(“A QUEEN IS DEPOSED”)

Esther 1:1-22 (NASU)

“If it pleases the king, let a royal edict be issued by him and let it be written in the laws of Persia and Media so that it cannot be repealed, that Vashti may no longer come into the presence of King Ahasuerus, and let the king give her royal position to another who is more worthy than she.”

(Esther 1:19)

(A) THE BOOK OF ESTHER

(1) The Book of Esther is named after its principle female character¹ – a Jewish exile, living in or near the Persian city of Susa – who, through a series of events over which she had little or no control, became Queen of Persia – and then later, was instrumental is saving the Jewish people from annihilation.

And yet, the book isn’t really about Esther – it’s about God, even though He’s never mentioned directly by name.² The story involves Esther, to be sure – but it’s really part of the Bible’s larger testimony about how God works (often behind the scenes, through ordinary circumstances) to bring about His Sovereign purposes for His covenant people.²

(2) The Book of Esther is what we call a narrative – which means it’s a story, not a doctrinal dissertation. Hence, it differs greatly from books like Romans and Ephesians where almost every verse can be studied for it’s doctrinal content. We dare NOT do that with the Book of Esther – indeed, we must be careful about trying to draw TOO MANY doctrinal or even practical applications from this book – especially since one of the basic rules of sound biblical interpretation says that narratives should always be interpreted in the light of “teaching” passages³ found elsewhere in Scripture, rather than making them (i.e. the narrative) the basis for some doctrinal standard or practical application that has no biblical support anywhere else.

(3) Because of this lack of obvious doctrinal content, there is a tendency to want to try and fill in the gaps (as it were) by moralizing about the actions of the story’s main characters – like, for example, Queen Vashti’s “refusal” to obey “the king’s command” to “display her beauty” before his drunken guests⁴ (c.f. Esther 1:10-12).

Hence, narratives present us with the same temptation as parables – in this regard, that we want to go beyond the basic point – we want to try and find hidden lessons within the story or the actions of its characters (when they may not be any hidden lessons) – or we want to impress our class or congregation with how insightful we are, so we spiritualize narrative passages by assigning meanings to their different parts that aren’t there – much like Augustine once did with the story of the Good Samaritan by giving every detail, including the “inn”, and “the innkeeper”, and the “oil and wine” the Samaritan poured into the mans’ wounds a meaning – when the point of the story is that you and I should “be a neighbor” to the people around us, just like the Samaritan was to the man he found lying alongside the road between Jerusalem and Jericho (c.f. Luke 10:29-37).

I’m going to do my best to try and avoid these interpretive pitfalls – and to the degree that I’m successful, we will be moving through the Book of Esther at a rapid pace (at least “rapid” for me).

(B) THE KING THROWS A BANQUET

(1) The Book of Esther opens, then: “in the third year” of the “reign” of “King Ahasuerus”, ruler of the Persia-Media empire (c.f. Esther 1:1-3). Note the date – it’s one of three we’re given – the second coming in chapter two verse sixteen, which tells us Esther became Queen in “the seventh year of (King Ahasuerus’) reign” (c.f. Esther 2:16) – while the third chapter verse seven, tells us Haman cast “Pur” to determine the most favorable time to carry out his plot to exterminate the Jews, “in the twelfth year of King Ahasuerus” (c.f. Esther 3:7).

For the moment, I would simply draw your attention to the fact that there is a four-year gap between the time Vashti was deposed as Queen and Esther took her place. The question is, why was there a four-year delay? The Book of Esther never answers that question – but history may give us a clue.

(2) We know from ancient historical records that early in his reign, Ahasuerus (also known by his Greek name, Xerxes)⁵ initiated a disastrous military campaign against Greece – i.e. he attacked them, and suffered a crushing defeat.⁷ Hence, many think the “180” day festival spoken of in verses three and four (c.f. Esther 1:3-4) was really a planning session in preparation for this attack – especially since verse three says “the army officers of Persia and Media” (v. 3) were among those present. If that’s the case, then the prolonged display of “the riches of (the king’s) glory and the splendor of his great majesty” (v. 4) described in verse four would have been intended to bolster the confidence of the king’s subordinates – and convince them he had both the ability and resources⁶ needed to successfully carry out his invasion plan.

At the end of this sixth month strategy meeting King Ahasuerus gave a seven day banquet, which is described in verses five through eight (c.f. Esther 1:5-8), to celebrate the completion of those plans.⁶ As soon as the party was over, the king’s ill-fated military campaign probably got underway. However, these things took time – for military deployments in those days were not nearly as fast as today. Combine that with the time it took to go through the process of finding a new Queen, which may not have even started until after the king returned from his defeat at the hands of the Greeks (c.f. Esther 2:1) – and it’s easy to see how four years could have passed between Vashti being deposed, and Esther being crowned.

(3) Verses six through eight describe the lavishness of that seven day banquet (c.f. Esther 1:6-8) – the national colors⁸ of the Persian Empire, i.e. “white and violet” were everywhere (c.f. Esther 1:6) – “gold and silver” were in abundance – “marble columns”, and “mosaic pavement(s)” inlaid⁹ with “mother-of-pearl and (other) precious stones” (c.f. Esther 1:6) were all meant to impress the king’s guests with the greatness of his wealth, and splendor and power.⁸

Since it was “a banquet” (c.f. Esther 1:5), there was undoubtedly a great deal of feasting – however, the author of the Book of Esther never specifically mentions food. What he does mention is the drinking – namely that “drinks were served in golden vessels of various kinds ... (that) the royal wine was plentiful” ... and that everyone could drink as much as they wanted (c.f. Esther 1:7-8).

The description is meant to impress us¹⁰ with the greatness of grandeur of the Persian Empire and its king – Ahasuerus was sparing no expense – he was powerful, he was wealthy, he was generous, and he knew how to throw a party!

Meanwhile, verse nine tells us “Queen Vashti” was also giving a “banquet for the women” in another part of the royal “palace” (c.f. Esther 1:9).

(4) Let’s pause at this point in the narrative to briefly remind ourselves of what Scripture says (outside the Book of Esther) about the plans of kings and nations and men in general – namely, that all such plans are subject to God’s sovereign rule – that He is in absolute control of human history,¹¹ whether we see His hand at work or not – that His omnipotence extends to all the events that make up history, whether great or small – so that no man, or king, or nation succeeds or fails except by divine design. This is a great mystery, to be sure – especially when we consider some of the evil things wicked men are successful in doing – but it is also one of the basic, non-negotiable doctrines of the Christian faith!

For example, the Book of Psalms says: “The Lord nullifies the counsel of the nations; He frustrates the plans of the peoples” (c.f. Psalm 33:10) – in the Book Isaiah, God says: “Devise a plan, but it will be thwarted; state a proposal, but it will not stand ...” (c.f. Isaiah 8:10) – the Book of Proverbs says that “the lot is cast into the lap, but its every decisions is from the Lord” (c.f. Proverbs 16:33) – while the Book of James reminds us that whenever we are making any plans we should always say: “If the Lord wills, we will live and also do this or that” (c.f. James 4:13-15).

King Ahasuerus took six months (c.f. Esther 1:4) to make his plans for invading Greece – but all the gold and silver – all the marble and mother-of-pearl (c.f. Esther 1:6) – all the army officers, and nobles, and princes (c.f. Esther 1:3) couldn’t guarantee success. Not even “180 days” (c.f. Esther 1:4) of committee meetings and strategy sessions could ensure victory. In fact, as we’re about to see, Ahasuerus – for all his political and military power – couldn’t even make his Queen leave her banquet and come show off her beauty.

(C) THE QUEEN REFUSES TO COMPLY

(1) It was the last day of Ahasuerus’ climatic seven-day “send off” party, and the king was feeling the effects of all the “wine” he had been drinking. The Book of Ecclesiastes says, “wine makes life merry” (c.f. Ecclesiastes 10:10) – but the Book of Proverbs also says that, “wine is a mocker, (and) strong drink a brawler, and whoever is intoxicated by it is not wise” (c.f. Proverbs 20:1) – and that, “it is not for kings to drink wine, or for rulers to desire strong drink, (lest they) forget what is decreed and pervert the rights of ... the afflicted” (c.f. Proverbs 31:4-5).

I assume it was an inebriated Ahasuerus who “commanded ... (his) seven eunuchs ... to bring Queen Vashti ... with her royal crown in order to display her beauty to the people and the princes” (c.f. Esther 1:10-11). Someone has observed (rightly, I think) that the king had been showing off everything else he had – so, on the final day of the banquet he decided to show off his wife, his queen⁴ – for the last part of verse eleven tells us “she was (a very) beautiful (woman)” (c.f. Esther 1:11).

(2) Verse twelve tells us “Queen Vashti refused to come” (c.f. Esther 1:12) – that she “refused” to obey the king’s command to “display her beauty” (c.f. Esther 1:11). In effect, she told her husband the king, “No!” – and apparently neither he nor his seven big, strong eunuchs could make her comply. One writer put it like this: “A woman stood up and said ‘No!’ and the empire that was preparing to attack Greece was powerless to enforce its will.”¹²

What the Book of Esther doesn’t tell us is why Queen Vashti said “no”. But, as is often the case, that hasn’t stopped people from speculating. Some say she refused simply because it would have been undignified for a woman of her stature to parade around in her royal finery12 before a banquet hall full of drunken men13 – others say she refused to appear because she was pregnant14 – while one of the oldest and most persistent explanations says the king ordered her appear before his guests wearing nothing but “her royal crown” (c.f. Esther 1:11).

(3) There has been numerous attempts to draw moral lessons (not necessarily spiritual or biblical lessons) from Vashti’s refusal to obey Ahasuerus’ summons.⁴ One study guide, for example, uses the incident to ask this question: “What do you think a godly woman should do if her husband gives her command like the one Xerxes gave Vashti?” (Duh!) – and then comes the follow up question: “Should a woman accept orders from her husband at all?”¹⁵

I would suggest that the Book of Esther is not the place to try and build a biblical ethic regarding the roles of men and women in Christian marriage – nor should the behavior of pagans be used as a moral pattern for Christ’s people. There are other places in Scripture that speak directly and doctrinally to these issues, providing us with the answers we need – like Ephesians chapter five (c.f. Ephesians 5:22-33) and First Peter chapter three (c.f. I Peter 3:1-7). Even if we admire Vashti’s spunk and detest the king’s drunken command, Esther chapter one is not the sort of biblical passage on which to try and build a sermon about marriage⁴ – which many people have tried to do. As we noted earlier, it’s a narrative – and while one might be able to use narratives to ILLUSTRATE doctrinal truths taught elsewhere in Scripture, they are not the sorts of passages on which to actually BUILD a doctrinal position.

Besides, the role of men and women in marriage is not even the point of the passage – the purpose of this passage is to lay the groundwork for what follows – namely, how it was that Esther became the Queen of Persia. The purpose of the passage is to show us how God was already working to preserve His covenant people from destruction almost a full decade before the threat even existed in time (compare Esther 1:2; 2:17; 3:7).

(D) A SOCIAL AND POLITICAL CRISIS

(1) Whatever her reasons were, Queen Vashti’s refusal to comply not only angered the king (c.f. Esther 1:12), it set off something of a social and political crisis – one that can be summed up by this question (verse fifteen), “what (should) done with Queen Vashti, (since) she did not obey the command of King Ahasuerus ...?” (c.f. Esther 1:13-15).

Had this incident happened privately, it’s possible the king might have overlooked it. But since it happened in front of “all the princes, and army officers, and nobles of the Persian Empire” (c.f. Esther 1:3, 5), it was viewed as a public insult to the king’s pride, and grandeur, and even his authority – hence, something had to be done. The only question was, “what”?

(2) And so, a royal conference¹⁰ of the supposed “wise men” of the empire was convened to deal with the crisis – men who supposedly “understood the times” – and “knew law and justice” (c.f. Esther 1:13). But instead of dealing with this incident in a wise and sensible manner, these men proceeded to add fuel to the royal fire by telling Ahasuerus “Queen Vashti had not only wronged him, she had also wronged all the princes and peoples of the nation” (c.f. Esther 1:16). Indeed, one advisor in particular, named “Memucan”, suggested that once the queen’s conduct became known to the general public, “all the women” of the empire would take their cue from Vashti and start rebelling against their husbands (c.f. Esther 1:17-18) – with the result that “there will be plenty of contempt and anger” (v. 18) throughout the realm.

(3) To keep this from happening, the king must do something to reestablish his authority as quickly as possible – so Memucan offered a plan – “If it pleases the king, let a royal edict be issued by him and let it be written in the laws of Persia and Media so that it cannot be repealed, that Vashti may no longer come into the presence of King Ahasuerus, and let the king give her royal position to another who is more worthy than she” (c.f. Esther 1:19). Memucan went on to theorize that once people read this edict, “all the women of the empire would realize Vashti had been punished for her insubordination, and would be afraid to dishonor their husbands in a similar way” (c.f. Esther 1:20).

Of course the whole matter was being blown way out of proportion. There was no crisis – just a king’s wounded vanity. And, it’s unlikely the knowledge of Vashti’s refusal to comply would have had much (if any) impact on such a male dominated society.¹³ Nevertheless, the last two verses of the chapter tell us Memucan’s counsel “pleased the king” – and that he ordered an edict to be written and disseminated, that said: “every man should be master in his own house” (c.f. Esther 1:21-22). (Imagine where moralizing about that verse might take us!)

(E) SOME FINAL OBSERVATIONS

(1) As we bring our study of Esther chapter one to a close, there are a couple of things we need to note – the first being several pieces of information we’ve been given that play an important role in the rest of the story – like the volatile, unpredictable nature of King Ahasuerus. Being his queen was no picnic – nor did it guarantee any special favors. This will become a factor later on, when Esther prepares to enter the king’s court unannounced (c.f. Esther 4:11; 5:1).

Then there’s the fact that the laws of Media-Persia could not be repealed (c.f. Esther 1:19) – not even by the king.¹⁶ It doesn’t matter what you and I think about that rule of law – it was a fact of life in Esther’s day (as well as Daniel’s – c.f. Daniel 6:5-9) – and it plays a pivotal role in explaining how Esther and the Jews handled Haman’s plot to have them all killed (c.f. Esther 8:8-12).

Finally, there’s the matter of the Persian communication system, whereby important edicts could be circulated throughout the whole empire in a relatively short amount of time¹⁶ (c.f. Esther 1:20-22). This, too, plays an important role in Haman’s plot to exterminate the Jews (c.f. Esther 3:12-15), and in how this crisis was finally averted (c.f. Esther 8:9-10, 14).

(2) The Book of Esther raises numerous moralistic issues for those who are inclined to go in that interpretive direction.¹⁷ By “moralistic” I mean using the actions of the story’s main characters to try and establish certain standards of moral conduct, or teach certain moral lessons. Those issues or lessons include (but are not limited to) – when to obey and not to obey those in positions of authority over us¹⁸ – the roles of headship and submission in marriage – the evils of drunkenness (which I mentioned in passing) – extravagance and waste in government – and whether or not governing officials should try and legislate morality, or standards of personal conduct, to mention just five.

(3) I’ve not chosen to do a moralistic interpretation of the Book of Esther, because I don’t think that’s the purpose of the book – and because I don’t think it’s wise to use narrative passages of Scripture in that way.

What we have here in chapter one of the Book of Esther, then, is some scene preparation for what comes next – some ground work for being able to see God’s providential hand at work in human history. It’s a messy situation, to be sure – but God is not at the mercy of our messes – nor is He at the mercy of kings and nations. His ability to take care of His covenant people cannot be derailed by petulant kings, drunken parties, or political stupidity.¹⁹

One writer put it like this: “Why did Vashti throw away her position and privilege for a noble but predictably futile gesture? Why did Ahasuerus make his foolish demand in the first place? And what in the world were those so-called wise men of the empire thinking when they decided replacing Vashti with another woman would be better than finding a way to resolve the offense? On the one hand, all these events can be explained as normal human activity, with no miraculous components whatsoever. And yet, all of them are necessary to make way for the process by which Esther will rise to the position where she can use her power and influence to protect God’s people from a powerful enemy. Is all of this just coincidence?”²⁰ Hardly! Rather, all these things are by divine design – they are all the result of God’s hand working behind the scenes (as it were), ordering everything “according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will” (c.f. Ephesians 1:11). Or, as someone has said: “Just because we can’t see God working doesn’t mean He isn’t.”²⁰