Ourselves; conscious of sin, suffering from quiet, craving peace, and at last yielding ourselves to these higher influences which have been adapted to our wants and are mighty for our quickening.

It is objected that this view makes too little of conversion! We do not see the ground of the objection. Does it make less than the facts or the scriptures make of it? Is it a light thing? Is it nothing or little to restore a turbulent family, or a belligerent state to quiet and harmony? Is it a slight thing to bring out of a block of marble the Greek slave or the Belvidere Apollo? from some varied pigments to develop the Transfiguration of Raphael? or group the words of a lexicon into Patrick Henry's speech, or Shakespeare's Hamlet, or Milton's Paradise Lost? But there are more significant elements in the chaotic and sinful soul capable of more surprising combinations and grander results, when God puts forth his hand to create the spirit anew and bring out its resources and shine upon it with his glory.

ART. VI. ESTHER.

Sacred History and also profane, are valuable as records of past events, and especially so as they show that God reigns over the nations of the earth and providentially superintends the affairs of men. "He putteth down one and setteth up another." "He causeth the wrath of man to praise Him." "The counsel of the froward is carried headlong." "The blind are led by a way they knew not." "The wise are taken in their own craftiness." "The way of the wicked is turned upside down. Those that dig a pit for the good to fall into, fall into it themselves; and those that plot for the ruin of the good, find that disaster, confusion, dismay and destruction come upon themselves. He who notices the falling sparrow, careth for the righteous, and will have them "in everlasting remembrance."

The first universal monarchy was the Assyrian. It was denoted by the golden head of the metallic image in Dan. Ch. 2, and the beast like a lion with eagle's wings in Ch. 7. This empire was idolatrous and wicked. It repeatedly made war upon God's people, the Jews in Palestine, finally prevailed over them, —took Jerusalem,—destroyed the temple and carried the people into captivity to Babylon. After the empire had existed 1695 years it fell by its own corruptions B. C. 538. The account of its fall is recorded in Dan. Ch. 5. Belshazzar the king was slain, the Persians and Medes under Cyrus were the victors, and the Medo-Persian empire commenced.

This empire was designated by the breast and arms of silver in the image, Dan. Ch. 2; and the beast like a bear in Ch. 7. The captivity being ended, the history of the Jews, as contained in the books Nehemiah, Ezra and Esther, is connected with the affairs of the Medo-Persian empire. Often the reigning princes showed God's people great favors, and for a time the empire had much prosperity and power, but it became voluptuous, oppressive and corrupt. After existing 207 years it fell, being subdued by the Grecians under Alexander the conqueror, B. C. 331. Esther was the queen of the Persian prince, called in Scripture Ahasuerus.

WHO WAS AHASUERUS ?

Histories of the Persians give a somewhat full account of the reigning monarchs, but no one is mentioned bearing this name. It becomes then a question of some interest as to which of the kings the sacred writer in the book of Esther applies the name Ahasuerus. In Ezra Ch. 4, a ruler is mentioned named Ahasu

erus.

But this was not the Ahasuerus of Esther. Both Rollin and Dr. Clarke say this was a prince named Cambyses.

Those who have investigated, have not came to a uniform conclusion. Usher, the author of the chronology of the Bible, was of opinion that Ahasuerus was Darius. He reigned 36 years and was the prince, who, as recorded in Ezra ch. 6, enforced the decree for rebuilding the temple in Jerusalem. Rollin notices this view of Usher, and being aware that others thought differently, declares he will not engage in controversies of this kind, but he

follows Usher in chronology much, and more than intimates that he agrees with him on this subject.

Dr. Kitto says it was Xerxes, son of Darius, who succeeded him to the throne. He was a powerful ruler but violent and oppressive. He reigned 13 years. He collected the largest army ever known. This army with its attendants numbered five millions. He led it against the Lacedemonians. The campaign was attended with disaster, and Xerxes after various misfortunes abandoned himself to ease and luxury and was murdered while asleep by Artabanus, captain of his guards. Dr. Kitto defends his opinion with some reason, and then says, "To desire stronger evidence is to mistake the nature of the question."

Dr. Prideaux who lived 250 years ago, maintained that it was Artaxerxes, surnamed Longimanus. Others were of the same opinion. Dr. Adam Clarke coincides in this same belief.

Among the reasons for believing that Ahasuerus was Artaxerxes, two may be named. In the history of Esther, as we shall see, he judged righteously concerning the Jews and favored them. when they were in great jeopardy. He also was favorable to this people in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah. The other evidence is, that the chronology of Esther's time in the Bible is between 462 and 453 B. C., and Rollin gives this as part of the time in which Artaxerxes reigned.

The most probable reason for the surname Longimanus given by historians is that his right hand was longer than his left. As already seen his father Xerxes was murdered. But Artaxerxes was not the next heir to the throne, as his brothers Darius and Hystaspes were older. He was assisted by his uncle Artabanus in killing Darius, and then he ascended the throne. Next, finding that Artabanus was plotting to drive him from it he killed him. Then the sons of this Artabanus were in the way. Forces were raised, a bloody battle fought, and the enemies of the king vanquished. The next year he fought a battle with the forces of his brother Hystaspes, overcame him and thus through blood and carnage, secured possession of the empire. He reigned about 49 years, and died a natural death.

STATE OF THE JEWS.

The idolatrous apostacy of God's chosen people together with

other criminal enormities was the cause of the captivity. Still God had witnesses; Isaiah and Ezekiel had foretold what would come unless there was a reform, and Jeremiah, a man of unblemished piety and conscientious integrity, pathetically warned and implored his countrymen to turn lest ruin should come. His entreaties and expostulations were delivered just on the eve of the captivity. He lived to witness the terrible catastrophe, and in view of it wrote in deep sorrow and mourning the Book of Lamentations.

Daniel went with the Jews into captivity, but he feared God and adhered unflinchingly to the right. He found favor with the Assyrian monarch and God wrought wonderful deliverances for him, and enabled him to foretell the rise and fall of empires, the coming of Christ and the glory that should follow. At the end of the captivity he was aged and it is doubtful if he returned to Judea.

From the termination of the captivity to the time of Esther about a century passed. Zeal for God and vital piety had somewhat revived. Ezra labored for the rebuilding of the temple, and when the foundation was laid amid the tears and rejoicings of the people, Haggai took up the "Harp of prophecy” and declared that "the topmost stone should be brought on with shouting, crying grace, grace unto it ;" and that "the glory of this latter house should exceed that of the former;" also that Christ, "the desire of all nations should come;" and grace this temple with his presence. Nehemiah too was faithful. He was cupbearer to king Artaxerxes. This office was conferred only on such as could be trusted. It was a place of honor; the one who filled it was near the king's person, and often could make requests and obtain favors for himself or others. This pious man had the broken down walls of Jerusalem repaired; became governor of Judea, then a Persian province, and was successful in reforming many of the bad practices of the Jews.

It was in the reign of Artaxerxes also that Esdras, as related in the Apocrypha, obtained a commission to return to Jerusalem with such Jews as were disposed and settle the Jewish government and religion according to their laws. It is interesting to observe that it appears from the commission that Artaxerxes was

not only just to the Jews, but had some knowledge and veneration for the God of Israel as he said, "Let all things be performed after the law of God diligently, unto the Most High God, that wrath come not upon the kingdom of the king and his son. Esdras Ch. 7. Such is a short sketch of the zeal and faith of the times, but when we come to the events of Esther, it will appear probable that as a whole an interest in the true worship and work of God was low as indeed it was through the four centuries that followed till the coming of Christ.

ESTHER BECOMES QUEEN.

The king in the third year of his reign made a great feast to the princes, servants and people. If this king was Artaxerxes Longimanus, the feast occurred soon after he prevailed over the factions against him as he came to the throne, as Rollin states that work was finished in the second year of his reign. The king and probably others were merry with wine and he sent for his queen, Vashti, to come into his presence, that he might show the princes and people her beauty. She refused, not wishing to be the gaze of a drunken court. The king put her away by divorcement; apprehensive that women might take occasion from this example of the queen not to submit to the most rigid authority of their husbands, letters were sent that each man should bear rule in his own house. Then fair maidens from every part of the realm were brought that from them the king might elect a queen. Esther, an orphan Jewish maiden, who had been adopted by her uncle Mordecai, was among the number. She was fair and beautiful; the king chose her and she became his queen.

HAMAN OFFENDED.

Haman was the first or highest minister of state. Mordecai, a Jew, who had been a captive in Babylon, was keeper of the king's gate. He refused to bow to Haman as he passed out or in. Why did he refuse? Blair thinks it was because Haman was an Amalekite, a race at enmity with the Jewish people. But it is by no means certain that he was an Amalekite. Calmet thinks that this obeisance was not merely civil respect, but a sort of divine honor, such as was sometimes addressed to the Persian