I find myself stuck in Ezra 7. There’s the letter of Artaxerxes I Longimanus that needs to be studied. To do so, studying history with the Bible is absolutely recommended. That was the style the late D. James Kennedy employed in writing his book Why I Believe. I’d look at some secular sources to look into the life of Artaxerxes I, to further understand his letter to the Jews and his relations to Ezra and Nehemiah.
The Jewish Encyclopedia gives us this detail of his rise to power, aside from his relations with the Jews:
His Character.
Artaxerxes was the second son of Xerxes, who was murdered in the summer of 465 by his all-powerful vizir Artaban. The murderer accused the king’s eldest son Darius of the crime, with the result that Darius was slain by his younger brother Artaxerxes, who then mounted the throne. But Artaban sought the crown for himself, and therefore aimed at the life of the young king; the latter, it is stated, warned by Megabyzus, his brother-in-law, rid himself of the murderer by slaying him, with all his household and party, in open combat (Ctesias, “Persica,” 29; Diodorus, xi. 69; Justin, iii. 1, according to Dinon; but Aristotle, “Politics,” viii. 8, 14 has a different version). The murder of Xerxes is mentioned also by Ælian, (“Variæ Historiæ,” xiii. 3), and in an Egyptian inscription of the time of Ptolemy I., which ascribes the deed to the vengeance of an Egyptian god on theforeign king. The Greek chronologists, evidently through a misunderstanding, make of Artaban a Persian king and state that he reigned seven months. The Greeks gave Artaxerxes the surname Μακρόχειρ (Longimanus, Long-Hand), asserting, probably correctly, that his right hand was longer than his left. They uniformly describe him as a brave and handsome man, a kindly and magnanimous ruler (Nepos, “De Regibus,” ch. i.; Plutarch, “Artaxerxes,” ch. i.). The authentic narrative of Nehemiah gives an accurate picture, showing him to have been a kindly monarch, who, noticing the sadness of his cupbearer, asked him his wish and granted it. This characterization does not deny that he was susceptible to harem-influence or that he could become very angry when any one appeared presumptuous. Ctesias relates that he once sought to decapitate Megabyzus because, on a hunting expedition, when a lion was about to spring upon the king, Megabyzus slew him without awaiting the royal spear-thrust. The women of the court interceded for the offender, and his sentence was commuted to long exile upon an island in the Persian gulf, whence he finally succeeded in escaping. He afterward secured the king’s pardon. The reverence with which the Persians regarded Artaxerxes may be seen in the fact that two of his successors adopted his name.
His long reign was generally tranquil, the system of government introduced by Darius working satisfactorily. A few satraps who rebelled now and again (as, for instance, at the very beginning of the reign, the governor of Bactria), were speedily subdued. On the borderlands and in the mountainous districts the authority of the government may not have been vigorously sustained, but every other religion under his sway in Asia may be said to have enjoyed a period of peaceful growth. Artaxerxes I. was, however, not a creative genius.
The Encyclopedia Iranica contains details that Xerxes from the Book of Esther who was later assassinated. Here are more insights about the brutal history of Persian kings after the fall of the Babylonian Empire:
ARTAXERXES I, a son of Xerxes I and Amestris, whose name Flavius Josephus (Jewish Antiquities 11.6.1.) gives as Cyrus, Persian king 465-64 to 424-23 B.C. Greek authors (first Plutarch, Artoxerxes 1.1) give him the surname “Longhanded, Long-armed” (Makrocheir, Latin Macrochir, Longimanus, New Persian Ardašīr-e derāzdast). They explain the term symbolically (cf. Pollux, Onomastikon 2.151) as “with far-reaching power” or in a rationalized manner, because his right arm was longer than the left one (Plutarch, loc. cit.). In 465-64, in the course of a court revolution, the details of which are not clear (Ctesias F 13f. in Jacoby, Fragmente; Aristoteles, Politica 5.10.1311 b37; Diodorus 11.69.1-6; Justin 3.1.2-9), Xerxes was murdered by court officials, including the chief of his life-guards Artapanus. They accused Darius, Xerxes’ oldest son, of being the murderer. After having put aside his brother, the still young Artaxerxes (Justin 3.1.3) ascended the throne and killed Artapanus (who had made an attempt on the new king’s life) and the other murderers (Diodorus 11.71.1); he was aided by the general Megabyzus, his brother-in-law. The exact month-dates of all these events are not given. Artaxerxes’ accession year is generally thought to be the year 284 of the Babylonian Nobonassar era (beginning in December, 465 B.C.), that is, the 4th year of Olympiad 78.
This revolution and the fall of Artapanus caused further rebellions. One in Bactria was led either by the satrap Artabanus (Ctesias F 14) or more plausibly, by another brother of the king, Hystaspes (Diodorus 11.69.2), who also asserted a claim to the throne. In Egypt the Libyan king Inarus (Ctesias, loc. cit.; Thucydides 1.104.1) also headed a revolt. Since Inarus asked the Athenians for help, the Egyptian revolt of the following years resulted in another confrontation of the Persians and the Greeks. With the utmost exertion of military forces, as well as diplomacy, Artaxerxes succeeded in subjugating and reconquering Egypt, but only in 455-54. First Inarus overthrew the Persians under the king’s uncle (according to Ctesias, his brother) Achaemenes, who was the satrap of Egypt, and then an Athenian fleet under Cimon won a great triumph over the Persian ships on the Egyptian coast. Having looked in vain for an alliance with Sparta (Thucydides 1.109.2f.), Artaxerxes sent a relieving force commanded by Megabyzus, who set free the Persians enclosed in the so-called White Wall at Memphis for more than a year. Megabyzus defeated Inarus and the Athenians, besieged them at Byblus in the Nile delta, and forced them to surrender on safe retreat in the beginning of 455-54 (Herodotus 3.12.4, 160.2; 7.7; Thucydides 1.104, 109-10; Ctesias F 14; Isocrates 8.86; Diodorus 11.71.3-6, 74-75, 77.1-5). An Arsames was then appointed as the new satrap of this province, which now remained definitely under Persian control. He probably is the same person who is attested as the sender and addressee on a series of Aramaic papyri. Shortly after Callias’ peace (see below), Megabyzus rebelled in Syria against Artaxerxes. According to Ctesias (F 14), this was caused by the execution of Inarus and the captured Greeks by the king, contrary to the agreement the general had made with them. Two armies under Usiris and Menostates were defeated by Megabyzus. Finally a settlement was arranged by Amestris and by Amytis (the king’s sister and the wife of Megabyzus); a quarrel and reconciliation between the two men took place a second time some years later (Ctesias, ibid.).
Soon after his accession, Artaxerxes gave refuge to the fugitive Themistocles, thus pardoning his father’s greatest antagonist. After some time Themistocles went back to Asia Minor, where he governed Magnesia, Lampsacus, and Myus and protected them against Greek attacks (Thucydides 1.137.3-138.5; Cornelius Nepos, Themistocles 9.1-10.3). Artaxerxes’ mildness and highmindedness are praised by Plutarch (Artoxerxes 1.1); he was a capable, resolute, and skillful monarch (especially in foreign affairs). In spite of his youth, he showed statesmanship and seemed qualified to renew Persia’s world power status. He is termed a strong and brave warrior (Cornelius Nepos, De Regibus 1.4) passionately interested in hunting (Ctesias F 14). But in internal affairs of the court and the family, other persons, notably Amestris and Amytis (see above), influenced the king, so that he has also been called a weakling commanded by the harem.
In 450 B.C. a large Athenian fleet made a new attack on Cyprus. It gained a victory but lost its leader Cimon, who died in Citium (Plutarch, Cimon 18.1-19.4). Artaxerxes sent as envoys to Athens his successful generals of the Egyptian campaign, Artabazus and Megabyzus. In reply an Athenian delegation led by Callias came to Susa; in the winter of 449-48 the so-called peace of Callias (or Cimon) was negotiated (Herodotus 7.151; Thucydides 1.112.2-4; Diodorus 12.2.3-4.6, 26.2; Cornelius Nepos, Cimon 3.4; Plutarch, Cimon 13.4-6). The basis for settlement was the status quo ante, whereby Persians and Athenians delimited their respective spheres of rule. Athens gave up Egypt, Cyprus, and the Ionian cities on the Anatolian coast (these being now autonomous), while the Persians promised not to advance an army beyond the Halys river or to send their larger ships beyond Phaselis in Pamphylia or beyond the “dark rocks” at the entrance to the Euxine Sea. Callias regarded this treaty, contrary to common Athenian opinion, as a diplomatic victory. While it manifests the results of Persian diplomacy and Greek corruptibility, it also indicates the decline of the Persian empire. In 440-39 Athens broke the treaty by attacking Samos, then at war with Miletus. Pericles had already sent Athenian reinforcements to the latter state (under democratic government), while the satrap of Lydia, Pissuthnes, had responded by aiding the oligarchic Samos (Thucydides 1.115.4, 116.3; Diodorus 12.27.1-28.4; Plutarch, Pericles 25.2-26.4). When the Peloponnesian war broke out in 431, first Sparta (Thucydides 2.67.1-3, 4.50.1-2) and then Athens tried to enter into relations with the Persian Great King; but no treaty had been achieved when Artaxerxes died in the prime of life in 424-23 (Thucydides 4.50.3; Diodorus 12.64.1; his last date is attested in this year, day 29, month 11, regnal year 41, in a Babylonian document, BM 33342; see M. W. Stolper, AMI 16, 1983 [1985], pp. 223-36). The generally accepted date of his death in 425-24 seems based on the Babylonian Nabonassar era; but the sources show some confusion about the length of his reign: Ctesias, for instance, gives 42 years, Diodorus 40. The chronology is complicated by the brief and officially unrecognized reigns of Artapanus before, and of Xerxes II and Sogdianus after his own.
It should be noted both Ezra and Nehemiah were officials in his court. Furthermore, the Encylopedia Iranica also cites this about Artaxerxes I:
Under Artaxerxes I the situation of the Jews in Israel considerably improved. The king appointed the orthodox scribe Ezra as a sort of court official for Jewish affairs. In the seventh regnal year Ezra proceeded to Jerusalem with about 1,500 Jewish families of the exile community (Ezra 7:7ff.). They included many priests, Levites, and temple slaves and brought sacrificial utensils and abundant money. Ezra was authorized to be their leader by Artaxerxes and commanded to regulate the Jews’ life according to the Mosaic Law (edict in Ezra 7:11-26). The king thus conceded a measure of autonomy. In year 20 the king sent his cupbearer Nehemiah (one of several high officials who were Jews) to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Nehemiah 1:1, 2:1). He was governor of Judea for 12 years (ibid., 5:14) and then returned to Susa. The restoration of the Temple, previously ordered by Cyrus the Great, so progressed in this reign that it was completed in year six of Darius II (Ezra 6:15).
Now, for a chronological overview where the Book of Esther actually takes place:
a. Now after these things: Some 60 largely uneventful years passed between Ezra 6 and Ezra 7. The ruler of Persia at the end of that period was Artaxerxes, who is also known to history as Artaxerxes Longimanus, the successor to Xerxes, the king who married Esther. The events of the book of Esther took place between Ezra 6-7.
i. “There can be no reasonable doubt that his reference is to the son and successor of Xerxes – known by the Greeks as ‘Macrocheir,’ and by the Romans as ‘Longimanus’ – Artaxerxes ‘of the long hand,’ for this Artaxerxes alone enjoyed a sufficiently extended reign to include both the commencement of Ezra’s public work and the later scenes in the life of Nehemiah which the chronicler associates with the same king.” (Adeney)
ii. “If this was Artaxerxes I as the traditional view maintains, which we believe is correct, Ezra arrived in Palestine in 458 (457)…. The traditional view assumes a gap of almost sixty years between the events of chapter 6 and chapter 7.” (Yamauchi)
Was he even Esther’s son or stepson? Was Amestris Esther? I decided to jump to the Thru the Bible Commentary’s comment on Esther 9. The late J. Vernon McGee also writes on who might possibly be the mother of Artaxerxes I. If Esther was really Amestris, that would make Artarxerxes I Longinus half-Jewish. If not, Esther was one of the many stepmothers to Artaxexes I. Was Artaxerxes I the child of Vashti or not? Herodotus the Greek historian records that Xerxes returned home after his defeat in the Greek campaign and that Amestris was cold and vindictive. It would seem cold and vindictive for Esther to carry things out. Remember that the Jewish people were nearly murdered by a wicked man’s brutal campaign.
I’m slowing things down to understand Artaxerxes I’s role in writing the letter.
Reformed Baptist Christian Blogger 