Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Esther 1:16 - 1:16
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
The counsel of the wise men. Est 1:16. Memucan, who was the last mentioned in Est 1:14, comes forward as spokesman for the rest, and declares before the king and the princes, i.e., in a solemn assembly, and evidently as the result of a previous joint consultation: Vashti the queen has not done wrong to the king alone, but also to all the princes and all the people, because the example of the queen will lead all the Median and Persian wives to despise their husbands. Therefore an irrevocable edict is to be published decreeing the divorce of Queen Vashti, and this law published throughout the whole realm, that all wives may show honour to their husbands. Vashti has not transgressed against the king alone (Est 1:16), but against all the princes and people in all the provinces of King Ahashverosh (Est 1:16). In what respect, then, is the latter assertion true? We are told Est 1:17 and Est 1:18. “For the deed of the queen will come abroad to (עַל for אֶל) all women, to bring their husbands into contempt in their eyes (the infin. לְהַבְזֹות stating the result), while they will say,” etc. (the suffix of בְּאָמְרָם relates to the women, who will appeal to the disobedience of the queen). Est 1:18. “And this day (i.e., already) the princesses of the Persians and Medians, who hear of the act of the queen (דָּבָר, not the word, but the thing, i.e., her rejection of her husband's command), will tell it to all the princes of the king, and (there will be) enough contempt and provocation. קֶצֶף is an outburst of anger; here, therefore, a provocation to wrath. Bertheau makes the words זק בז וּכְדֵי the object of תֹּאמַרְנָה, which, after the long parenthesis, is united to the copula by w, and for, “to speak contempt and wrath,” reads: to speak contemptuously in wrath. But this change cannot be substantiated. The expression, to speak wrath, is indeed unexampled, but that is no reason for making קֶצֶף stand for בְּקֶצֶף, the very adoption of such an ellipsis showing, that this explanation is inadmissible. The words must be taken alone, as an independent clause, which may be readily completed by יִהְיֶה: and contempt and wrath will be according to abundance. כְּדַי is a litotes for: more than enough. The object of תֹּאמַרְנָה must be supplied from the context: it - that is, what the queen said to her husband. In the former verse Memucan was speaking of all women; here (Est 1:18) he speaks only of the princesses of the Persians and Medes, because these are staying in the neighbourhood of the court, and will immediately hear of the matter, and “after the manner of the court ladies and associates of a queen will quickly follow, and appeal to her example” (Berth.).