“Here we have, I. Haman advanced by the prince, and adored thereupon by the people. Ahasuerus had lately laid Esther in his bosom, but she had no such interest in him as to get her friends preferred, or to prevent the preferring of one who she knew was an enemy to her people. When those that are good become great they still find that they cannot do good, nor prevent mischief, as they would. This Haman was an Agagite (an Amalekite, says Josephus), probably of the descendants of Agag, a common name of the princes of Amalek, as appears, Num 24:7. Some think that he was by birth a prince, as Jehoiakim was, whose seat was set above the rest of the captive kings (Kg2 25:28), as Haman's here was, Est 3:1. The king took a fancy to him (princes are not bound to give reasons for their favours), made him his favourite, his confidant, his prime-minister of state. Such a commanding influence the court then had that (contrary to the proverb) those whom it blessed the country blessed too; for all men adored this rising sun, and the king's servants were particularly commanded to bow before him and to do him reverence (Est 3:2), and they did so. I wonder what the king saw in Haman that was commendable or meritorious; it is plain that he was not a man of honour or justice, of any true courage or steady conduct, but proud, and passionate, and revengeful; yet was he promoted, and caressed, and there was none so great as he. Princes' darlings are not always worthies. II. Mordecai adhering to his principles with a bold and daring resolution, and therefore refusing to reverence Haman as the rest of the king's servants did, Est 3:2. He was urged to it by his friends, who reminded him of the king's commandment, and consequently of the danger he incurred if he refused to comply with it; it was as much as his life was worth, especially considering Haman's insolence, Est 3:3. They spoke daily to him (Est 3:4), to persuade him to conform, but all in vain: he hearkened not to them, but told them plainly that he was a Jew, and could not in conscience do it. Doubtless his refusal, when it came to be taken notice of and made the subject of discourse, was commonly attributed to pride and envy, that he would not pay respect to Haman because, on the score of his alliance to Esther, he was not himself as much promoted, or to a factious seditious spirit and a disaffection to the king and his government; those that would make the best of it looked upon it as his weakness, or his want of breeding, called it a humour, and a piece of affected singularity. It does not appear that any one scrupled at conforming to it except Mordecai; and yet his refusal was pious, conscientious, and pleasing to God, for the religion of a Jew forbade him, 1. To give such extravagant honours as were required to any mortal man, especially so wicked a man as Haman was. In the apocryphal chapters of this book (ch. 13:12-14) Mordecai is brought in thus appealing to God in this matter: Thou knowest, Lord, that it was neither in contempt nor pride, nor for any desire of glory, that I did not bow down to proud Haman, for I could have been content with good will, for the salvation of Israel, to kiss the soles of his feet; but I did this that I might not prefer the glory of man above the glory of God, neither will I worship any but thee. 2. He especially thought it a piece of injustice to his nation to give such honour to an Amalekite, one of that devoted nation with which God had sworn that he would have perpetual war (Exo 17:16) and concerning which he had given that solemn charge (Deu 25:17), Remember what Amalek did. Though religion does by no means destroy good manners, but teaches us to render honour to whom honour is due, yet it is the character of a citizen of Zion that not only in his heart, but in his eyes, such a vile person as Haman was is contemned, Psa 15:4. Let those who are governed by principles of conscience be steady and resolute, however censured or threatened, as Mordecai was. III. Haman meditating revenge. Some that hoped thereby to curry favour with Haman took notice to him of Mordecai's rudeness, waiting to see whether he would bend or break, Est 3:4. Haman then observed it himself, and was full of wrath, Est 3:5. A meek and humble man would have slighted the affront, and have said, "Let him have his humour; what am I the worse for it?" But it makes Haman's proud spirit rage, and fret, and boil, within him, so that he becomes uneasy to himself and all about him. It is soon resolved that Mordecai must die. The head must come off that will not bow to Haman; if he cannot have his honours, he will have his blood. It is as penal in this court not to worship Haman as it was in Nebuchadnezzar's not to worship the golden image which he had set up. Mordecai is a person of quality, in a post of honour, and own cousin to the queen; and yet Haman thinks his life nothing towards a satisfaction for the affront: thousands of innocent and valuable lives must be sacrificed to his indignation; and therefore he vows the destruction of all the people of Mordecai, for his sake, because his being a Jew was the reason he gave why he did not reverence Haman. Herein appear Haman's intolerable pride, insatiable cruelty, and the ancient antipathy of an Amalekite to the Israel of God. Saul the son of Kish, a Benjamite, spared Agag, but Mordecai the son of Kish, a Benjamite (Est 2:5), shall find no mercy with this Agagite, whose design is to destroy all the Jews throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus (Est 3:6), which, I suppose, would include those that had returned to their own land, for that was now a province of his kingdom. Come and let us cut them off from being a nation, Psa 83:4. Nero's barbarous wish is his, that they had all but one neck.”

“After these things,.... After the marriage of Esther, and the discovery of the conspiracy to take away the king's life, five years after, as Aben Ezra observe, at least more than four years, for so it appears from Est 3:7 did King Ahasuerus promote Haman the son of Hammedatha the Agagite; whom both the Targums make to descend from Amalek, and to be of the stock or family of Agag, the common name of the kings of Amalek; and so Josephus (g); but this is not clear and certain; in the apocryphal Esther he is said to be a Macedonian; and Sulpitius the historian says (h) he was a Persian, which is not improbable; and Agag might be the name of a family or city in Persia, of which he was; and Aben Ezra observes, that some say he is the same with Memucan, see Est 1:14, and advanced him, and set his seat above all the princes that were with him; erected a throne for him, higher than the rest, either of his own princes and nobles, or such as were his captives, see Kg2 25:28. It was the custom of the kings of Persia, which it is probable was derived from Cyrus, to advance those to the highest seats they thought best deserved it: says he to his nobles, let there be seats with you as with me, and let the best be honoured before others;--and again, let all the best of those present be honoured with seats above others (i). (g) Ut supra, (Antiqu. l. 11. c. 6.) sect. 5. (h) Hist. Sacr. l. 2. p. 78. (i) Xenophon, Cyropaedia, l. 8. c. 41.”

“The elevation of Haman above all the princes of the kingdom is said in a general manner to have taken place "after these things," i.e., after the matters related in Est 2. גּדּל, to make great, to make any one a great man; נשּׂא, elevated, is more precisely defined by the sentence following: he set his seat above all the princes that were with him, i.e., above the seat of all the princes about the king; in fact, advanced him to the highest post, made him his grand vizier. Haman is called the son of Hammedatha האגגי, the Agagite, or of the Agagites. אגגי recalls אגג kings of the Amalekites, conquered and taken prisoner by Saul, and hewn in pieces by Samuel, Sa1 15:8, Sa1 15:33. Hence Jewish and Christian expositors regard Haman as a descendant of the Amalekite king. This is certainly possible, though it can by no means be proved. The name Agag is not sufficient for the purpose, as many individuals might at different times have borne the name אגג, i.e., the fiery. In 1 Sam 15, too, Agag is not the nomen propr. of the conquered king, but a general nomen dignitatis of the kings of Amalek, as Pharaoh and Abimelech were of the kings of Egypt and Gerar. See on Num 24:7. We know nothing of Haman and his father beyond what is said in this book, and all attempts to explain the names are uncertain and beside the mark. Est 3:2 All the king's servants that were in the gate of the king, i.e., all the court officials, were to kneel before Haman and bow themselves to the earth. So had the king commanded concerning him. This mark of reverence was refused by Mordochai. Est 3:3-4 When the other officials of the court asked him from day to day, why he transgressed the king's commandment, and he hearkened not unto them, i.e., gave no heed to their words, they told it to Haman, "to see whether Mordochai's words would stand; for he had told them that he was a Jew." It is obvious from this, that Mordochai had declared to those who asked him the reason why he did not fall down before Haman, that he could not do so because he was a Jew, - that as a Jew he could not show that honour to man which was due to God alone. Now the custom of falling down to the earth before an exalted personage, and especially before a king, was customary among Israelites; comp. Sa2 14:4; Sa2 18:28; Kg1 1:16. If, then, Mordochai refused to pay this honour to Haman, the reason of such refusal must be sought in the notions which the Persians were wont to combine with the action, i.e., in the circumstance that they regarded it as an act of homage performed to a king as a divine being, an incarnation of Oromasdes. This is testified by classical writers; comp. Plutarch, Themist. 27; Curtius, viii. 5. 5f., where the latter informs us that Alexander the Great imitated this custom on his march to India, and remarks, 11: Persas quidem non pie solum, sed etiam prudenter reges suos inter Deos colere; majestatem enim imperii salutis esse tutelam. Hence also the Spartans refused, as Herod. 7.136 relates, to fall down before King Xerxes, because it was not the custom of Greeks to honour mortals after this fashion. This homage, then, which was regarded as an act of reverence and worship to a god, was by the command of the king to be paid to Haman, as his representative, by the office-bearers of his court; and this Mordochai could not do without a denial of his religious faith. Est 3:5-6 When, then, Haman, whose attention had been called to the fact, saw, when next he went in unto the king, that Mordochai did not fall down before him, he was full of wrath, and (Est 3:6) thought scorn, i.e., in his pride esteemed it too contemptible, to lay hands on Mordochai alone, i.e., to execute him alone, for this opposition to the royal commands; for they had showed him the people of Mordochai, i.e., had told him that as a Jew Mordochai had refused this act of worship, and that the whole Jewish nation thought and acted accordingly. Therefore he sought to destroy all the Jews that were throughout the whole kingdom of Ahashverosh, the people of Mordochai. The subject Haman is repeated before ויבקּשׁ for the sake of clearness, because it was not expressly named with ויּבן. מרדּכי עם is in apposition to כּל־היּהוּדים: all the Jews as the people of Mordochai, because they were the people of Mordochai and shared his sentiments.”

“And the king's servants that were in the king's gate,.... Or court, all his courtiers; for it cannot be thought they were all porters, or such only that bowed and reverenced Haman; gave him divine honours, as to a deity; for such were given to the kings of Persia (k), and might be given to their favourites, and seems to be the case; for, though Haman might not erect a statue of himself, or have images painted on his clothes, as the Targum and Aben Ezra, for the Persians did not allow of statues and images (l); yet he might make himself a god, as Jarchi, and require divine worship, with leave of the king, which he had, yea, an order for it: for the king had so commanded concerning him; which shows that it was not mere civil honour and respect, for that in course would have been given him as the king's favourite and prime minister by all his servants, without an express order for it; this, therefore, must be something uncommon and extraordinary: but Mordecai bowed not, nor did him reverence; which is a further proof that it was not mere civil honour that was required and given; for that the Jews did not refuse to give, and that in the most humble and prostrate manner, and was admitted by them, Sa1 24:8 Kg1 1:16, nor can it be thought that Mordecai would refuse to give it from pride and sullenness, and thereby risk the king's displeasure, the loss of his office, and the ruin of his nation; but it was such kind of reverence to a man, and worship of him, which was contrary to his conscience, and the law of his God. (k) Vid. Salden. Otia Theolog. l. 3. Exercitat. 1. sec. 4, 5. (l) Laert. Prooem. ad Vit. Philosoph. p. 5, 6.”

“The king's servants, that were in the king's gate - By servants here, certainly a higher class of officers are intended than porters; and Mordecai was one of those officers, and came to the gate with the others who were usually there in attendance to receive the commands of the king. Mordecai bowed not - לאיכרע lo yichra. "He did not bow down;" nor did him reverence, ולא ישתחוה velo yishtachaveh, "nor did he prostrate himself." I think it most evident, from these two words, that it was not civil reverence merely that Haman expected and Mordecai refused; this sort of respect is found in the word כרע cara, to bow. This sort of reverence Mordecai could not refuse without being guilty of the most inexcusable obstinacy, nor did any part of the Jewish law forbid it. But Haman expected, what the Persian kings frequently received, a species of Divine adoration; and this is implied in the word שחה shachah, which signifies that kind of prostration which implies the highest degree of reverence that can be paid to God or man, lying down flat on the earth, with the hands and feet extended, and the mouth in the dust. The Targum, says that Haman set up a statue for himself, to which every one was obliged to bow, and to adore Haman himself. The Jews all think that Mordecai refused this prostration because it implied idolatrous adoration. Hence, in the Apocryphal additions to this book, Mordecai is represented praying thus: "Thou knowest that if I have not adored Haman, it was not through pride, nor contempt, nor secret desire of glory; for I felt disposed to kiss the footsteps of his feet (gladly) for the salvation of Israel: but I feared to give to a man that honor which I know belongs only to my God."”

“all the king's servants, that were in the king's gate, bowed, and reverenced Haman--Large mansions in the East are entered by a spacious vestibule, or gateway, along the sides of which visitors sit, and are received by the master of the house; for none, except the nearest relatives or special friends, are admitted farther. There the officers of the ancient king of Persia waited till they were called, and did obeisance to the all-powerful minister of the day. But Mordecai bowed not, nor did him reverence--The obsequious homage of prostration not entirely foreign to the manners of the East, had not been claimed by former viziers; but this minion required that all subordinate officers of the court should bow before him with their faces to the earth. But to Mordecai, it seemed that such an attitude of profound reverence was due only to God. Haman being an Amalekite, one of a doomed and accursed race, was, doubtless, another element in the refusal; and on learning that the recusant was a Jew, whose nonconformity was grounded on religious scruples, the magnitude of the affront appeared so much the greater, as the example of Mordecai would be imitated by all his compatriots. Had the homage been a simple token of civil respect, Mordecai would not have refused it; but the Persian kings demanded a sort of adoration, which, it is well known, even the Greeks reckoned it degradation to express. As Xerxes, in the height of his favoritism, had commanded the same honors to be given to the minister as to himself, this was the ground of Mordecai's refusal.”

“Now it came to pass, when they spake daily unto him,.... Putting him in mind of his duty to obey the king's command, suggesting to him the danger he exposed himself to, pressing him to give the reasons of his conduct: and he hearkened not unto them; regarded not what they said, and continued disobedient to the king's order, and disrespectful to Haman that they told Haman, to see whether Mordecai's matters would stand; they informed Haman that Mordecai refused to give him reverence as the king had ordered; this they did to try whether such a conduct would be suffered and bore with, and whether Mordecai would persevere in it when taken notice of: for he had told them that he was a Jew; which was all the reason he gave why he would not reverence Haman; and a reason sufficient, because, by a fundamental law of his religion, he was not to worship mere man, but God only: and this confirms what has been before observed; for this would have been no reason for refusing civil respect and honour, but was a strong one for denying religious worship and reverence; and no wonder that the Jews should refuse it, when even the Grecians, though Heathens, refused to give the Persian kings the divine honours they required (m); yea, the Athenians put Timagoras to death for prostrating himself in such a manner to Darius (n); for the Persian kings were, as Aristotle says (o), called Lord and God, and said to hear and see all things. (m) Herodot. Polymnia, sive, l. 7. c. 136. Justin e Trogo. l. 6. c. 2. Aelian. Var. Hist. l. 1. 21. (n) Plutarch. in Artaxerxe, Valer. Maxim. l. 6. c. 3. (o) De Mundo, c. 6.”

“Haman values himself upon that bold and daring thought, which he fancied well became his great spirit, of destroying all the Jews - an undertaking worthy of its author, and which he promised himself would perpetuate his memory. He doubts not but to find desperate and bloody hands enough to cut all their throats if the king will but give him leave. How he obtained leave, and commission to do it, we are here told. He had the king's ear, let him alone to manage him. I. He makes a false and malicious representation of Jews, and their character, to the king, Est 3:8. The enemies of God's people could not give them such bad treatment as they do if they did not first give them a bad name. He would have the king believe, 1. That the Jews were a despicable people, and that it was not for his credit to harbour them:"A certain people there is," without name, as if nobody knew whence they came and what they were; "they are not incorporated, but scattered abroad and dispersed in all the provinces as fugitives and vagabonds on the earth, and inmates in all countries, the burden and scandal of the places where they live." 2. That they were a dangerous people, and that it was not safe to harbour them. "They have laws and usages of their own, and conform not to the statutes of the kingdom and the customs of the country; and therefore they may be looked upon as disaffected to the government and likely to infect others with their singularities, which may end in a rebellion." It is no new thing for the best of men to have such invidious characters as these given of them; if it be no sin to kill them, it is no sin to belie them. II. He bids high for leave to destroy them all, Est 3:9. He knew there were many that hated the Jews, and would willingly fall upon them if they might but have a commission: Let it be written therefore that they may be destroyed. Give but orders for a general massacre of all the Jews, and Haman will undertake it shall be easily done. If the king will gratify him in this matter, he will make him a present of ten thousand talents, which shall be paid into the king's treasuries. This, he thought, would be a powerful inducement to the king to consent, and would obviate the strongest objection against him, which was that the government must needs sustain loss in its revenues by the destruction of so many of its subjects; so great a sum, he hoped, would be equivalent for that. Proud and malicious men will not stick at the expenses of their revenge, nor spare any cost to gratify it. Yet no doubt Haman knew how to re-imburse himself out of the spoil of the Jews, which his janizaries were to seize for him (Est 3:13), and so to make them bear the charges of their own ruin; while he himself hoped to be not only a saver but a gainer by the bargain. III. He obtains what he desired, a full commission to do what he would with the Jews, Est 3:10, Est 3:11. The king was so inattentive to business, and so bewitched with Haman, that he took no time to examine the truth of his allegations, but was as willing as Haman could wish to believe the worst concerning the Jews, and therefore he gave them up into his hands, as lambs to the lion: The people are thine, do with them as it seemeth good unto thee. He does not say, "Kill them, slay them" (hoping Haman's own cooler thoughts would abate the rigour of that sentence and induce him to sell them for slaves); but "Do what thou wilt with them." And so little did he consider how much he should lose in his tribute, and how much Haman would gain in the spoil, that he gave him withal the ten thousand talents: The silver is thine. Such an implicit confidence likewise he had in Haman, and so perfectly had he abandoned all care of his kingdom, that he gave Haman his ring, his privy-seal, or sign-manual, wherewith to confirm whatever edict he pleased to draw up for this purpose. Miserable is the kingdom that is at the disposal of such a head as this, which has one ear only, and a nose to be led by, but neither eyes nor brains, nor scarcely a tongue of its own. IV. He then consults with his soothsayers to find out a lucky day for the designed massacre, Est 3:7. The resolve was taken up in the first month, in the twelfth year of the king, when Esther had been his wife about five years. Some day or other in that year must be pitched upon; and, as if he doubted not but that Heaven would favour his design and further it, he refers it to the lot, that is, to the divine Providence, to choose the day for him; but that, in the decision, proved a better friend to the Jews than to him, for the lot fell upon the twelfth month, so that Mordecai and Esther had eleven months to turn themselves in for the defeating of the design, or, if they could not defeat it, space would be left for the Jews to make their escape and shift for their safety. Haman, though eager to have the Jews cut off, yet will submit to the laws of his superstition, and not anticipate the supposed fortunate day, no, not to gratify his impatient revenge. Probably he was in some fear lest the Jews should prove too hard for their enemies, and therefore durst not venture on such a hazardous enterprise but under the smiles of a good omen. This may shame us, who often acquiesce not in the directions and disposals of Providence when they cross our desires and intentions. He that believeth the lot, much more that believeth the promise, will not make haste. But see how God's wisdom serves its own purposes by men's folly. Haman has appealed to the lot, and to the lot he shall go, which, by adjourning the execution, gives judgment against him and breaks the neck of the plot. V. The bloody edict is hereupon drawn up, signed, and published, giving orders to the militia of every province to be ready against the thirteenth day of the twelfth month, and, on that day, to murder all the Jews, men, women, and children, and seize their effects, Est 3:12-14. Had the decree been to banish all the Jews and expel them out of the king's dominions, it would have been severe enough; but surely never any act of cruelty appeared so barefaced as this, to destroy, to kill, and to cause to perish, all the Jews, appointing them as sheep for the slaughter without showing any cause for so doing. No crime is laid to their charge; it is not pretended that they were obnoxious to the public justice, nor is any condition offered, upon performance of which they might have their lives spared; but die they must, without mercy. Thus have the church's enemies thirsted after blood, the blood of the saints and the martyrs of Jesus, and drunk of it till they have been perfectly intoxicated (Rev 17:6); yet still, like the horse-leech, they cry, Give, give. This cruel offer is ratified with the king's seal, directed to the king's lieutenants, and drawn up in the king's name, and yet the king knows not what he does. Posts are sent out, with all expedition, to carry copies of the decree to the respective provinces, Est 3:15. See how restless the malice of the church's enemies is: it will spare no pains; it will lose no time. VI. The different temper of the court and city hereupon. 1. The court was very merry upon it: The king and Haman sat down to drink, perhaps to drink "Confusion to all the Jews." Haman was afraid lest the king's conscience should smite him for what he had done and he should begin to wish it undone again, to prevent which he engrossed him to himself, and kept him drinking. This cursed method many take to drown their convictions, and harden their own hearts and the hearts of others in sin. 2. The city was very sad upon it (and the other cities of the kingdom, no doubt, when they had notice of it): The city Shushan was perplexed, not only the Jews themselves, but all their neighbours that had any principles of justice and compassion. It grieved them to see their king so abused, to see wickedness in the place of judgment (Ecc 3:16), to see men that lived peaceably treated so barbarously; and what would be the consequences of it to themselves they knew not. But the king and Haman cared for none of these things. Note, It is an absurd and impious thing to indulge ourselves in mirth and pleasure when the church is in distress and the public are perplexed.”

“In the first month, that is the month Nisan,.... Which was the first month of the sacred year of the Jews, by divine appointment, Exo 12:2, and there called Abib, and answers to part of February and part of March; from hence it is clear this book was written by a Jew, and very probably by Mordecai: in the twelfth year of King Ahasuerus; four years and near two months after his marriage of Esther, Est 2:16, they cast Pur, that is, the lot, before Haman; being a Persian word, it is explained in Hebrew a lot, the word signifying "steel" in the Persian language. Reland (p) conjectures that this was that sort of lot called "sideromantia". Who cast this lot is not said; whether Haman himself, or one of his servants: perhaps a diviner. The latter Targum calls him Shimshai the scribe: from day today, and from month to month, to the twelfth month, that is the month Adar; which answers to part of January and part of February; so that the lot was cast for every month and every day of the month throughout the year, to find out which was the most lucky month, and which the most lucky day in that month, to destroy the Jews in and none could be found till they came to the last month, and the thirteenth day of that month, Est 3:13, the providence of God so overruling the lot, that there might be time enough for the Jews, through the mediation of Esther to the king, to prevent their destruction; so in other nations the Heathens had their lucky and unlucky days (q). (p) Antiqu. Heb. par. 4. c. 12. sect. 1. (q) Vid. Macrob. Saturnal l. 1. c. 16. Alex. ab Alex. Genial. Dier. l. 4. c. 20.”

“The first month - That is, of the civil year of the Jews. The month Nisan - Answering to a part of our March and April. The twelfth year of king Ahasuerus - According to the chronology in our Bibles, about five hundred and ten years before Christ. They cast Pur, that is, the lot - This appears to be the Hebrew corruption of the pure Persian word pari, which signifies any thing that happens fortuitously. There is an addition here in the Greek text that was probably in the original, and which makes this place very plain. I shall set down the whole verse, and give the Greek in a parenthesis, that it may be read consecutively with what is in the Hebrew: "In the first month, that is, the month Nisan, in the twelfth year of King Ahasuerus, they cast Pur, that is, the lot, before Haman, from day to day, and from month to month." (ὡστε απολεσαι εν μιᾳ ἡμερᾳ το γενος Μαρδοχαιου, και επεσεν ὁ κληρος εις την τεσερακαιδεκατην του μηνος ὁς εστιν Αδαρ "that they might destroy in one day the people of Mordecai; and the lot fell on the fourteenth day of the month Adar.") We see plainly intimated by the Hebrew text that they cast lots, or used a species of divination, to find which of the twelve months would be the most favorable for the execution of Haman's design; and, having found the desired month, then they cast lots, or used divination, to find out which day of the said month would be the lucky day for the accomplishment of the enterprise. But the Hebrew text does not tell us the result of this divination; we are left to guess it out; but the Greek supplies this deficiency, and makes all clear. From it we find that, when they cast for the month, the month Adar was taken; and when they cast for the day, the fourteenth (Heb. thirteenth) of that month was taken. Some have questioned whether Pur may not have signified also some game of chance, which they played before or with Haman, from day to day, to divert him from his melancholy, till the lucky time came in which he was to have the gratification of slaying all the people who were objects of his enmity; or they cast lots, or played, who should get the property of such and such opulent families. Holinshed, one of our ancient historians, informs us that, previously to the battle of Agincourt, the English army, under Henry V., were so thinned and weakened by disease, and the French army so numerous, that "Frenchmen, in the mean while, as though they had been sure of victory, made great triumphe, for the captaines had determined before how to divide the spoil; and the souldiers, the night before, had plaied the Englishmen at dice." To this the chorus of Shakspeare alludes: - "Proud of their numbers, and secure of soul, The confident and over-lusty French Do the low-rated English play at dice. - The poor condemned English, Like sacrifices by their watchful fires, Sit patiently and inly ruminate The morning's danger; and their gestures sad, Investing lank-lean cheeks, and war-worn coats, Presenteth them unto the gazing moon So many horrid ghosts. Hen. V. Monstrelet, who is an impartial writer, does not mention this. Did Haman and his flatterers intend to divide the spoils of the designed-to-be-massacred Jews in some such manner as this?”

“To ensure the success of this great undertaking, viz., the extermination of all the Jews in the kingdom, Haman had recourse to the lot, that he might thus fix on a propitious day for the execution of his project. Astrology plays an important part among all ancient nations, nothing of any magnitude being undertaken without first consulting its professors concerning a favourable time and opportunity; comp. rem. on Eze 21:26. Est 3:7 "In the first month, i.e., Nisan, in the twelfth year of King Ahashverosh, they cast Pur, i.e., the lot, before Haman from day to day, and from month to the twelfth month, i.e., the month Adar." The subject of הפּיל is left indefinite, because it is self-evident that this was done by some astrologer or magician who was versed in such matters. Bertheau tries unnaturally to make Haman the subject, and to combine the subsequent המן לפני with הגּורל: "Haman cast Pur, i.e., the lot, before Haman," which makes Pur signify: the lot before Haman. המן לפני means in the presence of Haman, so that he also might see how the lot fell. פּוּר is an Old-Persian word meaning lot (sors); in modern Persian, bâra signifies time, case (fois, cas), pâra or pâre, piece (morceau, pice), and behr, behre, and behre, lot, share, fate; comp. Zenker, Turco-Arabic and Persian Lexicon, pp. 162 and 229. The words "from day to day, from month to the twelfth month," must not be understood to say, that lots were cast day by day and month by month till the twelfth; but that in the first month lots were at once cast, one after the other, for all the days and months of the year, that a favourable day might be obtained. We do not know the manner in which this was done, "the way of casting lots being unknown to us." The words: from month to the twelfth month, are remarkable; we should expect from month to month till the twelfth month. Bertheau supposes that the words לחדשׁ ויּ פּל הגּורל על יום שׁלשׁה עשׂר were omitted after וּמחדשׁ through the eye of the transcriber passing on from the first לחדשׁ to the second. The text of the lxx actually contains such words, and the possibility of such an oversight on the part of a transcriber must certainly be admitted. In the book of Esther, however, the lxx translation is no critical authority, and it is just as possible that the author of the Hebrew book here expresses himself briefly and indefinitively, because he was now only concerned to state the month determined by lot for the undertaking, and intended to mention the day subsequently. Est 3:8-9 Haman having by means of the lot fixed upon a favourable day for the execution of the massacre, betook himself to the king to obtain a royal decree for the purpose. He represented to the monarch: "There is a people scattered abroad and dispersed among the peoples in all the provinces of thy kingdom, and their laws are different from all other people (i.e., from the laws of all other people), and they keep not the laws of the king, and it is not fitting for the king to leave them alone. Est 3:9. If it seem good to the king, let it be written (i.e., let a written decree be published) to destroy them; and I will weigh ten thousand talents of silver to those who do the business, that they may bring them into the treasuries of the king." This proposal was very subtilly calculated. First Haman casts suspicion on the Jews as a nation scattered abroad and dwelling apart, and therefore unsociable, - as refractory, and therefore dangerous to the state; then he promises the king that their extermination will bring into the royal treasury a very considerable sum of money, viz., the property of the slaughtered. Ten thousand talents of silver, reckoned according to the Mosaic shekel, are 3,750,000, according to the civil shekel 1,875,000; see rem. on Ch1 22:14. המּלאכה עשׁי, those who execute a work, builders in Kg2 12:12, are here and Est 9:3 the king's men of business, who carry on the king's business with respect to receipts and disbursements, the royal financiers. Est 3:10 The king agreed to this proposal. He drew his signet ring from his hand, and delivered it to Haman, that he might prepare the edict in the king's name, and give it by the impression of the royal seal the authority of an irrevocable decree; see rem. on Est 8:8. "To the enemy of the Jews" is added emphatically. Est 3:11 Lest it should appear as though the king had been induced by the prospect held out of obtaining a sum of money, he awards this to Haman. "The silver be given to thee, and the people to do to them (let it be done to them) as seemeth good to thee." והעם precedes absolutely: as for the people of the Jews, etc.”

“And Haman said unto King Ahasuerus, Or "had said" (r), as some choose to render it; nor indeed is it likely that Haman should cast lots to know when would be a proper time to destroy the Jews, until he had got leave of the king to do it: there is a certain people scattered abroad, and dispersed among the people in all the provinces of thy kingdom; for, though many of the Jews returned to their own land, on the proclamation of Cyrus, yet others remained, being well settled as to worldly things, and not having that zeal for God and his worship as became them, and not caring to be at the trouble and expense of such a journey, and especially those of the ten tribes; now Haman, through contempt of them, mentions them not by name, only describes them as a scattered insignificant people: and their laws are different from all people; concerning their diet and observation of days, and other things; so Empedocles, an Heathen, observes (s) of the Jews, that they were a separate people from all others in those things; for he says,"they separated not only from the Romans, but even from all men; for, having found out an unmixed way of living, they have nothing common with men, neither table nor libations, nor prayers, nor sacrifices, but are more separate from us than the Susians or Bactrians, or the more remote Indians:" neither keep they the king's laws; and, no doubt, he had a special respect to the non-observance of the king's command to give him reverence; and in like manner the Jews are represented by Heathen writers, as by Tacitus (t), Juvenal (u), and others: therefore it is not for the king's profit to suffer them; that is, to dwell in his dominions; he got nothing by them, and they might be prejudicial to his subjects, and poison them with their notions; and since they were not obedient to the laws of the kingdom, it was not fit and equitable that they should be continued in it. (r) "dixerat enim", Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Drusius, so Patrick. (s) Apud Philostrat. Vit. Apollon. l. 5. c. 11. (t) Hist. l. 5. c. 4. (u) "Romanas antem soliti", &c. Satyr. 14. ver. 99.”

“Let it be written that they may be destroyed - Let it be enacted that they may all be put to death. By this he would throw all the odium off himself, and put it on the king and his counsellors; for he wished the thing to pass into a law, in which he could have but a small share of the blame. I will pay ten thousand talents of silver - He had said before that it was not for the king's profit to suffer them; but here he is obliged to acknowledge that there will be a loss to the revenue, but that loss he is willing to make up out of his own property. Ten thousand talents of silver is an immense sum indeed; which, counted by the Babylonish talent, amounts to two millions one hundred and nineteen thousand pounds sterling; but, reckoned by the Jewish talent, it makes more than double that sum. Those who cavil at the Scriptures would doubtless call this one of the many absurdities which, they say, are so plenteously found in them, supposing it almost impossible for an individual to possess so much wealth. But though they do not believe the Bible, they do not scruple to credit Herodotus, who, lib. vii., says that when Xerxes went into Greece, Pythius the Lydian had two thousand talents of silver, and four millions of gold darics, which sums united make near five millions and a half sterling. Plutarch tells us, in his life of Crassus, that after this Roman general had dedicated the tenth of all he had to Hercules, he entertained the Roman people at ten thousand tables, and distributed to every citizen as much corn as was sufficient for three months; and after all these expenses, he had seven thousand one hundred Roman talents remaining, which is more than a million and a half of English money. In those days silver and gold were more plentiful than at present, as we may see in the yearly revenue of Solomon, who had of gold from Ophir, at one voyage, four hundred and fifty talents, which make three millions two hundred and forty thousand pounds sterling; and his annual income was six hundred and sixty-six talents of silver, which make four millions seven hundred and ninety-five thousand two hundred pounds English money. In addition to the above I cannot help subjoining the following particulars: - Crassus, who was mentioned before, had a landed estate valued at one million six hundred and sixty-six thousand six hundred and sixty-six pounds thirteen shillings and four pence. C. Coecilius Ridorus, after having lost much in the civil war, left by will effects amounting to one million forty-seven thousand one hundred and sixty pounds. Lentullus, the augur, is said to have possessed no less than three millions three hundred and thirty-three thousand three hundred and thirty-three pounds six shillings and eight pence. Apicius was worth more than nine hundred and sixteen thousand six hundred and seventy-one pounds thirteen shillings and four pence; who, after having spent in his kitchen eight hundred and thirty-three thousand three hundred and thirty-three pounds six shillings and eight pence, and finding that he had no more left than eighty-three thousand three hundred and thirty-three pounds six shillings and eight pence, considered it so little for his support, that he judged it best to put an end to his life by poison! The superfluous furniture of M. Scaurus, which was burnt at Tusculum, was valued at no less than eight hundred and thirty-three thousand three hundred and thirty-two pounds thirteen shillings and four pence. Anthony owed, at the ides or March, the sum of three hundred and thirty-three thousand three hundred and thirty-three pounds six shillings and six pence, which he paid before the calends of April. None of these men were in trade, to account for the circulation of such immense sums through their hands. See Dickson's Husband. of the Anc.”

“Then were the king's scribes called, on the thirteenth day of the first month,.... The month Nisan, Est 3:7, after Haman had leave and power from the king to destroy the Jews, and his ring given him in token of it; the king's scribes or secretaries of state were called together on that day, to write the letters for that purpose: and there was written according to all that Haman had commanded; whatever he would have done; he had an unlimited power to do what he pleased, and he made use of it, and directed the scribes what they should write: unto the king's lieutenants, and to the governors that were over every province; the deputy governors of the one hundred and twenty seven provinces, Est 1:1 and to the rulers of every people of every province; it seems there were different people in every province, which had their rulers; and these were sent to: according to the writing thereof, and to every people after their language; and letters were written in the language, and character of the language, each people spoke, that they might be understood by them: in the name of King Ahasuerus was it written, and sealed with the king's ring. All this Haman took care to have done so early as the thirteenth of Nisan, though the execution was not to be until the thirteenth of Adar, eleven months after; partly that there might be time enough to send the letters everywhere, even to the most distant parts; and chiefly lest Ahasuerus should change his mind, and be prevailed upon to revoke his grant; and, it may be, either to keep the Jews in continual dread, or cause them to flee.”

“Haman, without delay, causes the necessary writings to be prepared, and sent into all the provinces of the kingdom. Est 3:12. "Then were called the king's scribes in the first month, on the thirteenth day of it (בּו, in it, in the said month); and there was written according to all that Haman commanded, to the satraps of the king, and to the governors who (were placed) over every province, and to the rulers of every people, to each several province according to its writing, and to each different people according to their language (comp. rem. on Est 1:22); in the name of King Ahashverosh was it written, and sealed with the king's seal." אחשׁדּרפּנים and פּחות placed in juxtaposition, as in Ezr 8:36, are the imperial officials. Beside these are also named the שׂרים of every people, the native princes of the different races. The writing was finished on the thirteenth day of the month, because this day of the month had been fixed upon as propitious by the lot. Est 3:13 And the letters were sent (נשׁלוח, infin. abs. Niph. instead of the verb. fin.) by posts. הרצים are the post-riders, the aggaroi, who were stationed on the high roads of the realm, generally four parasangs apart, to transmit with the more speed the royal letters and messages. Herod. 5.14, 8.98 (Berth.), comp. Brisson, de reg. Pers. princ. i. c. 238f. וגו להשׁמיד, to destroy, to kill, and cause to perish all Jews from the youth to the old man, children and women, in one day, on the thirteenth day of the twelfth month, and to deprive them of their spoil. The three verbs are combined to give strength to the expression. שׁללם is their property, which is called spoil because it was delivered up to plunder. Haman having held out the prospect of a large sum as the result of exterminating the Jews, and the king having bestowed this upon Haman, the plundering of the Jews, thus permitted to all the inhabitants of the kingdom who should assist in exterminating them, must be understood as implying, that they would have to deliver a portion of the booty thus obtained to Haman. Est 3:14 The copy of the writing, that the law might be given in every province, was opened to all people, that they might be ready by this day. This verse does not announce a copy of the royal decree that had been prepared and sent by the posts, which would in that case be replaced by a mere allusion to its contents (Bertheau). The words contain no trace of an announcement such as we find in Ezr 4:11; Ezr 7:11, but the historical notice, that the copy of the writing which was sent as a law into the provinces was גּלוּי, opened, i.e., sent unclosed or unsealed to all people. גּלוּי is the predicate to the subject וגו פּתשׁגן (comp. on this word the note to Ezr 4:14), and between the subject and predicate is inserted the infinitive clause וגו דּת להנּתן for the purpose of once more briefly mentioning the contents and destination of the כּתב: that a law might be given in every province. To attain this object the more certainly, the copy of the decree, which was brought into every province by the posts, was open or unsealed, that all people might read its contents, and keep themselves in readiness for the execution of what was therein commanded on the appointed day. הזּה ליּום is the thirteenth day of the twelfth month named in the letter. Est 3:15 The posts went forth hastening (דּחף like Ch2 26:20) at the king's commandment, and the decree was given (promulgated) in the citadel of Susa, - an explanatory clause; and the king and Haman sat down to drink while the messengers went forth with the decree, but the city of Susa, in which it was first published, was in perplexity (on נבוכה comp. Exo 14:3; Joe 1:18). The cruel measure could not but fill all peace-loving citizens with horror and anxiety. - Here the question is forced upon us, why the decree should have been so prematurely published. The scribes were summoned to prepare it on the thirteenth day of the first month. For this purpose, even though many copies had to be made in different languages, no very long time would be required in a well-appointed government office. As soon as the scribes had finished their work, the decree was sent out by the posts into all quarters of the realm, and would arrive in even the most distant provinces in three weeks at furthest. This would place almost eleven, and in the remotest parts about ten months between the publication and execution of the decree. What then was the motive for such an interval? Certainly so long a time could not be required for preparing to carry it out, nor is this hinted at in the text, as Bertheau supposes. Nor could it be intended that the Jews should suffer a long period of anxiety. On the contrary, the motive seems to have been, as Clericus and others have already conjectured, to cause many Jews to leave their property and escape to other lands, for the sake of preserving their lives. Thus Haman would attain his object. He would be relieved of the presence of the Jews, and be able to enrich himself by the appropriation of their possessions. On the other hand, the providence of God overruling the event in the interest of the Jews, is unmistakeably evident both in Haman's haste to satisfy his desire for vengeance, and in the falling of the lot upon so distant a day. It was only because there was so long an interval between the publication of the decree and the day appointed by lot for its execution, that it was possible for the Jews to take means for averting the destruction with which they were threatened, as the further development of the history will show.”

“And the letters were sent by post into all the king's provinces,.... Or by the runners (x); by which it seems as if these letters were carried by running footmen, men swift of foot; or rather they were running horses, on which men rode post with letters, and which the Persians called Angari; a scheme invented by Cyrus, for the quick dispatch of letters from place to place, by fixing horses and men to ride them at a proper distance, to receive letters one from another, and who rode night and day (y), as our mail men do now; and nothing could be swifter, or done with greater speed; neither snow, nor rain, nor heat, nor night, could stop their course, we are told (z): the purport of these letters was: to destroy, to kill, and to cause to perish, all Jews, both young and old, little children and women, in one day, even upon the thirteenth day of the twelfth month, which is the month Adar; see Est 3:7. The orders were to destroy, by any means whatsoever, all the Jews, of every age and sex, all in one day, in all the provinces which are here named, that they might be cut off with one blow: and to take the spoil of them for a prey; to be their own booty; which was proposed to engage them in this barbarous work, to encourage them in it to use the greater severity and dispatch. (x) "in manu cursorum", Montanus; so the Tigurine version, Drusius, V. L. Junius & Tremellius, Piscator. (y) Xenophon. Cyropaedia, l. 8. c. 43. (z) Herodot. Urania, sive, l. 8. c. 98.”

“The posts - Literally, the couriers, the hircarrahs, those who carried the public despatches; a species of public functionaries, who have been in use in all nations of the world from the remotest antiquity. The decree was given at Shushan - It was dated from the royal Susa, where the king then was. The city Shushan was perplexed - They saw that in a short time, by this wicked measure the whole city would be thrown into confusion; for, although the Jews were the only objects of this decree, yet, as it armed the populace against them, even the Persians could not hope to escape without being spoiled, when a desperate mob had begun to taste of human blood, and enrich themselves with the property of the murdered. Besides, many Persian families had, no doubt, become united by intermarriages with Jewish families, and in such a massacre they would necessarily share the same fate with the Jews. A more impolitic, disgraceful, and cruel measure was never formed by any government; and one would suppose that the king who ordered it must have been an idiot, and the counsellors who advised it must have been madmen. But a despotic government is ever capable of extravagance and cruelty; for as it is the bane of popular freedom and happiness, so is it the disgrace of political wisdom and of all civil institutions. Despotism and tyranny in the state are the most direct curses which insulted justice can well inflict upon a sinful nation.”

“Jews. Hebrew, “but the city of Susan was in perplexity.” Greek, “troubled.” (Calmet) — Even the pagans could not view such a cruel decree, without horror. (Haydock) Bible Text & Cross-references: Aman, advanced by the king, is offended at Mardochai, and therefore procureth the king’s decree to destroy the whole nation of the Jews. 1 After these things, king Assuerus advanced Aman, the son of Amadathi, who was of the race of Agag: and he set his throne above all the princes that were with him. 2 And all the king’s servants, that were at the doors of the palace, bent their knees, and worshipped Aman: for so the emperor had commanded them; only Mardochai did not bend his knee, nor worship him. 3 And the king’s servants that were chief at the doors of the palace, said to him: Why dost thou alone not observe the king’s commandment? 4 And when they were saying this often, and he would not hearken to them; they told Aman, desirous to know whether he would continue in his resolution: for he had told them that he was a Jew. 5 Now when Aman had heard this, and had proved by experience that Mardochai did not bend his knee to him, nor worship him, he was exceedingly angry. 6 And he counted it nothing to lay his hands upon Mardochai alone: for he had heard that he was of the nation of the Jews, and he chose rather to destroy all the nation of the Jews that were in the kingdom of Assuerus. 7 In the first month, (which is called Nisan) in the twelfth year* of the reign of Assuerus, the lot was cast into an urn, which, in Hebrew, is called Phur, before Aman, on what day and what month the nation of the Jews should be destroyed: and there came out the twelfth month, which is called Adar. 8 And Aman said to king Assuerus: There is a people scattered through all the provinces of thy kingdom, and separated one from another, that use new laws and ceremonies, and moreover despise the king’s ordinances: and thou knowest very well that it is not expedient for thy kingdom that they should grow insolent by impunity. 9 If it please thee, decree that they may he destroyed, and I will pay ten thousand talents to thy treasurers. 10 And the king took the ring that he used, from his own hand, and gave it to Aman, the son of Amadathi, of the race of Agag, the enemy of the Jews, 11 And he said to him: As to the money which thou promisest, keep it for thyself: and as to the people, do with them as seemeth good to thee. 12 *And the king’s scribes were called in the first month, Nisan, on the thirteenth day of the same month: and they wrote, as Aman had commanded, to all the king’s lieutenants, and to the judges of the provinces, and of divers nations, as every nation could read, and hear, according to their different languages, in the name of king Assuerus: and the letters, sealed with his ring, 13 Were sent by the king’s messengers to all provinces, to kill and destroy all the Jews, both young and old, little children, and women, in one day, that is, on the thirteenth of the twelfth month, which is called Adar, and to make a spoil of their goods. 14 And the contents of the letters were to this effect, that all provinces might know, and be ready against that day. 15 The couriers, that were sent, made haste to fulfil the king’s commandment. And, immediately, the edict was hung up in Susan, the king and Aman feasting together, and all the Jews, that were in the city, weeping.”