by reference to the customs of Persia at that period. It was common among the Persians to bring their legitimate wives to the table, to eat with them.* Hence the king's request; but how could the queen refuse? Why was she unwilling to appear at the banquet, according to the command of her husband? This is explained by a passage of Plutarch, in which it is said that the queens were generally present at the banquet; but when the men gave themselves up to wine, they retired, leaving the place to the concubines. Such was the case here. Vashti felt that an indignity was done her by the king's demand. She saw that by this act he would put her into the class of concubines. The king saw in her refusal one of those insolent acts, in which the history of the Persian queens abounds. Cognizance was taken of it, as an act of disobedience to the king's order; and the fact that females used to be present at the banquets made it the more easy to decide against the queen. Thus it is that the principal features of the narrative agree with history. The same may be said of all the details. The king sends seven eunuchs to the queen, with his command (v. 10). The statement of their names bears witness to the precision of the author. The number seven is equally characteristic. "It appears," says Heeren, "in almost all their public institutions, where more than one was required. Hence it was probably a sacred number among them, through the influence of some ancient superstition." Seven servants stand around the sacred person of the king. In v. 13, the author mentions "the wise men, the astrologers, and those that knew law and judgment," with whom the king consulted. These are doubtless the magi, from whom the royal college of judges (οι βασιλήτοι δικασταί,) spoken of as early as the time of Cambyses, were taken. It was their special care to see that the king's course was agreeable to the rules of etiquette, and that the unalterable laws of the Medes and Persians were sacredly executed (v. 19). It is equally important to observe how carefully the author distinguishes from these officers the seven princes,

*Est. v. Herod. v. 18, who applies this expressly to the xovgidias yvrainas. This agrees with the customs of other ancient nations.

+ Plut. Conjug. Præc. Opp. T. II. p. 138, ed. Hutt. "The lawful wives of the Persian kings sit and feast with them. But when the kings wish to drink to intoxication, their wives are sent away, and they call for their concubines."

whose names he gives, who were next in rank to the king, "which saw the king's face, and which sat the first in the kingdom" (v. 14.) These latter were the seven nobles spoken of in the history of Darius, and mentioned in Ezra 7: 14. They were descended from ancient princely families, and, according to Herodotus, favored with the peculiar privilege of going into the king's presence at all times without the ceremony of introduction (Her. 3, 70 Heeren, s. 414 seq.)

Chap. 2 describes the elevation of Esther to the rank of queen, instead of Vashti. The date of this occurrence (ch. 2: 16) is specially worthy of notice. The narrator places it, not as might have been expected immediately subsequent to the deposition of Vashti (comp. 1: 3,) but in the seventh year of Xerxes; i. e. the seventh year from his actual assumption of the absolute power. This period corresponds with the termination of the expedition into Greece, after which Xerxes gave himself up to riot and debauchery.* The history contained in the book of Esther is the only one which describes this portion of his life. The things here related of the harem and of the manner of introduction into it bear the most striking marks of truthfulness. "The interior of those seraglios," says Heeren, "is faithfully exhibited in the book of Esther. Herodotus also gives us a similar accurate view, in narrating a court intrigue under the reign of Xerxes(ix. 110 seq.") Here belong the notices concerning the regulation of the harem, the divisions of the edifice in which the different classes of the women resided, the year's preparation for the enjoyment of the tokens of the king's favor, etc. (comp. 2: 12 with Herod. 3, 69). It is particularly worthy of remark that when Esther had been received into the harem, portions of food were immediately sent her (v. 9); these were the portions of honor sent from the king's table, to the friends or favorites of the court (Brisson. p. 155 seq.) According to the Persian custom, she is adorned, as queen,

*Herod. ix, 108 seq. Diod. Sic. xi, 69. It has contributed not a little to the confusion of our history, that persons have sought for the names, Esther and Vashti, in profane history, without thinking how easily, in such a multitude of similar histories, numerous wives, etc., both the names and the occurrence itself might have escaped our Greek historians. The effort has most often been made to discover Esther in Amestris (so Scaliger); but for this there is no sufficient ground. See Wesseling. Obss. Miscell., II, c. 24, p. 251 seq, Prideaux' Connections, Kleinert, Dörp. Beitr I. s. 236 seq., etc. Amestris had been the wife of Xerxes before the seventh year of his reign.

with the diadem (v. 17,) (Ibid. p. 159.) Mordecai kept the origin of Esther secret as long as possible; "he dreaded," says Clericus, "lest she should be despised on account of her people and her religion." Perhaps, however, a better reason was the Persian usage of choosing the legitimate wives of the king only among regular descendants from the family of Cyrus or Achæmenes (Herod. 3, 88. Ctesias, Persica, $20, and Bähr. p. 152.) If Esther had the prospect of being raised to such a rank, she had every reason to conceal her origin. In chap. 2: 3 mention is made of Hegai or Hege, as an officer of the king's. Ctesias speaks of perhaps the very same person under the name Hyias. Mordecai "sat in the king's gate," when he went to present his petition (2:21). This corresponds exactly to a ceremony of the Persian court.

Chap. 3. Under Xerxes, Haman rose to the dignity of vizier. It is well known that royal favorites among the Persians often attained to such rank. The number of persons thus elevated, during this reign, appears to have been unusually great. Xerxes was known to be at that time a feeble king; hence the great power of Haman. Haman was desirous of being next in dignity to the king; for, standing as the representative of the king, an enterprising, ambitious man would naturally receive nearly the same honor as royalty itself. The history of the Eastern world shows in every part, how eagerly the viziers in the oriental courts strove for this dignity, and how well they turned to account the weakness of princes for their own exaltation.* This explains the reverence done to Haman by command of the king (3: 2). All antiquity saw, in the reverence shown to kings, a sort of divine honor. The system of Persian worship, including the respect paid both to God and to rulers, was connected with their peculiar ideas of the religion of the Magi, which regarded the king as an incarnation of Ormuzd, and hence directed divine honors to be paid him (Brisson., p. 15 seq. Hengstenberg, Beitr. z. Einl. I, s. 125-132). Such honor paid to kings did not, however, comport with the notions of liberty prevalent among the Greeks; and that the religious feelings of the Jews were equally opposed to it, appears

*For example, under the Caliphs, the title of Sultan passed over to the viziers; see Bohaedd., Vit. Saladin. p. 30, etc.

from Mordecai's reply, that he was a Jew (3: 4,); implying that the laws of his nation, in opposition to the usages of the Persians, did not permit him to do as the king's commandment required (comp. 3: 8). Hence also another circumstance is explained which has hitherto presented a difficulty, and which sometimes has not been rightly understood. Haman proposed to put to death all the Jews who were dispersed throughout the kingdom of Xerxes. Such a thing has been deemed incredible (Bertholdt, s. 2427 seq.) Can it be believed, it is said, that Haman, however unreasonable and bloodthirsty a man he might have been, could have cherished the monstrous idea of slaughtering such a multitude in a single day? Viewing the matter a priori, one would judge it impossible. But on the mere ground of improbability, we could as easily explain away the occurrences of St. Bartholomew's night. We will concede, however, that a mere oriental despotism cannot sufficiently account for such severe measures, although examples are not wanting in which an innocent people have been punished for the sin of one of their number.* Another element, the interest of religion, here comes in. The more inseparable the connection, in Persia, between religion and the state, the more severe must be the punishment of disobedience to the secular power. Haman saw in the Jewish nation a separate people, whose laws were at variance with the fundamental ideas of the Persians: "neither keep they the king's laws; therefore it is not for the king's profit to suffer them" (3: 8). Hence his accusation against the Jews was not without reason; viewed from the standpoint of a Persian, it was the most serious that could be alleged. Rebellion against the royal law was rebellion. against the divine law. Strabo says (xv. p. 753), "Whatever service or burden was imposed on them by their kings, they submitted to it with alacrity; but if any one was disobedient, his head and hands were cut off, and he was cast away." Brissonius says (p. 48), "No man could differ from the king with impunity." The Persians entertained such views of the relation of the king to God, that they made no distinction between human law and

D'Arvieux gives a remarkable example from the history of the Druses (Merkw. Nachr. 1, s. 391 seq.). For other examples of the same kind see Rosenm., Alterthumsk. I, 1, s. 379.

VOL. XIII.-NO. LI.

33*

divine. Such a distinction clearly set forth in the presence of the Jews, would have been fatal to the existence of the Persian state.

This point therefore shows the truthfulness of the book, and its agreement with history. But there are still others. Haman's offer, in support of his proposal (3:9), to give the king 10,000 talents of silver,* excellently harmonizes with the character of Xerxes, whose avarice was notorious, and his treasury exhausted by the expedition against Greece. Here also appear the royal scribes, γραμματιστεί βασιλαίοι (3: 12, 8: 9), whose office it was to despatch the king's decrees; the royal posts (3: 13, 15, 8: 10, 14), conveying the king's orders on swift horses to the provinces (Her. viii. 98. Heeren, s. 487 seq.); and the king's signet ring, by which the decrees were sealed (3: 10 seq. comp. Herodot. 3, 128). Haman cast the lot upon a day which would be favorable to his design. The custom of the lot is prevalent in all the East, but particularly in Persia. One thing only strikes the reader as remarkable, viz. the length of the interval between the proclamation of the order and its execution. In the first month Haman cast the lot (3: 7), and immediately caused the decree to be promulgated: must he not have feared a conspiracy of the Jews, or their emigration to unknown. regions? (Bertholdt, s. 2429 seq.) To this Rosenmüller well replies, "In the first place, it cannot be inferred that no attempts were made by the Jews to avoid the ruin which hung over them; from the fact that no mention is made of such attempts. And secondly, it may have been Haman's intention, by an early promulgation of the decree, to give the people an opportunity to save themselves by flight, that the real estate of the wealthy Jews might the sooner come into the possession of the government" (Alterthumsk. s. 380). The end in view was the expulsion of the Jews from the kingdom of Persia; those who could not escape were to be put to the sword. At the same time, it is to be observed that Haman could promul

*Comp. Herod. I, 183, Eichhorn, p. 657 seq. It is evident that this sum did not belong to the satraps, as Bertholdt supposes (p. 2433), because it was a revenue wholly out of the common course, and not included in the regular returns of tribute-money.

† Dale, de Orac. Ethnic., c. 14, Rosenm. A. u. N. Morgenl. III, s. 301 seq. Her. 3, 128 Xenoph. Cyr. I, 6, 46. IV, 5, 55. This description is in keeping with what Strabo says of the arts of the magicians.