[Today’s English Version F.11; Revised Standard Version 11.1]
Three different people with the same name are mentioned in this verse: (1) Ptolemy, the king of Egypt, (2) Ptolemy, the son of Dositheus, and (3) Ptolemy, the father of Lysimachus.
In the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra: Ptolemy and Cleopatra were Egyptian rulers, but since there were several Ptolemies who ruled for at least three years and who had a wife named Cleopatra, it is uncertain which Ptolemy is intended: either Ptolemy VIII (the year would be 114 B.C.), Ptolemy XII (78-77 B.C.), or, least likely, Ptolemy XIV (51-47 B.C.).
Some common language translations normally make explicit which ruler is referred to when more than one ruler had the same name. Jeroboam (2 Kgs 13.13), for example, is called Jeroboam II in Today’s English Version and Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje. In this verse in Esther, however, since there is no firm evidence to identify which Egyptian ruler is intended, it is preferable to say simply “Ptolemy” without stating which one. Translators may use a footnote to indicate the possible rulers and dates.
A priest and a Levite: in the period after the Babylonian exile, a clear distinction existed between priests and Levites, though priests were also descendants of the tribe of Levi. Today’s English Version and Revised English Bible understand these words to be hendiadys, that is, the two words express one idea, “a levitical priest.” Less likely, the word “Levite” may be taken as the proper noun Levitas, as in the marginal note in New Revised Standard Version (“Dositheus, who said that he was a priest, and Levitas, and his son Ptolemy”).
The words who said and which they said may be taken as straightforward statements that imply no doubt. Since, however, the Greek text of Esther exists in different forms, it is possible that the writer of this note had doubts about the truth of the claims made by Dositheus and his son Ptolemy. Anchor Bible therefore places these words in quotation marks: “who ‘said’ he was a priest” and “which they ‘said’ was authentic.” The interpretation represented by this punctuation in Anchor Bible is reasonable, but it should be noted that it will not be found in most major-language translations.
The words brought to Egypt are literally “brought in.” From the context it appears very probable that Egypt was the destination, and Revised Standard Version seems justified in adding “Egypt” to the text (so also New Revised Standard Version, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). In some languages it is difficult to say that something was “brought” without indicating its destination. If translators add the words “to Egypt,” they may wish to indicate in a footnote that those words are not in the Greek text.
The preceding Letter of Purim may refer to all of the book of Esther in Greek or possibly to only the letter mentioned in 9.29. As Today’s English Version makes clear, this letter is “about the Purim festival.” New Revised Standard Version says “the preceding Letter about Purim.”
Had been translated: the text does not identify the languages of the translation, either which language it had been translated from or which language it had been translated into. It may be necessary to make explicit that Lysimachus translated the letter into Greek.
Today’s English Version specifies that Lysimachus was “a member of a Jerusalem family.” It is preferable to stay closer to the text, which simply says “[one] of those in Jerusalem,” or as New Jerusalem Bible translates, “a member of the Jerusalem community.” Although he lived in Jerusalem, perhaps he was not born there. That is, he was a “person of Jerusalem” but not necessarily a “son of Jerusalem.”