And it came to pass in the days of
Achashverosh, he was the Achashverosh who ruled from India to Ethiopia, over a
hundred and twenty-seven provinces.
QUESTIONS
Generally,
the phrase “and it came to pass in the days” is used to recount an occurrence
that took place in the life of the person or during the period mentioned and is
a method of dating that occurrence. Here, though, the usage is
self-referential, using the lifetime of Achashverosh to tell us about
Achashverosh himself.
The phrase
“he was the Achashverosh who ruled from India to Ethiopia” seems superfluous.
We do not know of any other Achashverosh that this could be coming to exclude.
What does this phrase teach us?
Throughout
the entire Megillah, the name “King Achashverosh” is used. This verse is the
only one to use the name
Achashverosh
without the appellation “King.” Why?
If the
absence of “King” is to tell us that he was not yet the monarch, then why are
we told that he “ruled from India to Ethiopia”?
The phrase
“who ruled” is written as in the present tense, hamolech, rather than the past tense, asher malach, as we would expect. Why?
COMMENTARY
An
understanding of Megillas Esther requires a brief introduction into how
monarchies functioned when Egyptians, Medes, and Persians controlled the world
stage.
There were
two types of monarchies. The first was a monarchy in which the king was elected
by the people. The second type of monarchy was rule by force, in which the king
conquered the country and became its ruler.
The powers of
the king in the first type of monarchy were limited. The limits of his powers
were legislated at the time of his election. Upon taking office, the king swore
to follow the laws and practices of the country. In the second type of
monarchy, however, the powers of the king were unlimited. Though he might seek
the advice of ministers, he did what he wanted, changing the laws of the
country as he saw fit.
There were
five major, practical differences between these two types of monarchies:
- In the
limited monarchy, the king was the head of state who legislated and was
responsible for leading the country in its wars. The people, in turn, pledged
their allegiance, accepting their duties to the king and agreeing to pay taxes
for the mutual welfare of the entire populace. In the unlimited monarchy,
however, the country was totally subservient to the king, and its people were
his slaves.
- The
national treasuries in the limited monarchy belonged to the state. In the
unlimited monarchy, they belonged to the king himself.
- The king that
ruled in a limited monarchy was not free to make major policy decisions without
the approval of the country’s ministers. The unlimited monarch had no such
restrictions.
- The limited
monarch was bound by the laws of the country. The unlimited monarch could
change the laws as he wished.
- The capital
city could not be changed in a limited monarchy; the king had to rule from the
same city as his forebears. The unlimited monarch could change his capital city
as and when he wanted.
With this
introduction we can proceed to the Purim story. Achashverosh was originally a
commoner who, through his wealth, gained control over Media and Persia until he
eventually conquered one hundred and twenty-seven countries. These had all been
provinces of the Babylonian empire which had Babylon as its capital city, and
not Shushan.
In order to
consolidate his control, he married Vashti, granddaughter of Nevuchadnetzar,
the former emperor of the Babylonian empire, and heiress to the throne. Now his
position was doubly assured. His wife was successor to the throne and he,
himself, had conquered the empire. If his claim to power rested on his
conquest, his dominion would be unlimited; if, however, it was based on his
wife’s claim to the throne, the monarch’s power would be limited. Originally,
the provinces of the empire had acceded to Achashverosh’s dominion in the
belief that his claim to power rested on his wife’s inheritance of the throne
and that his monarchy was, consequently, limited in power. Achashverosh,
though, wanted limitless power, and this was his prime motive in moving the
capital city to Shushan, in hosting his huge banquet, and in commanding Vashti
to appear before him. As we shall see, all these were cunning strategies to
achieve this goal.
The name
“Achashverosh” is used without the appellation “King” to tell us that he was
not from royal descent and that his rise to power was not gradual, which would
have given time for people to forget his humble origins, but it came to pass in the days of Achashverosh,
when he was still a commoner. In those same days he became the Achashverosh who ruled from India to Ethiopia – his conquest
happened so quickly that nobody remembered which province he had conquered
first. That explains why the present tense is used – people could not recollect
what he used to control. It all happened so quickly that people could only
remember that Achashverosh the commoner now
ruled over a hundred and twenty-seven
provinces.
Buy The Malbim Esther at a special online price at www.targum.com
