translated by J. A. F. Gregg, in R. H. Charles's Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (1913)

The Book of Esther is unique among the Hebrew scriptures for never once naming God — yet the Greek version that circulated among the Jews of Egypt could not leave it that way. Six passages survive only in Greek, entirely absent from the Hebrew text: a symbolic dream given to Mordecai and its interpretation, the full wording of both royal decrees that the Hebrew book only summarizes, and the prayers Mordecai and Esther offer in the hours before Esther risks her life before the king. Where the Hebrew narrative is famously reticent about faith, these additions are saturated with it — God is named, invoked, and shown acting openly at every turn. Scholars place their composition in Ptolemaic Egypt, a century or two after the Hebrew story took shape, the work of Greek-speaking Jews who wanted their favorite heroine's story to speak more plainly of the God they trusted to save her people.

Introductory Note (1913, J. A. F. Gregg)

1. Character of the Additions

The Additions to Esther consist of six passages (containing 107 verses not in the Hebrew text), inserted in the LXX text by way of amplification of subjects referred to in the canonical chapters.

It cannot be said that these Additions, which are imaginative reconstructions of a forgotten past, are of great interest or importance. Perhaps as much as two centuries separate their date from that of the canonical portions of Esther, and they emanate from a different centre of Jewish life and thought, which possessed no independent sources of historical information.

Any interest, therefore, that these fragments possess lies not in their power to enlarge our knowledge of the story of Esther, but in the reflection they offer of the religious development of the circle in which they originated.

If we are to attach any weight to the postscript found in the LXX (Esther xi. 1) — and Ryssel's reason for rejecting its witness is not sufficient — the translation of canonical Esther dates from not later than 114 B.C.; but it seems unlikely that the Additions were incorporated with the translated portions until after this postscript was appended. The Additions may not all be the work of one author, but they are not translations, and Greek was their original language. It is probable that the Additions, with their slightly Egyptian flavour (cf. the use of ἀδελφός in D 9, φίλοι in E 5, the application of the word "Macedonian" to Haman in E 10, and ἐκτιθέναι in E 19), were composed in Egypt, where the veneration for the canonical book was naturally not so high as in Palestine, rather than in Palestine by Egyptian Jews temporarily residing there.

But were the Additions made immediately upon the reception of the translation of Esther in Egypt, or only after some time had passed, and interest in the book had been awakened, and a desire aroused in the minds of patriotic Jews to hear the story of Esther in greater detail? The latter hypothesis seems the more probable. Not only is time required for the creative activity of the imagination to get to work; but the postscript, which with its explicit reference to the translation of Esther must have been appended immediately on the introduction of the translation into Egypt, would surely have been worded differently, if the Additions had been already incorporated.

The date of the Additions, therefore, may be placed in the earlier part of the first century, and they may be regarded as contemporaneous with the Book of Wisdom. They can be referred to Maccabean times (as e.g. by Jacob and V. Ryssel) only by a complete rejection of the witness of the postscript.

Wisdom is the work of an Alexandrian Jew keenly distressed by Egyptian idolatry and by the growing laxity and indifference to the national religion on the part of a large number of the Jews resident in Egypt. The writer of Wisdom represents that more conservative section of the Egyptian Jews in whom the forces of reaction were at work, and who became the more ardently patriotic in proportion as they saw the traditions of their religion neglected.

The Additions to Esther may be accounted for in a similar way. The relations between the domiciled Jews of the Diaspora and the natives of the country were at times far from cordial, and in periods of trial and oppression, when the Jews were driven in upon themselves, it was natural for them to take refuge in the study of their sacred books, and of those especially, such as Esther, which told of the subjection of the heathen to the chosen people. It was only natural that elaborations of these favourite narratives should spring up, and in course of time take their place as authentic parts of the original works.

The Additions are free from all trace of Alexandrine doctrine, but there is no reason to suppose that every Jew residing in Egypt surrendered to the influence of the philosophic atmosphere of Alexandria. The practical purpose with which the Additions were composed would cause their author to eschew the introduction of all foreign elements. His hearers would be of the simpler type, not versed in speculation, but familiar only with the religious ideas of the Old Testament; his object would be rather to confirm them in the old than to provide a meeting-place for the old with the new. Accordingly, the Additions might be expected to be strictly orthodox and conservative in tone; and this is exactly what we find. The spirit of simple prayer breathes in them, and trust in God and remembrance of God's mercies to Israel are especially emphasized.

The object of the author is purely practical, and speculative questions are altogether beyond his range. It has been thought that the object of the Additions was "to remove the uneasiness arising from the secular tone of the original story." This is a proposition very difficult to accept, suggesting as it does a deliberate effort to correct the canonical book, and thereby an implied censure on its character. The difference between the tone of the canonical book and the additions can be less invidiously accounted for, on the supposition that the latter came into existence to meet an historical need, and that floating legendary material was drawn upon for the purpose of consoling and strengthening a simple-minded people in adversity. If it is true that the Additions have introduced the religious note, it cannot be said that they have a materially higher tone. Hatred of the heathen and thirst for revenge appear in undiminished vehemence.

It has been assumed so far that we are justified in speaking of these six passages as additions, which first took shape in Greek. It is true that they are not all homogeneous, and that some of them are more Hebraic in character than others. But of two (Adds. B and E) it may be said that any re-translation of these rhetorical and florid pieces into Hebrew would be impossible, while of the rest it is enough to say that the Hebraisms they contain are fully accounted for by the fact that the Jew who composed them could not divest himself altogether of the idioms of his people.

A somewhat paradoxical contention has been put forward by Langen, Kaulen, and Scholz, who are concerned to prove the authenticity of the Additions, the effect of which would be to show that the LXX form of Esther is the original, and the Hebrew only an abbreviated edition of the book. This hypothesis rests on the existence of various Midrashic compilations, and especially of an Aramaic piece known as "Mordecai's Dream," containing the Dream and the Prayer of Mordecai and the Prayer of Esther, of which the so-called Additions to Esther are ex hypothesi the Greek form.

But there is much more reason to regard these diffuse Aramaic fragments as being indirectly based on the LXX Additions than vice versa; and, further, inasmuch as not more than one of these pieces can be proved to have existed as early as even the middle of the fourth century, they are quite valueless as proofs of a Hebrew original earlier than that known to St. Jerome.

Almost equally baseless is the argument that the older and fuller Hebrew text was deliberately expurgated of the name of God, in order that it might not suffer dishonour when the Esther-roll was read during the course of the rather secular festival of Purim. Such editing of the book is far more difficult to credit than the hypothesis of subsequent additions.

One of the surest arguments against the original integrity of the book in its LXX form lies in the many discrepancies between the canonical Esther and the so-called Additions. Some of these may be noted here:

(1) A 2. Mordecai is represented as holding a high position at court in the second year of Artaxerxes; but Esther ii. 16 speaks of the seventh year.

(2) A 13. Mordecai himself informs the king of the conspiracy of the eunuchs; but Esther ii. 21-23 says that Esther told the king in Mordecai's name.

(3) A 16. Mordecai is rewarded for his services, but Esther vi. 3, 4 shows that Mordecai had been forgotten.

(4) A 17. The reason for Haman's grudge against Mordecai is that Mordecai had caused the death of the eunuchs, but in Esther iii. 5 it is that Mordecai will not bow before Haman.

(5) C 26, 27. Esther protests her hatred of the position of queen to an uncircumcised alien. But the Hebrew makes no such suggestion.

(6) E 10. Haman is called a Macedonian, but in Esther iii. 1 his father's name is Persian.

(7) E 22. The Persians as well as the Jews are required to keep the feast of Purim; but in Esther ix. 20-28 the Jews alone are charged to observe it.

The Additions are six in number, distinguished by Dr. Swete in his edition of the Old Testament in Greek by the letters A to F, in accordance with a suggestion made by the late Prof. Hort. As they stand in the Authorized and Revised Versions, they are practically unintelligible. Jerome's relegation of the Additions to an appendix, in which their relation to the canonical chapters was altogether obscured, is responsible for this.

Not finding them in the Hebrew, he desired in his translation to mark the distinction between them and the authentic portions; and this arrangement was carried over into the Authorized and Revised Versions.

Their contents are as follows:

A. Mordecai's Dream, and the conspiracy of the two eunuchs (a double of Esther ii. 21-23). Precedes Esther i. 1.

B. The king's Edict commanding the destruction of the Jews. Follows Esther iii. 13, and expands iii. 8-13.

C. Prayer of Mordecai, and Prayer of Esther. Follows Esther iv. 17.

D. Esther's appearance before the king. Follows C, and is an amplification of Esther v. 1, 2.

E. The king's second Edict in favour of the Jews. Follows Esther viii. 12.

F. Interpretation of Mordecai's Dream. Follows Esther x. 3.

2. Manuscripts

The current and unrevised text of the third century is more or less closely represented by the uncials:

B. Vaticanus, cent. iv.

A. Alexandrinus, cent. v.

א. Sinaiticus, cent. iv.

N. Basilio-Vaticanus, cent. viii-ix; and by many cursives, of which the most important are (as numbered by Holmes and Parsons, Vetus Testamentum Graecum cum variis lectionibus, Oxford, 1798-1827) —

55. Rome (Vat. Reg. Gr. 1).

56. Rome (Vat. Gr. 330), containing two recensions, the first of which, known as 108a, represents the unrevised text.

57. Rome (Vat. Pius I).

Other nearly allied cursives are —

52. Florence (Laur. Acq. 44).

53. Paris (Nat. Reg. Gr. 2).

54. Venice (St. Mark's, cod. 16), with which the Aldine edition is connected.

55. Rome (Vat. Gr. 346), of which the Polyglot of Alcala (Complutensian, 1514) is a reproduction.

The recension made by Origen in the third century is represented by the cursive numbered 93, which contains two recensions of Esther, that known as 93a having the critical signs employed by Origen.

The readings of 93a correspond very closely with the corrections inserted in Cod. Sinaiticus by the first of three seventh-century hands, known as א**, who acknowledges his indebtedness to the work of Origen.

The Hesychian, or Egyptian, recension, of the fourth century, is represented by 44, 68, 71, 74, 76, 106, 107, 120, 236.

The Lucianic, or Antiochian, recension, of about A.D. 300, is represented by 19, 93a, 108b. P. de Lagarde, who designates these manuscripts by corresponding letters, has reconstructed the Lucianic text, and placed it in parallel columns with that of the uncials. There is a very wide difference between the two types of text, but the Lucianic (known by Lagarde as α) contains all the six longer additions.

Certain resemblances between the details in Josephus's account and those in the Lucianic text led Langen to argue that Josephus had in his hands the so-called Lucianic recension, and that therefore this text is not a recension of the third or fourth century, but an independent translation from the Hebrew. But there are too many correspondences between the two types of text, especially in the Additions, for this theory to be possible.

3. The Ancient Versions

No Syriac version of Esther is known; the book is altogether absent from the Nestorian manuscripts. Paton writes that the Coptic versions, which would presumably give a Hesychian type of text, have never been published, while the Ethiopic version, fourteen manuscripts of which are known to contain the Book of Esther, is equally inaccessible. An Armenian version of Esther also exists, but in too corrupt a form to be of any service.

The only ancient versions extant and available are the Old Latin and the Vulgate.

(1) The Old Latin belongs to the middle of the second century, and is a useful witness to the LXX text as it existed before the time of the three recensions. It is the work of one who, though not a good Greek scholar, made a faithful effort to translate the Greek original, and where he failed to understand the Greek, as in the case of the two edicts, reproduced it word for word in Latin. This makes it possible in many cases to reconstruct with comparative certainty the Greek text which lay in front of him. The Old Latin version contained all the six Additions (except A 12-17), together with certain others peculiar to it, e.g. after B 7, in C 14, a very long addition in C 16, after C 30, in D 7. On the other hand it omits A 12-17, and (in Cod. Pechianus) C 17-23.

(2) The Vulgate was undertaken by St. Jerome at the request of Pope Damasus, and was produced between A.D. 390 and 405. He devoted himself particularly to the books which belonged to the Hebrew Canon, and paid less attention to those which were only known through the LXX.

In the case of Esther, he gathered all the non-Hebraic additions together, and placed them somewhat contemptuously at the end of his translation of the canonical book. In the Prologue to Esther he writes: "Quae habentur in Hebraeo, plena fide expressi. Haec autem quae sequuntur scripta repperi in editione vulgata quae Graecorum lingua et litteris continetur, et interim post finem libri hoc capitulum ferebatur, quod iuxta consuetudinem nostram obelo, id est veru, praenotavimus" — that is, what is found in the Hebrew he has rendered with full fidelity; what follows he found written in the current Greek edition, where it used to be carried after the end of the book as a separate section, which, following his custom, he has marked with an obelus, that is, a dagger.

Jerome's translation differs very largely from the Old Latin, the former being as free as the latter is slavishly literal. Very often he is content to give only the general sense of the Greek, and his work is more like an original Latin composition than a translation.

4. Date of the Additions

The Additions belong to that mass of floating legendary material which in the course of years gathered around the name of Esther.

It is impossible to assign a single date to them, as they are written in different styles, and may be the work of different authors, some of the additions (e.g. A, C, D, F) having probably grown up gradually and assumed their present shape after an existence of some years in an oral tradition.

The two edicts (B and E), on the other hand, are of a quite different character from the four already mentioned which have strong Hebraic affinities: B and E belong undoubtedly to Egypt, and their periodic style shows that they could have originated in no other way than as formal written compositions. They show considerable resemblance to 2 Maccabees, which clearly emanated from Egypt (cf. B 5, πρὸς τὸ μὴ τὴν βασιλείαν εὐσταθίας τυγχάνειν, with 2 Macc. xiv. 6, οὐκ ἐῶντες τὴν βασιλείαν εὐσταθείας τυχεῖν); but although the place of origin is clear, the date (in so far as internal evidence is concerned) is in both cases equally indeterminate.

No conclusion, again, as to the lateness of A and F is to be drawn from the failure of Josephus to employ them. It is quite as likely that they did not suit his purpose as that they were absent from the manuscript he employed or from all the manuscripts of that period.

The present writer is not satisfied with the arguments of Jacob against the validity of the postscript in Esther xi. 1: "In the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, Dositheus, who said he was a priest and a Levite, and Ptolemaeus his son, brought the Epistle of Phrurai here set forth, which they said was true, and that Lysimachus the son of Ptolemaeus, that was in Jerusalem, had interpreted it." Jacob's objection is based on the assumed impossibility of a translation with so many clearly marked examples of Egyptian vocabulary having been made in Palestine; but he ignores the assertion of Dositheus and Ptolemy who brought it to Egypt, that it was made by Lysimachus son of Ptolemy, whose very name proclaims him to have been connected with Egypt, even if a temporary resident at Jerusalem. The postscript may be regarded as reasonably trustworthy, and various inferences may be drawn from it.

(1) It was appended to the translation of the canonical Esther immediately on its introduction into Egypt.

(2) That date was 114 B.C.

(3) The postscript refers so definitely to the translation of Esther, that it cannot be held to cover the Additions, which were not translations.

(4) Some time must have passed between 114 B.C., the date of the introduction of the translation into Egypt, and the incorporation therewith of unauthentic matter. Its sacredness would have protected it from formal alterations for at least a quarter of a century.

(5) The most probable date then for the incorporation of the Additions would be from about 80 B.C. onwards, the terminus ad quem being about A.D. 90, the date of their employment by Josephus.

If the postscript is rejected (as by Jacob, followed by Ryssel), the dating of the Additions is rendered even more indefinite. Jacob can only name one certainty with regard to date derivable from the Greek form of canonical Esther, i.e. that it must have been made at some time long or short before the destruction of the Ptolemaic régime in 30 B.C. He also argues that Esther must have been one of the earliest of the Old Testament books to have been translated into Greek after Kings, Chronicles, and Job, which Freudenthal has shown were translated about 150 B.C.; but Jacob's argument is mere hypothesis, however reasonable. Apart from the postscript, we are left without any means of dating the Additions more closely than between about 125 B.C. and A.D. 90.

5. Authorship

The Additions are not a homogeneous whole, and are bound together by no community of style. This does not prevent them from being the work of one hand; for an even greater dissimilarity exists between the earlier and later chapters of the Book of Wisdom.

But there is no evidence of any kind to show whether the Additions were all composed at the same time, or were all intercalated at the same time. All that can be said is that the Additions originated among the Egyptian Hellenistic Jews, and that they are based on familiar legendary materials.

In view of the more Hebraic tone of A, C, D, F, and their simple narrative style, as contrasted with the Greek tone and self-conscious rhetoric of B and E, it is not unnatural to view the former as the written form of a tradition long known and finally reduced into its present shape by dint of frequent repetition, and to regard the latter as having originated with a single individual. It is hardly likely that the agent in the two cases was one and the same.

6. Influence on Later Literature

(a) Jewish. The direct influence of the Additions is to be seen in Josephus, Antiquities xi. 6. He draws upon Additions B, C, D, E, following them closely and yet employing them with by no means a slavish dependence. He introduces a few details not found in the Additions, which were either his own invention or copied from embellishments in the manuscript he used. He makes no reference to the Dream of Mordecai (Add. A) or its interpretation (Add. F); he alters the time of the conspiracy of the eunuchs, and relates that the services rendered by Mordecai were forgotten, whereas the Additions say that he was rewarded. Josephus gives the reason adduced in Esther iii. 5 for Haman's hatred of Mordecai, and not that given in the Additions. He introduces new features into the Prayers of Esther and Mordecai, and into the account of Esther's appearance before the king. Similarly, he deviates from the exact language of the Greek in the Royal Edicts.

But the dependence of Josephus on the Additions is in the main beyond doubt.

The so-called second Targum gives a very free reproduction of the Edict in Addition E. This Targum dates from about A.D. 800.

The Prayers of Mordecai and Esther were used by Josephus ben-Gorion in his history composed about the beginning of the tenth century.

From this work has been borrowed the abbreviated form of the same prayers in Midrash Esther Rabba (cent. xi, xii), and also the Prayer of Esther in Midrash Lekach Tob (c. 1100). It is also the source of the Prayers of Esther and Mordecai which are found in an Aramaic fragment of cent. xi or xii. This fragment, which was claimed by Langen as a witness to a Hebrew original of the Additions, is now clearly recognized by Bissell and Fuller as being derived, through Josephus ben-Gorion, from the Greek Additions.

(b) Christian. The Additions are occasionally mentioned in the Fathers, but they can hardly be said to have exercised any influence. Clement of Rome (ch. lv) makes a reference to the Prayer of Esther, ἠξίωσεν τὸν παντεπόπτην δεσπότην, comparing Add. D 2, ἐπικαλεσαμένη τὸν πάντων ἐπόπτην Θεόν; while Origen writes (ad Africanum 3): "From the Book of Esther neither the Prayer of Mordecai nor that of Esther is accepted among the Hebrews; and similarly neither the Edict of Haman for the destruction of the Jews nor that of Mordecai."

Nevertheless, he held these Additions "to be fitted to edify the reader," and he regarded their absence from the Hebrew Canon as no reason for "rejecting as spurious the copies in use in the Christian Churches," or for "enjoining the Brotherhood to put away the sacred copies in use among them." References to the Additions are found in Clement of Alexandria, Stromata iv. 19; Rufinus, Apol. ii. 33; Augustine, Contra Epist. a Pelag., col. 428, and De grat. et lib. arb., col. 741.

7. Theology of the Additions

The theology of the Additions is strictly conservative and Palestinian in type. It stands in the same category with that of Ecclesiasticus, ch. xxxiii (xxxvi), xlii, xliii, the Prayer of Daniel (Dan. ix), and the Prayer of Judith (Judith ix).

The absence of all trace of Alexandrine doctrine can only be accounted for on the assumption that the Additions took their rise in a pious and simple-minded stratum of orthodox Egyptian Judaism, or else were based on legendary material belonging to Palestine which had nearly crystallized into the shape we know when it was carried in an oral form to Egypt. The truth probably lies somewhere between these alternatives.

The points which find illustration in the Additions are: God as Creator, C 3; as omniscient, C 5, 26, 27, D 2; as supreme, C 2, 4, 23, 30, E 16, 18; as the only true God, C 14; as the God of Abraham, C 8, 29, and of Israel, C 14; as having chosen Israel, C 9, 16, E 21; as the Redeemer from Egypt, C 9; His disposing Providence, D 8, E 16, F 1, 7; His readiness to hear prayer, F 6, 9; and to help the needy in trouble, C 14, 24, 30; His holiness, C 17; His righteousness, C 18; His jealousy of His honour, C 7, 8, 20, 22, 28, 29; His punishment of sin, C 17, 22, E 18; His mercy and pity, C 10.

There is no mention of the Law or of a future life; the temple and the altar are only mentioned metaphorically (D 20). There is one reference to angels (D 13).

(The contributor's mechanical bibliography of editions, versions, and critical inquiries, which followed as § 8, is omitted here; see the Colophon.)

Section A

The Dream of Mordecai

1 In the second year of the reign of Artaxerxes the great king, on the first day of Nisan, Mardocheus the son of Jairus, the son of Semeias, the son of Kiseus, of the tribe of Benjamin, saw a dream.

2 He was a Jew, dwelling in the city of Susa, a great man, serving in the king's court;

3 and he was of the captivity, which Nabuchodonosor the king of Babylon carried from Jerusalem with Jechonias, the king of Judaea.

4 And this was his dream: and behold noise and tumult, thunderings and earthquake, confusion upon the earth.

5 And, behold, two great dragons came forth, both of them ready to fight, and their cry was great.

6 And at their cry every nation made itself ready for war, to make war upon a nation of righteous men.

7 And behold a day of darkness and of gloom; tribulation and anguish; affliction and great confusion upon the earth.

8 And the whole righteous nation was troubled, fearing the evils that threatened them, and they made ready to perish.

9 And they cried unto God; and from their cry, as it were from a small spring, there came up a great river, even much water.

10 A light and the sun rose, and the humble were exalted and consumed the glorious.

11 And Mardocheus, having seen this dream and observed what God had determined to do, awoke and kept it in his heart, and sought by all means to understand it until the night.

Mordecai discovers the plot of the two eunuchs

12 And Mardocheus took his rest, as was his custom, in the court with Gabatha and Tharra, the two eunuchs of the king who kept the court.

13 And he heard their communings, and searched out their counsels, and learned that they were preparing to lay hands upon Artaxerxes the king; and he informed the king concerning them.

14 And the king examined the two eunuchs, and they confessed their intention and were led forth and executed.

15 And the king wrote these things for a memorial, and Mardocheus wrote concerning these things.

16 And the king charged Mardocheus to serve in the court, and gave him gifts in respect of these things.

17 And Haman, the son of Hamadathus, a Bugaean, was in honour in the king's sight, and sought to bring evil upon Mardocheus and his people because of the two eunuchs of the king.

Section B

The Letter of Artaxerxes

1 Now the copy of the letter is as follows. The great king Artaxerxes writeth these things to the princes of one hundred and twenty-seven provinces from India to Ethiopia, and to the subordinate governors.

2 Having become lord of many nations and attained dominion over the whole world, not as though I am elated with the presumption of power, but as one who ever rule my life with moderation and mildness, I desire to establish the lives of my subjects in a lasting tranquillity, and, making my kingdom peaceable and safe for passage to its furthest bounds, to restore that peace which is desired of all men.

3 But having made inquiry of my advisers how this might be brought to pass, Haman, who excels in prudence among us, and is approved for his unswerving goodwill and firm faithfulness, and is

4 exalted to the second place in the kingdom, has shown us that among all the nations in the world there is scattered a certain evilly-disposed people, which sets itself in opposition to every nation by its laws, and which habitually neglects the ordinances of the kings, so that the consolidation of the kingdom honourably intended by us cannot be brought about.

5 Having understood therefore that this nation stands alone in opposition to all men continually, observing perversely an alien manner of life in respect of its laws and being ill-affected towards our government, working all the damage it can that our kingdom may not attain to security,

6 we have decreed accordingly that they that are indicated to you in the letters of Haman, who is set over our affairs and is our second father, be all with wives and children destroyed root and branch by the sword of their enemies without pity or mercy, on the fourteenth day of the twelfth month Adar in the present year;

7 that they who in days past and even now are malicious may in one day go down violently into Hades, and may henceforth leave our state secure and unthreatened.

Section C

The Prayer of Mordecai

1 And Mardocheus besought the Lord, calling to remembrance all the works of the Lord, and said,

2 "Lord, Lord, King that rulest over all: for in Thy power is the whole world, and there is none that

3 gainsayeth Thee when Thou willest to save Israel: for Thou didst make heaven and earth, and

4 every wondrous thing beneath the heaven; and Thou art Lord of all, and there is not one that shall resist Thee, the Lord.

5 Thou knowest all things; Thou knowest, Lord, that it was not in insolence or in pride or in vainglory that I did this, to wit, that I did not bow before proud Haman.

6 For I had been content to kiss the soles of his feet for the salvation of Israel.

7 But I did this that I might not set the glory of a man above the glory of God: and I will bow before none save before Thee, my Lord, and I will not do it in pride.

8 And now, Lord, God and King, the God of Abraham, spare Thy people; for the eyes of our enemies are against us to consume us, and they seek to destroy the heritage that is Thine from the beginning.

9 Despise not Thy portion which Thou didst redeem unto Thyself out of the land of Egypt.

10 Hearken to my prayer, and be gracious unto Thine heritage; and turn our mourning into feasting, that we may live and sing Thy Name, O Lord; and destroy not the mouth of them that praise Thee."

11 And all Israel cried out with their might, for their death was before their eyes.

The Prayer of Esther

12 And Esther, the queen, fled in prayer unto the Lord, being seized with an agony of death.

13 And taking off her glorious raiment, she put on garments of anguish and mourning; and instead of the choice ointments, she covered her head with ashes and dung, and she humbled her body with much

14 fasting, and every place of the ornament of her joy she filled with her tangled hair. And she besought the Lord God of Israel and said, "My Lord, our King, Thou art God alone; help me who

15 stand alone, and have no helper save Thee: for my danger is in my hand.

16 I have heard ever since I was born in the tribe of my family that Thou, Lord, didst take Israel out of all the nations, and our fathers from their progenitors, for an everlasting inheritance, and that Thou didst for them all that Thou didst promise.

17 And now we have sinned before Thee, and Thou hast delivered us into the hands of our enemies

18 because we have given glory to their gods. Righteous art Thou, O Lord.

19 And now they have not been satisfied with the bitterness of our captivity, but they have laid

20 their hands in the hands of their idols, to remove the ordinance of Thy mouth, and to destroy Thine inheritance, and to stop the mouth of them that praise Thee, and to quench the glory of Thy

21 house, and Thy altar, and to open the mouth of the nations to give praise to vain idols, and that a king of flesh should be magnified for ever.

22 Surrender not, O Lord, Thy sceptre unto them that be not gods; and let not them that are our enemies mock at our fall; but turn their counsel against themselves, and make an example of him that began to do this against us.

23 Remember us, O Lord; make Thyself known to us in the time of our tribulation, and give me courage, O King of the gods and Lord over all dominion.

24 Put eloquent speech into my mouth before the lion; and turn his heart to hatred of him that fighteth against us, that there may be an end of him and of them that are likeminded with him.

25 But save us by Thy hand, and help me who stand alone, and have none save Thee, O Lord.

26 Knowledge hast Thou of all things, and Thou knowest that I hate the glory of the wicked, and I

27 detest the bed of the uncircumcised and of any alien. Thou knowest my necessity, that I abhor the sign of my proud estate, which is upon my head in the days when I show myself openly; I abhor it as a menstruous rag, and I wear it not in the days of my leisure.

28 And Thy servant hath not eaten at the table of Haman, and I have not honoured the king's feast, neither have I drunk the wine of the libations.

29 And Thy servant hath known no joy since the day I was brought here until now, save in Thee,

30 Lord God of Abraham. O God, whose strength is over all, hear the voice of the hopeless, and save us from the hand of them that deal wickedly, and save me out of my fear."

Section D

The appearance of Esther before the king

1 And it came to pass on the third day, when she had ceased praying, she put off her garments of humiliation,

2 and clothed herself in her glorious apparel. And being majestically adorned, she called

3 upon the all-seeing God and Saviour, and took with her two maids: and upon the one she leaned as

4 one that walked delicately, and the other followed her, holding up her train.

5 And she herself was radiant in the perfection of her beauty, and her countenance was happy and lovely; but her heart was stricken with fear.

6 And when she had passed all the doors, she took her stand before the king: now he was sitting upon his royal throne, clad in all his array of majesty, all adorned with gold and precious stones. And he was very terrible.

7 And lifting up his face that flamed with glory, he looked upon her in fierce wrath. And the queen fell down and changed colour and swooned, and she bowed herself down upon the head of the maid who went before her.

8 And God changed the spirit of the king into mildness, and in alarm he sprang up from his throne and raised her in his arms until she came to herself again, and comforted her with reassuring words,

9 and said unto her, "What is it, Esther? I am thy brother. Be of good cheer, thou shalt not die.

10 For our commandment is only for our subjects.

11 Draw near."

12 Then he raised the golden sceptre and laid it on her neck, and embraced her and said, "Speak to me."

13 And she said unto him, "I saw thee, my lord, as an angel of God, and my heart was dismayed for

14 fear of thy glory. For wonderful art thou, lord, and thy countenance is full of grace."

15 But while she was speaking, she fell swooning.

16 And the king was troubled, and all his servants sought to comfort her.

Section E

The Decree of Artaxerxes concerning the Jews

1 Of which letter that which follows is a copy: The great king Artaxerxes to the rulers of countries in one hundred and twenty-seven satrapies from India to Ethiopia, and to those who are well affected to our government, greeting.

2 Many, the more often they are honoured by the all too great goodwill of their benefactors, have

3 become the more proud; and not only do they seek to injure our subjects, but, being unable to

4 endure abundance, they take in hand to devise schemes against their own benefactors. And not only do they take thankfulness away from men, but also, being lifted up with the ostentatiousness of the foolish, they suppose that they shall escape the evil-hating justice of the all-surveying God.

5 Yea, and oftentimes many of those who have been placed in the highest positions of authority have been moved by the specious words of those their friends who have been entrusted with the administration of the government to become partakers of innocent blood, and have become involved

6 in irretrievable disasters, these men beguiling the innocent goodwill of their lords with the false trickery of their evil disposition.

7 And the things impiously accomplished through the pestilent behaviour of men who thus exercise their power unworthily may be seen not so much by an examination of the more ancient records

8 which have been handed down as by observation of the things near at hand; and care must be taken for the future, in order that we may render the kingdom tranquil and peaceable for all men,

9 not by relying upon informations, but by ever passing judgement with clemency and attentiveness upon the matters that are brought to our notice.

10 For Haman, the son of Hamadathus, a Macedonian

11 (an alien in very truth from the Persian blood, and one who is fallen far from our favour), having been a guest among us, so far enjoyed the goodwill which we display towards every nation, that he was called our father, and continued to receive the honour of all as the second person after the royal throne.

12 But he, not bearing his proud position, took counsel to deprive us of our kingdom,

13 and to deprive of life not only Mardocheus, who is at once our saviour and perpetual benefactor, but also Esther the blameless partner of our kingdom, together with their entire nation, by manifold chicanery and deceits asking for them to be delivered up to destruction.

14 For through these wiles he thought to catch us isolated and to transfer the kingdom of the Persians to the Macedonians.

15 But we find that the Jews whom this trebly-dyed villain had delivered to destruction are no evil-doers,

16 but govern themselves with the most righteous laws, and are sons of the Most High, Most Mighty, Living God, who ordereth the kingdom both for us and for our fathers with the most excellent governance.

17 Ye will do well therefore not to give effect to the letters sent by Haman the son of Hamadathus,

18 because the man himself who wrought these things has been hanged with all his house at the gate of Susa; for God that ruleth over all hath speedily rendered unto him the justice that he merits.

19 Now therefore display the copy of this letter openly in every place, and suffer the Jews to obey

20 their own laws, and reinforce them so that on the thirteenth day of the twelfth month Adar, on the selfsame day, they may defend themselves against those who attacked them in the time of their

21 affliction: for this day hath the God who ruleth over all made to be unto them a day of gladness instead of the day of destruction for the chosen race.

22 Do ye also therefore, among your commemorative festivals keep it a notable day with all good

23 cheer, that both now and hereafter it may be a day of salvation to us and to the Persians friendly to us, but a memorial of destruction to those who conspire against us.

24 And every city or country without exception which shall not do according to these commands shall fall under our wrath and be destroyed with fire and sword; it shall be rendered not only unpassable for men, but also hateful for all time to beasts and birds.

Section F

The interpretation of the Dream of Mordecai

1 And Mardocheus said, "These things are from God.

2 For I remember concerning the dream which I saw respecting these things; and nothing thereof is unfulfilled.

3 The little spring became a river, and there was a light and the sun and much water.

4 The river is Esther, whom the king married and made queen. And the two dragons are I and

5 Haman. And the nations are those that were gathered together to destroy the name of the Jews.

6 And my nation, this is Israel, which cried unto God and were saved. And the Lord saved His people, and the Lord delivered us out of all these evils. And the Lord wrought great signs and wonders, such as have not been done among the nations.

7 Therefore the Lord made two lots, one for the people of God and the other for all the other nations;

8 and these two lots came at the hour and the moment and the day of judging before God for His people and for all the nations.

9 So God remembered His people, and justified His inheritance.

10 And these days shall be unto them in the month Adar, on the fourteenth and fifteenth day of the same month, with an assembly and joy and gladness before God, from generation to generation for ever among His people Israel."

11 In the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, Dositheus, who said he was a priest and a Levite, and Ptolemaeus his son, brought in the Epistle of Phrurai here set forth, which they said was true, and that Lysimachus the son of Ptolemaeus, of the dwellers in Jerusalem, had interpreted it.

Colophon

Prepared from R. H. Charles (ed.), The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English, Vol. 1: Apocrypha (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913), translation and introduction by J. A. F. Gregg. Source: archive.org item apocryphapseudep01charuoft (University of Toronto copy).

This edition's per-verse textual-critical apparatus — the dense line-by-line Greek-manuscript and versional notes accompanying the translation — is omitted from this transcription; it survives complete in the 1913 printed edition and in the cited scan. The contributor's mechanical bibliography list (§ 8 of the introduction) is likewise omitted; all discursive content of the introduction is reproduced in full.

The 1913 translation itself marks a handful of words as corrupt or uncertain in the underlying Greek (the epithet "Bugaean" applied to Haman in A 17, "fourteenth" in B 6, "informations" in E 9); these are reproduced exactly as Gregg rendered them, since the uncertainty belongs to the ancient Greek text he was translating, not to this scan. No words in the translation text proper were found illegible in the scan.

The scanned page repeatedly splits and scrambles the small marginal verse numbers around the two-column layout of translation and apparatus. Verse breaks and numbers below were reconstructed by cross-checking the surviving numeral fragments against Gregg's own per-verse apparatus lemmata, which quote the opening words of each verse — this recovers the verse divisions of the 1913 print with confidence, though the numerals are hardest to follow directly in the scan at Addition C vv. 3, 5, 21, 23-25, and Addition E vv. 12-13 and Addition F vv. 3-10, where this transcription relies most heavily on the apparatus for placement. Minor scanno cleanup (spacing, broken hyphenation, single-character OCR errors such as "7" for "I") was applied throughout both introduction and translation.

Prepared for the Good Work Library by the New Tianmu Anglican Church with AI-assisted transcription and editorial work.

🌲