Blogging the Deuterocanon: Esther with Additions
(my notes below are based on reading the Harper Collins Study Bible which prints Esther in the OT and separately has Esther with Additions in the Deuterocanonical Apocrypha section. Some Bibles have the Additions printed at the end of the canonical Esther, while this arrangement of the NRSV has them integrated with the Septuagint [Greek language] version of Esther).
I’ve been familiar with the book of Esther for a long time, but I’ve never read the deuterocanonical version of Esther before. This version features all the same characters with the same basic plot. The addition of extra material and several changes from the Hebrew to the Greek version give the story a different tone and provide the reader with more familiar examples of Biblical literature: prayers, letters, and a symbolic dream.
As a reader I would say that this version of Esther was a lot more satisfying. I feel more connected to the characters who are purposefully cast in a pious light. Also, the story has a more definite framing with a prophetic dream beginning and its interpretation appearing at the end.
As a student of the Bible I would have to say that I can see why this book is not accepted as canonical by Protestants or Jews. The additions fill in a lot of gaps in the original story, but by their very nature it is clear that they weren’t part of the first author’s story. The fact that the original story is more concerned about action and irony and less concerned about the morals of the characters presented should not lead orthodox readers to make up excuses for it. If you want scandalous narrative read Judges or Ruth, books that are far from questioned in their status! In other words, I think it is a common mark of Biblical literature that characters are presented in all of their color; God doesn’t just work through the perfectly pious but he chooses to use even the simpleminded and the questionable to rescue his people when necessary. The characters in the Additions of Esther are good examples to follow, but I think that “softening up” the original courtly tale is ultimately unnecessary.
Feel free to disagree with my assessment and leave your own comments on Esther (either edition) below.
