Esther and the Politics of Negotiation: Public and Private Spaces and the Figure of the Female Royal Counselor

6. Conclusion

6 Conclusion Therefore these days are called Purim, from the word Pur. Thus because of all that was written in this letter, and of what they had faced in this matter, and of what had happened to them, the Jews established and accepted as a custom for themselves and their descendants and all who joined them, that without fail they would continue to observe these two days every year, as it was written at the time appointed. These days should be remembered and kept throughout every generation, in every family, province, and city; and these days of Purim should never fall into disuse among the Jews, nor should the commemoration of these days cease among their descendants. Queen Esther daughter of Abihail, along with the Jew Mordecai, gave full written authority, confirming this second letter about Purim. Letters were sent wishing peace and security to all Jews, to the one hundred twenty-seven provinces of the kingdom of Ahasuerus and giving orders that these days of Purim should be observed at their appointed seasons, as the Jew Mordecai and Queen Esther had enjoined on the Jews, just as they had laid down for themselves and for their descendants regulations concerning their fast and their lamentations. The command of 123 Queen Esther fixed these practices of Purim, and it was recorded in writing. –—Esther 9:26-32 (NRSV) The primary question that this study has sought to answer is, how might we characterize the narrative depiction of Esther’s political involvement in the affairs of the Persian state? Most scholars have tried to answer this question by focusing on another question: Does Esther represent an aberration from gender norms or an embodiment of male patriarchal values? The project undertaken here has been to challenge the way in which the entire question has been framed, because underlying it is a set of problematic assumptions. The results of the question framed thus can only lead to more interpretive difficulties, either denying the commonalities between Esther and other biblical women or ignoring the dynamics at play when the very same descriptions are used of men. In addition, the reliance on gender categories has provided a kind of self-perpetuating logic, so that scholarship about men and women and their respective roles tends to replicate two separate and divided spheres within academic discourse. Chapter 1 identifies two divergent tendencies, to view Esther as either typical or exceptional, both of which are problematic. In addition, I suggest that beneath these opposing representations of Esther is an underlying reliance on the dichotomous categories of public and private. In chapter 2, I evaluate the way that the public/private discourse has impacted scholarship on biblical women, and I explore theoretical problems with this approach. Some of the problems surveyed include the fact that these categories do not have an obvious or fixed meaning, can change over time, and are anachronistic to ancient societies. Furthermore, the rhetoric often belies more complicated lived realities. Chapter 3 examines the narrative of Esther to see whether the text offers any cause for employing the categories of public and private in relationship to women’s lives. I have looked at three categories with regard to gender, including spatial dynamics, women’s authority, and Esther’s characterization. Chapter 4 compares portrayals of Esther in the narrative to Greek historiography on Persia and indigenous Persian sources, none of which indicate any reason to assume that women were categorically confined to a private sphere. Although the story of Esther does employ a number of stereotypical representations of Persians also found in Greek sources, its 124 | Esther and the Politics of Negotiation connections to biblical traditions suggest that the narrative is not merely a satire on Persia. In Chapter 5, I have suggested that Esther is portrayed as a political player, a role that has strong biblical precedents, especially in the role of counselors who prevent violence. This portrayal connects Esther to a wide variety of biblical literature, suggesting that she is not the exceptional figure that some have claimed but is deeply embedded within a tradition. The aggregate of this evidence allows for the historic possibility that women could participate in political affairs, especially in the role of royal counselor. Esther’s portrayal as a woman who is involved in the politics of negotiation is not unique among biblical accounts of women, nor was it extraordinary for women of the ancient Near East, including...