Wherein the king granted the Jews which were in every city to gather themselves together, and to stand for their life, to destroy, to slay, and to cause to perish, all the power of the people and province that would assault them, both little ones and women, and to take the spoil of them for a prey,
The king granted the Jews ... to stand for their life ... to slay ... all ... that would assault them. The fixed and unalterable character claimed for Persian edicts often placed the king in a very awkward dilemma; because, however bitterly he might regret things done in a moment of haste and thoughtlessness, it was beyond even his power to prevent the consequences. This was the reason on account of which the king was laid under a necessity not to reverse but to issue a contradictory edict; according to which it was enacted that, if pursuant to the first decree the Jews were assaulted, they might, by virtue of the second, defend themselves, and even slay their enemies.
However strange, and even ridiculous, this mode of procedure may appear, it was the only one which, from the peculiarities of court etiquette in Persia, could be adopted. Instances occur in sacred (Daniel 6:14), no less than profane, history. Many passages of the Bible attest the truth of the this, particularly the well-known incident of Daniel's being cast into the den of lions, in conformity with the rash decree of Darius, though, as it afterward appeared, contrary to the personal desire of that monarch. That the law of Persia has undergone no change in this respect, and the power of the monarch in not less immutable, appears from many anecdotes related in the books of modern travelers through that country.