and Poratha and Adalia and Aridatha
Esther 9:8 sits in the middle of a list. Three names — Poratha, Adalia, Aridatha — stand among the ten sons of Haman who fell when the Jews defended themselves in the fortress of Susa. Why does a book that never names God stop to list ten dead men? And what does their fall say about the plot their father started?
A list, not a footnote
The scene is the thirteenth day of Adar, the very day Haman had chosen for wiping out the Jews. In the citadel of Susa the count reached five hundred, and then the writer slows down to name Haman's family one by one.
Arno Clemens GaebeleinThe fateful day, the thirteenth day of Adar, came, and with it the punishment of the enemies of the Jews. On that day the Jews gathered to stand against all who would attack them. The princes, the governors, and all the king's other officials helped the Jews. They knew the powerful position Mordecai held, and that he grew greater and greater. Theirs was a great victory. In Susa itself the Jews killed 500, and 300 more in another part of the city. In the provinces they killed 75,000. They killed the ten sons of Haman too, and the record gives their Persian names.
The line of Haman ends
Naming all ten sons is the writer's way of showing that nothing of Haman survived. What began with one man's wounded pride closed with his household gone.
C E StuartEsther told Ahasuerus about the plot. The result was Haman's execution, and the execution of his ten sons, which wiped out his family in the direct male line. It also lifted Mordecai to favour and power next to the king, and led to a second decree, this time in favour of the Jewish people.
An old quarrel finally settled
The book calls Haman "the Agagite." That title reaches back centuries, and it explains both Mordecai's refusal to bow and why this whole family falls.
Morrish Bible DictionaryHaman was the son of Hammedatha the Agagite (Esther 3:1-10; Esther 8:3, 5; Esther 9:24). Fürst says that Josephus explains Haman's Gentile name by calling him an Amalekite by race, and Jewish tradition says the same. That is, Haman was an Amalekite. This explains why Mordecai refused to bow down before Haman. Haman belonged to the race that Jehovah had sworn to fight for ever, and that Saul was told to destroy completely (Ex. 17:16; Deut. 25:19; 1 Sam. 15:3).
God told Saul to destroy Amalek. Generations later a man of that same race rose to power in Persia and plotted against the Jews.
Judgment carried out, no plunder taken
The verses that name the sons also record that the victors took no plunder. That restraint follows older instructions about Israel's enemies.
H. L. RossierGod judges the oppressor of the Jews, and his race with him (vv. 6-10). In the same way the apostate race of the Antichrist will perish in a future day, for the hour of vengeance has struck. Only the people "did not lay their hands on the plunder" (vv. 10, 15, 16), in keeping with what had been prescribed concerning Amalek or the enemies of Israel. (1 Sam. 15:9; Joshua 6:19-20) It is only a matter of carrying out God's judgment, without any profit for those who carry it out.
Another writer draws the same conclusion from the untouched plunder: it shows the Jews "were not moved by lust for gain, a picture of the pure justice that will characterize the establishment of the kingdom of the Lord Jesus."
Why this is not a pattern for Christians
The executions in this chapter trouble many readers. Commentators answer that the scene belongs to a coming day of righteous rule, not to the present calling of believers.
William KellyThere are many that cannot understand this. And no wonder! They take Esther as the type of the Lord's dealings with the church. You can see at once what deep confusion that creates. It is not so. Here the Gentile is set aside and the Jew is called in. Righteousness will mark the reign of the kingdom in a coming day, but grace is what suits the church now. Carrying out righteous vengeance would be completely out of keeping with the calling of the Christian — with the church's place.
God unnamed, God at work
The chapter never names God as the one acting. One writer reads the whole book from that silence.
William KellyIn the book of Esther we have no more than the witness of God's secret providence in the face of the most extreme dangers. It looks onward to that grand public outcome. Meanwhile it leaves behind a striking and lasting ordinance from Him who delivers though unseen.
Summary
- Unseen. God's name never appears, yet His providence works in secret — He delivers though unseen.
- Unfinished. Haman the Agagite came from Amalek. God swore lasting war on that race, and it was still alive in Haman's day.
- Unspared. The record names all ten sons: Haman's line ended in the direct male line.
- Unprofitable. The victors touched no plunder — judgment carried out with no gain for those who carried it out.
- Unrepeatable. Commentators read this as a picture of a coming kingdom of righteousness. It is not a model for Christians, whose calling today is grace.