[1:1]  ¹ sn In the English Bible Esther appears adjacent to Ezra-Nehemiah and with the historical books, but in the Hebrew Bible it is one of five short books (the so-called Megillot) that appear toward the end of the biblical writings. The canonicity of the book was questioned by some in ancient Judaism and early Christianity. It is one of five OT books that were at one time regarded as antilegomena (i.e., books “spoken against”). The problem with Esther was the absence of any direct mention of God. Some questioned whether a book that did not mention God could be considered sacred scripture. Attempts to resolve this by discovering the tetragrammaton (YHWH) encoded in the Hebrew text (e.g., in the initial letters of four consecutive words in the Hebrew text of Esth 5:4) are unconvincing, although they do illustrate how keenly the problem was felt by some. Martin Luther also questioned the canonicity of this book, objecting to certain parts of its content. Although no copy of Esther was found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, this does not necessarily mean that the Qumran community did not regard it as canonical. It is possible that the absence of Esther from what has survived at Qumran is merely a coincidence. Although the book does not directly mention God, it would be difficult to read it without sensing the providence of God working in powerful, though at times subtle, ways to rescue his people from danger and possible extermination. The absence of mention of the name of God may be a deliberate part of the literary strategy of the writer.

[1:1]  ² tn Heb “it came about”; KJV, ASV “Now it came to pass.”

[1:1]  ³ tn Where the Hebrew text has “Ahasuerus” (so KJV, NAB, NASB, NRSV) in this book the LXX has “Artaxerxes.” The ruler mentioned in the Hebrew text is Xerxes I (ca. 486-465 B.C.), and a number of modern English versions use “Xerxes” (e.g., NIV, NCV, CEV, NLT).

[1:1]  ⁴ tn Heb “in the days of Ahasuerus, that Ahasuerus who used to rule…” The phrase “I am referring to” has been supplied to clarify the force of the third person masculine singular pronoun, which is functioning like a demonstrative pronoun.

[1:1]  ⁵ sn The geographical extent of the Persian empire was vast. The division of Xerxes’ empire into 127 smaller provinces was apparently done for purposes of administrative efficiency.

[1:1]  ⁶ tn Heb “Cush” (so NIV, NCV; KJV “Ethiopia”) referring to the region of the upper Nile in Africa. India and Cush (i.e., Ethiopia) are both mentioned in a tablet taken from the foundation of Xerxes’ palace in Persepolis that describes the extent of this empire. See ANET 316-17.

[1:2]  ⁷ tn Heb “Shushan” (so KJV, ASV). Most recent English versions render this as “Susa.”

[1:2]  ⁸ tn The Hebrew word בִּירָה (birah) can refer to a castle or palace or temple. Here it seems to have in mind that fortified part of the city that might be called an acropolis or citadel. Cf. KJV “palace”; NAB “stronghold”; NASB “capital”; NLT “fortress.”

[1:3]  ⁹ sn The third year of Xerxes’ reign would be ca. 483 b.c.

[1:3]  ¹⁰ tc Due to the large numbers of people implied, some scholars suggest that the original text may have read “leaders of the army” (cf. NAB “Persian and Median aristocracy”; NASB “the army officers”; NIV “the military leaders”). However, there is no textual evidence for this emendation, and the large numbers are not necessarily improbable.

[1:3]  ¹¹ sn Unlike the Book of Daniel, the usual order for this expression in Esther is “Persia and Media” (cf. vv. 14, 18, 19). In Daniel the order is “Media and Persia,” indicating a time in their history when Media was in the ascendancy.

[1:3]  ¹² sn The size of the banquet described here, the number of its invited guests, and the length of its duration, although certainly immense by any standard, are not without precedent in the ancient world. C. A. Moore documents a Persian banquet for 15,000 people and an Assyrian celebration with 69,574 guests (Esther [AB], 6).

[1:4]  ¹³ tn Heb “many days” (so KJV, ASV); NASB, NRSV “for many days.”

[1:4]  ¹⁴ tn The words “to be exact!” are not in the Hebrew text but have been supplied in the translation to bring out the clarifying nuance of the time period mentioned. Cf. KJV “even an hundred and fourscore days.”

[1:5]  ¹⁵ tc The Hebrew text of Esther does not indicate why this elaborate show of wealth and power was undertaken. According to the LXX these were “the days of the wedding” (αἱ ἡμέραι τοῦ γάμου, Jai Jhmerai tou gamou), presumably the king’s wedding. However, a number of scholars have called attention to the fact that this celebration takes place just shortly before Xerxes’ invasion of Greece. It is possible that the banquet was a rallying for the up-coming military effort. See Herodotus, Histories 7.8. There is no reason to adopt the longer reading of the LXX here.

[1:5]  ¹⁶ tc The LXX has ἕξ ({ex, “six”) instead of “seven.” Virtually all English versions follow the reading of the MT here, “seven.”

[1:5]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “were found.”

[1:5]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “from the great and unto the small.”

[1:6]  ¹⁹ sn The finest linen was byssus, a fine, costly, white fabric made in Egypt, Palestine, and Edom, and imported into Persia (BDB 101 s.v. בּוּץ; HALOT 115-16 s.v. בּוּץ).

[1:6]  ²⁰ tn The Hebrew noun מִטָּה (mittah) refers to a reclining couch (cf. KJV “beds”) spread with covers, cloth and pillow for feasting and carousing (Ezek 23:41; Amos 3:12; 6:4; Esth 1:6; 7:8). See BDB 641-42 s.v.; HALOT 573 s.v.

[1:7]  ²¹ tn Heb “to cause to drink” (Hiphil infinitive construct of שָׁקָה, shaqah). As the etymology of the Hebrew word for “banquet” (מִשְׁתֶּה, mishteh, from שָׁתָה, shatah, “to drink”) hints, drinking was a prominent feature of ancient Near Eastern banquets.

[1:8]  ²² tn Heb “the drinking was according to law; there was no one compelling.”

[1:8]  ²³ tn Heb “every chief of his house”; KJV “all the officers of his house”; NLT “his staff.”

[1:8]  ²⁴ tn Heb “according to the desire of man and man.”

[1:9]  ²⁵ sn Vashti is the name of Xerxes’ queen according to the Book of Esther. But in the Greek histories of this period the queen’s name is given as Amestris (e.g., Herodotus, Histories 9.108-13). The name Vashti does not seem to occur in the nonbiblical records from this period. Apparently the two women are not to be confused, but not enough is known about this period to reconcile completely the biblical and extrabiblical accounts.

[1:10]  ²⁶ tn Heb “as the heart of the king was good with the wine.” Here the proper name (King Ahasuerus) has been substituted for the title in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[1:10]  ²⁷ tn Heb “King Ahasuerus”; here the proper name has been replaced by the pronoun “him” in the translation for stylistic reasons. Cf. similarly NIV, NCV, CEV, NLT “King Xerxes.”

[1:11]  ²⁸ tn Heb “was good of appearance”; KJV “was fair to look on”; NAB “was lovely to behold.”

[1:12]  ²⁹ sn Refusal to obey the king was risky even for a queen in the ancient world. It is not clear why Vashti behaved so rashly and put herself in such danger. Apparently she anticipated humiliation of some kind and was unwilling to subject herself to it, in spite of the obvious dangers. There is no justification in the biblical text for an ancient Jewish targumic tradition that the king told her to appear before his guests dressed in nothing but her royal high turban, that is, essentially naked.

[1:12]  ³⁰ tn Heb “at the word of the king”; NASB “at the king’s command.”

[1:12]  ³¹ tn Heb “burned in him” (so KJV).

[1:13]  ³² tn Heb “judgment” (so KJV); NASB, NIV “justice”; NRSV “custom.”

[1:14]  ³³ tn Heb “seers of the face of the king”; NASB “who had access to the king’s presence.”

[1:14]  ³⁴ tn Heb “were sitting first”; NAB “held first rank in the realm.”

[1:15]  ³⁵ tn These words are not present in the Hebrew text, but have been supplied in the translation for clarity (cf. NIV, NCV, CEV, NLT, all of which supply similar phrases).

[1:15]  ³⁶ tc The location of the prepositional phrase “according to law” is somewhat unusual in the Hebrew text, but not so much so as to require emendation. Some scholars suggest deleting the phrase as an instance of dittography from the final part of the immediately preceding word in v. 14. Others suggest taking the phrase with the end of v. 14 rather than with v. 15. Both proposals, however, lack adequate justification.

[1:19]  ³⁷ sn Heb “If upon the king it is good”; KJV “If it please the king.” Deferential language was common in ancient Near Eastern court language addressing a despot; it occurs often in Esther.

[1:19]  ³⁸ sn Laws…that cannot be repealed. On the permanence of the laws of Media and Persia see also Esth 8:8 and Dan 6:8, 12, 15.

[1:19]  ³⁹ sn Previously in this chapter the word “queen” accompanies Vashti’s name (cf. vv. 9, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17). But here, in anticipation of her demotion, the title is dropped.

[1:19]  ⁴⁰ tn Heb “her neighbor”; NIV “someone else.”

[1:19]  ⁴¹ tn Heb “who is better than she.” The reference is apparently to worthiness of the royal position as demonstrated by compliance with the king’s wishes, although the word טוֹב (tob, “good”) can also be used of physical beauty. Cf. NAB, NASB, NLT “more worthy than she.”

[1:20]  ⁴² tn Heb “heard”; KJV, NAB, NLT “published”; NIV, NRSV “proclaimed.”

[1:20]  ⁴³ tc The phrase “vast though it is” is not included in the LXX, although it is retained by almost all English versions.

[1:22]  ⁴⁴ sn For purposes of diplomacy and governmental communication throughout the far-flung regions of the Persian empire the Aramaic language was normally used. Educated people throughout the kingdom could be expected to have competence in this language. But in the situation described in v. 22 a variety of local languages are to be used, and not just Aramaic, so as to make the king’s edict understandable to the largest possible number of people.

[1:22]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “in his house”; NIV “over his own household.”

[1:22]  ⁴⁶ tc The final prepositional phrase is not included in the LXX, and this shorter reading is followed by a number of English versions (e.g., NAB, NRSV, NLT). Some scholars suggest the phrase may be the result of dittography from the earlier phrase “to each people according to its language,” but this is not a necessary conclusion. The edict was apparently intended to reassert male prerogative with regard to two things (and not just one): sovereign and unquestioned leadership within the family unit, and the right of deciding which language was to be used in the home when a bilingual situation existed.

[2:1]  ⁴⁷ tn Heb “after these things” (so KJV, NASB, NRSV). The expression is very vague from a temporal standpoint, not indicating precisely just how much time might have elapsed. Cf. v. 21.

[2:1]  ⁴⁸ sn There may be a tinge of regret expressed in the king’s remembrance of Vashti. There is perhaps a hint that he wished for her presence once again, although that was not feasible from a practical standpoint. The suggestions by the king’s attendants concerning a replacement seem to be an effort to overcome this nostalgia. Certainly it was to their advantage to seek the betterment of the king’s outlook. Those around him the most were probably the most likely to suffer the effects of his ire.

[2:1]  ⁴⁹ tn Or “decreed” (so NAB, NASB, NRSV); TEV “and about his proclamation against her.”

[2:2]  ⁵⁰ tn Heb “young women, virgins, good of form.” The same phrase also occurs in v. 3.

[2:3]  ⁵¹ tn Heb “the house of the women” (so KJV, ASV). So also in vv. 9, 11, 13, and 14.

[2:3]  ⁵² tn Heb “their ointments”; cf. NIV, CEV, NLT “beauty treatments.”

[2:4]  ⁵³ tn Heb “who is good in the eyes of the king.”

[2:4]  ⁵⁴ tn Heb “the matter was good in the eyes of the king.” Cf. TEV “The king thought this was good advice.”

[2:5]  ⁵⁵ sn Mordecai is a pagan name that reflects the name of the Babylonian deity Marduk. Probably many Jews of the period had two names, one for secular use and the other for use especially within the Jewish community. Mordecai’s Jewish name is not recorded in the biblical text.

[2:6]  ⁵⁶ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[2:6]  ⁵⁷ sn Jeconiah is an alternative name for Jehoiachin. A number of modern English versions use the latter name to avoid confusion (e.g., NIV, NCV, TEV, NLT).

[2:7]  ⁵⁸ tn According to HALOT 64 s.v. II אמן the term אֹמֵן (’omen) means: (1) “attendant” of children (Num 11:12; Isa 49:23); (2) “guardian” (2 Kgs 10:1, 5; Esth 2:7); (3) “nurse-maid” (2 Sam 4:4; Ruth 4:16); and (4) “to look after” (Isa 60:4; Lam 4:5). Older lexicons did not distinguish this root from the homonym I אָמַן (’aman, “to support; to confirm”; cf. BDB 52 s.v. אָמַן). This is reflected in a number of translations by use of a phrase like “brought up” (KJV, ASV, RSV, NIV) or “bringing up” (NASB).

[2:7]  ⁵⁹ sn Hadassah is a Jewish name that probably means “myrtle”; the name Esther probably derives from the Persian word for “star,” although some scholars derive it from the name of the Babylonian goddess Ishtar. Esther is not the only biblical character for whom two different names were used. Daniel (renamed Belteshazzar) and his three friends Hananiah (renamed Shadrach), Mishael (renamed Meshach), and Azariah (renamed Abednego) were also given different names by their captors.

[2:7]  ⁶⁰ tn Heb “for there was not to her father or mother.” This is universally understood to mean Esther’s father and mother were no longer alive.

[2:7]  ⁶¹ tn Heb “beautiful of form.” The Hebrew noun תֹּאַר (to’ar, “form; shape”) is used elsewhere to describe the physical bodily shape of a beautiful woman (Gen 29:17; Deut 21:11; 1 Sam 25:3); see BDB 1061 s.v. Cf. TEV “had a good figure.”

[2:7]  ⁶² tn Heb “had taken her to him.” The Hebrew verb לָקַח (laqakh, “to take”) describes Mordecai adopting Esther and treating her like his own daughter: “to take as one’s own property” as a daughter (HALOT 534 s.v. I לקח 6).

[2:8]  ⁶³ tn Heb “were heard” (so NASB); NRSV “were (had been NIV) proclaimed.”

[2:8]  ⁶⁴ tn Heb “the house of the king.” So also in vv. 9, 13. Cf. NLT “the king’s harem.”

[2:9]  ⁶⁵ tn Heb “was good in his eyes”; NLT “Hegai was very impressed with Esther.”

[2:9]  ⁶⁶ tn Heb “being looked at (with favor).”

[2:9]  ⁶⁷ tn Heb “of the house of the women” (so KJV, ASV). So also in vv. 11, 13, 14.

[2:10]  ⁶⁸ tn Cf. v. 20, where the same phrase occurs but with the word order reversed.

[2:10]  ⁶⁹ tn Heb “that she not tell” (NRSV similar); NASB “that she should not make them known.”

[2:11]  ⁷⁰ tn Heb “to know the peace of Esther.”

[2:12]  ⁷¹ tc The LXX does not include the words “that were required for the women.”

[2:14]  ⁷² tn Heb “second.” The numerical adjective שֵׁנִי (sheniy, “second”) is difficult here. As a modifier for “house” in v. 14 the word would presumably refer to a second part of the harem, one which was under the supervision of a separate official. But in this case the definite article would be expected before “second” (cf. LXX τὸν δεύτερον, ton deuteron). Some scholars emend the text to שֵׁנִית (shenit, “a second time”), but this does not completely resolve the difficulty since the meaning remains unclear. The translation adopted above follows the LXX and understands the word to refer to a separate group of women in the king’s harem, a group housed apparently in a distinct part of the residence complex.

[2:14]  ⁷³ tc The LXX does not include the words “was pleased with her.”

[2:15]  ⁷⁴ tn Heb “who had taken her to him as a daughter”; NRSV “who had adopted her as his own daughter.”

[2:16]  ⁷⁵ tc The Greek MSS Codex Alexandrinus (A) and Codex Vaticanus (B) read “twelfth” here.

[2:16]  ⁷⁶ tc The Syriac Peshitta reads “fourth” here.

[2:17]  ⁷⁷ tn Heb “grace and loyal love.” The expression is probably a hendiadys.

[2:17]  ⁷⁸ tc The LXX does not include the words “more than all the other young women.”

[2:17]  ⁷⁹ tn Heb “caused her to rule.”

[2:18]  ⁸⁰ tc The LXX does not include the words “and he provided for offerings at the king’s expense.”

[2:19]  ⁸¹ tc The LXX does not include the words “Now when the young women were being gathered again.” The Hebrew word שֵׁנִית (shenit, “a second time”) is difficult in v. 19, but apparently it refers to a subsequent regathering of the women to the harem.

[2:19]  ⁸² sn That Mordecai was sitting at the king’s gate apparently means that he was a high-ranking government official. It was at the city gate where important business was transacted. Being in this position afforded Mordecai an opportunity to become aware of the plot against the king’s life, although the author does not include the particular details of how this information first came to Mordecai’s attention.

[2:20]  ⁸³ sn That Esther was able so effectively to conceal her Jewish heritage suggests that she was not consistently observing Jewish dietary and religious requirements. As C. A. Moore observes, “In order for Esther to have concealed her ethnic and religious identity…in the harem, she must have eaten…, dressed, and lived like a Persian rather than an observant Jewess” (Esther [AB], 28.) In this regard her public behavior stands in contrast to that of Daniel, for example.

[2:20]  ⁸⁴ tc The LXX adds the words “to fear God.”

[2:21]  ⁸⁵ tn This individual is referred to as “Bigthana,” a variant spelling of the name, in Esth 6:2.

[2:21]  ⁸⁶ tc The LXX does not include the names “Bigthan and Teresh” here.

[2:21]  ⁸⁷ tn Heb “guarders of the threshold”; NIV “who guarded the doorway.”

[2:21]  ⁸⁸ tn Heb “sought to send a hand against”; CEV “decided to kill.”

[2:22]  ⁸⁹ sn The text of Esther does not disclose exactly how Mordecai learned about the plot against the king’s life. Ancient Jewish traditions state that Mordecai overheard conspiratorial conversation, or that an informant brought this information to him, or that it came to him as a result of divine prompting. These conjectures are all without adequate support from the biblical text. The author simply does not tell the source of Mordecai’s insight into this momentous event.

[2:22]  ⁹⁰ tc The LXX simply reads “Esther” and does not include “the queen.”

[2:22]  ⁹¹ tc The LXX adds here “the things concerning the plot.”

[2:23]  ⁹² tn Heb “they both were hanged.” The referent (the two eunuchs who conspired against the king) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:23]  ⁹³ tn Or “on a pole”; KJV, ASV “on a tree.”

[3:1]  ⁹⁴ tn Heb “after these things” (so KJV, ASV); NAB, NASB, NIV “After these events.”

[3:1]  ⁹⁵ tn Heb “made great”; NAB “raised…to high rank”; NIV “honored.”

[3:1]  ⁹⁶ tn Heb “chair”; KJV, NRSV “seat”; NASB “established his authority.”

[3:2]  ⁹⁷ tn Heb “and” (so KJV, NASB, NRSV). Other modern English versions leave the conjunction untranslated here (NAB, NIV, NCV, NLT).

[3:2]  ⁹⁸ sn Mordecai did not bow. The reason for Mordecai’s refusal to bow before Haman is not clearly stated here. Certainly the Jews did not refuse to bow as a matter of principle, as though such an action somehow violated the second command of the Decalogue. Many biblical texts bear witness to their practice of falling prostrate before people of power and influence (e.g., 1 Sam 24:8; 2 Sam 14:4; 1 Kgs 1:16). Perhaps the issue here was that Haman was a descendant of the Amalekites, a people who had attacked Israel in an earlier age (see Exod 17:8-16; 1 Sam 15:17-20; Deut 25:17-19).

[3:4]  ⁹⁹ sn Mordecai’s position in the service of the king brought him into regular contact with these royal officials. Because of this association the officials would have found ample opportunity to complain of Mordecai’s refusal to honor Haman by bowing down before him.

[3:4]  ¹⁰⁰ tn Heb “Will the matters of Mordecai stand?”; NASB “to see whether Mordecai’s reason would stand.”

[3:4]  ¹⁰¹ sn This disclosure of Jewish identity is a reversal of the practice mentioned in 1:10, 20.

[3:5]  ¹⁰² tn Heb “Haman.” The pronoun (“he”) was used in the translation for stylistic reasons. Repeating the proper name here is redundant according to contemporary English style, although the name is repeated in NASB and NRSV.

[3:6]  ¹⁰³ tn Heb “to send a hand against”; KJV, NRSV “to lay hands on.”

[3:6]  ¹⁰⁴ tn Heb “they had related to him.” For stylistic reasons this has been translated as a passive construction.

[3:6]  ¹⁰⁵ tc The entire first half of the verse is not included in the LXX.

[3:6]  ¹⁰⁶ tc This parenthetical phrase is not included in the LXX. Some scholars emend the MT reading עַם (’am, “people”) to עִם (’im, “with”), arguing that the phrase is awkwardly placed and syntactically inappropriate. While there is some truth to their complaint, the MT makes sufficient sense to be acceptable here, and is followed by most English versions.

[3:7]  ¹⁰⁷ sn This year would be ca. 474 b.c. The reference to first month and twelfth month indicate that about a year had elapsed between this determination and the anticipated execution.

[3:7]  ¹⁰⁸ tn The term פּוּר (pur, “lot”) is an Akkadian loanword; the narrator therefore explains it for his Hebrew readers (“that is, the lot”). It is from the plural form of this word (i.e., Purim) that the festival celebrating the deliverance of the Jews takes its name (cf. 9:24, 26, 28, 31).

[3:7]  ¹⁰⁹ tc The LXX adds the following words: “in order to destroy in one day the race of Mordecai, and the lot fell on the fourteenth day of the month.” The LXX reading is included by NAB.

[3:7]  ¹¹⁰ tn Since v. 7 seems to interrupt the flow of the narrative, many scholars have suggested that it is a late addition to the text. But there is not enough evidence to warrant such a conclusion. Even though its placement is somewhat awkward, the verse supplies to the reader an important piece of chronological information.

[3:8]  ¹¹¹ tn Heb “one people.” Note the subtle absence at this point of a specific mention of the Jewish people by name.

[3:8]  ¹¹² tn Heb “peoples” (so NASB, NIV); NAB “nations”

[3:8]  ¹¹³ tn Heb “to cause them to rest”; NASB “to let them remain”; NAB, NIV, NRSV “to tolerate them.”

[3:9]  ¹¹⁴ tn Heb “If upon the king it is good”; KJV “If it please the king.”

[3:9]  ¹¹⁵ tn Heb “let it be written” (so KJV, ASV); NASB “let it be decreed.”

[3:9]  ¹¹⁶ sn The enormity of the monetary sum referred to here can be grasped by comparing this amount (10,000 talents of silver) to the annual income of the empire, which according to Herodotus (Histories 3.95) was 14,500 Euboic talents. In other words Haman is offering the king a bribe equal to two-thirds of the royal income. Doubtless this huge sum of money was to come (in large measure) from the anticipated confiscation of Jewish property and assets once the Jews had been destroyed. That such a large sum of money is mentioned may indicate something of the economic standing of the Jewish population in the empire of King Ahasuerus.

[3:10]  ¹¹⁷ sn Possessing the king’s signet ring would enable Haman to act with full royal authority. The king’s ring would be used to impress the royal seal on edicts, making them as binding as if the king himself had enacted them.

[3:11]  ¹¹⁸ tn Heb “the silver is given to you”; NRSV “the money is given to you”; CEV “You can keep their money.” C. A. Moore (Esther [AB], 40) understands these words somewhat differently, taking them to imply acceptance of the money on Xerxes’ part. He translates, “Well, it’s your money.”

[3:11]  ¹¹⁹ tn Heb “according to what is good in your eyes”; NASB “do with them as you please.”

[3:12]  ¹²⁰ tn Or “secretaries” (so NIV, NRSV, NLT).

[3:12]  ¹²¹ tn Or “princes” (so NLT); CEV “highest officials.”

[3:13]  ¹²² tn The words “stating that” are not in the Hebrew text but have been supplied in the translation for clarity.

[3:13]  ¹²³ tn Heb “children and women.” The translation follows contemporary English idiom, which reverses the order.

[3:13]  ¹²⁴ tc The LXX does not include the words “on the thirteenth day.”

[3:14]  ¹²⁵ tn Heb “peoples” (so NASB, NRSV).

[3:15]  ¹²⁶ tn Heb “runners.” So also in 8:10, 14. Cf. NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV “couriers.”

[3:15]  ¹²⁷ tn Or “went forth in haste” (so ASV).

[3:15]  ¹²⁸ tn Heb “with the word of the king.”

[3:15]  ¹²⁹ sn The city of Susa was in an uproar. This final statement of v. 15 is a sad commentary on the pathetic disregard of despots for the human misery and suffering that they sometimes inflict on those who are helpless to resist their power. Here, while common people braced for the reckless loss of life and property that was about to begin, the perpetrators went about their mundane activities as though nothing of importance was happening.