|
The BibleTexts.com Bible Commentary Copyright 1996-2005 Robert Nguyen Cramer THE BOOK OF ESTHER |
|
.
|
|
Jump
to chapter ...
|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| Other resources |
Harper’s
Bible Commentary (edited by James Luther Mays, NY: Harper &
Row, 1988, [book
review])
comments:
1:1-4, The Royal Banquet for the Officials. The story begins at some distance from the main action of the plot, with the depiction of a sumptuous 180-day banquet for officials from all over the Persian Empire. The function of this scene is principally to portray the magnificence and luxury of the Persian court as a backdrop to the decidedly shabby treatment that will be meted out to one of the subject races of that empire, the Jews.
1:5-9, The Royal Banquets for the Citizens of Susa. The narrative focus sharpens on a briefer, but equally pretentious pair of banquets given immediately thereafter by the king and the queen for the citizens of the Persian capital Susa. The king’s banquet for the males is, according to the Persian custom, primarily an extended drinking bout, the only rule for its conduct being that “the drinking is to be unstinted” (1:8). The ostentation of the men’s banquet and the elaborate description of the decor of the palace pavilion where it is held contrast with the perfunctory notice given to Queen Vashti’s banquet for the women (1:9). But at least the queen, who will prove a mainspring of action in this chapter, has been introduced, even though her strict subordination to the king is emphasized with the notation that her own quarters, where she gives her banquet, are “the palace that belonged to King Ahasuerus” (1:9).
1:10-22, Vashti’s Refusal to Obey the King’s Command. On the seventh and closing day of the festivities and thus presumably as the climax to his self-advertisement, the king sends for Vashti to appear before him at the men’s banquet “to show off her beauty” (1:11)—to his advantage rather than hers. Contrary to custom and expectation, she refuses. It is all the more alarming that she gives no reason for her refusal, not even the fact that the king is tipsy. A feminist reading of the narrative is today inescapable, but the author more probably intends a satire against Persian men as incapable of commanding their wives’ obedience. It is hardly to the credit of this absolute monarch, fabulously wealthy and masterfully supreme in every sphere, that on the domestic front he can be so decisively worsted. He, rather than Vashti, has become the spectacle.
Vashti’s unelaborated refusal forms an amusing contrast to the histrionic reaction of the king and his counselors. While the outcome is (perhaps) tragic for Vashti—though we observe that her punishment, never to come again before the king (1:19), is conceivably her dearest wish—it is in other respects pure farce. It involves the whole elaborate machinery of Persian law and administration—to say nothing of the postal service—in asserting the right of every man in the empire to be master in his own house. And it is implied that the story of Vashti’s independence will spread like wildfire throughout Persian lands, every wife in the empire waiting only for this sign from the empress to break out in long-stifled rebellion against her husband.
The Interpreter's
One-Volume Commentary on the Bible (edited by Charles M. Laymon,
Nashville: Abingdon, 1971, page 233, written by H. Neil Richardson)
comments:
1:2-8. The governmental center of the Persian Empire was Persepolis. The phrase translated "Susa the capital" refers rather to the "citadel of Susa," a large acropolis which was formerly the capital of Elam. There Darius [the father of Ahasuerus/Xerxes I] built a luxurious palace as a winter residence. Excavation of its court has shown that the description here is based on accurate information about it. The banquets also have some foundation in the reputation of the Persians in the ancient world for lavish entertaining.
1:9-12. Vashti's Disobedience. Herodotus states that Xerxes' queen was Amestris, daughter of a Persian general; but the fact that Vashti is an Elamite name suggests that it may represent a historical person -- possibly a local princess who was added to the royal harem. The author gives no motivation for her refusal to appear at the king's bidding. Early rabbinic interpreters concocted the explanation that she was ordered to appear wearing only the royal crown.
The Oxford
Bible Commentary (edited by John Barton and John Muddiman,
NY: Oxford University Press, 2001, pages 326-327, written by
Carol Meyers)
comments:
The book's plot is initiated by an incident involving the queen, Vashti, who gave her own banquet at the same time as the king's second one. The announcement (v.9) of the queen's feast, which appears almost as an aside, establishes the legitimacy of official banquets being offered by the queen of the realm and anticipates the meals to be hosted later by Esther at a critical point in the tale. Certainly the fact of Vashti hosting a banquet for women does not seem essential for the incident that next occurs -- except that it may indicate that Vashti was too busy to respond to her husband's request that his beautiful queen be paraded before the king, his officials, and all the people in attendance at the king's second banquet. She survives her disobedience by losing only her position (v. 19). The calm assertion of autonomy by Vashti results in royal rage and then a ridiculous royal decree -- that all men should be master in their own homes -- which adds a comic touch in that it could hardly be enforced, and indicates that men were not actually dominant in their households.
The Anchor
Bible: Esther (by Carey A. Moore,
New York: Doubleday, 1971, pages 13-14)
comments:
Woman could be present at Persian meals (see Herodotus V. 18, IX. 110); Plutach Artaxerxes V), but Queen Vashti chose to have a separate party for the women. We should understand the segregation of the sexes here in the narrative as a literary device of the authro, whereby he sets the stage for the intoxicated king's request at his stag party (vs. 10).
The MT [Masosetic Text] gives no reason for Vashti's refusal to answer the king's summons (vs. 12), thus opening the doors for speculation. Since she was specifically commanded to come with the royal turban (vs. 11), the Megilla, I and II Targums, and other ancient commentaries inferred that Vashti was commanded to wear only that, and was in effect, commanded to appear stark naked; and so she refused. Modern interpreters all agree, however, that the king was in effect insisting that she appear fully attired, with her lovely turban. Since Josephus (Antiquities XI. 191) says that strangers were not allowed to look at the beauty of Persian wives, many commentators have seen Vashti's defiance as a modest and totally justifiable refusal to appear, even fully clad, before a group of drunken men... (The whole incident is vaguely reminiscent of the account in Herodotus [I. 8-13] of how the Lydian king Candaules contrived to have his servant Gyges see his wife naked, so proud was Candaules of her beauty.)...
That the king should have been infuriated at his queen's defiance is just as understandable as his subsequent removal of her as queen; but that he should have brought into full play the communications system of the entire Persian empire for such a purpose is ridiculous. Then again, drunken men sometimes are ridiculous...
For additional details, see The International Critical Commentary: The Book of Esther (by Lewis Bayles Paton, Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1908), pages 147-151.
| Other resources |
| Other resources |
.
| Other resources |
| Other resources |
.
| Other resources |
.
| Other resources |
| Other resources |
.
| Other resources |
.
| Other resources |
.
| Abbreviations |
Copyright
1996-2005 Robert Nguyen Cramer
|
Bibliography |
| editor@bibletexts.com |