Such are the principal objections which have been urged by De \Vette and Bleek against the credibility of this book. To readers in this country accustomed to weigh evidence, they will, doubtless, appear of little moment, while some of them will hardly escape being regarded as `weak and con temptible.' It only remains for us to accept the historical character of the book. The history is a curious one, but its very singularity makes it all the more valuable as a record of customs and events in that distant time. With the establishment of its credibility falls to the ground the objections to its canonicity, founded on its alleged unhistorical cha racter.
4. Authorship and Date.—No information exists as to the author of this book ; nor have we any means of forming a tenable conjecture on the sub ject. Some have ascribed it to Mordecai, some to Ezra, some to Joiachim the high-priest ; but these are mere guesses, for which no authority or valid reason can be adduced. ` Libri esther auctorem indicare velle,' says Le Clerc, prinde est ac haeri olum se profiteri.' That the book was written after the downfall of the Persian monarchy in the time of the Maccabees is the conclusion of Bertholdt, De Wette, and Bleek. The reasons, however, which they assign
for this are very feeble, and have been thoroughly nullified by Havemick. The latter supposes it to have been written at a much earlier date, and the reasons he urges for this are—I. The statement in ix. 32, compared with x. 2, where the author places what he himself has written on a par in point of authenticity with what is recorded in the Persian annals, as if cotemporary productions ; 2. The vividness, accuracy, and minuteness of his details respecting the Persian court ; 3. The language of the book, as presenting, with some Persianisms, those idioms which characterise the books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Chronicles ; and 4. The fact that the closing of the canon cannot be placed later than the reign of Artaxerxes, so that an earlier date must be assigned to this book, which is included in it. These reasons seem to be not without weight. Whether the book was written in Palestine or in Persia is uncertain, but probability inclines to the latter supposition.
5. Com mentaries.—Serrarius, 161o, fol. ; Fritzsche, 1848 ; Calmberg, 1837 ; Bertheau, 1862.—W. L. A.