Good News Translation has restructured this verse by arranging the references to time in a manner more natural in English style. La Bible du Semeur provides another way of restructuring: “It was the tenth month, that is, the month of Tebeth, of the seventh year of his reign, that they took Esther to the emperor in the imperial palace.”

The text does not say who took Esther to King Xerxes, only that she was taken. Perhaps the king’s eunuchs were the ones who took her to the king. In some languages a specific verbal construction of either a verb or a verb plus preposition may be used to indicate that Esther was being taken to the king as his wife. It may also be necessary to restate the clause in the active voice; for example, “And when they took Esther to King Ahasuerus.”

The tenth month was approximately from mid-December to mid-January of our modern calendar. (See the detailed comment and diagram of the Hebrew calendar, page 97 and following.) Tebeth, found only here in the Old Testament, began with the new moon that would appear about mid-December to mid-January of our modern calendar. This is the first event in the book that the author locates according to month. He cites the month first by number in the Hebrew fashion, and then by its Babylonian name that the Jews used from the time of the captivity. Almost all versions retain both the ordinal and the name used by the author. Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, however, omits the name of the month: “in the tenth month of his seventh year of reigning.” The Living Bible also omits the Babylonian name but substitutes the modern English name: “in January of the seventh year of his reign.” The use of two calendars in identifying months is evidence of the importance the author gives to time and to history in telling the story of Esther. The two calendar systems should be maintained in translation. The Babylonian name may be transliterated like other proper nouns. A footnote may then be used to explain Tebeth, or a glossary entry may discuss the Old Testament calendar system.

Seventh year: about 478 B.C.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Noss, Philip A. A Handbook on Esther (The Hebrew Text). (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Mordecai’s response to Esther is given in the form of a direct quotation. It may be understood as a simple statement of fact, or as a threat or reproach.

Following the use of the plural verb “they told” in the previous verse, Revised Standard Version says in verse 13 Mordecai told them, though the Hebrew does not actually have a pronoun here. The Hebrew is literally “and he said to send back to Esther.”

Think not is literally “Think not in your nefesh,” that is, “in yourself” (compare King James Version “with thyself”). In some languages an equivalent expression such as “within yourself” or “in your heart [or, liver]” may be appropriate.

In the king’s palace: just because Esther is married to the king, she should not consider that fact sufficient to protect her. Revised Standard Version uses a comparative construction any more than, while Good News Translation uses “safer,” but such comparatives may not be acceptable in some languages. It may be easier to say something like “Do not think in yourself that you [being] in the house of the king will escape [alone] of all the Jews” (compare New Jerusalem Bible, “Do not imagine that you, of all the Jews, will escape with your life by being in the king’s palace”). This is indeed similar to the Hebrew text. The escape referred to is from the destruction Haman had planned for the Jews.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Noss, Philip A. A Handbook on Esther (The Hebrew Text). (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The king rose: in some cultures the action of rising may signal judgment, but here it is the movement that will take the king out of the presence of Esther and Haman. Where the Hebrew style is sparse and elliptical, Good News Translation spells everything out. The Hebrew uses only one verb, “rose … into the garden,” while Good News Translation says “got up … left … went outside.” The translator should try to convey the anger of the king and his abrupt departure from the scene.

The feast is literally “the feast [or, banquet] of wine.” New Jerusalem Bible says “The king, in his fury, left the wine feast….” New International Version says “The king got up in a rage, left his wine and went out….” Neither Revised Standard Version nor Good News Translation translates the word “wine” here, perhaps assuming that it is not necessary, since verse 2 has already indicated that wine was being drunk at the banquet. Translators, however, are urged to follow the Hebrew here and retain this information in verse 7.

On the palace garden see comments on 1.5.

To beg his life (Revised Standard Version) or “to beg for his life” means “to beg the queen to save his life” (so Bible en français courant, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). In verse 3 above, Esther is pleading to the king for her nefesh, life; here Haman begs Esther for his nefesh, life.

Evil was determined against him: the Hebrew says raʿah “evil, calamity, wickedness,” which is interpreted by some to mean “fate” in this context (so New English Bible, New International Version). The author makes a play on words here. The same Hebrew word used here with reference to Haman was used by Esther when she described him in verse 6 (“This wicked Haman!”). Some languages may prefer to restructure the sentence and use an active verb, like New Jerusalem Bible, which says “he saw that the king had resolved to destroy him,” or Biblia Dios Habla Hoy, which says “upon realizing that the king had decided to condemn him to death.” Although there is an implication of punishment (compare Good News Translation), it is not punishment in a strictly legal sense, but more in the sense of vengeance. The emphasis in the following verses is not on Haman’s having broken a law but on the king’s anger over Haman’s actions. Gordis renders these words in idiomatic English as “he saw that his doom was sealed with the king.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Noss, Philip A. A Handbook on Esther (The Hebrew Text). (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The Hebrew word translated as villages in Revised Standard Version is actually a noun that refers to people who live in open settlements, that is, “villagers.” The very same Hebrew word is used with “towns” to mean open towns that have no protective walls around them: (Anchor Bible “Jewish villagers who are living in unwalled towns”; FOX “village Jews, living in unwalled towns”). A translation such as open towns (Revised Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, Gordis) will have no meaning in many languages. Though the words “small towns” correctly preserve one aspect of the meaning, they fail to preserve the cultural fact that larger towns were often surrounded by walls for protection, while smaller isolated villages were not. Revised English Bible correctly focuses on the aspect of being remote and isolated: “Jews in the countryside who live in remote villages” (similarly Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). Biblia Dios Habla Hoy preserves both the meaning that these were “small towns” and that they were unwalled: “the Jews who live in towns and villages that don’t have walls.” Another model may be “Jews who live in the rural areas in remote unprotected villages.”

A day for gladness and feasting and holiday-making: in this verse the special day is described as it had been previously (see 8.16, 17 above), although the descriptive features are reversed in order. However, the author does not merely repeat. He emphasizes the special nature of the day by providing an additional detail. It is also a “good day,” frequently translated as a “holiday,” a day when special gifts are given to one another.

The sending of choice portions to one another during festivals was a customary practice (see 1 Sam 1.4; Neh 8.10). The choice portions were portions of food. The same Hebrew word for choice portions is translated as “portion of food” in 2.9. In this context it may be best to follow Good News Translation, New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, and New American Bible, which say “gifts of food.” The word “presents” as in New Jerusalem Bible and New International Version is too general and suggests gifts other than food.

One another: the Hebrew is literally “each to his fellow, his companion, his neighbor.” It may be translated “to one another, to each other,” or by a verb form that expresses reciprocal action.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Noss, Philip A. A Handbook on Esther (The Hebrew Text). (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

In presence of in Hebrew is literally “to the face of.” The meaning is that Memucan spoke “in front of” the king and his officials, or “to the king and his officials” (Good News Translation). Many languages have idioms similar to the Hebrew; for example, “in [to] the eyes of.” However, the translator must take care to avoid using an expression that suggests arrogance or defiance on the part of the speaker.

On the princes see comment on 1.3.

Memucan’s answer to the king is reported also in direct quotation form and takes the emphatic form, Not only … but also…, which is restructured in Good News Translation to maintain and clarify emphasis according to English style (similarly Bible en français courant). To avoid making a sentence that is long and overly complicated, the translator may prefer to divide it into two separate sentences as the New Century Version (New Century Version) has done: “He said, ‘Queen Vashti has not done wrong to the king alone. She has also done wrong to all the important men and all the people in the empire of King Xerxes.’ ” Each language will have its own preferred grammatical structures and emphatic expressions; for example, “Queen Vashti has done wrong toward the king. On the head of that, she has done wrong to all the big people and all the people in all the lands under King Ahasuerus!” In some languages the exclamation point will be represented by an emphatic particle. In translating this verse and the following verses, the translator must remember that Memucan is speaking in the presence of the king and the princes. Courtly protocol must be respected in the form of language used to translate Memucan’s words.

The word peoples is plural because the speaker is referring to all the different ethnic groups in the large Persian Empire. In the light of the following verses, which refer explicitly to husbands, the implicit meaning here is that the Queen has wronged “every man” (so Good News Translation and Bible en français courant). However, since Memucan is emphasizing the seriousness of the queen’s offense by referring to the entire kingdom, it will be better in the receptor language to use a general word for peoples in this verse, as in Revised Standard Version.

In all the provinces of King Ahasuerus refers to the 127 provinces mentioned in 1.1. Good News Translation shortens and combines information by omitting part of the author’s repetition of detail.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Noss, Philip A. A Handbook on Esther (The Hebrew Text). (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Disdained: the Hebrew verb expresses strong negative connotations, “to scorn, despise.” New Jerusalem Bible translates “he thought it beneath him merely to get rid of Mordecai.”

On to lay hands on someone, see 2.21.

They had made known: they here refers to the same persons who were identified as the king’s servants in verse 3 and who told Haman about Mordecai in verse 4. Revised Standard Version translates the Hebrew verb as a pluperfect, had made known, because it is obvious that Haman’s decision to destroy the Jews was taken after learning Mordecai’s identity. Although most languages can express previous action, some translators may wish to restructure the verse to show clearly the order of events, as Good News Translation has done.

In the second half of this verse, some interpreters change one vowel so that the people of Mordecai becomes “with Mordecai.” The translation will then be “Haman sought to destroy all the Jews with Mordecai,” but such a change really does not alter the meaning of the entire verse, nor is it necessary.

The Hebrew says the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus. This kingdom was “the whole Persian Empire” (Good News Translation).

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Noss, Philip A. A Handbook on Esther (The Hebrew Text). (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The queen prefaces her second invitation by two conditions instead of one as for the first invitation in 5.4. The first condition is personal, the second is formal (see comment on “If it pleases the king” in 1.19). This use of two conditions parallels the king’s use of two questions in verse 6. The style of Esther’s language is formal, as when she was before him in audience in verse 4.

There in verse 4 she invited the king to a banquet that she had prepared “for him.” Now, in verse 8, she invites the king and Haman to the banquet that she will prepare for them. In Good News Translation the second occurrence of the pronoun “you” in this verse should be understood as being plural.

The Hebrew says “let the king and Haman come to the banquet that I will prepare for them,” but most translations add the word “tomorrow,” as does the Septuagint (see footnote in Revised Standard Version). Since Esther has already given one banquet, Good News Translation also adds the word “another”: “tomorrow at another banquet.” Revised English Bible says “come again tomorrow.” Since the Hebrew does say at the end of this verse that Esther will do “tomorrow” as the king has said, there is good reason to expect that the time of the second banquet is “tomorrow,” and this information may be inserted earlier in the verse, as Revised Standard Version has done.

This delay in telling the king her wish is not intended to mean that she considers herself to be the king’s equal, nor is it a sign of disrespect. It serves rather to heighten the drama, and the king is apparently not troubled by the delay. According to the following verse, Haman went away “happy” (Good News Translation).

I will do as the king has said: Esther’s assurance that she will do as the king wishes is restated by Good News Translation to make explicit what Esther is promising to do. This is no doubt the meaning, but Revised Standard Version reflects the formal similarity of the text of Esther’s promise with that of the king’s promise in verses 3 and 6 above.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Noss, Philip A. A Handbook on Esther (The Hebrew Text). (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse repeats elements of 3.12b-13a. It includes several expressions that have been used previously, together with several Persian technical terms. The literary effect is to emphasize the legitimacy of what is taking place and the rapidity with which it is carried out.

The verse is in two parts, the first focusing on The writing and the second on the letters. In the case of the first, it may be possible to restate and say “they wrote,” while the second can be “what was written” or “the [written] messages.” Moffatt‘s translation states explicitly that “Mordecai wrote,” but it is more likely that Mordecai “had the letters written” by secretaries (see verse 9 above).

On in the name of see comments on 2.22.

Sealed with the king’s ring: see the comments on 3.10.

Swift horses that were used in the king’s service, bred from the royal stud: the exact meaning of the Hebrew in this phrase is unclear, especially the word translated as stud in Revised Standard Version. The word translated as royal in Revised Standard Version is a word borrowed from the Persian language. The meaning seems to be “fast horses especially bred for the king” (New International Version). A possible translation may be “horses that run fast that were bred [or, born] in the king’s concession [or, compound].” Compare also New Century Version: “The messengers rode fast horses, which were raised just for the king.” Good News Translation also provides a good model here. The King James Version rendering of the last part of this verse, “and riders on mules, camels, and young dromedaries,” is widely rejected by contemporary scholarship.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Noss, Philip A. A Handbook on Esther (The Hebrew Text). (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .