Talk:Ahasuerus

Article Change

The original Wiki page stated;

19th century Bible commentaries generally identified him with Xerxes I of Persia, although this assumption is now rejected by other scholars.

And referenced;

The Religious Policy of Xerxes and the "Book of Esther", Littman, Robert J., The Jewish Quarterly Review, 65.3, Jan 1975, p.145-148.

This is not what the reference says, page 148 of that article states;

Whatever one's judgment about the origins of Purim, whether Esther and Mordecai are historical figures, or merely gods demoted to the human level, it is agreed that the Book of Esther has a historical setting in the reign of Xerxes, and it is replete with details of Persian court life. It is the purpose of this paper, while not denying the romantic and ritual elements and complicated amalgamation of history, religion and romance, to return to the search for historical material, particularly in the reign of Xerxes, which may be connected to the Book of Esther

The article concludes on page 155 with;

Many unanswered questions remain about the Book of Esther in regard to its origins, composition and literary merits, but it is beyond the scope of this paper to delve into these aspects. What has emerged from this paper is the following: The Book of Esther is set in the reign of Xerxes, who was heavily committed to Zoroastrianism of an orthodox variety and who reversed the practice of religious tolerance of his predecessors. I will now change the page to reflect the source.

Considerations for Cyrus as Ahasuerus in the Book of Esther

The story of Curus and Cassandane is preserved in the first couple of chapters in Herodotus Book 3. There are many similarities between the two stories. Of all the Persian Kings it was only Cyrus the Great that was recorded as being influenced by a beautiful orphan, her name was Netetis. The Kings wife (Cassandane) was quite jealous of her. Herodotus says that Egypt was invaded by Cassandane’s son Cambyses because he hated the way his father chose Netetis over his mother. Also it’s the death of Cassandane that clears the way for Cyrus to free the Jews who were captive in Babylon, because when Vashti (Cassandane) finally dies, the Jews are freed from Babylon, that very same year. Therefore the Book of Esther is important because it’s the story of Cyrus the Great and why he chose to free the Jews.

Esther is Nitetis, Vashti is Cassandane, Ahasuerus is Cyrus the Great Mordecai is the eye doctor.

There isn’t anything that would exclude Cyrus the Great as being the king who was named Ahasuerus in the book of Esther. At the same time, the fourth chapter of Ezra would make it impossible for Ahasuerus to be Artaxerxes. Not to mention the book of Nehemiah. Ezra was sent to Judah by Artaxerxes in the seventh year of Artaxerxes (Ezra 7:6-7), Nehemiah became the governor of Judah under Artaxerxes from the 20th year of his reign until the 32nd year (Nehemiah 5:14). Certainly this could easily be Artaxerxes II, but it’s impossible for it to be Artaxerxes I. If Ezra entered Jerusalem in the 7th year of Artaxerxes, then this can only be Artaxerxes II (398 BCE) in Ezra chapter 7. The king named Ahasuerus in the book of Esther gave the green light to Haman to kill all the Jews , that order went out in that kings twelfth year of reign (Esther 3:7). Another question that arises is why doesn’t Ahasuerus in the book of Esther know that Cyrus the Great had already freed the Jews in writing? Or how come Ahasuerus in the book of Esther sees the Jews as a bunch of rag tag nomads? Is that possible if Ahasuerus in the book of Esther came after Cyrus?

Historical accuracy

@Acjones49: About attempt to remove some bias against historical accuracy in Scripture; more needed—the historical accuracy of the Book of Esther is dead in the water in the mainstream academia. We follow the mainstream academia, not your church. tgeorgescu (talk) 12:01, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Above comment appeals to authority of "mainstream academia". Oyveyvey (talk) 13:29, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

WP:VERECUNDIAM. Don't try to dodge it if you want that your edits stick. tgeorgescu (talk) 20:20, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

@Oyveyvey: More to the point: (i) the Book of Esther is a work of fiction (that is the mainstream academic view); (ii) it never defines which really existing king is being meant. So, that Ahasuerus means this or that king is an interpretation. Who does biblical interpretation for Wikipedia? Mainstream Bible scholars do. tgeorgescu (talk) 21:21, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Source of the Koine?

The article opens with the Koine Greek, Ἀσουήρος. Later, the article states that the Septuagint refers to Artaxerxes, which in Koine would be Ἀρταξέρξης. So which is it? Ἀσουήρος or Ἀρταξέρξης? Here's my source.

https://biblebento.com/index.html?lxx1i&190.1.1 Geraldpriddle (talk) 05:23, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Suggest updating!

This description does not tally with the up to date Bible 1971. (New World Testament) or even better … the JW.org ‘The Holy Scriptures’

Which are more accurate as to dates, people and our God Jehovah.

The account of Esther is more accurate than anything else written, so should be the basis of all things written! Thanks and ‘Love’ to all! Llygoden (talk) 19:19, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

We don't consider NWT to be a WP:RS. Not even close.

That means NWT is an authority for Jehovah's Witnesses only. Not for evangelicals, not for mainline Protestants, not for Catholics, not for Eastern Orthodox, not for Muslims, not for Hindus, not for Buddhists, not for Shintoists, not for atheists, and so on. tgeorgescu (talk) 02:18, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

My function is only to inform of the error, nothing more.

Thank you for your input! 2A00:23C6:6C2F:6F01:69A6:C29E:AE35:84B3 (talk) 03:35, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

According to mainstream Bible scholarship, that is no error. It's the consensus view of the Ivy League and US state universities, mainline Protestant divinity schools, and most US Catholic divinity schools. Wikipedia sides with them, not with the Jehovah's Witnesses. tgeorgescu (talk) 03:38, 9 October 2025 (UTC)