Special Saturday Bible Study: The Book of Esther

Esther requires a substantial introduction, worth a post to itself, so I figured I'd get it out of the way. It was probably written in the 4th Century BCE.  It comes here because we're following the order of the protestant Old Testament, but in the Tanakh it comes near the end. The version in the Septuagint differs considerably from the Masoretic text, and is not really considered a translation but a retelling. 

Esther is notable for a few reasons, not least that it is one of two books of the Bible that does not mention God, the other being the Song of Songs or so-called Song of Solomon. (Although Solomon almost certainly had nothing to do with it.) Despite the complete absence of any religious content, it is important to contemporary Judaism as the basis for the festival of Purim, and it is read in the synagogue during the holiday. It has obvious resonance because it is the story of a planned holocaust of the Jews, which is averted. The Jews end up turning the tables on their would-be persecutors.

It is also notable because it is probably explicitly a work of fiction. It was not meant to be taken as a historical narrative, but as what we would today call a novella. The setting is also unusual -- it takes place in the Persian capital of Shusha, during the reign of a fictitious emperor called Ahasuerus. There was no emperor of that name, so scholars and translators who were determined to conclude that this is historical fact have identified him with either Xerxes or Artaxerxes II. The translators of the New International Version, which we will be reading, call him Xerxes, maybe just because he's the most famous Achaemenid emperor, specifically because he tried and failed to conquer Greece. But we know this story is fiction because the events are preposterous, and there is no corroborating historical record.

 

Nevertheless, like all historical fiction the author does try to give the setting verisimilitude. The protagonist Esther is ethnically Jewish, but does not practice the Jewish religion, which is in fact never mentioned. The story presumes that there are many such ethnic Jews living in diaspora in the empire, who did not chose to return to Judah, and as that is also an implication in Nehemiah we can presume it to be a historical fact. It would be impossible for them to practice the Jewish religion because at the time, religious practice required proximity to the Temple. There were no synagogues, rabbis, Sabbath services or davening with a minyan. The only way to practice the religion was to participate in the sacrificial rituals at the Temple in Jerusalem, deliver the required swag to the priests, and participate in the pilgrimage festivals. If you aren't living in Judah, you can't do any of that. So the lack of mention of God is basically a fortiori. He's in the Temple. We aren't there.

Although the story depicts a couple of highly agentic women, the society it depicts is extraordinarily sexist. The extent to which the author intends to protest that can be debated, but it may be interpreted that way, along with the more obvious celebration of Jewish ethnicity and resistance -- but as a sub-national group. The book does not challenge the power or legitimacy of the emperor, nor does it refer to the province of Judah.