.
Esther 1:1-21: "The Banishing of a Queen"
" Now it came to pass in the days of Ahasuerus (this was the Ahasuerus who reigned over one hundred and twenty-seven provinces, from India to Ethiopia), in those days when King Ahasuerus sat on the throne of his kingdom, which was in Shushan the citadel, that in the third year of his reign he made a feast for all his officials and servants — the powers of Persia and Media, the nobles, and the princes of the provinces being before him when he showed the riches of his glorious kingdom and the splendor of his excellent majesty for many days, one hundred and eighty days in all."
"And when these days were completed, the king made a feast lasting seven days for all the people who were present in Shushan the citadel, from great to small, in the court of the garden of the king's palace. There were white and blue linen curtains fastened with cords of fine linen and purple on silver rods and marble pillars; and the couches were of gold and silver on a mosaic pavement of alabaster, turquoise, and white and black marble. And they served drinks in golden vessels, each vessel being different from the other, with royal wine in abundance according to the generosity of the king. In accordance with the law, the drinking was not compulsory; for so the king had ordered all the officers of his household, that they should do according to each man's pleasure."
Introduction: Profiling "Vashti"
According to the Fausset's Bible Dictionary:
Vashti is the Queen of Ahasuerus or Xerxes (Esther chapter 1 and 2). who refused to appear at the king's command, to exhibit her beauty before the king's guests at a banquet; was therefore deposed and repudiated lest a precedent should be given for insubordination of wives to husbands. Vashti may answer to Amestris the queen consort throughout Xerxes' reign, and queen mother under his son and successor-Artaxerxes. it was when his "heart was merry with wine" that he sent for Vashti as a concubine; but she, looking on herself as a legitimate wife, would not come.
Esther chapter 5:4,8,12, shows that it was no impropriety for wives to be at banquets in front of other men (besides their husbands).
A Little Bit about Mordecai:
Mordecai held a position among the lower officials of the royal palace This epic event takes place in the " Return Stage" of Israel returning from the 70 years of captivity YAHWEH IMPOSED UPON THEM prophesied by Jeremiah in Jeremiah 29:10. For whatever the reason, her family was one of the many that chose to stay in Persia rather than accept the edict by Cyrus the Great that freed all Jews and permitting them to leave Persia and return to Jerusalem to rebuild the city and repair the walls and gates and their lives. Cyrus even financed their exodus .
A Little Bit About Esther: The woman who ultimately replaced Vashti as Queen
Esther's persona in the Bible projects her as a "woman" of deep piety, faith, courage, patriotism, and caution, all combined with her resolution to "lay" her life on the line for safety of her people. She was a dutiful daughter to her adopted father Mordecai, docile and obedient to his counsels, and anxious to share the king's favor with him for the good of the Jewish people. There must have been a singular grace and charm in her aspect and manners, since "she obtained favor in the sight of all them that looked upon her" (Esther 2:15). That she was raised up as an instrument in the hand of God to avert the destruction of the Jewish people, and to afford them protection and forward their wealth and peace in their captivity,
The Storyline occurs in the time of the Med-Persian Empire in the backdrop of a 180 day festival hosted by the King of Persia Ahasuerus in celebration of 'his" splendor and that of the conquering empire. Ahasuerus is concluding the half year festivities with an additional week public celebration as he prepares to go to war with Greece. The king was feeling "uninhibited, because he had been drinking wine all throughout the celebrations..
Public Display: "A Queen's Refusal"
"Queen Vashti also made a feast for the women in the royal palace which belonged to King Ahasuerus. On the seventh day, when the heart of the king was merry with wine, he commanded Mehuman, Biztha, Harbona, Bigtha, Abagtha, Zethar, and Carcas, seven eunuchs who served in the presence of King Ahasuerus, to bring Queen Vashti before the king, wearing her royal crown, in order to show her beauty to the people and the officials, for she was beautiful to behold. But Queen Vashti refused to come at the king's command brought by his eunuchs; therefore the king was furious, and his anger burned within him."
A Royal Decision: What to do About Vashti?
"Then the king said to the wise men who understood the times (for this was the king's manner toward all who knew law and justice, those closest to him being Carshena, Shethar, Admatha, Tarshish, Meres, Marsena, and Memucan, the seven princes of Persia and Media, who had access to the king's presence, and who ranked highest in the kingdom): "What shall we do to Queen Vashti, according to law, because she did not obey the command of King Ahasuerus brought to her by the eunuchs?"
And Memucan answered before the king and the princes: "Queen Vashti has not only wronged the king, but also all the princes, and all the people who are in all the provinces of King Ahasuerus. For the queen's behavior will become known to all women, so that they will despise their husbands in their eyes, when they report, 'King Ahasuerus commanded Queen Vashti to be brought in before him, but she did not come. 'This very day the noble ladies of Persia and Media will say to all the king's officials that they have heard of the behavior of the queen. Thus there will be excessive contempt and wrath the counsel feared a women's movement, and public and private anarchaic rebellion in their households, and in the kingdom.
Counsel's Recommendation: Dethrone Her and let her appear before the King no more!
If it pleases the king, let a royal decree go out from him, and let it be recorded in the laws of the Persians and the Medes, so that it will not be altered, that Vashti shall come no more before King Ahasuerus; and let the king give her royal position to another who is better than she. When the king's decree which he will make is proclaimed throughout all his empire (for it is great), all wives will honor their husbands, both great and small."
"And the reply pleased the king and the princes, and the king did according to the word of Memucan. Then he sent letters to all the king's provinces, to each province in its own script, and to every people in their own language, that each man should be master in his own house, and speak in the language of his own people". (NKJV)
Apparently the men felt so threatened by Vashti's public refusal to the king that they felt the need for the king to denounce her actions and have her dethroned. Not only that, they coaxed the king to also make a public and signed edict declaring all men head of their households and heir wives completely subjective to them in every way. IN searching the Matthew Henry Commentary, I found an interesting commentary concerning what Vashti did and the effect it had in the Persian Empire:
"The proposal which Memucan made, that Vashti should be divorced for her disobedience. Some suggest that he gave this severe advice, and the rest agreed to it, because they knew it would please the king, and would gratify both his passion now and his appetite afterwards".
The Jewish Historian Josephus voiced an somewhat different opinion to the contrary.
According to Josephus, Ahasuerus had a strong affection for Vashti, and would not have put her away for this offence if he could have legally have avoided it; and then we must suppose Memucan, in the advice he gave, other than for political reasons had a sincere regard to see justice done for the public good. Memucan's real reason for his advice was the potential consequence of the queen's disobedience to her husband, if left overlooked, passed by and not adverted would embolden other wives both to disobey their husbands and attempt to exert dominance over them. In essence, tne men of the kingdom feared losing control over their houses because their wives would rebel against them.
Had this unhappy public falling out between the king and his wife been private and remained that way, this schism would have remained with the two of them and the quarrel might have been easily settled privately between them. BUT it happened in the public, and perhaps it is likely the ladies, or some of them that were feasting with the queen agreed with her public refusal, her rebellion would likely have a bad influence upon many if not all the Persian women in the kingdom. If the queen must have her humor, and the king must submit to it (since the houses of private persons commonly take their measures from the courts of princes), the wives would be haughty and imperious and would refuse to obey their husbands, and the poor despised husbands feared this, but couldn't help themselves; for the contentions of a wife are a continual dropping. (Proverbs 19:13) In other words, the husbands and wives will constantly be at odds with each other.
In Proverbs 27:15-16, Solomon put it this way:
a quarrelsome wife is like a constant dripping on a rainy day; restraining her is like restraining the wind or grasping oil with the hand".
When wives despise the very husbands they ought to reverence, there is rarely peace in the house and there is constant contention for dominion over their spouses. The Apostle Paul gives us God's formula for a happy home and a even more happy Church in Ephesians 5: 22-33:
"Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church. For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let each one of you in particular so love his own wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband".
NKJV
A question of ponderance: Was Vashti right for refusing to parade herself before a drunken celebration of Persian men?
Had Vashti complied with the King, she would have had to parade herself naked before these men. Persia was in this time of history a rough, barbaric cruel and crude empire. Unfortunately for the dethroned queen, the celebration was kingdom wide and because the king hosted it, everything the king ordered or asked was under kingdom protocol. She broke kingdom protocol when she refused to come before the king and he drunken court. Had Persia been a country that promoted prevailing moral and social decency, she could have and should have refused.......
Because of Persian protocal.....
Memucan conveyed what would be the good consequence of a kingdom decree against Vashti that she should be divorced by the king. We may suppose that before they proceeded to this extremity, they sent to Vashti to find out if she would yet submit, that is, cry "Peccavi"—I have done wrong, and ask the king's pardon, and that, if she had done so, the mischief of her example would have been effectually prevented, and process would have been stayed; but it is obvious she continued to be obstinate, and insisted upon it as her prerogative to do as she pleased, whether it pleased the king or not, and therefore they gave this judgment against her, that she come no more before the king, and this judgment so ratified as never to be reversed, v. 19.
The consequence of this, it was hoped, would be that the wives would give to their husbands honor, even the wives of the great, notwithstanding their own greatness, and the wives of the small, notwithstanding the husband's meanness (v. 20); and thus every man would bear rule in his own house, as he ought to do, and, the wives being subject, the children and servants would be so too. It is the interest of states and kingdoms to provide that good order be kept in private families.
The edict that passed according to this proposal, signifying that the queen was divorced for contumacy, according to the law, and that, if other wives were in like manner undutiful to their husbands, they must expect to be in like manner disgraced (v. 21,22): were they better than the queen? Whether it was the passion or the policy of the king that was served by this edict, God's providence served its own purpose by it, which was to make way for Esther to the crown.
The Queen Banished
Burning with anger and acting upon the advice of his cronies advisors, Ahasuerus (Xerses) banishes his wife Vashti from his presence forever, a move that was to serve as a warning to any of the women in the kingdom that might follow the example of Vashti and become insubordinate their homes Memucan also persuaded the king to make this a public proclamation kingdom wide..
Esther 1:20-22
"When the king's decree which he will make is proclaimed throughout all his empire (for it is great), all wives will honor their husbands, both great and small."And the reply pleased the king and the princes, and the king did according to the word of Memucan. Then he sent letters to all the king's provinces, to each province in its own script, and to every people in their own language, that each man should be master in his own house, and speak in the language of his own people". NKJV
The Prevaiding Moral of this Passage........Some laws and proclamations prove to be meaningless!
Both God's law and common sense taught this from the foundation of the world. And is it possible that this did not obtain in the Persian empire, previously to this edict?
Esther 1:20 has another clause, That all wives shall give to their husbands honour, both to great and small. This decree was universally understood. This law in reality did nothing.
I suppose the reeal motive of this edict enactment was only made to deprive "honest" Vashti of her crown. In truth, it was to convey "That each woman should speak the language of her husband." If she were even a foreigner, she should be obliged to learn and speak the language of the king. Perhaps maybe there might be some degree of common sense in this, because it would oblige the foreigner to devote much time to study and improvement; and, consequently, to make her a better woman, and a better wife. Who knows if this was part of the purpose for coming up with a decree like this. There seems to be no proof that this was a part of the decree.
Rev. Dr. William Edward Boddie
Esther 1:1-21: "The Banishing of a Queen"
" Now it came to pass in the days of Ahasuerus (this was the Ahasuerus who reigned over one hundred and twenty-seven provinces, from India to Ethiopia), in those days when King Ahasuerus sat on the throne of his kingdom, which was in Shushan the citadel, that in the third year of his reign he made a feast for all his officials and servants — the powers of Persia and Media, the nobles, and the princes of the provinces being before him when he showed the riches of his glorious kingdom and the splendor of his excellent majesty for many days, one hundred and eighty days in all."
"And when these days were completed, the king made a feast lasting seven days for all the people who were present in Shushan the citadel, from great to small, in the court of the garden of the king's palace. There were white and blue linen curtains fastened with cords of fine linen and purple on silver rods and marble pillars; and the couches were of gold and silver on a mosaic pavement of alabaster, turquoise, and white and black marble. And they served drinks in golden vessels, each vessel being different from the other, with royal wine in abundance according to the generosity of the king. In accordance with the law, the drinking was not compulsory; for so the king had ordered all the officers of his household, that they should do according to each man's pleasure."
Introduction: Profiling "Vashti"
According to the Fausset's Bible Dictionary:
Vashti is the Queen of Ahasuerus or Xerxes (Esther chapter 1 and 2). who refused to appear at the king's command, to exhibit her beauty before the king's guests at a banquet; was therefore deposed and repudiated lest a precedent should be given for insubordination of wives to husbands. Vashti may answer to Amestris the queen consort throughout Xerxes' reign, and queen mother under his son and successor-Artaxerxes. it was when his "heart was merry with wine" that he sent for Vashti as a concubine; but she, looking on herself as a legitimate wife, would not come.
Esther chapter 5:4,8,12, shows that it was no impropriety for wives to be at banquets in front of other men (besides their husbands).
A Little Bit about Mordecai:
Mordecai held a position among the lower officials of the royal palace This epic event takes place in the " Return Stage" of Israel returning from the 70 years of captivity YAHWEH IMPOSED UPON THEM prophesied by Jeremiah in Jeremiah 29:10. For whatever the reason, her family was one of the many that chose to stay in Persia rather than accept the edict by Cyrus the Great that freed all Jews and permitting them to leave Persia and return to Jerusalem to rebuild the city and repair the walls and gates and their lives. Cyrus even financed their exodus .
A Little Bit About Esther: The woman who ultimately replaced Vashti as Queen
Esther's persona in the Bible projects her as a "woman" of deep piety, faith, courage, patriotism, and caution, all combined with her resolution to "lay" her life on the line for safety of her people. She was a dutiful daughter to her adopted father Mordecai, docile and obedient to his counsels, and anxious to share the king's favor with him for the good of the Jewish people. There must have been a singular grace and charm in her aspect and manners, since "she obtained favor in the sight of all them that looked upon her" (Esther 2:15). That she was raised up as an instrument in the hand of God to avert the destruction of the Jewish people, and to afford them protection and forward their wealth and peace in their captivity,
The Storyline occurs in the time of the Med-Persian Empire in the backdrop of a 180 day festival hosted by the King of Persia Ahasuerus in celebration of 'his" splendor and that of the conquering empire. Ahasuerus is concluding the half year festivities with an additional week public celebration as he prepares to go to war with Greece. The king was feeling "uninhibited, because he had been drinking wine all throughout the celebrations..
Public Display: "A Queen's Refusal"
"Queen Vashti also made a feast for the women in the royal palace which belonged to King Ahasuerus. On the seventh day, when the heart of the king was merry with wine, he commanded Mehuman, Biztha, Harbona, Bigtha, Abagtha, Zethar, and Carcas, seven eunuchs who served in the presence of King Ahasuerus, to bring Queen Vashti before the king, wearing her royal crown, in order to show her beauty to the people and the officials, for she was beautiful to behold. But Queen Vashti refused to come at the king's command brought by his eunuchs; therefore the king was furious, and his anger burned within him."
A Royal Decision: What to do About Vashti?
"Then the king said to the wise men who understood the times (for this was the king's manner toward all who knew law and justice, those closest to him being Carshena, Shethar, Admatha, Tarshish, Meres, Marsena, and Memucan, the seven princes of Persia and Media, who had access to the king's presence, and who ranked highest in the kingdom): "What shall we do to Queen Vashti, according to law, because she did not obey the command of King Ahasuerus brought to her by the eunuchs?"
And Memucan answered before the king and the princes: "Queen Vashti has not only wronged the king, but also all the princes, and all the people who are in all the provinces of King Ahasuerus. For the queen's behavior will become known to all women, so that they will despise their husbands in their eyes, when they report, 'King Ahasuerus commanded Queen Vashti to be brought in before him, but she did not come. 'This very day the noble ladies of Persia and Media will say to all the king's officials that they have heard of the behavior of the queen. Thus there will be excessive contempt and wrath the counsel feared a women's movement, and public and private anarchaic rebellion in their households, and in the kingdom.
Counsel's Recommendation: Dethrone Her and let her appear before the King no more!
If it pleases the king, let a royal decree go out from him, and let it be recorded in the laws of the Persians and the Medes, so that it will not be altered, that Vashti shall come no more before King Ahasuerus; and let the king give her royal position to another who is better than she. When the king's decree which he will make is proclaimed throughout all his empire (for it is great), all wives will honor their husbands, both great and small."
"And the reply pleased the king and the princes, and the king did according to the word of Memucan. Then he sent letters to all the king's provinces, to each province in its own script, and to every people in their own language, that each man should be master in his own house, and speak in the language of his own people". (NKJV)
Apparently the men felt so threatened by Vashti's public refusal to the king that they felt the need for the king to denounce her actions and have her dethroned. Not only that, they coaxed the king to also make a public and signed edict declaring all men head of their households and heir wives completely subjective to them in every way. IN searching the Matthew Henry Commentary, I found an interesting commentary concerning what Vashti did and the effect it had in the Persian Empire:
"The proposal which Memucan made, that Vashti should be divorced for her disobedience. Some suggest that he gave this severe advice, and the rest agreed to it, because they knew it would please the king, and would gratify both his passion now and his appetite afterwards".
The Jewish Historian Josephus voiced an somewhat different opinion to the contrary.
According to Josephus, Ahasuerus had a strong affection for Vashti, and would not have put her away for this offence if he could have legally have avoided it; and then we must suppose Memucan, in the advice he gave, other than for political reasons had a sincere regard to see justice done for the public good. Memucan's real reason for his advice was the potential consequence of the queen's disobedience to her husband, if left overlooked, passed by and not adverted would embolden other wives both to disobey their husbands and attempt to exert dominance over them. In essence, tne men of the kingdom feared losing control over their houses because their wives would rebel against them.
Had this unhappy public falling out between the king and his wife been private and remained that way, this schism would have remained with the two of them and the quarrel might have been easily settled privately between them. BUT it happened in the public, and perhaps it is likely the ladies, or some of them that were feasting with the queen agreed with her public refusal, her rebellion would likely have a bad influence upon many if not all the Persian women in the kingdom. If the queen must have her humor, and the king must submit to it (since the houses of private persons commonly take their measures from the courts of princes), the wives would be haughty and imperious and would refuse to obey their husbands, and the poor despised husbands feared this, but couldn't help themselves; for the contentions of a wife are a continual dropping. (Proverbs 19:13) In other words, the husbands and wives will constantly be at odds with each other.
In Proverbs 27:15-16, Solomon put it this way:
a quarrelsome wife is like a constant dripping on a rainy day; restraining her is like restraining the wind or grasping oil with the hand".
When wives despise the very husbands they ought to reverence, there is rarely peace in the house and there is constant contention for dominion over their spouses. The Apostle Paul gives us God's formula for a happy home and a even more happy Church in Ephesians 5: 22-33:
"Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church. For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let each one of you in particular so love his own wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband".
NKJV
A question of ponderance: Was Vashti right for refusing to parade herself before a drunken celebration of Persian men?
Had Vashti complied with the King, she would have had to parade herself naked before these men. Persia was in this time of history a rough, barbaric cruel and crude empire. Unfortunately for the dethroned queen, the celebration was kingdom wide and because the king hosted it, everything the king ordered or asked was under kingdom protocol. She broke kingdom protocol when she refused to come before the king and he drunken court. Had Persia been a country that promoted prevailing moral and social decency, she could have and should have refused.......
Because of Persian protocal.....
Memucan conveyed what would be the good consequence of a kingdom decree against Vashti that she should be divorced by the king. We may suppose that before they proceeded to this extremity, they sent to Vashti to find out if she would yet submit, that is, cry "Peccavi"—I have done wrong, and ask the king's pardon, and that, if she had done so, the mischief of her example would have been effectually prevented, and process would have been stayed; but it is obvious she continued to be obstinate, and insisted upon it as her prerogative to do as she pleased, whether it pleased the king or not, and therefore they gave this judgment against her, that she come no more before the king, and this judgment so ratified as never to be reversed, v. 19.
The consequence of this, it was hoped, would be that the wives would give to their husbands honor, even the wives of the great, notwithstanding their own greatness, and the wives of the small, notwithstanding the husband's meanness (v. 20); and thus every man would bear rule in his own house, as he ought to do, and, the wives being subject, the children and servants would be so too. It is the interest of states and kingdoms to provide that good order be kept in private families.
The edict that passed according to this proposal, signifying that the queen was divorced for contumacy, according to the law, and that, if other wives were in like manner undutiful to their husbands, they must expect to be in like manner disgraced (v. 21,22): were they better than the queen? Whether it was the passion or the policy of the king that was served by this edict, God's providence served its own purpose by it, which was to make way for Esther to the crown.
The Queen Banished
Burning with anger and acting upon the advice of his cronies advisors, Ahasuerus (Xerses) banishes his wife Vashti from his presence forever, a move that was to serve as a warning to any of the women in the kingdom that might follow the example of Vashti and become insubordinate their homes Memucan also persuaded the king to make this a public proclamation kingdom wide..
Esther 1:20-22
"When the king's decree which he will make is proclaimed throughout all his empire (for it is great), all wives will honor their husbands, both great and small."And the reply pleased the king and the princes, and the king did according to the word of Memucan. Then he sent letters to all the king's provinces, to each province in its own script, and to every people in their own language, that each man should be master in his own house, and speak in the language of his own people". NKJV
The Prevaiding Moral of this Passage........Some laws and proclamations prove to be meaningless!
Both God's law and common sense taught this from the foundation of the world. And is it possible that this did not obtain in the Persian empire, previously to this edict?
Esther 1:20 has another clause, That all wives shall give to their husbands honour, both to great and small. This decree was universally understood. This law in reality did nothing.
I suppose the reeal motive of this edict enactment was only made to deprive "honest" Vashti of her crown. In truth, it was to convey "That each woman should speak the language of her husband." If she were even a foreigner, she should be obliged to learn and speak the language of the king. Perhaps maybe there might be some degree of common sense in this, because it would oblige the foreigner to devote much time to study and improvement; and, consequently, to make her a better woman, and a better wife. Who knows if this was part of the purpose for coming up with a decree like this. There seems to be no proof that this was a part of the decree.
Rev. Dr. William Edward Boddie
RSS Feed