Nehemiah 7

Part II. REFORMCh. Nehemiah 7:73 b–8:12. The Public Reading of the Law. –18. The Celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles. Ch. 9. The National Confession, preliminary to the Covenant. Ch. Nehemiah 10:1-29. The Sealing of the Covenant. –39. Certain Obligations of the Covenant.

Nehemiah 7:1

Ch. Nehemiah 7:1-5. Nehemiah’s dispositions for the protection of the City1. the doors] We saw in Nehemiah 6:1 that this alone remained to be done to complete the walls. Those who were responsible for the doors are mentioned in Nehemiah 3:1; Nehemiah 3:3; Nehemiah 3:6; Nehemiah 3:13-15. Nehemiah’s completion of the great work is celebrated by the son of Sirach, ‘And among the elect was Neemias whose renown is great, who raised up for us the walls that were fallen, and set up the gates and the bars, and raised up our ruins again’ (Sir 49:13). the porters and the singers and the Levites] The ‘porters’ were a guild whose ordinary duty it was to guard the entrances and defences of the Temple. In the unsettled state of affairs, when he was in constant expectation of attacks from without, and was conscious of intrigues going on within the walls, Nehemiah entrusted the protection of the whole city to this body of trained ‘police,’ and augmented their force by other available trained bands, i.e. the musicians and the main body of Levites, who assisted the priests in the Temple services. The mention of ‘the Levites’ generally after that of the two special classes is noticeable, but in some measure they were regarded in Nehemiah’s time as distinct, cf. Nehemiah 12:47, Nehemiah 13:5-10. They were already a disciplined and organised set of men. The great majority could apparently be relied on to support the policy of Nehemiah and Ezra.

Nehemiah put the keeping of the walls into their hand, with the duty of superintending the watch, and of organising a system of sentinel-work among the citizens themselves (Nehemiah 7:3). The fact that Nehemiah thus trusted these Levites, and Temple servants, indicates that they sympathised with him in his scheme of a religious constitution for the Jews, which would completely exclude the Samaritan and the foreigner.

Nehemiah 7:2

2. my brother Hanani] cf. Nehemiah 1:2. Hananiah the ruler of the palace] R.V. Hananiah the governor of the castle. On the castle or ‘Bira’ see Nehemiah 2:8. The ‘governor of the castle’ would be an official of great importance, being probably in command of troops for the purpose of keeping order in the city. ‘He’ refers to Hananiah. Possibly Nehemiah’s appointment of two officers to the command of the city corresponds with the mention of the two men in Nehemiah 3:9; Nehemiah 3:12, who were ‘rulers of half the district of Jerusalem.’ a faithful man, and feared God] cf. Exodus 18:21, ‘able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating unjust gain.’ The Hebrew is noticeable; not absolutely ‘a man of truth,’ but ‘such as only a man of truth is.’ above many] i.e. more than most. LXX. παρὰπολλούς. Vulg. ‘plus cζteris.’ The phrase which only occurs here in the O.T. has a very lifelike ring.

Nehemiah 7:3

3. I said unto them] The reading of the C’thib, ‘He said,’ is clearly wrong. The K’ri is supported by the LXX. and Vulg. ‘Them,’ Hanani and Hananiah. until the sun be hot] Vulg. ‘Usque ad calorem solis,’ i.e. until the sun was high in the heavens; cf. 1 Samuel 11:9, ‘By the time the sun is hot.’ The customary practice was to open the gates at sunrise. By this regulation the enemy would be effectually prevented from obtaining any advantage by an entry into the city before the inhabitants were stirring. The LXX. (ἔωςἄματῷἡλίῳ) did not understand the sentence. Rashi also explains ‘until mid-day,’ erroneously. The shutting of the gates was a sign of suspicion: cf. the opposite description of security in Isaiah 60:11. stand by] R.V. stand on guard. The meaning apparently is that the gates were to be shut while the regular watch was still on guard. The A.V. ‘stand by’ refers to Hanani and Hananiah, as if the gates were always to be shut in the presence of the governors. But it would have been an impossibility for the two officers to have been present at the fastening of each gate. The emphasis rests on the word ‘while.’ The guard of Levites are to be at their post, while the doors were being secured. shut … bar] LXX. κλείσθωσαν … σφηνούσθωσαν, Vulg. ‘clausζ … oppilatζ.’ The versions give the general sense. The word rendered ‘shut’ occurs only here in the O.T. in the mood employed in this verse. The word rendered ‘bar’ means literally ‘to seize.’ Hence Rashi explains, ‘let them take hold of the doors in order to shut them;’ and other interpretations have been ‘take hold in order to see whether they were fastened,’ and ‘take hold of the keys.’ But the marginal rendering of the R.V. 1 Kings 6:10, ‘he fastened the house,’ will illustrate its usage in the present verse. appoint watches &c.] It does not appear whether Hanani and Hananiah are the subject or the Levite guards. The verb in the original is in the Infin. Abs. (cf. Nehemiah 6:9) and expresses the command in general terms (LXX. στῆσον, Vulg. ‘posui’). The citizens themselves were to be organised for the defence of the place. Every man was to belong to a particular guardhouse, and take his turn in sentinel duty; and every man also was to be responsible for the protection of his own dwelling.

Nehemiah 7:4

4. large and great] R.V. wide and large. The phrase rendered ‘wide’ (cf. Genesis 34:21; Judges 18:10) denotes extension on every side; its literal rendering would be ‘wide on both hands.’ the people were few] The inhabitants of Jerusalem were in Nehemiah’s time very few in comparison with what they had been before the captivity, see Nehemiah 11:1-2. The number of Jews that had returned with Zerubbabel had been 42360 (Ezra 2:64; Nehemiah 7:66). With Ezra there had come rather more than 1500 (Ezra 8:1-20). Others had come from time to time. But of the whole number of 50,000 or so, a very large proportion were settled in the country and towns in the neighbourhood, as appears from Nehemiah 7:73, Nehemiah 11:25-36, Nehemiah 12:27-29. the houses were not builded] An expression that cannot be understood literally. The meaning is, there were large open spaces within the walls unoccupied.

Nehemiah 7:5

5. my God put into mine heart] R.V. my heart. For this expression see note on Nehemiah 2:12. nobles … rulers (R.V. marg. deputies) … people] cf. Nehemiah 2:16; Nehemiah 4:14; Nehemiah 4:19. that they might be reckoned by genealogy] LXX. εἰςσυνοδίας, Vulg. ‘ut recenserem eos.’ Nehemiah’s census seems to be referred to in Nehemiah 11:1-3, from which passage we gather that the census was a preliminary to measures for replenishing the population of Jerusalem.

Nehemiah 7:6

6. came again to] R.V. returned unto. Ezra 2:1 has ‘carried away unto Babylon’; the words ‘unto Babylon’ have probably been accidentally omitted in transcription.

Nehemiah 7:7

7. Azariah] = Seraiah in Ezra. Raamiah] = Reelaiah in Ezra. Nahamani] Not in Ezra. Mispereth] = Mizpar in Ezra. Nehum] = Rehum in Ezra. I say, … was this] R.V. omits.

Nehemiah 7:15

15. Binnui] = Bani in Ezra: cf. Nehemiah 10:14; 1Es 5:12.

Nehemiah 7:21-23

21–23. Ater … Hashum … Bezai … Hariph] In Ezra the order is Ater, Bezai, Jorah (= Hariph), Hashum. For Hariph see Nehemiah 10:19.

Nehemiah 7:25

25. Gibeon] = Gibbar (probably a mistake) in Ezra.

Nehemiah 7:26

26. the men of Beth-lehem and Netophah] = ‘the children of Beth-lehem … the men of Netophah’ in Ezra.

Nehemiah 7:30

30. Geba] Some copies of the A.V. have ‘Gaba’; but ‘Geba’ stands in the 1611 edition.

Nehemiah 7:33

33. The men of the other Nebo] = ‘the children of Nebo’ in Ezra. Perhaps the word ‘other’ has come in accidentally from Nehemiah 7:34. Our list omits ‘the children of Magbish 156,’ which in Ezra comes between ‘Nebo’ and ‘Elam.’

Nehemiah 7:43

43. and of the children of Hodevah] R.V. of the children of Hodevah. Marg. ‘Another reading is Hodeiah.’ See on Ezra 2:40; Ezra 3:9.

Nehemiah 7:46

46. The Nethinims] R.V. The Nethinim.Hashupha] R.V. Hasupha.

Nehemiah 7:52

52. Nephishesim] R.V. Nephusheshim. Marg. ‘Another reading is Nephishesim’. See Ezra 2:50.

Nehemiah 7:55

55. Tamah] R.V. Temah.

Nehemiah 7:59

59. Pochereth Zebaim] R.V. Pochereth-hazzebaim. ‘Of Zebaim’ appears in some copies of the A.V.; but ‘of’ is not in the 1611 edition.

Nehemiah 7:61

61. also] R.V. omits. Tel-haresha] R.V. Tel-harsha.fathers’ house] R.V. fathers’ houses.

Nehemiah 7:63

63. Habaiah] R.V. Hobaiah.Koz] R.V. Hakkoz.one of the daughters] R.V. a wife of the daughters.

Nehemiah 7:64

64. were they, as polluted, put from the priesthood] R.V. were they deemed polluted and put, &c. Marg. Heb. they were polluted from, &c.

Nehemiah 7:65

65. the Tirshatha] R.V. marg. Or, governor. a priest] Literally ‘the priest.’ ‘With Urim and Thummim.’ LXX. ὁἱερεὺςφωτίσων. Vulg. ‘sacerdos doctus et eruditus.’

Nehemiah 7:67

67. two hundred forty and five] So 1Es 5:41, Ezra 2:65 ‘two hundred.’

Nehemiah 7:68

68. This verse does not appear in some of the oldest Hebrew MSS., and is not reckoned in the computation of 685 verses assigned to these books in the Massoretic note at its close. The omission, however, is not supported by the parallel passages in Ezra and 1 Esdr., nor by the LXX. and Vulg. If therefore it be an interpolation from Ezra 2:66, it must have been inserted at a very early date. The alternative is most probable that the omission is the result of an oversight on the part of a copyist, whose eye passed from the ‘five’ at the end of Neh 7:67 to that at the end of Neh 7:68.

Nehemiah 7:70

70. And some of the chief of the fathers] R.V. And some from among the heads of fathers’ houses. So in Nehemiah 7:71. The Tirshatha] The contributions are here described in greater detail than in Ezra. the treasure] R.V. the treasury.drams] R.V. darics. So in Nehemiah 7:71-72. five hundred and thirty priests’ garments] See note on Ezra 2:69 for the conjecture ‘five hundred pound of silver and thirty priests’ garments.’

Nehemiah 7:71

71. to the treasure] R.V. into the treasury.pound] R.V. marg. ‘Heb. maneh’.

Nehemiah 7:73-8

Nehemiah 7:73 b–8:12. The Reading of the LawThis verse begins a new section in the work. The style alters. The use of the first pers. sing. is resumed in Nehemiah 12:31. The Compiler has recourse to other material for this narrative. The thread of Nehemiah’s Memoir, which was broken off at Nehemiah 7:5, is therefore not resumed. and when the seventh month came] R.V. And when the seventh month was come. The R.V. gives the right division of the verse. The second clause introduces a new section. Very similar words occur in Ezra 3:1 after the register of names. The close of the ‘register’ perhaps contained suitable words with which to resume the narrative in both passages. But possibly the Compiler consciously repeats himself and borrows from Ezra 3:1, ‘the seventh month.’ The mention of this date raises the question of the chronology of the following episodes. The year is not stated. It is not therefore possible to say with certainty that the events described in chap. 8. followed immediately upon the completion of the wall. But, although not stated, this is what is clearly suggested by the compiler of the work. The mention of the 25th of the 6th month (Nehemiah 6:15) is followed by the narrative of the 1st of the 7th month (Nehemiah 7:73; Nehemiah 8:2). As no other year is mentioned, presumably the events are those which occurred in the same year. The objection which has been raised against this simple view is chiefly based upon the difficulty caused by the strangely sudden reappearance of Ezra. The fact that in 1Es 9:37 ff. the events here described follow immediately upon the expulsion of ‘the strange women’ (Ezra 9) has been by some scholars understood to supply the right order of time. The public reading of the law and the sacred covenant would then have to be placed in the year 457, and ‘the seventh month’ in the second year after Ezra’s arrival. An apparent confirmation of this view is given by Josephus. But the chronology of Josephus in this period is very untrustworthy. Undoubtedly following 1 Esdras, which does not mention Nehemiah, he places Ezra’s activity in the generation before that of Nehemiah, and Ezra’s death before Nehemiah’s arrival at Jerusalem.

His treatment of their lives seems to be based on the supposition that they were not contemporaries (see Josephus, Antiquities, xi. 5); in § 1, Ezra appears as a contemporary of Joiakim the High-priest, in § 5 his death is mentioned as occurring at the same time as that of Joiakim the High-priest, who was succeeded by Eliashib. It seems fatal to this view that, in order to maintain it, it is necessary to strike out, as later glosses, the mention of Nehemiah’s name in Nehemiah 8:9, Nehemiah 10:1.