already gives the correct meaning: de doctoribus narrating quod L'liei-int ct dederint intellectum, de auditoribus, quod lecttu/i ihtclUwevint. The manner of proceeding with this reading is not quite clear. According to vers. 5-8, the Levites alone seem to have read to the people out of the book of the law, and to have explained what they read to their auditors; while according to ver. 3, Ezra read to the assembled people, and the ears of all were attentive to the book of the law, while we are told in ver. 5 that Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people. If, however, we regard vers. 4-8 as only a more detailed description of what is related vers. 2, 3, it is obvious that both Ezra and the thirteen Levites mentioned in ver. 7 read out of the law. Hence the occurrence may well have taken place as follows: Ezra first read a section of the law, and the Levites then expounded to the people the portion just read; the only point still doubtful being whether the thirteen (fourteen) Levites expounded in succession, or whether they all did this at the same time to different groups of people.
Vers. 9-12. The celebration of the feast of the new moon. — Ver. 9. Then Nehemiah, the Tirshatha (see remarks on Ezra ii. 63), and the priest Ezra the scribe, and the Levites who were teaching the people, said to all the people, u This day is holy to the Lord our God. Mourn not, nor weep; for all the people wept when they heard the words of the law." Disn is the new moon of the seventh month. The portion read made a powerful impression upon the assembled crowds. Undoubtedly it consisted of certain sections of Deuteronomy and other parts of the Thorah, which were adapted to convict the people of their sin in transgressing the commands of the Lord, and of the punishments to which they had thus exposed themselves. They were so moved thereby that they mourned and wept. This induced Nehemiah, Ezra, and the Levites, who had been applying what was read to the hearts of their hearers, to encourage them. — Ver. 10. And he said to them (viz. Nehemiah as governor and head of the community, though the fact that his address is mentioned does not exclude the participation of Ezra and the Levites):
"Go, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send gifts to them for whom nothing is prepared, for this day is holy to our Lord; neither be ye sorry, for joy in Jahve is your refuge." D^DtPDj fatnesses (XnrdafiaTa, LXX.), fat pieces of meat, not "rich cakes" (Bertheau); comp. D^DtP HAGPp, Isa. xxv. 6. D*i?r03? sweetened drinks. The sense is: Make glad repasts on good feast-day food and drink; and send portions to the poor who have prepared nothing, that they too may rejoice on this festival. HUE, gifts, are portions of food; Esth. ix. 19, 22; 1 Sam. i. 4. Hence we see that it was customary with the Israelites to send portions of food and drink, on festivals, to the houses of the poor, that they too might share in the joy of the day. |toj pi6 for [WJ P« "1K;^ (see rem. on 1 Chron.xv. 12), to them for whom nothing is prepared, who have not the means to prepare a feast-day meal. Because the day is holy to the Lord, they are to desire it with holy joy. nirp nnn is a joy founded on the feeling of communion with the Lord, on the consciousness that we have in the Lord a God long-suffering and abundant in goodness and truth (Ex. xxxiv. 6). This joy is to be to them TtyD, a strong citadel or refuge, because the Almighty is their God; comp. Jer. xvi. 19. — Ver. 11. The Levites also strove to pacify the people, saying: u Hold your peace, i.e. give over weeping, for the day is holy; neither be ye grieved." — Ver. 12. This address had its effect. The people went their way, some to their houses, some to their lodgings, to partake of festal repasts, and to keep the feast with joy; " for they gave heed to the words that were declared to them," i.e. they took to heart the address of Nehemiah, Ezra, and the Levites.
Vers. 13-18. Celebration of the feast of tabernacles. — Ver. 13. On the second day were gathered together the heads of the houses of all the people, of the priests, and of the Levites to Ezra the scribe, to attend to the words of the law. The infinitive ^?K'np may indeed be taken (as by Bertheau) as the continuation of the finite verb, instead of as infinitive absolute (Ewald, § 352, c); this is, however, admissible only in cases where the second verb either states what must be done, or further describes the condition of affairs, while
L,,::'~s here states tlie purpose for which the heads of the people, etc, Assembled themselves unto Ezra. Hence we take TSfcrtp in its usual meaning, and the 1 before it as explicative. tN '?-,;?, as in Ps. xli. I, expresses taking an attentive interest in anything. They desired to be further and more -deeply instructed in the law by Ezra. — Vers. 14, 15. And they found written in the law that the Lord had commanded Moses, that the children of Israel should dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month; and that thev should publish and proclaim in all their cities, and in Jerusalem, saying: a Go forth to the mount, and fetch olive branches, etc. to make booths, as it is written." This statement is not to be understood as saying that the heads of the people sought in the law, fourteen days before the feast, for information as to what they would have to do, that they might prepare for the due celebration of the feast of tabernacles (Bertheau). The text only states that the heads of the people again betook themselves to Ezra on the second day, to receive from him instruction in the law, and that in reading the law they found the precept concerning the celebration of the festival in booths, i.e. they met with this precept, and were thereby induced to celebrate the approaching festival in strict accordance with its directions. The law concerning the feast of tabernacles, of which the essentials are here communicated, is found Lev. xxiii. 39-43. In Deut. xvi. 13 they were only commanded to keep the feast with gladness. The particular of dwelling in booths or bowers is taken from Lev. xxiii. 43; the further details in ver. 15 relate to the carrying out of the direction: u Ye shall take you on the first day the boughs of goodly trees, branches of palm trees, and the boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook" (Lev. xxiii. 43). Go to the mountain, a woody district, whence branches may be obtained, vy, state constructive plural of TO, leaf, foliage, here leafy boughs or branches of trees, JVT, the olive, |DB> yy, the wild olive (oleaster), the myrtle, the palm, and branches of thick-leaved trees, are here mentioned (the two latter being also named in Leviticus), ainaa does not relate to the preparation of the booths, but to the precept that the feast should be kept in booths. In ver. 16 the accomplishment of the matter is related, presupposing a compliance with the proclamation sent out into all the cities in the land, and indeed so speedy a compliance that the booths were finished by the day of the feast. The object (the branches of ver. 15) must be supplied to W3J} from the context. They made themselves booths, every one upon the roof of his house, and in their courts, and in the courts of the house of God, and in the open space at the water-gate (see on ver. «3), and the open space at the gate of Ephraim. On the situation of this gate, see rem. on iii. 8, p. 179. The open space before it must be thought of as within the city walls. On these two public places, booths were probably made by those who had come to Jerusalem, but did not dwell there; while the priests and Levites belonging to other places would build theirs in the courts of the temple. — Ver. 17. And the whole community that had returned from captivity (comp. Ezra vi. 21) made themselves booths and dwelt in booths;.for since the days of Joshua the son of Nun unto that day, had not the children of Israel done so. |2? so, refers to the dwelling in booths; and the words do not tell us that the Israelites had not celebrated this festival since the days of Joshua, that is, since they had taken possession of Canaan: for, according to Ezra iii. 4, those who returned from captivity kept this feast in the first year of their return; and a celebration is also mentioned after the dedication of Solomon's temple, 2 Chron. vii. 9, 1 Kings viii. 65. The text only, states that since the days of Joshua the whole community had not so celebrated it, i.e. had not dwelt in booths. Neither do the words imply that since the days of Joshua to that time no booths at all had been made at the celebration of the feast of tabernacles, but only that this had not been done by the whole congregation. On former occasions, those who came up to Jerusalem may have regarded this precept as non-essential, and contented themselves by keeping the feast with solemn assemblies, sacrifices, and sacrificial feasts, without making booths and dwelling in them for seven days. — d:iv. inw with the subject indefinite, while Ramb. and others supply Ezra. The reading of the law was only ordered at that celebration of the feast of tabernacles which occurred during the sabbatical year, Dent. xxxi. 10 sq. The last day was the seventh, for the eighth as a n^?.V did not belong to the feast of tabernacles; see rem. on Lev. xxiii. 36. DB5PD3 like 2 Chron. iv. 20, and elsewhere.
Chap. ix. The day of general fasting and prayer. — On the twenty-fourth day of the month, i.e. twro days after the termination of the feast of tabernacles, the children of Israel re-assembled in the temple to humble themselves before God with mourning and fasting, and, after the reading of the law, to confess their own sins and the sins of their fathers (1-3). After the Levites had invited them to praise God (4, 5), a general confession was made, in which the congregation was reminded of all the grace and favour shown by God to His people, from the days of Abraham down to the time then present; and all the departures of the people from their God, all their rebellions against Him, were acknowledged, to show that the bondage and oppression to which Israel was now subjected were the well-deserved punishment of their sins (6-37). This confession of sin much resembles the confession of the faithfulness of God and the unfaithfulness of Israel in the 106th Psalm, both in its plan and details, but differs from this " Hallelujah Psalm" in the circumstance that it does not rise to the praise of God, to the hallelujah, but stops at the confession that God is righteous and true in all that He has done, and that Israel has done wickedly, without definitely uttering a request for pardon and deliverance from oppression.
Vers. 1-3. On the twenty-second of Tishri was the Hazereth of the feast of tabernacles; on the twenty-fourth the congregation re-assembled in the temple, u with fasting and with sackcloths (penitential garments made of hair; see rem. Joel i. 8) and earth upon them," i.e. spread upon their heads (1 Sam. iv. 12; 2 Sam. i. 2; Job ii. 12), — the external marks of deep mourning and heaviness of heart. — Ver. 2. " And the seed of Israel separated themselves from all strangers, and stood and confessed all their sin?, and the iniquities of their fathers." This separation from strangers does not specially relate to the dissolution of the marriages contracted with heathen women, nor to anv measures taken that only Israelites should be admitted to this assembly (Bertheau). It was rather a voluntary renunciation of connection with the heathen, and of heathen customs. — Ver. 3. And they stood up {i.e. remained standing) in their place (comp. viii. 7), and read in the book of the law of the Lord their God, i.e. listened to the reading of the law, a fourth part of the day (about three hours), and a fourth part (the next three hours) they confessed (made a confession of their sins), and worshipped the Lord their God. This confession and worship is more nearly described 4-37. — Vers. 4 and 5. There stood upon the scaffold of the Levites, i.e. upon the platform erected for the Levites (comp. viii. 4), Jeshua and seven other Levites whose names are given, and they cried with a loud voice to God, and said to the assembled congregation, " Stand up, bless the Lord your God for ever and ever! and blessed be the name of Thy glory, which is exalted above all blessing and praise." The repetition of the names of the Levites in ver. 5 shows that this invitation to praise God is distinct from the crying to God with a loud voice of ver. 4, and seems to say that the Levites first cried to God, i.e. addressed to Him their confessions and supplications, and after having done so, called upon the congregation to worship God. Eight names of Levites being given in both verses, and five of these — Jeshua, Bani, Kadmiel, Shebaniah, and Sherebiah — being identical, the difference of the three others in the two verses — Bunni, Bani, and Chenani (ver. 4), and Hashabniah, Hodijah, and Pethahiah (ver. 5) — seems to have arisen from a clerical error, — an appearance favoured also by the circumstance that Bani occurs twice in ver. 4. Of the other names in question, Hodijah occurs x. 14, and Pethahiah Ezra x. 23, as names of Levites, but *?J3 and nT^?yT! nowhere else. Hence Bunni, Bani, and Chenani (ver. 4), and Hashabniah (ver. 5), may be assigned to a clerical error; but we have no means for restoring the correct names* With regard to the matter of the* es, Ramb« remarks on ver* 1: constitiste opinor omnes simul, ita ipsi odstantibui atgue $ua etiam vice Deum orantibu8} hen that the eight Levitei prayed to (i<>d successively; while Bertheao thinks that these Levites entreated God, in penitential and supplicatory psalms, to have mercy on His sinful but penitent people. In this case we must also regard their address to the congregation in ver. 5 as a liturgical hymn, to which the congregation responded by praising God in chorus. To this view may be objected the circumstance, that no allusion is made in the narrative to the singing of penitential or other song<. B:. a confession of sins follows in vers. 5-37, which may fitly be called a crying unto God, without its being stated by whom it was uttered. u This section," says Bertheau, u whether we regard its form or contents, cannot have been sung either by the Levites or the congregation. We recognise in it the speech of an individual, and hence accept the view that the statement of the LXX., that after the singing of the Levites, ver. 4, and the praising of God in ver. 5, Ezra came forward and spoke the words following, is correct, and that the words ical elirev 'Ea&pas, which it inserts before ver. 6, originally stood in the Hebrew text." But if Psalms, such as Ps. cv., cvi., and cvii., were evidently appointed to be sung to the praise of God by the Levites or by the congregation, there can be no reason why the prayer vers. 6-37 should not be adapted both in form and matter for this purpose. This prayer by no means bears the impress of being the address of an individual, but is throughout the confession of the whole congregation. The prayer speaks of our fathers (vers. 9, 16), of what is come upon us (ver. 33), addresses Jahve as our God, and says we have sinned. Of course Ezra might have uttered it in the name of the congregation; but that the addition of the LXX., ical elirev "Ea&pas. is of no critical value, and is a mere conjecture of the translators, is evident from the circumstance that the prayer does not begin with the words mrr tan nrix of ver. 6, but passes into the form of direct address to God in the last clause of ver. 5: Blessed be the name of Thy glory. By these words the prayer which follows is evidently declared to be the confession of those who are to praise the glory of the Lord; and the addition, " and Ezra said," characterized as an unskilful interpolation. According to what has now been said, the summons, ffliT nx a*}3 V2ftp, ver. 5, like the introductions to many Hodu and Hallelujah Psalms (e.g. Ps. cv. 1, cvi. 1), is to be regarded as only an exhortation to the congregation to praise God, i.e. to join in the praises following, and to unite heartily in the confession of sin. This view of the connection of vers. 5 and 6 explains the reason why it is not stated either in ver. 6, or at the close of this prayer in ver. 37, that the assembled congregation blessed God agreeably to the summons thus addressed to them. They did so by silently and heartily praying to, and praising God with the Levites, who were reciting aloud the confession of sin. On *3"iTl
R. Sal. already remarks: nunc incipiunt loqui Levitce versus Shechinam s. ad ipsum Deum. The invitation to praise God insensibly passes into the action of praising. If, moreover, vers. 6-37 are related in the manner above stated to ver. 5, then it is not probable that the crying to God with a loud voice (ver. 4) was anything else than the utterance of the prayer subsequently given, vers. 6-37. The repetition of the names in ver. 5 is not enough to confirm this view, but must be explained by the breadth of the representation here given, and is rescued from the charge of mere tautology by the fact that in ver. 4 the office of the individuals in question is not named, which it is bv the word D8vn in ver. 5. For D'vn in ver. 4 belongs as genitive to nbyip^ and both priests and lavmen might have stood on the platform of the Levites. For this reason it is subsequently stated in ver. 5, that Jeshua, etc., were Levites; and in doing this the names are again enumerated. In the exhortation, Stand up and bless, etc., Bertheau seeks to separate "for ever and ever" from the imp. *3"}3, and to take it as a further qualification of D3WK. This is, however, unnatural and arbitrary; comp. 1 Chron. xvi. 26. Still more arbitrary is it to supply " One day all people " to I3W, "shall bless Thy name," etc. HI DDnni adds;i MCO(ld predicate to Dj?: and which is exalted above all blessing and praise, i.e. sublimius est quam ut pro d'ujnitate laudarl possit (R. Sal.).
In ver. 6 this praising of God begins with the acknowledgment that Jahve, the Creator of heaven and earth, chose A brain and made a covenant with him to give the land of Canaan to his seed, and had performed this word (vers. 6-8). These verses form the theme of that blessing the name of His glory, to which the Levites exhorted. This theme is then elucidated by facts from Israel's history, in four strophes. a. When God saw the affliction of His people in Egypt, He delivered them by great signs and wonders from the power of Pharaoh, gave them laws and judgments on Sinai, miraculously provided them with food and water in the wilderness, and commanded them to take possession of the promised land (vers. 9-15). b. Although their fathers rebelled against Him, even in the wilderness, God did not withdraw His mercy from them, but sustained them forty years, so that they lacked nothing; and subdued kings before them, so that they were able to conquer and possess the land (vers. 16-25). c. After they were settled in the land they rebelled again, and God delivered them into the hand of their oppressors; but as often as they cried unto Him, He helped them again, till at length, because of their continued opposition, He gave them into the power of the people of the lands, yet of His great mercy did not wholly cast them off (vers. 26-31). d. May He now too look upon the affliction of His people, as the God that keepeth covenant and mercy, although they have deserved by their sins the troubles they are suffering (vers. 32-37).
Vers. 6-8. " Thou art Jahve alone; Thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, and all their host, the earth and all that is thereon, the sea and all therein; and Thou givest life to them all, and the host of heaven worshippeth Thee. Ver. 7. Thou art Jahve, the God who didst choose Abram, and broughtest him forth out of Ur of the Chaldees, and gavest him the name of Abraham: Ver. 8. And foundest his heart faithful before Thee, and madest a covenant with him to give the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Jebusites, and the Girgashites, to give to his seed, and hast performed Thy word; for Thou art righteous." Jahve alone is God, the Creator of heaven and earth, and of all creatures in heaven and on earth. In order duly to exalt the almightiness of God, the notion of heaven is enhanced by the addition "heaven of heavens," as in Deut. x. 14, 1 Kings viii. 27; and that of earth by the addition "the sea and all therein;" com p. Ps. cxlvi. 6. DK3V"?3, Gen. ii. 1, here refers only to heaven. rt'C1*?* to cause to live — to give and preserve life. B?3 relates to all creatures in heaven and earth. The host of heaven who worshipped God are the angels, as in Ps. cxlviii. 2, ciii. 21. This only God chose Abram; comp. Gen. xii. 1 with xi. 31 and xv. 7, xvii. 5, where God bestowed upon the patriarch Abram the name of Abraham. The words, " Thou foundest his heart faithful," refer to P?^n ni.T3 there mentioned. The making of a covenant allu.des to Gen. xvii. 5 sq.; the enumeration of six Canaanitish nations to Deut. vii. 1, Ex. iii. 8; comp. with Gen. xv. 20 sq. This His word God performed (fulfilled), for He is righteous. God is called P*W, inasmuch as with Him word and deed correspond with each other; comp. Deut. xxxii. 4.
Vers. 9-15. The fulfilment of this word by the deliverance of Israel from Egypt, and their guidance through the wilderness to Canaan. — Ver. 9. "And Thou sawest the affliction of our fathers in Egypt, and heardest their cry by the Red Sea: Ver. 10. And showedst signs and wonders upon Pharaoh and all his servants, and on all the people of his land, because Thou knewest that they dealt proudly against them, and madest Thyself a name, as this day. Ver. 11. And Thou dividedst the sea before them, and they went through the midst of the sea on dry land; and their persecutors Thou threwest into the deeps, as a stone into the mighty waters." In ver. 9 are comprised two subjects, which are carried out in vers. 10, 11: (1) the affliction of the Israelites in Egypt, which God saw (comp. Ex. iii. 7), and out of which He delivered them by the signs and wonders lie showed upon Pharaoh (ver. 10); (2) the crying for help at the Bed Sea, when the Israelites perceived Pharaoh with his horsemen and chariots in pursuit (Ex. xiv. 10), and the help which God gave them by dividing the sea, etc. (ver. 11). The words in ver. 10a are supported by Dent. vi. 22, on the ground of the historical narrative, Ex. vii.-x. The expression Dflvg VWn *3 is formed according to Dn^y m 1BW, Ex. xviii. 11. hv Tin occurs Ex. xxi. 14 in a general sense. On 'U1 D^ 1? ^V™, comp. Jer. xxxii. 20, Isa. Ixiii. 12, 14, 1 Chron. xvii. 22. A name as this day — in that the miracles which God then did are still praised, and He continues still to manifest His almighty power. The words of ver. 11 are supported by Ex. xiv. 21, 22, 28, and xv. 19.?3N iM niitozi are from Ex. xv. 5; &W D*»3 from Ex. xv. and Isa. xlii'i. 16.— Ver. 12. u And Thou leddest them in the day by a cloudy pillar, and in the night by a pillar of fire, to give them light in the way wherein they should go. Ver. 13. And Thou earnest down upon mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right judgments and true laws, good statutes and commandments: Ver. 14. And madest known unto them Thy holy Sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses Thy servant. Ver. 15. And gavest them bread from heaven for their hunger, and broughtest forth water for them out of the rock for their thirst; and Thou commandedst them to go in and possess the land,, which Thou hadst lifted up Thine hand to give them." Three particulars in the miraculous leading of Israel through the wilderness are brought forward: a. Their being guided in the wray by miraculous tokens of the divine presence, in the pillar of fire and cloud, ver. 12; comp. Ex. xiii. 21, Num. xiv. 14. b. The revelation of God on Sinai, and the giving of the law, vers. 13, 14. The descent of God on Sinai and the voice from heaven agree with Ex. xix. 18, 20, and xx. 1 sq., compared with Deut. iv. 36. On the various designations of the law, comp. Ps. xix. 9, cxix. 43, 39, 142. Of the commandments, that concerning the Sabbath is specially mentioned, and spoken of as a benefit bestowed by God upon the Israelites, as a proclamation of His holy Sabbath, inasmuch as the Israelites were on the Sabbath to share in the rest of God; see rem. on Ex. xx. 9-11. c. The provision of manna, and of water from the rock, for their support during their journey through the wilderness on the way to Canaan; Ex. xvi. 4, 10 sq., Ex. xvii. 6, Num. xx. 8; comp. Ps. lxxviii. 24, 15, cv. 40. T\Vrh tfHsb like Deut. ix. 1, 5, xi. 31, and elsewhere. *JVTIN nKfefl is to be understood according to Num. xiv. 30.
Vers. 16-25. Even the fathers to whom God had shown such favour, repeatedly departed from and rebelled against Him; but God of His great mercy did not forsake them, but brought them into possession of the promised land. — Ver. 16. " And they, even ourfathers, dealt proudly, and hardened their necks, and hearkened not to Thy commandments. Ver. 17. They refused to obey, and were not mindful of Thy wonders that Thou didst amongst them; and hardened their necks, and appointed a captain to return to their bondage. But Thou art a God ready to pardon, gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and forsookest them not." In these verses the conduct of the children of Israel towards God is contrasted with His kindness towards this stiff-necked people, the historical confirmation following in ver. 18. Dfll is emphatic, and prefixed to contrast the conduct of the Israelites with the benefits bestowed on them. The contrast is enhanced by the) explicative before ^nhtf, even our fathers (which J.D. Michaelis would expunge, from a misconception of its meaning, but which Bertheau with good reason defends). Words are accumulated to describe the stiffnecked resistance of the people. Wn as above, ver. 10. "They hardened their necks" refers to Ex. xxxii. 9, xxxiii. 3, xxxiv. 9, and therefore already alludes to the worship of the golden calf at Sinai, mentioned ver. 18; while in ver. 17, the second great rebellion of the people at Kadesh, on the borders of the promised land, Num. xiv., is contemplated. The repetition of the expression, il they hardened their hearts," shows that a second grievous transgression is already spoken of in ver. 17. This is made even clearer by the next clause, 'til ^i ^rn?
which is taken almost verbally from Num. xiv. 4: "They said one to another, Let us make a captain (B>N"i »™?), and return to Egypt;" the notion being merely enhanced here by the addition DrfOy7, to their bondage. The comparison with Num. xiv. 4 also shows that BJ1B3 is a clerical error for D^VOa, as the LXX. read; for Dp03, in their stubbornness, after Drnay?, gives no appropriate sense. In spite, however, of their stiff-neckedness, God of His mercy and goodness did not forsake them, ninvp PIPK, a God of pardons; comp. Dan. ix. 9, Ps. cxxx. 4. 'm Dirni |t3n is a reminiscence of Ex. xxxiv. 6. The) before ^pn came into the text by a clerical error. — Ver. 18. "Yea, they even made them a molten calf, and said, This is thy god that brought thee up out of Egypt, and wrought great provocations. Ver. 19. Yet Thou, in Thy manifold mercies, didst not forsake them in the wilderness; the pillar of the cloud departed not from them by day to lead them, and the pillar of fire by night to show them light in the way wherein they should go. Ver. 20. Thou gavest also Thy good Spirit to instruct them, and withheldest not Thy manna from their mouth, and gavest them water for their thirst: Ver. 21. And forty years didst Thou sustain them in the wilderness; they lacked nothing, their clothes waxed not old, and their feet swelled not." ^ *|K, also (even this) = yea even. On the worship of the golden calf, see Ex. xxiv. 4. The words u they did (wrought) great provocations" involve a condemnation of the worship of the molten calf; nevertheless God did not withdraw His gracious presence, but continued to lead them by the pillar of cloud and fire. The passage Num. xiv. 14, according to which the pillar of cloud and fire guided the march of the people through the wilderness after the departure from Sinai, i.e. after their transgression in the matter of the calf, is here alluded to. |JVn TOy is rhetorically enhanced by HN: and with respect to the cloudy pillar, it departed not; so, too, in the second clause, Bfcn IWTm; comp. Ewald, § 277, d. The words, ver. 20, " Thou gavest Thy good Spirit," etc., refer to the occurrence, Num. xi. 17, 25, where God endowed the seventy elders with the spirit of prophecy for the confirmation of Moses' authority. The definition "good Spirit" recalls Ps. cxliii. 10. The sending of manna is first mentioned Num. xi. 6-9, comp. Josh. v. 12; the giving of water, Num. xx. 2-8. — In ver. 21, all that the Lord did for Israel is summed up in the assertion of Deut. ii. 7, viii. 4, Vion SO* see the explanation of these passages. — Vers. 22—25. The Lord also fulfilled His promise of giving the land of Canaan to the Israelites notwithstanding their rebelliousness. Ver. 22. " And Thou gavest them kingdoms and nations, and didst divide them by boundaries; "and they took possession of the land of Sihon, both the land of the king of Heshbon, and the land of Og king of Bashan. Ver. 23. And Thou didst multiply their children as the stars of heaven, and bring them into the land which Thou hadst promised to their fathers, that they should go in to possess. Ver. 24. And the children went in and possessed the land, and Thou subduedst before them the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, and gavest them into their hands, both their kings and the people of the land, to do with them according to their pleasure. Ver. 25. And they took fortified cities, and a fat land, and took possession of houses filled with all kinds of goods, wells digged, vineyards and olive gardens, and fruit trees in abundance; and they ate and became fat, and delighted themselves in Thy great goodness." »"I^?P B£?CV?1 is variously explained. Aben Ezra and others refer the suffix to the Canaanites, whom God scattered in multos angulos or varias mundi partes. Others refer it to the Israelites. According to this view, Ramb. says: fecisti eos per omnes terra? Canancece angulos hahitare; and Gusset.: distribuisti eis terram usque ad angulum h. L nulla vel minima regionum particula excepta. But piri, Piel, generally means the dividing of things; and when used of persons, as in Gen. xlix. 7, Lam. iv. 16, to divide, to scatter, sensu malo, which is here inapplicable to the Israelites. P?n signifies to divide, especially by lot, and is used chiefly concerning the partition of the land of Canaan, in Kal, Josh, xiv. 5, xviii. 2, and in Piel, Josh. xiii. 7, xviii. 10, xix. 51. The word HXQ also frequently occurs in Joshua, in the sense of a corner or side lying towards a certain quarter of the
II, ir», 20. According to this, Bertheau rightly takes the words ti> Bay: Thou didst divide them (the kingdoms and nations, i.e. the land of these nations) according to sides or boundaries, i.e. according to certain definite limits. Sihon is the king of Ileshbon (Deut. i. 4), and the 1 before P^"n? 'n 'd is not to be expunged as a gloss, but regarded as explicative: and, indeed, both the land of the king of Ileshbon and the land of Og. The conquest of these two kingdoms is named first, because it preceded the possession of Canaan (Num. xxi. 21-35). The increase of the children of the Israelites is next mentioned, ver. 23; the fathers having fallen in the wilderness, and only their children coming into the land of Canaan. The numbering of the people in the plains of Moab (Num. xxvi.) is here alluded to, when the new generation was found to be twice as numerous as that which marched out of Egypt; while the words riBh? **w, }iere and in ver. 15, are similar to Deut. i. 10. The taking possession of Canaan is spoken of in ver. 24. l^rn recalls Deut. ix. 3. Bjrt^Tsl, according to their pleasure, comp. Dan. viii. 4. Fortified cities, as Jericho and Ai.
Vers. 26-31. But even in that good land the fathers were disobedient: they rejected the commands of God, slew the prophets who admonished them, and were not brought back to the obedience of God even by the chastisements inflicted on them, till at length God delivered them into the hands of Gentile kings, though after His great mercy He did not utterly forsake them. — Yer. 26. a And they were disobedient, and rebelled against Thee, and cast Thy law behind their backs, and slew Thy prophets which testified against them to turn them to Thee, and they wrought great provocations. Ver. 27. And Thou deliveredst them into the hand of their oppressors, so that they oppressed them; and in the time of their oppression they cried unto Thee. Then Thou heardest them from heaven, and according to Thy manifold mercies Thou gavest them deliverers, who delivered them out of the hand of their oppressors. Ver. 28. And when they had rest, they again did evil before Thee. Then Thou deliveredst them into the hand of their enemies, so that they had dominion over them; and they cried again unto Thee, and Thou heardest from heaven, and didst deliver them according to Thy great mercy, many times." — Ver. 26 again contains, like ver. 16, a general condemnation of the conduct of the children of Israel towards the Lord their God during the period between their entrance into Canaan and the captivity, which is then justified by the facts adduced in the verses following. In proof of their disobedience, it is mentioned that they cast the commands of God behind their back (comp. 1 Kings xiv. 19, Ezek. xxiii. 35), and slew the prophets, e.g. Zechariah (2 Chron. xxiv. 21), the prophets of the days of Jezebel (1 Kings xviii. 13, xix. 10), and others who rebuked their sins to turn them from them. 3 Tyn? to testify against sinners, comp. 2 Kings xvii. 13, 15. The last clause of ver. 26 is a kind of refrain, repeated from ver. 18. — Vers. 27 and 28 refer to the times of the judges; comp. Judg. ii. 11-23. DT^iD are the judges whom God raised up to deliver Israel out of the power of their oppressors; comp. Judg. iii. 9 sq> with ii. 16. D^y nfol, multitudes of times, is a co-ordinate accusative: at many times, frequently; fiisn like Lev. xxv. 51. — Ver. 29. " And testifiedst against them, to bring them back again to Thy law; yet they hearkened not to Thy commandments, and sinned against Thy judgments, which if a man do he shall live in them, and gave a resisting shoulder, and hardened their neck, and would not hear. Ver. 30. And Thou didst bear with them many years, and didst testify against them by Thy Spirit through Thy prophets; but they would not hearken, therefore Thou gavest them into the hand of the people of the lands. Ver. 31. Nevertheless in Thy great mercy Thou didst not utterly consume them, nor forsake them; for Thou art gracious and merciful." — Vers. 29 and 30 treat of the times of the kings. Dfia *?|fffl} is the testimony of the prophets against the idolatrous people; comp. ver. 26. T^SBT?^ is emphatically prefixed, and taken up again by D3. ^ne sentence, which if a man do he shall live in them, is formed upon Lev. xviii. 5, comp. Ezek. xx. 11. On the figurative expression, they gave a resisting shoulder, romp. Zech.vii. 11. The simile is taken from tlicox, who rears against the yoke, and desires not to bear it; comp. IIos. iv. 16. The sentences following are repeated from ver. 16. D^vV "i\u}fin is an abbreviated expression for ipn Sj^D, Ps. xxxvi. 11, cix. 12, Jer. xxxi. 3, to draw out, to extend for a long time favour to any one: Thou hadst patience with them for many years, viz. the whole period of kingly rule from Solomon to the times of the Assyrians. The delivering into the power of the people of the lands, i.e. of the heathen (comp. Ps. cvi. 40 sq.), began with the invasion of the Assyrians (comp. ver. 32), who destroyed the kingdom of the ten tribes, and was inflicted upon Judah also by means of the Chaldeans. — Ver. 31. But in the midst of these judgments also, God, according to His promise, Jer. iv. 27, v. 10, 18, xxx. 11, and elsewhere, did not utterly forsake His people, nor make a full end of them; for He did not suffer them to become extinct in exile, but preserved a remnant, and delivered it from captivity.
Vers. 32-37. May then, God, who keepeth covenant and mercy, now also look upon the affliction of His people, though kings, rulers, priests, and people have fully deserved this punishment; for they are now bondmen, and in great affliction, in the land of their fathers. Ver. 32. u And now, our God, the great, the mighty, and the terrible God, who keepest covenant and mercy, let not all the trouble that hath come upon us, on our kings, our princes, our priests, our prophets, and our fathers, and on all Thy people, since the times of the kings of Assyria unto this day, seem little to Thee. Ver. 33. Thou art just in all that is come upon us; for Thou hast done right, but we have done wickedly. Ver. 34. And our kings, our princes, our priests, and our fathers have not kept Thy law, nor hearkened to Thy commandments and Thy testimonies, wherewith Thou didst testify against them. Ver. 35. And they have not served Thee in their kingdom, and in Thy great goodness that Thou gavest them, and in the large and fat land which Thou gavest up to them, and have not turned from their wicked works. Ver. 36. Behold, we are now bondmen; and the land that Thou gavest unto our fathers to eat the fruit thereof, and the £ood thereof, behold, we are bondmen in it. Ver. 37. And it yieldeth much increase unto the kings whom Thou hast set over us because of our sins; and they have dominion over our bodies, and over our cattle at their pleasure, and we are in great distress." The invocation of God, ver. 32, like that hi i. 5, is similar to Deut. x. 17. T?.?? &VPI '*? stands independently, the following clause being emphasized by FIX, like e.g. ver. 19: Let not what concerns all our trouble be little before Thee; comp. the similar construction with W? in Josh. xx. 17. What seems little is easily disregarded. The prayer is a litotes; and the sense is, Let our affliction be regarded by Thee as great and heavy. The nouns 0*3?D?, eta, are in apposition to the suffix of wnsso, the object being continued by?. — Ver. 33. Thou art just: comp. ver. 8, Deut. xxxii. 4, Ezra ix. 15. '2?V^ upon all, i.e. concerning all that has befallen us; because their sins deserved punishment, and God is only fulfilling His word upon the sinners. In ver. 34, HX again serves to emphasize the subject. In the enumeration of the different classes of the people, the prophets are here omitted, because, as God's witnesses, they are not reckoned among these who had transgressed, though involved (ver. 32) in the sufferings that have fallen on the nation. — Ver. 35. &[} are the fathers who were not brought to repentance by God's goodness. DJTDpDS, in their independent kingdom. 2"jn ^D? Thy much good, i.e. the fulness of Thy goodness, or " in the midst of Thy great blessing " (Bertheau). The predicate '"^rpn, the wide, extensive country, is derived from Ex. iii. 8. In ver. 36 sq., the prayer that God would not lightly regard the trouble of His people, is supported by a statement of the need and affliction in which they still are. They are bondmen in the land which God gave to their fathers as a free people, bondmen of the Persian monarchs; and the increase of the land which God appointed for His people belongs to the kings who rule over them. The rulers of the land dispose of their bodies and their cattle, by carrying off both men and cattle for their use, e.g. for military service. DJivo like ver. 24.
Chap, x. A covenant made (1-32), and an engagement entered into, to furnish what was needed for the maintenance of the temple, its services, and ministers (vers. 33-40). — Vers. 1-28. For the purpose of giving a lasting influence to this clay of prayer and fasting, the assembled people, after the confession of sin (given in chap, ix.), entered into a written agreement, by which they bound themselves by an oath to separate from the heathen, and to keep the commandments and ordinances of God, — a document being prepared for this purpose, and sealed by the heads of their different houses. — Ver. 1. And because of all this wre make and write a sure covenant; and our princes, Levites, and priests sign the sealed (document). ns;T"P33 does not mean post omne hoc, after all that we have done this day (Schmid, Bertheau, and others); still less, in omni hoc malo, quod nobis ohtigerat (Rashi, Aben Ezra), but upon all this, i.e. upon the foundation of the preceding act of prayer and penitence, we made •"'J?**, *•*• a settlement, a sure agreement (the word recurs xi. 23); hence IT}3 is used as with J"P"]3? ix. 8. '"'J*?- may again be taken as the object of E^nb, we write it; Dinnn?jn be understood as "our princes sealed." Dinnn is the sealed document; comp. Jer. xxii. 11, 14. Dtfinn?y means literally, Upon the sealed document were our princes, etc.; that is, our princes sealed or signed it. Signing was effected by making an impression with a seal bearing a name; hence originated the idiom Dinnn by "i^'x, " he who was upon the sealed document," meaning he who had signed the document by sealing it. By this derived signification is the plural D^DVinn by (ver. 2), " they who were upon the document," explained: they who had signed or sealed the document. — Ver. 2. At the head of the signatures stood Nehemiah the Tirshatha, as governor of the country, and Zidkijah, a high official, of whom nothing further is known, perhaps (after the analogy of Ezra iv. 9, 17) secretary to the governor. Then follow (in vers. 3-9) twenty-one names, with the addition: these, the priests. Of these twenty-one names, fifteen occur in chap. xii. 2-7 as chiefs of the priests who came up with Joshua and Zerubbabel from Babylon, and in xii.
11-20 as heads of priestly houses. Hence it is obvious that all the twenty-one names are those of heads of priestly classes, who signed the agreement in the names of the houses and families of their respective classes. Seraiah is probably the prince of the house of God dwelling at Jerusalem, mentioned xi. 11, who signed in place of the high priest. For further remarks on the orders of priests and their heads, see xii. 1 sq. — Vers. 10-14. The Levites who sealed were: Jeshua the son of Azaniah, Binnui of the sons of Henadad, Kadmiel, and their brethren, fourteen names. Sons of Jeshua and Kadmiel returned, together with seventy-four other Levites, with Zerubbabel and Jeshua; Ezra ii. 4; Neh. vii. 42. Jeshua, Binnui, Kadmiel, and Sherebiah are also named in xii. 8 as heads of orders of Levites. Of the rest nothing further is known, but we may regard them as heads of Levitical houses. — Vers. 15-28. The heads of the people. Forty-four names, thirteen of which are found in the list (Ezra ii.) of the kindreds who returned with Zerubbabel; see Ezra ii. The rest are names either of the heads of the different houses into which these kindreds were divided, or of the elders of the smaller towns of Benjamin and Judah. The fact that, while only thirty-three kindreds and places are enumerated in Ezra ii., forty-four occur here, — although names of kindreds mentioned in Ezra ii., e.g. Shephatiah, Arah, Zaccai, etc., are wanting here, — is to be explained partly by the circumstance that these kindreds included several houses whose different heads all subscribed, and partly by fresh accessions during the course of years to the number of houses.
Vers. 29-32. All the members of the community acceded to the agreement thus signed by the princes of the people, and the heads of the priests and Levites, and bound themselves by an oath to walk in the law of the Lord, and to separate themselves from the heathen. — Vers. 29 and 30. And the rest of the people, the priests, the Levites, the doorkeepers, the singers, the Nethinim, and all that had separated themselves from the people of the lands unto the law of God, their wives, their sons, and their daughters, all who had knowledge and understanding, held with their brethren, their nobles, and entered into an oath and curse, etc. D^tno is the predicate of the subjects in ver. 29: they were holding with their brethren, i.e. uniting with them in this matter. u The rest of the people, the priests," etc., are the members of the community, exclusive of the princes and heads of the priestly and Levitical orders. The Nethinim, to whom belonged the servants of Solomon (see rem. on Ezra ii. 43 sq.), wore probably also represented in the assembly by the heads of the Levites. To these are added all who had separated themselves, etc., i.e. the descendants of those Israelites who had been left in the land, and who now joined the new community; see rem. on Ezra vi. 21. The connection of 7123 with rnin~7X is significant: separated from the heathen to the law of God, i.e. to live according thereto; comp. Ezra vi. 21. Not, however, the men only, but also women and children of riper years, acceded to the covenant. P?9 JHV~72, every one knowing, understanding (j^D and JTrt* being connected as an asyndeton, to strengthen the meaning), refers to sons and daughters of an age sufficient to enable them to understand the matter. Dn^T^IK, their nobles, is connected in the form of an apposition with Brpnx, instead of the adjective D'H'nNn. The princes and the heads of the community and priesthood are intended. npsn Kin, to enter into an oath, comp. Ezek. xvii. 13. H;S is an oath of self-imprecation, grievous punishments being imprecated in case of transgression; W3E>, a promissory oath to live conformably with the law. We hence perceive the tenor of the agreement entered into and sealed by the princes. Non subscripsit quidem populus, remarks Clericus, sed ratum habuit, quidquid nomine totius populi a proceribus factum erat, juravitque id a se observatum iri. Besides the general obligation to observe all the commandments, judgments, and statutes of God, two points, then frequently transgressed, are specially mentioned in vers. 31 and 32. In ver. 31: that we would not give our daughters to the people of the lands, etc.; see rem. on Ezra ix. 2. In ver. 32: that if the people of the land brought wares or any victuals on the Sabbath-day, to sell, we would not buy it of them on the Sabbath, or on a holy clay; and would let the seventh year lie, and the loan of every hand. The words 'W H^n ^y are prefixed absolutely, and are afterwards subordinated to the predicate of the sentence by DHD. rrinpD? wares for sale, from npf, to take, in the sense of to buy, occurs only here. Enp njM, to take from them, i.e. to buy. BHp DV beside ri3B> means the other holy days, the annual festivals, on which, according to the law, Num. xxviii. and xxix., no work was to be done. To the sanctification of the Sabbath pertained the celebration of the sabbatical vear, which is therefore named immediately afterwards. The words '^;n nwftr'JUC WM, to let the seventh year lie, i.e. in the seventh year to let the land lie untilled and unsown, is an abbreviation taken from the language of the law, Ex. xxiii. 10. v?2 X$E also depends upon ^B3. This expression (**#D, not K^D, being the reading of the best editions) is to be explained from Deut. xv. 2, and means the loan, that which the hand has lent to another; see rem. on Deut. xv. 2.
Vers. 33-40. Agreement to provide for the expenses of the temple and its ministers. — If the community seriously intended to walk by the rule of God's law, they must take care that the temple service, as the public worship of the community, should be provided for according to the law and a firm footing and due solemnity thus given to religion. For this purpose, it was indispensable to guarantee the contributions prescribed for the necessary expenses of the temple worship, and the support of its ministers. Hence this entering into a solemn agreement to observe the law was regarded as a suitable occasion for regulating the services prescribed by the law with respect to the temple and its ministers, and mutually binding themselves to their observance. — Yer. 33. We ordained for ourselves (^vV, upon us, inasmuch as such things are spoken of as are taken upon one). ^vy nrp, to lay upon ourselves the third part of a shekel yearly for the service of the house of our God. It is not said who were to be bound to furnish this contribution, but it is assumed that it was a well-known custom. This appointed payment is evidently only a revival of the Mosaic precept, Ex. xxx. 13, that every man of twenty years of age and upwards should give half a shekel as a nBVin to the Lord, — a tribute which was still paid in Christ's days, Matt. xvii. 24. In consideration, however, of the poverty of the greater portion of the community, it was now lowered to a third of a shekel. The view of Aben Ezra, that a third of a shekel was to be paid in addition to the half shekel levied in conformity with the law, is unsupported by the text, rnuyn, the service of the house of God, is not the building and repairs of the temple, but the regular worship. For, according to ver. 34, the tax was to be applied to defraying the expenses of worship, to supplying the shew-bread, the continual meat and burnt offerings (Num. xxviii. 3-8), the sacrifices for the Sabbaths, new moons (Num. xxviii. 9—15), and festivals (Num. xxviii. 16-29, 38),— for the M^ holy gifts, by which, from their position between the burnt-offering and the sin-offering, we may understand the thank-offerings, which were offered in the name of the congregation, as e.g. the two lambs at Pentecost, Lev. xxiii. 19, and the offerings brought at feasts of dedication, comp. Ex. xxiv. 5, Ezra vi. 17, — for the sin-offerings which were sacrificed at every great festival; and finally for all the work of the house of our God, i.e. whatever else wa3 needful for worship (? must be supplied from the context before nstfbp'bs). The establishment of such a tax for the expenses of worship, does not justify the view that the contributions promised by Artaxerxes in his edict, Ezra vii. 20 sq., of things necessary to worship had ceased, and that the congregation had now to defray the expenses from their own resources. For it may readily be supposed, that besides the assistance afforded by the king, the congregation might also esteem it needful to furnish a contribution, to meet the increased requirements of worship, and thus to augment the revenues of the temple, — the royal alms being limited to a certain amount (see Ezra vii. 22). — Ver. 35. u And we cast lots among the priests, the Levites, and the people for the wood-offering, to bring it into the house of our God, after our houses, at times appointed, year by year, to burn upon the altar of the Lord our God, as it is written in the law." In the law we merely find it prescribed that wood should be constantly burning on the altar, and that the priest should burn wood on it every morning, and burn thereon the burntoffering (Lev. vi. 12 sq.). The law gave no directions concerning the procuring of the wood; yet the rulers of the people must, at all events, have always provided for the regular delivery of the necessary quantity. Nehemiah now gives orders, as he himself tells us, xiii. 31, which make this matter the business of the congregation, and the several houses have successively to furnish a contribution, in the order decided by casting lots. The words, " at times appointed, year by year," justify the conclusion that the order was settled for several years, and not that all the different houses contributed in each year.1 — Vers. 36-38. It was also arranged to contribute the first-fruits prescribed in the law. The infinitive W2*p depends on ^"lEyn, and is co-ordinate with nr6, ver. 33. The first-fruits of the ground, comp. Ex. xxiii. 19, xxxiv. 26, Deut. xxvi. 2; the first-fruits of all fruit trees, comp. Num. xviii. 13, Lev. xix. 23; the firstborn of our sons who were redeemed according to the estimation of the priest, Num. xviii. 16, and of our cattle {i.e.
1 Josephus (bello Jud. ii. 17. 6) speaks of a rZu ^vT^oQoptav soprv], which he places on the fourteenth day of the month Aao;, i.e. Ab, the fifth month of the Jewish year. From this Bertheau infers that the plural D^BTID DTiy, here and xiii. 31, denotes the one season or day of delivery in each year. But though the name of this festival is derived from the present verse, the LXX. translating D^'^n ]7T\p?V, mpl xhypov %vho$opiots, it appears even from what Josephus says of this feast, h J? noioiv 'idog vKyiu tw fiapo) irpooQipuu, that the feast of wood-carrying does not designate that one day of the year on which the wood was delivered for the service of the altar. According to Mishna Taanit, chap. iv. (in Lightfoot's horse hebraicse in Matth. i. 1), nine days in the year were appointed for the delivery of wood, viz. IstNisan, 20th Tammuz, 5th, 7th, and 10th Ab, etc. Further particulars are given in Lundius, jiid. Heiligtiimer, p. 1067 sq. The feast of wood-carrying may be compared with our harvest festival; and Bertheau's inference is not more conclusive than would be the inference that our harvest festival denotes the one day in the year on which the harvest is gathered in.
in the case of the unclean, the required redemption, Ex. xiii. 12 sq., Num. xviii. 15), and the firstlings of the herds and of the flocks, the fat of which was consumed on the altar, the flesh becoming the share of the priests, Num. xviii. 17. In ver. 38 the construction is altered, the first person of the imperfect taking the place of the infinitive: and we will bring the first-fruits. J")iD"]y, probably groats or ground flour; see rem. on Num. xv. 20, etc. niDnri, heaveofferings, the offering in this connection, is probably that of wheat and barley, Ezek. xlv. 13, or of the fruits of the field, which are suitably followed by the " fruit of all manner of trees." On u the first of the wine and oil/' comp. Num. xviii. 12. These offerings of first-fruits were to be brought into the chambers of the house of God, where they were to be kept in store, and distributed to the priests for their support. a And the tithes of our ground (will we bring) to the Levites; and they, the Levites, receive the tithes in all our country towns. (Ver. 39) And a priest, a son of Aaron, shall be with the Levites when the Levites take tithes; and the Levites shall bring the tithe of the tithes to the house of our God, into the chambers of the treasury." The parenthetical sentences in these verses, D^BTOp D*)?n dhi and D^?p "CT3, have been variously understood. "OT in the Piel and Hiphil meaning elsewhere to pay tithe, comp. Deut. xiv. 22, xxvi. 12, Gen. xxviii. 22, many expositors adhere to this meaning in these passages also, and translate ver. 38: for they, the Levites, must give again the tenth (to the priests); and ver. 39: when the Levites give the tenth; while the LXX., Vulgate, Syriac, Rashi, Aben Ezra, Clericus, Bertheau, and others, take "W and ^V\} in these sentences as signifying to collect tithe. We prefer the latter view, as giving a more suitable sense. For the remark that the Levites must give back the tenth (ver. 38) does not present so appropriate a motive for the demand that the tithes should be paid, as that the tithes are due to the Levites. Still less does the addition, in our agricultural towns, suit the sentence: the Levites must give back the tithe to the priests. Again, the fact that it is not said till ver. 39 that the Levites have to give the tenth of the tenth to the priests, speaks still more against this view. A priest is to be present when the Levites take the tenth, so that the share of the priests may not be lessened. On u the tenth of the tenth," comp. Num. xviii. 26. Hezekiah had provided store-chambers in the temple, in which to deposit the tithes, 1 Chron. xxxi. 11. — Ver. 40 is confirmatory of the preceding clause: the Levites were to bring the tithe of the tithes for the priests into the chambers of the temple; for thither are both the children of Israel and the Levites, to bring all heave-offerings of corn, new wine, and oil: for there are the holy vessels for the service of the altar (comp. Num. iv. 15), and the priests that minister, and the doorkeepers and the singers, for whose maintenance these gifts provide. u And we will not forsake the house of our God," i.e. we will take care that the service of God's house shall be provided for; comp. xiii. 11-14.
CHAP. XT. — INCREASE OF THE INHABITANTS OF JERUSALEM. LIST OF THE INHABITANTS OF JERUSALEM, AND OF THE OTHER TOWNS.
Vers. 1 and 2 narrate the carrvinsj out of Nehemiah's resolution, chap. vii. 4, to make Jerusalem more populous, and follow vii. 5 as to matter, but the end of chap. x. as to time. For while Nehemiah, after the completion of the wall, was occupied with the thought of bringing into the thinly populated capital a larger number of inhabitants, and had for this purpose convoked a public assembly, that a list of the whole Israelite population of the towns of Benjamin and Judah might be taken in hand, the seventh month of the year arrived, in which all the people assembled at Jerusalem to perform those acts of worship and solemnities (described viii.-x.) in which this month abounded. Hence it was not till after the termination of these services that Nehemiah was able to carry out the measures he had resolved on. For there can be no doubt that vers. 3 and 2 of the present chapter narrate the execution of these measures. The statement that one in ten of all the people was appointed by lot to dwell in Jerusalem, and the remaining nine in other cities, and that the people blessed the men who showed themselves willing to dwell at Jerusalem, can have no other meaning than, that the inhabitants of Jerusalem were increased in this proportion, and that this was consequently the measure which God had, according to vii. 5, put it into Nehemiah's heart to take. The statement taken by itself is indeed very brief, and its connection with vii. 5 not very evident. But the brevity and abruptness do not justify Bertheau's view, that these two verses are not the composition of Nehemiah himself, but only an extract from a larger context, in which this circumstance was fully explained. For Nehemiah's style not unfrequently exhibits a certain abruptness; comp. e.g. the commencements of chaps, v. and vi., or the information xiii. 6, which are no less abrupt, and which yet no one has conceived to be mere extracts from some other document. Besides, as the connection between vii. 5 and xi. 1 is interrupted by the relation of the events of the seventh month, so, too, is the account of the building of the wall, iv. 17, vi. 15 sq., and vii. 1, interrupted by the insertion of occurrences which took place during its progress. The first sentence, ver. 1, "And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem," cannot be so closely connected with the next, " and the rest of the people cast lots," etc., as to place the rulers in direct contrast to the rest of the people, but must be understood by its retrospect to vii. 4, which gives the following contrast: The rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem, but few of the people dwelt there; to this is joined the next sentence: and the rest of the people cast lots. The " rest of the people " does not mean the assembled people with the exception of the rulers, but the people with the exception of the few who dwelt at Jerusalem. These cast lots to bring (fcOSn?) one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem. The predicate, the holy city, occurs here and ver. 18 for the first time. Jerusalem is so called, on the ground of the prophecies, Joel iii. 17 and Isa. xlviii. 2, because the sanctuary of God, the temple, was there. B^ya means, in the other cities of Judah and Benjamin. MWttSH, those who showed themselves willing to dwell in Jerusalem, is taken by most expositors in contrast to those who were bound to do this in consequence of the decision of the lot; and it is then further supposed that some first went to Jerusalem of their free choice, and that the lot was then cast with respect to the rest. There are not, however, sufficient grounds for this conclusion, nor yet for the assumption that the decision of the lot was regarded as a constraint. The disposal of the lot was accepted as a divine decision, with which all had, whether willingly or unwillingly, to comply. All who willingly acquiesced in this decision might be designated as WflJflD; and these departed to Jerusalem accompanied by the blessings of the people. Individuals are not so much meant, as chiefly fathers of families, who went with their wives and children.
Vers. 3—36. The inhabitants of Jerusalem and the other cities. — Ver. 3. The title reads: u These are the heads of the province who dwelt at Jerusalem; and in the cities of Judah dwelt every one in his possession in their cities, Israel, the priests, the Levites, the Nethinim, and the sons of Solomon's servants." nrnon is, as in Ezra ii. 1, the land of Judah, as a province of the Persian kingdom. The repetition of *3B^ after rvrcsv S">V3 is not to be understood as con- trasting those who dwelt in the cities with the dwellers in Jerusalem in the sense of " but in the cities of Judah dwelt," etc., but is here a mere pleonasm. Even the enumeration of the different classes of inhabitants: Israel, the priests, etc., clearly shows that no such contrast is intended; for Israel, the priests, etc., dwelt not only in Jerusalem, but also, according to ver. 20, in the other cities of Judah. And this is placed beyond all doubt by the contents of the list following; the inhabitants of Jerusalem being enumerated 4-24, and the inhabitants of the other cities of Judah and Benjamin, 25-36. If, however, this title refers to the whole of the following list, it cannot, as Rambach and others thought, contain only an enumeration of those who, in consequence of the lot, had taken up their residence at Jerusalem, but must be intended as a list of the population of the whole province of Judah in the times of Ezra and Nehemiah. It seems strange that the title should announce nJ,|*]'?i] "^"J, while in the list of the inhabitants of Jerusalem are given, besides the heads, the numbers of their brethren, i.e. of the individuals or fathers of families under these heads; and that in the list of the inhabitants of the other cities, only inhabitants of Judah and Benjamin are spoken of. Hence this statement refers a potiori to the heads, including the houses and families belonging to them, while in the case of the other cities it is assumed that the inhabitants of each locality were under a head. With ver. 4 begins the enumeration of the heads dwelling in Jerusalem, with their houses; and the first clause contains a special title, which affirms that (certain) of the children of Judah and of the children of Benjamin dwelt at Jerusalem. On the parallel list of the inhabitants of Jerusalem before the captivity, 1 Chron. ix. 2-34, and its relation to the present list, see the remarks on 1 Chron. ix.
Vers. 46—6. Of the children of Judah two heads: Athaiah of the children of Perez (comp. 1 Chron. ii. 4), and Maaseiali of the children of Shela. It has been already remarked on 1 Chron. ix. 5, that sp\jfa is wrongly pointed, and should be read *##»}. ntiT73 is a proper name, as in iii. 15. Athaiah and Maaseiah are not further known. There were in all four hundred and sixty-eight able-bodied men of the sons of Perez, i.e. four hundred and sixty-eight fathers of families of the race of Perez, among whom are probably included the fathers of families belonging to Shela, the younger brother of Perez. — Vers. 7-9. Of the Benjamites there were two heads of houses: Sallu, and after him Gabbai-Sallai, with nine hundred and twenty-eight fathers of families. Their chief was Joel the son of Zichri, and Jehuda the son of Sennah over the city as second (prefect). — Vers. 10-14. Of the priests: Jedaiah, Joiarib, and Jachin, three heads of houses, therefore of orders of priests (for |2 before Joiarib probably crept into the text by a clerical error; see rem. on 1 Chron. ix. 10); Seraiah, a descendant of Ahitub, as ruler of the house of God, and their brethren, i.e. the eight hundred and twenty-two ministering priests belonging to these three orders. Also Adaiah, of the house or order of Malchiah, and his brethren, two hundred and forty-two fathers of families; and lastly, Amashai, of the order of Immer, with one hundred and twenty-eight brethren, i.e. priests. And their chief was Zabdiel ben Haggedolim (LXX. uto<? t&v fMeydXojv). DH^y refers to all the before-named priests. ninsp B^N"), heads of fathers, i.e. of families, ver. 13, is striking, for the brethren of Adaiah (V*nK), in* number two hundred and forty-two, could not be heads of houses, but only fathers of families. The words seem to have come into the text only by comparing it with 1 Chron. ix. 13. If they were genuine, we should be obliged to understand nus? D^fcO of fathers of families, contrary to general usage. — Vers. 15-18. Of Levites, Shemaiah, a descendant of Bunni, with the members of his house; Shabbethai and Jozabad, " of the heads of the Levites over the outward business of the house of God," i.e. two heads of the Levites who had the care of the outward business of the temple, probably charged with the preservation of the building and furniture, and the office of seeing that all things necessary for the temple worship were duly delivered. The names Shabbethai and Jozabad have already occurred, viii. 7, as those of two Levites, and are here also personal names of heads of Levites, as the addition D'vn kt?&PD informs us. As the office of these two is stated, so also is that of those next following in ver. 17; whence it appears that Shemaiah, of whom no such particular is given, was head of the Levites charged with attending on the priests at the sacrificial worship (the DWsn ^3 ra&op, ver. 22). The three named in ver. 17, Mattaniah an Asaphite, Bakbukiah, and Abda a Jeduthunite, are the chiefs of the three Levitical orders of singers. Mattaniah is called njnnn K'Kij head of the beginning, which gives no meaning; and should probably, as in the LXX. and Vulgate, be read Hpnrin wth: head of the songs of praise, — he praised for who praised, i.e. sounded the Hodu for prayer; com p. 1 Chron. xvi. 5, where Asaph is called the chief of the band of singers. He is followed by Bakbukiah as second, that is, leader of the second band (WKB H3fB like *mf», 1 Chron. xvi. 5); and Abda the Jeduthunite, as leader of the third. All the Levites in the holy city, i.e. all who dwelt in Jerusalem, amounted to two hundred and eighty-four individuals or fathers of families. The number refers only to the three classes named vers. 15—17. For the gatekeepers are separately numbered in ver. 19 as one hundred and seventytwo, of the families of Akkub and Talmon.
Certain special remarks follow in vers. 20-24. — Ver. 20 states that the rest of the Israelites, priests, and Levites dwelt in all the (other) cities of Judah, each in his inheritance. These cities are enumerated in ver. 25 sq. — Ver. 21. The Nethinim dwelt in Ophel, the southern slope of Mount Moriah; see rem. on iii. 26. Their chiefs were Zihah and Gispa. nrv¥ occurs Ezra ii. 43, followed by Njp^n, as head of a division of Levites; whence Bertheau tries, but unsuccessfully, to identify the latter name with Ka^3. For it does not follow that, because a division of Nethinim was descended from Hasupha, that Gishpa, one of the chiefs of those Nethinim who dwelt on Ophel, must be the same individual as this Hasupha. — Ver. 22. And the overseer (chief) of the Levites at Jerusalem was Uzzi, the son of Bani, of the sons of Asaph, the singers, in the business of the house of God. The HDSpp of the house of God was the duty of the Levites of the house of Shemaiah, ver. 15. Hence the remark in the present verse is supplementary to ver. 15. The chiefs or presidents of the two other divisions of Levites — of those to whom the outward business was entrusted, and of the singers — are named in vers. 16 and 17; while, in the case of those entrusted with the business of the house of God, ver. 15, the chiefs are not named, probably because they were over the singers, the sons of Asaph, who in ver. 15 had not as yet been named. This is therefore done afterwards in ver. 22. nr?*V*? T?.J?> coram opere, i.e. circa ea negotia, quae coram in templo exigenda erant (Burm. in Ramb.), does not belong to Dni'^Dn, but to D»pn Tps: Uzzi was overseer of the Levites in respect of their business in the house of God, i.e. of those
Levites who had the charge of this business. The reason of this is thus given in ver. 23: u for a command of the king was over them, and an ordinance was over the singers concerning the matter of every day." ^[}y.V. refers to the Levites. u A command of the king was over them" means: the king had commanded them. This command was concerning DV "OT ioV3, the matter of every day. The words stand at the end of the verse, because they refer to the two subjects "H^rt and njos. nJ*?« is an arrangement depending upon mutual agreement, a treaty, an obligation entered into by agreement; comp. x. 1. The meaning of the verse is: The every-day matter was laid upon the Levites by the command of the king, upon the singers by an agreement entered into. D^ ^21 icvn, pensum quotidianum, is correctly explained by Schmid: de rebus necessariis in singulos dies. That we are not to understand thereby the contribution for every day, the rations of food (Ramb., Berth.), but the duty to be done on each day, is obvious from the context, in which not provisions, but the business of the Levites, is spoken of; and Uzzi the Asaphite was placed over the Levites in respect of their business in the house of God, and not in respect of food and drink. The business of the Levites in the house of God was determined by the command of the king; the business of the singers, on the contrary, especially that one of the singers should exercise a supervision over the services of the Levites in worship, was made the matter of an 'ijptf, an agreement entered into among themselves by the different divisions of Levites. The kin£ is not David, who once regulated the services of the Levites (1 Chron. xxiii. 4 sq.), but the Persian king Artaxerxes, who is mentioned as ^^n in ver. 24; and ^l^n rn¥D undoubtedly refers to the full power bestowed by Artaxerxes upon Ezra to order all that concerned the worship of God at Jerusalem; Ezra vii. 12 sq. — Ver. 24. Finallv, the official is named who had to transact with the king the affairs of the people, i.e. of the whole Jewish community in Judah and Jerusalem. Pethahiah, a Jew of the descendants of Zerah, was at the king's hand in all matters concerning the people. T|7©n T? can scarcely be understood of a royal commissioner at Jerusalem, but certainly designates an official transacting the affairs of the Jewish community at the hand of the king, at his court.
Vers. 25-36. The inhabitants of the towns of Judah and Benjamin. — The heads who, with their houses, inhabited country districts are here no longer enumerated, but only the towns, with their adjacent neighbourhoods, which were inhabited by Jews and Benjamites; and even these are but summarily mentioned. — Vers. 25-30. The districts inhabited by the children of Judah. u And with respect to the towns in their fields, there dwelt of the sons of Judah in Kirjatharba and its daughters," etc. The use of?# as an introductory or emphatic particle is peculiar to this passage,? being elsewhere customary in this sense; comp. Ew. § 310, a. PK denotes a respect to something. D*W!, properly enclosures, signifies, according to Lev. xxv. 31, villages, towns, boroughs, without walls. nilK> fields, field boundaries. rpnfaa the villages and estates belonging to a town; as frequently in the lists of towns in the book of Joshua. Kirjath-arba is Hebron, Gen. xxiii. 2. Jekabzeel, like Kabzeel, Josh. xv. 21. ij^n f its enclosed places, the estates belonging to a town, as in Josh. xv. 45 sq. Jeshua, mentioned only here, and unknown. Moladah and Beth-phelet, Josh. xv. 26, 27. Hazar-shual, i.e. Fox-court, probably to be sought for in the ruins of Thaly; see rem. on Josh. xv. 28. Beersheba, now Bir es Seba; see rem. on Gen. xxi. 31. Ziklag, at the ancient Asluj, see Josh. xv. 31. Mekonah, mentioned only here, and unknown. En-rimmon; see rem. on 1 Chron. iv. 32. Zareah, Jarmuth, Zanoah, and Adullam in the plains (see Josh. xv. 33-35), where were also Lachish and Azekah; see on 2 Chron. xi. 9. — In ver. 306 the whole region then inhabited by Jews is comprised in the words: "And they dwelt from Beer-sheba (the south-western boundary of Canaan) to the valley of Hinnom, in Jerusalem," through which ran the boundaries of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah (Josh. xv. 8). — Vers. 31-35. The dwellings of the Benjamites. Ver. 31. The children of Benjamin dwelt from Geba to Michmash, Aija, etc. Geba, according to 2 Kings xxiii. 8 and Josh xiv. 10, the northern boundary of the kingdom of Judah, is the half-ruined village of Jibia in the Wady el Jib, three leagues north of Jerusalem, and three-quarters of a league north-east of Ramah (Er Ram); see on Josh, xviii. 24. Michmash (t^?3D or D02D), now Mukhmas, sixtythree minutes north-east of Geba, and three and a half leagues north of Jerusalem; see rem. on 1 Sam. xiii. 2. Aija (^V or TO, Isa. x. 28), probably one with *#n, Josh. vii. 2, viii. 1 sq., the situation of which is still a matter of dispute, Van de Velde supposing it to be the present Tell el Hadshar, three-quarters of a league south-east of Beitin; while Schegg, on the contrary, places it in the position of the present Tayibeh, six leagues north of Jerusalem (see Delitzsch on Isa. vol. i. p. 277, etc., translation), — a position scarcely according with Isa. x. 28 sq., the road from Tayibeh to Michmash and Geba not leading past Migron (Makhrun), which is not far from Beitin. We therefore abide by the view advocated by Krafft and Strauss, that the ruins of Medinet Chai or Gai, east of Geba, point out the situation of the ancient Ai or Ajja; see rem. on Josh. vii. 2. Bethel is the present Beitin; see on Josh. vii. 2. The position of Nob is not as yet certainly ascertained, important objections existing to its identification with the village el-Isawije, between Anata and Jerusalem; comp. Valentiner (in the Zeitschrift d, deutsch. morgld. Gesellsch. xii. p. 169), who, on grounds worthy of consideration, transposes Nob to the northern heights before Jerusalem, the road from which leads into the valley of Kidron. Ananiah (n^V), a place named only here, is conjectured by Van de Velde (after R. Schwartz), Mem, p. 284, to be the present Beit Hanina (UjJ^), east of Nebi Samwil; against which conjecture even the exchange of y and n raises objections; comp. Tobler, Topographie, ii. p. 414. Hazor of Benjamin, supposed by Robinson {Palestine) to be Tell 'Assur, north of Tayibeh, is much more probably found by Tobler, eight minutes eastward of Bir Nebala (between Rama and
Gibeon); comp. Van de Velde, Mem. p. 319. Ramah, now er Ram, two leagues north of Jerusalem: see rem. on Josh, xviii. 25. Githaim, whither the Beerothites fled, 2 Sam. iv. 3, is not yet discovered. Tobler (dritte Wand. p. 175) considers it very rash to identify it with the village Katanneh in Wady Mansur. Hadid, '^48t8a, see rem. on Ezra ii. 33. Zeboim, in a valley of the same name (1 Sam. xiii. 18), is not yet discovered. Neballat, mentioned only here, is preserved in Beith Nebala, about two leagues north-east of Ludd (Lydda); comp. Rob. Palestine, and Van de Velde, Mem. p. 336. With respect to Lod and Ono, see rem. on 1 Chron. viii. 12; and on the valley of craftsmen, comp. 1 Chron. iv. 14. The omission of Jericho, Gibeon, and Mizpah is the more remarkable, inasmuch as inhabitants of these towns are mentioned as taking part in the building of the wall (iii. 2, 7). — Ver. 36. The enumeration concludes with the remark, "Of the Levites came divisions of Judah to Benjamin," which can only signify that divisions of Levites who, according to former arrangements, belonged to Judah, now came to Benjamin, i.e. dwelt among the Benjamites.
CIIAP. XII. 1-43. — LISTS OF PRIESTS AND LEVITES. DEDICA- TION OF THE WALL OF JERUSALEM.
The list of the inhabitants of the province, chap, xi., is followed by lists of the priests and Levites (xii. 1-26). These different lists are, in point of fact, all connected with the genealogical register of the Israelite population of the whole province, taken by Nehemiah (vii. 5) for the purpose of enlarging the population of Jerusalem, though the lists of the orders of priests and Levites in the present chapter were made partly at an earlier, and partly at a subsequent period. It is because of this actual connection that they are inserted in the history of the building of the wall of Jerusalem, which terminates with the narrative of the solemn dedication of the completed wall in vers. 27-43.
Vers. 1-26. Lists of the orders of priests and Levites. — Vers. 1-9 contain a list of the heads of the priests and
Levites who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel and Joshua. The high priests during five generations are next mentioned by name, vers. 10, 11. Then follow the names of the heads of the priestly houses in the days of Joiakim the high priest; and finally, vers. 22-26, the names of the heads of the Levites at the same period, with titles and subscriptions.
Vers. 1-9. Ver. la contains the title of the first list, vers. 1-9. u These are the priests and Levites who went up with Zerubbabel... and Joshua;" comp. Ezra ii. 1, 2. Then follow, vers. 15—7, the names of the priests, with the subscription: u These are the heads of the priests and of their brethren, in the days of Joshua." B^nw still depends on *&$>'}. The brethren of the priests are the Levites, as being their fellow-tribesmen and assistants. Two-and-twenty names of such heads are enumerated, and these reappear, with but slight variations attributable to clerical errors, as names of priestly houses in vers. 12-21, wThere they are given in conjunction with the names of those priests who, in the days of Joiakim, either represented these houses, or occupied as heads the first position in them. The greater number, viz. 15, of these have already been mentioned as among those who, together with Nehemiah, sealed as heads of their respective houses the agreement to observe the law, chap. x. Hence the present chapter appears to be the most appropriate place for comparing with each other the several statements given in the books of Nehemiah and Ezra, concerning the divisions or orders of priests in the period immediately following the return from the captivity, and for discussing the question how the heads and houses of priests enumerated in Neh. x. and xii. stand related on the one hand to the list of the priestly races who returned with Zerubbabel and Joshua, and on the other to the twentv-four orders of priests instituted by David. For the purpose of giving an intelligible answer to this question, we first place in juxtaposition the three lists given in Nehemiah, chaps, x. and xii.
When, in the first place, we compare the two series in chap, xii., we find the name of the head of the house of Minjamin, and the names both of the house and the head, Hattush, between Meluchi and Shebaniah, omitted. In other respects the two lists agree both in the order and number of the names, with the exception of unimportant variations in the names, as *3vD (Chethiv, ver. 14) for?Jw (ver. 2); iW3B> (ver. 3) for *?&& (ver. 14, x. 6); Dfn (ver. 3), a transposition of tnn (ver. 15, x. 6); rt*}D (ver. 15) instead of nionp (ver. 3, x. 6); KHJJ (Chethiv, ver." 16) instead of Kty (ver. 4); PD«0 (ver. 5) for PP^O (ver. 17); nn#D (ver. 17) for Tnyn (ver. 4), or, according to a different pronunciation, W^D (x. 9); ^9 (ver. 20) for w (ver. 7). — If we next compare the two lists in chap. xii. with that in chap, x., we find that of the twenty-two names given (chap, xii.), the fifteen marked thus * occur also in chap. x.; •",'J")W, x. 4, being evidently a clerical error, or another form of N"}ty, xii. 2, 13. Of the names enumerated in chap, x., Pashur, Malehiah, Obadiah, Daniel, Baruch, and Meshullam are wanting in chap, xii., and are replaced by Iddo and the six last: Joiarib, Jedaiah, Sallu, Amok, Hilkiah, and Jedaiah. The name of Eliashib the high priest being also absent, Bertheau seeks to explain this difference by supposing that a portion of the priests refused their signatures because they did not concur in the strict measures of Ezra and Nehemiah. This conjecture would be conceivable, if we found in chap. x. that only thirteen orders or heads of priests had signed instead of twenty-two. Since, however, instead of the seven missing names, six others signed the covenant, this cannot be the reason for the difference between the names in the two documents (chap, x., xii.), which is probably to be found in the time that elapsed between the making of these lists. The date of the list, chap. xii. 1-7, is that of Zerubbabel and Joshua (B.C. 536); that of the other in chap, xii., the times of the high priest Joiakim the son of Joshua, i.e., at the earliest, the latter part of the reign of Darius Hystaspis, perhaps even the reign of Xerxes.
How, then, are the two lists in chap. xii. and that in chap. x., agreeing as they do in names, related to the list of the priests who, according to Ezra ii. 36—39 and Neh. vii. 39—42, returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel and Joshua? The traditional view, founded on the statements of the Talmud,1
1 In Hieros. Taanith, f. 68a; Tosafta Taanith, c. 11, in Babyl. Erachin, f. 126. The last statement is, according to Herzfeld, Gesch. i. p. 393, as follows: "Four divisions of priests returned from captivity, viz. Jedaiah, Charim, Paschur, and Immer. These the prophets of the returned captives again divided into twenty- four; whereupon their names were written upon tickets and put in an urn, from which Jedaiah drew five, and each of the other three before-named divisions as many: it was then ordained by those prophets, that even if the division Joiarib (probably the first division before the captivity) should return, Jedaiah should nevertheless retain his position, and Joiarib should be "p 7£D (associated with him, belonging to him)." Comp. Bertheau on Neh. p. 230, and Oehler in Herzog's Realencycl. xii. p. 185, who, though refusing this tradition the value of independent historical testimony, still give it more weight than it deserves.
is, that the four divisions given in Ezra ii. and Neh. vii., "the sons of Jedaiah, the sons of Immer, the sons of Pashur and Harim," were the priests of the four (Davidic) orders of Jedaiah, Immer, Malchijah, and Harim (the second, sixteenth, fifth, and third orders of 1 Chron. xxiv.). For the sake of restoring, according to the ancient institution, a greater number of priestly orders, the twenty-two orders enumerated in Neh. xii. were formed from these four divisions; and the full number of twenty-four was not immediately completed, only because, according to Ezra ii. 61 and Neh. vii. 63 sq., three families of priests who could not find their registers returned, as well as those before named, and room was therefore left for their insertion in the twenty-four orders: the first of these three families, viz. Habaiah, being probably identical with the eighth class, Abia; the second, Hakkoz, with the seventh class of the same name. See Oehler's before-cited work, p. 184 sq. But this view is decidedly erroneous, and the error lies in the identification of the four races of Ezra ii. 36, on account of the similarity of the names Jedaiah, Immer, and Harim, with those of the second, sixteenth, and third classes of the Davidic division, — thus regarding priestly races as Davidic priestly classes, through mere similarity of name, without reflecting that even the number 4487, given in Ezra ii. 36 sq., is incompatible with this assumption. For if these four races were only four orders of priests, each order must have numbered about 1120 males, and the twenty-four orders of the priesthood before the captivity would have yielded the colossal sum of from 24,000 to 26,000 priests. It is true that we have no statement of the numbers of the priesthood; but if the numbering of the Levites in David's times gave the amount of 38,000 males, the priests of that time could at the most have been 3800, and each of the twenty-four orders would have included in all 150 persons, or at most seventyfive priests of the proper age for officiating. Now, if this number had doubled in the interval of time extending to the close of the captivity, the 4487 who returned with Zerubbabel would have formed more than half of the whole number of priests then living, and not merely the amount of four classes. Hence we cannot but regard Jedaiah, Immer, Pashur, and Harim, of Ezra ii. 36, as names not of priestly orders, but of great priestly races, and explain the occurrence of three of these names as those of certain of the orders of priests formed by David, by the consideration, that the Davidic orders were named after heads of priestly families of the days of David, and that several of these heads, according to the custom of bestowing upon sons, grandsons, etc., the names of renowned ancestors, bore the names of the founders and heads of the greater races and houses. The classification of the priests in Ezra ii. 36 sq. is genealogical, i.e. it follows not the division into orders made by David for the service of the temple, but the genealogical ramification into races and houses. The sons of Jedaiah, Immer, etc., are not the priests belonging to the official orders of Jedaiah, Immer, etc., but the priestly races descended from Jedaiah, etc. The four races (mentioned Ezra ii. 36, etc.), each of which averaged upwards of 1000 men, were, as appears from Neh. xii. 1-7 and 12, divided into twenty-two houses. From this number of houses, it was easy to restore the old division into twentyfour official orders. That it was not, however, considered necessary to make this artificial restoration of the twenty-four classes immediately, is seen from the circumstances that both under Joiakim, i.e. a generation after Zerubbabel's return (xii. 12-21), only twenty-two houses are enumerated, and under Nehemiah, i.e. after Ezra's return (in Neh. x.), only twenty-one heads of priestly houses sealed the document. Whether, and how the full number of twenty-four was completed, cannot, for want of information, be determined. The statement of Joseph. Ant. vii. 14. 7, that David's division into orders continues to this day, affords no sufficient testimony to the fact.
According, then, to what has been said, the difference between the names in the two lists of chap. x. and xii. is to be explained simply by the fact, that the names of those who sealed the covenant, chap, x., are names neither of orders nor houses, but of heads of houses living in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah. Of these names, a portion coincides indeed with the names of the orders and houses, while the rest are different. The coincidence or sameness of the names does not, however, prove that the individuals belonged to the house whose name they bore. On the contrary, it appears -from xii. 13 and 16, that of two Meshullams, one was the head of the house of Ezra, the other of the house of Ginnethon; and hence, in chap, x., Amariah may have belonged to the house of Malluch, Hattush to the house of Shebaniah, Malluch to the house of Meremoth, etc. In this manner, both the variation and coincidence of the names in chap. x. and xii. may be easily explained; the only remaining difficulty being, that in chap. x. only twenty-one, not twentytwo, heads of houses are said to have sealed. This discrepancy seems, indeed, to have arisen from the omission of a name in transcription. For the other possible explanation, viz. that in the interval between Joiakim and Nehemiah, the contemporary of Eliashib, one house had died out, is very far-fetched.
Vers. 8 and 9. The heads of Levitical houses in the time of xJeshua the high priest, — Of these names we meet, chap. x. 10 sq., with those of Jeshua, Binnui, Kadmiel, and Sherebiah, as of heads who sealed the covenant; while those of Sherebiah, and Jeshua the son (?) of Kadmiel, are again cited in ver. 24 as heads of Levites, i.e. of Levitical divisions. The name »TT*rP does not occur in the other lists of Levites in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, and is perhaps miswritten for nnSn (x. 10, xiii. 7). Mattaniah is probably Mattaniah the Asaphite, the son of Micha, the son of Zabdi, head of the first band of singers (xi. 17); for he was nnsn 7y; over the singing of praise. The form flVisn, which should probably be read according to the Keri JVH5?, is a peculiar formation of an abstract noun; comp. Ewald, § 165, b. — Ver. 9. Bakbukiah and Unni (Chethiv 13JJ), their brethren, were before them (opposite them) nnD^'D?, at the posts of service, i.e. forming in service the opposite choir. Ver. 24 forbids us to understand nriD^p as watch-posts, though the omission of the doorkeepers (comp. Ezra ii. 42) is remarkable. Bakbukiah recurs ver. 24; the name Unni is not again met with, though there is no occasion, on this account, for the inapt conjecture of Bertheau, that the reading should be W| or
Vers. 10 and 11. A note on the genealogy of the highpriestly line from Jeshua to Jaddua is inserted, so to speak, as a connecting link between the lists of Levites, to explain the statements concerning the dates of their composition, — dates defined by the name of the respective high priests. The lists given vers. 1-9 were of the time of Jeshua; those from ver. 12 and onwards, of the days of Joiakim and his successors. The name |HJV, as is obvious from vers. 22 and 23, is a clerical error for Ijni'1, Johanan, Greek 'Icodvvrjs, of whom we are told, Joseph. Ant. xi. 7. 1, that he murdered his brother Jesus, and thus gave Bagoses, the general of Artaxerxes Mnemon, an opportunity for taking severe measures against the Jews.
Vers. 12-21 contains the list of the priestly houses and their heads, which has been already explained in conjunction with that in vers. 1-7.
Vers. 22-26. Tlie list of the heads of the Levites, vers. 22 and 24, is, according to ver. 26, that of the days of Joiakim, and of the days of Nehemiah and Ezra. Whence it follows, that it does not apply only to the time of Joiakim; for though Ezra might indeed have come to Jerusalem in the latter days of Joiakim's high-priesthood, yet Nehemiah's arrival found his successor Eliashib already in office, and the statements of vers. 22 and 23 must be understood accordingly. — Ver. 22. " With respect to the Levites in the days of Eliashib, Joiada, Johanan, and Jaddua were recorded the heads of the houses, and also (those) of the priests during the reign of Darius the Persian." To jud^e from the Dsvri with which it commences, this verse seems to be the title of the list of Levites following, while the rest of its contents rather seems adapted for the subscription of the preceding list of priests (vers. 12-21). JTD^p by, under the reign. The use of by with reference to time is to be explained by the circumstance that the time, and here therefore the reign of Darius, is regarded as the ground and soil of that which is done in it, as e.g. eVt vvkti, upon night == at night-time. Darius is Darius Nothus, the second Persian monarch of that name; see p. 148, where also the meaning of this verse has been already discussed. In ver. 23, the original document in which the list of Levites was originally included, is alluded to as the book of the daily occurrences or events of the time, i,e, the public chronicle, a continuation of the former annals of the kingdom. W W, and also to the days of Johanan, the son of Eliashib. So far did the official records of the chronicle extend. That Nehemiah may have been still living in the days of Johanan, i.e. in the time of his high-priesthood, has been already shown, p. 150. The statements in vers. 22 and 23 are aphoristic, and of the nature of supplementary and occasional remarks. — Ver. 24. The names Hashabiah, Sherebiah, Jeshua, and Kadmiel, frequently occur as those of heads of Levitical orders: the two first in x. 12 sq., Ezra viii. 18 sq.; the two last in ver. 8, x. 10, and Ezra ii. 40; and the comparison of these passages obliges us to regard and expunge as a gloss the }3 before Kadmiel. Opposite to these four are placed their brethren, whose office it was "to praise (and) to give thanks according to roe commandment of David," etc.: comp. 1 Chron. xvi. 4, xxiii. 30, 2 Chron. v. 13; and 'l HJVD3, 2 Chron. xxix- 25. "i?^? ™?¥? "i^;P, ward opposite ward, elsewhere used of the gatekeepers, 1 Chron. xxvi. 16, is here applied to the position of the companies of singers in divine worship. The names of the brethren, i.e. of the Levitical singers, follow, ver. 25, where the first three names must be separated from those which follow, and combined with ver. 24. This is obvious from the consideration, that Mattaniah and Bakbukiah are mentioned in xi. 17 as presidents of two companies of singers, and with them Abda the Jeduthunite, whence we are constrained to suppose that nH3"y is only another form for tnay of xi. 17. According, then, to what has been said, the division into verses must be changed, and ver. 25 should begin with the name Dpf'p. Meshullam, Talmon, and Akkub are chiefs of the doorkeepers; the two last names occur as such both in xi. 19 and Ezra ii. 42, and even so early as 1 Chron. ix. 17, whence we perceive that these were ancient names of races of Levitical doorkeepers. In Ezra ii. 42 and 1 Chron. ix. 17, Dw, answering to oW» of the present verse, is also named with them. The combination W Dn$B> D"nD# is striking: we should at least have expected IDBte" ffn»# Dnjp, because, while D*W cannot be combined with ^^?, D'Hips? may well be so; hence we must either transpose the words as above, or read accordins to xi. 19, ^"Wn D^W. In the latter case, Dnjm js more closely defined by the apposition D,HJ7$n ''QDxn: at the doors, viz. at the treasure-chambers of the doors. On ^QpK, see rem. on 1 Chron. xxvi. 15, 17. — Ver. 26 is the final subscription of the two lists in vers. 12-21 and vers. 24, 25. Vers. 27-43. The dedication of the wall of Jerusalem. — The measures proposed for increasing the numbers of the inhabitants of Jerusalem having now been executed (vii. 5 and xi. 1 sq.), the restored wall of circumvallation was solemnly dedicated. Vers. 27—29 treat of the preparations for this solemnity. — Ver. 27. At the dedication (i.e. at the time of, 2 denoting nearness of time) they sought the Levites out of all their places, to bring them to Jerusalem to keep the dedication. Only a portion of the Levites dwelt in Jerusalem (xi. 15-18); the rest dwelt in places in the neighbourhood, as is more expressly stated in vers. 28 and 29. n™?^., to keep the dedication and joy, is not suitable, chiefly on account of the following nninin, and with songs of praise. We must either read nnD^ dedication with joy (comp. Ezra vi. 16), or expunge, with the LXX. and Vulgate, the 1 before nnira. 2 must be repeated before &^??9 from the preceding words. On the subject, comp. 1 Chron. xiii. 8, xv. 16, and elsewhere. — Vers. 28, 29. And the sons of the singers, i.e. the members of the three Levitical companies of singers (comp. ver. 25 and xi. 17), gathered themselves together, both out of the Jordan valley round about Jerusalem, and the villages (or fields, D^fn, comp. Lev. xxv. 31) of Netophathi, and from Beth-Gilgal, etc. "123? does not mean the district round
Jerusalem, the immediate neighbourhood of the city (Bertheau). For, according to established usage, ""I33n is used to designate the Jordan valley (see rem. on iii. 22); and rbvhn* niMD is here added to limit the "133, — the whole extent of the valley of the Jordan from the Dead Sea to the Sea of Galilee not being intended, but only its southern portion in the neighbourhood of Jericho, where it widens considerably westward, and which might be said to be round about Jerusalem. The villages of Netophathi (comp. 1 Chron. ix. 16) are the villages or fields in the vicinity of Netopha, i.e. probably the modern village of Beit Nettif, about thirteen miles south-west of Jerusalem: comp. Rob. Palestine; Tobler, dritte Wand. p. 117, etc.; and V. de Velde, Mem. p. 336. Bertheau regards Beth- Gilgal as the present Jirjilia, also called Gilgal, situate somewhat to the west of the road from Jerusalem to Nablous (Sichem), about seventeen miles north of the former town. This view is, however, questionable, Jiljilia being apparently too distant to be reckoned among the fliMp of Jerusalem. " And from the fields of Geba and Azmaveth." With respect to Geba, see rem. on xi. 31. The situation of Azmaveth is unknown; see rem. on Ezra ii. 24 (p. 30). For the singers had built them villages in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem, and dwelt, therefore, not in the before-named towns, but in villages near them. — Ver. 30. The dedication began with the purification of the people, the gates, and the wall, by the priests and Levites, after they had purified themselves. This was probably done, judging from the analogy of 2 Chron. xxix. 20, by the offering of sin-offerings and burnt-offerings, according to some special ritual unknown to us, as sacrifices of purification and dedication. This was followed by the central- point of the solemnity, a procession of two bands of singers upon the wall (vers. 31-42). — Yer. 31. Nehemiah brought up the princes of Judah upon the wall, and appointed two great companies of those who gave thanks, and two processions. These went each upon the wall in different directions, and stopped opposite each other at the house of God. The princes of Judah are the princes of the whole community, — Judah being used in the sense of EVW> iii - 34. noinp fyfy upwards to the wall, so that they stood upon the wall. "Wppn, to place, i.e. to cause to take up a position, so that those assembled formed two companies or processions.,*1']^, acknowledgment, praise-, thanks, and then thankofferings, accompanied by the singing of psalms and thanksgivings. Hence is derived the meaning: companies of those who gave thanks, in vers. 31, 38, 40. rfrPQDIj et processiones, solemn processions, is added more closely to define rVTfcl. The company of those who gave thanks consisted of a number of Levitical singers, behind whom walked the princes of the people, the priests, and Levites. At the head of one procession went Ezra the scribe (ver. 36), with one half of the nobles; at the head of the second, Neheiniah with the other half (38). The one company and procession went to the right upon the wall. Before P?£ we must supply, "one band went" (n^in nnsn rninn), as is evident partly from the context of the present verse, partly from ver. 38. These words were probably omitted by a clerical error caused by the similarity of ^i^pnn to J"D?in. Thus the first procession went to the right, i.e. in a southerly direction, upon the wall towards the dung-gate (see rem. on iii. 14); the second, ver. 38, went over against the first ('KB?), i.e. in an opposite direction, and therefore northwards, past the tower of the furnaces, etc. The starting-point of both companies and processions is not expressly stated, but may be easily inferred from the points mentioned, and can have been none other than the valley-gate, the present Jaffa gate (see rem. on ii. 13). Before a further description of the route taken by the first company, the individuals composing the procession which followed it are enumerated in vers. 32-36. After them, i.e. after the first company of them that gave thanks, went Hoshaiah and half of the princes of Judah. Hoshaiah was probably the chief of the one half of these princes. The seven names in vers. 33 and 34 are undoubtedly the names of the princes, and the 1 before ^yty is explicative: even, namely. Bertheau's remark, "After the princes came the orders of priests, Azariah," etc., is incorrect. It is true that of these seven names, five occur as names of priests, and heads of priestly houses, viz.: Azariah, x. 3; Ezra, xii. 2; Meshullam, x. 8; Shemaiah, x. 9 and xii. 6; and Jeremiah, xii. 2. But even if these individuals were heads of priestly orders, their names do not here stand for their orders. Still less do Judah and Benjamin denote the half of the laity of Judah and Benjamin, as Bertheau supposes, and thence infers that first after the princes came two or three orders of priests, then half of the laity of Judah and Benjamin, and then two more orders of priests. Yer. 38, which is said to give rise to this view, by no means confirms it. It is true that in this verse EVH W, besides Nehemiah, are stated to have followed the company of those who gave thanks; but that Dyn in this verse is not used to designate the people as such, but is only a general expression for the individuals following the company of singers, is placed beyond doubt by ver. 40, where Byrt is replaced by D^jDH Wj; while, beside the half of the rulers, with Nehemiah, only priests with trumpets and Levites with stringed instruments (ver. 41) are enumerated as composing the second procession. Since, then, the priests with trumpets and Levites with musical instruments are mentioned in the first procession (vers. 35 and 36), the names enumerated in vers. 33 and 34 can be only those of the one half of the D*3Jp of the people, i.e. the one half of the princes of Judah. The princes of Judah, i.e. of the Jewish community, consisted not only of laymen, but included also the princes, i.e. heads of priestly and Levitical orders; and hence priestly and Levitical princes might also be among the seven whose names are given in vers. 33 and 34. A strict severance, moreover, between lay and priestly princes cannot be made by the names alone; for these five names, which may designate priestly orders, pertain in other passages to laymen, viz.: Azariah, in iii. 23; Ezra, as of the tribe of Judah, 1 Chron. iv. 17; Meshullam, Neh. iii. 4, x. 21, and elsewhere; Shemaiah, Ezra vi. 13, x. 31, 1 Chron. iii. 22, iv. 37 (of Judah), v. 4 (a Keubenite), and other passages (this name being very usual; comp. Simonis Onomast. p. 546); Jeremiah, 1 Chron.