[Esther 1:4]

The riches of his royal glory is literally “the wealth of the glory of his kingdom.” Glory here has the sense of “dazzling”; Revised English Bible says “the dazzling wealth of his kingdom,” and Moffatt (Moffatt) says “his royal treasures in their splendour.” Since the display of the wealth of the kingdom is focused in the royal court, Today’s English Version reads “the riches of the imperial court.” According to one modern historian, when Alexander the Great captured the Persian cities of Susa and Persepolis in 331 B.C., he found treasures that were the equivalent of 836 tons of gold (Olmstead, 518, 520).

The splendor and pomp of his majesty: these words are literally “the costly splendor of his [or, its] greatness.” The Hebrew pronoun attached to the word “greatness” may refer to the imperial court (so Today’s English Version), but it is equally possible that it refers to the king (Revised Standard Version, New Jerusalem Bible). The word splendor sometimes means “ornament” and may refer to clothing (Isa 52.1) or to jewels (Ezek 16.17, 39). Moffatt renders these words “his rare kingly robes.” If the reference is to the king, then the meaning may be the glorious appearance and majesty of the king himself.

A hundred and eighty days was the length of time that the banquet continued, and this detail gives emphasis to the claim that the king showed his majesty for many days. Though most translations keep a literal rendering, some modern versions give the equivalent time in months, since it is more natural in those languages to speak of six months than of 180 days (Today’s English Version, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Bible en français courant). In other languages it may be more acceptable to speak of “nights” or “markets,” that is, weeks, or even “half a year.” If days are converted to weeks, the total time specified should still be equal to 180 days.

Septuagint 1.4

After this refers to the banquet of verse 3. Closely following the structure of the Hebrew, the Greek is literally “And after these things after showing to them the wealth of his kingdom and the glory of the festivities [or, celebration] of his wealth….” Today’s English Version restructures in similar fashion for both the Hebrew and the Greek, while other translations retain two separate objects; for instance, “the wealth of his kingdom and the dazzling splendor of his riches” (Revised English Bible; similarly Bible en français courant).

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

She came back to the second harem is literally “she came back to the house of the women, second.” The word “second” is not connected grammatically to the rest of the verse. Probably the meaning is that she was taken to a second harem, since Shaashgaz is in charge now, whereas Hegai was in charge of the first harem (see 2.3). Nearly all translations take “second” as an adjective modifying “the house of the women.” Rather than understanding this to be a “second harem” completely separate from the first harem, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente and Biblia Dios Habla Hoy say “another department [section] of the harem.” It is possible, though, to understand “second” as an adverb meaning “a second time,” that is, she was taken back to the same harem again (a second time), as in verse 3.

The king’s eunuch: see comments on 2.3

Concubines: the women who belonged to the royal harem (compare Dan 5.2, 3, 23, where a different Hebrew term is used for “concubines”). They were considered to be wives of the king, but they were of a lower rank than the one chosen to be queen. In Old Testament times having concubines was not considered to be an adulterous relationship. The translator should therefore avoid using a word with connotations of illicitness. La Bible du Semeur renders this word as “wives of the second rank.” In some cultures they may be referred to as “the king’s other wives.”

Delighted in her: the verb translated delighted has a broad range of meanings, depending on the context. It basically means “to care for [something or someone]” or “to have a joyous desire [for something or someone].” In some contexts it expresses the idea of friendship between two persons. Even in the sexual realm of love between a man and a woman, it sometimes means only “delight in,” without strong sexual connotations. Here, however, “delight” seems to express the sense of sexual desire.

Summoned by name: the meaning here is that, unless a woman was specifically identified by name, she did not go a second time to the king. The importance of the name as a means of designating a woman wanted by the king should be clear in the translation.

Septuagint 2.14

The Septuagint says that Gai was in charge of the concubines rather than Shaashgaz (see Septuagint 2.8), and omits the words “delighted in her.” Rather than “second harem” (so also Bible en français courant), some translations say “another harem” (Today’s English Version) or “another part of the women’s quarters” (Revised English Bible, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). Unlike the Hebrew, the Greek cannot mean “a second time.”

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

When Mordecai learned: Mordecai did not “learn” something literally as a schoolchild does. He “came to know” or “found out” (FOX) what had happened. The Hebrew is literally “he knew.”

Mordecai rent his clothes: tearing of clothing was a customary way of expressing great emotion such as anger, grief, and humiliation. In this context Mordecai’s emotion is probably “anguish” (Today’s English Version) or mourning. It may be necessary to make explicit the reason why he tears his clothes, as Today’s English Version has done.

Sackcloth and ashes were symbols of mourning and grief. They occur frequently in the Old Testament, accompanied by various actions. The action may be walking as here; often it is sitting (Jonah 3.6); and occasionally it is lying down (4.3 below). Sackcloth was a coarse cloth made out of goat hair or camel hair that was used for making bags or clothing (see Gen 37.34; 42.25; 2 Sam 3.31). Although it was not always a sack, some translations describe it as “sack-clothing,” that is, clothing made from cloth of sacks. In other languages it may be referred to as “mourning cloth.” Ashes were put on one’s head (see 2 Sam 13.19), and this is made explicit in some translations (Today’s English Version, Bible en français courant).

He put on sackcloth and ashes uses the one verb for putting on clothing to refer to two different actions. However, in translation it may be necessary to use two distinct verbs that are appropriate to each gesture. For instance, it may be said, “he dressed [or, wrapped] himself in sackcloth,” and “he sprinkled [or, rubbed] ashes on his head.”

In some societies the meanings of these gestures may not be known. However, instead of making cultural adaptations in the translation, it is preferable to make the meaning clear in the context. For example, it could be said, “he dressed in sackcloth and sprinkled ashes on his head to show that he was sorrowing” or “that he was in great distress.” Another solution may be to use a footnote or a glossary entry to explain these Old Testament practices. In this way as much historical accuracy is retained in the translation as possible.

The midst of the city is not a specific location in the city. It indicates simply that Mordecai walked “through” the city (Today’s English Version, New Jerusalem Bible), wailing or lamenting loudly and bitterly, or “with bitterness.” That Mordecai wept “with bitterness” means that he wept because of the intense misery that he experienced. The Hebrew idiom expresses not primarily a sense of anger but rather the sense of undergoing a severely unpleasant experience. In some languages this may be expressed with an idiom like “with sourness in his heart” or “with a darkened liver.” In other languages it may be better to avoid the figurative language of bitterness and say something like “crying loudly and very sadly” (New Century Version) or “crying out loudly with pain” (La Bible du Semeur).

Septuagint 4.1

The words An innocent nation is being destroyed are not in the Hebrew text. By introducing a direct quotation, citing the very words that Mordecai was proclaiming throughout the city, the author creates a more lively style than in the Hebrew, where the reader can only imagine Mordecai’s cry. The Greek also says literally that Mordecai “ran” through the street of the city.

Innocent here means a nation that “has done no wrong” (so Bible en français courant). The innocent nation is Israel, “a people on whose head there are no words.”

Is being destroyed: the Greek verb of the direct quotation is present tense. Sometimes the present tense is used to describe vividly a future event, as in this verse. Of course the Jews were not yet being destroyed at this very moment. If use of the present tense will suggest that the Jews are already being destroyed while Mordecai is speaking, translators may choose to follow the model of Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, “An innocent people is destined to be massacred,” or Biblia Dios Habla Hoy, “An innocent nation is about to be exterminated!” Another model is “They are about to destroy a people that has done nothing wrong!” Languages that have a verb form to specify action that is about to begin or on the point of beginning may use it here.

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

[Today’s English Version C.18; Revised Standard Version 14.7]

Glorified their gods means that the Jews “worshiped” (Today’s English Version), or paid homage to, the gods of the Gentiles.

The Greek says literally “You are righteous, Lord.” The implication is that, because God is dikaios, “righteous,” he did right in handing the Jews over to their enemies. Today’s English Version correctly captures the sense with the words “we deserved your punishment,” but it shifts the focus from a statement that God acted justly in punishing the Jews to focus on the fact that the Jews deserved their fate. Perhaps a better translation is “You did right in punishing us.”

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

[Esther 5:8]

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 Today’s English Version 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, Today’s English Version 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” (Today’s English Version).

I will do as the king has said: Esther’s assurance that she will do as the king wishes is restated by Today’s English Version 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.

Septuagint 5.8

The Greek lacks the words “and if it please the king to grant my petition and fulfill my request.” The end of the verse is also different in Greek: “and tomorrow I will do the same things.” The meaning is apparently that the banquet tomorrow will be just like the one today (so Today’s English Version). Unlike the Hebrew, the Septuagint has the word “tomorrow” twice in this verse: “let the king and Haman come tomorrow to the dinner that I shall prepare them, and tomorrow I will do the same things.” New Revised Standard Version has not translated the first “tomorrow,” and Today’s English Version has not translated the second “tomorrow.” Normally the translation of the Greek should not be harmonized with the Hebrew, but if the form in Greek results in an awkward style in the receptor language, then it is acceptable to change the form, even if this results in a form similar to the Hebrew.

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

On the golden scepter see 5.2.

For discussion of the verse break, see verse 5 below.

Septuagint 8.4

The Greek text of verse 4 is the same as the Hebrew. On the verse break see the comment below.

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

[Today’s English Version E.24; Revised Standard Version 16.24]

Every city and country: the Greek may be translated city and country as Revised Standard Version and other translations have done. Today’s English Version, Bible en français courant, and New American Bible harmonize with the translation of the same Greek word in Septuagint 1.1 to say “province” and “city,” for it was over provinces that King Xerxes ruled (see 1.1-2 for comments on translation of “province”). For the sake of consistency, using the same word here and in Septuagint 1.1 seems best. According to Revised Standard Version every city and country without exception will be punished if they do not obey the king’s decree. The words without exception translate a single Greek word meaning “all together.” This idea may be expressed at the beginning of the sentence by saying “No city or country should think….” Other alternatives are “every city and country, not one will be left out” and “all cities and countries together on top of each other.”

Shall be destroyed in wrath: the king proclaims his threat without specifying who will carry out this punishment upon those who disobey his command. His words are stated in the passive voice. This may be changed to the active to say “I will order people [or, my army] to destroy every city and province,” or in some languages it may be necessary to use the indefinite third person plural pronoun “they,” or to say “people will destroy.” As Today’s English Version makes explicit, the “anger” is the king’s anger. A possible translation is “my army will show my anger [or, that I am angry] when they destroy….” New Jerusalem Bible combines the anger and the destruction by saying “will be mercilessly devastated.”

With spear and fire refer respectively to warfare (Today’s English Version “battle”) and the burning of cities to the ground. The author uses the literary device of metonymy to render his account vivid and dramatic. The impact of the imagery may be retained in some languages by saying “spear and fire will destroy every city and province.” In some cultures it will be necessary to specify what kind of spear is meant. In this context it is a weapon of war, not a ceremonial or ritual instrument. Translators who do not wish to use figurative language will need to restate, perhaps saying something like “soldiers will kill everyone with spears [or, weapons] and they will burn down the houses.”

Impassable for men: New Revised Standard Version correctly uses the term “human beings” instead of the word men, since the reference is not to males only. The word impassable means “untrodden,” that is, “not walked on.” Compare the idiomatic rendering in Revised English Bible, which preserves this imagery: “not only will no man set foot in it.” The destruction will be so complete that people will not have access to travel there.

Hateful for all time to beasts and birds: elsewhere in Old Testament prophecy cities are threatened with desolation, so that only animals and birds will live there (Jer 50.39; 51.37), but here the destruction will be so complete that not even wild animals and birds will pass through the ruins.

The scene evoked in these final lines stands in sharp contrast to the “quiet and peaceable” kingdom the king envisaged earlier (verse 8; also 13.2, 7 [B.2, 7]).

Those who translate the LXX in its normal order should turn to the text and discussion on page 207.

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