Prayer Tents Bible References - Prayer Tents

ESTHER

The fifth and last of the Megilloth, included among the Writings in the Hebrew canon.

Synopsis

The book opens with a banquet held by the Persian king Ahasuerus for all the inhabitants of his capital, Susa. After a drinking bout, the king summons his queen, Vashti, so the court might admire her great beauty. Vashti refuses, and the angry king banishes her. When he regrets losing her, his counselors suggest an empire-wide search for a new queen. All eligible virgins are gathered into his harem. Among them is Esther (Heb. “Hadassah,” Esth. 2:7), the protagonist, who wins the regard of all who know her. Esther pleases Ahasuerus so greatly that he makes her his queen. Subsequently, Esther’s uncle Mordecai discovers a plot to assassinate the king and reports it to Esther, thus saving Ahasuerus’ life.

Some time later, the king promotes Haman the Agagite as vizier. Haman demands that all the people bow down to him, but Mordecai refuses. Angered, Haman seeks revenge by plotting to slaughter all the Jews in the Persian Empire. Mordecai learns of the plot and turns to Esther to intercede with the king. At the climax of the story, Esther, risking her life, appears unsummoned before the king in an attempt to save her people. She gains Ahasuerus’ favor and then, in a series of skillful maneuvers, uncovers Haman’s plot and foils his scheme. Haman is put to death, the enemies of the Jews are destroyed, and Mordecai is elevated to vizier. The book ends with Esther and Mordecai instituting the festival of Purim to commemorate these great events.

As the synopsis shows, the plot is quite simple, and there is much more emphasis upon action than character study. Indeed, the characters seem stereotypical — Mordecai and Esther are the righteous wise, struggling against the cunning Haman and his wife for the favor of the powerful but witless Ahasuerus.

Canonicity

Historically, there have been contradictory opinions on the contributions the book of Esther makes to religious doctrine(s) as well as its canonicity. Martin Luther was hostile to the book because it “judaized” too greatly and had “much pagan impropriety,” but Maimonides ranked it after the Pentateuch. Esther is the only OT book not yet found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, perhaps for theological reasons. The Essenes may have rejected it because it contains no mention of God, and Esther apparently did not observe the dietary laws. Although Josephus mentions the book in his Antiquities and it was regarded as canonical by the Council of Jamnia in 90 c.e., the canonicity of Esther was a matter of some dispute in Judaism until after the 3rd century. The Western Church accepted the book as canonical in the 4th century, while the Eastern Church did not accept it until after the 8th.

Esther is found in different portions of the Bible. In the Hebrew MT, the book is part of the Writings (Ketubim); the LXX places it between Sirach and Judith, and English versions following the KJV put it between Nehemiah and Job.

Composition

The authorship of Esther is unknown. Most scholars agree that the story first appeared in the 4th century (during the Persian period). The final Hebrew version as transmitted in the MT dates from the Hellenistic period, at the latest the turn of the 1st century b.c.e. (cf. 2 Macc. 15:36). Supporting this dating are its Persian setting and local coloring, the absence of Greek influences, and the sympathetic attitude toward the gentile king. The writer displays a most intimate and accurate knowledge of the Persian court and customs, so much so that Esther is used to fill gaps in the accounts of classical historians. Ahasuerus has been identified as Xerxes, the fourth Achaemenid monarch (486-465). Moreover, there is a significant number of Persian nouns.

However, certain statements in the book seem to contradict extrabiblical sources. Some of these discrepancies are quite minor: e.g., Mordecai as part of Nebuchadnezzar’s deportation in 597 (2:6), which would make him, and especially Esther, far too old to fit the events. Other contradictions are more significant: e.g., according to Herodotus, Persian queens had to come from one of seven noble Persian families, which would have ruled out Esther, a Jew. Taken individually, few of these problems are sufficiently notable to undermine the essential historicity of Esther. They are ultimately important only because they tend to support two more objections: (1) the striking resemblance of a number of elements to certain ancient Near Eastern legendary stories, such as A Thousand and One Nights, and (2) the suspicion that Purim was originally a pagan festival.

Although the core of the narrative is the clash between the two opponents Haman and Mordecai, there are also several subplots: Vashti’s banishment, Esther’s becoming queen, Mordecai’s saving the king, the institution of Purim, and Haman as usurper of monarchical privilege. Despite the fact that the plot seems well constructed, the interweaving of these several story lines has led scholars to suggest that some of the subplots are based on individual narratives, perhaps specific Persian tales, borrowed and reformulated by the author of Esther (e.g., Henri Cazelles, Elias Bickerman, Hans Bardtke).

It is certainly true that any of the story lines could and does make for a good traditional tale, but the most compelling argument against dividing the narrative into separate sources is literary. The sub-plots do not separate cleanly, but instead overlap a great deal, and they cannot stand independently without key elements of the whole. Despite attempts to prove two separate strands, one focusing on the harem intrigues involving Vashti and Esther, the other on the court struggles of Mordecai and Haman, there is literary legitimacy in considering this book a single unit. Joyce G. Baldwin demonstrates the story’s unity based on a role reversal, from elevation to downfall (Vashti, Haman, and the Jews’ enemies) and from humiliation to victory (Esther, Mordecai, and the Jewish community).

Versions

The LXX version of Esther, produced in the late 2nd or early 1st century b.c.e., contains six passages not found in the Hebrew text. When the Christian scholar Jerome revised the Old Latin translation of the Bible, he collected them and placed these passages at the end of the canonical book. In English translations, Protestant Bibles place the Additions in the Apocrypha (either alone or integrated with the Hebrew Esther), while recent Roman Catholic Bibles (JB, NAB) translate the Hebrew Esther but insert the Greek Additions in the appropriate places. Tradition assigns the Additions the letters A-F.

These Greek Additions describe prophetic dreams, prayers of Mordecai and Esther, declarations by Esther of her loathing Persian food and bed, and other such pious trappings. Unlike the Hebrew narrative, which richly exploits comic elements of the story (Haman’s and Mordecai’s human vanity, Haman’s fall, Ahasuerus’ blindness), the Greek version presents a more somber lesson in a far more serious tone.

Genre

Various genres have been ascribed to the book, including “historicized wisdom tale”(Shemaryahu Talmon), based on characterization (Ahasuerus the foolish king, Mordecai the wise and virtuous courtier, Haman the wise but wicked courtier, and Esther the orphan adopted by a wise man who makes good), and “romance” (Edgar McKnight), depicting a successful quest entailing a perilous journey and crucial struggle in the face of death, and exaltation of the hero. Other suggestions include a traditional “comedy” (uplifting and ultimately optimistic with a cathartic release of tension and ultimate vindication for the heroes), “court tale” (the wise heroine/hero representing a “ruled ethnic group,” persecution of the protagonists and their ultimate vindication), and “travesty,” wherein serious subjects are treated lightly, drawing upon the incongruity of situations and sharp reversals of fate (Jack Sasson).

Most scholars view Esther as an early Jewish novella or “diaspora novella,” fictional prose that is not intended as an “accurate” historical document. It has the “traditional” narrative framework: tension develops, several complications, and ultimate resolution of the tension. Unlike longer narratives, there is only one chain of events over a limited time period, with the focus on action rather than character development.

Purpose

Most commentators agree that Esther was intended to evoke identification in an audience that was subordinated sociopolitically. Both Esther and Mordecai function in a completely heathen environment, vulnerable and relatively powerless, using skills crucial for the survival of Diaspora Jewry in a predominately gentile world which does not envision or promote the return of the Jews to Palestine. Esther in particular serves as a role model of the characteristics necessary for survival in a precarious world; by working within the system she succeeds in making the system work for her (Sidnie Ann White). Mordecai is variously admired for demonstrating reconciliation to minority status in an unpredictable environment (B. W. Jones) and reviled as inflexible, incurring the wrath of Haman and thus imperiling all Jews under Persian rule.

Others see an altogether different purpose for the book: a “call to arms.” By the time of the Council of Jamnia, with Jerusalem destroyed by the Romans in 70 c.e. and their people even more scattered than before, the Jews had good cause to find consolation in the hope that another Esther or Mordecai would rise to save them from the finality of the Diaspora. Nothing in the book seems improbable, especially since the plot centers around court intrigue and ethnic prejudices. Indeed, the text takes great pains to appear as an accurate historical account of a time when the Jews were saved from almost certain extinction.

Reading the Greek text instead of the Hebrew suggests another possible purpose. The six Greek Additions began to be written shortly after the Hebrew text and radically change the nature of the narrative. The timing of the LXX version (the colophon, Addition F, attributes the translation to Lysimachus “in the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra,” either 114 or 77 b.c.e.) seems to indicate that the story of Esther was soon understood or reinterpreted as conveying a religious message. Unlike the Hebrew text which mentions neither the deity nor religious observances, the LXX refers to God more than 50 times, as well as prayer, the temple, its cult, and the practice of dietary laws. Esther becomes more “Jewish” by claiming to have followed these laws and, in particular, by declaring her loathing for her heathen environment. Purim is de-emphasized, and a more strongly anti-gentile attitude espoused. The Additions, by turning what was originally a court intrigue into a cosmic conflict between Jew and Gentile, make God the champion of the chosen people, and thus the real “hero” of the book.

Recent Scholarly Issues

If the “strength” of literature can be defined by the intensity of its impact on readers, the book of Esther would doubtless qualify as one of the “strongest,” most effective texts of all time. Few literary texts have provoked so many interpretations, so many exegetic passions, and so many energetic controversies. Much recent work has been among feminist scholars and tends to focus on gender issues and their implications (e.g., comparison of the Esther story and the Joseph cycle in Genesis; the “problematic” of the female figures — Esther, the beautiful, and Vashti, the headstrong). Other scholars have focused on wider matters of form, contexts, and ideology, such as the appropriate uses of regal authority, assimilation, and national identity. Now, as throughout its history, this small text continues to provoke strong emotions and stimulate academic debate.

Bibliography. J. G. Baldwin, Esther. TOTC 12 (Downers Grove, 1984); S. B. Berg, The Book of Esther. SBLDS 44 (Missoula, 1979); A. Brenner, ed., A Feminist Companion to Esther, Judith and Susanna (Sheffield, 1995); C. A. Moore, Esther. AB 7B (Garden City, 1971); J. M. Sasson, “Esther,” in The Literary Guide to the Bible, ed. R. Alter and F. Kermode (Cambridge, Mass., 1987), 335-342; S. Talmon, “‘Wisdom’ in the Book of Esther,” VT 13 (1963): 419-55; S. A. White, “Esther: A Feminine Model for Jewish Diaspora,” in Gender and Difference in Ancient Israel, ed. P. L. Day (Minneapolis, 1989), 161-77.

Ilona N. Rashkow

Prayer Tents Bible References - Prayer Tents

ESTHER

Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible (2000)