■with the heathen for the sake of the God of Israel. — Yer. 22. Hereupon they kept the feast of unleavened bread for seven days with joy; for the Lord had made them joyful, and turned to them (i.e. had made them joyful by turning to them) the heart of the king of Assyria. With regard to the expression, comp. 2 Chron. xx. 27, Neh. xii. 43. The kincr of Assur is the Persian kin^ Darius, who as ruler of the former realm of Assyria is thus designated. The turning of this king's heart to them consisted in this, that their hands were strengthened for the work of the house of God, i.e. that through the goodwill of the king they were enabled to complete the building of their temple, and to restore the worship of the God of Israel. On p)J}? D?T.> comp. 1 Sam. xxiii. 19.
II.— THE RETURN OF EZRA THE SCRIBE FROM BABYLON TO JERUSALEM, AND HIS ENTRY UPON HIS OFFICIAL DUTIES THERE.— Chap. VII.-X.
In the seventh year of the reign of King Artaxerxes Longimanus, Ezra the priest and scribe returned with certain priests, Levites, and other Israelites from Babylon to Jerusalem, furnished with a royal commission to provide for the worship of God, and the observance of the law, according to the ordinance of God, by the community, chap. vii. and viii. This mission he began to execute by sending away such heathen women as were married to Israelites.
Vers. 1-10 form the introduction to the narrative which follows of Ezra's return to Jerusalem and his ministry there, and speak in general terms of himself and his arrival at Jerusalem with a band of exiles. They are followed, vers. 11-26, by a copy of the royal commission, and a thanksgiving, vers. 27, 28, on the part of Ezra, for the mercv of God bestowed upon him.
Vers. 1-6. What follows is slightly combined with the former occurrences by the formula " after these things," without any more exact chronological definition; comp. Gen. xv. 1, xxii. 1, and elsewhere. Between the dedication of the temple in the sixth year of Darius and the arrival of Ezra in Jerusalem, a period of fifty-seven years had elapsed. " In the reign of Artachshasta king of Persia, went up Ezra," etc. The verb of the subject X~}]y does not follow till ver. 6, where, after the interposition of the long genealogy, vers. 1-5, the distant subject is ac;ain taken up in Ntty RW. It is all but universally agreed that Artaxerxes Longimanus is intended by Nfip'^nrnx; the explanation of this appellation as Xerxes in Joseph. Aniiq. xi. 5. 1, for which Fritzsche (on 1 Esclr. viii. 1) has recently decided, being a mere conjecture on the part of that not very critical historian. The fact that the Artachshasta of the book of Nehemiah (i. 1, v. 14, xiii. 6) can be no other than Artaxerxes, is decisive of this point: for in Neh. xiii. 6 the thirty-second year of Artachshasta is mentioned; while according to Neh. viii. 9, xii. 26, 36, Ezra and Nehemiah jointly exercised their respective offices at Jerusalem.1 Ezra is called Ben Seraiah, whose pedigree is traced to Eleazar the son of Aaron; Seraiah the son of Azariah, the son of Hilkiah, was the father of Josedec the high priest carried into captivity (1 Chron. v. 40, etc.), and was himself the high priest whom Nebuchadnezzar slew at Riblah (2 Kings xxv. 18-21). Between the execution of Seraiah in the year 588 and the return of Ezra from Babylon in 458 B.C., there is a period of 130 years. Hence Ezra could have been neither the son nor grandson of Seraiah, but only his great or great-great-grandson. When we consider that Joshua, or Jeshua (ii. 2), the high priest who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel, was the grandson of Seraiah, we cannot but
1 Very superficial are the arguments, and indeed the whole pamphlet, Etude Chronoloyique des livres cCEsdras et de Nt'hemie, Paris 1868, p. 40, etc., by which F. de Saulcy tries to show that the Artachshasta of Ezra vii. and of Nehemiah is Artaxerxes II. (MnemonX regard Ezra, who returned thence 78 years later, as a greatgreat-grandson of Seraiah. Moreover, we are justified in inferring from the fact that Ezra is not, like Joshua, designated as Ben Josedech, that he did not descend from that line of Seraiah in which the high-priestly dignity was hereditary, but from a younger son, and hence that his immediate ancestors were not (though his forefathers from Seraiah upwards were) of high-priestly descent. Hence the names of Ezra's ancestors from Seraiah up to Aaron (vers. 1-5) agree also with the genealogy of the high-priestly race (1 Chron. v. 30-40), with the one deviation that in ver. 3, between Azariah and Meraioth, six members are passed over, as is frequently the case in the longer genealogies, for the sake of shortening the list of names. — In ver. 6 Ezra, for the sake of at once alluding to the nature of his office, is designated 'm THD "i3iD a scribe skilful in the law of Moses. The word laiD means in older works writer or secretary; but even so early as Jer. viii. 8 the lying pen of the D^3D is spoken of, and here therefore "IBID has already attained the meaning of one learned in the Scripture, one who has made the written law a subject of investigation. Ezra is, however, the first of whom the predicate "i^Dn, 6 >ypafjLfjLaTev$y is used as a title. He is so called also in the letter of Artaxerxes (ver. 11), because he is said (ver. 9) to have applied his heart to seek out and to do the law of the Lord, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgment, i.e. because he had made the investigation of the law, for the sake of introducing the practice of the same among the congregation, his life-task; and the king granted him all his desire, according to the hand of the Lord his God upon him. The peculiar expression V?V Vr6tf mil* T3, which is found only here and in vers 9, 28, viii. 18, Neh. ii. 8, 18, and in a slightly altered guise in Ezra viii. 22, 31, a according to the good hand of his God, which was over him," means: according to the divine favour or divine care arranging for him; for the hand of God is niton, the good (ver. 9, and viii. 18), or natBp, viii. 22. ntfjja, the desire, request, demand, occurs only here and in the book of Esther. — Ver. 7. With Ezra went up a number of Israelites, priests; and Levites. \0 partitive: a part of the whole. That they went up with Ezra appears from the context, and is expressly stated both in the royal edict (ver. 13) and in the further description of the expedition (ver. 28, viii. 1). They went up in the seventh year of Artaxerxes, and reached Jerusalem in the fifth month of that year. — In ver. 8 Ezra is again, as in ver. 6, the subject of the sentence; the intervening seventh verse being really only in apposition with ver. 6. — In ver. 9 the time occupied by the journey is more precisely defined; *3 is explanatory. Namely, on the first day of the first month, he had appointed the journey from Babylon, etc. The Keri ID? fcwn can only mean, ipsum erat fandamentum profectionis, as J. H. Mich, after R. Sal. explains it, for "ID* is pointed as the construct state. The departure of the expedition from the place of meeting occurred, according to viii. 31, on the twelfth day of the first month. Since, however, they encamped three days there, making the final preparations for their journey, eleven days might easily elapse between the period when the whole caravan had assembled, and the day of actual departure. The Keri offers no appropriate signification; for since Kin can only be taken for the subject, and 'on "ID* for the predicate, the sentence would contain an anacoluthon. To translate fcttH by ipsum cannot be justified by the usages of the language, for there is no such emphasis on ID* as to cause Kin to be regarded as an emphatic reference to the following noun. TDS must be pointed 1DJ or IB*, as the third pers. perf. Kal or Piel, meaning to arrange, to appoint, and fcttn referred to Ezra. On mitsn m^h T3, comp. ver. 6. The hand of his God era- ciously arranged for him, for he had prepared his heart to seek and to do the law of Jahve, i.e. to make the law of God his rule of action, tanp pan, like 2 Chron. xii. 14, xix. 3, xxx. 19. To teach in Israel statutes and judgments, as both are prescribed in the law of God.
Vers. 11-28. The commission given by Artachshasta to Ezra (vers. 11-26), ivith a short postscript by Ezra (vers. 27 and 28). — Ver. 11. The introductory title, "This is the copy of the letter." On lJKhb, comp. iv. 11, and on jW?, iv. 7. Ezra is here, as also in the letter itself, vers. 12, 21, and in Neh. viii. 9, xii. 26, called only ">BiDn jnbn? the priest, the scribe; in other places we find merely one title or the other: either the priest, x. 10, 16, Neh. viii. 2; or the scribe, Neh. viii. 4, 13, xii. 36. To designate him according to his rank, as the priest, seems to have subsequently become more customary; hence in the first book of Esdras he is constantly called o 'Iepeix;. ">??iDn is explained by the addition 'U1 "nyi ISDj scribe of the words of the law of Jahve and of His statutes to Israel, i.e. the scribe, whose investigations referred to the law of God. More briefly in vers. 12 and 21: scribe of the law. — Ver. 12, etc. The letter containing the royal commission is given in the Chaldee original. It is questionable what explanation must be given to TD3 in the title. If it were the adjective belonging to Krrc isd, we should expect the emphatic state KTD3. Hence Bertheau combines it with the following rDJDI as an abbreviation, " completeness, etc.," which would signify that in the royal commission itself this introductory formula would be found fully given, and that all the words here missing are represented by njJEfo. This would be, at all events, an extremely strange expression. We incline to regard W2 as an adverb U3ed adjectively: To the scribe in the law of God perfectly, for the perfect scribe, etc.-, corresponding with the translation of the Vulgate, doctissimo. The commission begins with an order that those Israelites who desire to go to Jerusalem should depart with Ezra, because the king and his seven counsellors send him to order matters in Judah and Jerusalem according to the law of God, and to carry thither presents and free-will offerings as a contribution towards the sacrifices, and other matters necessary for the worship of God, vers. 13-19. "By me is commandment given," as in vi. 8. sjno?... 2?H£9 /3: Every one of the people of Israel in my kingdom, who shows himself willing to go up to Jerusalem, let him go up with thee. On ^JHJ and the infin. ^n^ comp. v. 5. — Ver. 14. "Forasmuch as thou (art) sent by the king and his seven counsellors to inquire (to institute an inquiry) concerning Judah and Jerusalem, according to tlie law of thy God, which is in thy hand," i.e. which thou handiest or possessest and understandest. The seven counsellors of the king formed the supreme court of the realm; see remarks on Esth. i. 14. It is obvious from the context that nw must be completed by H38j for it is evidently Ezra who is addressed both in what precedes and follows, 7JJ it"ij53, to inquire concerning (the condition of) Judah, i.e. concerning the religious and civil relations of the Jewish community, to arrange them in conformity with the divine law. — Ver. 15, etc. "To carry the silver and gold which the king and his counsellors have freely offered to the God of Israel, whose habitation is at Jerusalem, and all the silver and gold which thou shalt obtain in all the province of Babylon, with the free-will offering of the people and the priests, willingly offering for the house of their God at Jerusalem." Three kinds of offerings for the temple are here spoken of: 1st, the gifts of the king and his counsellors for the service of the God of Israel; 2d, the gold and the silver that Ezra should obtain in the province of Babylon, i.e. by the collection which he was consequently empowered to make among the non-Israelite population of Babylon; 3c/, the free-will offerings of his fellow-countrymen. nOOTlfl is an abstract formed from the infin. Hithpael: the freely given. The participle P^WIO (not in the stat. empli., i.e. without an article) is but slightly connected, in the sense of, if they, or what they, may freely offer. — Vers. 17-19. The application of these contributions, nn «i?"v?j for this very reason, sc. because furnished by the king and his counsellors, and by the heathen and Israelite inhabitants of Babylon, thou shalt diligently buy with this money bullocks, rams, lambs, with their meat-offerings and their drink-offerings (the meat and drink offerings pertaining by the law, Num. xv. 1, etc., to the sacrifices), and offer them upon the altar... The Pael ^yr\ instead of the Aphel, vi. 10, 17. The distribution and collection were thus chiefly destined for the support of public worship, but were larger and more abundant than was necessary for this purpose. Hence the further injunction, ver. 18: u And whatsoever shall seem good to thee and to thy brethren to do with the rest of the gold and the silver, that do after the will of your God," i.e. according to the precept of the law in which the will of God is expressed. u Thy brethren " are the priests, to whom was committed the care of the temple and its worship.—:Ver. 19. The gold and silver vessels, moreover, which, according to viii. 25-27, the king and his counsellors, and the princes and all Israel, presented for the service of the house of God, he is to deliver before the God at Jerusalem (an abbreviated expression for the God whose dwelling is at Jerusalem). The noun!£v?, only here and in the Targums, in the Syriac |ri7i3, the service, corresponds with the Hebrew nniny. D?£> in the Aphel, to complete, to make full, then to deliver entirely, to consign. — Ver. 20. Ezra is to defray the expenses of all other things necessary for the temple from the royal treasury, on which account a royal order is despatched to the treasurer on this side the river. "And whatsoever more shall be needful for the house of thy God, which thou shalt have occasion to give" (i.e. whatever necessary expenses shall be incurred which cannot be determined beforehand), and for which the gifts and contributions already furnished to Ezra shall not suffice, he is to give, i.e. to defray, out of the house of the king's treasures, i.e. the royal treasury. For this purpose Artaxerxes commands all the treasurers on this side the river, that whatsoever Ezra shall require of them shall be immediately done. njK is an emphatic repetition of the pronoun, as in Dan. vii. 15, and frequently in Hebrew. — Ver. 22. Unto one hundred talents of silver, one hundred cors of wheat, one hundred baths of wine, one hundred baths of oil, and salt without prescription, i.e. as much as is needed. Cor had already become, even in Hebrew, the later word for chomer, e.g. 1 Kings v. 2, Ezek. xlv. 14. It was equal to ten ephahs or baths, almost two sheffels; see my bibl. Archaol. ii. § 126. The command closes with the injunction, ver. 23: Whatsoever is commanded by the God of heaven, i.e. whatever is needful according to the law for the service of God, let it be completely done for the house of the God of heaven; for why should the wrath of heaven come upon the realm of the king and of his sons % The air \ey. Kjrywi is derived from the Aryan, but is not to be regarded (as by Hitzig and Bertheau) as compounded of "HK and tfjTX; but probably (as by Haug in Ewald's blbh with N prosthetic, from the Zend root doreg, to grow, to flourish, to become firm, in the meaning of perfect in all parts, exact. The motive of the royal order, that the priests may offer acceptable offerings to the God of heaven, and pray for the life of the king and of his sons, recalls vi. 10. On the formula HE? VrTJ for why should wrath come, com p. iv. 22. — Ver. 24. The priests, the Levites, and all the servants of the temple, are also to be free from all customs and taxes, nnino DbTi, we also make known to vou (it is made known to you). These words also are addressed to the treasurers, as levyers of taxes on this side the river. That, with regard to all priests,... and (other) ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose upon them toll, tribute, or custom. The NrPN JVn '•nps are not worshippers in the house of God, but they who do service in the house of God. The expression comprises any servants of the temple who might have been omitted in the classes enumerated. On 'U1 v3 rrJ?9j comp. iv. 13. WW N7, (any one) has no right, with an infinitive following: it is allowed to no one to do. W?")P from Mp"j, Targ. forD'b\ On this matter, compare Josephus, Ant. xii. 3. 3, according to which Antiochus the Great freed the priests and Levites from taxation. — Ver. 25, etc. Finally, Ezra is empowered to appoint over his whole people (all the Jews) on this side the river, judges who know the law of God, and to inflict severe penalties upon those who transgress it. — Ver. 25. "Thou, Ezra, after the wisdom of thy God which is in thy hand (T^ **! like ver. 14), set magistrates and judges, which may judge all the people that are on this side the river, namely all such as know the laws of thy God, and teach ye them that know them not." The form *30 is i in per. Pael for
*3D, the A sound probably passing in rapid speech into the flatter E sound. u All the people on this side the river" is limited to Israelites or Jews by the further particulars, " who know the law of thy God," etc. These are to receive from Ezra judges, viz. such as are acquainted with the law, i.e. Israelite judges, and thus to be placed under the jurisdiction established at Jerusalem. The sentence, " and they who know it (the law) not, them teach ye, make them acquainted with it," does not refer to the heathen, but to born Israelites or Jews, who, living among the heathen, had not hitherto made the Mosaic law the rule of their lives. Such were the judges to constrain to the observance and obedience of the law. — Ver. 26. But whosoever will not do the law of thy God, and the law of the king, let a court be speedily (B3D) held on his account {i.e. let him be brought to justice, and punished). This, too, applies chiefly to such as were Israelites born. The law of the king is the present edict, the commission therein entrusted to Ezra: whoever opposes, neglects, or transgresses it, shall be condemned, whether to death, or to banishment, or to confiscation of goods, or to imprisonment. \\}... |n — the Hebrew DK... DK = sive... sive. Whf (Keri 'Vhf), rooting out (from &n^, to root out), i.e. banishment, exilium (Vulg.), not TrcaZela (LXX.).
Vers. 27 and 28. This royal commission granted to the Jews all they could possibly desire from the heathen governors of the country, for the establishment and furtherance of their civil and religious polity. By granting these privileges, Artaxerxes was not only treading in the footsteps of Cyrus and Darius Hystaspes, but even going beyond these princes in granting to the Jews a jurisdiction of their own. Without a magistrate who was one of themselves, the Jewish community could not well prosper in their own land; for the social and religious life of Israel were so closelv connected, that heathen magistrates, however well-intentioned, were incapable of exercising a beneficial influence upon the welfare of the Jews. Hence Ezra, having thus reported the royal commission, adds a thanksgiving to God for having put such a thing into the king's heart, namely, to beautify the house of the Lord, and for having granted him favour before the king and his counsellors. The sentence ntsn wi is a continuation of the preceding infinitive sentence in the tempus jinit.? before ^.^OS is the? comprehensive. Ezra names the beautifying of the house of God as the occasion of his thanksgiving, not only because this formed the chief matter of the roval favour, but also because the re-establishment of divine worship was the reestablishment of the moral and religious life of the community. u And I felt myself st'rengthened, and gathered together (so that I gathered together) the heads of Israel to go up with me (to Jerusalem)." Ezra assembled the heads, i.e. of houses, as fellow-travellers, because their decision would be a rule for the families at the head of which they stood. With their heads, the several races and families determined to return to the land of their fathers.
Vers. 1-14. A list of those heads of houses who returned with Ezra from Babylon to Jerusalem. Compare the parallel list, 1 Esdr. viii. 28-40.— Ver. 1. The title: « These are the heads of the houses, and (this is) their genealogy, who went up with me." Dn-nhK *fiftO for Dn>nhx-JV:i »B*q, as frequently. Bf''?!'"?™? u and their genealogy," is added, because in the list following the heads of the different houses are not merely enumerated according to their own names, but the names of the races to which they belonged are also stated. — Ver. 2. Priests and descendants of David. Of priests, Gershom of the sons of Phinehas, and Daniel of the sons of Ithamar. Gershom and Daniel are the names of heads of priestly houses, and "sons of Phinehas and sons of Ithamar" designations of races. Phinehas was the son of the high priest Eleazar, the son of Aaron, and Ithamar a younger son of Aaron, 1 Chron. v. 30 and 29. This does not signify that only the -two priests Gershom and Daniel went up with Ezra; for in ver. 24 he chose twelve from among the chief of the priests, who went up with him, to have charge of the gifts (Bertheau). The meaning is, that Gershom and Daniel, two heads of priestly houses, went up, and that the house of Gershom belonged to the race of Phinehas, and that of Daniel to the race of Ithamar. A Daniel is named among the priests in Neh. x. 7, but whether lie is identical with the Daniel in question does not appear. Of the sons (descendants) of David (the king), Hattush, as head of a house. A Hattush, son of Hashabniah, occurs Neh. iii. 10, and a priest of this name Neh. x. 5 and xii. 2. Hattush also holds the first place among the sons of Shemaiah enumerated 1 Chron. iii. 22, who probably were among the descendants of David. It seems strange that the numbers neither of the priests nor of the sons of David who went up with Ezra should be given, since from ver. 3 onwards, in the case of the houses of lay races, the numbers of those who returned to the home of their ancestors is regularly stated. — Vers. 3-14. Twelve lay houses are named both in the present text and in 1 Esdr. viii. 30-40. In ten cases the names of the races, which are uniformly introduced with ^20, are identical in both texts, viz. Parosh, Pahath-Moab, Adin, Elam, Shephatiah, Joab, Bebai, Azgad, Adonikam, and Bigvai. On the other hand, it appears surprising, 1st, that in the first house mentioned, before the name nj7??j besides " of the sons of Parosh," we have also iT3DB* \J2D (ver. 3), while before all the other names we find only u of the sons of" one individual; 2dly> that in ver. 5, after n^3B> *J3, instead of a name of the head of a house, only Ben Jahaziel follows; 3t%, that in ver. 10 also, after TVDW *2??S we have merely Ben Josiphiah, the names themselves being apparently omitted in these two last cases. This conjecture is corroborated by a comparison with the LXX. and 1 Esdr. viii., which shows, moreover, that it is not the personal name of the head of the house, but the name of the race, which has been lost. For ^KW p TODS' "on», ver. 5, we find in the LXX. airo tcov vlCov ZaOorjs Ze^evla^ u/o? ^A^arfK, and in 1 Esdr. viii. 32, etc i(ov vicov Za66r)<; Se^vta*; 'Ie£>]\ov; and for *TBDV» p irote »J3»1, ver. 10, in tlie LXX. teal airo Tcov vioov Baavi XeXtpiovO vio? 'Icoae^ia, and in 1 Esdr. viii. 36, etc twv vlS)V BavLas 2a\i/jLO)9 'Icoaacpiov. In ZaOor]? and "Baavi (Bavlas) we recognise &ttfiT and ^3 of Ezra ii. 8 and 10. Hence the text of ver. 5 needs emendation, and should run iTOattf KUtt *33D, and that of ver. 10, WO^ *?3 'jam. It is more difficult to decide concerning H*32BJ ^3D of ver. 3, though undoubtedly we have here too a corruption of the text. For, first, there is no other instance in the whole list of the sons of two men being cited before the proper name of the house; and then, too, the absence of the 1 copulative before 'a \}3D is opposed to the notion that the house of Zechariah was formed by a union of the sons of Shecaniah and Parosh, since in* this case the and could not be omitted. It is true that we have in the LXX. airo vlcov Xayavia teal airo vicov $6pos; but in this case the /cal is certainly derived from the translator, who was thus seeking to make sense of the words. In 1 Esdr. viii. we read Ao-ttovs rov Se^evlov; and AaTrovs corresponding with B^tan, the words rP33B> *03 (or p) are taken into the preceding verse. This treatment of the words Bertheau considers correct, because Hattush in 1 Chron. iii. 22 is reckoned amono; the descendants of Shecaniah. This conjecture is, however, a very doubtful one. For, first, in 1 Chron. iii. 22 Hattush is said to be of the sons of Shemaiah, and Shemaiah of the sons of Shecaniah; then we should as little expect any further statement in the case of Hattush as in the cases of Daniel and Gershom; and further, if he had been thus more precisely designated by naming his father, we should undoubtedly read fW3P p, not 'v *J3D, and thus the Masoretic text would at any rate be incorrect; and finally, 1 Esdras, where it differs from the LXX., is, generally speaking, no critical authority upon which to base safe conclusions. Under these circumstances, we must give up the hope of restoring the original text, and explaining the words i"P2DB> *03D. VWJ)7) te>V, " and with Zechariah, his genealogy of 150 males," i.e. with him his race, consisting of 150 males, registered in the genealogy of the race. In the case of the names which follow, the number only is given after the briefer expression te?.
A review, then, of the twelve races, according to the restoration of the original text in vers. 5 and 10, presents us with names already occurring in the list of the races who came from Babylon with Zerubbabel, ii. 3-15, with the exception of the sons of Joab, ver. 9, who are wanting in chap, ii., where, on the other hand, several other races are enumerated. Bertheau seeks to identify the sons of Joab, ver. 9, with the sons of Joab who in ii. 6 are reckoned with the sons of Pahath-Moab, and to explain their special enumeration in the present list, by the conjecture that the one house subsequently separated into the two houses of Pahath- Moab and Joab. This is, indeed, possible; but it is quite as probable that only one portion or branch of the sons (descendants) of Joab was combined with the race of the sons of Pahath-Moab, and that the rest of the bne Joab formed a separate house, no family of which returned with Zerubbabel. The occurrence of the other races in both lists is to be explained by the circumstance that portions of them returned with Zerubbabel, and that the rest did not follow till Ezra's departure. — Ver. 13. The addition E^iritf, last (comp. 2 Sam. xix. 12), is thus explained by J. H. Mich.: respectu eorum qui primum cum Zorohabele sub Cyro in patriam redierunt c. ii. 13. Bertheau, however, considers this explanation untenable, because D^"inK stands in the present series only with the sons of Adonikam, while it is nevertheless certain, that many families belonging also to other races than this had returned with Zerubbabel, in comparison with whom all who returned with Ezra might be called last. This reason, however, is not conclusive; for in ver. 13 the further statement also differs, both in form and matter, from those in the former verses. Here, instead of the name of the head of the house, we read the words " last, and these their names;" whereupon three names are given, and not till then 'til D;]W, " and with them sixty males." Here, then, it is not the head of the house who is named, but in his place three heads of families, amounting together to sixty males. Now, as these three families did not form a house, these sixty sons of Adonikam who returned with Ezra are, with regard to the six hundred and sixty-six sons of Adonikam who returned with Zerubbabel, designated the last, or last arrived, and thus comprised with them as one house. — Ver. 14. Of the sons of Bigvai also two heads are named, Uthai and Zabbud, and with them seventy males. In 1 Esdr. viii. 40, the names Uthai and Zabbud are corrupted into Ov6l 6 tov 'laTokicovpov. The total number of individuals belonging to these twelve races, who returned with Ezra, amounts, according to the Hebrew text, to 1496 males and fifteen heads; according to 1 Esdras, to 1690 males, and the thirteen heads of the twelve races, without reckoning the priests and sons of David, whose numbers are not stated.
Vers. 15—36. Account of the journey. — Vers. 15-20. The assembling of the expedition. When the Israelites who were about to return to Jerusalem had assembled, and were ready for starting, Ezra perceived that there were.no Levites among them. He then sent for certain chief men among them, and by means of the influence of Iddo, the chief at the place Casiphia, induced a number of Levites and Nethinim to determine on joining the expedition (vers. 15-20). He then proclaimed a fast at the place of meeting, for the purpose of supplicating God to grant them a prosperous journey (vers. 21—23). — Ver. 15. The travellers assembled at the river Ahava, where they encamped three davs. In ver. 15 the river is designated Nins"?K N3n i.e, either which comes (flows) towards Ahava, or flows into Ahava; in ver. 21 it is more briefly called KJHK inj, and in ver. 31 KJlW "^j which may mean the river of Ahava, of the region or district called Ahava, or, after the analogy of rn3 "tnij merely the river of the name of Ahava. It is doubtful which of these meanings is correct, the name Ahava being still unexplained. Comp. the various conjectures in A. G. F. Schirmer, observations e.ccg. crit. in libr. Esdrce, Vratisl. 1820, p. 28 sqq. The connection points to a place or district in the neighbourhood of Babylon;
hence Bertheau is inclined to regard Ahava as a tributary or canal of the Euphrates, flowing through a place, perhaps only a field or open space, of the same name, in the immediate neighbourhood of Babylon; while Ewald supposes it may be the river somewhat to the west or south of Euphrates, called by the Greeks Pallacopas, whose situation would suit the context, and whose name might arise from Nina:6a, the river Ahwa or Aba. The LXX. gives the name Evl; in 1 Esdr. viii. 40 and 61 we find Qepd, evidently a false reading. Josephus says quite generally, et? to irepav rov EvfppaTou. — When Ezra, during the three days7 encampment at this place, directed his attention to the people and the priests (2 pnrij to give heed, Neh. xiii. 7, Dan. ix. 23, and elsewhere), he found no Levites amoncr those who had assembled. Ver. 16. He then sent several chief men to Iddo, the chief man in the place Casiphia, to beg him and his brethren to bring him servants for the house of God. The LXX. translates? nCV^, " I sent to (or for) Eliezer," etc., which would mean to fetch them: "that I might then send them to Iddo." The Vulgate, on the other hand, and many expositors, understand? as nota accus., like 2 Chron. xvii. 7, which is simpler. Of the nine men here designated as D^'N"}, the names of Eliezer, Shemaiah, Jarib, Nathan, Zechariah, and Meshullam occur again in x. 15, 18-31, though we cannot certainly infer the indentity of those who bear them. The appellation D^S"J does not determine whether they belonged to the priesthood or laity. The two remaining are called ETO^D, teachers; comp. Neh. viii. 7, 9, 1 Chron. xv. 22, xxv. 8, and elsewhere. Although this word is, in the passages cited, used of Levites, yet we cannot suppose those here named to have been teaching Levites, because, according to ver. 16, there were as yet no Levites amongst the assemblage; hence, too, they could not be teachers properly so called, but only men of wisdom and understanding. The Chethiv nx^iXI must be read ^^>^^J: I sent them to (?JJ, according to later usage, for?N); the Keri is "WIS, I despatched, sent them. Both readings suit the sense. The place Casiphia is entirely unknown, but cannot have been far from the river Ahava.
Caspia, the region of the Caspian Sea, is out of the question, being far too remote. "I put words in their mouth to speak to Iddo," i.e. I told them exactly what they should say to Iddo; comp. 2 Sam. xiv. 3, 19. The words DWI3H vriK fass idve no intellionble meaning; for Vns we must, with the Vulgate, 1 Esdras, and others, read Vns'i: to Iddo and his brethren, the Nethinim, at the place Casiphia. This would seem to say that Iddo was one of the Nethinim. Such an inference is not, however, a necessary one; for the expression may also, like " Zadok the (high) priest and his brethren, the (ordinary) priests," 1 Chron. xvi. 39, be understood to mean that Iddo, the chief man of that place, was a Levite, and that the Nethinim were, as a lower order of temple servants, called brethren of Iddo the Levite. The circumstance that not only Nethinim, but also Levites, were induced by Iddo to join the expedition (8-20), requires us thus to understand the words. '?$ JV27 DWCD servants for the house of God, are Levites and Nethinim, the upper and lower orders of temple ministers. From ver. 17 it appears that both Levites and Nethinim had settled in the place Casiphia, and that Iddo, as the chief man of the place, held an influential position among them. No further inferences, however, concerning their settlement and employment can be drawn from this circumstance. — Vers. 18 and 19. The delegates sent to Iddo succeeded, through the gracious assistance of God (?8 T3, see vii. 6), in inducing forty Levites, and two hundred and twenty Nethinim, by means of Iddo's influence, to join their fellow-countrymen in their journey to Jerusalem. They brought to us... ^7 and ^vy refer to Ezra and his fellow-travellers. «& E^N, contrary, is not again met with in the books of either Ezra or Nehemiah. — Ver. 20. With respect to the Nethinim, whom David and the princes (of Israel) had given for the service of the Levites (i.e. made servants of the temple, to perform the lowest offices for the Levites), comp. Josh. ix. 21 and Ezra ii. 43. " They all were distinguished by name," i.e. were men of note; comp. remarks on 1 Chron. xii. 31.
Vers. 21-30. The last preparations for the journey. — Ver. 21. When the company of fellow-travellers was thus completed, Ezra proclaimed a fast at the place of meeting at the river Ahava, u that we might humble ourselves before our God, to seek of Him a prosperous journey for ourselves, our families, and our goods." Fasting, as a means of humbling themselves before God, for the purpose of obtaining an answer to their petitions, was an ancient custom with the Israelites: Judg. xx. 26; 1 Sam. vii. 6; Joel i. 14; 2 Chron. xx. 3. *tjbH itt^ a straight way, a way made level by the removal of obstructions, i.e. a prosperous journev; comp. Ps. cxii. 7. *)tt? a noun collective, properly the little children, more frequently denoted the entire family, a man's wives and children; see remarks on Ex. xii. 37. Bflno possessions in cattle and other goods. — Ver. 22. For I was ashamed to request of the king a band of soldiers and horsemen to help us against enemies in the way (i.e. to protect us from hostile attacks during our journey); for we had said to the kincr: The hand of our God is over all them that seek him for good (i.e. for their good), and His power and His wrath against all them that forsake Him. W in connection witli isx is not His powerful wrath, but His power and might to conquer all enemies, evidencing itself in wrath against the wicked. This confession, which they had uttered before the king, they desired to make good by earnest humble supplication, that God would prove Himself their help and defence against all their enemies. And for this — adds Ezra, looking back on their prosperous journey after it was accomplished — He was entreated of us. Because they had supplicated His assistance by prayer and fasting,
God granted them His protection by the way. — Vers. 24-30. Then Ezra delivered the gold, the silver, and the vessels, which he had received as gifts for the temple, to twelve of the chiefs of the priests, and twelve Levites, that they might take charge of them during the journey, and bring them to Jerusalem. u I separated twelve of the chief of the priests," i.e. from the whole company of priests who were journeying with us. The following Waig'p does not suit the sense, whether we take the? as a si^n of the dative (LXX.) or of the accusative (Vulgate, and several expositors). For Sherebiah and Hashabiah were neither priests nor chiefs of priests, but Levites of the race of Merari (ver. 18), and cannot therefore be reckoned among the twelve chiefs of priests. If we take rP3"i&^ for a dative, and translate, " I separated twelve of the chiefs of the priests for Sherebiah and Hashabiah," this would place the priests in a servile relation to the Levites, contrary to their true position. For JVT1B9 we must read njyjB^, and accept the reading of 1 Esdras, ical 'Eaepefiiav, as correct. Ezra separated twelve chiefs of the priests and twelve Levites, for the purpose of delivering to their custody the gifts of gold, silver, and implements for the temple. Of the chiefs of the priests no names are mentioned; of the Levites, the two names Sherebiah and Hashabiah are given as those of heads of houses, with whom ten other Levites were associated.— Ver. 25, etc. To these chief priests and Levites Ezra weighed the silver and the gold and the vessels;?i?'f, to weigh, i.e. to deliver by weight. In the Chethiv njip^K the O sound is maintained, and consequently the Keri is pointed ~. On the other hand, in ver. 26 the i is dropped, and the form pointed with —, though many MSS., followed by J. H. Michaelis, have — here also. vN rP3 J1DVIFI is in apposition with the before-named objects: the gold, the silver, and the vessels, the offering for the house of our God, which the king, his councillors... had offered; comp. vii. 15, 16, 10. In *D*"}nn the article represents the relative pronoun; see on 1 Chron. xxvi. 28. D'fetiRpan, all Israelites who were found, met with, in Babylon, and were not going with them to Jerusalem; comp. 1 Chron. xxix. 17, 2 Chron, v. 11. D"JJ?V, like T 'V, i. 8, to their hand, i.e. handed over to their keeping. The gifts amounted to: six hundred and fifty talents of silver, and silver vessels one hundred in talents, i.e. one hundred talents in value, one hundred talents of.gold, and twenty covered basins of gold (comp. i. 10) one thousand dariks in value, and two brazen vessels of fine golden brilliancy, precious as gold, ^nyp is an abstract noun, formed from the participle Hophal of 3^ to glitter like gold, and constructed as a feminine. The word, with its adjective, either depends upon J"i^n:? in the stat. construct, or stands in apposition thereto, and is not, as a participle Hophal, used adjectively and combined with n^n?, for then the two adjectives 2n¥ft and nniD would not be in different genders. niTOn, like'niTOn fe* 2 Chron. xx. 25.— Ver. 28, etc. On delivering these treasures, Ezra adds the admonition: Ye are holy to the Lord, and the vessels are holy, and the gold and the silver are a free-will offering unto the Lord God of your fathers; watch and keep (that which is committed to you). Since they were themselves, as priests and Levites, holy to the Lord, they were also to treat and keep the gifts committed to their charge as holy gifts, until, on their arrival at Jerusalem, they should weigh them (i.e. deliver them by weight) before the priests, the Levites, and the princes of Israel, in the chambers of the house of the Lord. The article to ni2E>?n (stat. construct.) is among the incorrectnesses of the later Hebrew. — Ver. 30. Then they took the weight of the silver,... i.e. received the silver, etc., delivered to them by weight.
Vers. 31—36. The start, the journey, and the arrival at Jerusalem. — Ver. 31. The start from the river Ahava (comp. ver. 15) did not take place till the twelfth day of the first month; while according to vii. 9, the journey from Babylon was appointed for the first day of the month, and according to viii. 15, the bands of travellers who assembled at the river Ahava encamped there three days. These statements may be reconciled as follows: On the first day the company of travellers began to assemble, and during the three days' encampment at the place of meeting Ezra became aware that no Levites were found among the travellers; upon which he took the measures mentioned, ver. 16, etc., to induce certain Levites and Nethinim to accompany them. When these were afterwards present, Ezra ordained a fast, to supplicate the divine protection for the journey, and committed the sacred gifts to the care of the priests and Levites. Eight days elapsed while these preparations for departure were being made, so that the start from the river Ahava did not take place till the twelfth day. The journey was successfully accomplished, God's gracious protection delivering them from the hands of enemies and marauders; comp. ver. 22. — Vers. 32, 33. They arrived at Jerusalem, as stated vii. 9, on the first day of the fifth month, the journey consequently occupying three months and a half. The particulars of the journey are not communicated; and as we do not even know the locality of the place of meeting at the river Ahava, the length of road to be traversed cannot be determined. After their arrival at Jerusalem, Uiey abode, i.e. remained, as Nehemiah subsequently did, quiet and inactive three days, to recover from the fatigues and hardships of the journey, Neh. ii. 11, before they undertook the x arrangement of their affairs. On the fourth day, the gifts they had brought with them were delivered in the house of God (^?, like n^fK, ver. 16) into the hand of Meremoth and Eleazar the priests, and Jozabad and Noadiah, two Levites, who took charge of them, the chiefs of the priests and Levites being, according to ver. 29, also present. Meremoth Ben Uriah reappears in Neh. iii. 4, 21, and is also intended Neh. xii. 3. Eleazar the son of Phinehas, and the Levite Noadiah, are not again met with. Jozabad, of the sons of Jeshua (ii. 40), may be the Levite Jozabad mentioned x. 23. Binnui is named among the Levites, Neh. x. 10 and xii. 8. — Ver. 34. u By number, by weight, as to all," i.e. all was delivered by number and weight; and the whole weight was written at that time, i.e. an authentic list was made at the delivery which then took place. — Ver. 35. After the delivery of the dedicated gifts, those who had come up out of captivity (with Ezra), the sons of the captivity, offered burnt- offerings and sin-offerings, out of gratitude for the favour shown by God in the gracious restoration of His people Israel. This is implied in the words: " burnt-offerings to the God of Israel, twelve bullocks for all Israel" (the twelve tribes), and twelve he-goats for a sin-offering, as in vi. 17. Ninety-six (8 X 12) lambs and seventy-seven lambs (77, the intensified seven) were likewise brought as a burnt-offerin<r. " All this was a burntoffering for the Lord," of which, therefore, nothing could be eaten by the offerers. The sin-offering preceded the burntoffering, as the necessary basis of an acceptable burnt-offering. The sin-offerings availed as an atonement for the sins of all Israel, and the burnt-offerings typified the surrender of the entire nation to the service of the Lord. Thus the fact that these were offered for all Israel was an actual declaration that they who had now returned were henceforth resolved, together with all Israel, to dedicate their lives to the service of the Lord their God. — Ver. 36. Here upon the royal decrees (the commission, vii. 12-26) were delivered to the satraps of the king, and to the governors on this side the river; and they furthered the people and the house of God, as Artaxerxes had commanded in his edict, vii. 20-24. On DWWnK and rmna, see rem. on Dan. iii. 2. The satraps were the military chiefs of the province, the nuns, the heads of the civil government. K&J, to lift up, to support, like i. 4.
When Ezra, some time after his arrival, was in the temple at Jerusalem, the princes of the people informed him that the Israelites had mingled themselves by marriage with the people of the lands (ix. 1, 2). Deeply moved by this communication, he sat astonished till the time of the evening sacrifice, while all who feared God's word assembled about him (vers. 3, 4). At the evening sacrifice he fell upon his knees and prayed, making a touching confession of sin before God, in the name of the congregation (vers. 5-15). During this prayer many were gathered around him weeping, and Shecaniah coming forth from their midst, acknowledged the transgressions of the congregation, and declared that they would make a covenant with God to put away all the strange wives (x. 1-4). After making the princes, the priests, and Levites take an oath that thev would do according to the declaration thus made, Ezra left the temple and retired to the chamber of Johanan, to fast and mourn over the transgression of those who had returned from captivity (vers. 5, 6). An assembly at Jerusalem was then proclaimed, and those who should not attend it were threatened with heavy penalties (vers. 7-9). At this assembly Ezra reproved the people for their transgression, and called upon them to separate themselves from the people of the countries, and from the strange wives (vers. 10, 11); upon which the assembly resolved to appoint a commission to investigate and decide upon individual cases. In spite of the opposition of some, this proposal was accepted, and the commission named (vers. 12-17), which held its sittings from the first day of the tenth month, and made an end of its investigations into all cases brought before it by the close of the year. Then follows the list of those who had taken strange wives (vers. 18—44), with which the book concludes.
Chap. ix. Information given of the intermingling of Israel with the heathen nations of the land by marriage (vers. 1—4), and Ezra s prayer and confession (vers. 5-15). — Vers. 1, 2. "When this was done, the princes came to me, and said, The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, do not separate themselves from the people of the lands, according to their abominations, (even) of the Canaanites;... for they have taken (wives) of their daughters for themselves and for their sons, and the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of the lands." What now follows is placed in close chronological sequence with what precedes by the formula nps TOD3^ at the time of the completion of these things; comp. 2 Chron. xxxi. 1, xxix. 29, vii. 1. n^N are the things related chap. viii. 33-36. Of these the delivery of the gifts took place on the fourth day after Ezra's arrival at Jerusalem, i.e. on the fourth or fifth day of the first month (comp. viii. 32, etc., with vii. 9). The sacrifices (viii. 35) would undoubtedly be offered immediately; and the royal orders would be transmitted to the satraps and governors (viii. 36) very soon after. As soon, then, as Ezra received intelligence concerning the illegal marriages, he took the matter in hand, so that all related (ix. 3-10) occurred on one day. The first assemblage of the people with relation to this business was not, however, held till the twentieth day of the ninth month (x. 9); while on the calling of this meeting, appearance thereat was prescribed within three days, thus leaving apparently an interval of nine whole months between chap, viii. and ix. Hence Bertheau conjectures that the first proclamation of this assembly encountered opposition, because certain influential personages were averse to the further prosecution of this matter (x. 15). But though x. 4-7 does not inform us what period elapsed between the adoption of Shecaniah's proposal to Ezra, and the proclamation for assembling the people at Jerusalem, the narrative does not give the impression that this proclamation was delayed for months through the opposition it met with. Besides, Ezra may have received the information concerning the unlawful marriages, not during the month of his arrival at Jerusalem, but some months later. We are not told whether it was given immediately, or soon after the completion of the matters mentioned viii. 33-36. The delivery of the royal commands to the satraps and governors (viii. 36) may have occupied weeks or months, the question being not merely to transmit the king's decrees to the said officials, but to come to such an understanding with them as might secure their favour and goodwill in assisting the newly established community, and supporting the house of God. The last sentence (viii. 36), "And they furthered the people and the house of God," plainly shows that such an understanding with the royal functionaries was effected, by transactions which must have preceded what is related chap. ix. This matter having been arranged, and Ezra being now about to enter upon the execution of his commission to inquire concerning Judah and Jerusalem according to the law of his God (vii. 12), he received information of the illegal marriages. While he was in the temple, the princes (DHtpn, the princes, are those who give the information, the article being used e.g. like that in BvSn, Qeil# x{Vt 13) came to him, saying: The people (viz. Israel, the priests, and the Levites; the three classes of the Israelite community) do not separate themselves from the people of the lands; comp. vi. 21. DHTihvh:^ with respect to their abominations, i.e. as Israel should have done with respect to the abominations of these people. The? to "TO?? might be regarded as introducing the enumeration of the different nations, and corresponding with ^yp; it is, however, more likely that it is used merely as a periphrasis for the genitive, and subordinates the names to DHTihyft; their, i.e. the Canaanites', etc., abominations, the suffix relating, as e.g. at iii. 12 and elsewhere, to the names following. Five Canaanitish races are here named, as in Ex. xiii. 5, with this difference, that the Perizzites are here substituted for the Hivites, while in Ex. iii. 8, xxiii. 23, both are enumerated, making six; to these are added in Deut. vii. 1 the Girgashites, making, generally speaking, seven nations. Ammonites, Moabites, and Egyptians are here cited besides the Canaanitish races. The non-severance of the Israelites from these nations consisted, according to ver. 2, in the fact of their having contracted marriages with them. In the law, indeed (Ex. xxxiv. 16; Deut. vii. 3), only marriages with Canaanitish women wTere forbidden; but the reason of this prohibition, viz. that Israel might not be seduced by them to idolatry, made its extension to Moabites, Ammonites, and Egyptians necessary under existing circumstances, if an effectual check was to to be put to the relapse into heathenism of the Israelitish community, now but just gathered out again from among the Gentiles. For during the captivity idolaters of all nations had settled in the depopulated country, and mingled with the remnant of the Israelites left there. By
" the people of the lands," however, we are not to understand, with J. H. Michaelis, remnants of the races subjugated by Nebuchadnezzar and carried to Babylon, — who were now, after seventy years, returning, as well as the Jews, to their native lands under Cyrus; in support of which view Mich, incorrectly refers to Jer. xxv. 9, etc., — but those portions, both of the ancient Canaanitish races and of the Moabites and Ammonites, who, escaping the sentence of captivity, remained in the land. tt*fco is naturally completed by D^BO from the context; comp. x. 44, 2 Chron. xi. 21, and other passages. The subject of ^"ljjnn is the collective JPT £Hp?, the holy seed, i.e. the members of the nation called to holiness (Ex. xix. 5). The appellation is taken from Isa. vi. 13, where the remnant of the covenant people, preserved in the midst of judgments, and purified thereby, is called a holy seed. The second part of ver. 2 contains an explanatory accessory clause: and the hand of the princes and rulers hath been first in this unfaithfulness (?VD, comp. Lev. v. 15), i,e. the princes were the first to transgress; on the figurative expression, comp. Deut. xiii. 10. Q^J9 is an Old-Persian word naturalized in Hebrew, signifying commander, prefect; but its etymology is not as yet satisfactorily ascertained: see Delitzsch on Isa. xli. 25. — Ver. 3, etc. This information threw Ezra into deep grief and moral consternation. The tearing of the upper and under garments was a sign of heartfelt and grievous affliction (Josh. viii. 6); see remarks on Lev. x. 6. The plucking out of (a portion of) the hair was the expression of violent wrath or moral indignation, comp. Neh. xiii. 25, and is not to be identified with the cutting off of the hair in mourning (Job i. 20). "And sat down stunned;" UiyiWto, desolate, rigid, stunned, without motion. While he was sitting thus, there were gathered unto him all who feared the word of God concerning the transgression of those that had been carried away. Tin, trembling, being terrified, generally construed with?JJ or?K (e.g. Isa. lxvi. 2, 5), but here with 3 (like verbs of embracing, believing), and meaning to believe with trembling in the word which
God had spoken concerning this TTO, i.e. thinking with terror of the punishments which such faithless conduct towards a covenant God involved.
Vers. 5-15. Ezra s prayer and confession for the congregation.— Yer. 5. And at the time of the evening sacrifice, I rose up from my mortification (l"Wfi, humiliation, generally through fasting, here through sitting motionless in deep affliction of soul), and rending my garment and my mantle. These words contribute a second particular to Vipp, and do not mean that Ezra arose with his garments torn, but state that, on arising, he rent his clothing, and therefore again manifested his sorrow in this manner. He then fell on his knees, and spread out his hands to God (comp. 1 Kings viii. 22), to make a confession of the heavy guilt of the congregation before God, and thus impressively to set their sins before all who heard his prayer. — Ver. 6, etc. The train of thought in this prayer is as follows: I scarcely dare to lift up my face to God, through shame for the greatness of our misdeeds (ver. 6). From the days of our fathers, God has sorely punished us for our sins by delivering us into the power of our enemies; but has now again turned His pity towards us, and revived us in the place of His sanctuary, through the favour of the king of Persia (7-9). But we have again transgressed His commands, with the keeping of which God has connected our possession of the good land given unto us (vers. 10-12). Should wre then, after God has spared us more than we through our trespasses have deserved, bring His wrath upon us, till we are wholly consumed % God is just; He has preserved us; but wre stand before Him with heavy guilt upon us, such guilt that we cannot endure God's presence (vers. 13-15). Ezra does not pray for the pardon of their sin, for he desires only to bring the congregation to the knowledge of the greatness of their transgression, and so to invite them to do all that in them lies to atone for their guilt, and to appease God's wrath. — Ver. 6. " I am ashamed, and am covered with shame, to lift up my face to Thee, my God." *1W3 *flD?331 united, as in Jer. xxxi. 19, comp. Isa. xlv. 16, and other passages. &P}, to be covered with shame, is stronger than nn. a For our iniquities are increased over our head," i.e. have £rown above our head. EW rkyn?, to or over the head. n?Vu? serves to enhance the meanincr of ^"i like 1 Chron. xxiii. 17. " And our guiltiness is great, (reaching) unto the heavens;" comp. 2 Chron. xxviii. 9. — Ver. 7. " Since the days of our fathers, have we, our kings, our priests, been delivered into the hands of the kings of the lands, to the sword, to captivity, to plunder, and to shame of face." The words from 2"irQ onwards serve to explain what is meant by being delivered into the hand of strange kings. On the expression D^3 nB>3? comp. Dan. ix. 7, etc., 2 Chron. xxxii. 21. W DTan3? as it is this day, as is to-day the case; see remarks on Dan. ix. 7. The thought is: We are still sorely suffering for our sins, by being yet under the yoke of foreign sovereigns. — Ver. 8. a And now for a little moment there has been mercy from the Lord our God, to leave us a rescued remnant, and to give us a nail in His holy place, that our God may lighten our eyes, and give us a little reviving in our bondage." He calls the short interval between their release from captivity by Cyrus, and the time when he is speaking, W?. OTp3, a little moment (comp. Isa. xxvi. 20), in comparison with the long period of suffering from the times of the Assyrians (comp. Neh. ix. 32) till the reign of Cyrus. ^p r?E, a rescued remnant, is the new community delivered from Babylon, and returned to the land of their fathers. In proportion to the numerous population of former days, it w,as but a remnant that escaped destruction; but a remnant which, according to the predictions of the prophets, was again to grow into a large nation. A foundation for this hope was given by the fact that God had given them u a nail in the place of His sanctuary." The expression is figurative. W is a nail or peg struck into the wall, to hang any kind of domestic utensils upon; comp. Isa. xxii. 23, etc. Such a nail was the place of God's sanctuary, the temple, to the rescued community. This was to them a firm nail, by which they were borne and upheld; and this nail God had given them as a support to which they might cling, and gain new life and vigour. The infinitive clauses following, "^Nnp and ttWP, are dependent upon the preceding infinitives ywtftV and ririp*?, and state the purpose for which God has given a nail in His house to this remnant. That our God may enlighten our eyes, i.e. may bestow upon us new vitality; comp. Ps. xiii. 4. Suffering and misfortune make the eyes dim, and their light is quenched in death: the enlightened or beaming eye is an image of vital power; comp. 1 Sam. xiv. 27, 29. n*no ynn? is not to be translated, ut daret nobis vivificationem, the suffix to ^fiH? being not dative, but accusative. The literal rendering is: that He may make us a slight reviving. *^J}^ the means of supporting life, restoration to life; see on 2 Chron. xiv. 13. Ezra adds BVD; for the life to which the community had attained was but feeble, in comparison with a vigorous social life. Their deliverance from Babylon and return to the land of their fathers was, so to speak, a revival from death; compare the embodiment of this figure in Ezekiel's vision, Ezek. xxxvii. 1-14: they were, however, still in a state of vassalage, and had not yet regained their independence. This thought is further carried out in ver. 9: " For we are bondmen, yet our God hath not forsaken us in our bondage, but hath extended mercy to us before the kings of Persia; so that they have given us a reviving to build up the house of our God, and to repair its ruins, and have given us a wall about us in Judah and Jerusalem.', They who have returned to Jerusalem and Judah are still bondmen, for they are yet under the Persian yoke; but God has disposed the kings of Persia so to favour them as to give them a reviving, to enable them to rebuild the house of God. Cvrus and Darius had not merely permitted and commanded the buildino- of the temple, but had also furnished them with considerable assistance towards the carrying out of this work; comp. i. 3, etc., vi. 7-9. The suffix in WjSnfJ alludes to OWN n'?. The words of the last sentence are figurative. "H3 means the wall of a vineyard, the wall or fence built for its protection (Isa. v. 2, 5). Hence the wall, or enclosure, is an image of protection from the incursions and attacks of enemies. Such a wall has been given them in Judah and Jerusalem by the kings of Persia. " The meaning is not that they possess a place defended by walls (perhaps, therefore, the temple) in Jerusalem and Judah, but that the Persian kings have given to the newcommunity a safe dwelling-place (or the means of existence), because the power of the Persian empire secures to the returned Israelites continued and undisturbed possession of the city and the land." (Bertheau.)
After this statement concerning the divine favour, Ezra next sets himself to describe the conduct of his countrymen with respect to the mercy extended to them. — Ver. 10. "And now, O our God, what can we say after this? That we have forsaken Thy commandments." DKT, i.e. such proofs of the divine compassion as have just been mentioned. The answer which follows commences with s3, before which "IOK3 is mentally repeated: " we can only say that we have forsaken Thy commandments, requited Thy kindness with sins." — Ver. 11. Namely, the commandments u which Thou hast commanded by Thy servants the prophets, saying, The land unto which ye go to possess it is an unclean land through the uncleanness of the people of the lands, through their abominations, wdierewith they have filled it from one end to another through their impurity. And now give not your daughters unto their sons, neither take their daughters unto your sons (for wives), nor seek their peace nor their wealth for ever; that ye may be strong, and eat the good of the land, and leave it for an inheritance to your children for ever." The words of the prophets introduced by "foN? are found in these terms neither in the prophetical books nor the Pentateuch. They are not, therefore, to be regarded as a verbal quotation, but only as a declaration that the prohibition of intermarriage with the heathen had been inculcated by the prophets. The introduction of this prohibition by the words: the land unto which ye go to possess it, refers to the Mosaic age, and in using it Ezra had chiefly in view Deut. vii. 1-3. He interweaves, however, with this passage other sayings from the Pentateuch, e.g. Deut. xxiii. 7, and from the prophetic writings, without designing to make a verbal quotation. He says quite generally, by His servants the prophets, as the author of the books of Kings does in similar cases, e.p. 2 Kings xvii. 23, xxi. 10, xxiv. 2, where the leading idea is, not to give the saying of some one prophet, but to represent the truth in question as one frequently reiterated. The sayings of Moses in Deuteronomy also bear a prophetical character; for in this book he, after the manner of the prophets, seeks to make the people lay to heart the duty of obeying the law. It is true that we do not meet in the other books of Scripture a special prohibition of marriages with Canaanites, though in the prophetical remarks, Judg. iii. 6, such marriages are reproved as occasions of seducing the Israelites to idolatry, and in the prophetic descriptions of the whoredoms of Israel with Baalim, and the general animadversions upon apostasy from the Lord, the transgression of this prohibition is implicitly included; thus justifying the general expression, that God had forbidden the Israelites to contract such marriages, by His servants the prophets. Besides, we must here take into consideration the threatening of the prophets, that the Lord would thrust Israel out of the land for their sins, among which intermarriage with the Canaanites was by no means the least. Ezra, moreover, makes use of the general expression, " by the prophets," because he desired to say that God had not merely forbidden these marriages once or twice in the law, but had also repeatedly inculcated this prohibition by the prophets. The law was preached by the prophets when they reiterated what was the will of God as revealed in the law of Moses. In this respect Ezra might well designate the prohibition of the law as the saying of the prophets, and cite it as pronounced according to the circumstances of the Mosaic period.1 The words: the land into which ye go, etc., recall the introduction of the law in Deut. vii. 1, etc.; but the
1 It is hence evident that these words of Ezra afford no evidence against the single authorship of the Pentateuch. The inference that a saying of the law, uttered during the wanderings in the wilderness, is here cited as a saying of the prophets, the servants of Jahve, is, accord- description of the land as a land of uncleanness through the uncleanness of the people, etc., does not read thus either in the Pentateuch or in the prophets, iTHJj the uncleanness of women, is first applied to moral impurity by the prophets: comp. Lam. i. 17; Ezek. vii. 20, xxxvi. 17, comp. Isa. lxiv. 5. The expression ^B~?X nap, from edge to edge, i.e from one end to the other, like HD^ na, 2 Kings x. 21, xxi. 16, is taken from vessels filled to their upper rim. nrijn introduces the consequence: and now, this being the case. The prohibition 'W WFl?K is worded after Deut. vii. 3. The addition: nor seek their peace, etc., is taken almost verbally from Deut. xxiii. 7, where this is said in respect of the Ammonites and Moabites. *P?n0)¥v? recalls Deut. xi. 8, and the promise: that ye may eat the good of the land for ever, Isa. i. 19. KM?? pflt^nj, and leave it for an inheritance to your children, does not occur in this form in the Pentateuch, but only the promise: that they and their children should possess the land for ever. On #Hifl in this sense comp. Judg. xi. 24, 2 Chron. xx. 11. — Ver. 13, etc. And after all, continues Ezra, taking up again the ntfPnrw of ver. 10, — " after all that is come upon us for our evil deeds, and for our great trespass — yea, Thou our God hast spared us more than our iniquity deserved, and hast given us this escaped remnant — can we again break Thy commandments, and join in affinity with the people of these abominations? Wilt Thou not be angry with us even to extirpation, so that no residue and no escaped remnant should be left?" The premiss in ver. 13a is followed in ver. 14 by the conclusion in the form of a question, while the second clause of ver. 13 is an explanatory parenthesis. Bertheau construes the passage otherwise. He finds the continuation of the sentence: and after all this... in the words 'W nriK '•a, which, calmly spoken, would read: Thou, O God, hast not wholly destroyed us, but hast preserved to us an escaped remnant; while instead of such a continuation we have an exclamation of grateful wonder, ing to the just remark of Bertheau, entirely refuted even by the fact that the words cited are nowhere found in the Pentateuch in this exact form, and that hence Ezra did not intend to make a verbal quotation.
emphatically introduced by ^ in the sense of *3 °JPN. With this construction of the clauses, however, no advance is made, and Ezra, in this prayer, does but repeat what he had already said, vers. 8 and 9; although the introductory *!£!* leads us to expect a new thought to close the confession. Then, too, the logical connection between the question ver. 14 and what precedes it would be wanting, i.e. a foundation of fact for the question ver. 14. Bertheau remarks on ver. 14, that the question: should we return to break (i.e. break again) the commands of God % is an antithesis to the exclamation. But neither does this question, to judge by its matter, stand in contrast to the exclamation, nor is any such contrast indicated by its form. The discourse advances in regular progression only when ver. 14a forms the conclusion arrived at from ver. 13a, and the thought in the premiss (13a) is limited by the thought introduced with T3. What had come upon Israel for their sins was, according to ver. 7, deliverance into the hand of heathen kings, to the sword, to captivity, etc. God had not, however, merely chastened and punished His people for their sins, He had also extended mercy to them, ver. 8, etc. This, therefore, is also mentioned by Ezra in ver. 13Z>, to justify, or rather to limit, the bb in K3n"73. The *3 is properly confirmatory: for Thou, our God, hast indeed punished us, but not in such measure as our sins had deserved; and receives through the tenor of the clause the adversative meaning of imo, yea (comp. Ewald, § 330, b). 'd ntSDp ^3bfn, Thou hast checked, hast stopped, beneath our iniquities. SJJPn is not used intransitively, but actively; the missing object must be supplied from the context: Thou hast withheld that, all of which should have come upon us, i.e. the punishment we deserved, or, as older expositors completed the sense, iram tuam. ^AVP n?P?> infra delicta nostra, i.e. Thou hast punished us less than our iniquities deserved. For their iniquities they had merited extirpation; but God had given them a rescued remnant. ^'D, as this, viz. this which exists in the community now returned from Babylon to Judoea. This is the circumstance which justifies the question: should we, or can we, again (2*$3 is used adverbially) break Thy commandments, and become related by marriage % (i^nnn like Deut. vii. 3.) ftiagfan 13^ people who live in abominations. The answer to this question is found in the subsequent question: will He not — if, after the sparing mercy we have experienced, we again transgress the commands of God — be angry with us till He have consumed us? n?3 "ly (comp. 2 Kings xiii. 17, 19) is strengthened by the addition: so that there will be no remnant and no escaping. The question introduced by Kvn is an expression of certain assurance: He will most certainly consume us. — Ver. 15. " Jahve, God of Israel, Thou art righteous; for we remain an escaped remnant, as (it is) this day. Behold, we are before Thee in our trespass; for no one can stand before Thy face, because of this." Ezra appeals to the righteousness of God, not to supplicate pardon, as Neh. ix. 33, for the righteousness of God would impel Him to extirpate the sinful nation, but to rouse the conscience of the community, to point out to them what, after this relapse into their old abominations, they had to expect from the justice of God. OTK&a *3 is confirmatory. God has shown Himself to be just by so sorely punishing this once numerous nation, that only a small remnant which has escaped destruction now exists. And this remnant has again most grievously offended: we lie before Thee in our trespass; what can we expect from Thy justice? Nothing but destruction; for there is no standing before Thee, i.e. no one can stand before Thee, ntfT7£, because of this (comp. viii. 23, x. 2), i.e. because of the fresh guilt which we have incurred.
Chap. x. The separation of the strange wives from the congregation.— Vers. 1-5. While Ezra was making this confession before God, a numerous assemblage gathered around him, and wept aloud. From this point onwards Ezra relates the further course of events in such wise as to cast his own person in the background, and speaks of himself in the third person. The matter of his prayer is more definitely declared by ttYWiro*, and his posture in prayer by ^riD} PD3, weeping and casting himself down (lying on his knees, ix. b).
a Before the bouse of God," i.e. in the court of the temple. The confirmatory clause: for the people wept much (^2"]n OPS, a weeping in mass), furnishes the motive of so great a number of men, women, and children gathering around Ezra. Very many were as distressed as he was at the marriages with strange wives, and regarded them as a grievous trespass; hence they assembled weeping around him. — Ver. 2, etc. Then one of the sons of Elam, Shecaniah, the son of Jehiel, stood forth from amidst the assembly, and uttered the confession: u We have been unfaithful towards our God by marrying strange wives, but there is yet hope for Israel concerning this thing. We will now make a covenant with God to put away all the strange wives and their children from the congregation, according to the counsel of the Lord, and of those who fear the commandment of our God, that it may be done according to the law." Shecaniah, of the sons of Elam (com p. ii. 7, viii. 7), is a different person from the descendant of Zattu, mentioned chap. viii. 5; nor is Jehiel identical with the individual whose name occurs in ver. 26. 3B*31? and have brought home strange wives. 3^n, to cause to dwell (in one's house), said in vers. 10, 14, 17, 18, and Neh. xiii. 23, 27, of bringing a wife home. Shecaniah founds his hope for Israel in this trespass upon the circumstance, that they bind themselves by a solemn covenant before God to put away this scandal from the congregation, and to act in conformity with the law. To make a covenant with our God, i.e. to bind themselves by an oath with respect to God, comp. 2 Chron. xxix. 10. W&\ to put away — the opposite of 3^'in. All the wives are, according to the context, all the strange women (ver. 2), and that which is born of them, their children. Instead of *JW nV^, according to the counsel of the Lord, De Wette, Bertheau, and others, following the paraphrase in the LXX. and 1 Esdras, read ^*W, according to the counsel of my lord, i.e. of Ezra. But this paraphrase being of no critical authority, there is no sufficient reason for the alteration. For Shecaniah to call Ezra my lord sounds strange, since usually this title was only given by servants to their master, or subjects to their sovereign, and Shecaniah afterwards addresses him simply as thou. Besides, Ezra had given no advice at all in this matter, and still less had he come to any resolution about it with the God-fearing members of the community. 7VPT after the preceding rvnzrrra^ we will make a covenant, must be taken as hortative: and let it be done according to the law. 2 l^n^ caring for with trembling. — Ver. 4. a Up! for this matter concerns thee (thou art called to carry it out), and we are with thee (will assist thee therein); be strong (courageous) and do it." — Ver. 5. Then Ezra (who during this speech had continued upon his knees) arose, and made the chiefs of the priests, of the Levites, and of all Israel swear to do according to this word; and they swore. Hjn "OW is Shecaniah's proposal to put away the strange wives. — Ver. 6. Hereupon Ezra left the place before the house of God, and went into the chamber of Johanan the son of Eliashib, to fast and mourn there for the unfaithfulness (transgression) of them that had been carried away (npian?^D like ix. 4). Johanan the son of Eliashib cannot actually be Johanan ben Eliashib (Neh. xii. 23) the high priest, however natural it may be to understand by the chamber of Johanan one of the chambers in the out-buildings of the temple, called after the name of some well-known individual. For the high priest Eliashib was a contemporary of Nehemiah, and the high priest Johanan was not the son, but, according to the definite statement, Neh. xii. 10, the grandson, of Eliashib, and the son of Joiada (the correct reading of Neh. xii. 11 being: Joiada begat Johanan and Jonathan). Now a chamber of the temple could not in Ezra's time have been as yet called after a grandson of Eliashib the contemporary of Nehemiah;* and both Johanan and Eliashib being names which frequently occur (comp. vers. 24, 27, 36), and one of the twenty-four
1 This would not, indeed, be impossible, because, as we shall subsequently show (in our Introduction to the book of Nehemiah, § 2), Eliashib's grandson Johanan might be already ten years of age at the time of the transaction in question; so that his grandfather, the high priest Eliashib, might have called a chamber of the temple after the name of his grandson. This view is not, however, a very probable one.
orders of priests being called after the latter (1 Chron. xxiv. 12), we, with Evvald (Gesch. iv. p. 228), regard the Johanan ben Eliasbib here mentioned as an individual of whom nothing further is known, — perhaps a priest descended from the Eliashib of 1 Chron. xxiv. 12, and who possessed in the new temple a chamber called by his name. For there is not the slightest reason to suppose, with Bertheau, that a subsequent name of this chamber is used in this narrative, because the narrator desired to state the locality in a manner which should be intelligible to his contemporaries. Cler. and Berth, desire, after 1 Esdr. ix. 1 (koX avXtaOeU i/cel), to change D^ SJ7M into DK> fp): and he passed the night there without eating bread or drinking water. But the LXX. having koli iiropevOrj i/cel, and the repetition of the same word being, moreover, by no means infrequent, comp. e.g. Qpjl in vers. 5, 6, and finally D^ repeatedly standing for thither, e.g. 1 Sam. ii. 14 (pw D^Klin)^ there are no adequate grounds for an alteration of the text. The paraphrase of 1 Esdr. arises merely from the connection, and is devoid of critical value. To eat no bread, etc., means to fast: comp. Ex. xxxiv. 28, Deut. ix. 9.
Vers. 7-17. The resolution carried into execution. — Vers. 7, 8. A proclamation was sent forth throughout Judah and Jerusalem (7\p "VagA, comp. i. 1) to all the children of the captivity to assemble at Jerusalem under pain of the punishment, that whoever should not come within three days, all his substance should be forfeited and himself excluded from the congregation, according to the decision of the princes and elders, who, as the heads of the community, had taken the matter in hand, and made this announcement. The forfeiture of substance is not its destruction, as prescribed Deut. xiii. 13-17 in the case of a city fallen into idolatry, but its appropriation to the benefit of the temple, after the analogy of Lev. xxvii. 28. — Ver. 9. After three days all the men of Judah and Benjamin assembled at Jerusalem. This took place on the twentieth day of the ninth month. On this statement of time, see the remark on ix. 1. The assembled multitude sat there on the open space of the house of God, i.e. probably the open space (^rH?) in front of the watergate, Neh. viii. 1, 3, 16, at the eastern or south-eastern side, before the temple court; see remarks on Neh. viii. 1. " Trembling" because of this matter, the seriousness of which they might perceive from the heavy penalty attached to their non-appearance within three days, and a because of the rain." The ninth month, corresponding with our December, is in the cold rainy time of the year (comp. ver. 13), "when the rain usually falls in torrents " (Robinson, PJtys. Geog. p. 287). — Ver. 10. Ezra then stood up and reproved the assembled multitude, saying: You have brought home (TE^in, comp. ver. 2) strange wives to increase the trespass of Israel (comp. Ezra's confession, ix. 6-15), and exhorted them to give glory to God and to do His pleasure, (viz.) to separate themselves from the people of the land, and from the strange wives. On sriin wn5 comp. Josh. vii. 19. Separation from the people of the land consisted, under the circumstances, in the dismissal of the strange wives. — Ver. 12. The whole assembly replied with a loud voice, and therefore with firm resolve: According to thy word it is our duty to do. HvJ? must not be drawn to what precedes, as in the Vulgate, juxta verbum tuum ad nos, sic fiat^ but to what follows, as in ver. 4, Neh. xiii. 13, 2 Sam. xviii. 11. But — they further remark, ver. 13 — the people are many, — i.e. the assemblage is very large to be able to deal immediately with the several cases; and it is (now) the time of the heavy rains, and there is no power to stand without, — i.e. at the present season we are not able to remain in the open air until the business is discharged; neither is this the work of one day, or of two, for we have transgressed much in this matter, — i.e. one or two days will not suffice to investigate and decide upon all cases, because very many have broken the law in this respect. — Ver. 14. " Let then our rulers stand for the whole congregation, and let all who in all our cities have brought home strange wives come at appointed times, and with them the elders of each city, and the judges thereof, until the fierce wrath of our God be turned away from us, as long as this matter lasts." There were so many cases to deal with, that the rulers, as the judicial authorities, must decide in this matter; and those who in all the cities of the land had transgressed, were to appear before these authorities, and submit their individual cases to their jurisdiction. The choice of the verb VTOJP, to stand or set oneself to discharge some business, here therefore to give judgment, is occasioned by the preceding "rioyp. The whole community had assembled according to the proclamation, and was standing there for the purpose of bringing the matter to a close. This they were not, however, able to do, for the reasons stated ver. 13; hence the princes, as rulers of the community, are to remain for the discharge of the business. <);1iJ?"'5?? is not a genitive dependent on tt*^ and explanatory of the suffix of this word — our, viz. the whole congregation's, princes (Bertheau) — an unnatural and superfluous elucidation; for if the whole congregation say: our princes, it is self-evident that not the princes of a section or portion of the people, but of the whole congregation, must be intended. pnprrW* is the object of ViojP; let them stand for the whole congregation P 1W like? EBp, Ps. xciv. 16), not instead of, but for the good of the congregation, and transact its business. In our cities, i.e. including the capital, for there is here no contrast between Jerusalem and the other cities. The article to ywnn stands, as- is often the case, for the relative 1f'«, e.g. ver. 17, viii. 25. tTClfcttp W, appointed times, stated terms, used only here and in Neh.x. 35, xiii. 31. ft?? is a Chaldaistic expression. With the accused were to come the elders and judges of every city, to furnish the necessary explanations and evidence. 3N?fJ? "W, until the turning away of the fierceness of the wrath (? *W according to the later usage of the language instead of "W onlv, comp. Ewald, § 315, a, not instead of? only, as Bertheau seeks, by incorrectly interpreted passages, to prove). The meaning is: until the fierce wrath of God concerning these marriages shall be turned away, by their dissolution and the dismissal of the strange women from the congregation. The last words, nw "O'n? IV, offer some difficulty. De Wette and Bertheau translate them: on account of this matter, which? *W can by no means signify. We regard? 1£ = "i£f of the 61der language, in the sense of during, like 2 Kings ix. 22, according to which the meaning is: as long as this thing lasts; but we connect these words, not, as J. H. Michaelis, with the immediately preceding clause: the wrath which is fierce during this matter (quae usque, i.e. constanter ardet), but take them as more exactly defining the leading idea of the verse: the princes are to stand and judge the guilty as long as this matter lasts, so that W "\2ib "W is co-ordinate with HOT? *iy 'UV — Ver. 15. Jonathan the son of Asahel, and Jahaziah the son of Tikvah, indeed opposed this proposal on the part of the community, and were supported in their opposition by two Levites, but without being able to carry it out. This statement is introduced by?]K, only, in the form of a qualification to the remark that the whole assembly (ver. 12) made this resolution: nevertheless Jonathan... stood up against this. For by *1Ey, to stand up against, or as elsewhere?¥ D^p, comp. 1 Chron. xxi. 1, 2 Chron. xx. 23, Dan. viii. 25, xi. 14. Such also is the view of R. Sal. and Lightf., while older expositors understand it as meaning: only Jonathan... stood up for this matter, like the steterunt super hoc of the Vulgate, or as the decidedly incorrect explanation of J. H. Mich.: prcefecti sunt hide negotio. — Nothing further is known of the four opponents here named. That they did not succeed in this opposition appears from what follows. Ver. 16. The children of the captivity, i.e. the returned exiles, did so; i.e. the congelation carried their resolve into execution. And Ezra the priest, and men, heads of houses according to their houses, — i.e. so that each house was represented by its head, — were separated, i.e. chosen to conduct the investigation. The 1 copulative before E^JN has been lost, an asyndeton seeming in this case inadmissible. Bertheau, on the contrary, unnecessarily changes ^1^ into V> 7|tt*} after 1 Esdras ix. 16. "And they all by names," comp. viii. 20. UBMj and they held a sitting (i.e. their first sitting) on the first day of the tenth month, and therefore only ten days after the assembly just spoken of. "Ojn B^Tl?, to inquire into the matter. It is impossible in Hebrew to form B^T! from Bn"J, and this word can only arise from ifrH, as Ewald,
§ 239, a, note, Olshausen, Lelirb. d. hebr. Spr. p. 150, and Bottcher, aasf. Lelirb. der hebr. Spr. i. 1, p. 162, note, unanimously agree. — Ver. 17. And they made an end with all, with respect to the men who had brought home strange wives. i>33 (with the article) cannot be so connected with tW3K, from which it is separated by the accentuation of the latter, as to admit of the repetition, as by older expositors, of the preposition 3 before B^JK: with all, namely, with the men. Still less can?33, as Bertheau thinks, be taken in the sense of " in every place," and D^JK connected as an accusative with to: they finished in every place the men (!); for n?3 with an accusative of the person signifies to annihilate, to make an end of, while 3 n?3 means to finish, to make an end with, comp. Gen. xliv. 12. If, as the accentuation requires, we take?33 independently, CtMK can only be an accusative of more exact definition: in respect of the men (Q^JN being without the article, because words which define it follow). As this gives a suitable meaning, it seems unnecessary to alter the punctuation and read D^JK'733, or with Ewald, § 290, c, note 1, to regard CMPJN 733 as a singular combination. — Till the first day of the first month (of the next year), therefore in three months, their sittings having begun, according to ver. 13, on the first day of the tenth month. — The account of this transaction closes with —
The list of the men who had taken strange wives, vers. 18-44; among whom were priests (18-22), Levites (23, 24), and Israelites, i.e. laymen (25-43). — Ver. 18, etc. Among the priests there stand first, four names of sons and brethren of the high priest Jeshua, the son of Jozadak, who returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel. PfTC, his (Jeshua' s) brethren. Judging by ii. 36, these were among the descendants of Jedaiah, a section of the house of the high-priestly family (see rem. on ii. 36), and were therefore distant cousins of the high priest. They gave their hands, i.e. bound themselves by shaking hands, to put away their wives, i.e. to dismiss them, and to sever them from the congregation of Israel, C'EBW, " and guilty a ram for their trespass," i.e. condemned to bring a ram as a trespass-offer- inrr. DW'Nl is to be regarded as the continuation of the infinitive clause K^'"1?* As elsewhere, infinitive clauses are continued without anything further in the verb, finit. (comp. Ewald, § 350); so here also does the adjective D*BBW follow, requiring that nvnp should be mentally supplied. pfcTTK, a ram of the flock, is, as an accusative of more exact definition, dependent on EPpg^ This trespassoffering was imposed upon them according to the principle of the law, Lev. v. 14, etc., because they had committed a pVO against the Lord, which needed expiation; see on Lev. v. 14. — In what follows, only the natnes of the individuals, and a statement of the families they belonged to, are given, without repeating that the same obligations, namely, the dismissal of their strange wives, and the bringing of a trespassoffering, were imposed on them also, this being self-evident from the context. — Among the sons of Immer were three, among the sons of Harim five, among the sons of Pashm* six offenders; in all, eighteen priests. By comparing ii. 36—39, we perceive that not one of the orders of priests who returned with Zerubbabel was free from participation in this transgression. Some of the names given, 20-22, reappear in the lists in Neh. viii. 4 and x. 2-9, and may belong to the same individuals. — Ver. 23. Of Levites, only six names are given, and that without stating the houses to which they belonged. From ii. 40, however, it appears that they were of the sons of Jeshua and Kadmiel there mentioned. **Kelaiah, the same is Kelita;" the latter is the usual name of the person in question, and that which he bears in Neh. viii. 7 and x. 11. Jozabad also reappears in Neh. viii. 7. — Ver. 24, etc. Of singers one, and of porters three names are given; comp. ii. 41, 42. In all, ten Levites. — Ver. 25. Of Israel, as distinguished from priests and Levites, i.e. of the laity. Of these latter are given in all eighty-six names, belonging to ten races, 25-43, who returned with Zerubbabel. See Nos. 1, 5, 6, 9, 8, 4, 30, 17, and 27 of the survey of these races, p. 33. ^liDT in ver. 29 should, according to the Chethiv, be read rnov. — The twofold naming of sons of Bani in this list (vers. 29 and 34)
is strange, and Bani is evidently in one of these places a mistake for some other name. Bertheau supposes that Bigvai may have stood in the text in one of these places. The error undoubtedly lies in the second mention of Bani (ver. 34), and consists not merely in the wrong transcription of this one name. For, while of every other race four, six, seven, or eight individuals are named, no less than seven and twenty names follow *23 '33D, though all these persons could hardly have belonged to one race, unless the greater number of males therein had married strange wives. Besides, no names of inhabitants of cities of Judah and Benjamin are given in this list (as in ii. 21-28, and 33-35), although it is stated in vers. 7 and 14 that not only the men of Jerusalem, but also dwellers in other cities, had contracted these prohibited marriages, and been summoned to Jerusalem, that judgment might be pronounced in their several cases. These reasons make it probable that the twenty-seven persons enumerated in vers. 34-42 were inhabitants of various localities in Judah, and not merely individuals belonging to a single house. This supposition cannot, however, be further corroborated, since even the LXX. and 1 Esdr. read the name Bani in vers. 27 and 34, nor can any conjecture respecting the correct reading laying claim to probability be ventured on. In the single names, the Greek texts of the Septuagint and 1 Esdras frequently differ from the Hebrew text, but the differences are almost all of a kind to furnish no material for criticism. A considerable number of these names reappear in the lists of names in the book of Nehemiah, but under circumstances which nowhere make the identity of the persons bearing them certain. — Yer. 44 contains the statement with which the account of this transaction closes. The Chethiv sKK-'3 seems to be an error of transcription for *Nb'3 (the Keri), which the sense requires. '131 DHD t^l, " and there were among them women who had brought forth sons." DHD must be referred to women, notwithstanding the masculine suffix, ^fc^, too, can only be referred to D^'j, and cannot be explained, as by J. H. Mich.: wide etiam Jilios susceperant seu procreaverant. The gender of the verb is adapted to the form of the word D^J, an incorrectness which must be attributed to the increasing tendency of the language to use the masculine instead of the feminine, or to renounce a distinction of form between the genders. There are no adequate reasons for such an alteration of the text as Bertheau proposes; for the LXX. already had our text before them, and the kcli aweXvaav avTas avv re/cvoLs of 1 Esdr. ix. 36 is a mere conjecture from the context. The remark itself, that among the women who were sent away were some who had already brought children into the world, is not superfluous, but added for the purpose of showing how thoroughly this matter was carried out. Separation from women who already have children is far more grievous, ob communium liberorum carilatem, than parting with childless wives.
Strictly as this separation was carried out, this evil was not thereby done away with for ever, nor even for very long. After the arrival of Nehemiah at Jerusalem, when the building of the wall was concluded, the congregation again bound themselves by an oath, on the occasion of a day of prayer and fasting, to contract no more such illegal marriages (Neh. x. 31). Nevertheless, Nehemiah, on his second return to Jerusalem, some five and twenty to thirty years after the dissolution of these marriages by Ezra, again found Jews who had married women of Ashdod, Moab, and Ammon, and children of these marriages who spoke the tongue of Ashdod, and could not speak the Jews' language, and even one of the sons of the high priest Jehoiada allied to a daughter of Sanballat the Horonite (Neh. xiii. 23, etc.). Such a phenomenon, however strange it may appear on a superficial view of the matter, becomes comprehensible when we consider more closely the circumstances of the times. The nucleus of the Israelite community in Jerusalem and Judah was formed by those exiles who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel and Ezra; and to this nucleus the remnant of Jewish and Israelite descent which had been left in the land was gradually united, after the rebuilding of the temple and the restoration of the worship of Jahve. Those who returned from Babylon, as well as those who remained in the land, had now, however, lived seventy, and some of them one hundred and fifty, years (from the captivity of Jehoiachin in 599, to the return of Ezra in 457) among the heathen, and in the midst of heathen surroundings, and had thus become so accustomed to intercourse with them in civil and social transactions, that the consciousness of the barriers placed by the Mosaic law between Israel, the people of Jahve, and the Gentiles, was more and more obliterated. And this would especially be the case when the Gentiles who entered into matrimonial alliance with Israelites did not flagrantly practise idolatrous worship, i.e. did not offer sacrifice to heathen deities. Under such circumstances, it must have been extremely difficult to do away entirely with these unlawful unions; although, without a thorough reform in this respect, the successful development of the new community in the land of their fathers was not to be obtained.
Ezra's narrative of his agency in Jerusalem closes with the account of the dissolution of the unlawful marriages then existing. What he subsequently effected for the revival of religion and morality in the re-established community, in conformity with the law of God, was more of an inward and spiritual kind; and was either of such a nature that no striking results ensued, which could furnish matter for historical narrative, or was performed during the period of his joint agency with Nehemiah, of which an account is furnished by the latter in the record he has handed down to us (Neh. viii. 10).