ESTIKNXK. 



ETHELBKHT. 



816 



women, in one day, and to take the spoil of them for a prey (ver. 13), 

 the king aud Hainan sat down to drink;" but the fickle tyrant, 

 influenced in the meantime by the pathetic entreaties of Esther, and 

 by the recollection that Mordecai bad discovered a conspiracy against 

 hi. life, was induced to bang his favourite Hainan on a gallows thirty 

 yards high, which that minister had prepared for Mordecai. He then 

 promoted Mordecai to the highest honours in the empire ; and still 

 yielding to the influence of the fair Jewess aud of Mordecai, he hastily 

 fauued orders empowering all the Jews " to destroy, to slay, and to 

 cans* to perish all the people that would assault them, both little 

 ones and women, in one day, throughout ail the provinces of King 

 Ahasuerns, and to take the spoil of them for a prey" (viii. 11, 12), so 

 that " the Jews smote all their enemies with the sword, with slaughter 

 and destruction, and did whst they would unto those that hated them" 

 (chap. iz. 6). By the special request of Esther, the ten sons of Ham an 

 were hanged on the gallows, and in the city of Susa the Jews massacred 

 800 of the king's Persian subjects, and in the provinces 75,000 (ix. 12, 

 13, 15, 16). This signal revenge of Hainan's intended destruction of 

 the Jews in Persia has ever since been commemorated (iz. 21-28) on 

 the 14th and 15th days of the month Adar, in the Jewish 'Feast of 

 Purim,' that is, in Persian, ' the lot*,' with reference to those which 

 were cast before Human (chap. iii. 7 ; ix. 26). The word which in 

 the authorised version is repeatedly translated 'gallows,' should 

 properly be ' cross,' or tree. Hence it was that in the first ages of 

 Christianity the Jews, when celebrating this feast of Purim, were 

 accused of deriding the Christian crucifixion, in abusing and setting 

 fire to an effigy of Human affixed to a lofty wooden cross a custom 

 which ou this account was abolished in the Roman empire by the 

 decrees of Justinian and Theodosius. 



The book of Esther is a canonical book, and _though placed after 

 that of Nehemioh, comes chronologically between the sixth and 

 seventh chapters of the book of Ezra. Various opinions have been held 

 as to who was the writer of it. Augustin, Epiphanius, and Isidore sup- 

 posed the author to have been Ezra. Eusebius assigns a later date. 

 Some writers have attributed it to the high-priest Joachim ; others 

 believe it to have been composed by the Jewish synagogue, to whom 

 Esther and Mordecai wrote (iz. 20-29) ; but by tho greater number 

 Mordecai himself is thought to be the author, and Elias Levita, in his 

 'Mass. Hamum,' asserts this to be a fact unquestionable. The original, 

 according to Dr. Adam Clarke, was probably written in the language 

 of ancient Persia. The mo.-t likely opinion, that of Home, is that, with 

 some explanations and adaptations, it was extracted from the Persian 

 nnn*1', possibly by Ezra, Nehemiah, or Mordecai, which would account 

 for its peculiarities. St. Hieronymns and several other fathers regarded 

 this book as wholly uncanonical, because the name of God or religion 

 is not once mentioned or alluded to, and they have been followed by 

 some modern writers, as Cajetan and De Lyra ; but the Council of 

 Trent pronounced it to be wholly canonical ; and while the Protestant 

 churches admit into the canon only what is found in the Hebrew 

 copies, that i, as far as to the end of the third verse of chapter x., the 

 Greek and Roman churches use as canonical the Greek version and 

 Latin Vulgate, which contain each ten more verses of chapter x. and 

 six additional chapters. By the Jews the book has been always 

 considered as one of the most precious of their sacred scriptures, and 

 as a perfectly authentic history of real events which took place about 

 B.C. 519. They call it ' Mcgilah,' that is, ' The Volume,' and hold it 

 in the highest estimation; believing that whatever destruction may 

 happen to the other scriptures, Esther and the Pentateuch will always 

 be preserved by a particular Providence. Copies exist iu the Hebrew, 

 Syriac, Chaldaic, Greek, and Latin ; each of which widely differs from 

 the others, and all, especially the Greek and Chaldaic, are greatly 

 different from the Hebrew. The Chaldaic text contains five times 

 more than the Hebrew, and a notice of the various readings would 

 fill a large volume. Commentators differ much in determining to 

 which of the Persian and Median kings belongs the name of Ahasuenu, 

 whose kingdom extended from India to Ethiopia over 127 provinces 

 (L 1). Souie suppose him to be Darius Hystaspe*. Scaliger and Jahn 

 say Xerxes. By Capellus he is identified with Ochus, and by Arch- 

 bishop Usher with Ltarius the son of Hystaspea, Dean Pridoaux and 

 I T. Adam Clarke with greater probability take him to be Artazorzes, 

 who received the cognomen of Longimsnus. or Longhand cJ. 

 EdTlENNE. [STEHIMS.I 



KTHKLBALD, King of Wessez, was the eldest surviving son of 

 Ethelwulf, who resigned to him the throne of that state in 855 or 866. 

 (ETBELWULr.) On the death of Ethelwulf in 857 or 858, Ethclbald 

 married his young stepmother, Judith of France; but the vehement 

 remonstrance* of bwitbin, bishop of Winchester, prevailed upon hiui, 

 after rome time, to abandon the incestuous connection. Judith 

 afterward* became the wife of Baldwin, count of Flanders, and the 

 ancestress of Matilda, the wife of William the Conqueror, and, through 

 her, of all the succeeding kings of England. The chroniclers speak in 

 very favourable Urms of the subsequent conduct of Ethelbald ; but 

 although I.e had greatly distinguished himself in the wan with the 

 Dane* in his father's time, his own reign is not marked by any military 

 event*. He died in SCO, and was succeeded by hi* nczt brother, 



Ibert 



I.THELBERT, or, 01 th name is written by Bede, AKDILBERCT, 

 is described as the fourth kiu^ of Kent in lineal descent from Uengist, 



through Eric or Aesc, Ooha or Uchta, and Krmcric, whom he succeeded 

 while yet a child in the year 560. As the representative of the first 

 leader of the Anglo-Saxons and the fouuder of the oldest kingdom of 

 the Heptarchy, Ethelbert. as soon as he attained manhood, engaged in 

 a contest for the title of Brctwalda with Ceawlin, king of Wessez, who 

 claimed that supreme dignity as the grandson of Cerdic. He invaded 

 Wessez in 563, but the war was speedily ended by his defeat in a great 

 battle fought at Wibbandune, now Wimbledon, in Surrey. This was 

 the first instance of one of the states of the Heptarchy drawing the 

 sword against another. Ethelbert however, according to Bede, came 

 to be acknowledged as Bretwalda about the year 589, after the decline 

 of the fortunes of Ceawlin, who was deposed about this time by hU 

 subjects, and died a few years after. Ethelbert retained the supremacy 

 during all the remainder of his reign, though it would seem that his 

 title never was acknowledged by the kings of Northumberland. 



The most memorable event in the reign of Ethelbert was his 

 conversion to Christianity, and tho establishment of that religion in 

 his dominions by the ministration of St. Augustin. [Auuusnx, ST.] 

 Ethelbert professed himself a Christian, and was baptised on the feast 

 of Pentecost, 597. The Christian worship however must have been 

 familiar to him long before this time, for he had been married to a 

 Christian wife, Bertha, the daughter of Charibert, king of Paris, in the 

 year 570, aud she and her attendants hod continued to practise their 

 own religion under the guidance of Liudhard, a bUhop who had 

 accompanied her from France. After his conversion, Ethelbert exerted 

 himself with zeal in the diffusion of his new faith. He founded the 

 bishopric of Rochester about the year 604 in his own dominions, in 

 addition to the archbishopric of Canterbury, the establishment of 

 which is dated from the arrival of Augustin. To him also must be 

 principally attributed the foundation, about the same time with that 

 of Rochester, of the bishopric of London, in the state of Essex, which 

 was at that time governed in subordination to Kent by Sebert, 

 Saebryht, or Saba, a nephew of Ethelbert. Bede says that the cathe- 

 dral of London, which was dedicated, like the others that have since 

 been built on the same site, to St. Paul, was erected at the joiul 

 expense of Ethelbert and Sebert. The conversion of the king aud 

 people of Essex had previously been effected through the influence of 

 the king of Kent. It was also through his daughter Edilberga, who 

 married Edwin, king of Northutnbria, that Christianity was introduced 

 into that state. [EDWIN.] 



Ethelbert deserves especial remembrance in English history on 

 another account. He is the author of the earliest of our written laws, 

 the collection of 'Doom*,' as Bede calls them, " which he established 

 with the consent of his Witan in the days of St. Augustin." They 

 are written iu Saxon, or English, as it is termed by Bede, although 

 all tho other Teutonic nations employed the Latin language in their 

 codes ; and they are the earliest laws that exist iu any barbarous or 

 modern tongue. There is no reason however to suppose that the 

 regulations which they established were in general new. They relate, 

 to quote the words of Sir F. Palgrave (' Eug. Com.,' p. 44), " only to 

 the amount of the pecuniary fines payable for various transgressions, 

 the offences against the church being first enumerated. These were 

 of new introduction ; but every other mulct was known before ; and 

 it is probable that the principal benefit of the law consisted in a 

 fairer apportionment of the compensation to the crime than could bo 

 obtained according to the older customs." The collection consists 

 altogether of eighty-nine enactments or clauses ; at least cs it has coma 

 down to modern times. But the only copy of it which we possess is 

 that contained in the volume called the 'Textua Roffensis,' which 

 was compiled by Ernulphus, bishop of Rochester, iu the early part o( 

 the 12th century ; and " it is difficult to believe," as Sir F. Palgravo 

 has observed, " that the text of on Auglo-Noruian manuscript of tho 

 12th century exhibits an unaltered specimen of the Anglo-Saxou of 

 the reign of Ethelbert. The language has evidently been modernised 

 and corrupted by successive transcriptions. Some passages are quite 

 unintelligible. . . . Neither is there any proof whatever of the integrity 

 of the text It cannot be asserted with any degree of confidence that 

 we have the whole of tho law. Destitute of any statutory clause or 

 enactment, it is from tho title or rubric alone that we learn the name 

 of the legislator." The next oldest Anglo-Saxon laws that have been 

 preserved (those of Hlothaere aud Eadric, also kings of Kent) are 

 more than a century and a half later than Ethelbert. 



Ethelbert died iu 616. He appears in his old age to have married 

 a second wife, but her name has not been recorded. All that we 

 know of her is, that after the death of Ethelbert, her youth and 

 beauty were sufficient to tempt his son and successor, Eadbald, to 

 take her to his bed, and of course to renounce at the same time thu 

 profession of Christianity. After a short time however Eadbald 

 dismissed his stepmother, and returned to the faith be had abandoned, 

 of which be ever after continued a firm supporter. 



KTHKI.l'.KltT, King of Wessez, was the second surviving sou of 

 Ethelwulf, by whom ho was made king of the subordinate state 

 composed of Kent, Essex, Sussex, and Surrey in 852, on tho death of 

 in. [KniKi.wuLF.J On the death of his elder brother Ethel- 

 bald, in 860, although excluded by bin father's will from the succession 

 to the supremo crown of Wessez, he was preferred by the Witan to 

 his younger brother Ethelred, who claimed under tho will. Tliu 

 chronicles celebrate the courage and military talents of L'thelbvrt: 



