following a strictly chronological order, eschewing digressions, and of a single uniform tenor. The style has been called "remarkably chaste and simple."• It is certainly simple, presenting few difficulties of construction, and scarcely any ambiguities; but its purity may be questioned, at any rate, so far as the vocabulary is concerned, since that is largely impregnated with a Persian element, and contains also terms which belong properly to the later Hebrew, or Aramaic. The tone of the narrative is generally grave and dignified; in places it is even pathetic; but for the most part it interests more than it excites us. Character is well portrayed ; the descriptions are graphic, and occasionally very elaborate . .Altogether, the work is one of considerable literary merit, and, as a picture of court life in Persia under the .A.chremenian dynasty, is of the highest historical value, being quite without a parallel
§ 5. HIBTORIOAL TRUTH OF THE NARRATIVE. It has been said that the narrative of Esther " consists of a long string of historical difficulties and improbabilities, and contains a number of errors in regard to Persian customs." t One foreign critic ca.l.ls it "a poem," and seems to regard it as based on a very slight foundation of fact. t .Another reserves his opinion on the subject of itii authenticity, and "waits to see whether any documents are hereafter discovered which will confirm. and elucidate this isolated court story, with all its various details, and, if so, to what extent."§ The Jews, however, have always regarded it as a true history, uniting it with Daniel, Ezra, and N eherniah; and even holding it in peculiar esteem, as " more precious than Prophets, or Proverbs, or Psalms," II and as doomed to "outlast all the Hebrew Scriptures except the Pentateuch." ~ Nor does there seem to be any real ground for calling the historical character of the Book in question. The supposed "mistakes" with respect to Persian customs are wholly unproved; the "his- torical difficulties and improbabilities" disappear upon examination, or even transform themselves into historical coincidences, when the idiosyncrasy of Xerxes is taken into account. The latest critic is struck, not with" difficulties'' or with "mistakes" in the narrative, but with the fact that the whole of it is " thoroughly characteristic," all the various scenes being " full of the local genius of the empire, as we know it alike through the accounts of the earliest Greek travellers and the latest English investigators." ** The accord acknowledged in this sentence is indeed most striking; the suitability of all the main facts related to the personal character of Xerxes cannot be disputed; the notes of time fit in with what we know of his reign exactly; it is quite inconceivable that a poet,
• Bp. A. Hervey in Dr. Smith's 'Dictionary of the Bible,' voL i. p. 585. t De Wette, 'E1nleitung in d. Alt. Test.,'§ 198, a. ! Niebuhr, • Vortriige iiber alte Geschichte,' vol. i pp. 168, 159. § Ewald, 'History of Israel,' vol. v. pp. 230, 281, E. Tr. II Stanley • Lectures on the Jewish Church,' Third Series, p. 179. 'II Carpzo~, • Introductio,' c, u. § 6. 0 Stanley, pp. 173, 17¼. dii INTRODUCTION TO
or a romancer, writing 150 or 200 years after the events (which is the hypo- thesis of modern sceptical critics), should have been at once so full, so graphio, and so correct. We are, therefore, thrown back upon the opposite theory, that the writer was a contemporary, that he was familiar with the Persian court under Xerxes, and that the harmony observable between his narrative and all that we otherwise know of the time is to be referred to the unity and congruity of truth. Ti d>..718Ei. ,ravra trvv,i~n rd lnrapxovra, r,j OE ,PEVOEi. raxv o,alf,wvE°i rd>..718ic;. A historical romancer necessarily involves himself in discrepancies and contra- dictions ; the truthful narrator has nothing of this kind to fear, since with every statement that is true al,l the facts of the case must harmonise.
LITEB.A.TURE OF ESTHER.
There are extant three Targums, or Jewish comments, upon Esther, but they are neither ancient nor of much value. Carpzov, in 1721, wrote an interesting 'Intro- duction' to it. Fritzsche, early in the present century, devoted an entire work to the subject, which he entitled 'Zusii.tze zum Buche Esther; ' and Baumgarten fol- lowed his example in 1839, when he published his tractate 'De tide Libri Esther1e.' Recently Bertheau has contributed a comment on Esther to the 'Exegetisches Hand- buch zum Alten Testament,' published at Leipsic by S. Hirzel. Though far from faultless, it is upon the whole the best special work on the subject. Two important articles on ' Esther ' and 'the Book of Esther' were contributed to Dr. Smith's 'Dictionary of the Bible,' in 1860, by the present Bishop of Bath 'and Wells.
ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOK IN SECTIONS.
The Book of Esther is a continuous narrative, with no marked diTisione, and is somewhat difficult to divide even into sections. The following arrangement, which ;s nearly that of Bertheau, will be followed in the present comment. Section 1 (eh. i.). The great feast of King Ahasuerus at Susa, with the disgrace of Vashti. Section 2 (eh. ii. 1-18). The quest for maidens, and the choice of Esther to be queen in V ashti's place. Section 3 (eh. ii. 19-23). Mordecai's discovery of a plot against Ahasuerus' life. Section 4 (eh. iii 1--6). Mordecai, by want of respect, offends Haman, Ahasuerus' chief minister. Haman, in revenge, resolves to destroy the nation of the Jews. Section 5 (eh. iii. 7). Haman casts lots to obtain a lucky day for his-enterprise: the lot falls on a day in the month Adar, the last in the year. • Section 6 (eh. iii. 8---15). Haman persuades Ahasuerus to publish a decree com- manding the destruction of all the Jews in hie kingdom on the ensuing 13th of Adar. Section 7 (eh. iv. 1-3). Grief of Mordecai and general mourning of the Jews on receiving the intelligence. Section 8 (eh. iv. 4-17). Grief of Esther; her communications with Mordecai; ebe consents to risk making, uninvited, an appeal to the king. Section 9 (eh. v. 1-8). Ahasuerus receiving Esther favourably, she invites him and Haman to a banquet, at which, being permitted to make a request, ehe contents herself with inviting them both to another banquet. Section 10 ( eh. v. 9-14). Haman, exulting at these signs of royal favour, is the more exasperated by Mordecai's contempt. At the bidding of his w1.te he resolves to impale Mordecai, anc! causes a lofty cross to be erected for the purpose. Section 11 (eh. vi. 1-11). Ahasuerus, being wakeful during the night, ho.a the THE BOOK OF ESTHER. ix