[Esther 1:3]

Third year: about 483 B.C.

Of his reign: in some languages it may be more natural to use a verbal construction such as “after he became king” or “after he began to rule.”

The word banquet comes from the root word meaning “to drink” and is used in Esther to indicate eating and drinking on special occasions. The translator should use a word for a formal meal, a meal eaten during a festive event. Here banquet refers to festivities or a celebration that continued for 180 days.

Various groups of people were present at the banquet that the king gave in the third year of his reign. Princes and servants are probably government “officials” and “courtiers” (Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible), though the variety of translations of these two words indicates uncertainty as to their precise meaning: “officers and ministers” (New American Bible), “officers-of-state and ministers” (New Jerusalem Bible). In many languages princes will suggest a hereditary royal title, that of the king’s sons; this is not the meaning here. It will be better to use a word such as “governor” or “official.” The words the army chiefs of Persia and Media are literally “the army” (so Today’s English Version, New Revised Standard Version, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). Many interpreters find it impossible to think that the author of Esther could have meant the entire army that consisted of some 14,000 men, according to the ancient historian Herodotus. Therefore some translations insert the words “the commanders of” or “the officers of” before the army (An American Translation, New Jerusalem Bible, New International Version, Bible en français courant, Nueva Biblia Española). Some support for this latter view comes from the Septuagint translation, which may be based on a corrupted form of the Hebrew word for “officers.”

Another possible solution is to understand the word the army to be in apposition to the words princes and servants. According to this interpretation the writer refers to the entire army by mentioning only the leaders, the princes, and servants. Following this view FOX translates “all his princes and servants, the forces of Persia and Media.”

Since the Hebrew word translated as the army chiefs may also refer to wealthy landowners, another possible solution that is followed by several translations is to translate the Hebrew term, not with the word “army,” but rather as “aristocracy” or “nobility”: “the Persian and Median aristocracy, the nobles, and the governors of the provinces” (New American Bible; so also New Jerusalem Bible). Any of the above interpretations is possible, and translators must choose one.

Persia was an empire that came into existence about 550 B.C., when King Cyrus the Great defeated the Medes. The empire stretched from Greece in the west to India in the east and lasted until the time of Alexander the Great (about 330 B.C.). Media was a province within the Persian Empire. Media’s capital, Ecbatana, was one of the administrative centers of the Persian Empire (see Ezra 6.2). See the map, page x.

The names Persia and Media occur in this same order in 1.3, 14, 18, 19. Only in 10.2 is the order reversed, that is, “Media and Persia.” Various suggestions have been given to explain the change in word order in 10.2, including that a different writer was responsible for chapter 10. Although the reason for the order of these two names does not seem to be important, the translator should retain the order given in the Hebrew text, unless there is some strong reason in the receptor language for not doing so.

The nobles and governors of the provinces: the word translated as nobles was originally a Persian word. The word translated as governors is the same word translated as princes earlier in this same verse. Nearly all translations take the words of the provinces with both nobles and governors. It is, however, possible to connect of the provinces with the last noun only, as Nueva Biblia Española does: “the nobility of the palace and the governors of the provinces.” Such an interpretation may also lie behind the Revised English Bible translation “along with his nobles and provincial rulers.” Either interpretation is possible, and translators must choose one.

Being before him: the Hebrew expression “before his face” means that the guests were gathered in the king’s presence. They were “present,” as Today’s English Version says. Some languages will be able to use a similar idiom, “they were before his eyes,” for example.

Septuagint 1.3

Friends: according to the Septuagint, the banquet was given for his Friends. Archaeological evidence, as well as evidence from the Old Testament (1 Kg 4.5; 1 Chr 27.33), suggests that the expression “friend of the king” refers to an advisor who has a close official relationship to the king. For this reason New Revised Standard Version and Revised English Bible capitalize the word Friends in order to show that an official title is being used. Today’s English Version (“his advisers”) better captures the sense in English (see also 1.13; 3.1), although it is not necessary to specify “all,” which is not in the Greek text.

Other persons of various nations: literally “the remaining [or, other] nations.” Traduction œcuménique de la Bible says “for all the other nations,” but surely the sense is not that any person whatsoever from other nations was invited to come. It will probably be necessary in translation to supply a noun after the adjective “remaining.” New Revised Standard Version has added “persons,” but that is probably too general a term in this context. Today’s English Version correctly assumes that these persons were “representatives” (also Bible en français courant and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch). The word “representative” may, however, incorrectly suggest a democratic process of selection. Since the other persons at this banquet are all officials and people of high standing, no doubt the people from the other nations were also leading officials. Notice how Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente restructures to indicate that these people were also nobles: “gave a banquet for his close advisers, the nobles of Media, of Persia, and of the other nations of his empire.”

The theme of the “nations” is important in the book of Esther, especially in the Greek version. The Greek term ethn often refers to non-Jews as opposed to Jews (see F.5), but here it refers to people who were not Medes or Persians (see also 1.5 below). Although the term may be taken in a political sense, as Today’s English Version does by translating it as “countries,” it may be preferable to refer to ethnic groups or “tribes.”

Provinces here translates the Greek “satrapies,” although the Hebrew form of the word does not occur until 3.12 (see comments on 1.1 above).

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 .

Went in to the king: the meaning here is that the maiden went in to be with the king, not simply that she moved from one location to another, as may be understood from the Today’s English Version rendering.

The words whatever she desired to take with her are not specific. Clothing, cosmetics, jewelry, or other items may be included. Probably the words mean that she could wear whatever garment or jewelry she desired (so Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente “all the ornaments she asked for” and Today’s English Version “she could wear”), though the Hebrew does not actually state that whatever she took with her was something to wear. The translator should not attempt to specify what the young woman took with her.

Today’s English Version restructures the verse to avoid repetition. In so doing, the artist’s style of repetition and parallel structures is lost. From the harem to the king’s palace is literally “from the house of the women to the house of the king.”

Septuagint 2.13

Unlike the Hebrew, the Greek says “and then she goes in to the king.” In the Greek, this clause is part of the preceding sentence. Following a semicolon the Greek sentence goes on to state how the young woman went to the king. It explains that then she was handed over to someone who took her to the king’s palace. In many languages the verb goes in to (“enter, go into”), which is repeated twice in verse 14 below, will be understood to mean as a wife goes to her husband. The form of the verb should indicate that the author is reporting general practice, what occurred on a regular basis in the Persian palace.

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 3:15]

This verse is one of the most dramatic in the entire Book of Esther. In the first part there is a play on words, the two most common legal terms occurring in juxtaposed clauses. These are davar “word” and dat “law,” translated respectively as order and decree in Revised Standard Version. Revised Standard Version says that the decree was issued. The verb in Hebrew is literally “was given,” but in this context a technical term such as “issued,” “publicized,” or “announced” may be more appropriate in some languages.

On couriers see 3.13. These couriers went in haste; literally “they went hurrying.” Perhaps the idea of going quickly is implicit in the Today’s English Version translation “runner,” but most translations keep this explicit: “The couriers went out posthaste” (New Jerusalem Bible).

On Susa the capital see comments on 1.2.

In the second half of the verse, the author uses a very simple style by setting two brief statements together, the one directly following the other. A city thrown into total confusion is depicted in stark contrast to the king and his prime minister, who sit down to drink. Poetic form in the receptor language may offer models of juxtaposition that will reflect the sharp contrast of the original. In some languages it may be more effective not to specify a relationship between the two sentences by introducing a conjunction as Revised Standard Version has done with “but,” and as Today’s English Version has done with “while.”

The king and Haman sat down to drink: perhaps the words to drink should not be understood in the limited sense of drinking but should be understood in the sense of “to feast” as in 7.1 (so New Jerusalem Bible, Nueva Biblia Española, New American Bible). If the verb to drink is kept in translation, some languages must supply an object for the verb. The most natural object is the word “wine” as in 7.2.

The city of Susa was perplexed: the Hebrew word used to describe the city of Susa does not occur often in the Old Testament (see “entangled” in Exo 14.3; “perplexed” in Joel 1.18). It describes a state of bewilderment (New International Version) or consternation (New Jerusalem Bible). The inhabitants of the city of Susa were “dumbfounded” (New Jerusalem Bible) by the decree issued against the Jews (see comments on Greek verse below).

Septuagint 3.15

The Hebrew text of 3.14 states that the decree is supposed to be issued throughout the Persian Empire, but the Hebrew does not state explicitly until verse 15 that this was done. However, the Greek text does state already in verse 14 that the decree was posted throughout the empire. For this reason the Greek of verse 15 omits the words telling that the couriers went quickly.

The drama of this last episode is heightened in the Hebrew version by the juxtaposition, that is, the placing together, of two clauses that are similar in form, without any conjunction linking the two. In Greek, juxtaposition is also used, but the overall syntactic structure is different. By juxtaposing the verbs of the two clauses, the author of the Greek version achieves dramatic impact through chiasmus (subject-verb, verb-subject): “and the king and Haman got drunk, and was thrown into confusion the city.” Translators will need to find equivalent ways of expressing the dramatic qualities of this verse in their own languages. In some languages this can be achieved through special syntax, in others through special words or grammatical constructions.

The Greek states explicitly that Haman and the king “got drunk” (Today’s English Version, Bible en français courant, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible).

Was thrown into confusion: although the Hebrew equivalent of this expression only occurs once in the book, the Greek word occurs prominently several times and is therefore a word that takes on thematic importance (Septuagint 4.4 and Addition A.4, 7, 8). The basic meaning of this verb is “to stir, to stir up, to be troubled [like water],” but it has several extended meanings. It can be used to describe a person’s state of mind, “to be troubled, to be agitated, to be distressed” (see D.16) or even to be frightened (see D.13). It can refer to a political situation that is “in confusion, in a state of anarchy,” or it can describe a situation of “disorder, tumult,” for example an army that is in disarray or a city that is “in an uproar,” as in this verse (see also A.4, 7, 8). The word also occurs as a noun, as an adjective, and as an adverb with the same meanings. When it has a prefix a- it has the opposite meaning, “without confusion,” that is, “calm, peaceful, stable” (see B.7; E.8).

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.17; Revised Standard Version 14.6]

And now we have sinned before thee: though no specific time is mentioned to indicate when Israel sinned against God, the context clearly points to the time when the Jewish people still lived in Palestine, before they were carried off into exile. The Revised Standard Version translation now we have sinned incorrectly suggests that Esther is referring to the sins of the Jews in her own time. Today’s English Version (“we sinned”) more clearly places the time of sinning in the (remote) past. And now is a discourse feature marking a new thought in Esther’s prayer. Today’s English Version therefore begins a new paragraph at this point. Before thee is expressed as “against you” in Today’s English Version (compare Luke 15.18). It means that the Jews had not been faithful to God (so Bible en français courant); they had not obeyed God’s will.

And thou hast given us into the hands of our enemies: as the following words indicate, the conquest of the Jews by their enemies was God’s punishment for worshiping foreign gods. God had now delivered them into the “power” (Biblia Dios Habla Hoy), or the “control,” of their enemies.

Revised Standard Version and Today’s English Version differ in where the division occurs between this verse and the next verse. Translators may choose either division or else follow an established tradition.

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 5:7]

Revised Standard Version, Today’s English Version, and most other translations make Esther’s words in verse 8 below to be the content of the request begun in this verse. It is preferable, though, to understand the invitation to a second banquet in verse 8 as an interruption of the request and not the request itself. Thus ver1 La Bible de la Pléiadever1* (La Bible Pléiade) presents Esther’s words in this verse in the form of a suspended sentence, “My petition and my request is….” This same interpretation is also expressed in Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, LSR, and New Jerusalem Bible. According to this interpretation Esther’s request is not that they come to a banquet again the next day. Rather Esther withholds her real request and tells the king that she will make the request the next day if he will return then for another dinner. Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente reflects the same interpretation but translates Esther’s words in the form of a question: “What thing will I ask?” Verse 8 is then not the statement of what she will ask but rather a request to delay her request until the next day (similarly Moffatt). Esther refers to her wish with the same two words the king used in verse 6.

Septuagint 5.7

The Greek lacks the name “Esther,” leaving the subject of She said to be understood as Esther.

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 .

A new scene begins with verse 3. Some translations make this explicit: “In another audience with the king” (New American Bible); “Esther again went to speak to the king” (New Jerusalem Bible).

The Hebrew is literally “And she added and said.” This is idiomatic Hebrew and means that Esther spoke again. The Anchor Bible translation does not begin a new paragraph with verse 3, since the Hebrew does not say that Esther “came again,” only that she “spoke again.” Though it is possible that verse 3 continues the same scene as in verses 1-2 (so Anchor Bible), the fact that the king extended his scepter to Esther in verse 4 seems to indicate that Esther had come into the king’s presence on another occasion, as New American Bible and New Jerusalem Bible state (but see comments on verse 7).

Through a sequence of six verbs, each prefaced by the connective waw, “and,” the author builds up the drama of the action to the high point of her plea: “and she added … and she spoke … and she fell … and she wept … and she implored….” Her request is that the king “cause the evil [wickedness] of Haman to go by” and “his project that he devised against the Jews.” The same basic word “evil [wickedness]” is used here that occurred in 7.6, 7 (see comments on “evil” in 7.7). In parallel phrases the author uses near synonyms to describe Haman’s intention, namely, evil design and plot.

On she fell at his feet, see the first paragraph of comments on 7.8. Like Today’s English Version, which uses a common English equivalent, “throwing herself at his feet,” the translator will need to select an appropriate verb to express Esther’s gesture of supplication in pleading for the king’s mercy for her people.

With tears is literally “and she wept.” Hebrew uses three verbs: “she fell … and she wept, and she pleaded [or, begged].” She wanted the king to avert the evil plot. To avert is literally “to cause to pass over.” In certain contexts, as here, the meaning is “to do away with,” “to get rid of.”

Haman the Agagite: see comments on 3.1.

Which he had devised against the Jews: it may be necessary to restate this to say “the plan [or thought, or design] that he had intended to carry out against [or, on] the Jews.”

Septuagint 8.3

Septuagint translates literally the beginning of the verse, which in Hebrew says that Esther “added and said,” which means that she spoke … again. The Greek does not mention Esther by name in this verse, but most translations begin a new paragraph here and use the proper noun rather than the pronoun she (Today’s English Version, Revised English Bible, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch).

The Greek itself reflects the Hebrew, and both New Revised Standard Version and Today’s English Version shorten and combine it into a single plea (see comments in the paragraph above). According to the text, Esther “begged him to remove [avert] the evil of Haman and all that he did [planned] against the Jews.”

The Septuagint does not state that Esther “besought him with tears,” and it omits the words “the Agagite” after Haman’s name.

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.23; Revised Standard Version 16.23]

Though both Revised Standard Version and Today’s English Version have the first person plural pronoun us in this verse, some Greek manuscripts have the second person plural “you.” If the latter reading is followed as in Nueva Biblia Española and Anchor Bible, the word “you” refers to the Jewish people.

Since the Jews were to be destroyed, it may seem that the best reading would be “for those who plot against you [the Jews].” But verse 14 clearly indicates that the Persian empire itself was in danger of being destroyed, and the king himself had been the subject of plots, both by the eunuchs (12.1-3 [A.12-14]; 2.21-23) and as alluded to in this letter (verses 3, 12).

It may mean salvation for us: as people celebrate this day in future years, this day will “be a symbol” (Revised English Bible) or “represent” (New Revised Standard Version) for them that God delivers his people from those who oppose them or who try to destroy them. On the other hand this same day, the thirteen of Adar, will symbolize for the opponents of the king and the Persian Empire that God will destroy them just as he destroyed those who opposed the Jewish people.

The loyal Persians: these words may be interpreted two different ways. The word loyal translates a participle meaning “to be favorable.” (1) The participle may modify the word Persians as in Revised Standard Version and mean “the Persians who are favorable [toward the king and the Persian Empire]” (so New Jerusalem Bible, Revised English Bible, Bible en français courant, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy). Revised English Bible says “for us and our loyal Persians.” (2) The participle may be used as a noun meaning “the ones favorable to [someone]”; and the word Persians will be the object of the participle. In other words, the king is referring to non-Persians who have goodwill toward the Persians. This interpretation seems to be the basis for the Today’s English Version translation “and all our allies.” Other translations based on this second interpretation are “those who are favorable to the Persians” (La Bible Pléiade), “the friends of the Persians” (Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente), and “the supporters of the Persians” (Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). Either interpretation is grammatically possible and makes sense in the context.

Plot against us means to “make evil plans against us” or “to prepare ways to kill [destroy] us.”

Reminder of destruction: the theme of making a record for posterity and remembering is repeated many times in the book of Esther (for example, 12.4 [A.15]; 2.23; 13.8 [C.1]; 6.1; 9.32; 10.2; 10.5 [F.2]). Each time this day will be observed over and over again, it will be a reminder of how God saved his people and how he destroyed their enemies. The reminder is on the one hand something that brings joy; on the other hand it is a warning.

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 .

The verb “to write” in this verse is feminine singular in form, which makes the Revised Standard Version translation questionable, although Revised Standard Version is not alone in making this interpretation. Traduction œcuménique de la Bible and Bible en français courant both use a plural verb to say that Esther and Mordecai wrote. Chouraqui, like Today’s English Version, keeps the verb in the singular but includes Mordecai by saying “with Mordecai.”

To solve the difficulty of the singular verb, the New English Bible and Revised English Bible versions change the Hebrew text slightly to read “to Mordecai” rather than “and Mordecai”: “Queen Esther daughter of Abihail gave full authority in writing to Mordecai the Jew, to confirm this second letter about Purim.” This change of the Hebrew text in New English Bible and Revised English Bible leads to a change in verse 31 also in New English Bible (see comments on verse 31 below). However, no Hebrew manuscripts support the text translated by New English Bible and Revised English Bible. In fact HOTTP gives an “A” evaluation to the Hebrew text.

Another solution to this grammatical problem is to understand the meaning to be that Esther was the daughter of Abihail and of Mordecai (see 2.7, where it is said that Mordecai adopted Esther as his own daughter), as New American Bible does: “Queen Esther, daughter of Abihail and of Mordecai the Jew, wrote to confirm with full authority this second letter about Purim.” According to this punctuation of the text, Mordecai is not a subject of the verb “to write” along with Esther.

Yet another solution has been to alter the order of the words in the Hebrew, supposing that the order of the Hebrew text has been mistakenly changed by copyists. Such is the solution of New Jerusalem Bible: “Then Queen Esther daughter of Abihail wrote a second letter of Purim for the purpose of confirming with full authority the aforementioned one of Mordecai the Jew.”

It is very likely that the Hebrew text originally did not have the words and Mordecai the Jew. They were probably added by a scribe who wished to add the authority of Mordecai also to this letter. Moffatt omits these words from his translation. In any case, translators need to translate the text as it now exists. Probably the best choice is to follow the interpretation found in Today’s English Version and Chouraqui, that is, Esther wrote the letter with the help of Mordecai. Whether the verb will then be in the singular or the plural will depend on the grammar of the receptor language.

Though some languages may need to indicate whether Esther’s letter was written soon after or long after the earlier letter by Mordecai, the text does not provide this information, and either interpretation is possible.

The words this second letter are difficult to interpret, and some interpreters regard them as a later scribal addition and omit them. Four letters are mentioned in the Book of Esther: (1) Haman’s letter in 3.13, (2) Mordecai’s letter in 8.9-13, countering Haman’s letter, (3) Mordecai’s letter in 9.20-22, instituting the festival of Purim, and (4) the letter written by Esther, possibly with Mordecai, in 9.29. The words “the second” that come at the end of verse 29 in Hebrew may refer to letter number 4, the second of the two letters (letters 3 and 4) instituting Purim. In that case “the second” refers to Esther’s own letter (verse 29), and the meaning is that Esther wrote with full authority this second letter about Purim (Mordecai’s letter being the first). This is the interpretation favored in Anchor Bible.

The second letter can also be referring to Mordecai’s second letter (9.20-22), the first being the edict that Mordecai wrote in the king’s name in chapter 8. In this interpretation the meaning is not that Esther’s letter was the second letter about Purim, but rather that Mordecai’s second letter that Esther confirms was a letter about Purim. This interpretation is followed in the notes of New American Bible and seems to be the basis of the Today’s English Version translation. This interpretation seems more likely. Compare also New Jerusalem Bible, which is cited above.

Daughter of Abihail: in the English language, reference is normally made to a child of someone as a son or daughter, and that is what Revised Standard Version and Today’s English Version have done here. However, many languages only specify whether a child is male or female to make a special point. If that is the case the Hebrew may be translated “child of Abihail.”

Full written authority is literally “with all power.” This noun for “power” occurs only three times in the Hebrew Old Testament: here, in 10.2 below, and in Dan 11.17. The sense is that Esther the Queen put her power (or, authority) behind the letter that Mordecai had previously written. As Queen she stood behind the letter. It was written with her royal authority and was not a letter that people could ignore.

Confirming here is the same word that was translated “enjoining” in verse 21 above (see comments on verses 21 and 27 above).

Septuagint 9.29

Esther is called the daughter of Aminadab (see Septuagint 2.7, 15). As in the Hebrew (see discussion above) the verb wrote is a third person singular verb. The emphasis thus seems to be placed on Esther, with Mordecai included secondarily. The word “second” is omitted in the Septuagint; and the letter about Purim apparently refers to the letter written by Mordecai (9.20).

The Greek says “the solid body the foundation of the letter of Purim” but does not mention “power, authority.” New Revised Standard Version and Today’s English Version perhaps are harmonizing with the Hebrew and interpret the Greek expression to mean that Esther and Mordecai wrote the letter with royal authority. Traduction œcuménique de la Bible takes the meaning to be “confirmation”: “[they] put in writing all their deeds as well as the confirmation of the letter…” (so also Bible en français courant). A possible model for the translator is “and they gave solidness to the letter” or “they stood behind the letter about Purim strongly.”

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 .