Verses 7 through 10 are clearly a unit. Syntactically they begin with a conjunction and together with the Hebrew direct object marker ʾeth followed by ten names. Only after identifying the father of the ten people cited does the author provide the verb, “they [the Jews] killed.” Most versions bring the verb forward from verse 10 to verse 7; New Jerusalem Bible even adds a footnote explaining that this is done for the sake of clarity. Good News Translation, Bible en français courant, and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch also bring forward the information that these were Haman’s sons, and number the verses as a group (7-10). If translators wish to keep the order of the Hebrew and present the name of Haman after the names of his sons, they may restate verse 10 slightly to say “those were the ten sons of Haman…” (for comments on Haman’s identity see 3.1, 10).

The ten names are all Persian and occur only here in the Old Testament. Translators will need to transliterate and adapt to the sound system of the receptor language. In the Hebrew text the names of the ten sons are listed in columns, but the reason for that format is not known. The names consist of three groups of three names, plus one extra name. The first name of each group begins with the letter “P” and the last name of each group begins with the letter “A.” Though Traduction œcuménique de la Bible (1980 edition) copies the traditional Hebrew form by placing the names in columns, few other translations follow the Hebrew. Since the reasons for the Hebrew form are not known, and since the use of columns would have no meaning for readers today, translators will probably want to place the names in regular paragraph form. However, appropriate conjunctions must be used in citing a list of ten names.

A very striking clause brings this syntactic unit to a close. Though the edict allowed the Jews to plunder (8.11), they laid no hand on the plunder. The Hebrew reads literally “and [or, but] on [the] plunder not they extended [or, laid] the hand of them.” No reason is given to explain why no looting occurred, but that fact seems to be significant, since it is repeated again in verses 15 and 16. Perhaps the writer is alluding to the story of 1 Sam 15, in which King Saul’s fall from divine favor came when he took the best of the plunder and did not totally destroy Agag and the Amalekites as God had commanded (see comments on 3.1).

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Noss, Philip A. A Handbook on Esther (The Hebrew Text). (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .