2.((r) Connection, &c. par. 1. B. 4. p. 252, &c. (s) Antiqu. l. 11. c. 6. sect. 1. and so Suidas in voce (t) Chronolog. Sacr. p. 294. (u) Hypotypos. Hist. Sacr. p. 110. (w) Schichart. de Festo Purim. Rainold. Praelect. 144. p. 231. Alsted. Chronolog. p. 126, 181. (x) In Abulpharag. Hist. Dynast. p. 87. (y) Ut supra. (Broughton, Works, p. 38, 259, 581.) (z) Vid. Hiller. Arcan. Keri & Ketib, p. 87. & Onomastic. Sacr. p. 639. (a) Herodot. Thalia, sive, l. 3. c. 97. (b) lb. Melpomene, sive, l. 4. c. 44. (c) lb. Polymnia, sive, l. 7. c. 9. (d) lb. c. 65, 69, 70.

Ahasuerus and Vashti make a royal banquet, Est 1:1-9. He sends for Vashti, Est 1:10,1. She refuseth to come, Est 1:12. He consulteth his wise men about it, Est 1:13-15. Their judgment and advice to put her away, Est 1:16-20. He maketh the decree of men's sovereignty in their own houses, Est 1:21,22.

Quest. Who was this king?

Answ. It is confessed and manifest that this was one of the kings of Persia; but which of them it was is not yet agreed, nor is it of any necessity for us now to know. But it is sufficiently evident that this was either,

1. Darius Hystaspes, as divers both Jewish and Christian writers affirm; for his kingdom was thus vast, and he subdued India, as Herodotus reports; and one of his wives was called Atossa, which differs little from Hadassah, which is Esther's other name, Est 2:7. Or,

2. Xerxes, whose wife, as Herodotus notes, was called Amestris, which is not much differing from Esther; by whom all these things were transacted whilst he was potent and prosperous, before his unhappy expedition against the Grecians. Or,

3. Artaxerxes Longimanus, to whom the characters of Ahasuerus represented in this book do not disagree. And whereas it is objected, that by this account Mordecai must be a man of about a hundred and forty years, and consequently Esther, who is called his uncle's daughter, Est 2:7, must be too old to make a wife for the king; as for Mordecai, it may be granted, there being divers instances of persons of greater age than that in sacred and profane historians; and for Esther, it may be said that she was his uncle's granddaughter, nothing being more frequent than for the names of sons or daughters to be given to more remote posterity.

An hundred and seven and twenty provinces; so seven new provinces were added to those hundred and twenty mentioned Dan 6:1.

Verse 1. - In the days of Ahasuerus. Ahasuerus, in the original Akhashverosh, corresponds to Khshayarsha (the Persian name from which the Greeks formed their Xerxes) almost as closely as possible. The prosthelic a was a necessity of Hebrew articulation. The only unnecessary change was the substitution of v for y (vau for yod) in the penultimate syllable. But this interchange is very common in Hebrew. This is Ahasuerus which reigned, etc. The writer is evidently acquainted with more than a single Ahasuerus. Ezra had mentioned one (Ezra 4:6), and Daniel another (Daniel 9:1). If he knew their works, he would necessarily know of these two. Or he may have known of them independently. The Ahasuerus of his narrative being different from either, he proceeds to distinguish him

(1) from the Ahasuerus of Daniel, as a "king," and

(2) from the Ahasuerus of Ezra by the extent of his dominion.

Cambyses (see comment on Ezra 4:6) had not ruled over India. India is expressed by Hoddu, which seems formed from the Persian Hidush ('Nakhsh-i-Rus-tam Inser.,' par. 3, 1. 25), by the omission of the nominatival ending, and a slight modification of the vocalisation. The Sanscrit and the Zend, like the Greek, retained the n, which is really an essential part of the native word. Ethiopia is expressed, as usual, by Cush. The two countries are well chosen as the extreme terminal of the Persian empire. An hundred and twenty-seven provinces. The Hebrew medinah, "province," does not correspond to the Persian satrapy, but is applied to every tract which had its own governor. There were originally no more than twenty satrapies (Herod., 3:89-94), but there was certainly a very much larger number of governments. Judaea was a medinah (Ezra 2:1; Nehemiah 11:3), though only a small part of the satrapy of Syria.

(1) Ahasuerus.—Three persons are called by this name in the Old Testament—(1) the Ahasuerus of Daniel 9:1, the father of “Darius the Mede;” if, as is probable, this latter is the same with Astyages, Ahasuerus must be identified with Cyaxares: (2) the Ahasuerus of Ezra 4:6, who is doubtless the same with Cambyses, the son of Cyrus; and (3) the one now before us, whom we have shown in the Introduction to be almost certainly Xerxes. For the history and character of this sovereign reference must be especially made to the contemporaneous writers, Herodotus (vii., viii. 1-90), and Æschylus in his play of The Persians. The spirited lines of Juvenal should also be read (Sat. x. 173-187). We find that Xerxes succeeded his father, Darius Hystaspes, in the year 485 B.C. , five years after the momentous battle of Marathon. Undeterred by his father’s failure, he resolves upon a fresh attack on Greece, and sets out in 481 B.C. from Susa for the West. He winters at Sardis, leaving it in the spring of the following year. The summer sees the fight of the pass of Thermopylæ, which has covered the name of Leonidas and his three hundred, though vanquished and slain, with undying glory; in the autumn Themistocles, by his victory over the Persians at Salamis, changes the history of the world, and the beginning thus made is carried on by the victories at Platæa and Mycale in 479 B.C. From the rout at Salamis, Xerxes had fled to Sardis, which he did not leave till the spring of 478 B.C. All that we know of the further course of the reign of Xerxes is but one unbroken tale of debauchery and bloodshed, which came to an end in 464 B.C, when he was murdered by two of his officers, Mithridates and Artabanus, and Artaxerxes Longimanus, his son (see Ezra 7; Nehemiah 2), reigned in his stead.

This is Ahasuerus.—This is added to make clear which particular sovereign we are here dealing with. We have seen that three of the name are mentioned in the Old Testament.

Ethiopia.—Herodotus tells us that Ethiopia paid tribute to Xerxes (iii. 97).

An hundred and seven and twenty.—In Daniel 6:1. we find that Darius the Mede appointed a hundred and twenty satraps, but probably the similarity in numbers is quite accidental. There seem to have been a gradually increasing number of satrapies in the kingdom of Darius—20, 21, 23, 29 (Herod, iii. 89-94), and the nations in the empire of Xerxes are said to be sixty (ib. vii. 61-95). Thus the provinces here mentioned must include subdivisions of these.

Chap. Esther 1:1-9. The great feast given by Ahasuerus at Susa

1. Now it came to pass] Heb. And it came to pass. ‘And’ is a strange word with which to begin a book. In the case of similar openings to other historical Books (Joshua, Judges, etc.) it implies the continuation of a former narrative. Here, on the other hand, as probably at the commencement of Ezekiel and Jonah, it only denotes a connexion in the writer’s own mind with preceding history in general or with the period of Ahasuerus in particular. It may even have become established as an opening formula, irrespective of its strict applicability.

Ahasuerus] The Heb. Aḥashvçrôsh represents the Persian Khshayarsha (mighty eye, or, mighty man), whence was derived the Greek Xerxes, who is no doubt the monarch intended. The Ahasuerus of this Book has indeed been identified with (a) Cambyses (b.c. 529), father of Darius Hystaspes, on the strength of Daniel 9:1, a passage, however, which in reality lends no aid to this hypothesis (see Driver in Camb. Bible, ad loc.), or (b) Artaxerxes Longimanus, the son and successor of Xerxes (b.c. 465–425), with whom the LXX., followed by Josephus, identifies him, or (c) Cyaxares, a Median ruler, or (d) ‘Darius the Mede’ of Daniel 5:31 (where see note in Camb. Bible).

The last two identifications may be at once dismissed. Ahasuerus was evidently a king of Persia, as is shewn by the extent of his dominions as well as from other considerations, such as the whole atmosphere of the Book. Moreover (b) is precluded by the Hebrew, which uses the form Artaḥshashta for Artaxerxes (Ezra 4:7). Accordingly there can be little or no doubt that Xerxes (b.c. 485–465), conspicuous in history for the defeat of his gigantic armaments at Salamis (b.c. 480) and Plataea (479), is the king of whom we here read. Further, (i) the capricious and sensual character of Ahasuerus corresponds with the notices of Xerxes in Herodotus (ix. 108 ff.), (ii) the extent of his empire agrees with the account here, (iii) the gathering at Susa in the third year of his reign (Esther 1:3) harmonises with the statement of Herodotus (vii. 8) that after Xerxes’ subjugation of Egypt there was a great assembly of satraps at Susa to make arrangements for the attack on Greece about two years later, while the interval of four years between Vashti’s disgrace and Esther’s promotion (Esther 2:16) leaves time for the king’s return from that ill-fated expedition to comfort himself for its ignominious ending with sensual gratifications.

from India even unto Ethiopia] The word in the original for India (Hôddu) appears to represent the Persian Hidush. Both have lost the n which has been retained by the Greek (LXX. τῆς Ἰνδικῆς), and so (through the Latin) by ourselves. The name was originally confined to the land watered by the seven streams of the Indus, and was later extended eastward and southward. Ethiopia, here and elsewhere, is the Heb. Cush.

an hundred and seven and twenty provinces] The satrapies into which the Persian Empire was divided were, according to Herodotus (iii. 89), at first but twenty. The Heb. word here, however, (mědînâh) denotes a subdivision of the satrapy, so that the large number given in the text may be quite accurate. The later Aramaic paraphrase (Targum Shçnî, or second Targum; see Introd. p. xxxiii) fancifully connects the number of the provinces over which Ahasuerus was permitted by God to rule with the fact that he was destined to take for his queen a descendant of Sarah who lived a hundred and twenty-seven years (see Genesis 23:1).

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

Esther 1:1. In the days of Ahasuerus— Archbishop Usher is of opinion, that Darius Hystaspes was the king Ahasuerus who married Esther, that Atossa was the Vashti, and Artystona the Esther, of the Holy Scriptures; but Herodotus positively tells us, that Artystona was the daughter of Cyrus, and therefore could not be Esther; and that Atossa had four sons by Darius, besides daughters, all born to him after he was king; and therefore she could not be that queen Vashti who was divorced from the king her husband in the third year of his reign, (Esther 1:3.) nor he the Ahasuerus who divorced her. Joseph Scaliger is of opinion, that Xerxes is the Ahasuerus, and Hamestris, his queen, the Esther of the Holy Scriptures; but, whatever seeming similitude there may be in the names, (and this is the whole foundation of his conjecture,) it is plain, from Herodotus, that Xerxes had a son by Hamestris, who was marriageable in the seventh year of his reign; and therefore it is impossible that he should have been Esther's son, because Esther was not married to Ahasuerus till the seventh year of his reign, chap. Esther 2:16. And, considering that the choice of virgins was made for him in the fourth of his reign, and a whole year employed in their purifications, the soonest that she could have a son by him must be in the sixth; and therefore we may conclude with Josephus, the Septuagint, and the apocryphal additions to the book of Esther, that the Ahasuerus of Scripture was Artaxerxes Longimanus, and Esther a Hebrew virgin, as she is all along represented. See Prideaux and Calmet.

return to '

Now it came to pass in the days of Ahasuerus, (this [is] Ahasuerus which reigned, from India even unto Ethiopia, [over] an hundred and seven and twenty provinces:)

Now it came to pass in the days of Ahasuerus — This book is in the Hebrew called Esther, because she is a chief party therein mentioned and memorized. The Rabbis call it Megillath Esther, that is, the volume of Esther; and further tell us that there be five such volumes of Scripture books; viz. Solomon’s Song, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, and this of Esther: which they use to read all over in their synagogues, five times a year. 1. Solomon’s Song at the Passover; in remembrance of their one time deliverance out of Egypt, and their future salvation by the Messiah. 2. Ruth at Pentecost; because therein is set down the genealogy of David their first king. 3. The Lamentations of Jeremiah on the ninth day of the fifth month (that is, of August); in regard to the Babylonian captivity, and ruin of the Temple. 4. Ecclesiastes, at the feast of Tabernacles; in a thankful remembrance of the Divine providence asserted in that book; and exercised over them in a special manner, when they wandered in the wilderness. 5. Lastly, this of Esther, on the fourteenth and fifteenth days of the month Adar, or February; and as often as they hear mention of Haman, they do, even to this day, with their fists and hammers beat upon the benches and boards, as if they did beat upon Haman’s head (R. Abraham, Hispanus cognom, σοφος ). They tell us that this book was written by Mordecai himself, an eyewitness and a main party, according to Esther 9:20 , and have ever reckoned it among the Chetubin or Hagiographa, that is, the books of Holy Scripture. Indeed, because they find not the name of God or Lord in this whole book, they have a custom to cast it to the ground before they read it. But they need not; for as the ancient heathens used to write upon their books, Yεος, Yεος , God, God, so might the Jews upon this; there being nowhere in Scripture found more remarkable passages and acts of God’s immediate providence for his calamitous people than in this. Surely (saith a great divine) like as a man by a chain made up of several links, some of gold, others of silver, some of brass, iron, or tin, may be drawn out of a pit; so (it may here be seen that) the Lord, by the concurrence of several subordinate things which have no manner of dependence or natural coincidence among themselves, hath wonderfully wrought the deliverance of his Church; that it might appear to be the work of his own hand.

In the days of Ahasuerus — That is, of Xerxes, the terror of Greece, called Ahasuerosh, that is, a hereditary, begotten by king Darius, and born of a king’s daughter, viz. Atossa, daughter to Cyrus, and heir of the kingdom by lineal descent. Such a hereditary prince was our Henry VIII. Greek authors also call Xerxes, Oxyastris, and his wife Amestris, which seemeth to be the same as Esther, who is called Amestris by a like composition, saith an interpreter, as Haman’s father was called Ham-Adata, an honourable addition to a name among the Persians.

This is Ahasuerus which reigned from India even unto Ethiopia — viz. Inclusive, ut loquuntur. This must needs be Xerxes; for he subdued Ethiopia, and thereupon made this great feast. He was lord, we see, of a very great part of the habitable world; as is now the Great Turk, not inferior in greatness and strength, to the mightiest monarchs that ever yet were upon the face of the earth. No part of the world is left untouched by him but America only; not more fortunate, saith one, with her rich mines, than in that she is so far from so great and dangerous an enemy. Nevertheless of all this greatness (belluine rather than genuine), what saith Luther? Turcicum imperium quantum quantum est, … The Turkish empire in its utmost extent is but a crust cast to his dogs, by the great housekeeper of the world. The inheritance he reserves for his children; who though held here to strait allowance, yet are far dearer to him than the world’s greatest darlings; as the poor captive Jews were, than this great emperor. Those that seek a mystery in this history tell us, that Ahasuerus typically representeth God the Father ruling over all kingdoms and creatures on earth; choosing some to be heirs of heaven, and purifying them for that purpose. Mordecai (signifying bitter and contrite) setteth forth Christ, say they, broken for our sins, and suffering the bitter wrath of God. Esther (being the same with Alma, Isaiah 7:14 , a pure virgin, secreted and secured from defilement) is a lively image of the Church, unspotted by the world, and provided for by her Mordecai. The disdainful Vashti (taking her name from Shatha, to drink) is a fit effigy of the world, proud and luxurious, and therefore excluded heaven. Haman (signifying a tumultuous and obstreperous person) represents the devil, restless and rageful, but to his own utter ruin, … These are pretty things, but not so proper. The Popish commentators are full of them.

Over an hundred and seven and twenty provinces — Seven more than were in Darius the Mede’s time, Daniel 6:1 . Monarchs will be still adding; and although a man were monarch of the whole world, yea, had the command of moon and stars, yet would he still be peeping beyond them for more, more. Herodotus reckons up sundry satrapies under the king of Persia, out of which he received, yearly, fourteen thousand five hundred and threescore Euboian talents: so that this monarchy is fitly compared (in Daniel) to the silver breast and arms in Nebuchadnezzar’s image.

return to '