"That yew tree of a thousand years was once a little seed; An apple, all too fair to see, destroyed a world of souls! Tupper. SOMETIME between the famous battle of Marathon, and the celebrated retreat of the ten thousand Greeks under Xenophon, say about five hundred years before the angels sang "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men," the great king Ahasuerus sat on his throne, in the royal city of Susa, and made a feast to all his princes and servants. But so uncertain is human fame so evanescent all earthly glory, that it is difficult to know who this same great king Ahasuerus was. Almost every Medo-Persian king, from Cyaxeres I down to Ochus, or Artaxerxes III, has, in turn, been identified by some interpreter of ancient records as the Ahasuerus of Esther. Some of the uncertainties that surround us, in Persian history, may be anticipated, when we remember the curious fact that, up to this time, I believe, no trace whatever is found of the name of Xerxes in the Persian records. It is probable, as his father reigned sixty years, that the period of his government has been confounded with that of his father, Gustasp. If so, it is a remarkable instance of the uncertainty of enduring fame. If a monarch, that led such armies as Xerxes did, has failed to perpetuate his name in the history of his own country, who can expect to live in the memory of mankind? If it be correct that Gustasp was his father, and that his reign is merged into his, then his name, in the Persian annals, is not Xerxes, but Isfunder, the father of Artaxerxes Longimanus. Perhaps all agree that the name Ahasuerus of the Hebrews and Romans is the same as the Artaxerxes of the Greeks, and the Ardsheer of the Persians. Ardsheer, or Ardashir, signifies, according to some, "the lion of the camp"-Sir John Malcolm says, "the Prince of the earth;" and Grotefend says, "the great warrior." The whole name, in Persian, is the long-handed Ardsheer, which corresponds exactly to Artaxerxes Longimanus, that is, Artaxerxes Longarms—his arms are said to have been so long, that when he stood upright, like Rob Roy, the ends of his fingers reached below his knees. It was at the court of famous Themistocles this long-armed prince that the found refuge as an exile, and where he is said to have. learned the Persian language in one year. Thucy. lib. I: 138. If this is correct, it is a proof that the Greek and Persian languages were much alike, which is as we should expect, if they are descendants from one common mother, the Sanskrit, as our best scholars tell us. See Vaux., p. 116. Some say, this Ahasuerus was Xerxes the Great, the terror of Greece- so Jahn, Scaliger and others. The learned Scaliger identifies as proof of this, Xerxes' queen WHO WAS AHASUERUS? 81 Hamestris with Esther. But how can this be, when Xerxes had a son by Hamestris that was marriageable in the seventh year of his reign? And the similarity urged between the names is more than counter-balanced by the striking dissimilarity of their characters. Queen Hamestris was as much unlike Queen Esther as the name Xerxes was like the name Artaxerxes. Usher says, Ahasuerus was Darius Hystaspes, and that Atossa, his wife, was Vashti, and Artystona was Esther. Now, if Herodotus is correct, and all the Archbishop's reliance is upon the Greek writers of Alexander's age, and following, this Artystona was a daughter of Cyrus, and could not therefore have been Esther. And again, Atossa bore several daughters and four sons to Darius, after he was king; but, according to the Bible, Vashti was divorced in the third year of the king's reign. She could hardly, therefore, have been the mother of four sons and several daughters in three years; and, moreover, Atossa retained her influence over the king to his death, and gained the crown for her son, Xerxes. Atossa then could not have been Vashti, nor Darius Hystaspes, Ahasuerus. No doubt the difficulty of fixing the identity of Ahasuerus has been enhanced from the fact that the same name has been given to two other Persian kings in the Bible -to Cambyses, the son of Cyrus, in Ezra iv.: 6; and to Astyages, king of the Medes, and father of Cyaxares, Dan. ix.: 1, neither of whom can be identical with the Ahasuerus of Esther. Dr. Kitto properly concludes that the real alternative is between Xerxes the Great and Artaxerxes Longimanus; but, it seems to me, the reasons which he assigns in favor of Xerxes are not at all satisfactory. See his Cyclo. Bib. Lit. The extent of the king's dominions, and the luxurious habits of the court, and the condition of the Hebrews, and the favor shown to them, apply equally well to either of the Persian monarchs named, so that no decisive proof can be had to this point from the internal evidences of the book of Esther. If anything can be gathered from the history of Esther at all, bearing on this point, it is in favor of Artaxerxes Longimanus, whose favor toward the Hebrews we may conclude was owing to the influence of Mordecai and Esther. Josephus, and the apochryphal books, and the Septuagint, and, I believe, the learned generally, have agreed that this Ahasuerus was Artaxerxes Longimanus, son and successor of Xerxes. So Drs. Prideaux, Hales, Gray and many others. The reasons, briefly, in favor of this opinion, are: 1. The high authority of Josephus and of the authors who hold this opinion. 2. Though, as I have stated before, Persian chronology is but little more than a mass of confusion, if not of contradictions, still, as far as we can understand it from contemporary records, the time of Artaxerxes Longimanus is more fully in harmony with the events recorded in our history than of any other Persian king. 3. There are, it seems to me, insuperable difficulties in receiving the Xerxes of the Greeks as the husband of Esther, or of admitting any other Persian king than Artaxerxes Longimanus, as the Ahasuerus of the Bible. And yet I believe the tendency of scholars, |