After these things is a literal translation of the Hebrew. This introductory phrase is the author’s way of carrying his story forward by linking a new event to past events, while at the same time signaling the passage of time. However, no precise duration of time is indicated. The events described in the following verses may have happened immediately after Queen Vashti refused to come before the king. Since a period of four years passed from the time of the banquet in chapter one (1.3: “In the third year of his reign”) to the time that Esther became queen (2.16: “in the seventh year of his reign”), and since Esther was in preparation for one year (see 2.12), these events may have occurred as much as three years later. It therefore seems better to leave the time unspecified, as in the Today’s English Version translation “Later” (so also New International Version). Some versions, though, do indicate that a period of time had passed: New Jerusalem Bible “Some time afterward”; Revised English Bible “Some time later”; New Jerusalem Bible “Some time after this.”

Anger … abated: this verse is the reversal of 1.12, where the king’s anger was kindled (see comments on 1.12). It will be appropriate to use a related expression or image here to indicate the opposite of what happened in that verse. Today’s English Version says the king’s anger “cooled”; Traduction œcuménique de la Bible says his anger was “calmed.” Other languages may say “his anger had lain down,” “his heart was appeased,” or “his liver had become calm [or, cool].”

He remembered Vashti does not necessarily mean that he had forgotten her for a period of time. It may mean that “he thought over what Vashti had done” (so New American Bible, also Today’s English Version, Bible en français courant), without specifying precisely what he was thinking of. Or it may mean that he felt sorry for Vashti. Elsewhere in the Old Testament the same verb of “remembering” is frequently used of God when he is about to act on behalf of his people (see Gen 8.1; 30.22; Exo 2.24).

Having focused the reader’s attention on Vashti, the author uses parallel relative clauses to specify how the king remembered her: he remembered what she had done and what had been decreed against her. Both clauses are strikingly vague. In the first the reader is left to wonder specifically what Vashti had done; was it her refusal to answer the king’s call (1.12)? In the second the passive construction avoids stating what had been decreed against her or by whom (1.19, 21). In translation the ambiguity of the first clause should be maintained. In translating the second clause, some languages may need to restate it in active form to specify that it was the king who had made a decree against her (so New International Version).

Septuagint 2.1

The second half of this verse in the Septuagint has a negative before the main verb, and it is not clear how the verse should be translated. Part of the difficulty in Greek is that the verb (concerned) and the participle (remembered) come from the same root and may mean either “remember” or “mention.” Did the king no longer “remember” her? Or did he no longer “mention” her?

New Revised Standard Version closely follows the Greek but does not seem to make sense in the story. Today’s English Version, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, and Bible en français courant take the negative with the verb “mentioned” but not with the participle “thinking” (remembered) as New Revised Standard Version does. Although it is possible to take the negative with both the verb and the participle as New Revised Standard Version does, the more natural reading of the Greek is probably to take the negative with the verb only, as in Today’s English Version.

An additional difficulty arises from the fact that the subject of the verbs had said and had condemned may be either masculine or feminine. Unlike New Revised Standard Version, Bible en français courant takes the subject of the verb said to be Vashti rather than the king (see comments on LXX 1.13). It reads “He no longer had Astin summoned to him, for he remembered how she had spoken and the verdict that he had pronounced against her.” While Bible en français courant makes excellent sense, some scholars question whether the writer would have switched subjects without some more explicit indication.

Both the Göttingen and Rahlfs editions of the Septuagint include the negative, but one fifth-century manuscript, Codex Alexandrinus, omits the negative in this verse. Revised English Bible and Biblia Dios Habla Hoy apparently follow this manuscript. Revised English Bible says “he called Astin to mind, remembering what she had done and how he had given judgment against her.” Biblia Dios Habla Hoy is similar: “But he called Astin again, remembering what she had said and how he had condemned her.”

How he had condemned her: the terminology used here is that of a court of law. The king had pronounced a verdict; he had judged her to be guilty.

All of the above translations are attempts to make sense of a difficult verse. Perhaps the best solution is to take the queen as the subject of the verb had said, as in Bible en français courant. Such an interpretation gives the following translation: “… and he no longer remembered Astin [that is, to have her called—in other words, he rejected her], thinking of what she had said and how he had condemned her.” This may be said idiomatically in some languages; for instance, “the word that he had cut on her head” or “the throat of the word that he had cut against her.” This verse then closes the chapter on Vashti and opens the way for Esther to come into the king’s life.

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 .