In verses 12-14 the narrative briefly and suddenly returns to the subject of the women in order to provide the reader with necessary background information or to demonstrate the author’s familiarity with his subject. The writer used this same technique of suddenly changing the subject in verses 5-7.

The translator should look at verses 12-14 as a single unit. Both Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation make them a paragraph because they describe a custom or a tradition in the royal palace. Revised Standard Version follows the complex syntax of the original Hebrew, while Good News Translation revises the order of the information to make it easier to understand. The translator needs to mark very clearly the fact that this information is not part of the series of events in the story of Esther, but it is an explanation that has been added to the story; that is, the story turns to a different subject for a moment in order to explain something. In Revised Standard Version the adverb Now marks this digression; it sets off this information from the preceding part of the story.

When the turn came most likely means that the young women were assigned an order in which to go in to the king. A possible translation is the following: “When the time [or, day] came for each young woman to go….” Less likely is the understanding expressed in the Septuagint and followed by a few interpreters, that the turn means “the opportune time” or “the critical moment,” that is, just the time when each maiden looked her best.

Twelve months and six months: the author earlier referred to time in terms of days (see 1.4, 5, 10), but here he speaks of months. Good News Translation follows the common current practice of speaking of twelve months as a year. Unless there is a strong cultural preference to do otherwise, the translator may wish to retain months. Twelve months was the regular period, that is, the normal or customary length of time. The Hebrew idiom is literally “thus the days were completed [or, came to an end].”

Under the regulations: literally, “according to regulation” (for the Hebrew word dat see 1.8). These words in the Hebrew probably go with the words “twelve months,” and New Jerusalem Bible expresses the meaning clearly in English: “the twelve months’ treatment prescribed for women.” Traduction œcuménique de la Bible says “the twelve-month rule.” Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, however, takes these words with the phrase “when the turn came.” Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente says “According to the rule of the harem, each maiden went to King Ahasuerus when it was her turn.” Though the meaning is essentially the same either way, the “regulation” probably concerned the length of the treatment (Revised Standard Version) rather than the fact that each woman should go to the king only when her turn came (Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). Good News Translation says “the regular beauty treatment,” but this translation fails to express the idea that this treatment was “prescribed” and was not an optional choice for the women. Bible en français courant more correctly says “The young women of the harem had to follow for a year the beauty treatment prescribed for the women.”

Their beautifying with oil, spices, and ointments apparently refers to massages, as Good News Translation makes explicit. Myrrh is a resin of certain trees in Africa and Asia that gives off a good smell. Where myrrh is unknown, one may say “oil of very good quality.” The spices are taken by some translators to be balsam (Good News Translation, Bible en français courant, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). Balsam was a mixture of oil and resin that was obtained from certain trees and shrubs, and was used for medicines and perfumes. Obviously the spices are not condiments associated with cooking. Most versions indicate use of oil the first six months and perfumed substances the second six months.

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 .

As in verse 4, no time frame is provided. Probably all of the trips back and forth between Esther and Mordecai in verses 5-15 occurred in a short space of time, maybe even all on the same day. The Hebrew does not state how quickly all of this happened.

Like verse 6, this is a pivotal verse that shifts the scene back to Esther. The repetition of the names of Esther and Mordecai in the Hebrew (see also Revised Standard Version) is a way of keeping these two people in focus. Hathach is only a messenger carrying out his duty. Good News Translation shortens this verse considerably in order to avoid repetition. Such avoiding of repetition is characteristic of modern English style but may not be desirable in other languages, especially if it changes the emphasis of the text as it does here.

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 .

Esther’s response begins with the same conditions she set forth in 5.8 above. In the second part, her plea parallels the structure of the king’s double question and promise. Her petition is for her nefesh, life, her request is for her people. The word nefesh occurs frequently in the Old Testament with a range of meanings, “breath, soul, the seat of emotions, oneself.” In this context most versions say “life.” Traduction œcuménique de la Bible says “my own life,” and Chouraqui says “my being.” In many languages life is not an object to be given or taken. It may be necessary to restate Esther’s request to say “that I may [continue to] live” or “that I not be killed.”

At my petition means “in response to my petition” and may be translated “My petition is that you allow me to live.” At my petition and at my request may also be combined and translated as in Good News Translation.

The words and my people at my request are elliptical in Hebrew, that is, words are missing that must be supplied to complete the meaning. This is part of the poetic form of the story. Esther is not asking that her people be given to her, but that “the deliverance of” her people be granted to her. Revised English Bible restructures in prose form to make the meaning clear, but in doing so it loses dramatic impact: “what I ask is that my own life and the lives of my people be spared.”

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 .

Many translators interpret the Hebrew to mean that the Jews of verses 5-10 were those living in the citadel and not in the city proper (so New Jerusalem Bible and New American Bible). Good News Translation‘s use of the words “got together again,” however, suggests incorrectly that in verse 15 it is the same people acting again who acted in 9.5-10. Good News Translation emphasizes this interpretation by saying “more people” and “But again,” although these adverbs do not occur in the original text. The final clause is an exact repetition in the Hebrew of the final clause of verse 10 (see above).

On the Good News Translation translation of three hundred men as “three hundred people” (also New Revised Standard Version), see comments on 9.6.

Plunder: see comment on verses 7-10 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 .

The author informs the reader that Queen Vashti refused to come at the davar “word” of the king “that was by the hand of the eunuchs.” This is the second term used in the book to refer to a command or an order. What form the “word” took or how it was conveyed is not clear, unless “by the hand of” may be taken to imply the delivery of a written message. In the Hebrew text there is ellipsis, that is, there is no verb to indicate how the message was conveyed. The translator may prefer to follow Revised Standard Version (also Bible en français courant) in using a verb that does not specify how it was transmitted (conveyed), rather than Good News Translation, which makes the command oral (“told”).

No motive is given for the queen’s refusal, but her refusal was necessary for the development of the story of how Esther saved her people.

At this is simply the Hebrew conjunction waw “and”; translators should use a normal transition term for continuing the narration from the queen’s refusal to the king’s anger.

The writer of Esther frequently uses repetition of words and phrases. Sometimes the repetition is in the form of words that are near synonyms. In other cases the repetition takes the form of phrases or sentences with nearly identical meaning. In this verse the king’s reaction to the queen’s refusal to obey his word is described twice: the king was enraged, and his anger burned within him. Though most translations keep this repetition (Revised Standard Version, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, New International Version), some versions omit the second part as being redundant (Good News Translation, Bible en français courant). In keeping with the literary style of the book, the translator may wish to express the king’s anger first in normal prose fashion, “the king became very angry,” and then by a parallel idiomatic expression; for example, “his heart rose up,” “his heart burned,” or “his liver blackened.”

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 .

On the king’s servants see 1.3.

On the king’s gate see 2.19.

Bowed down and did obeisance: the author in his typical fashion uses two verbs to express essentially the same idea, that of paying homage. The first is more specifically the gesture of bowing or kneeling; the second more generally means venerating or worshiping. Both verbs can be used to describe showing reverence to gods or idols, but here they are used for honoring a human being. Good News Translation and Bible en français courant retain the repetition of two verbs with regard to the servants but restate the idea with regard to Mordecai. The text makes the contrast very clear, namely, that Mordecai did not kneel or pay homage. Some common language translations add the words “to show their respect” (Good News Translation and Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje); and such an addition may be helpful in other languages if the verbs do not indicate the reason for bowing down.

For the king had so commanded: Good News Translation restructures the verse to make the actions consistent with the order in which they occur. First the king’s command is mentioned, then the obedience of all his officials, and lastly Mordecai’s disobedience. This may help to make the story easier to understand, but it also blurs one of the features of the author’s style, which is to present events in interlocking fashion. That is, the author frequently recalls an earlier event as the story moves forward. For example, in this verse the reader learns that everyone honored Haman because the king had so commanded concerning him, and then the plot moves forward as the new information is given that Mordecai did not do so.

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 .

If it please the king: both Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation reflect the language of the court. Esther cannot address the king in public with terms of familiarity. Revised Standard Version therefore continues the quotation in the third person, let the king and Haman come.

The Hebrew verb “let [the king] come” expresses Esther’s will. The Hebrew form may be used to express a command, a wish, a request, an invitation, permission, or advice, depending on the context. Here Esther is expressing an invitation, not a command. Revised English Bible says “If it please your majesty … will you come today, my lord, and Haman with you…?” Good News Translation has changed the invitation to a statement in the first person, “I would like,” which is more natural in present-day English. The translator will need to find the most natural and appropriate way to say this in the receptor language. Creating unnatural expressions in an attempt to find a direct equivalent of the Hebrew form should be avoided.

Dinner: the development of the plot of the Book of Esther revolves around banquets, those offered by the king and the queen, those offered by Esther, and that of Purim. Esther’s “banquet” (Good News Translation) is not the grandiose feast seen in chapter 1, but neither is it a simple “meal” or merely an invitation to “come and eat.” Although the Hebrew term is the same as in 1.3 and in 1.9, some versions (Bible en français courant, New Jerusalem Bible) call those “banquets” and this a “feast.” The word chosen to refer to this meal will no doubt determine what verb will be used to translate prepared (compare “organized,” Traduction œcuménique de la Bible).

This day renders a Hebrew word that may refer to the daylight hours or more generally to a calendar day of twenty-four hours. The Hebrew does not specify whether the banquet is to be held during the hours of sunlight or whether it is to be held in the evening. New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, and many other translations say “today.” The Good News Translation translation “tonight” assumes that the banquet will be held after the sun has set. Since the Hebrew does not specify, perhaps it is better to use a general term that may include either the daylight hours or the nighttime, if such a term exists.

The expression “be my guests” used by Good News Translation is a special English usage conveying an invitation. It should be interpreted to imply neither a simple guest-host relationship in this context, nor a form of seduction on the part of Esther.

The end of verse 4 in the Hebrew is literally “that I have prepared for him.” Good News Translation interprets this to be in present time, “which I am preparing” (compare the Septuagint at ESG 5.18[4]), but most translations retain a past tense of a perfective verb form (so Revised Standard Version).

Since Esther speaks to the king in the third person, she says “for him” rather than “for you.” Revised Standard Version makes clear that the pronoun refers to the king: that I have prepared for the king. Though English translations such as Good News Translation are ambiguous, since the pronoun “you” can be singular or plural, in this verse the word “you” is singular (so Bible en français courant). If a second person singular pronoun is used in translation, it must not carry the connotation of disrespect.

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 two rhetorical questions, Esther personalizes the tragedy that she wishes to avert. Using two pairs of near synonyms, calamity and destruction, and people and kindred, the author heightens the drama of the scene. Good News Translation has restructured to form one sentence, thereby avoiding the apparent redundancy of two questions. The translator will need to consider the rules of dramatic literature in the receptor language to determine how to express Esther’s emotional plea.

Endure to see: the verb rendered “endure” most frequently means “to be able” in the Old Testament. It may also mean “to bear” or “to endure.” Compare New Jerusalem Bible: “For how can I bear to see the disaster…! And how can I bear to see the destruction…!” This may be stated as a negative in some languages. New Century Version, for example, says “I could not stand to see that terrible thing happen to my people. I could not stand to see my family killed.” In some languages rhetorical questions will express Esther’s emotion: “How could I see such a powerful bad thing fall on my people? How could I see the death of my family?”

Calamity … destruction: the first of these words is raʿah, which was used to describe Haman’s own situation (see 7.7). The second word, destruction, is the noun form of one of the three verbs that were used in the letters that were sent throughout the kingdom regarding the fate intended for the Jews (see 3.13, where the verb form is translated “to annihilate” in Revised Standard Version).

On my people and my kindred, see the comments on 2.10, 20.

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 .