�EHEMIAH 12 COMME�TARYEDITED BY GLE�� PEASE

Priests and Levites

1 These were the priests and Levites who returned with Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel and with Joshua:

Seraiah, Jeremiah, Ezra,

BAR�ES, "The priests - The number of the names here given, which is 22, is probably to be connected with that of the Davidic “courses,” which was 24 1Ch_24:7-18. Eight names are identical with those of the heads in David’s time. On comparing the present list with that of the families who sealed to Nehemiah’s covenant Neh_10:2-8, we shall find that the first sixteen recur in that document nearly in the same order; but that the last six are absent from it. It would seem that as these six declined to seal to Nehemiah’s covenant, they were placed below the rest here in a sort of supplementary list. Note especially the “and” which connects the second part of the lists with the earlier part, both in Neh_12:6 and in Neh_12:19.

CLARKE, "Now these are the priests - Not the whole, but the chief of them, as we are informed, Neh_12:7, Neh_12:22, Neh_12:23, and Neh_12:24. The Septuagint omit Neh_12:3, except the word Shechaniah; as also Neh_12:4, Neh_12:5,Neh_12:6, Neh_12:9,Neh_12:37, Neh_12:38, Neh_12:39, Neh_12:40, and Neh_12:41. The Arabic omits the first twenty-six verses, and Neh_12:29. Mention is made of Ezra in this verse; and he is generally allowed to be that Ezra whose book the reader has already passed over, and who came to Jerusalem in the time of Cyrus, with Zerubbabel. If this were the same, he must have been at this time upward of a hundred years of age: and this case is not improbable, as an especial providence might preserve such a very useful man beyond the ordinary age of men. See what has been said on the case of Nehemiah, Neh_1:1(note).

GILL, "Now these are the priests and the Levites that went up with Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, and Jeshua,.... Who went up from the captivity in Babylon to Jerusalem with them; the one was the prince, the other the high priest, the same with Joshua the high priest, Zec_3:1, the names of the priests are given in this and the six following verses:

Seraiah, Jeremiah, Ezra; not Jeremiah the prophet, who cannot be thought to live so long as through the captivity; but Ezra may be Ezra the priest and scribe, who might come up with Zerubbabel to Jerusalem, and return to Babylon again, and from thence come again as he did, in the seventh year of Artaxerxes, Ezr_7:1, though this by some (m) is not thought very probable.

HE�RY 1-26, "We have here the names, and little more than the names, of a great many priests and Levites, that were eminent in their day among the returned Jews. Why this register should be here inserted by Nehemiah does not appear, perhaps to keep in remembrance those good men, that posterity might know to whom they were beholden, under God, for the happy revival and re-establishment of their religion among them. Thus must we contribute towards the performance of that promise, Psa_112:6, The righteous shall be in everlasting remembrance. Let the memory of the just be blessed, be perpetuated. It is a debt we still owe to faithful ministers to remember our guides,who have spoken to us the word of God,Heb_13:7. Perhaps it is intended to stir up their posterity, who succeeded them in the priest's office and inherited their dignities and preferments, to imitate their courage and fidelity. It is good to know what our godly ancestors and predecessors were, that we may learn thereby what we should be. We have here, 1. The names of the priests and Levites that came up with the first out of Babylon, when Jeshua was high priest. Jeremiah and Ezra are mentioned with the first (Neh_12:1), but, it is supposed, not Jeremiah the prophet nor Ezra the scribe; the fame of the one was long before and that of the other some time after, though both of them were priests. Of one of the Levites it is said (Neh_12:8) that he was over the thanksgiving,that is, he was entrusted to see that the psalms, the thanksgiving psalms, were constantly sung in the temple in due time and manner. The Levites kept their turns in their watches, reliving one another as becomes brethren, fellow-labourers, and fellow-soldiers. 2. The succession of high priests during the Persian monarchy, from Jeshua (or Jesus), who was high priest at the time of the restoration, to Jaddua (or Jaddus), who was high priest when Alexander the Great, after the conquest of Tyre, came to Jerusalem, and paid great respect to this Jaddus, who met him in his pontifical habit, and showed him the prophecy of Daniel, which foretold his conquests. 3. The next generation of priests, who were chief men, and active in the days of Joiakim, sons of the first set. Note, We have reason to acknowledge God's favour to his church, and care of it, in that, as one generation of ministers passes away, another comes. All those who are mentioned Neh_12:1, etc., as eminent in their generation, are again mentioned, though with some variation in several of the names, Neh_12:12, etc., except two, as having sons that were likewise eminent in their generation - a rare instance, that twenty good fathers should leave behind them twenty good sons (for so many here are) that filled up their places. 4. The next generation of Levites, or rather a latter generation; for those priests who are mentioned flourished in the days of Joiakim the high priest, these Levites in the days of Eliashib, Neh_12:22. Perhaps then the forementioned families of the priests began to degenerate, and the third generation of them came short of the first two; but the work of God shall never fail for want of instruments. Then a generation of Levites was raised up, who were recorded chief of the fathers (Neh_12:22), and were eminently serviceable to the interests of the church, and their service not the less acceptable either to God or to his people for their being Levites only, of the lower rank of ministers. Eliashib the high priest being allied to Tobiah (Neh_13:4), the other priests grew remiss; but then the Levites appeared the more zealous, as appears by this, that those who were now employed in expounding (Neh_8:7) and in praying (Neh_9:4, Neh_9:5) were all Levites, not priests, regard being had to their personal qualifications more than to their

order. These Levites were some of them singers (Neh_12:24), to praise and give thanks,others of them porters (Neh_12:25), keeping the ward at the thresholds of the gates, and both according to the command of David.

JAMISO�, "Neh_12:1-9. Priests and Levites who came up with Zerubbabel.

these are the priests— according to Neh_12:7, “the chief of the priests,” the heads of the twenty-four courses into which the priesthood was divided (1Ch_24:1-20). Only four of the courses returned from the captivity (Neh_7:39-42; Ezr_2:36-39). But these were divided by Zerubbabel, or Jeshua, into the original number of twenty-four. Twenty-two only are enumerated here, and no more than twenty in Neh_12:12-21. The discrepancy is due to the extremely probable circumstance that two of the twenty-four courses had become extinct in Babylon; for none belonging to them are reported as having returned (Neh_12:2-5). Hattush and Maadiah may be omitted in the account of those persons’ families (Neh_12:12), for these had no sons.

Shealtiel— or Salathiel.

Ezra— This was most likely a different person from the pious and patriotic leader. If he were the same person, he would now have reached a very patriarchal age - and this longevity would doubtless be due to his eminent piety and temperance, which are greatly conducive to the prolongation of life, but, above all, to the special blessing of God, who had preserved and strengthened him for the accomplishment of the important work he was called upon to undertake in that critical period of the Church’s history.

K&D 1-7, "Neh_12:1-7

Neh_12:1 contains the title of the first list, Neh_12:1-9. “These are the priests and Levites who went up with Zerubbabel ... and Joshua;” comp. Ezr_2:1-2. Then follow, Neh_12:1, the names of the priests, with the subscription: “These are the heads of the

priests and of their brethren, in the days of Joshua.” ואחיהם still depends on ראשי. 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 Neh_12:12-21, where 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, Neh 10. 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 10 and 12 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 twenty-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, chs. 10 and 12.

Neh_10:3-9 Neh_12:1-7 Neh_12:12-21

Priests who sealed the Covenant

Priests who were Heads of their Houses

Priestly Houses and their respective Heads

1. Seraiah 1. Seraiah* SeraiahMeraiah

2. Azariah 2. Jeremiah* Jeremiah Hananiah

3. Jeremiah 3. Ezra* Ezra Meshullam

4. Pashur 4. Amariah* Amariah Jehohanan

5. Amariah 5. Malluch* Meluchi Jonathan

6. Malchijah 6. Hattush*

7. Hattush 7. Shecaniah* Shebaniah Joseph

8. Shebaniah 8. Rehum* Harim Adna

9. Malluch 9. Meremoth* Meraioth Helkai

10. Harim 10. Iddo Idiah Zecariah

11. Meremoth 11. Ginnethon* Ginnethon Meshullam

12. Obadiah 12. Abijah* Abijah Zichri

13. Daniel 13. Miamin* Miniamin

14. Ginnethon 14. Maadiah* Moadiah Piltai

15. Baruch 15. Bilgah* Bilgah Shammua

16. Meshullam 16. Shemaiah* Shemaiah Jehonathan

17. Abijah 17. Joiarib Joiarib Mathnai

18. Mijamin 18. Jedaiah Jedaiah Uzzi

19. Maaziah 19. Sallu Sallai Kallai

20. Bilgai 20. Amok Amok Eber

21. Shemaiah 21. Hilkiah Hilkiah Hashabiah

22. Jedaiah 22. Jedaiah Nethaneel

When, in the first place, we compare the two series in Neh 12, 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 מלוכי (Chethiv, Neh_12:14) for מ�וך� (Neh_12:2); שכניה (Neh_12:3) for שבניה

(Neh_12:14, Neh_10:6); רחם (Neh_12:3), a transposition of חרם (Neh_12:15, Neh_10:6);

(Chethiv, Neh_12:16) עדיא ;(Neh_12:3, Neh_10:6) מרמות instead of (Neh_12:15) מריות

instead of וא� (Neh_12:17) מועדיה ;(Neh_12:17) מנימין (Neh_12:5) for מ מין ;(Neh_12:4) ע

for מעדיה (Neh_12:4), or, according to a different pronunciation, מעזיה (Neh_10:9); ס�י

(Neh_12:20) for ס�ו (Neh_12:7). - If we next compare the two lists in Neh 12 with that in Neh 10, we find that of the twenty-two names given (Neh 12), the fifteen marked thus *

occur also in Neh 10; עזריה, Neh_10:4, being evidently a clerical error, or another form of

,Neh_12:2, Neh_12:13. Of the names enumerated in Neh 10, Pashur, Malchiah ,עזראObadiah, Daniel, Baruch, and Meshullam are wanting in Neh 12, 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 Neh 10 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 (Neh 10, 12), which is probably to be found in the time that elapsed between the making of these lists. The date of the list, Neh_12:1-7, is that of Zerubbabel and Joshua (b.c. 536); that of the other in Neh 12, 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 Neh 12 and that in Neh 10, agreeing as they do in names, related to the list of the priests who, according to Ezr_2:36-39 and Neh_7:39-42, returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel and Joshua? The traditional view, founded on the statements of the Talmud,

(Note: In Hieros. Taanith, f. 68a; Tosafta Taanith, c. 11, in Babyl. Erachin, f. 12b. 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 טפל�לו (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 2 and Neh 7, “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 24). For the sake of restoring, according to the ancient institution, a greater number of priestly orders, the twenty-two orders enumerated in Neh 12 were formed from these four divisions; and the full number of twenty-four was not immediately completed, only because, according to Ezr_2:61 and Neh_7:63., 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. 184f. But this view is decidedly erroneous, and the error lies in the identification of the four races of Ezr_2:36, 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 Ezr_2:36., 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 seventy-five 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 Ezr_2:36, 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 names 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 Ezr_2:36. 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 Ezr_2:36, etc.), each of which averaged upwards of 1000 men, were, as appears from Neh_12:1-7 and Neh_12:12, divided into twenty-two houses. From this number of houses, it was easy to restore the old division into twenty-four 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 (Neh_12:12-21), only twenty-two houses are enumerated, and under Nehemiah, i.e., after Ezra's return (in Neh 10), 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 Neh 10 and 12 is to be explained simply by the fact, that the names of those who sealed the covenant, Neh 10, 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 Neh_12:13 and Neh_12:16, that of two Meshullams, one was the head of the house of Ezra, the other of the house of Ginnethon; and hence, in Neh 10, 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 Neh 10 and 12 may be easily explained; the only remaining difficulty being, that in Neh 10 only twenty-one, not twenty-two, 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.

BE�SO�, ". �ow these are the priests — The chief of the priests; the heads of those

twenty-four courses which David appointed by divine direction, 1 Chronicles 24.

And whereas there were twenty-four, and here but twenty- two, and �ehemiah

12:12, &c., only twenty, the reason of this difference may be because two of the

twenty-four courses were extinct in Babylon, and two of the persons here named,

(verse, 2-5,) Hattush and Maadiah, may be omitted in the account of the posterity of

these, (�ehemiah 12:12, &c.,) because they had no posterity. Ezra — Either this was

another Ezra, or, if it were the same mentioned Ezra 7., he lived to a great age;

which may well be supposed, considering his great sobriety, and his great piety, to

which God promised long life, and withal the special providence of God continuing

him so long in such a season, wherein the church of God did greatly need his help

and counsel.

PETT, "Verses 1-9

List Of The Leading Priests And Levites Who Went Up With Zerubbabel From

Exile (�ehemiah 12:1-9).

The list is divided into two parts, the names of chiefs of the priests, and the names of

the (leading) Levites. These were the priests and Levites whose genealogies had been

demonstrated (�ehemiah 7:64; Ezra 8:15-20).

�ehemiah 12:1

‘�ow these are the priests and the Levites who went up with Zerubbabel the son of

Shealtiel, and Jeshua:’

�ote how it is emphasised that among the returnees were a substantial number of

priests and Levites. Thus the worship of the new Israel is seen to have been

established on a sound foundation, being in the hands of those authorised by God.

As happens so often Zerubbabel, and Joshua the High Priest, are named together

(compare Haggai 1:12; Haggai 2:2; Haggai 2:4; Ezra 3:2; Ezra 3:8; Ezra 4:3; Ezra

5:2), and there may be the underlying thought that the foundation of the new Israel

was to be seen as established on the houses of David (Zerubbabel was a ‘son of

David’) and Aaron (Joshua/Jeshua was a ‘son of Aaron’).

�ehemiah 12:1-7

The Chiefs of The Priests Who Went Up With Zerubbabel (�ehemiah 12:1-7).

Here we are given the names of the chiefs of the priests and their brothers who

returned from exile with Zerubbabel ‘in the days of Jesuha (the High Priest)’. It is

being made clear that the priests of the new Israel are firmly vouched for as being of

genuine descent (compare �ehemiah 7:64). It will be noted that these names are

largely paralleled in �ehemiah 12:12-21 where they are (as we would expect) the

‘fathers’ of the chiefs of priests in the time Joiakim the High Priest, i.e. the next

generation. Apart from understandable variations (Hebrew names were flexible) the

names are the same except that Hattush is not mentioned in �ehemiah 12:12-21, for

reasons we can only surmise. Possibly he was childless. A Hattush is included in

�ehemiah 10:2-8 as a priestly signatory to the covenant, which may exclude the idea

that the family had died out, but we must remember that Hattush was a fairly

common name. That Hattush spoken of there may have been a relative signing in

the name of the family. See also, for example, �ehemiah 3:10 where a Hattush was

supervising repairs on one part of the wall. See also 1 Chronicles 3:22, of a

descendant of David; and Ezra 8:2 of a prominent returnee with Ezra.

The names of ‘the chiefs of the priests and their brothers’ are now given:

�ehemiah 12:1

‘Seraiah, Jeremiah, Ezra,’

�ehemiah 12:2

Amariah, Malluch, Hattush,

�ehemiah 12:3

Shecaniah, Rehum, Meremoth,

�ehemiah 12:4

Iddo, Ginnethoi (or in some MSS Ginnethon), Abijah,

�ehemiah 12:5

Mijamin, Maadiah, Bilgah,

�ehemiah 12:6

Shemaiah, and Joiarib, Jedaiah.

�ehemiah 12:7

Sallu, Amok, Hilkiah, Jedaiah.

Some of the twenty two names parallel those in �ehemiah 10:2-8 where they were

names of signatories to the covenant of �ehemiah (a generation or so later). This

could partly have arisen from the fact that the signatories signed, not in their own

names, but in the name of the clan. It may also partly have arisen because of the

popularity at that time of the custom of giving the names of grandfathers to their

grandsons. But both lists include names which are not in the other. Thus seven

name mentioned here (Iddo and the last six names) are not found in the list of

signatories in �ehemiah 10:2-8, whilst the latter includes six other names, viz

Passhur, Malchijah, Obadiah, Daniel, Baruch, Meshullam, which are not included

here.

�ehemiah 12:7

‘These were the chiefs of the priests and of their brothers in the days of Jeshua.’

It is stated specifically that those named here lived in the days of Jeshua the High

Priest, although whether they had changed their names, taking the clan name, is

something of which we cannot be sure. It is difficult from our viewpoint to see why

the phrase ‘these were the chiefs of the priests’ has had added on ‘and of their

brothers’. It may suggest that not all those mentioned were seen as chiefs of priests

(compare the similar use of Levites in �ehemiah 12:8-9). Possibly ‘of their brothers’

refers to the last six names distinguishing them in some from the remainder (note

the ‘and’ which occurs before the names of the last six, which distinguishes them

from the remainder). These six are not mentioned as signatories of the covenant.

They might not thus have been officially recognised ‘chiefs of the priests’. They may

have been included here because attempts were being made to increase the number

of priestly courses until they reached twenty four, as they did towards the end of the

Persian period, and as they were in the days of David. Eventually towards the end of

the Persian period the number of courses of priests would again be twenty four, as

they would be in the time of Jesus. The names Joiarib and Jedaiah may have been

taken by those named in order deliberately to connect them with the Davidic courses

of priests. They are the first two names in that list (1 Chronicles 24:7-18). But the

fact that there are only twenty two names here confirms the early nature of this list.

It is significant that it is not specifically conformed to the Davidic pattern. Rather it

arose through necessity.

When we remember that at the return only four priestly clans were mentioned

(apart from those who could not prove their ancestry), viz. Jedaiah, Immer, Passhur

and Harim (�ehemiah 7:39-42), it is clear that the number of priestly houses was

increasing, probably with a view to the requirements of Temple worship and

service. Jedaiah and Harim (if identified also as Rehum, with a transposition having

taken place of the first two consonants. Hebrew names are fluid. Compare

�ehemiah 12:3 with �ehemiah 12:15. But this is by no means certain) are names

mentioned above. But there is no mention of the names of Immer and Passhur,

which may be explained by the division into sub-clans. Immer is also unmentioned

in �ehemiah 10:1-8. The whole situation is undoubtedly complex, and many

suggestions have been made by commentators, too numerous to deal with simply.

�ehemiah 12:8-9

The Levites Who Went Up With Zerubbabel (�ehemiah 12:8-9).

We are now given the names of the Levites who went up with Zerubbabel. These are

all recognised Levite names, clearly passed on from one generation to another,

which means that we have to be careful in the Book of �ehemiah about identifying

who is who. But the important point here is that there were genuine Levites of true

descent, available to carry on the work of God in the new nation in accordance with

God’s ordinance. �ot for this new Israel the error of appointing ‘strange priests and

Levites’ as northern Israel had done long before (1 Kings 12:31).

�ehemiah 12:8

‘Moreover the Levites:’

�ehemiah 12:8

‘Jeshua, Binnui, Kadmiel, Sherebiah, Judah, (and) Mattaniah, who was over the

thanksgiving, he and his brothers.’

These chief Levites returned with Zerubbabel. They have names which occur over

and over again in Ezra/�ehemiah. Thus this Jeshua had no direct connection with

the High Priest of that name, but was rather a chief Levite. He was connected with

the building of the new Temple and the commencement of its activities in Ezra 3:9.

The Jeshua mentioned in �ehemiah 7:43; Ezra 2:40 was either his clan ancestor, or

himself. It was a descendant of his who signed the covenant, either in his own name

or, as clan-leader, taking the name of the clan (�ehemiah 10:9), and was

presumably the Jeshua who helped the people to understand the covenant

(�ehemiah 8:7), and who, with others, interceded on behalf of the new Israel

(�ehemiah 9:4-5). This Jeshua is described as ‘the son of Azaniah’. A Jeshua is

mentioned in �ehemiah 12:24, but he was ‘the son of Kadmiel’ (although see on that

verse).

Binnui was another popular Levite name. His descendant, who also bore the same

name, also signed the covenant (�ehemiah 10:9), and assisted in the building of the

wall (�ehemiah 3:24) and if the same as Bani (a good possibility in context, the

difference in the Hebrew names being slight), helped the people to understand the

covenant (�ehemiah 8:7), and interceded on behalf of Israel (�ehemiah 9:4-5).

Descendants of both Jeshua and Binnui helped to receive from Ezra the gold and

silver vessels for the house of God (Ezra 8:33). Men with, or connected with, the

names Bani and Binnui had to rid themselves of idolatrous foreign wives (Ezra

10:29-30; Ezra 10:34; Ezra 10:38) but there is no reason for connecting them with

this Binnui, and Bani was a very common name used by people of all tribes (2

Samuel 23:36; 1 Chronicles 9:4; Ezra 2:10).

This Kadmiel likewise passed on his name to his descendants. The Kadmiel

mentioned in �ehemiah 7:43; Ezra 2:40 was either this Kadmiel or his ancestor, and

it was this Kadmiel who, along with Jeshua, was connected with the building of the

new Temple and the commencement of its activities in Ezra 3:9. One of his

descendants (either having been given the name or having taken the name) signed

the covenant (�ehemiah 10:9), helped the people to understand the covenant

(�ehemiah 8:7), and interceded on behalf of the new Israel (�ehemiah 9:4-5). A

Kadmiel was the father of the Jeshua mentioned in �ehemiah 12:24, which see. It is

noteworthy that Jeshua, Binnui and Kadmiel, in that order, are constantly the first

names spoken of when the Levites are described, the exception being �ehemiah

12:24 for a reason we consider easily explicable.

Sherebiah was another common Levite name. Here it referred to a chief Levite who

arrived with Zerubbabel, of whom nothing further is known. One of his

descendants signed the covenant of �ehemiah, either in his own name, having

himself been given the family name, or in the family name (�ehemiah 10:12). This

descendant also caused the people to understand the Law (�ehemiah 8:7), and made

intercession for the new Israel (�ehemiah 9:4-5). There can be no certainty as to

whether he is linked with the Sherebiah of �ehemiah 12:24. In Ezra 8:24 one of the

chiefs of the priests was named Sherebiah, but that demonstrates nothing more than

the popularity of the name, especially in the tribe of Levi.

Judah is nowhere else spoken of as a chief Levite or family head of the Levites, but

the name was common among the Jews (compare �ehemiah 12:34), and we should

note a Levite named Judah who had to put away his idolatrous foreign wife (Ezra

10:24). Furthermore mention is made in Ezra 3:9 MT of ‘the sons of Judah’, this

Judah also being a Levite. We can also compare Judah the son of Hassenuah who

was a Benjamite (�ehemiah 11:9). Some seek to relate the name Judah to the very

similar Hodiah who is often referred to as one of the leading Levites in the time of

�ehemiah (�ehemiah 8:7; �ehemiah 9:5; �ehemiah 10:10; �ehemiah 10:13), but

there are no solid grounds for doing so. It may, however, relate to the Hodaviah of

Ezra 2:40. In view of the lack of mention elsewhere of these leading Levites in the

time of Zerubbabel (apart from sparse mention in Ezra 3:9), there are no good

grounds for seeking to see their names in terms of later times. They were probably

rather obtained from contemporary records. It would indeed be this fact that gave

the argument of the chapter solidity (the argument that worship in the new ‘holy

city’ was being carried on by those who were of genuinely valid ancestry).

Mattaniah, who was over the thanksgiving, may relate in some distant way to the

Mattaniah who was an ancestor at least four removed of Uzzi the Levite, who was

an overseer of the Levites in Jerusalem (�ehemiah 11:22). He may indeed have been

the grandfather of ‘Hanan the son of Zaccur the son of Mattaniah’ (�ehemiah

13:13) who was connected with the Temple treasury distributions, but it is not

certain. His connection with the Mattaniah who was the chief to begin the

thanksgiving in prayer in the time of �ehemiah (�ehemiah 11:17), was probably

ancestral. This latter would serve to confirm that ‘over the thanksgiving’ indicate a

central role in worship The Mattaniah in �ehemiah 12:25, who was a gate-keeper,

was therefore a distinct person, despite his being in parallel with a Bakbukiah

(compare �ehemiah 12:8-9). The ‘he’ of ‘he and his brothers’ probably refers to

Mattaniah, ‘his brothers’ thereby bringing in the wider Levite family.

So in all cases the later repetition of these names simply emphasises the custom of

passing on the family name from grandfather to grandson, and a possible tendency

for the beginners of the new Israel to take the names of their leading ancestors in

recognition of that new beginning. What is underlined is that these were genuine,

true-born Levites, which is the purpose of the whole passage.

�ehemiah 12:9

‘Also Bakbukiah and Unno, their brothers, were over against them according to

their offices.’

Additional to the six leading Levites mentioned were Bakbukiah and Unno,

described as ‘their brothers’, that is, fellow Levites. These two were important, but

not as important as the six. They stood out more because of the positions they held

than directly because of ancestry. The Bakbukiah of �ehemiah 11:17 was probably

the direct descendant of the Bakbukiah mentioned here. But Bakbukiah is probably

not the Bakbukiah of �ehemiah 12:25, who was a gate-keeper and ‘kept watch at

the storehouses of the gates’. The name Unno (Unni) is unknown elsewhere except as

applied to Levite musicians from the time of David (1 Chronicles 15:18; 1

Chronicles 15:20).

The suggestion that �ehemiah 12:8-9 were based on �ehemiah 12:24-25 has little to

commend it except for the coincidence of popular names. Those in �ehemiah 12:8-9

were Levites at the time of the return. Those in �ehemiah 12:24-25 were Levites at a

later date. Both lists would be obtained from contemporary records. The differences

are as striking as the coincidences at a time when repetition of names were popular.

Thus the first list includes Binnui, Judah and Unno, not mentioned in the second

list, whereas the second list has Hashabiah, Obadiah, Meshullam, Talmon and

Akkub, not mentioned in the first list. Furthermore the Kadmiel of the first list,

named alongside Jeshua, does not equate with the Kadmiel of the second list who

was the father of Jeshua. The coincidences may simply reflect the popularity in

certain Levite circles of the names in question over this period, partly based on the

past, and the custom of naming a grandson after his grandfather. It is noteworthy

that Bukkiah (now Bakbukiah) and Mattaniah were also linked in David’s day (1

Chronicles 25:4).

Verses 1-26

Details Concerning The Priests And Levites Who Returned With Zerubbabel, And

Those Who Subsequently Developed (�ehemiah 12:1-26).

The importance of the genuinely appointed Priests and Levites to the new Israel and

to the new Jerusalem as the holy city is now emphasised by providing details

concerning their connection with the return, and their subsequent development. It is

being emphasised that God had made provision for the continuation of orthodox

worship in ‘the holy city’, including the maintenance of the High Priesthood. The

passage may be divided up into:

· The chiefs of the priests who went up with Zerubbabel, whose genealogies

had been verified (�ehemiah 12:1-7; compare �ehemiah 7:64).

· The Levites who went up with Zerubbabel (�ehemiah 12:8-9).

· The maintenance of the High Priestly line (�ehemiah 12:10-11).

· Subsequent chiefs of priests in the time of the high priest Joiakim (�ehemiah

12:12-21), thus down to the time of �ehemiah.

· Brief note regarding when the records of priests and Levites were made

(�ehemiah 12:22-23).

The chiefs of the Levites in the days of Joiakim the high priest, who was

contemporary with �ehemiah and Ezra (�ehemiah 12:24-26).

COFFMA�, "DEDICATIO� OF THE COMPLETED WALL OF JERUSALEM

(�ote: in this chapter, we shall use the text of the RSV, which has returned to the

order of verses in the KJV).

This chapter exhibits two separate parts: (1) certain lists of priests, High Priests and

Levites (�ehemiah 12:1-16); and (2) the elaborate ceremonies of the dedication.

Cook classified the lists thus: (1) the chief priestly and Levitical families who

returned with Zerubbabel (�ehemiah 12:1-9); (2) the first six of the post-exilic High

Priests from Jesuha to Jaddua (�ehemiah 12:19-11); (3) the actual heads of the

priestly families in the times of the High Priest Joiakim (�ehemiah 12:12-21); and

(4) the chief Levitical families of �ehemiah's time (�ehemiah 12:22-26). Cook wrote

that all of these lists were probably compiled by �ehemiah, except the second;[1] he

supposed that list might have been far later due to the mention of Jaddua,

mentioned by Josephus as High Priest in the times of Alexander the Great (339

B.C.). This writer rejects that supposition altogether.

REGARDI�G THE PROBLEM OF JADDUA (�ehemiah 12:22)

This is as good a place as any to dispose of the problem centered around the name

Jaddua.

(1) There might easily have been several High Priests named Jaddua. If there's

anything about all these Jewish names we have been studying that stands out above

everything else, it is that the same names appear again, and again, generation after

generation. "For example there were twenty-seven Zechariahs"![2] And even among

the Twelve Apostles there were two Simons and two James. �ehemiah mentions a

Jaddua here (�ehemiah 12:11,22), apparently in his times; and Josephus mentions

another one more than a century later. The critics will have to come up with

something a lot better than this in order to late-date �ehemiah. We simply will not

receive any such thing on the premise that only one High Priest was named Jaddua!

(2) We believe that Josephus' identification of Jaddua as the High Priest in the times

of Alexander the Great is an error by Josephus. There's not a scholar on earth who

has not questioned Josephus' reliability on many things.

(3) It is altogether possible that Jaddua lived to be over a hundred years old and

might have been high priest in the times of both �ehemiah and Alexander.

Whitcomb stressed this, pointing out that one of the High Priests, "Jehoiada died at

the age of 130 (2 Chronicles 24:15)."[3] That possibility is supported by the fact that

Jaddua died very soon after his meeting with Alexander the Great, indicating that

he might indeed have been a very old man when that happened.

(4) Then there is the very definite possibility that the word Jaddua here is an

interpolation. It is this writer's opinion that overwhelming odds favor this

possibility. Williamson admitted that these lists are "defective," due to copyist's

errors, etc. We appreciate Hamrick, a very recent scholar, and his elaboration of

this very point. "Jaddua in verse 22 (�ehemiah 12:22) may have been added by a

subsequent editor. In the Hebrew, it reads, `and Johanan, and Jaddua' (cf. KJV), as

though the latter name had been inserted by a later hand."[4]

All of these four options may be defended, and indeed have been defended, by able

scholars; so one may take his choice. Until the critics effectively refute all four of

these options, we shall stick to our conviction that the appearance of the name of

Jaddua in this chapter is no adequate basis whatever for late-dating �ehemiah.

There isn't anything that betrays the enthusiastic bias of critics in favor of late-

dating Bible books any better that their ridiculous seizure of one single word in a

defective list of names as their sole basis for denying the Word of God, which

ascribes this Book to �ehemiah, and not to some mythical `chronicler' living a

hundred years later in the times of Alexander the Great. Such an action goes much

further in discrediting the critics than it does toward late-dating �ehemiah.

Counting the list of the inhabitants of the province given in �ehemiah 11, the four

we have here in �ehemiah 12 make five lists in all. "They are all connected with the

genealogical register of the Israelite population of the whole province, taken by

�ehemiah for the purpose of enlarging the population of Jerusalem."[5]

We shall not discuss these lists in detail. It is sufficient to remember that they served

their purpose as far as �ehemiah was concerned. The discrepancies, questions,

problems and variations in all of these are insoluble at this period of time, twenty

five centuries afterward.

One of the first problems regarding the two lists in �ehemiah 10 and �ehemiah 12

is that they do not coincide. "This difference is due to the time elapsed between the

taking of the two lists; and also because, the names in �ehemiah 10 are not the

names of orders nor houses, but the names of heads of families."[6]

PRIESTS A�D LEVITES WHO CAME UP WITH ZERUBBABEL

"�ow these are the priests and Levites who went up with Zerubbabel the son of

Shealtiel, and Jeshua: Seraiah. Jeremiah, Ezra, Amariah, Malluch, Hattush,

Shechaniah, Rehum, Meremoth, Iddo, Ginnethoi, Abijah, Mijamin, Maadiah,

Bigah, Shemiah, Joiarib, Jedaiah, Sallu, Antok, Hilkiah, Jedaiah. These were the

chiefs and of their brethren in the days of Jeshua. And the Levites: Jeshua, Binnui,

Kadmiel, Sherebiah, Judah and Mattaniah, who with his brethren was in charge of

the songs of thanksgiving. And Bakbukiah and Unno their brethren stood opposite

them in the service. And Jeshua was the father of Joiakim,Joiakim the father of

Eliashib, Eliashib the father of Joiada, Joiada the father of Jonathan, and Jonathan

the father of Jaddua.

�ehemiah 12:10 and �ehemiah 12:11 are a parenthesis thrown in at this point as an

aid in the chronology. The names are those of the first six High Priests in the period

after the exile.

CO�STABLE, "Verses 1-26

3. The priests and Levites12:1-26

The priests and Levites were the most important people who returned from exile

because they reestablished worship in the land. �ehemiah 12:1-7 give the names

of22leaders among them who had returned in537 B.C. with Zerubbabel and Jeshua

(cf. 1 Chronicles 24:7-19). The writer also mentioned eight Levites by name (

�ehemiah 12:8-9; cf. Ezra 2:40-42).

The genealogy of the high priest was especially important. Five succeeding

descendants of Jeshua appear in the text ( �ehemiah 12:10-11). [�ote: On the

complex problem of the identification of these high priests, see Yamauchi, " Ezra -,

�ehemiah ," pp580-83.] This list continues the one in 1 Chronicles 6:3-15 that ends

with the Babylonian exile in586 B.C.

The text also lists heads of21priestly families in the generation that followed

Jeshua"s ( �ehemiah 12:12-21). The names of the heads of the nine Levitical

families that �ehemiah referred to in �ehemiah 12:22 appear in �ehemiah 12:24-

26. The four high priests he mentioned in �ehemiah 12:22 evidently registered these

names. Darius the Persian ( �ehemiah 12:22) is probably Darius II (423-404 B.C.).

[�ote: Whitcomb, p443.] The "Book of the Chronicles" ( �ehemiah 12:23) is not the

canonical Book of Chronicles but another record of names. [�ote: Vos, p129.]

LA�GE, "Before the ceremony of the dedication is rehearsed, a preliminary

statement regarding the priests and Levites, as chief actors in the dedication, is

made.

�ehemiah 12:1-9. This is a list of the principal priests and Levites who came with

Zerubbabel from Babylon in the preceding century.

We have already spoken of the accidental identity of names, in many of these, with

those who sealed the Covenant ( �ehemiah 10:1-8). If the question is here asked,

“Why, then, are not the names of the sealers put down in �ehemiah 12:12-21, as the

representatives of the old priestly houses of Zerubbabel’s day?” the reply is that the

sealers were in Eliashib’s day, but the representatives of the priestly families in

�ehemiah 12:12-21 were of Joiakim’s day, Eliashib’s father. The persons were not

the same, and hence we do not look for the same names. We have three sets of

names. In �ehemiah 12:1-7 we have those of Jeshua’s time (i.e., Zerubbabel’s); in

�ehemiah 12:12-21, we have also those of Joiakim’s day. In �ehemiah 10:1-8 we

have those of Eliashib’s day.

But another question is raised by the fact that in Ezra 2:36-39 and �ehemiah 7:39-

42 only four orders of priests are said to have come up with Zerubbabel, to wit,

those of Jedaiah, Immer, Pashur, Harim, i.e., the 2 d, 3d, 5th and 16 th orders,

Pashur representing Malchijah, (see �ehemiah 11:12), while here are twenty-two

families. The answer is suggested by Keil that those four represent grand families

(and not the four priestly orders) and these represent an inferior division into

twenty-two, two of the names, Jedaiah and Harim, being accidentally the same with

two of the four. I know not, however, why the four courses or orders may not be

intended in �ehemiah 7:39-42 and the twenty-two families belong to these four.

Keil’s reasoning seems defective.

PULPIT, "Verses 1-26

EXPOSITIO�

LIST OF THE LEVITICAL A�D PRIESTLY FAMILIES WHICH RETUR�ED

FROM BABYLO� WITH ZERUBBABEL (�ehemiah 12:1-9). This list receives

elucidation and, to some extent, correction from two others:—

1. That of the priestly families whose seals were set to the covenant (�ehemiah 10:2-

8); and,

2. That of the heads of the priestly courses under the high priest Joiakim (�ehemiah

12:12-21). The number of the names in each of the three lists is almost exactly the

same (twenty-two or twenty-one); the names are for the most part the same; and

they are given nearly in the same order. That they are the names of families appears

most distinctly from the third list (�ehemiah 12:12-21).

�ehemiah 12:1

Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel. See the comment on Ezra 3:2. Jeshua. The high

priest of Zerubbabel's time. Seraiah. Compare �ehemiah 11:11 with the comment

on that place. The original Seraiah was the high priest murdered by

�ebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 25:18-21). Jeremiah and Ezra, who gave name to the

second and third course, must not be regarded as the prophet or the scribe so

named, but as persons of whom nothing more is known to us.

BI 1-28, "Were written in the book of the chronicles.

A book

I. A book unites the ages. Brings the past into the present; borrows the future to give the present significance. The “sceptred spirits of history” rule us still. With books the poorest enters the highest society: the loneliest need not be solitary.

II. A book reveals life’s importance. It gives permanence to thought. Life is a writing.

III. A book silently anticipates the judgment. A record may be appealed to: “Is this thy handwriting?” God’s “Book of Remembrance.” (J. Parker, D. D.)

Books

“The commerce of books,” says our gossiping Montaigne “has the constancy and facility of its service for its own share: it goes side by side with me in my whole course, and everywhere is assisting to me: it comforts me in my age and solitude; it eases me of a troublesome weight of idleness, and delivers me at all times from a company that I dislike: and it blunts the point of griefs, if they are not extreme, and have not got an entire possession of my soul . . . books do not mutiny to see that I have only recourse to them for want of other more real, natural, and lively conveniences; they always receive me with the same kindness.”

2 Amariah, Malluk, Hattush,

BE�SO�, "�ehemiah 12:2. Malluch — In the repetition of this and some other

names hereafter, �ehemiah 12:14, &c., there are some small variations, which are

very frequent in the Hebrew language.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:2

Malluch is rolled "Melicu" below, in �ehemiah 12:14; but the reading of "Malluch"

is confirmed by �ehemiah 10:4. Hattush. It is curious that Hattush is omitted from

the third list (infra, �ehemiah 10:12-21). He appears, however, in the first

(�ehemiah 10:4), as well as here.

GILL 2-7, "Amariah, Malluch, Hattush,.... Whose names are among the sealers of the covenant, Neh_10:3. Malluch is afterwards called Melicu, Neh_12:14,

Shechaniah, called Shebaniah, Neh_12:14 and so in Neh_10:4

Rehum, who, by transposition of letters, is Harim, Neh_12:15, and so in Neh_10:5.

Meremoth, called Meraioth, Neh_12:15,

Iddo, Ginnetho, read Ginnethon, Neh_12:16 so in Neh_10:6.

Abijah; there was a course of a priest of this name, of which Zechariah the father of John the Baptist was, Luk_1:5.

Miamin, Maadiah, Bilgah; the first two are called Miniamin and Moadiah, Neh_12:17.

Shemaiah, Joiarib, Jedaiah, Sallu; called Sallai, Neh_12:20.

Amok, Hilkiah, Jedaiah these were the chief of the priests, and of their brethren, in the days of Jeshua; heads of courses; or, however, priests of the greatest note in the times of Je

3 Shekaniah, Rehum, Meremoth,

PULPIT, "Shechaniah Rather, "Shebaniah," as the name is given in �ehemiah 10:4

and �ehemiah 12:14. Rehum. Rather, "Harim," which is found in �ehemiah 12:15,

and also in �ehemiah 10:5. Compare, moreover, Ezra 2:39; �ehemiah 7:42.

Meremoth is probably correct, though altered to Meraioth in �ehemiah 7:15, since

we find Meremoth in �ehemiah 10:5.

4 Iddo, Ginnethon,[a] Abijah,

PULPIT, "Iddo is probably correct, rather than "Obadiah," which we find after

Meremoth in �ehemiah 10:5, since "Iddo" recurs in �ehemiah 10:16. Ginnetho.

Rather, "Ginnethon"(see �ehemiah 10:6; �ehemiah 12:16). Abijah. This would

seem to be the course to which Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, belonged

(Luke 1:5).

JAMISO�, "Abijah— one of the ancestors of John the Baptist (Luk_1:5).

5 Mijamin,[b] Moadiah, Bilgah,

PULPIT, "Miamin is confirmed by �ehemiah 10:7, and is therefore to be preferred

to the "Miniamin" of �ehemiah 10:17. Maadiah "Moadiah" (�ehemiah 10:17), and

"Maaziah" (�ehemiah 10:8) are not so much different names as different ways of

spelling the same name. The same may be said of Bilgah and "Bilgai" (�ehemiah

10:8).

6 Shemaiah, Joiarib, Jedaiah,

PULPIT, "And Joiarib. The introduction of the conjunction "and" here, and here

only, in this list separates off very markedly the last six names from the first sixteen.

A similar division is made in �ehemiah 12:19. The reason for the division seems to

be that these last six courses, though including some of the very highest priestly

families, as those of Joiarib and Jedaiah (1 Chronicles 24:7; Ezra 2:36; �ehemiah

7:39; �ehemiah 11:10), for some reason or other, did not seal to the covenant,

whereas the other sixteen courses did so. Jedaiah. The double occurrence of this

name (in �ehemiah 12:6 and �ehemiah 12:7) would naturally raise a suspicion of

corruption; but the two Jedaiahs are confirmed by �ehemiah 12:19, �ehemiah

12:21.

7 Sallu, Amok, Hilkiah and Jedaiah.

These were the leaders of the priests and their associates in the days of Joshua.

CLARKE, "The chief of the priests - They were twenty-four orders or courses in number, all subordinate to each other; as established by David, 1Ch_24:18. And these orders or courses were continued till the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. See Calmet.

BE�SO�, "�ehemiah 12:7. These were the chief of the priests — The heads of the

courses of the priests instituted by David, which were restored after their return

from captivity, though as yet they were not so many as they had been before: see

Ezra 6:18. And of their brethren — That is, of the priests, who were their brethren;

in the days of Jeshua — Who was the high-priest at the return from captivity.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:7. And of their brethren.—This does not refer to the

Levites, for they are especially mentioned immediately afterward. It is a phrase in

apposition, thus “chief of the priests, namely, their brethren.”

Jeshua or Joshua, the high-priest at the return from Babylon under Cyrus (B.

C536), nearly a hundred years before.

PULPIT, "These were the chief, etc. It may be suspected that this is properly the

heading of another list, parallel to that in �ehemiah 12:12-21, which gave the names

of the actual heads of the courses in Jeshua's time.

8 The Levites were Jeshua, Binnui, Kadmiel, Sherebiah, Judah, and also Mattaniah, who, together with his associates, was in charge of the songs of thanksgiving.

BAR�ES, "Of the Levitical houses here mentioned, three only returned at first, those of Jeshua, Kadmiel, and Judah or Hodevah Neh_7:43. The others must have returned

subsequently.

CLARKE, "Over the thanksgiving - The principal singers: See on Neh_11:17(note).

GILL, "Moreover the Levites,.... Who lived in the same times: were

Jeshua, Binnui, Kadmiel, Sherebiah, Judah, and Mattaniah; most of these are made mention of in Neh_8:7, the last of them is said to be

over the thanksgiving, he and his brethren; he was the precentor, or had the directing and conducting of the songs of the temple, particularly the thanksgiving song at the daily sacrifices; Jarchi takes the word here used to be the name of a musical instrument.

K&D, "Neh_12:8-9

The heads of Levitical houses in the time of Jeshua the high priest. - Of these names we meet, Neh_10:10., 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 Neh_12:24 as heads of Levites, i.e., of Levitical divisions. The name

does not occur in the other lists of Levites in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, and יהודה

is perhaps miswritten for הוד ה (Neh_10:10; Neh_13:7). Mattaniah is probably Mattaniah the Asaphite, the son of Micah, the son of Zabdi, head of the first band of

singers (Neh_11:17); for he was ה דות which ,ה דות over the singing of praise. The form ,על

should probably be read according to the Keri ה דות, is a peculiar formation of an abstract noun; comp. Ewald, §165, b.

BE�SO�, "Verse 8-9

�ehemiah 12:8-9. Moreover the Levites, which were over the thanksgiving —

Appointed to see that the psalms of thanksgiving were continually sung in the

temple, in due time and manner. Also, their brethren were over against them in the

watches — That is, in the places where they were appointed to stand, and wait, and

perform their office, which was to keep the guard of the gates, while the others sung.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:8. We have already shown that the identity of names here

with those in �ehemiah 10 is accidental. See notes on �ehemiah 10:1-13, and the

first note in this chapter. Hence the identification of Judah, Mattaniah and

Bakbukiah with Hodijah ( �ehemiah 10:10), Mattaniah of �ehemiah 11:17, and

Bakbukiah of �ehemiah 12:25 (which identification Keil suggests) is an error, as

these last three were men of �ehemiah’s time (see �ehemiah 12:26), while the first

three were of Jeshua’s day, (see �ehemiah 12:1; �ehemiah 12:7).

This Mattaniah and his brethren were over the thanksgiving (’al huyyedoth) in

Jeshua’s day. The Mattaniah of �ehemiah 11:17 was “the principal to begin the

thanksgiving in prayer” (rosh hat-tehillah yehodheh lat-tephillah) in �ehemiah’s

day. The phrases are not identical. One refers to several men, the other to one.

PULPIT, "Moreover the Levites: Jeshua, Binnui, Kadmiel, etc. Here again families

are probably intended, as in Ezra 2:40; Ezra 3:9; �ehemiah 9:4, �ehemiah 9:5, etc;

though it is possible that the founders of the families actually returned with

Zerubbabel. Jeshua, Binnui, and Kadmiel appear as the leading Levitical families at

the sealing of the covenant (�ehemiah 10:9). On Mattaniah see the comment upon

�ehemiah 11:17.

9 Bakbukiah and Unni, their associates, stood opposite them in the services.

GILL, "Also Bakbukiah and Unni,.... Two other Levites; the first is mentioned in Neh_11:17,

their brethren, were over against them in the watches; the Levites were divided into twenty four wards, and these were placed one against another, 1Ch_23:6.

JAMISO�, "their brethren, were over against them in the watches— that is, according to some, their stations - the places where they stood when officiating - “ward over against ward” (Neh_12:24); or, according to others, in alternate watches, in course of rotation.

K&D, "Neh_12:9

Bakbukiah and Unni (Chethiv their brethren, were before them (opposite them) ,(ע%ו

at the posts of service, i.e., forming in service the opposite choir. Neh_12:24 ,למשמרות

forbids us to understand משמרות as watch-posts, though the omission of the doorkeepers (comp. Ezr_2:42) is remarkable. Bakbukiah recurs Neh_12:24; 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 וענו or ו ענו.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:9. Bakbukiah and Unni were chiefs of the Levitical relays,

who, in Jeshua’s day, kept the watches over against the Levites commissioned to

sing the thanksgivings. Mishmar must mean a watch or guard, even in �ehemiah

13:14 and in Ezekiel 38:7.

PULPIT, "Bakbukiah and Unni. Bakbukiah's position with respect to Mattaniah

has been already mentioned (�ehemiah 11:17). "Unni" appears, in this place only,

as a Levite of Zerubbabel's time. Were over against them in the watches. i.e.

"ministered in their courses, as the others did, and kept their stations over against

them in their turns of attendance, which are called their 'watches' or wards" (Bp.

Patrick).

10 Joshua was the father of Joiakim, Joiakim the father of Eliashib, Eliashib the father of Joiada,

BAR�ES 10-11, "The six generations of high priests covered a little more than two centuries (538-333 B.C.), or a little under thirty-five years to a generation. Jaddua was the high priest who (according to Josephus) had an interview with Alexander shortly after the battle of Issus.

GILL 10-11, "And Jeshua begat Joiakim, Joiakim also begat Eliashib, and Eliashib begot Joiada, and Joiada begat Jonathan, and Jonathan begot Jaddua. This is an account of the high priests in succession in the second temple, the first six of them; and if Jaddua, the last mentioned, is the same with Jaddus, as Josephus (n) supposes, who went forth in his pontifical robes to meet Alexander the great returning from his conquests of Tyre and Gaza, from whom he obtained many favours, and whom he had into the temple, and showed him the prophecy of Daniel concerning himself; this paragraph must be written by another hand, and not Nehemiah, since it can hardly be thought he should live so long; and as to his times, this account of him, or the history of his own times, seems not to have gone through the priesthood of Eliashib, the third of those high priests, see Neh_13:28, and to reach no further than to the thirty second of Darius Hystaspis, Neh_13:6 this fragment therefore might be inserted by some godly man under a divine direction in later times, as we have several insertions in the books of Moses and Joshua of the like kind; and particularly in 1Ch_3:19 where the genealogy of Zerubbabel is carried down beyond the times of the Maccabees, and so could not be placed there by Ezra.

JAMISO�, "Neh_12:10-47. Succession of the High Priests.

Jeshua begat Joiakim, etc.— This enumeration was of great importance, not only as establishing their individual purity of descent, but because the chronology of the Jews

was henceforth to be reckoned, not as formerly by the reigns of their kings, but by the successions of their high priests.

K&D 10-11, "A note on the genealogy of the high-priestly 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 Neh_12:1 were of the time of Jeshua; those from Neh_12:12 and onwards, of the days of Joiakim and his successors. The

name יונתן, as is obvious from Neh_12:22 and Neh_12:23, is a clerical error for יוחנן,

Johanan, Greek &ωάννης, 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.

BE�SO�, "�ehemiah 12:10-11. And Jeshua begat Joiakim — In these two verses is

an account of the succession of the high-priests, from the return of the captivity till

the time when they began to bear the greatest sway in the Jewish nation. For the

Jaddua mentioned at the end of �ehemiah 12:11, is commonly thought to be that

Jaddus, the high-priest, who went to meet Alexander the Great in his pontifical

habit, as he came from the conquest of Tyre and Gaza, and procured great

privileges for the Jewish nation. This catalogue of their high-priests was the more

necessary, because their times were now to be measured, not by the years of their

kings, as formerly, but by their high-priests.

PETT, "Verse 10-11

The Genealogy Of Jeshua The High Priest Who Went Up With Zerubbabel

(�ehemiah 12:10-11).

Central to the success of the new Israel, and the establishment of the holy city as

holy, was the succession of High Priests. Jeshua (Joshua), along with large numbers

of priests, had already been able to demonstrate his genealogy, as �ehemiah 7:64

assumes. As the son of Jozadak (Ezra 3:2), or Jehozadak, his genealogy is given in 1

Chronicles 6:1-15, and was therefore clearly available. The succession from Jeshua

is therefore now outlined, although it is not stated that they all actually acted as

High Priests (we have to consider those who might have been excluded by some

disability but who might have passed on heirship to their sons).

�ehemiah 12:10-11

‘And Jeshua begat Joiakim, and Joiakim begat Eliashib, and Eliashib Joiada, and

Joiada begat Jonathan, and Jonathan begat Jaddua.’

Joshua arrived with Zerubbabel in around 538 BC, and was still High Priest in 520

BC, whilst Eliashib was High Priest in the days of Ezra/�ehemiah in and around

445 BC. If the genealogy is complete (which may not be so for genealogies regularly

omitted names) this would indicate a long tenure for Joiakim (although we do not

know when Jeshua died). This is not, however, impossible, and is supported by the

fact that his tenure is related to the days of Ezra and �ehemiah in �ehemiah 12:26.

Following Jeshua Joiakim was High Priest, and he is the one who is important for

what immediately follows (�ehemiah 12:12-22. See also �ehemiah 12:24-26). He was

then followed by Eliashib who was High Priest when the walls were rebuilt

(�ehemiah 3:1). Eliashib was a grandfather by the time of �ehemiah’s second visit,

and at that stage had an adult grandson (�ehemiah 13:28). He was succeeded by

Joiada, one of whose sons married a daughter of Sanballat the Horonite (�ehemiah

13:28). This indicates that Joiada’s eldest son Jonathan was apparently a mature

adult whilst Sanballat the Horonite, the contemporary of �ehemiah (�ehemiah

2:10; �ehemiah 2:19), was still alive.

If the genealogy is complete Jonathan begat a son Jaddua, who would presumably

have been born by the time of the listing, and could thus have been known to an

ageing �ehemiah as the heir-apparent to the High Priesthood. It is not stated that he

was High Priest at the time of writing (or indeed that he ever became High Priest).

Thus it is not impossible that this genealogy was recorded by �ehemiah. Alternately,

if �ehemiah was the author of the whole book, the words ‘and Joiada begat

Jonathan, and Jonathan begat Jaddua’ may have been added at a later date in

order to update the sequence. A slight indication of this may be that ‘begat’ is

missing after Eliashib in the MT (although included in some manuscripts), which

may suggest that at one stage the genealogy only reached Joiada. (This assumption

is, however, not strictly necessary for them to fit into �ehemaic authorship). But the

important point in context is that this list demonstrates the legitimacy of the

continuing High Priesthood.

�ote On Jaddua.

The importance of identifying Jaddua lies in the light that that identification would

throw on the earliest date by which the Book Of �ehemiah could have been

completed as it now stands. It could not have been completed before Jaddua was

born. On the other hand the main part of the book may have been written earlier,

with the reference to Jonathan and Jaddua being added later.

But on the face of the genealogy here, assuming no gaps, this Jaddua was probably

born around 432 BC. He was the first-born son of Jonathan who was a mature adult

at the time spoken of in �ehemiah 13, when his younger brother had already

married Sanballat’s daughter, that is around the thirty second year of Artaxerxes

(�ehemiah 13:6), thus around 432 BC. At this stage �ehemiah was certainly still

alive and active. �ehemiah would thus have seen Jaddua grow up.

Furthermore the High Priest at the time of one Elphantine papyrus dated 407 BC

speaks of Johanan as High Priest, and there is no real justification for equating

Jonathan with Johanan. How Johanan fits in with the above genealogy we have

therefore no way of knowing. Perhaps he was the son of Jaddua. Or Jonathan may

have had some impediment preventing him from being High Priest so that his uncle

Johanan became so instead (�ehemiah 12:23), he then being followed by Jaddua.

A complication is introduced by a reference in Josephus to a Jaddua, son of

Johanan, who was High Priest in 351-331 BC when Alexander the Great had

contact with Jerusalem. But in view of our lack of knowledge of the genealogy of the

High Priests after this time there is no real reason why that Jaddua may not have

been the grandson of the Jaddua mentioned here in �ehemiah 12:11. Indeed, if he

had lived to a great age, he could even have been this Jaddua, with ‘son of Johanan’,

simply signifying that he took over the High Priesthood from Johanan.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:10-11. The pedigree of the high-priests from Zerubbabel’s

time to the time of Alexander the Great, i.e., from B. C536 to B. C332. As

�ehemiah’s government of Jerusalem was B. C446–434, we have this genealogy

carried a century beyond him by a later hand. Jonathan is evidently a mistake in

transcription for Johanan, as in �ehemiah 12:22-23.

PULPIT, "LIST OF THE HIGH PRIESTS FROM JESHUA TO JADDUA

(�ehemiah 12:10, �ehemiah 12:11).

That this is the line of descent in the high priestly family of the time sufficiently

appears both from the names themselves, and from the position assigned to those

who bore them in �ehemiah 12:22, �ehemiah 12:23, �ehemiah 12:26. Whether all

of them actually exercised the high priest's office is left uncertain in Scripture, but

satisfactorily established by Josephus. The six names cover a space of at least 205

years—from the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus, b.c. 538, to the submission of

Jerusalem to Alexander the Great, b.c. 333, which gives very long generations, but

still such as are historically possible. Jeshua was certainly high priest from b.c. 538

to b.c. 516. He may have been succeeded by his son, Joiakim, about b.c. 490. Joiakim

had certainly been succeeded by his son, Eliashib, before b.c. 444 (�ehemiah 3:1);

and Eliashib was probably succeeded by Joiada about b.c. 420. Joiada's high

priesthood may be assigned to the period between b.c. 420 and 380; Jonathan's to

that between b.c. 380 and 350. Jaddua might then hold the dignity from b.c. 350 to

330, or later, and so be brought into contact with Alexander the Great. It is

questioned whether in that case �ehemiah can have written the present passage,

and certain that he cannot have done so unless he lived to be at least 131 years of

age. As this is exceedingly improbable, it is best to suppose, either that the whole list

was placed here by Malachi, or at any rate that that prophet added the clause, "and

Jonathan begat Jaddua."

�ehemiah 12:10

Jeshua. The "Jeshua" of �ehemiah 12:1, not of �ehemiah 12:8—the high priest of

Zerub-babel's time (Ezra 3:2, Ezra 3:8; Ezra 4:3; Ezra 5:2, etc.). Begat Joiakim. The

high priesthood of Joiakim falls into the interval between the first part (chs. 1-7.)

and the second part (chs. 7-10.) of Ezra. He is only mentioned in this chapter (verses

12, 26). Eliashib is first mentioned in Ezra 10:6, but he does not appear as high

priest until after �ehemiah reaches Jerusalem (�ehemiah 3:1). On his close

connection with Tobiah see �ehemiah 13:4, �ehemiah 13:5, �ehemiah 13:28. Joiada

is called Judas by Josephus ('Ant. Jud.,' 11.7, § 1). His term of office lasted,

according to Syncellus and the Paschal Chronicle, thirty-six years.

11 Joiada the father of Jonathan, and Jonathan the father of Jaddua.

JAMISO�,"Jaddua— It is an opinion entertained by many commentators that this person was the high priest whose dignified appearance, solemn manner, and splendid costume overawed and interested so strongly the proud mind of Alexander the Great; and if he were not this person (as some object that this Jaddua was not in office till a considerable period after the death of Nehemiah), it might probably be his father, called by the same name.

PULPIT, "Jonathan, or "Johanan," as the name is given in �ehemiah 12:22,

�ehemiah 12:23, became high priest about b.c. 380, according to Syncellus and the

Paschal Chronicle, and held the office for thirty-two years. Josephus, who calls him

"Jannseus" (= John), says that he murdered his own brother, Jeshua, in the temple,

because he was endeavouring to supplant him in the high priesthood through the

influence of the Persians. Jaddua is mentioned as high priest at the time of

Alexander's entrance into Jerusalem by Josephus ('Ant. Jud.,' 11.8, § 5) and

Eusebius. The story of Alexander's having previously seen him in a dream is not

generally credited. He is said to been high priest for twenty years, and to have

outlived Alexander.

12 In the days of Joiakim, these were the heads of the priestly families:

of Seraiah’s family, Meraiah;

of Jeremiah’s, Hananiah;

GILL 12-21, "And in the days of Joiakim were priests, the chief of the

fathers,.... This was the son and successor of Jeshua, or Joshua, the first high priest of the second temple; the principal men of the priesthood in his time were as follow, and who were the sons, or however the descendants of the priests in the time of his father before mentioned: these were Meraiah, Hananiah, Meshullam, Jehohanan, Jonathan, Joseph, Adna, Helkai, Zechariah, (the prophet of that name,) Meshullam, Zichri, Piltai, Shammua, Jehonathan, Mattenai, Uzzi, Kallai, Eber, Hashabiah, Nethaneel; in all twenty, whereas there are twenty two named, as in his father's days, there being no sons or descendants from two of them, namely, Hattush and Miamin.

JAMISO�, "in the days of Joiakim were priests, the chief of the fathers—As there had been priests in the days of Jeshua, so in the time of Joiakim, the son and successor of Jeshua, the sons of those persons filled the priestly office in the place of their fathers, some of whom were still alive, though many were dead.

PETT, "Verses 12-21

The Priests Who Were Heads Of Fathers’ Houses In The Days Of Joiakim, Son Of

Jeshua (�ehemiah 12:12-21).

We now have listed priest who were head of father’s houses at some point during

the High Priesthood of Joiakim, the son of Jeshua. This is the next generation from

those above, something that is indicated by introducing them in terms of their

ancestry. It is probable, but not necessary, that the naming is of father and eldest

son. However, strictly speaking, only descent is indicated. The slight differences

between the names of the ‘fathers’ given here, and those given in �ehemiah 12:1-7

merely indicate that Hebrew names were flexible. They are not necessarily due to

copying errors, but rather indicate that the two lists have different primary sources,

those sources having been obtained from the records office. Had one been copied

from the other we would have expected the names to be the same, nor would we

have anticipated the introduction of Hattush in �ehemiah 12:1-7. But it is

noteworthy that once again the last six names are introduced by ‘and’ (for which see

explanation above on �ehemiah 12:1-7), which confirms a distinction between the

first named and the last six.

The fact of an inclusio, - ‘and in the days of Joiakim were’ (�ehemiah 12:12) - ‘these

were in the days of Joiakim --’ (�ehemiah 12:26) may suggest that �ehemiah 12:12-

26 are to be seen as a whole unit, although it is not impossible that some material

was inserted (e.g. �ehemiah 12:22-25), with ‘these were in the days of Joiakim’ in

�ehemiah 12:26 referring strictly to �ehemiah 12:12-21.

�ehemiah 12:12

‘And in the days of Joiakim were priests, heads of fathers’ houses:

�ehemiah 12:12

‘Of Seraiah, Meraiah;’

12:12c ‘Of Jeremiah, Hananiah;’

12:13a ‘Of Ezra, Meshullam;’

12:13b ‘Of Amariah, Jehohanan;’

12:14a ‘Of Malluchi, Jonathan;’

12:14b ‘Of Shebaniah, Joseph;’

12:15a ‘Of Harim, Adna;’

12:15b ‘Of Meraioth, Helkai;’

12:16a ‘Of Iddo, Zechariah;’

12:16b ‘Of Ginnethon, Meshullam;’

12:17a ‘Of Abijah, Zichri;’

12:17b ‘Of Miniamin, of Moadiah, Piltai;’

12:18a ‘Of Bilgah, Shammua;’

12:18b ‘Of Shemaiah, Jehonathan;’

12:19a ‘And of Joiarib, Mattenai;’

12:19b ‘Of Jedaiah, Uzzi;’

12:20a ‘Of Sallai, Kallai;’

12:20b ‘Of Amok, Eber;’

12:21a ‘Of Hilkiah, Hashabiah;’

12:21b ‘Of Jedaiah, �ethanel.’

The unusual ‘of Miniamin, of Mohdiah, Piltai’ in �ehemiah 12:17 b (we would

expect a name after Miniamin) may either indicate that the name of the ‘son’ of

Miniamin has dropped out, or that the names of the sons of both Miniamin and

Moadiah was Paltai, or that Miniamin died without an heir and Moadiah being

related to him, produced an heir for him through the law of levirate marriage, who

was named Paltai. On the information given the number of courses at this stage was

twenty, a reduction on the previous twenty two. But if men died without male seed

that could have occurred. Once more then the writer makes clear that the Jerusalem

priesthood is of genuine descent. It is an interesting possibility that Zechariah the

son of Iddo in �ehemiah 12:16 a is a reference to the prophet Zechariah.

COFFMA�, "Verse 12

LIST OF PRIESTS WHE� JOIAKIM WAS HIGH PRIEST

"And in the days of Joiakim were priests, heads of fathers' houses: of Seraiah,

Meraiah; of Jeremiah, Hananiah; of Ezra, Meshullam; of Amariah, Jehohanan; of

Malluci, Jonathan; of Shebaniah, Joseph; of Harim, Adna; of Meraioth, Helkai; of

Iddo, Zechariah; of Ginnethon, Meshullam; of Abijah, Zichri; of Miniamin,

Moadiah, Piltai; of Bilgai, Shammua; of Shemaiah, Jehonathan; of Joiarib,

Matteniah; of Jedaiah, Uzzi; of Sallai, Kallai; of Amok, Eber; of Hilkiah, Hashabai;

of Jedaiah, �ethanel."

BE�SO�, "�ehemiah 12:12. In the days of Joiakim were priests — As the writer

had mentioned those who were the chief of the priests in the days of Jeshua, so now

he mentions the sons of every one of them who officiated in the days of Joiakim the

son of Jeshua, either as assistants to their fathers, or succeeding them when they

were dead. He begins with the three named in this verse, and so proceeds in order to

give an account of the rest, which reaches to �ehemiah 12:22.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:12-21. A list of the representatives in Joiakim’s day of the

priestly houses whose names are obtained from those chiefs of the priests who came

with Zerubbabel, as given in �ehemiah 12:1-7.

Melicu = Malluch. Hattush is omitted (see �ehemiah 12:2). Shebaniah =

Shechaniah.Harim = Rehum.Meraioth = Meremoth.Miniamin = Miamin.

Miniamin’s representative is omitted,—dropped accidentally in transcription. Sallai

= Sallu. These changes in a list evidently intended to be a copy of one immediately

preceding form a good instance of the uncertainty of names in these old genealogical

registers.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:12-21

LIST OF THE HEADS OF THE PRIESTLY COURSES I� THE TIME OF THE

HIGH PRIEST JOIAKIM (�ehemiah 12:12-21).

Joiakim must have been contemporary with Xerxes, and consequently have been

high priest at the time when the very existence of the Jewish people was threatened

by Haman. It is curious that we have no record of his high priesthood, nor of the

condition of the Palestinian Jews at the time, beyond the slight hints furnished by

this chapter. These hints seem to imply that under him special attention was paid to

the formation of lists, especially of the chief priests and Levites, and that the temple

service was celebrated with great exactness and regularity (�ehemiah 12:24-26).

The present list is particularly valuable, as enabling us to check that with which the

chapter opens, and as establishing the family character of the names whereof that

list is made up.

�ehemiah 12:12

Of Seraiah, Meraiah. It will be observed that the family names of the priestly,

courses follow the order of the same names in �ehemiah 12:1-7, and exactly accord

with them, excepting in minute differences of spelling, and in one omission—that of

the name of "Hattush.' It might be supposed that the family of Hattush had died

out; but this is contradicted by its reappearance among the signatures to the

covenant (�ehemiah 10:4); the omission here would therefore appear to be

accidental.

13 of Ezra’s, Meshullam;

of Amariah’s, Jehohanan;

14 of Malluk’s, Jonathan;

of Shekaniah’s,[c] Joseph;

15 of Harim’s, Adna;

of Meremoth’s,[d] Helkai;

16 of Iddo’s, Zechariah;

of Ginnethon’s, Meshullam;

17 of Abijah’s, Zikri;

of Miniamin’s and of Moadiah’s, Piltai;

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:17

Of Miniamin Rather, "of Miamin" (see �ehemiah 12:5). The name of the head of

the course in Joiakim's time has, by the carelessness of a copyist, fallen out.

18 of Bilgah’s, Shammua;

of Shemaiah’s, Jehonathan;

19 of Joiarib’s, Mattenai;

of Jedaiah’s, Uzzi;

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:19

And of Joiarib. The conjunction "and' occurring here, exactly as it does in

�ehemiah 12:6, once only in the whole list, and before the same name, shows that

the two documents (�ehemiah 12:1-7, �ehemiah 12:12-21) are from the same hand.

That the hand is that of �ehemiah, or a contemporary, seems to follow from the fact

that no reason can be assigned for the division, or for the low place in the lists of the

names Joiarib and Jedaiah, except the failure of these families to set their seals to

the covenant (see the comment on verse 6).

20 of Sallu’s, Kallai;

of Amok’s, Eber;

21 of Hilkiah’s, Hashabiah;

of Jedaiah’s, �ethanel.

22 The family heads of the Levites in the days of Eliashib, Joiada, Johanan and Jaddua, as well as those of the priests, were recorded in the reign of Darius the Persian.

BAR�ES, "These verses interrupt the account of the church officers in the time of Joiakim, resumed in Neh_12:24. They appear to be an addition to the original text, made about the time of Alexander the Great, when the Books of Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah would seem to have first taken their existing shape. The same writer who introduced these verses, probably also added Neh_12:11 to the original text.

Darius the Persian - Probably Darius Codomannus (336-331 B.C.), the antagonist of Alexander the Great. See the introduction of the Book of Nehemiah.

This passage shows that the practice of keeping a record of public events in state

archives was continued after the return from the captivity, at least to the time of Johanan, the son, i. e., “the grandson,” of Eliasbib.

CLARKE, "Jaddua - This was probably the high priest who went in his pontifical robes, accompanied by his brethren, to meet Alexander the Great, when he was advancing towards Jerusalem, with the purpose to destroy it, after having conquered Tyre and Gaza. Alexander was so struck with the appearance of the priest, that he forbore all hostilities against Jerusalem, prostrated himself before Jaddua, worshipped the Lord at the temple, and granted many privileges to the Jews. See Josephus, Ant. lib. xi., c. 3, and Prideaux’s Connections, lib. 7, p. 695.

To the reign of Darius the Persian - Calmet maintains that this must have been Darius Codomanus, who was defeated by Alexander the Great: but Archbishop Usher understands it of Darius Nothus, in whose reign he thinks Jaddua was born, who was high priest under Darius Codomanus.

GILL, "The Levites, in the days of Eliashib,.... The third priest of the second temple:

Joiada; he was the son of Eliashib, and the fourth high priest:

and Johanan; the same with Jonathan, Neh_12:11 and whom Josephus (o) also calls Joannes:

and Jaddua; the same as in Neh_12:10 in the days of each of these were

recorded chief of the fathers; the principal men among the Levites:

also the priests, to the reign of Darius the Persian; thought to be Darius Codomannus, the last king of the Persian monarchy, whom Alexander conquered; and if so, this verse must be inserted after the death of Nehemiah, and as the next verse also seems to be; for these two verses interrupt the natural order of the relation: an account is given of the priests in the times of Joiakim, Neh_12:12, these verses being inserted, the account goes on, Neh_12:24, &c. of the chief of the Levites in the times of Joiakim only.

K&D 22-23, "“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 judge from the הלו ם 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 (Neh_12:12-21).

מלכות with reference to time is to be explained by the על under the reign. The use of ,עלcircumstance 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., -π/�νυκτί, upon night = at night-time. Darius is Darius Nothus, the second Persian monarch of that name; where also the meaning of this verse has been already discussed. In Neh_12:23, 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. ימי and also to the days of Johanan, the son of Eliashib. So far ,ועדdid 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. 95. The statements in Neh_12:22 and Neh_12:23 are aphoristic, and of the nature of supplementary and occasional remarks.

PETT, "Verses 22-26

The Levites Who Were Heads Of Fathers’ Houses In The Days Of Joiakim the Son

of Jeshua And Of �ehemiah The Governor And Of Ezra The Priest (�ehemiah

12:22-26).

It is now pointed out by the writer that the information concerning the chiefs of the

Levites in the time of Joiakim, necessary to complete the full picture, was obtained

from subsequent records. This would serve to confirm that the previous information

supplied was obtained from contemporary records.

�ehemiah 12:22

‘As for the Levites, in the days of Eliashib, Joiada, and Johanan, and Jaddua, there

were recorded the heads of fathers’ (houses), also the priests, in the reign of Darius

the Persian.’

This rather complex statement can be seen as explaining that in order to complete

the pattern ‘priests/Levites of the first generation, priests/Levites of the subsequent

generation’, resort had to be made to records which were not contemporary for

details concerning the Levites, although such contemporary records were available

for the priests. The writer is thus honest enough to inform us that, unlike the

previous information, the details concerning these Levites in the days of Joiakim

(�ehemiah 12:26) were not obtained from contemporary records, but from records

made in subsequent generations, namely in the time of Eliashib, Joiada, and

Johanan and Jaddua, whilst the records concerning the priests were made in the

days of Darius the Persian.

To deal with the last first. The description ‘the Persian’ is comparatively rare, and

Darius the Persian is probably called such here in order to distinguish him from

Darius the Mede (Daniel 5:31). Compare Daniel 6:28 where Cyrus is called ‘the

Persian’ in order to distinguish him from Darius the Mede. Thus reference here is to

Darius I (522-486 BC), who, as the writer indicates, was not Darius the Mede, but

Darius the Persian. This would make the records concerning the priests

contemporary.

With regard to ‘the days of Eliashib, Joiada, Johanan and Jaddua’, this phrase

suggests that the records from which the material concerning the Levites was taken,

were made in subsequent generations. This is the one incontrovertible fact (if such

can be said to exist). And this is especially so as �ehemiah 12:26 suggests that

Joiakim, Eliashib’s father, continued on until the days of �ehemiah. What is not

clear is the period covered by ‘the days of Eliashib, Joiada, Johanan and Jaddua’.

At first glance it might appear that these names were simply repeating the

information given in the above genealogy of Jeshua the High Priest, but that this is

not so is evident from the fact that Jonathan is not mentioned here, while a Johanan

is introduced. There is no good reason for suggesting that Johanan is simply an

alternative name for Jonathan. On the other hand we do know that a Johanan did

become High Priest at a date early enough to enable him to be in authority when in

407 BC letters were written from the unorthodox Jewish community in Elephantine

concerning the destruction of their Temple. Johanan may thus have been

Jonathan’s uncle, for it may be he who is elsewhere called ‘Johanan the son of

Eliashib’ (�ehemiah 12:23; Ezra 10:6). It may be that he became High Priest

because Jonathan suffered from some deficiency, and Jaddua was not yet of age.

On the other hand �ehemiah 12:23 limits the writing of these records as ‘even until

the days of Johanan the son of Eliashib’. Taken at face value this would exclude the

idea that the Jaddua here mentioned was subsequent to Johanan, and would

confirm that Johanan was Joiada’s brother, for Joiada was also the son of Eliashib

(�ehemiah 13:28). It may thus be that Joiada, Johanan, and Jaddua were brothers.

The situation is further complicated by the fact that Eliashib also appears to have

had a brother named Johanan (1 Chronicles 3:24), whilst on top of this there may

also have been another Eliashib connected with the Temple who was ‘over the

chambers of the house of God’ (�ehemiah 13:4), so that the Johanan of Ezra 10:6

may have been the son of this Eliashib. And just to add to the complications there

was also an Eliashib who was one of the singers in Ezra 10:24, so that it is just

possible that the Johanan in �ehemiah 12:23, in a verse referring to Levites, was his

son.

It would appear to us that the most likely solution is that Joiada, Johanan, and

Jaddua were brothers, and all sons of Eliashib. But it is no more than that. What is

certain is that for the present nothing reliable can now be built on the mention of

these names, other than the indication that the records were made after the days of

Joiakim, Eliashib’s father.

COFFMA�, "Verse 22

LIST OF THE LEVITES I� THE DAYS OF THE LAST FOUR HIGH PRIESTS

ME�TIO�ED I� �EH. 12:10,11

"As for the Levites in the days of Eliashib, Joiada, Johanan, and Jaddua, there were

recorded the heads of fathers' houses; also the priests until the reign of Darius the

Persian. The sons of Levi, heads of fathers' houses, were written in the book of the

Chronicles until the days of Johanan the son of Eliashib. And the chiefs of the

Levites: Hashabiah, Sherebiah, and Jeshua the son of Kadmiel, with their brethren

over against them, to praise and to give thanks, according to the commandment of

David the man of God, watch corresponding to watch. Mattaniah, Bakbukiah,

Obadiah, Meshullam, Talmon, and Akkub were gatekeepers standing guard at the

storehouses of the gates. These were in the days of Joiakim the son of Jeshua son of

Jozadak, and in the days of �ehemiah the governor and of Ezra the priest the

scribe."

"In the days of Joiakim" (�ehemiah 12:26). That entire list of six High Priests in

�ehemiah 12:10,11, raises the question of why four were named in �ehemiah 12:22,

whereas, here (�ehemiah 12:26), all of the names in this paragraph are identified as

those who lived in the days of Joiakim. This makes it a certainty that the Darius the

Persian mentioned here was none other than, "Darius �othus, the second Persian

king of that name."[7] "This is proved by the Elephantine papyri."[8] It appears

that the best explanation of why four High Priests are named in �ehemiah 12:21 is

that all four generations of them were living at the same time, which would mean

that Jaddua was indeed quite a young child at the time. The text nowhere states that

the names given were those of people living throughout the administrations of all

four of those High Priests.

COKE, "�ehemiah 12:22. Also the priests, to the reign of Darius the Persian— This

verse, wherein mention is made of Darius Codomanus, and the high-priest Jaddua,

affords us a proof, says Mr. Le Clerc, that �ehemiah did not put the finishing hand

to this book. For �ehemiah, to be able to speak of Darius, must have lived,

according to Huet, at least one hundred and thirty-one years, and at that age have

written or enlarged his book; which is not probable. We may therefore conclude,

that the book of �ehemiah could not have been published such as it is, till the reign

of Darius Codomanus at least; and since one chapter of the book of �ehemiah has

been put into that of Ezra, we may very probably suppose, that it did not appear in

its present form till about the same time. So that these two books have been collected

from the memoirs of three different authors; to which have been added several

things for the illustration of the history. See Le Clerc's "Sentimens de "quelques

Theologiens," &c. and Houbigant's note on the place.

BE�SO�, "�ehemiah 12:22. Also the priests, to the reign of Darius the Persians —

“This verse,” observes Dr. Dodd, after Le Clerc, “wherein mention is made of

Darius Codomanus, and the high-priest Jaddua, affords us proof that �ehemiah did

not put the finishing hand to this book. For �ehemiah, to be able to speak of Darius,

must have lived, according to Huet, at least one hundred and thirty-one years, and

at that age have written or enlarged his book, which is not probable. We may

therefore conclude, that the book of �ehemiah could not have been published, such

as it is, till the reign of Darius Codomanus at least; and since one chapter of the

book of �ehemiah has been put into that of Ezra, we may very probably suppose

that it did not appear in its present form till about the same time. So that these two

books have been collected from the memoirs of three different authors, to which

have been added several things for the illustration of the history.” Le Clerc, and

Houbigant’s note on the place.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:22-23. An interjected statement by the later hand. The

Levites were regularly to the time of Alexander the Great recorded by the names of

their chiefs, and the priests also, that Isaiah, to the reign of Darius (Codomannus).

But the book of the Chronicles ( 1 Chronicles 9.) only contained their names to

Johanan’s high-priesthood. That Isaiah, probably in Jaddua’s time the record was

no longer engrossed. Keil’s effort to make these verses refer to �ehemiah’s time as

the ultimate is ingenious but forced. The days of Johanan and the days of Jaddua

cannot mean the days in which they were living as young men or boys, but the days

of their active high-priesthood. Hence the Darius is not �othus, but Codomannus.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:22-23

PARE�THETIC STATEME�T OF THE TIME DOW� TO WHICH EXACT

LISTS OF THE LEADI�G PRIESTS A�D LEVITES WERE KEPT (�ehemiah

12:22, �ehemiah 12:23).

These verses appear to constitute a late insertion. They interrupt the list of high

church officers in the time of Joiakim, which is commenced in �ehemiah 12:12 and

not concluded till �ehemiah 12:26. By their mention of Jaddua as high priest, and of

"Darius the Persian" as contemporary king, they betray a writer who lived at least

as late as b.c. 336, or nearly a century after the time of �ehemiah's religious

reforms. The facts put on record by this writer are not of very much importance.

They seem to be simply these:—

1. That the practice of accurately recording the heads of the priestly and Levitical

courses, which �ehemiah has noted as belonging to the days of Joiakim, was

continued under his successors, Eliashib, Joiada, Johanan, and Jaddua, down (at

any rate) to the accession of Darius Codomannus; and,

2. That in the case of the Levites the lists were inserted into the book of the

chronicles—not our "Book," but that larger one, of which ours is in the main an

abbreviation—down to the time of Johanan, the son (or, rather, grandson) of

Eliashib. It has been supposed that the writer originally accompanied these

statements with lists that have been lost, but this does not appear to be probable.

�ehemiah 12:22

In the days of Eliashib, Joiada, and Johanan, and Jaddua. See comment on

�ehemiah 12:10, �ehemiah 12:11. In the reign of Darius. Rather, "to the reign."

The "Darius" intended is beyond all doubt Codomannus, the adversary of

Alexander the Great, who was contemporary with Jaddua. The lists went on under

the four high priests down to the time when Darius Codomannus was king of Persia.

It is not said that they then ceased. The Persian. Some suppose an antithesis here

between this Darius.and "Darius the Mede" of Daniel (Daniel 5:31; Daniel 11:1).

But this is unlikely, since there was nothing to recall that unimportant personage to

the thoughts of the writer. Others, with better reason, suggest a tacit allusion to the

transfer of empire from Persia to Macedon, and think the date of the passage must

be subsequent to b.c. 331, when the kingdom passed away from Persia

23 The family heads among the descendants of Levi up to the time of Johanan son of Eliashib were recorded in the book of the annals.

CLARKE, "The book of the chronicles - This is not the book of Chronicles which we have now, no such list being found in it; but some other book or register, which is lost.

GILL, "The sons of Levi, the chief of the fathers, were written in the book of the chronicles,.... Some think this refers to 1Ch_9:14, &c.

until the days of Johanan the son of Eliashib; from whence Dr. Lightfoot (p)concludes, that the Chronicles were written by Ezra in the times of this Johanan.

JAMISO�, "The sons of Levi ... were written in the book of the chronicles— that is, the public registers in which the genealogies were kept with great regularity and exactness.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:23

‘The sons of Levi, heads of fathers’ (houses), were written in the book of the

chronicles, even until the days of Johanan the son of Eliashib.’

This would appear to be confirming that the information concerning the Levites

now to be described was obtained from records made up to the time of Johanan, the

son of Eliashib, which may mean up until the time of his High Priesthood, for the

writer’s contemporaries would have known that Johanan became High Priest. This

would serve to confirm our solution suggested above.

The phrase ‘the sons of Levi, heads of fathers’ is interesting. In Ezra/�ehemiah the

phrase ‘sons of Levi’ only elsewhere occurs in Ezra 8:15, where it continues the idea

of ‘sons of --’ from the previous verses. The usual designation is ‘the Levites’. Here,

however, it may simply be used precisely because ‘the Levites’ had already headed

the previous sentence. The phrase as a whole parallels ‘priests, heads of fathers’ in

�ehemiah 12:12. Both these facts suggest (although not conclusively) that �ehemiah

12:23 was part of the original passage from �ehemiah 12:12 to �ehemiah 12:24,

rather than being an insertion.

BE�SO�, "Verses 23-25

�ehemiah 12:23-25. Written in the book of the Chronicles — That is, in the public

annals or registers, in which the genealogies of the several families were recorded by

the Jews with great exactness, as all persons agree. Ward over against ward — Or,

by turns, one coming in when another went out, to attend in their courses, which are

called wards. At the thresholds of the gates — To wit, of the temple, where the holy

things were laid up, their watching-place being close by the thresholds of the gates.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:23-26. The Levites in Joiakim’s day and in �ehemiah’s

time. Hashabiah = Hashabniah in �ehemiah 9:5.

Sherebiah (see �ehemiah 9:5). Jeshua, the son of Kadmiel. See �ehemiah 9:4, where

Jeshua and Bani and Kadmiel is probably for “Jeshua ben Kadmiel.” These were

leaders of the singing Levites.

Mattaniah is put probably by mistake among the porters. He was a singer, (see

�ehemiah 11:17). The same remark may be made of Bakbukiah and Obadiah

(Abda). See, as before, �ehemiah 11:17.

Meshullam is Shallum in 1 Chronicles 9:17. Porters keeping the ward at the

treasuries of the gates.—See 1 Chronicles 26:15; 1 Chronicles 26:17. These were the

store-chambers attached to the various gates, inner and outer, belonging to the

temple.

�ehemiah 12:26. Joiakim was probably high-priest when Ezra arrived at Jerusalem,

Eliashib his son soon succeeding.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:23

Even until the days of Johanan. Why the practice of inserting the names in the book

of the chronicles ceased at this date it is impossible to say, unless it was that the

chronicles themselves ceased to be compiled. There certainly appears to be a long

gap in the authentic Jewish annals between the close of the Old Testament canon

and the composition of the First Book of the Maccabees. Johanan, the son of

Eliashib. The "grandson" really, as appears by �ehemiah 12:10, �ehemiah 12:11.

24 And the leaders of the Levites were Hashabiah, Sherebiah, Jeshua son of Kadmiel, and their associates, who stood opposite them to give praise and thanksgiving, one section responding to the

other, as prescribed by David the man of God.

BAR�ES, "Jeshua the son of Kadmiel - If the reading be sound, this Jeshua must have been the head of the Levitical family of Kadmiel in the time of Joiakim; but (compare Neh_8:7; Neh_9:4), some read “Jeshua, Bani, Kadmiel,” etc.

Ward over against ward - i. e., “alternately,” one part of the choir corresponding the other.

GILL, "And the chief of the Levites,.... Here the thread of the history of Nehemiah, interrupted by the insertion of the two preceding verses, is carried from the priests to the Levites in the times of the third high priest:

Hashabiah, Sherebiah, and Jeshua the son of Kadmiel; these were singers, since it follows:

with their brethren over against them, to praise and to give thanks, according to the commandment of David the man of God, ward over against ward; which office of theirs they performed by turns in courses, as David under a divine direction ordered, see 1Ch_23:5.

K&D 24-25, "The names Hashabiah, Sherebiah, Jeshua, and Kadmiel, frequently occur as those of heads of Levitical orders: the two first in Neh_10:12., Ezr_8:18.; the two last in Neh_12:8, Neh_10:10, and Ezr_2:40; and the comparison of these passages

obliges us to regard and expunge as a gloss the 4ן before Kadmiel. Opposite to these four are placed their brethren, whose office it was “to praise (and) to give thanks according to

the commandment of David,” etc.: comp. 1Ch_16:4; 1Ch_23:30; 2Ch_5:13; and 4מצות ,ד

2Ch_29:25. משמר לע6ת ,ward opposite ward, elsewhere used of the gatekeepers ,משמר1Ch_26:16, 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, Neh_12:25, where the first three names must be separated from those which follow, and combined with Neh_12:24. This is obvious from the consideration, that Mattaniah and Bakbukiah are mentioned in Neh_11:17 as presidents of two companies of singers, and with them Abda

the Jeduthunite, whence we are constrained to suppose that עבדיה is only another form

for א� of Neh_11:17. According, then, to what has been said, the division into verses עב

must be changed, and Neh_12:25 should begin with the name מש�ם. Meshullam, Talmon, and Akkub are chiefs of the doorkeepers; the two last names occur as such both in Neh_11:19 and Ezr_2:42, and even so early as 1Ch_9:17, whence we perceive that

these were ancient names of races of Levitical doorkeepers. In Ezr_2:42 and 1Ch_9:17,

of the present verse, is also named with them. The combination מש�ם answering to ,שלום

משמר שוערים משמר is striking: we should at least have expected שמרים שמרים ,שוערים

because, while שוערים cannot be combined with שמרים ,משמר may well be so; hence we

must either transpose the words as above, or read according to Neh_11:19, 74ערים .שמרים

In the latter case, 74ערים is more closely defined by the apposition ה7ערים at the :4אס8יdoors, viz., at the treasure-chambers of the doors. On 'acupiym, see rem. on 1Ch_26:15, 1Ch_26:17.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:24

‘And the chiefs of the Levites:

The names of the chiefs of the Levites in the days of Joiakim are now given.

�ehemiah 12:24

‘Hashabiah, Sherebiah, and Jeshua the son of Kadmiel, with their brothers over

against them, to praise and give thanks, according to the commandment of David

the man of God, watch next to watch.’

The names of the chiefs of the Levites who returned with Zerubbabel were ‘Jeshua,

Binnui, Kadmiel, Sherebiah, Judah, Mattaniah, who was over the thanksgiving, he

and his brothers’ (�ehemiah 12:8). This may be their given names or they may have

taken their ancestral names in view of the new beginning. The names of the leading

chiefs of the Levites who signed the covenant (or their ancestral names) were

‘Jeshua, the son of Azaniah, Binnui of the sons of Henadad, Kadmiel’ (�ehemiah

10:9), who were possibly third generation. They were the leading Levite chiefs in the

time of �ehemiah. This verse may therefore be seen as indicating that, of the three

chiefs mentioned here in the time of Joiakim, Hashabiah was Jeshua’s son,

Sherebiah was Binnui’s son, and, as stated, Jeshua was Kadmiel’s son. ‘Sherebiah,

Judah and Mattaniah who was over the thanksgiving, he and his brothers’ were

now seen in terms of ‘their brothers over against them’ who ‘praise and give

thanks’.

This suggestion takes into account both the confirmed order of the chiefs of the

Levites (why should Jeshua otherwise have slipped to third) and the unexpected

‘son of Kadmiel’, and makes perfect sense.

Some have suggested that ‘ben-Kadmiel’ is a copying error for ‘Binnui, Kadmiel’.

But the ‘and’ before Joshua supports the MT text, for ‘and’ regularly appears

before the last name in a list. Furthermore where Jeshua the son of Azaniah

(�ehemiah 10:9) is spoken of he regularly heads such lists, whereas here this Jeshua

comes last. In view of these facts we accept the text as it stands. And we should note

that under the alteration theory the absence in �ehemiah 12:24 of the name of

Binnui is equally striking. If he is constantly of the three why is he not mentioned

there? Furthermore the relegation of Jeshua to third place would be equally striking

if he were not stated to rather be a Jeshua who was the son of Kadmiel. Elsewhere

the name Jeshua always heads Levite lists (e.g. �ehemiah 8:7; �ehemiah 10:9;

�ehemiah 12:8).

The truth is that the names are in fact all common Hebrew names which were

regularly given (we can compare John and Peter in my day), which is why when the

father’s name is lacking the names can be easily confused. For example, in Ezra 8:24

‘Hashabiah and Sherebiah’ were the names of chiefs of priests who returned with

Ezra, whereas in Ezra 8:18-19 we have reference to Levites named Sherebiah and

Hashabiah. There are no good grounds, apart from the coincidence of the names,

for connecting those priests with these leading Levites. �or are there good grounds

for connecting them with the two mentioned here. Thus we see these coincidences as

simply an indication of the popularity of certain names among the descendants of

Levi. Indeed, the names Hashabiah and Sherebiah also appear as leading Levites

(among a number of other names) at the signing of the covenant, but clearly as

inferior to Jeshua (�ehemiah 10:11-12). It would, of course, have been helpful if the

writer had given their fathers’ names in order to identify them. But unfortunately

he did not.

For the phrase “to praise (and) to give thanks according to the commandment of

David the man of God” as connected with Levites see 1 Chronicles 16:4; 1

Chronicles 23:30; 2 Chronicles 5:12-13. or the phrase ‘watch next to watch’

compare 1 Chronicles 26:16 where it is used of gatekeepers. There is clearly an

attempt here to confirm that all now goes on as it did in the time of David. It is a

new beginning, recreating the old ideal. It may also indicate an expectancy that

shortly a new ‘kingdom of David’ would arise as anticipated by the prophets (e.g.

Hosea 3:5; Jeremiah 30:9 Ezekiel 34:23; Ezekiel 37:24).

The description of David as ‘the man of God’ is rare in Scripture (here, �ehemiah

12:36 and 2 Chronicles 8:14) and always occurs in connection with the worship of

the Temple. It brings out that David’s great prophetic inspiration expressed itself in

musical worship. It was in the Psalms that his prophetic inspiration was revealed

(compare Mark 12:36).

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:24-26

LIST OF THE CHIEF LEVITICAL FAMILIES I� THE TIME OF JOIAKIM

A�D LATER (�ehemiah 12:24-26).

That family, rather than personal, names are here intended is sufficiently shown in

the final summary of �ehemiah 12:26, since the same individuals cannot have

flourished under Joiakim and also under �ehemiah. The actual names—Jeshua,

Kadmiel, Hashabiah, Shersbiah, etc.—are all found as family names.

�ehemiah 12:24

Hashabiah. See above, �ehemiah 9:5; �ehemiah 10:11. Sherebiah. Compare

�ehemiah 9:4, �ehemiah 9:5; �ehemiah 10:12; �ehemiah 12:8. Jeshua, the son of

Kadmiel. For ben, "son," we should probably read "Bani," a common Levitical

name (�ehemiah 9:4, �ehemiah 9:5; �ehemiah 10:13), in which case the passage

would run as follows:—"And the chief of the Levites were Hashabiah, Sherebiah,

Jeshua, Bani, Kadmiel, with their brethren," etc. To praise and to give thanks,

according to the commandment of David. Compare 1 Chronicles 15:16; 1 Chronicles

23:5; 1 Chronicles 25:3, etc. Man of God is an epithet not often applied to David. It

occurs, however, again in verse 36, and also in 2 Chronicles 8:14. Ward over against

ward. Antiphonically—division over against division.

PULPIT, "Sacred singing.

Its place in public worship at the tabernacle and the temple, from David onward, if

not earlier. The careful arrangements made for conducting it. Its place in the

Christian Church, in which it was prominent from the first. Pliny's testimony.

I. Its DESIG�. �ot the glorification of poets, organists, or choirs, or the musical

entertainment of the people; but—

1. The united praise of God. Of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. This

chiefly, not this only, or many of cur best hymns would have to be condemned.

2. The benefit of the congregation. Of the Christians worshipping, and of others

present. Promoting devout feelings, and impressing great truths on the heart. In

Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16, a distinctly didactic purpose seems,

notwithstanding adverse criticism, to be reeognised.

II. The QUALIFICATIO�S it requires. Besides the physical and the musical, and

far above them in nature and importance.

1. Understanding of what is sung (1 Corinthians 14:15).

2. Faith. In the object of worship, the truths uttered, the Mediator (Hebrews 11:6;

Hebrews 13:15).

3. Devout feelings. Reverence, humility, gratitude, love, joy in God.

4. Unity with fellow-worshippers (Romans 15:5, Romans 15:6). Mutual harmony is

essential to harmonious praise. Anger, envy, alienation, hinder united worship, spoil

the best singing.

III. The DUTY OF THOSE WHO PROVIDE FOR OR CO�DUCT IT. Such as

(Colossians 3:12) are "over the thanksgiving" are to regard themselves not as

performers exhibiting their own skill, but as ministers of Christ and the

congregation, to worship with their brethren, and aid them in worshipping God.

The composition and choice of hymns and tunes, and the style of playing and

singing, are all to be subordinate to this end. If this seem to require of composers,

organists, and choirs some sacrifice of credit, it confers on them a far higher dignity

than they could otherwise reach, and secures them a richer recompense now and

hereafter.

IV. THE DUTY OF CO�GREGATIO�S I� RESPECT TO IT.

1. To take part in the worship. In heart, if not with voice.

2. To unite, if capable, in the singing itself. The singing at the temple appears to

have been chiefly choral; that of the Christian Church should be congregational. All

are as Levites, "to praise and to give thanks," unless physically incapacitated. The

benefits of the service depend much on the union of the many in it.

3. To qualify themselves, therefore, as far as possible for the exercise. That "with

one mouth" (Romans 15:6), as well as "one mind," all may "glorify God." The

subject requires more thought and care by ministers and congregations than it

sometimes receives.

25 Mattaniah, Bakbukiah, Obadiah, Meshullam, Talmon and Akkub were gatekeepers who guarded the storerooms at the gates.

BAR�ES, "In 1Ch_9:17, 1Ch_9:24, 1Ch_9:26, four families of porters only are mentioned; six are implied here, in Neh_7:45, and in Ezr_2:42. From 1Ch_26:14-19 it appears that the temple had four chief gates, fronting the cardinal points, and two minor ones, “toward Asuppim,” and “at Parbar.”

CLARKE, "The thresholds of the gates - Some understand this of a sort of porticoes at the gates, and are puzzled about it, because they find no mention of porticoes elsewhere: but why may we not suppose these to resemble our watch-boxes or some temporary moveable shelters for those who took care of the gates? That there must have been some such conveniences, common sense dictates.

GILL, "Mattaniah, and Bakbukiah, Obadiah, Meshullam, Talmon, Akkub, were porters,.... At the gates of the temple, see 1Ch_9:15,

keeping the ward, at the thresholds of the gates; of the temple, where they stood and watched; or "at the collection of the gates", meaning either where the people were gathered together, or where money gathered was laid up; and so some render it, "the treasuries of the gates": unless a place called Asuppim should be meant, 1Ch_26:15.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:25

‘Mattaniah, and Bakbukiah, Obadiah, Meshullam, Talmon, Akkub, were

gatekeepers keeping the watch at the store-houses of the gates.’

It is an open question here as to whether we should see the first two or three names

as to be tacked on to �ehemiah 12:24 as named singers, with a full stop coming after

Obadiah (or even after Meshullam), with Meshullam, Talmon and Akkub then

being seen as the gatekeepers. Compare how in �ehemiah 11:17 we have mention of

Mattaniah, Bakbukiah and Abda (Obadiah) as worship leaders, although at a

different time. But in view of the constant proliferation of the same names for

different people it can only be a conjecture. Compare how Meshullam occurs

regularly as referring to different people (�ehemiah 3:4; �ehemiah 3:6; �ehemiah

8:4; �ehemiah 10:7; �ehemiah 10:20; �ehemiah 11:7; �ehemiah 11:11; �ehemiah

12:13; �ehemiah 12:16; �ehemiah 12:33; Ezra 8:16; Ezra 8:25). Talmon and Akkub

are the names of different generations of gatekeepers in �ehemiah 7:45; with Ezra

2:42; and �ehemiah 11:19; with 1 Chronicles 9:17.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:25

Meshullam and Obadiah are new as Levitical names; but the remaining names of

the passage are well known. Talmon and Akkub are among the porters of David's

time (1 Chronicles 9:17), and are mentioned in Ezra 2:42; �ehemiah 7:45;

�ehemiah 11:19. Bakbukiah and Mattaniah occur in �ehemiah 11:17 and

�ehemiah 12:8, �ehemiah 12:9; but as families of singers, rather than of porters, in

those places. Keeping the ward at the thresholds of the gates. Rather, as in the

margin, "at the treasuries." It is thought that the chambers above the gateways may

have been used as storehouses or treasuries.

26 They served in the days of Joiakim son of Joshua, the son of Jozadak, and in the days of �ehemiah the governor and of Ezra the priest, the teacher of the Law.

GILL, "These were in the days of Joiakim the son of Jeshua, the son of Jozadak,.... Who was high priest in Babylon, and whose grandson was now high priest in the time referred to:

and in the days of Nehemiah the governor; the writer of this book:

and of Ezra the priest, the scribe; who was contemporary with him.

K&D, "Neh_12:26 is the final subscription of the two lists in Neh_12:12-21 and Neh_12:24, Neh_12:25.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:26

‘These were in the days of Joiakim the son of Jeshua, the son of Jozadak, and in the

days of �ehemiah the governor, and Ezra the priest the scribe.’

‘These were in the days of Joiakim the son of Jeshua, the son of Jozadak.’ This is

emphasising the end of an inclusio which began at �ehemiah 12:12. �ote the

assumption that Ezra and �ehemiah operated alongside each other.

The peoples mentioned in the passage from �ehemiah 12:12 onwards, played their

part in the days of Joiakim, the son of Jeshua, in other words in the next generation

after the return. This coincided with the arrival of Ezra and �ehemiah, although by

that time they would be old, and the third generation would be coming through as

depicted in the signing of the covenant. There is no real substance in the argument

that ‘in the days of �ehemiah’ signifies that �ehemiah was dead. It is simply a

reminder that the days of Joiakim (who was dead), coincided with the days of

�ehemiah. The writer, whether �ehemiah or someone else, is simply repeating the

pattern.

The writer has thus demonstrated that, from the return onwards, Israel has been

served by a genuine priesthood, whose genealogy was known, which operated in

accordance with the Law of Moses, something especially brought out in chapter 7

where those who could prove their genealogy were the ones who alone could conduct

the worship of the Temple.

Dedication of the Wall of Jerusalem

27 At the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem, the Levites were sought out from where they lived and were brought to Jerusalem to celebrate joyfully the dedication with songs of thanksgiving and with the music of cymbals, harps and lyres.

BAR�ES, "The dedication of the wall - The ceremony had been deferred for the space of nearly 12 years Neh_13:6. Perhaps Nehemiah required an express permission from the Persian king before he could venture on a solemnity which might have been liable to misrepresentation.

Out of all their places - i. e., out of the various cities of Judah and Benjamin in which they dwelt Neh_11:36.

CLARKE, "At the dedication of the wall - They sent for the Levites from all quarters, that this dedication might be as solemn and majestic as possible; and it is likely that this was done as soon as convenient after the walls were finished. The dedication seems to have consisted in processions of the most eminent persons around the walls, and thanksgivings to God, who had enabled them to bring the work to so happy a conclusion: and no doubt to all this were added a particular consecration of the city to God, and the most earnest invocation that he would take it under his guardian care, and defend it and its inhabitants against all their enemies.

The ancients consecrated their cities to the gods, and the very walls were considered as sacred. Ovid gives us an account of the ceremonies used in laying the foundations of the walls of the city of Rome, by Romulus. After having consulted together who should give name to the city, and have the direction of the wall by which it was necessary to surround it, they agreed to let the case be decided by the flight of birds. One brother went to the top of the Mons Palatinus, the other to that of Mount Aventine. Romulus saw twelve birds, Remus saw but six; the former, therefore, according to agreement, took the command. The poet thus describes the ceremonies used on the occasion: -

Apta dies legitur, qua moenia signet aratro;Sacra Palis suberant; inde movetur opus.Fossa fit ad solidum: fruges jaciuntur in ima.Et de vicino terra petita soloFossa repletur humo, plenaeque imponitur ara;Et novus accenso finditur igne focus.Inde, premens stivam, designat moenia sulco;Alba jugum niveo cum bove vacca tulit.Vox tuit haec regis; Condenti Jupiter urbem,

Et genitor Mavors, Vestaque mater ades:Quosque pium est adhibere deos, advertite cuncti:Auspicibus vobis hoc mihi surgat opus.Longa sit huic aetas, dominaeque potentia terrae:Sitque sub hac oriens occiduusque dies! Ille precabatur.Ovid, Fast. lib. iv., ver. 819.

“A proper day is chosen in which he may mark out the walls with the plough: the festival of Pales was at hand when the work was begun. A ditch is dug down to the solid clay, into which they cast the fruits of the season; and bring earth from the neighboring ground, with which they fill up the trench; and on it build an altar, by whose flames the newly made hearth is cleft asunder. Then Romulus, seizing the plough, which a white heifer yoked with a snowy bull drew along, marked out the walls with a furrow. And thus spoke the king: ‘O Jupiter, and Father Mars, with Matron Vesta, prosper me in founding this city! And all ye gods, approach, whomsoever it is right to invoke! Under your auspices may the work arise; may it endure for countless ages, and be the mistress of the world; and may the East and the West be under its control!’ Thus he prayed.”

The above is a literal version, and the account is not a little curious.

GILL, "And at the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem,.... In which many priests and Levites assisted, and seems to be the reason of the above account of them; the dedication of the wall takes in the whole city, gates, and houses, Neh_12:30, and if a new house was to be dedicated, much more a new city, and especially the holy city, in which stood the temple of the Lord, see Deu_20:5, this dedication was made by prayer and songs of praise, as follow, and no doubt by sacrifices, and was kept as a festival; and indeed, according to the Jewish writers (q), it was annually observed on the seventh of Elul, or August; it was on the twenty fifth of that month that the wall was finished, Neh_6:15, but the gates were not set up, and all things for the dedication were not ready till Elul, or August, following; and then all being finished, they made and served the seventh of that month as a festival:

they sought the Levites out of all their places, to bring them to Jerusalem, to keep the dedication with gladness; to assist in the solemnity of the day both with vocal and instrumental music, as follows:

both with thanksgiving and with singing; with songs of praise and thankfulness vocally, that they had been able, notwithstanding all the malice of their enemies, to build the wall in so short a time; or with a song, perhaps the thirtieth psalm was sung on this occasion:

with cymbals, psalteries, and with harps; some playing on one, and some on another, which were the three principal instruments of music used by them, see 1Ch_15:16.

HE�RY, "We have read of the building of the wall of Jerusalem with a great deal of fear and trembling; we have here an account of the dedicating of it with a great deal of joy and triumph. Those that sow in tears shall thus reap.

I. We must enquire what was the meaning of this dedication of the wall; we will suppose it to include the dedication of the city too (continens pro contentothe thing containing for the thing contained), and therefore it was not done till the city was pretty well replenished, Neh_11:1. It was a solemn thanksgiving to God for his great mercy to them in the perfecting of this undertaking, of which they were the more sensible because of the difficulty and opposition they had met with in it. 2. They hereby devoted the city in a peculiar manner to God and to his honour, and took possession of it for him and in his name. All our cities, all our houses, must have holiness to the Lord written upon them; but this city was (so as never any other was) a holy city, the city of the great King(Psa_48:2 and Mat_5:35): it had been so ever since God chose it to put his name there, and as such, it being now refitted, it was afresh dedicated to God by the builders and inhabitants, in token of their acknowledgment that they were his tenants, and their desire that it might still be is and that the property of it might never be altered. Whatever is done for their safety, ease, and comfort, must be designed for God's honour and glory. 3. They hereby put the city and its walls under the divine protection, owning that unless the Lord kept the city the walls were built in vain. When this city was in possession of the Jebusites, they committed the guardianship of it to their gods, though they were blind and lame ones, 2Sa_5:6. With much more reason do the people of God commit it to his keeping who is all-wise and almighty. The superstitious founders of cities had an eye to the lucky position of the heavens (see Mr. Gregory's works, p. 29, etc.); but these pious founders had an eye to God only, to his providence, and not to fortune.

JAMISO� 27-43, "at the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem— This ceremony of consecrating the wall and gates of the city was an act of piety on the part of Nehemiah, not merely to thank God in a general way for having been enabled to bring the building to a happy completion, but especially because that city was the place which He had chosen. It also contained the temple which was hallowed by the manifestation of His presence, and anew set apart to His service. It was on these accounts that Jerusalem was called “the holy city,” and by this public and solemn act of religious observance, after a long period of neglect and desecration, it was, as it were, restored to its rightful proprietor. The dedication consisted in a solemn ceremonial, in which the leading authorities, accompanied by the Levitical singers, summoned from all parts of the country, and by a vast concourse of people, marched in imposing procession round the city walls, and, pausing at intervals to engage in united praises, prayer, and sacrifices, supplicated the continued presence, favor, and blessing on “the holy city.” “The assembly convened near Jaffa Gate, where the procession commences. Then (Neh_12:31) I brought up the princes of Judah upon the wall (near the Valley Gate), and appointed two great companies of them that gave thanks, whereof one went on the right hand upon the wall towards the dung gate (through Bethzo). And after them went Hoshaiah, and half of the princes of Judah. And (Neh_12:37) at the fountain gate, which was over against them, they (descending by the Tower of Siloam on the interior, and then reascending) went up by the stairs of the city of David, at the going up of the wall, above the house of David, even unto the water gate eastward (by the staircase of the rampart, having descended to dedicate the fountain structures). And the other company of them that gave thanks went over against them (both parties having started from the junction of the first and second walls), and I after them, and the half of the

people upon the wall, from beyond the tower of the furnaces even unto the broad wall (beyond the corner gate). And from above the gate of Ephraim, and above the old gate (and the gate of Benjamin), and above the fish gate, and the tower of Hananeel, and the tower of Meah, even unto the sheep gate; and they stood still in the prison gate (or high gate, at the east end of the bridge). So stood the two companies of them that gave thanks in the house of God, and I, and half of the rulers with me (having thus performed the circuit of the investing walls), and arrived in the courts of the temple” [Barclay, City of the Great King].

K&D, "The dedication of the wall of Jerusalem. - The measures proposed for increasing the numbers of the inhabitants of Jerusalem having now been executed (Neh_7:5 and Neh_11:1.), the restored wall of circumvallation was solemnly dedicated. Neh_12:27-29 treat of the preparations for this solemnity.

Neh_12:27

At the dedication (i.e., at the time of, �4 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 (Neh_11:15-18); the rest dwelt in places in the

neighbourhood, as is more expressly stated in Neh_12:28 and Neh_12:29. ושמחה, to keep

the dedication and joy, is not suitable, chiefly on account of the following ובתודות, and

with songs of praise. We must either read 4שמחה, dedication with joy (comp. Ezr_6:16),

or expunge, with the lxx and Vulgate, the ו before �4 .4תודות must be repeated before

from the preceding words. On the subject, comp. 1Ch_13:8; 1Ch_15:16, and מצל:יםelsewhere.

PETT, "Verses 27-29

The Levites Are Sought Out To Play Their Part In The Celebrations (�ehemiah

12:27-29).

The emphasis at the commencement of the passage on the calling together of all the

Levites from all around Judah brings out that the celebratory nature of the events is

being emphasised. The prime emphasis is to be on joy and gladness, thanksgiving

and singing. The aim was to make the celebrations a time of ‘gladness --

thanksgivings -- singing’ (�ehemiah 12:27).

This can be seen as an echo of Isaiah 51:3,‘YHWH has comforted Zion, -- joy and

gladness will be found in it, thanksgiving and the voice of singing’. And it is

especially an echo of Jeremiah 33:11, which specifically had in mind the return the

return from captivity, seeing it as a new deliverance,‘the voice of joy and the voice of

gladness, -- the voice of those who say, “Give thanks to YHWH of Hosts, for YHWH

is good, for His mercy is for ever,” who bring thanksgiving into the house of

YHWH, “for I will cause the captivity of the land to return as at the first, says

YHWH”.’

�ow that the return had taken place, the walls of Jerusalem had been rebuilt, and

Jerusalem had been separated to pure worship, it must have appeared as though

these words had been fulfilled, and that the gladness and thanksgiving and singing

spoken of were now required. And this was something in which the Levites excelled.

They were at the very heart of the vocally expressed worship of Israel. Here the

‘singers (musicians)’ were seen very much as Levites (compare 1 Chronicles 6:31-

48).

�ehemiah 12:27

‘And at the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem they sought the Levites out of all

their places, to bring them to Jerusalem, to keep the dedication with gladness, both

with thanksgivings, and with singing, with cymbals, psalteries, and with stringed

instruments.’

The occasion of the celebrations was the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem. This

probably therefore came well before the events described in chapter 11 (the

largescale repopulation of Jerusalem), and may well even have led up to them. This

timing explains why the Levites were still on the whole widely scattered around

Judah. They were ‘sought out of all their places’ and brought to Jerusalem for the

celebrations precisely because the dedication was to be a joyous occasion centred

around vocal worship, and this was one of the fortes of the Levites. It was to be a

time of expressing gladness and thanksgiving by musical means. As this was to be in

the form of processions it brings out that all the musical instruments described were

hand held. A psaltery was a many-stringed instrument.

PETT, "Verses 27-31

THE PURIFYI�G OF THE HOLY CITY (�ehemiah 12:27 to �ehemiah 13:31).

The prophecies concerning Jerusalem as ‘the holy city’ had in mind the coming

eschatalogical age, and its consequent purification (Isaiah 52:1; Daniel 9:24), and

there can be little doubt, in view of the hopes expressed in the prophecies of Haggai,

Zechariah and Malachi, that this age must have been in mind as Jerusalem was so

triumphantly re-established. Thus the writer ends his book with a description of the

purification of Jerusalem, both religiously and practically, the details of which are

found in �ehemiah 12:27 to �ehemiah 13:31. This would be seen as necessary, in

preparation for that age, for in that age the city was to be holy and wholly ‘clean’

(Isaiah 52:1). These passages are united together by vague time notes (beyom,

beyamim) which connect them together, and they cover both the Godward side and

the manward side of its purification. Whilst the time frame is foreshortened, and the

time notes are imprecise, this section covers various aspects of its purification

during the lifetime of �ehemiah. Each section, apart from the initial one,

commences with the words beyom or beyamim, and sections 3-6 end with the

statement ‘remember me --.’ On this basis we may divide it up as follows:

1) The religious purifying of the city at the time of the celebrations over the

completion of the wall (�ehemiah 12:27-43).

2) The re-establishment of offerings and tithes for the support of the priests and

Levites who were the pure, uniquely chosen servants of YHWH and appointed to

the service of the Temple, thus ensuring its purity of worship in accordance with

God’s requirements. Introductory words ‘at that time -- (beyom)’ (�ehemiah 12:44-

47).

3) The purifying of the true Israel and the Temple, by the exclusion of

idolatrous foreign elements in accordance with the Law of Moses (�ehemiah 3:1-9),

and by establishing the God-ordained Levitical order (�ehemiah 13:10-14). This

included the exclusion of the Ammonite Tobiah who had wormed his way into the

Temple precincts, and had thereby taken over the chambers intended for the storing

of tithes and offerings (�ehemiah 3:4-9). In consequence it was seen as necessary to

purify the Temple chambers.

The consequent re-establishment of God’s chosen servants the Levites in their

responsibilities with regard to the Temple and its worship, something which had

failed because of the failure of Israel to respond to the tithing system. The result

would be that once again tithes would flow into God’s house providing for His

servants, a condition of God’s future blessing (Malachi 3:10-12). Introductory

words ‘at that time --’ (beyom). The passage ending with a ‘remember me --’

statement (�ehemiah 13:1-14).

4) The purification of Jerusalem by restoring full observance of the Sabbath

(another requirement for future blessing - Jeremiah 17:19-27), the gates to be

guarded by gatekeepers who had been purified. Introductory words ‘in those days’

(beyamim), with the passage ending with a ‘remember me’’ statement (�ehemiah

13:15-22).

5) The removal of those who had idolatrous foreign wives from Jerusalem, thus

preventing the watering down of their religious heritage, and ensured the

continuing purity of the cult. Introductory words ‘in those days (beyamim) --’ , with

the passage ending with a ‘remember me --’ statement (�ehemiah 13:23-29).

6) �ehemiah’s summary of what he had achieved: the purifying of Jerusalem

from all religiously foreign elements; the successful establishment of the God-

determined priesthood and the Levitical order in order to ensure the purity of the

cult; the ensuring of the means of offering sacrifices through purifying fire; and the

ensuring of the supply of the holy firstfruits, this finally closing with a ‘remember

me --’ statement (�ehemiah 13:30-31).

We should note how much of what is described here is a direct enforcing of the

provisions of the ‘sure agreement’ of �ehemiah 10:29-39 which stresses separation

from foreign influence especially in respect to marriage (�ehemiah 10:30);

observance of the Sabbath (�ehemiah 10:31); supply of the wood offering

(�ehemiah 10:34); the bringing in of the firstfruits (�ehemiah 10:35-37); and the

gathering of the tithes (�ehemiah 10:37-39).

Verses 27-43

Purifications And Celebrations At The Dedication Of The Wall (�ehemiah 12:27-

43).

Having established the newly walled Jerusalem as ‘the holy city’ (�ehemiah 11:1),

properly inhabited by a people who were fully faithful to YHWH (chapter 11), and

having demonstrated the proper succession of a genuine priesthood in accord with

the Law of Moses, who would keep the city ‘holy’ (�ehemiah 12:1-26), the writer

now describes the purifications and celebrations which took place at the dedication

of the wall, thereby underlining the holiness of Jerusalem. This was something in

which the Levites would have a prominent part as leaders of worship and singing.

This was one reason why it had been necessary to demonstrate that, as well as the

priests, the Levites operating in Judah, and especially in Jerusalem, were genuine

descendants of Levi (compare how important it had been to Ezra to ensure that he

brought with him genuine Levites - Ezra 8:15 ff). Only such could truly celebrate

YHWH’s doings.

The in-depth purifications (�ehemiah 12:30) were an essential part of the ceremony.

The vision of Jerusalem as the ‘holy city’, clothed in beautiful garments and totally

separated to God, as described in Isaiah 52:1, demanded such purifications.

Jerusalem was being prepared like a bride for her husband (Isaiah 49:18; Isaiah

61:10). She was to be His purified messenger to the world (Isaiah 52:9-12).

It is noteworthy that at this point the narrative returns to the first person singular, a

feature last seen in chapter 7, indicating that �ehemiah is the main source of the

material being presented. But while this suggests that chapters 8-12 were not a part

of �ehemiah’s initial record (often called the �ehemiah Memoirs), it does not

necessarily exclude him from being the ‘author’ of the whole, using contemporary

sources. It simply indicates that whether the writer was �ehemiah or someone else,

he called on other sources besides the Memoirs in order to build up the picture

presented.

We must, however, ask as to why the celebrations concerning the completion of the

wall, which quite possibly took place shortly after that completion (although not

necessarily), should have been placed at this point following chapters 8-11. It would

have fitted well after �ehemiah 7:3. And the answer unquestionably lies in the

message that the writer wishes to get over. For, whenever the celebration took place,

he saw it, not only in terms of the completion of the walls, but also in terms of the

renewal of the covenant, and of the establishment of Jerusalem as the holy city

spoken of by Isaiah and Daniel. That was what was made possible by the completion

of the walls. It was intrinsic within it, and was what Israel were so delighted about.

Jerusalem was once more theirs as the earthly dwellingplace of YHWH.

COFFMA�, "Verse 27

PREPARATIO� FOR THE DEDICATIO� CEREMO�IES

"And at the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem they sought the Levites in all their

places, to bring them to Jerusalem to celebrate the dedication with gladness, with

thanksgiving, and with singing, with cymbals, harps, and lyres. And the sons of the

singers gathered together from the circuit round Jerusalem and from the villages of

the �etophathites; also from Beth-gilgal and from the region of Geba and

Azmaveth; for the singers had built for themselves villages around Jerusalem. And

the priests and the Levites purified themselves; and they purified the people and the

gates and the wall."

The purification ceremonies probably included the offering of sacrifices and the

strict observance of all the prohibitions of the Mosaic law.

The time of this dedication was not long after the completion of the wall, as should

have been expected. This writer was astounded that several scholars placed the

dedication a decade or so after the wall was completed. Rawlinson made the

dedication "thirteen years after the wall was finished."[9] Cook wrote that, "The

dedication was deferred for nearly twelve years."[10] Such errors are due solely to

the scholarly emphasis upon that misplaced name of the High Priest Jaddua in

�ehemiah 12:22. Short got it right. "The dedication was only a few days after the

completion of the wall."[11]

Although our text does not give us the exact date of the dedication, the historical

note in, "Second Maccabees 1:18 gives the date of the dedication as the twenty fifth

of the ninth month (Kislew), only three months after the completion of the

wall."[12]

COKE, "Verse 27

�ehemiah 12:27. And at the dedication of the wall— Dedication was a religious

ceremony, whereby a temple, altar, or vessel thereunto belonging, was, by the

pronunciation of a certain form of blessing, consecrated to the service of God; and

this dedication extended not only to things sacred, but to cities and their walls, and

sometimes to private houses, Deuteronomy 20:5. As, therefore, Moses in the

wilderness dedicated the tabernacle, and Solomon the temple, when he had finished

it; so �ehemiah, having put things in good order, having built the walls, and set up

the gates, thought proper to dedicate the city as a place which God himself had

chosen and sanctified by his favour and gracious presence, and by this dedication to

restore it to him again, after it had lain waste and been profaned by the heathen.

REFLECTIO�S.—1st, The wall being finished, and the gates set up,

notwithstanding all the malice of their foes, we have the solemn dedication of the

whole to God. Sensible that their security was not walls and bulwarks, but the

favour of the Lord of hosts, they would commend all to his protection, and devote to

his glory the work of their hands; while with grateful thanksgivings they

acknowledge the support that he had afforded in the conclusion of the work,

undertaken in humble dependance on his blessing. For this purpose,

1. The Levites from the country were summoned to attend; and, with their brethren

the priests, having purified themselves by the necessary ablutions, or sprinkling the

water of purification, �umbers 8:6-21 they purified the people, the walls, and gates;

probably with the same ceremony, as typical of that blood of sprinkling which

purges our consciences from dead works, and, having cleansed our souls from sin,

restores us to the holy use and enjoyment of all God's creatures.

2. They made a solemn procession in two companies; who, separating, surrounded

the whole city, and met at the temple, singing and praising God as they went, with

instruments of music.

3. They there offered great sacrifices, and rejoiced before God; all the people, even

the women and children, uniting their voices in loud shouts of praise; so that the

sound was heard afar off. �ote; (1.) The mouths of babes and sucklings should be

taught to lisp God's praises; for this is the sweetest music in his ears. (2.) They who

have received great mercies from God are bound to rejoice before him with great

joy; to his glory, as well as their own comfort.

2nd, The good effects of this holy joy appear in the gracious dispositions here

mentioned. The priests and Levites, in their several functions, with diligence and

zeal discharged their ministrations: the people appeared highly satisfied in them,

and blessed God for them; and, as a fresh testimony of their respect, especial care

was taken for their liberal maintenance. �ote; When ministers labour in the word

and doctrine, they will be cheerfully and liberally supported; but no wonder if men

grudge that idlers should fatten on the spoil of flocks that they never fed.

BE�SO�, "�ehemiah 12:27. At the dedication of the wall — Of the city itself, which

is here dedicated to God, and to his honour and service, not only upon a general

account, by which we ought to devote ourselves, and all that is ours, to God; but

upon a more special ground, because this was a place which God himself had

chosen, and sanctified by his temple and gracious presence, and which therefore did

of right belong to him, whence it is often called the holy city. And they restored it to

God by this dedication, withal imploring the presence, and favour, and blessing of

God to this city, by solemn prayers, and praises, and sacrifices, wherewith this

dedication was accompanied. They sought the Levites out of their places — To

which they were now retired, after that great and general assembly, �ehemiah 8:9-

10.

EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE COMME�TARY, "BEGI��I�GS

�ehemiah 12:27-47

A CURIOUS feature of the history of the restoration of Israel already met with

several times is postponement. Thus in the days of Cyrus. Zerubbabel leads up an

expedition for the express purpose of building the temple at Jerusalem, but the work

is not executed until the reign of Darius. Again, Ezra brings the book of The Law

with him when he comes to the city, yet he does not find an opportunity for

publishing it till some years later. Once more, �ehemiah sets to work on the

fortifications with the promptitude of a practical man and executes his task with

astonishing celerity, still, even in his case the usual breach of sequence occurs; here,

too, we have interruption and the intrusion of alien matters, so that the crowning act

of the dedication of the walls is delayed.

In this final instance we do not know how long a postponement there was. Towards

the end of his work the chronicler is exceptionally abrupt and disconnected. In the

section �ehemiah 12:27-43 he gives us an extract from �ehemiah’s memoirs, but

without any note of time. The preservation of another bit of the patriot’s original

writing is interesting, not only because of its assured historicity, but further because

exceptional importance is given to the records that have been judged worthy of

being extracted and made portions of permanent scripture, although other sources

are only used by the chronicler as materials out of which to construct his own

narrative in the third person. While we cannot assign its exact date to the subject of

this important fragment, one thing is clear from its position in the story of the days

of �ehemiah. The reading of The Law, the great fast, the sealing of the covenant, the

census, and the regulations for peopling Jerusalem, all came between the completion

of the fortifications and the dedication of them. The interruption and the consequent

delay were not without meaning and object. After what had occurred in the interval,

the people were better prepared to enter into the ceremony of dedication with

intelligence and earnestness of purpose. This act, although it was immediately

directed to the walls, was, as a matter of fact, the re-consecration of the city, because

the walls were built in order to preserve the distinct individuality, the unique

integrity of what they included. �ow the Jews needed to know The Law in order to

understand the destiny of Jerusalem, they needed to devote themselves personally to

the service of God, so that they might carry out that destiny, and they needed to

recruit the forces of the Holy City, for the purpose of giving strength and volume to

its future. Thus the postponement of the dedication made that event, when it came

about, a much more real thing than it would have been if it had followed

immediately on the building of the walls. May we not say that in every similar case

the personal consecration must precede the material? The city is what its citizens

make it. They, and not its site or its buildings, give it its true character. Jerusalem

and Babylon, Athens and Rome, are not to be distinguished in their topography and

architecture in anything approaching the degree in which they are individualised by

the manners and deeds of their respective peoples. Most assuredly the �ew

Jerusalem will just reflect the characters of her citizens. This City of God will be

fair and spotless only when they who tread her streets are clad in the beauty of

holiness. In smaller details, too, and in personal matters, we can only dedicate aright

that which we are handling in a spirit of earnest devotion. The miserable

superstition that clouds our ideas of this subject rises out of the totally erroneous

notion that it is possible to have holy things without holy persons, that a mystical

sanctity can attach itself to any objects apart from an intelligent perception of some

sacred purpose for which they are to be used. This materialistic notion degrades

religion into magic; it is next door to fetichism.

It is important, then, that we should understand what we mean by dedication.

Unfortunately in our English Bible the word "dedicate" is made to stand for two

totally distinct Hebrew terms, one of which means to "consecrate," to make holy, or

set apart for God, while the other means to "initiate," to mark the beginning of a

thing. The first is used of functions of ritual, priestly and sacrifical, but the second

has a much wider application, one that is not always directly connected with

religion. Thus we meet with this second word in the regulations of Deuteronomy

which lay down the conditions on which certain persons are to be excused from

military service. The man who has built a new house but who has not "dedicated" it

is placed side by side with one who has planted a vineyard and with a third who is

on the eve of his marriage. [Deuteronomy 20:5-7] �ow the first word-that describing

real consecration-is used of the priests’ action in regard to their portion of the wall,

and in this place our translators have rendered it "sanctified." [�ehemiah 3:1] But

in the narrative of the general dedication of the walls the second and more secular

word is used. The same word is used, however, we must notice, in the account of the

dedication of the temple. [Ezra 6:16] In both these cases, and in all other cases of the

employment of the word, the chief meaning conveyed by it is just initiation. It

signalises a commencement. Therefore the ceremony at the new walls was designed

in the first instance to direct attention to the very fact of their newness, and to call

up those thoughts and feelings that are suitable in the consideration of a time of

commencement. We must all acknowledge that such a time is one for very earnest

thought. All our beginnings in life-the birth of a child, a young man’s start in the

world, the wedding that founds the home, the occupation of a new house, the

entrance on a fresh line of business-all such beginnings come to rouse us from the

indifference of routine, to speak to us with the voice of Providence, to bid us look

forward and prepare ourselves for the future. We have rounded a corner, and a new

vista has opened up to our view. As we gaze down the long aisle we must be heedless

indeed if we can contemplate the vision without a thrill of emotion, without a

thought of anticipation. The new departure in external affairs is an opportunity for

a new turn in our inner life, and it calls for a reconsideration of our resources and

methods.

One of the charms of the Bible is that, like nature, it is full of fresh starts. Inasmuch

as a perennial breath of new life plays among the pages of these ancient scriptures,

we have only to drink it in to feel what inspiration there is here for every

momentous beginning. Just as the fading, dank autumn gives way to the desolation

of winter in order that in due time the sleeping seeds and buds may burst out in the

birth of spring with the freshness of Eden, God has ordained that the decaying old

things of human life shall fall away and be forgotten, while He calls us into the

heritage of the new-giving a new covenant, creating a new heart, promising a new

heaven and a new earth. The mistake of our torpor and timidity is that we will cling

to the rags of the past and only patch them with shreds of the later age, instead of

boldly flinging them off to clothe ourselves in the new garment of praise which is to

take the place of the old spirit of heaviness.

The method in which a new beginning was celebrated by the Jews in relation to

their restored walls is illustrative of the spirit in which such an event should always

be contemplated.

In the first place, as a preparation for the whole of the subsequent ceremonies, the

priests and Levites carried out a great work of purification. They began with

themselves, because the men who are first in any dealings with religion must be first

in purity. Judged by the highest standard, the only real difference of rank in the

Church is determined by varying degrees of holiness; merely official distinctions

and those that arise from the unequal distribution of gifts cannot affect anybody’s

position of honour in the sight of God. The functions of the recognised ministry, in

particular, demand purity of character for their right discharge. They that bear the

vessels of the Lord must be clean. And not only so in general, especially in the

matter of purification is it necessary that those who carry out the work should first

be pure themselves. What here applies to priests and Levites ceremonially applies in

prosaic earnestness to all who feel called to purge society in the interest of true

morality. Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? The leaders of moral

reforms must be themselves morally clean. Only regenerate men and women can

regenerate society. If the salt has lost its savour it will not arrest corruption in the

sacrifice that is salted with it. But the purification does not cease with the leaders. In

ceremonial symbolism all the people and even the very walls are also cleansed. This

is done in view of the new departure, the fresh beginning. Such an occasion calls for

much heart-searching and spiritual cleansing-a truth which must have been

suggested to the minds of thoughtful people by the Levitical ceremonies. It is a

shame to bring the old stains into the new scenes. The fresh, clean start calls for a

new and better life.

�ext, it is to be observed, there was an organised procession round the walls, a

procession that included citizens of every rank-princes, priests, Levites, and

representatives of the general community, described as "Judah and Benjamin."

Starting at the west end of the city, these people were divided into two sections, one

led by �ehemiah going round by the north, and the other conducted by Ezra

proceeding by the south, so that they met at the eastern side of the city, where

opposite the Mount of Olives and close to the temple, they all united in an

enthusiastic outburst of praise. This arrangement was not carried out for any of the

idle ends of a popular pageant-to glorify the processionists, or to amuse the

spectators. It was to serve an important practical purpose. By personal participation

in the ceremony of initiation, all sections of the community would be brought to

perceive its real significance. Since the walls were in the keeping of the citizens, it

was necessary that the citizens should acknowledge their privileges and

responsibilities. Men and women need to come individually and directly face to face

with new conditions of life. Mere dulness of imagination encourages the lazy sense of

indifference with which so many people permit themselves to ignore the claims of

duty, and the same cause accounts for a melancholy failure to appreciate the new

blessings that come from the untiring bounty of God.

In the third place, the behaviour of the processionists invites our attention. The

whole ceremony was one of praise and gratitude. Levites were called in from the

outlying towns and villages where they had got themselves homes, and even from

that part of the Jordan valley that lay nearest to Jerusalem. Their principal function

was to swell the chorus of the temple singers. Musical instruments added emphasis

to the shout of human voices; clashing cymbals and finer toned harps supported the

choral song with a rich and powerful orchestral accompaniment, which was

augmented from another quarter by a young band of trumpeters consisting of some

of the priests’ sons. The immediate aim of the music and singing was to show forth

the praises of God. The two great companies were to give thanks while they went

round the walls. Sacrifices of thanksgiving completed the ceremony when the

processions were united and brought to a standstill near the temple. The

thanksgiving would arise out of a grateful-acknowledgment of the goodness of God

in leading the work of building the walls through many perils and disappointments

to its present consummation. Rarely does anything new spring up all of a sudden

without some relation to our own past life and action, but even that which is the

greatest novelty and wonder to us must have a cause somewhere. If we have done

nothing to prepare for the happy surprise, God has done much. Thus the new start

is an occasion for giving thanks to its great Originator. But the thankfulness also

looks forward. The city was now in a very much more hopeful condition than when

�ehemiah took his lonely night ride among its ghostly ruins. By this time it was a

compact and strongly fortified centre, with solid defences and a good body of

devoted citizens pledged to do their part in pursuing its unique destiny. The

prospect of a happy future which this wonderful transformation suggested afforded

sufficient reasons for the greatest thankfulness. The spirit of praise thus called forth

would be one of the best guarantees of the fulfilment of the high hopes that it

inspired. There is nothing that.so surely foredooms people to failure as a despairing

blindness to any perception of their advantages. The grateful soul will always have

most ground for a renewal of gratitude. It is only just and reasonable that God

should encourage those of His children who acknowledge His goodness with fresh

acts of favour over and above what He does for all in making His sun to shine and

His rain to fail on the bad as well as the good. But apart from considerations of self-

interest, the true spirit of praise will delight to pour itself out in adoration of the

great and good Father of all blessings. It is a sign of sin or selfishness or unbelief

when the element of praise fails in our worship. This is the purest and highest part

of a religious service, and it should take the first place in the estimation of the

worshippers. It will do so directly a right sense of the goodness of God is attained.

Surely the best worship is that in which man’s needs and hopes and fears are all

swallowed up in the vision of God’s love and glory, as the fields and woods are lost

in a dim purple haze when the sky is aglow with the rose and saffron of a brilliant

sunset.

Further, it is to be observed that a note of gladness rings through the whole

ceremony. The account of the dedication concludes with the perfectly jubilant verse,

"And they offered great sacrifices that day, and rejoiced, for God had made them

rejoice with great joy, and the women also and the children rejoiced, so that the joy

of Jerusalem was heard even afar off." [�ehemiah 12:43] The joy would be mingled

with the praise, because when people see the goodness of God enough to praise Him

from their hearts they cannot but rejoice, and then the joy would react on the

praise, because the more blessedness God sends the more heartily must His grateful

children thank Him. �ow the outburst of joy was accompanied with sacrifices. In

the deepest sense, a sense almost unknown till it was revealed by Christ, there is a

grand, solemn joy in sacrifice. But even to those who have only reached the Jewish

standpoint, the self-surrender expressed by a ceremonial sacrifice as a symbol of

glad thankfulness in turn affects the offerer so as to heighten his gladness. �o doubt

there were mundane and secular elements in this joy of a jubilant city. A laborious

and dangerous task had been completed; the city had been fortified and made able

to defend itself against the horrors of an assault; there was a fair prospect of

comfort and perhaps even honour for the oppressed and despised citizens of

Jerusalem. But beyond all this and beneath it, doubtless many had discovered

�ehemiah’s great secret for themselves; they had found their strength in the joy of

the Lord. In face of heathenish pleasure and superstitious terrors it was much to

know that God expected His holy people to be happy, and more, to find that the

direct road to happiness was holiness. This was the best part of the joy which all the

people experienced with more or less thought and appreciation of its meaning. Joy is

contagious. Here was a city full of gladness. �ehemiah expressly takes note of the

fact that the women and children shared in the universal joy. They must have been

among the most pitiable sufferers in the previous calamities, and they had taken

their place in the great Ecclesia when The Law was read, and again when the sad

confession of the nation’s sin was poured forth. It was well that they should not be

left out of the later scene, when joy and praise filled the stage. For children

especially who would not covet this gladness in religion? It is only a miserable short-

sightedness that allows any one to put before children ideas of God and spiritual

things which must repel, because of their gloom and sternness. Let us reserve these

ideas for the castigation of Pharisees. A scene of joyous worship is truly typical of

the perfect City of God of which children are the typical citizens-the �ew Jerusalem

of whose inhabitants it is said, "God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes and

there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any

more pain, for the former things are passed away."

Lastly, following his extract from the memoirs of �ehemiah, the chronicler shows

how the glad spirit of this great day of dedication flowed out and manifested itself in

those engagements to which he was always delighted to turn-the Levitical services.

Thus the tithe-gathering and the temple psalmody were helped forward. The

gladness of religion is not confined to set services of public worship, but when those

services are held it must flood them with the music of praise. It is impossible for the

worship of God’s house to be limp and depressed when the souls of His children are

joyous and eager. A half-hearted, melancholy faith may be content with neglected

churches and slovenly services-but not a joyous religion which men and women love

and glory in. While "The joy of the Lord" has many happy effects on the world, it

also crowds churches, fills treasuries, sustains various ministries, inspires hymns of

praise, and brings life and vigour into all the work of religion.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:27. The preliminary statements regarding the priests and

Levites being ended, here begins the account of the dedication of the walls. Out of

all their places, for the Levites were scattered throughout the province (see

�ehemiah 11:3). To keep the dedication with gladness.—Instead of supposing a

preposition wanting, we may take sim‘hah as a concrete and read to keep the

dedication and festivity.

Psalteries and harps differed but slightly from one another. The nebel or psaltery

had more strings than the kinnor or harp. They both rather resembled our guitar

than our harp.

PULPIT, "DEDICATIO� OF THE WALL (�ehemiah 12:27-43). It is supposed by

some that the author ,has here departed from the chronological order, and gone

back to a date not much subsequent to the completion of the wall in September, b.c.

444, since the dedication of a work under ordinary circumstances follows closely

upon its accomplishment. But no reason has been shown for the actual place held by

the narrative in the Book upon this supposition, nor is it easy to imagine that the

author would have separated the dedication of the wall from its completion by five

chapters and a half, unless they had been separated in fact by an interval of some

duration. The interval seems, by the notes of time contained in �ehemiah 12:1-47;

�ehemiah 13:1-31; to have been one of nearly thirteen years. �ehemiah's religious

reforms were certainly subsequent to the visit that he paid to the Persian court in

B.C. 432 (�ehemiah 13:6). These reforms grew out of a reading of the law which

took place at the time when �ehemiah appointed the temple officers (�ehemiah

13:1), and that appointment followed closely on the dedication (�ehemiah 12:44).

We may account for the long delay by supposing that �ehemiah was afraid of

offending Artaxerxes if he ventured on a ceremony, to which the superstition of the

surrounding heathen may have attached extreme importance, without his express

permission, and that to obtain this permission his personal influence was necessary.

The dedication of a city wall was, so far as we know, a new thing in Israel; but it had

been customary from a remote time to dedicate houses (Deuteronomy 20:5); and

natural piety extended this practice to aggregations of houses, and to the limit or

fence by which they were practically made one. The priestly order had shown its

sense of the fitness of such a consecration when they raised their portion of the wall,

and had at once "sanctified it" (�ehemiah 3:1). �ehemiah now, by the ceremony

which he planned and carried out, placed the whole circuit of the wall under the

Divine protection, confessing in this solemn act the intrinsic worthlessness of mere

walls and bulwarks, unless God lends them strength and makes them a protection

against enemies.

�ehemiah 12:27

And at the dedication … they sought the Levites. The nexus of this passage seems to

be with �ehemiah 11:36; and we may suppose that originally it followed

immediately on �ehemiah 11:1-36.—the lists (�ehemiah 12:1-26) being a later

insertion. The author, having (in �ehemiah 11:36) told us of the wide dispersion of

the Levites, now notes that they were summoned from all the places where they

dwelt, and brought (one and all) to Jerusalem for the solemnity of the dedication. To

keep the dedication with gladness, both with thanksgiving and with singing, etc.

Solomon's dedication of the temple was the pattern followed. As he had made the

service altogether one of praise and thanksgiving (2 Chronicles 5:13), and had

employed in it cymbals, trumpets, psalteries, and harps (ibid. �ehemiah 11:12), so

�ehemiah on the present occasion.

28 The musicians also were brought together from the region around Jerusalem—from the villages of

the �etophathites,

BAR�ES, "The plain country round about Jerusalem - Perhaps the valleys of Hinnom and Jehoshaphat, which enclose Jerusalem on three sides, are intended.

The villages of Netophathi - Rather, as in 1Ch_9:16. Netophah lay near Bethlehem 1Ch_2:54, and is perhaps represented by the modern Antubeh.

GILL, "And the sons of the singers gathered themselves together,.... Such of the Levites that were singers, and their sons that were trained up as such:

both out of the plain country round about Jerusalem the plain of Jordan by Jericho, and the plain of Saron and Lydda:

and from the villages of Netophathi: see 1Ch_9:16, here they dwelt, when not in their courses, to minister in the temple; but on this public occasion were summoned together.

HE�RY 28-43, "We must observe with what solemnity it was performed, under the direction of Neh_1:1-11. The Levites from all parts of the country were summoned to attend. The city must be dedicated to God, and therefore his ministers must be employed in the dedicating of it, and the surrender must pass through their hands. When those solemn feasts were over (ch. 8 and 9) they went home to their respective posts, to mind their cures in the country; but now their presence and assistance were again called for. 2. Pursuant to this summons, there was a general rendezvous of all the Levites, Neh_12:28, Neh_12:29. Observe in what method they proceeded. (1.) They purified themselves,Neh_12:30. We are concerned to cleanse our hands, and purify our hearts, when any work for God is to pass through them. They purified themselves and then the people. Those that would be instrumental to sanctify others must sanctify themselves, and set themselves apart for God, with purity of mind and sincerity of intention. Then they purified the gates and the wall. Then may we expect comfort when we are prepared to receive it. To the pure all things are pure (Tit_1:15); and, to those who are sanctified, houses and tables, and all their creature comforts and enjoyments, are sanctified, 1Ti_4:4, 1Ti_4:5. This purification was performed, it is probable, by sprinkling the water of purifying (or of separation, as it is called, Num_19:9) on themselves and the people, the walls and the gates - a type of the blood of Christ, with which our consciences being purged from dead works, we become fit to serve the living God (Heb_9:14) and to be his care. (2.) The princes, priests, and Levites, walked round upon the wall in two companies, with musical instruments, to signify the dedication of it all to God, the whole circuit of it (Neh_12:36); so that it is likely they sung psalms as they went along, to the praise and glory of God. This procession is here largely described. They had a rendezvous at one certain lace, where they divided themselves into two companies. Half of the princes, with several priests and Levites, went on the right hand, Ezra leading their van, Neh_12:36. The other half of the princes and priests, who gave thanks likewise, went to the left hand, Nehemiah bringing up the rear, Neh_12:38. At length

both companies met in the temple, where they joined their thanksgivings, Neh_12:40. The crowd of people, it is likely, walked on the ground, some within the wall and others without, one end of this ceremony being to affect them with the mercy they were giving thanks for, and to perpetuate the remembrance of it among them. Processions, for such purposes, have their use. (3.) The people greatly rejoiced, Neh_12:43. While the princes, priests, and Levites, testified their joy and thankfulness by great sacrifices, sound of trumpet, musical instruments, and songs of praise, the common people testified theirs by loud shouts, which were heard afar off, further than the more harmonious sound of their songs and music: and these shouts, coming from a sincere and hearty joy, are here taken notice of; for God overlooks not, but graciously accepts, the honest zealous services of mean people, though there is in them little of art and they are far from being fine. It is observed that the women and children rejoiced; and their hosannas were not despised, but recorded to their praise. All that share in public mercies ought to join in public thanksgivings. The reason given is that God had made them rejoice with great joy. He had given them both matter for joy and hearts to rejoice; his providence had made them safe and easy, and then his grace made them cheerful and thankful. The baffled opposition of their enemies, no doubt, added to their joy and mixed triumph with it. Great mercies call for the most solemn returns of praise, in the courts of the Lord's house, in the midst of thee, O Jerusalem!

K&D, "Neh_12:28-29

And the sons of the singers, i.e., the members of the three Levitical companies of singers (comp. Neh_12:25 and Neh_11:17), gathered themselves together, both out of

the Jordan valley round about Jerusalem, and the villages (or fields, חצרים, comp. Lev_

25:31) of Netophathi, and from Beth-gilgal, etc. ה;;ר does not mean the district round Jerusalem, the immediate neighbourhood of the city (Bertheau). For, according to

established usage, ה;;ר is used to designate the Jordan valley (see rem. on Neh_3:22);

and ירושלים the whole extent of the valley of the - ,;;ר is here added to limit the סביבותJordan 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. 1Ch_9:16) 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 Jiljilia, 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 סביבות of Jerusalem. “And from the fields of Geba and Azmaveth.” With respect to Geba, see rem. on Neh_11:31. The situation of Azmaveth is unknown; see rem. on Ezr_2:24. 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.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:28-29

‘And the sons of the singers gathered themselves together, both out of the plain

round about Jerusalem (or ‘from the circle of Jerusalem’), and from the villages of

the �etophathites; also from Beth-gilgal, and out of the fields of Geba and

Azmaveth: for the singers had built themselves villages round about Jerusalem.

So the singers gathered themselves together both from the area circling around

Jerusalem, and from places round about. The villages of the �etophathites consisted

of the settlements around �etophah, generally thought to have been about 5

kilometres (3 miles) south-east of Bethlehem (see �ehemiah 7:26; 1 Chronicles 2:54;

Ezra 2:22), and thus south of Jerusalem. Beth-gilgal may well have been the well-

known Gilgal near Jericho, and therefore east of Jerusalem. Geba and Azmaveth

were Benjamite cities a few kilometres north east of Jerusalem. So they came from

all quarters, for the singers had established themselves in villages around

Jerusalem, in view of the necessity to provide for themselves (�ehemiah 13:10).

Some see ‘the circle’ as a technical term for part of the Jordan valley, and see in it a

reference to people living in the Jordan valley near Jerusalem.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:28. The sons of the singers.—Heb. Bené hamshorerim. That

is the guild or company of singers of the three great Levitical families of Asaph,

Heman and Jeduthun. The plain country round about Jerusalem.—Heb. hakkikkar

sevivoth yerushalayim. There is no plain country round about Jerusalem. The

kikkar must here be simply “circuit” (περίχωρος). Compare �ehemiah 12:29.

If kikkar is to have here its specific meaning of “the valley of Jordan” (as Keil

insists), then we must insert umin ‘hatzrê between hakkikkar and sevivoth (for an

omission likely to happen) and read “the valley of Jordan and from the villages

round about Jerusalem.” The idea that the valley of Jordan at Jericho could be said

to be sevivoth yerushalayim (round about Jerusalem) is absurd.

�etophathi, the gentile noun without article, seems to be for �etophah, a place near

Bethlehem ( �ehemiah 7:26). Beit �etif, which is fourteen miles west of Bethlehem,

seems too far off.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:28

The sons of the singers. i.e. the Levites who belonged to the class of singers (1

Chronicles 15:16-22; �ehemiah 7:44, etc.). The plain country round about

Jerusalem. Dean Stanley understands by this "the Jordan valley"; but that is a

district too remote to be intended by the words "round about Jerusalem." The

valleys of Hinnom and Jehoshaphat better suit the description. The villages of

�etophathi. Rather, "of the �etophathites" (see 1 Chronicles 9:16), or people of

�etophah, which was a country town not far from Bethlehem.

29 from Beth Gilgal, and from the area of Geba and Azmaveth, for the musicians had built villages for themselves around Jerusalem.

BAR�ES, "The house of Gilgal - Or, “Beth-Gilgal” - probably the Gilgal north of Jerusalem (now “Jiljilia).

CLARKE, "From the house of Gilgal, and out of the fields of Geba andAzmaveth - Or, from Beth-Gilgal; a village erected in the place where the Israelites encamped after they had, under the direction of Joshua, passed over Jordan.

GILL, "Also from the house of Gilgal,.... Which likewise was in a champaign country in the plains of Jericho, Deu_11:30,

and out of the fields of Geba; which was a Levitical city in the tribe of Benjamin, Jos_21:17

and Azmaveth; the same with Bethazmaveth, Neh_7:28 where it follows Anathoth and Netophah, as it does in Ezr_2:24, and was very probably in the tribe of Benjamin:

for the singers had builded them villages round about Jerusalem; that they might be near it, to do their duty when required; by which it appears that the said places were near Jerusalem.

BE�SO�, "Verse 29-30

�ehemiah 12:29-30. The singers had built them villages, &c. — That they might be

near at hand for the service of God and of his house. The priests and the Levites

purified themselves — By sprinkling the water of purification upon them, by which

the tabernacle and sacred utensils were purified; (�umbers 8:7;) by solemn prayers

and sacrifices; and especially by keeping themselves from all impurity. And purified

the people — By sprinkling, it is probable, the same water upon them, and by

prayers and sacrifices.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:29. And from the house of Gilgal.—Rather, and from Beth-

haggilgal or Beth-Gilgal. Although we should look for a Jiljilia or a Beit-Jiljilia for

the modern name of this place, yet as no such name occurs near Jerusalem, we may

suppose Beit-Jala close to Bethlehem to be the modern representative.

Geba is now Jeba, six or seven miles north of Jerusalem. Azmaveth is not identified.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:29

From the house of Gilgal. Rather, "from Beth-Gilgal," which was the name now

borne by the Gilgal due north of Jerusalem. Out of the fields of Geba. See above,

�ehemiah 11:31. And Azmaveth, Compare Ezra 2:24; �ehemiah 7:28. Azmaveth

was a Benjamite town, not far from Anathoth. The singers had built themselves

villages round Jerusalem. Such of the singers as were not located in Jerusalem itself

fixed their dwellings in the immediate neighbourhood, in order the more readily to

attend the temple service.

30 When the priests and Levites had purified themselves ceremonially, they purified the people, the gates and the wall.

CLARKE, "The priests and the Levites purified themselves - This consisted in washings, abstinence from wine, and other matters, which, on all other occasions, were lawful. And as to the purifying of the gates and the walls, nothing was requisite but to remove all filth from the former, and all rubbish that might have been laid against the latter.

GILL, "And the priests and the Levites purified themselves,.... By washing their bodies and their clothes, perhaps by sprinkling the water of purification on them, see Num_8:6.

K&D, "Neh_12:30

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 2Ch_29:20, 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 (Neh_12:31-42).

PETT, "The Preparatory Purifying Of All Involved (�ehemiah 12:30).

The presence of the priests is assumed. For unlike the Levites, who were dependent

on the then non-existent tithes (�ehemiah 13:10), the priests would have been

continually provided for from their appointed share in the offerings and sacrifices.

All would be involved because now a great purification exercise was necessary. This

was to be the holy city.

�ehemiah 12:30

‘And the priests and the Levites purified themselves; and they purified the people,

and the gates, and the wall.’

So the Levites having gathered from their towns and villages, the priests and Levites

purified themselves. We do not know exactly how this purification was performed,

but it might have included such means as offering sacrifices and offerings; bathing

themselves ceremonially; being sprinkled with the water of purification (water

containing the ashes of a heifer - �umbers 19); washing their clothes; and

abstaining from sexual activity (compare Exodus 19:10; Exodus 19:14-15; Leviticus

16:28; �umbers 8:6-8; �umbers 8:19).

They then proceeded to purify the people, possibly by offerings and sacrifices

(compare Exodus 24:8), and the wall and gates of the city (compare possibly

Leviticus 14:49-53). This latter was confirmation that the city was now seen in a new

light. Their hope was that the kingdom of God was now present among them

(Psalms 22:27-28; Psalms 47:8 compare Haggai 2:22). The King reigned (Psalms

93:1; Psalms 97:1; Psalms 99:1). They believed that a purified Jerusalem would be

the beginning of great things as YHWH acted on their behalf. So they were putting

on its beautiful garments, with the intention of its remaining pure (Isaiah 52:1). This

is the emphasis of this section. The purification of the people would have followed a

similar pattern to that of the purifying of priests and Levites, although not being as

intensive. The purification of the gates and the wall may have followed the pattern

of the purification of buildings and have been by the sprinkling of blood-sprinkled

water, and the releasing of birds (Leviticus 14:49-53).

Then, all being purified, there began the great ceremony of praise and thanksgiving.

In a sense Jerusalem was seen as reborn.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:30

The priests and the Levites purified themselves. On this occasion there is no

preference of the Levites over the priests, as in 2 Chronicles 29:34 and Ezra 6:20.

Both classes were, it would seem, equally zealous, and equally forward to purify

themselves. And the gates and wall. Inanimate things might contract legal

defilement (Deuteronomy 23:14; Le 14:34-53). In case either the wall or the gates

should be in any such way unclean, they were made to undergo a legal purification

before the ceremony of the dedication began.

31 I had the leaders of Judah go up on top of[e] the wall. I also assigned two large choirs to give thanks. One was to proceed on top of[f] the wall to the right, toward the Dung Gate.

BAR�ES, "I brought up - Note the resumption of the first person, which has been laid aside since Neh_7:5, and which is confirmed now to the end of the book. It is generally allowed that we have here once more a memoir by Nehemiah himself.

The two “companies” or choirs, having ascended the wall on its western face, near the modern Jaffa Gate, stood looking eastward toward the city and temple; then the southern choir, being on the right, commenced the circuit of the southern wall, while the choir upon the left proceeded round the northern wall Neh_12:38-39, until both met on the eastern wall, between the water and the prison gates.

CLARKE, "Then I brought up the princes - Perhaps this verse should be read thus: “Then I caused the princes of Judah to go upon the wall, and appointed two great choirs, [to sing praises], and two processions, one on the right hand, etc.

The following seems to have been the order of the procession: he divided the priests, the Levites, the magistrates, and the people into two companies; each company to go round one half of the wall. They began at the dung gate, one party going to the right and the other to the left, till they met at the great space opposite to the temple, where they all offered many sacrifices to God, and rejoiced with exceeding great joy; shouting so that the noise was heard a great way off.

GILL, "Then I brought up the princes of Judah upon the wall,.... Which was so broad as to walk upon it, and there was a procession of the princes on it at its dedication, and here is described the manner of it; the princes of Benjamin must be included here:

and appointed two great companies of them that gave thanks; he divided the people who were met together to praise God on this occasion into two companies: whereof

one went on the right hand upon the wall; that is, on the southern part of it:

towards the dung gate; of which see Neh_2:13 some Jewish writers, as Jarchi and

Ben Melech, give a different sense of שתי�תודות, which we render "two companies", and take them to be two eucharistical loaves of leavened bread, with which a rite or ceremony was performed at the enlargement of a court or city; at the utmost boundary of which those were carried, and one was eaten and the other burnt (r); which rite is thus described by Maimonides (s),"how do they add to a city? the sanhedrim make two eucharistical sacrifices, and they take the leavened bread in them, and the sanhedrim go after the two eucharistical sacrifices, which follow one another, and they stand with harps, and psalteries, and cymbals, at every corner and at every stone in Jerusalem, and say, I will extol thee, for thou hast lifted up, &c. (#Ps 30:1) until they come to the end of the place they consecrate, there they stand and eat the thanksgiving loaf, one of the two, and the other is burnt.''

K&D, "Neh_12:31-34

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 יהודים, Neh_4:2. לחומה .upwards to the wall, so that they stood upon the wall ,מעל

to place, i.e., to cause to take up a position, so that those assembled formed two ,העמיד

companies or processions. תודה, acknowledgement, 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 Neh_12:31, Neh_12:38,

Neh_12:40. ותהלכת, et processiones, solemn processions, is added more closely to define

,The company of those who gave thanks consisted of a number of Levitical singers .תודהbehind whom walked the princes of the people, the priests, and Levites. At the head of one procession went Ezra the scribe (Neh_12:36), with one half of the nobles; at the head of the second, Nehemiah with the other half (Neh_12:38). The one company and

procession went to the right upon the wall. Before ל מין we must supply, “one band went”

הולכת) ה<חת as is evident partly from the context of the present verse, partly from ,(ה:ודהNeh_12:38. These words were probably omitted by a clerical error caused by the

similarity of הלכת: to הולכת. Thus the first procession went to the right, i.e., in a southerly direction, upon the wall towards the dung-gate (see rem. on Neh_3:14); the second,

Neh_12:38, went over against the first (למאל), 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 Neh_2:13). Before a further description of the route taken by the first company, the individuals composing the procession which followed it are enumerated in Neh_12:32-36. 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 Neh_12:33 and Neh_12:34 are undoubtedly

the names of the princes, and the ו before עזריה 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, Neh_10:2; Neh_12:1; Meshullam, Neh_10:7; Shemaiah, Neh_10:8and Neh_12:6; and Jeremiah, Neh_12:1. 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. Neh_12:38, which

is said to give rise to this view, by no means confirms it. It is true that in this verse העם

besides Nehemiah, are stated to have followed the company of those who gave ,חצי

thanks; but that העם 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 Neh_12:40, where העם is replaced by ה@גנים while, beside the half of ;חציthe rulers, with Nehemiah, only priests with trumpets and Levites with stringed instruments (Neh_12:41) are enumerated as composing the second procession. Since, then, the priests with trumpets and Levites with musical instruments are mentioned in the first procession (Neh_12:35 and Neh_12:36), the names enumerated in Neh_12:33

and Neh_12:34 can be only those of the one half of the סגנים 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 Neh_12:33 and Neh_12:34. 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 Neh_3:23; Ezra, as of the tribe of Judah, 1Ch_4:17; Meshullam, Neh_3:4; Neh_10:21, and elsewhere; Shemaiah, Ezr_6:13; Ezr_10:31; 1Ch_3:22; 1Ch_4:37 (of Judah), 1Ch_5:4 (a Reubenite), and other passages (this name being very usual; comp. Simonis Onomast. p. 546); Jeremiah, 1Ch_5:24 (a Manassite), Neh_12:4 (a Benjamite), Neh_12:10 (a Gadite). Even the name Judah is met with among the priests (Neh_12:36), and among the Levites, Neh_12:8, comp. also Neh_11:9, and that of Benjamin, Neh_3:23 and Ezr_10:32. In the present verses, the two names are not those of tribes, but of individuals, nomina duorum principum (R. Sal.).

PETT, "Verses 31-37

The Composition Of The First Company Who Went Towards The Dung Gate, The

Fountain Gate And The Stairs Of David (�ehemiah 12:31-37).

It is almost certain that the processions commenced from the Valley Gate, through

which �ehemiah had previously gone to examine the walls of Jerusalem (�ehemiah

2:13). This was in the West wall, and was roughly equidistant from the East gate of

the Temple which would be the final destination, both when going round the wall

clockwise and when going round anticlockwise. This is confirmed by the fact that

the first procession then proceeded towards the Dung Gate which was at the

southern end of Jerusalem (�ehemiah 12:31 b), whilst the other procession moved

towards the tower of the furnaces, and the broad wall (�ehemiah 12:38), which

were northwards of the Valley Gate. For the relevant geography see chapter 3,

especially �ehemiah 12:11-14.

Such giving of praise to YHWH as they walked around the wall of Jerusalem was

not unique to this occasion. Psalms 48:12-14 may be seen as suggesting that such

processions regularly took place on some festal occasions;

‘Walk about Zion,

And go round about her,

Count her towers,

Mark well her bulwarks,

Consider her palaces,

That you may tell it to the following generation,

For this God is our God for ever and ever,

He will be our guide even unto death.’

It will be noted that the purpose for doing this in the Psalmist’s case was so that they

might be aware of what God had done for them in order that they might proclaim

His glory to others. They were surrounding Jerusalem with praise, thereby calling

down God’s blessing on it.

�ehemiah 12:31

‘Then I brought up the princes of Judah on (or ‘beside’) the wall,’

�ehemiah now returns to the first person singular as he continues on the story of

the completion of the wall with a description of this final act of dedication. The last

reference in the first person singular was �ehemiah 7:5 but that had included the

details provided in �ehemiah 7:6-73. In chapter �ehemiah 8:1 to �ehemiah 12:30

he is referred to in the third person. But that does not necessarily mean that he did

not write the whole book, only that the material in that section was obtained from

different records available to him rather than from his own account of the building

of the wall, records which he did not materially alter.

Here he describes how he gathered ‘the princes of Judah’ to the wall in order to

commence the celebration. This refers not only to the aristocrats of the tribe of

Judah, but to all leaders of the nation in wider Judah, including Benjamin. He was

gathering together the aristocrats of the whole nation, a nation which as we have

seen, extended far beyond the Persian province of Judah. Whether they gathered on

the wall and proceeded to march round the top of the wall, or gathered beside the

wall and marched round the walls in that way, we do not know. The Hebrew text

can indicate either.

�ehemiah 12:31

And I appointed two great companies who gave thanks and went in procession; (of

which one went) on the right hand on the wall toward the dung gate:’

Gathered with the aristocrats were the singers and musicians who had been

summoned, and the whole were divided into two groups each of which would march

in the opposite direction to the other, one anticlockwise, the other clockwise, giving

thanks musically as they marched. One of the groups thus initially marched

southwards in the direction of the Dung Gate. It would appear that the singers and

musicians led the way, praising God as they went, and that these were followed by

Hoshaiah and half the aristocrats of Judah. These included seven leading priests

(including Ezra) who blew their priestly trumpets (an instrument exclusive to the

priests). It would have been a stirring and moving sight. The other group, following

a similar pattern, went northwards towards the tower of the furnaces and the broad

wall.

PETT, "Verses 31-43

Those Taking Part In The Ceremony Are Divided Into Two Great Companies Who

Proceed To Circumnavigate The Wall, One Company Going One Way And The

Other Company The Other (�ehemiah 12:31-43).

�ehemiah now divided the representatives of Judah (i.e. the new Israel) into two

great companies who together would give thanks as they circumnavigated the wall,

one company going one way and the other the other. We cannot be sure whether

they actually walked on top of the wall, or whether they walked alongside the wall

(the Hebrew is not clear on this). But while the details may not be fully clear the

ceremony followed an established pattern:

· First in each case went a company of those who gave thanks (�ehemiah

12:31; �ehemiah 12:38). These may well have been composed of the singers and

musicians who had been gathered together as previously described in �ehemiah

12:27-29.

· These were then followed, in the one case by Hoshaiah (�ehemiah 12:32),

and in the other by �ehemiah ( �ehemiah 12:38; �ehemiah 12:40). Hoshaiah was

clearly a man of great importance, a leader of the Jews, possibly deputy to

�ehemiah.

· Hoshaiah was then followed by half the ‘princes’ of Judah (�ehemiah 12:32),

and �ehemiah by the other half (�ehemiah 12:40). By the princes of Judah are

meant, not the leaders of that tribe, but the aristocrats of greater Judah, including

Benjamin. They included the aristocrats and clan leaders of the whole community of

the new Israel.

· These were then followed in each case by seven prominent named priests,

possibly accompanied by other priests, who blew the trumpets (�ehemiah 12:33-35

a, 41).

· After them came the leading named Chief Musicians, Zechariah (�ehemiah

12:35 b) and possibly Jezrahiah (�ehemiah 12:42), who in each case were

accompanied by eight leading Levitical musicians singing loudly (�ehemiah 12:36;

�ehemiah 12:42).

COFFMA�, "Verse 31

THE GRA�D PROCESSIO� ATOP THE WALL TO THE TEMPLE

"Then I brought up the princes of Judah upon the wall, and appointed two great

companies which gave thanks and went in procession. One went to the right upon

the wall to the Dung Gate; and after them went Hosahaiah and half of the princes of

Judah, and Azariah, Ezra, Meshullam, Judah, Benjamin, Shemaiah, Jeremiah, and

certain of the priests' sons with trumpets: Zechariah the son of Jonathan, son of

Shemaiah, son of Mattaniah, son of Micaiah, son of Zaccur, son of Asaph; and his

kinsmen, Shemaiah, Azarel, Milalai, Gilalai, Maai, �ethanel, Judah, and Hanani,

with musical instruments of David the man of God; and Ezra the scribe went before

them. At the Fountain Gate they went up straight before them by the stairs of the

city of David, at the ascent of the wall, above the house of David, to the Water Gate

on the east."

"Upon the wall ... upon the wall" (�ehemiah 12:31). Many of the older scholars

thought that the grand processions, one moving clockwise, the other counter

clockwise, circled the wall around the city, walking on the ground; but the text here

flatly declares that they marched atop the wall. This is to be trusted as the way it

happened. Excavations by Kathleen Kenyon in Jerusalem have indicated that,

"�ehemiah's wall was nine feet wide."[13] As Hamrick noted, "That was ample

room for a procession to move along the top of it."[14] (Our map, p. 138, will show

how the processions proceeded.)

These verses concern only half the procession; there were two, one led by Ezra the

priest the scribe, and the other by the governor �ehemiah. Both began in the area

between the Dung Gate and the Valley Gate, Ezra moving northward around the

eastern wall of the city, and �ehemiah and his procession heading northward

around the western wall, both processions coming together in the vicinity of the

temple.

BE�SO�, "Verses 31-33

�ehemiah 12:31-33. Then I brought up the princes — And half of the people with

them, as it is expressed afterward, �ehemiah 12:38. Upon the wall — For the wall

was broad and strong, and so built that men might conveniently walk upon it, as at

this day it is in many cities. Whereof one went on the right hand — Toward the

south and east. Azariah and Ezra — �ot the scribe, as is evident from �ehemiah

12:36, but another Ezra.

CO�STABLE, "Verses 31-47

2. The dedication ceremonies12:31-47

One large choir mounted the city wall and walked around it counterclockwise,

evidently beginning at the Valley Gate ( �ehemiah 12:31-37). Another choir

mounted it, probably at the same place, and proceeded in a clockwise direction (

�ehemiah 12:38-39). Both groups appear to have sung as they walked ( �ehemiah

12:42). They met at the temple ( �ehemiah 12:40-42). There the priests offered many

sacrifices and the people rejoiced greatly ( �ehemiah 12:43). This was the same wall

that Tobiah had earlier claimed would be so weak that even a fox walking on it

would break it down ( �ehemiah 4:3)!

"The final consummation of �ehemiah"s work had been reached. The city was

protected by a wall and could resist any attempt of the neighboring nations to attack

it. This was one of the main reasons for the joy. The other was that the people had

demonstrated that they could perform a major task as a unit, and this proved to be

a great stimulus to their morale." [�ote: Fensham, pp257-58.]

�ehemiah also reestablished the temple service as David had organized it (

�ehemiah 12:44-47). He did for the second temple what David had done for the first

temple.

This was the greatest day in the history of the restoration community. Israel was

now back in the land more securely and scripturally than it had been since the first

exiles had returned. �ehemiah had succeeded in rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem,

reestablishing the Mosaic Law as Israel"s authority, and reorganizing the temple

ministry in harmony with God"s will.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:31. Read literally, appointed two great thanksgivings, i, e,

two great thanksgiving-companies. Perhaps the thodhoth in �ehemiah 12:27 has

this concrete meaning.

Judah is used in this verse for the whole people of Israel.

Whereof one went on the right hand.—Literally, and processions on the right hand.

The whole passage should read, and appointed two thanksgiving- companies and

processions. On the right hand, etc. (i.e., the one on the right hand).

Although it is not mentioned, yet it is clear that the two processions started at the

valley-gate, the same at which �ehemiah had started to examine the ruined walls of

the city on his arrival ( �ehemiah 2:13). The valley-gate was at or south of the

present Jaffa Gate (see on �ehemiah 2:13). Dung-gate.—(See l. c.)

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:31

I brought up the princes of Judah upon the wall, and appointed two great

companies. �ehemiah caused all the chiefs of the nation, both lay and clerical, to

mount upon the wall, and there marshalled them into two companies, composed of

clergy and laity intermixed, one of which he placed under the direction of Ezra

(verse 36), while of the other he took the command himself (verse 38). The place of

assemblage must have been some portion of the western wall, probably the central

portion, near the modern Jaffa gate. From this Ezra's company proceeded

southward, and then eastward, along the southern wall, while �ehemiah's marched

northward, and then eastward, along the northern wall, both processions meeting

midway in the eastern wall, between the "water" and the "prison" gates. Toward

the dung gate. On the position of this gate, see the comment on �ehemiah 2:13.

32 Hoshaiah and half the leaders of Judah followed them,

GILL, "And after them went Hoshaiah, and half of the princes of Judah. The other half of them, with Hoshaiah at the head of them.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:32

‘And after them went Hoshaiah, and half of the princes of Judah,’

We do not know who Hoshaiah was. He was clearly one of the chief leaders of

Judah, and possibly deputy to �ehemiah himself. Following him was the group

consisting of half the aristocrats of ‘Judah’. But it is a nice touch that, whilst we

learn later that Ezra led the procession (�ehemiah 12:36), no doubt as an official

appointee of the King of Persia, here we are informed that the aristocrats were led

by a high official of Judah

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:32-34. There followed the one thanksgiving company of

Levites to the right (i.e., to the South) one-half the princes of Judah (i.e., chiefs of

the entire Jewish people) with Hoshaiah at their head. The names in �ehemiah

12:33-34 are the names of these princes. The names of Judah and Benjamin are not

the tribal names.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:32

After them. After the singers, who in each procession took the lead. Hoshaiah is

perhaps the "Hoshea" of �ehemiah 10:23, who "sealed to" the covenant. Half the

princes of Judah. The other half were with �ehemiah in the other "company" (verse

40).

33 along with Azariah, Ezra, Meshullam,

GILL, "And Azariah, Ezra, and Meshullam. Not Ezra the priest and the scribe, for he has another place assigned him in this procession, Neh_12:36, but this seems to be one of the princes.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:33-35

‘And Azariah, Ezra, and Meshullam, Judah, and Benjamin, and Shemaiah, and

Jeremiah, and certain of the priests’ sons, with trumpets.’

And along with them marched seven leading priests, together with other priests

(unless we translate as ‘even certain of the priests’ sons’, the phrase being

explicatory of the seven), all blowing sacred trumpets. The names of the seven are

given, and as there were also seven in the other party (�ehemiah 12:41) we have no

real reason to doubt the accuracy of the report. Azariah, Meshullam, Shemaiah and

Jeremiah were also named as signatories of the covenant of �ehemiah (�ehemiah

10:2; �ehemiah 10:7-8). Ezra we know of (see also �ehemiah 12:36 b) and he is

presumably mentioned after Azariah (a parallel name to Ezra) because of Azariah’s

superior status in the priestly hierarchy. There is no reason why Judah and

Benjamin should not have been the names of priests, although they are not

mentioned elsewhere as priests. But whilst Ezra is named as second in status from a

priestly point of view (he came from a noble priestly family) it was he who led the

way as the official representative of the King of Persia (�ehemiah 12:36).

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:33, �ehemiah 12:34

Azariah, Ezra, and Meshullam. �ext to the "princes" came two priestly families—

those of Azariah (or Ezra) and Meshullam (ch. x, 2, 7); then Judah and Benjamin,

or certain lay people of those tribes; after them two other priestly families—those of

Shemaiah and Jeremiah (�ehemiah 10:2, �ehemiah 10:8; �ehemiah 12:1, �ehemiah

12:6).

34 Judah, Benjamin, Shemaiah, Jeremiah,

BAR�ES, "“Judah and Benjamin” are the lay people of those two tribes.

GILL, "Judah and Benjamin,.... Not the tribes, but the names of the two princes, as Jarchi:

and Shemaiah and Jeremiah; who were two others.

35 as well as some priests with trumpets, and also Zechariah son of Jonathan, the son of Shemaiah, the son of Mattaniah, the son of Micaiah, the son of Zakkur, the son of Asaph,

GILL, "And certain of the priests' sons with trumpets,.... To blow with on this occasion; for these the priests sounded: namely:

Zechariah the son of Jonathan, the son of Shemaiah, the son of Mattaniah, the son of Michaiah, the son of Zaccur, the son of Asaph; not the Levite, but a priest of this name.

K&D, "Neh_12:35-36

The princes of the congregation were followed by certain “of the sons of the priests” (seven in number, to judge from Neh_12:41) with trumpets; also by Jonathan the son of

Zechariah, who, as appears from the subsequent ואחיו, was at the head of the Levitical musicians, i.e., the section of them that followed this procession. His brethren, i.e., the musicians of his section, are enumerated in Neh_12:36, - eight names being given, among which are a Shemaiah and a Judah. “With the musical instruments of David, the man of God:” comp. 2Ch_29:26; 1Ch_15:16; 1Ch_23:5; Ezr_3:10. “And Ezra the scribe before them,” viz., before the individuals enumerated from Neh_12:32, immediately after the company of those who gave thanks, and before the princes, like Nehemiah, Neh_12:38.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:35-36

‘Zechariah the son of Jonathan, the son of Shemaiah, the son of Mattaniah, the son

of Micaiah, the son of Zaccur, the son of Asaph; and his brothers, Shemaiah, and

Azarel, Milalai, Gilalai, Maai, �ethanel, and Judah, Hanani, with the musical

instruments of David the man of God,’

Following the aristocrats and the priests came the chiefs of the singers and

musicians, nine in number. These bore the kind of musical instruments

prophetically validated by David, as a ‘man of God’, for worship. This included

Zechariah, the son of Jonathan, whose ancestry traced back to Asaph, the leading

musician in David’s day, together with eight other named leading Levites. Their

names are given. The fact that none are specifically paralleled among the signatories

to the covenant in �ehemiah 10:9-13 suggests that there they had signed the

covenant in the name of their wider Levite family and not in their own name. It will

be noted that there were seventeen Levite families who signed the covenant, whilst

in these processions there were eighteen leading Levites. A leading Levite who was

not a head of family must presumably have been co-opted in order to even out the

numbers. (But see in this regard the comment on �ehemiah 12:42)

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:35. And certain of the priests’ sons with trumpets.—This

should close a section, as the names that follow are not of priests but of Levites. The

priests’ names have probably dropped out. In the corresponding list of the other

procession the priests’ names are given (see �ehemiah 12:41). Priests’ Sons,i.e., sons

of the priests, i.e., priests.

Zechariah, an Asaphite, is leader of those who bear the Davidic instruments of

music.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:35

Certain of the priests' sons with trumpets. Compare �ehemiah 12:41. A body of

priests, who blew trumpets, accompanied each procession, following closely upon

the "princes," and followed by a body of Levites. �amely, Zechariah. There is

nothing corresponding to "namely" in the original; and it is clear that Zechariah

was not a "priest's son," but a Levite, since he was descended from Asaph. Probably

a vau conjunctive has fallen out before his name.

36 and his associates—Shemaiah, Azarel, Milalai, Gilalai, Maai, �ethanel, Judah and Hanani—with musical instruments prescribed by David the man of God. Ezra the teacher of the Law led the procession.

GILL, "And his brethren,.... The brethren of Zechariah, the priest's son, and such are those that follow:

Shemaiah, and Azarael, Milalai, Gilalai, Maai, Nethaneel, and Judah, Hanani, with the musical instruments of David the man of God; which were invented by him, and ordered by him to be used in religious service, under the divine direction:

and Ezra the scribe before them; for he being a priest also, and a man of great eminence, was placed at the head of them in this procession.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:36

‘And Ezra the scribe was before them.’

Leading the procession, and the aristocrats and chief priests, but probably following

the leading singers, came Ezra the Scribe (already mentioned in �ehemiah 12:33),

no doubt due to his official position as an appointee of the King of Persia. Whilst

Azariah was superior in the priestly hierarchy he was lower than Ezra in political

status. He may well have marched alongside Hoshaiah.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:36. Zechariah had eight with him, as Jezrahiah had eight

with him in the other band (see �ehemiah 12:42).

Ezra the scribe went before all except the thanksgiving-company of �ehemiah

12:31, just as �ehemiah took this position in the other band (see �ehemiah 12:38;

�ehemiah 12:40).

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:36

The musical instruments of David. Cymbals, psalteries, and harps. See above,

�ehemiah 12:27, and comp. 1 Chronicles 15:16, 1 Chronicles 15:19-21. The Jews

had become acquainted with a great variety of musical instruments during the

captivity (Daniel 3:7; Psalms 150:4, Psalms 150:5), but rigidly excluded all except

the old instruments from the service of religion. Ezra the scribe before them. As

their leader. It is interesting to find no jealousy separating Ezra from the governor

who had superseded him. As the two conjointly had addressed the people on a

former occasion (�ehemiah 8:9), so now they conjointly conducted the ceremony of

the dedication.

37 At the Fountain Gate they continued directly up the steps of the City of David on the ascent to the wall and passed above the site of David’s palace to the Water Gate on the east.

BAR�ES, "Above the house of David - This choir or procession went above (or beyond) the old palace of David, following the line described in Neh_3:16-26, on their way to the eastern wall.

GILL, "And at the fountain gate, which was over against them,.... Of which see Neh_2:14 and which was to the south of the dung gate:

they went up; that is, one of the two companies, that which took to the right on the wall, Neh_12:31 with which these words are to be connected:

by the stairs of the city of David; which went up to the city of Zion, built on an eminence:

at the going up of the wall, above the house of David; where the wall was higher, and there was an ascent to it:

even unto the water gate eastward; of which see Neh_3:26 turning from the south to the east, and so drew nigh the temple.

K&D 37-42, "Neh_12:37-42

After this insertion of the names of the persons who composed the procession, the description of the route it took is continued. From “upon the wall, towards the dung-gate

(Neh_12:31), it passed on” to the fountain-gate; and ם� before them (i.e., going straight ,נגforwards; comp. Jos_6:5, Jos_6:20; Amo_4:3), they went up by the stairs of the city of David, the ascent of the wall, up over the house of David, even unto the water-gate eastward. These statements are not quite intelligible to us. The stairs of the city of David are undoubtedly “the stairs that lead down from the city of David” (Neh_3:15). These lay

on the eastern slope of Zion, above the fountain-gate and the Pool of Siloam. לחומה ה6עלהmight be literally translated “the ascent to the wall,” as by Bertheau, who takes the sense as follows: (The procession) went up upon the wall by the ascent formed by these steps at the northern part of the eastern side of Zion. According to this, the procession would have left the wall by the stairs at the eastern declivity of Zion, to go up upon the wall again by this ascent. There is, however, no reason for this leaving of the wall, and that

which Bertheau adduces is connected with his erroneous transposition of the fountain-

gate to the place of the present dung-gate. לחומה seems to be the part of the wall ה6עלה

which, according to Neh_3:19, lay opposite the ה6קצוע� ה%שק a place on the eastern ,עלתedge of Zion, where the wall was carried over an elevation of the ground, and where consequently was an ascent in the wall. Certainly this cannot be insisted upon, because

the further statement דויד לבית ל� is obscure, the preposition מעל admitting of various מעלinterpretations, and the situation of the house of David being uncertain. Bertheau,

indeed, says: “ועד in the following words corresponds with מעל before דויד a wall :לביתover the house of David is not intended; and the meaning is rather, that after they were come as far as the wall, they then passed over the house of David, i.e., the place called

the house of David, even to the water-gate.” But the separation of מעל from דויד is לבית

decidedly incorrect, ל� being in the preceding and following passages always used in מעלcombination, and forming one idea: comp. Neh_12:31 (twice) and Neh_12:38 and Neh_12:39. Hence it could scarcely be taken here in Neh_12:37 in a different sense from that which it has in Neh_12:31 and Neh_12:38. Not less objectionable is the notion that the house of David is here put for a place called the house of David, on which a palace of David formerly stood, and where perhaps the remains of an ancient royal building might still have been in existence. By the house of David is meant, either the royal palace built (according to Thenius) by Solomon at the north-eastern corner of Zion, opposite the temple, or some other building of David, situate south of this palace, on the east side of

Zion. The former view is more probable than the latter. We translate לבית ד past the ,מעל

house of David. For, though לחומה must undoubtedly be so understood as to express מעלthat the procession went upon the wall (which must be conceived of as tolerably broad),

yet ל�למג Neh_12:38, can scarcely mean that the procession also went up over the ,מעל

tower which stood near the wall. In the case of the gates, too, ל� cannot mean over מעלupon; for it is inconceivable that this solemn procession should have gone over the roof of the gates; and we conclude, on the contrary, that it passed beside the gates and towers. Whether the route taken by the procession from the house of David to the water-gate in the east were straight over the ridge of Ophel, which ran from about the horse-gate to the water-gate, or upon the wall round Ophel, cannot be determined, the description being incomplete. After the house of David, no further information as to its course is given; its halting-place, the water-gate, being alone mentioned.

The route taken by the second company is more particularly described. - Neh_12:38and Neh_12:39. “And the second company of them that gave thanks, which went over against, and which I and the (other) half of the people followed, (went) upon the wall past the tower of the furnaces, as far as the broad wall; and past the gate of Ephraim, and past the gate of the old (wall), and past the fish-gate, and past the tower Hananeel and the tower Hammeah, even to the sheep-gate: and then took up its station at the

prison-gate.” למואל (in the form with א only here; elsewhere מול, Deu_1:1, or מול), over against, opposite, sc. the first procession, therefore towards the opposite side, i.e., to the left; the first having gone to the right, viz., from the valley-gate northwards upon the

northern wall. וגו <חריה� is a circumstantial clause, which we may (and I behind them) ואניtake relatively. The order of the towers, the lengths of wall, and the gates, exactly answer to the description in Neh_3:1-12, with these differences: - a. The description proceeds from the sheep-gate in the east to the valley-gate in the west; while the procession

moved in the opposite direction, viz., from the valley-gate to the sheep-gate. b. In the description of the building of the wall, Neh 3, the gate of Ephraim is omitted (see rem. on Neh_3:8). c. In the description, the prison-gate at which the procession halted is also unmentioned, undoubtedly for the same reason as that the gate of Ephraim is omitted,

viz., that not having been destroyed, there was no need to rebuild it. רהB6ה is שערtranslated, gate of the prison or watch: its position is disputed; but it can scarcely be

doubted that רהB6ה is the court of the prison mentioned Neh_3:25 הB6רה) by or ,(חצרnear the king's house. Starting from the assumption that the two companies halted or took up positions opposite each other, Hupfeld (in his before-cited work, p. 321) transposes both the court of the prison and the king's house to the north of the temple

area, where the citadel. 4ירה, βDρις, was subsequently situated. But “this being forbidden,” as Arnold objects (in his before-cited work, p. 628), “by the order in the description of the building of the wall, Neh_3:25, which brings us absolutely to the southern side,” Bertheau supposes that the two processions which would arrive at the same moment at the temple, - the one from the north-east, the other from the south-east, - here passed each other, and afterwards halted opposite each other in such wise, that the procession advancing from the south-west stood on the northern side, and that from the north-west at the southern side of the temple area. This notion, however, having not the slightest support from the text, nor any reason appearing why the one procession should pass the other, it must be regarded as a mere expedient. In Neh_12:40 it is merely said, the two companies stood in the house of God; and not even that they stood opposite each other, the one on the north, the other on the south side of the temple. Thus they may have stood side by side, and together have praised the Lord. Hence we place the prison-gate also on the south-eastern corner of the temple area, and explain the name from the circumstance that a street ran from this gate over Ophel to the court of the prison near the king's house upon Zion, which, together with the gate to which it led, received its name from the court of the prison. Not far from the prison-gate lay the water-gate in the east, near which was an open space in the direction of the temple area (Neh_8:1). On this open space the two companies met, and took the direction towards the temple, entering the temple area from this open space, that they might offer their thank-offerings before the altar of burnt-offering (Neh_12:43). Besides, the remark upon the position of the two companies (Neh_12:40) anticipates the course of events, the procession following the second company being first described in Neh_12:40-42. At the end of Neh_12:40 the statement of Neh_12:38 - I and the half of the people behind - is again taken up in the words: I and the half of the rulers with me. The

are, as in Neh_12:32, the princes of the congregation, who, with Nehemiah, headed סגניםthe procession that followed the company of those who gave thanks. Then followed (Neh_12:41) seven priests with trumpets, whose names are given, answering to the sons of the priests with trumpets (Neh_12:36) in the first procession. These names are all met with elsewhere of other persons. These were succeeded, as in Neh_12:36, by eight Levites - eight individuals, and not eight divisions (Bertheau). And the singers gave forth sound, i.e., of voices and instruments, - whether during the circuit or after the two companies had take their places at the temple, is doubtful. The president of the Levitical singers was Jezrahiah.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:37

‘And by the fountain gate, and straight before them, they went up by the stairs of

the city of David, at the ascent of the wall, above the house of David, even unto the

water gate eastward.’

Having reached the Dung Gate, this procession rounded the southernmost point of

Jerusalem and then proceeded northwards up the eastern side of the wall, coming

first to the fountain gate, and then to the stairs of the city of David (�ehemiah 3:15).

Marching onwards they came to the part of the wall by the one-time palace of

David, and then to the water gate (�ehemiah 3:25-26). These were all well-known

landmarks. The assumption must be that from there they proceeded to the Temple.

The part of the wall from here to the sheep gate (the gate through which the other

procession entered) does not appear to have featured in either procession,

discounting the idea that a strict attempt was made to encircle Jerusalem for some

numinous or quasi-magical purpose.

BE�SO�, "Verse 37-38

�ehemiah 12:37-38. By the stairs of the city of David — By which they went up to

the hill of Zion and the city of David. The other company that gave thanks went

over against them — �amely, on the other side of the city, northward and eastward.

Even unto the broad wall — Which they had made thicker and stronger than the

rest of the wall, for some special reason.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:37. The fountain-gate we believe to have been near the pool

of Siloam, and the water-gate to have been an interior gate not far from the present

south wall of the Haram. (See for these and the stairs of the city of David the notes

on �ehemiah 3:15; �ehemiah 3:26; also see Excur.). We may read this verse, and

over the fountain gate and in front of them they went up over the stairs of the city of

David at the going up of the wall above the house of David even unto the water-gate

eastward. We explain this description thus; that the procession kept along the south

wall of Zion until it reached a point on the descent of that wall over against the

fountain-gate and the pool of Siloam. There it would be over the fountain-gate. At

this point it turned north (“in front of them”), leaving the main wall and passing up

over the line of the great stairs that led up to the city of David (Zion), where an

inner wall ran up and along the eastern crest of Zion. This inner wall had a place

called Beth-David below it on the side of the Tyropœon valley. (Or if me’al be

translated “past,” then the Beth-David may be placed above). The procession would

thus pass along Zion’s eastern front and cross over to Ophel and the water gate at a

point where the Tyropœon was not so deep and broad.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:37

At the fountain gate. See above, �ehemiah 2:14 and �ehemiah 3:15. Which was over

against them. There is no "which was" in the original; and it was clearly not the

gate, but the steps, that were "over against them." They came to the fountain gate in

the course of their perambulation of the wall, and there saw, "opposite to them," the

steps that led up to the city of David. By these they ascended the eastern hill, and

mounting upon the wall once more, followed its course until they reached the "water

gate," which overlooked the Kidron valley (�ehemiah 3:26), where they stopped.

Above the house of David. See the comment on �ehemiah 3:25.

38 The second choir proceeded in the opposite direction. I followed them on top of[g] the wall, together with half the people—past the Tower of the Ovens to the Broad Wall,

CLARKE, "The broad wall - What part this was, we know not: it might have been a place designed for a public promenade, or a parade for assembling the troops or guard of the temple.

GILL, "And the other company of them that gave thanks went over against them,.... On the left hand, on the northern part of the wall:

and I after them; Nehemiah, he brought up the rear of his company, as Ezra led the van of his:

and the half of the people upon the wall; the chief of them, for all could not walk upon it:

from beyond the tower of the furnaces; where they baked their bread, or their bricks, see Neh_3:11,

even unto the broad wall; where the wall was broader than common, for some reason or another, see Neh_3:8.

PETT, "Verses 38-43

The Two Companies Meet And Great Sacrifices Are Offered (�ehemiah 12:38-43).

The other procession was led by ‘those who gave thanks’ (the singers and musicians)

followed by �ehemiah himself, leading the other half of the aristocrats, seven named

leading priests and nine named leading Levites, exactly paralleling the first

procession. This went northwards from the Valley Gate, following the west wall and

then turning along the northern wall, until it reached the Sheep Gate from whence it

would proceed to the Temple.

The fact that the company led by �ehemiah is given less prominence tends to

confirm that we have here an extract from �ehemiah’s own record. Anyone else

would surely have given him greater prominence.

�ehemiah 12:38-39

‘And the other company of those who gave thanks went to meet them, and I after

them, with the half of the people, upon the wall, above the tower of the furnaces,

even to the broad wall, and above the gate of Ephraim, and by the old gate, and by

the fish gate, and the tower of Hananel, and the tower of Hammeah, even unto the

sheep gate: and they stood still in the gate of the guard.’

The second procession was led by ‘those who gave thanks’ (the singers and

musicians) who were followed by �ehemiah and ‘half the people’ (i.e. the aristocrats

including priests and Levites - see �ehemiah 12:40-42). These proceeded northward

from the Valley Gate, past the Tower of the Furnaces (Ovens), reaching the Broad

Wall. Then onwards past the Gate of Ephraim (not mentioned as rebuilt in chapter

3 and possibly therefor a ruin). Reaching the north-west corner they turned

eastwards, and passed along the north wall by the Old Gate, the Fish Gate, the

Tower of Hananel and the Tower of Hammeah, until they reached the Sheep Gate

(for these compare �ehemiah 3:1-11). They then proceeded to the gate of the guard.

This was probably within the city giving entrance to ‘the court of the guard’ so well

known as the place where Jeremiah was restrained (Jeremiah 38:13; Jeremiah

38:28). It was probably here that they awaited, and met up with, the first procession

(they ‘stood still’ there), before proceeding to the Temple.

COFFMA�, "Verse 38

�EHEMIAH HEADS THE PROCESSIO� AROU�D THE WESTER� SECTIO�

OF THE WALL

"The other company of those who gave thanks went to the left, and I followed them

with half of the people, upon the wall, above the Tower of the Ovens, to the Broad

Wall, and above the Gate of Ephraim, and by the Old Gate, and by the Fish Gate;

and the Tower of Hananel, and the Tower of the Hundred, to the Sheep Gate; and

they came to a halt at the Gate of the Guard. So both companies of those who gave

thanks stood in the house of God, and I and half the officials with me; and the

priests Eliakim, Maaseiah, Minamin, Micaiah, Elioenai, Zechariah, and Hananiah,

with trumpets; and Maaseiah, Shemiah, Eleazar, Uzzi, Jehohanan, Malchijah,

Elam, and Ezer. And the singers sang with Jezrahiah as their leader. And they

offered great sacrifices that day and rejoiced, for God had made them rejoice with

great joy; and the women and children also rejoiced. And the joy of Jerusalem was

heard afar off."

Any way it may be considered, this is a very remarkable narrative. The whole

celebration is outlined in such a manner that one may visualize it even today. There

was indeed a great joy in Jerusalem.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:38. And the other company of them that gave thanks. (See

on �ehemiah 12:31).

Read and the second thanksgiving company which went in the opposite direction,

and which I followed and half the people (went) upon the wall past the tower of the

furnaces even to the broad wall. By “the people” are meant those who formed the

procession, not the people at large. The Heb. me’al here when used before “the

tower of the furnaces” must mean “past.” We cannot conceive the procession’s

passing over a tower. (See note on �ehemiah 12:37, where the phrase “above the

house of David” occurs). For “the tower of the furnaces” and “the broad wall,” see

on �ehemiah 2:8; �ehemiah 2:11. Also see Excursus.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:38, �ehemiah 12:39

And the other company. �ehemiah now proceeds to trace the course of the other

choir or procession—the one which he himself accompanied. Starting from the same

part of the western wall as the other, its course was northward to the �.W. angle of

the city wall, after which it was eastward to the "sheep gate, and then southward to

the "prison gate." In this part of his description �ehemiah traces the same portion

of the wall as that which had engaged his attention in �ehemiah 3:1-11, and

mentions almost exactly the same features, but in the reverse order. For the tower of

the furnaces see �ehemiah 3:11; for the broad wall, �ehemiah 3:8; for the old gate,

�ehemiah 3:6; for the fish gate, �ehemiah 3:3; for the tower of Hananeel, the tower

of Meah, and the sheep gate, �ehemiah 3:1. The gate of Ephraim is not mentioned

in �ehemiah 3:1-32. It must have been in the north wall, a little to the west of the

"old gate." The prison gate, also omitted in �ehemiah 3:1-32; was probably in the

east wall, a little north of the water gate.

39 over the Gate of Ephraim, the Jeshanah[h] Gate, the Fish Gate, the Tower of Hananel and the Tower of the Hundred, as far as the Sheep Gate. At the Gate of the Guard they stopped.

GILL, "And from above the gate of Ephraim,.... The gate which led to the tribe of Ephraim, where that tribe formerly dwelt, see Neh_8:16

and above the old gate; of which mention is made, Neh_3:6

and above the fish gate, and the tower of Hananeel, and the tower of Meah, even unto the sheep gate; of all which see Neh_3:1, and they stood still in the prison gate; which was not a gate of the city, but of the court of the prison, Neh_3:25, which was near both the king's palace and the temple, see Jer_20:1.

BE�SO�, "Verse 39-40

�ehemiah 12:39-40. They stood still in the prison-gate — Waiting, as also their

brethren did, that they might go together in due order into God’s house, there to

perfect the solemnity. So stood the two companies, &c. — That is, they met together

at the temple, and gave thanks in the courts of it. And I and the half of the rulers

with me — And Ezra and the other half with him, as appears by comparing this

with �ehemiah 12:35-36. The order wherein they marched in this pompous manner

round about the city seems a little obscure; but the sense of the whole description is

this: that they being met together in the same place, half of the rulers went upon the

wall on the right hand, accompanied with several priests and Levites, and Ezra the

scribe at the head of them, �ehemiah 12:36; and the other half took the left hand,

and walked upon the wall in the same order, accompanied with �ehemiah, who

brought up the rear of them, �ehemiah 12:38. And, at length, both parts of this

chorus met in the temple, and there they stood still and completed their praises and

thanksgivings, and offered sacrifices, as mentioned �ehemiah 12:43.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:39. The gate of Ephraim must have been at the north-

eastern extremity of the broad wall. The prison gate was on the north side of the

temple, not connected with the palace prison of Jeremiah 32:2. See Excursus. (For

the other localities here mentioned, see on chap 2 and Excursus.)

�ehemiah 12:40-42. The latter part of �ehemiah 12:40 and verses41,42belong

before the former p

40 The two choirs that gave thanks then took their places in the house of God; so did I, together with half the officials,

GILL, "So stood the two companies of them that gave thanks in the house of God,.... Having made their procession on the wall in different ways, they met in the temple, that is, in the great court of it, for no other would hold them:

and I, and the half of the rulers with me; Nehemiah, and the other half with Hoshaiah, Neh_12:32.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:40

‘So stood the two companies of those who gave thanks in the house of God.’

The two companies were now united together for the purpose of giving thanks in the

house of God. This was towards the end of a long day of continual worship. And

there, in and around the outer court of the Temple, they worshipped YHWH

because of all that He had done for them, and all that they believed that He was

going to do for them. It would have been a time of great expectancy. And why

should it not have been so? Jerusalem was now purified and defensible. It was ‘the

holy city’, the city through which YHWH would do great things.

Verses 40-42

The Make-up Of The Second Company (�ehemiah 12:40-42 b).

�ot yet having given the details of the make-up of the second company the writer

now fills us in on the details. As well as the choir that led the way (‘those who gave

thanks’), the second company in procession was made up of :

· �ehemiah.

· Half of the aristocrats of wider Judah.

· Seven leading priests along with their priestly trumpets.

· Eight leading Levite singers, possibly under the supervision of a ninth,

Jezrahiah their overseer.

This followed the pattern of the other company, but whereas that was led by Ezra

the Scribe and Hoshaiah, this one was led by �ehemiah.

�ehemiah 12:40

‘And I, and the half of the rulers with me;’

In the lead (although behind the choir) was �ehemiah, and he was followed by half

the aristocrats, leading priests and leading Levites.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:40

So stood the two companies. Having performed their respective portions of the

perambulation, and reached the central portion of the eastern wall, opposite the

temple area, the two companies came to a stand, one over against the other, not in

the house of God, but by it, or near it, which is a meaning that the preposition ב

often has. The half of the rulers. Compare �ehemiah 12:32.

41 as well as the priests—Eliakim, Maaseiah, Miniamin, Micaiah, Elioenai, Zechariah and Hananiah with their trumpets—

GILL, "And the priests,.... They stood there also, whose names follow:

Eliakim, Maaseiah, Miniamin, Michaiah, Elioenai, Zechariah, and Hananiah, with trumpets; to sound on this occasion.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:41

‘And the priests, Eliakim, Maaseiah, Miniamin, Micaiah, Elioenai, Zechariah, and

Hananiah, with trumpets,’

The seven leading priests in this procession are named. Of these only Maaseiah

(Maaziah) and Miniamin (Mijamin) are recorded as signing the covenant, although

others may have done so under the family name. The blowing of trumpets was the

prerogative of the priests.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:41

And the priests, Eliakim, etc. These names are probably personal. With a single

exception, they are absent from the lists of priestly families (�ehemiah 10:2-8;

�ehemiah 12:12-21).

42 and also Maaseiah, Shemaiah, Eleazar, Uzzi, Jehohanan, Malkijah, Elam and Ezer. The choirs sang under the direction of Jezrahiah.

GILL, "And Maaseiah, and Shemaiah, and Eleazar, and Uzzi, and Jehohanan, and Malchijah, and Elam, and Ezer,.... These seem to be all priests that blew the trumpets:

and the singers sang loud, with Jezrahiah their overseer; these were the Levites, that sung the songs of praise vocally, and raised their voices very high, Jezrahiah being precentor, who led the tune, as well as played on instruments.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:42

‘And Maaseiah, and Shemaiah, and Eleazar, and Uzzi, and Jehohanan, and

Malchijah, and Elam, and Ezer.

Together with them were nine leading Levites, the eight named in this verse and

Jezrahiah who oversaw them in the same way as Zechariah had overseen those in

the other procession (�ehemiah 12:35). If seen in this way these Levites were ‘the

singers’ of �ehemiah 12:42 b. An alternative possible interpretation is found under

�ehemiah 12:42 b.

�ehemiah 12:42

‘And the singers sang loud, with Jezrahiah their overseer.’

If ‘the singers’ were the eight prominent Levites, then Jezrahiah was their leader

and made up a ninth, tying in with the nine leading Levites in the other group

headed by Zechariah the son of Jonathan (�ehemiah 12:35-36).

An alternative is to see this as indicating that Jezrahiah was not one of the leading

Levites, but led the singers who went ahead of the company, for we would expect

mention of the singers. Whilst in some ways spoiling the symmetry, this

interpretation limits the leading Levites to seventeen, tying in with the number of

leading Levite families in �ehemiah 10:9-13.

PULPIT, "And Maaseiah, etc. It may be suspected that these are Levitical names,

and correspond to the nine Levites mentioned as accompanying Ezra in verses 35,

36. The chief difference seems to have been that Ezra's Levites played on

instruments, while �ehemiah's were "singers."

43 And on that day they offered great sacrifices,

rejoicing because God had given them great joy. The women and children also rejoiced. The sound of rejoicing in Jerusalem could be heard far away.

GILL, "Also that day they offered great sacrifices, and rejoiced,.... Or many sacrifices, as Ben Melech interprets it; and these perhaps of the larger sort of cattle, oxen; and which, at least many of them, being peace offerings, the people feasted on them, so that it was a festival day:

for God had made them rejoice with great joy; on account of the wall being set up all around, and so were in greater safety from their enemies:

the wives also and the children rejoiced; while the priests blew the trumpets, and the singers sung and played on their instruments, the women and children gave loud shouts for joy:

so that the joy of Jerusalem was heard even afar off; as at the laying of the foundation of the temple, Ezr_3:13.

JAMISO�, "the joy of Jerusalem was heard even afar off— The events of the day, viewed in connection with the now repaired and beautified state of the city, raised the popular feeling to the highest pitch of enthusiasm, and the fame of their rejoicings was spread far and near.

K&D, "Neh_12:43

The solemnity terminated with the offering of great sacrifices and a general festival of rejoicing. In the matter of sacrificing, the person of Nehemiah would necessarily recede; hence he relates the close of the proceedings objectively, and speaks in the third person, as he had done when speaking of the preparations for them, Neh_12:27, etc., only using the first (Neh_12:31, Neh_12:38, Neh_12:40) person when speaking of what was

appointed by himself, or of his own position. The זבהים were chiefly thank-offerings which, terminating in feasting upon the sacrifices, - and these feasts in which the women and children participated, - contributed to the enhancement of the general joy, the joy which God had given them by the success He had accorded to their work of building their wall. For a description of their rejoicing, comp. 2Ch_20:27; Ezr_6:22, and Neh_3:13.

PETT, "Verse 43

The Culmination Of The Celebrations Which Took Place In The Temple (�ehemiah

12:43).

The processions on or about the wall having been completed the people gathered in

the Temple area and offered large numbers of sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving.

These would then, of course, have been partaken of, and there would be a great

feast as all the people, men, women and children joined in the rejoicing and

celebrations. They had a new sense of Jerusalem as the holy city, and of the presence

of YHWH acting on their behalf.

�ehemiah 12:43

‘And they offered great sacrifices that day, and rejoiced, for God had made them

rejoice with great joy, and the women also and the children rejoiced, so that the joy

of Jerusalem was heard even afar off.’

These sacrifices would inevitably include burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin, but

in the main they were probably sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving of which all

could partake, and it is clear that there were a great many of them. Indeed this was

necessary in order to provide meat for the feast. But they would be offered with

joyful hearts and a real sense of gratitude to God. �ote the emphasis on the fact that

everyone was gathered, even women and children, for which compare Ezra 10:1,

although there it was in penitence.

So great were the crowds, and so loud the praise from such a great multitude, that

‘the joy of Jerusalem was heard even afar off’. Compare for this Ezra 3:13. �ote the

emphasis. ‘They rejoiced -- God made them rejoice with great joy -- the women and

children rejoiced -- the joy of Jerusalem was heard afar off’. Joy was at the centre of

their worship. As a consequence everyone around knew that God had done great

things for His people, and that they were correspondingly grateful and filled with

joy.

BE�SO�, "Verse 43

�ehemiah 12:43. For God had made them rejoice with great joy — By restoring the

holy city to such a secure condition, that they could praise the Lord there without

disturbance or fear. And the children rejoiced — And their hosannas were not

despised, but are recorded to their praise. All that share in public mercies ought to

join in public thanksgivings. So that the joy of Jerusalem was heard even far off —

Either their loud voices and instruments were heard at a great distance, or the fame

of it was spread far and near.

PULPIT, "Also that day they offered great sacrifices. David had inaugurated the

"tabernacle" which he made for the ark of the covenant at Jerusalem with sacrifice

(2 Samuel 6:17), and had consecrated the threshing-floor of Araunah the Jebusite in

the same way (2 Samuel 24:25). Solomon, at his dedication of the temple, had

sacrificed sheep and oxen "that could not be numbered for multitude" (1 Kings 8:5).

Zerubbabel had followed this example at the dedication of the second temple (Ezra

6:17); and we may presume that it was with victims that Eliashib and his brethren

the priests had "sanctified" their portion of the wall soon after they completed it

(�ehemiah 3:1). �ehemiah now completed the dedication of the entire circuit of the

walls by sacrifices on a large scale. God had made them rejoice with great joy. It is

characteristic of �ehemiah to ascribe the universal joy, which another might well

have claimed as his own work, to the Divine mercy and forethought, which had

brought the matter of the wall to a prosperous and happy issue. The wives also and

the children rejoiced. It is seldom that the Jewish women are mentioned as taking

that prominent position in joy, which naturally belonged to them in sorrow ( 11:40;

Jeremiah 31:15; Jeremiah 49:3; Joel 1:8, etc.). There is, however, one remarkable

example of the kind, besides the present one—the rejoicing of the women after the

passage through the Red Sea, under the leadership of Miriam (Exodus 15:20). The

joy of Jerusalem was heard even afar off. See Ezra 3:13, and comp. 1 Kings 1:40; 2

Kings 11:13.

44 At that time men were appointed to be in charge of the storerooms for the contributions, firstfruits and tithes. From the fields around the towns they were to bring into the storerooms the portions required by the Law for the priests and the Levites, for Judah was pleased with the ministering priests and Levites.

BAR�ES, "Judah rejoiced - Judah’s satisfaction with the priests and Levites took the shape of increased offerings, more ample tithes, and the like, from where the appointment of treasuries and treasurers became necessary.

GILL, "And at that time were some appointed over the chamber for the treasuries,.... On the selfsame day the dedication was; while the people were in a good disposition, and a suitable frame for such service, certain persons from among the priests were appointed to be overseers of the chambers fixed upon for treasuries, to lay up safe in them the following things, and take care of them, that they were put to the use for which they were designed:

for the offerings, for the first fruits, and for the tithes, to gather into them out of the fields of the cities the portions of the law for the priests and Levites; what by the law of God were assigned them for their maintenance, and which the people had lately bound themselves to bring in, Neh_10:35,

for Judah rejoiced for the priests, and for the Levites that waited; at the temple, and performed their services there; they were so pleased with their ministrations that day, that they were determined to take care of them, and provide well for them, and that nothing should be wanting to them, enjoined by the law of God, and that they might not be obliged to dwell in fields and villages for the sake of their living, Neh_12:28.

HE�RY 44-47, "We have here an account of the remaining good effects of the universal joy that was at the dedication of the wall. When the solemnities of a thanksgiving day leave such impressions on ministers and people as that both are more careful and cheerful in doing their duty afterwards, then they are indeed acceptable to God and turn to a good account. So it was here. 1. The ministers were more careful than they had been of their work; the respect the people paid them upon this occasion encouraged them to diligence and watchfulness, Neh_12:45. The singers kept the ward of their God, attending in due time to the duty of their office; the porters, too, kept the ward of the purification, that is, they took care to preserve the purity of the temple by denying admission to those that were ceremonially unclean. When the joy of the Lord thus engages us to our duty, and enlarges us in it, it is then an earnest of that joy which, in concurrence with the perfection of holiness, will be our everlasting bliss. 2. The people were more careful than they had been of the maintenance of their ministers. The people, at the dedication of the wall, among other things which they made matter of their joy, rejoiced for the priests and for the Levites that waited, Neh_12:44. They had a great deal of comfort in their ministers, and were glad of them. When they observed how diligently they waited, and what pains they took in their work, they rejoiced in them. Note, The surest way for ministers to recommend themselves to their people, and gain an interest in their affections, is to wait on their ministry (Rom_12:7), to be humble and industrious, and to mind their business. When these did so the people thought nothing too much to do for them, to encourage them. The law had provided then their portions(Neh_12:44), but what the better were they for that provision if what the law appointed them either was not duly collected or not justly paid to them? Now, (1.) Care is here taken for the collecting of their dues. They were modest, and would rather lose their right than call for it themselves. The people were many of them careless and would not bring their dues unless they were called upon; and therefore some were appointedwhose office it should be to gather into the treasuries, out of the fields of the cities, the portions of the law for the priests and Levites (Neh_12:44), that their portion might not be lost for want of being demanded. This is a piece of good service both to ministers and people, that the one may not come short of their maintenance nor the other of their duty. (2.) Care is taken that, being gathered in, they might be duly paid out, Neh_12:47. They gave the singers and porters their daily portion, over and above what was due to them as Levites; for we may suppose that when David and Solomon appointed them their work (Neh_12:45, Neh_12:46), above what was required from them as Levites, they settled a fund for their further encouragement. Let those that labour more abundantly in the word and doctrine be counted worthy of this double honour. As for the other Levites, the tithes, here called the holy things, were duly set apart for them, out of which they paid the priests their tithe according to the law. Both are said to be sanctified; when what is contributed, either voluntarily or by law, for the support of religion and the maintenance of the ministry, is given with an eye to God and his honour, it is sanctified, and shall be

accepted of him accordingly, and it will cause the blessing to rest on the house and all that is in it, Eze_44:30.

JAMISO�, "portions of the law— that is, “prescribed by the law.”

for Judah rejoiced for the priests and ... Levites that waited— The cause of this general satisfaction was either the full restoration of the temple service and the reorganized provision for the permanent support of the ministry, or it was the pious character and eminent gifts of the guardians of religion.

K&D, "The joint efforts of Nehemiah and Ezra succeeded both in restoring the enactments of the law for the performance and maintenance of the public worship, and in carrying out the separation of the community from strangers, especially by the dissolution of unlawful marriages (Neh 12:44-13:3). When Nehemiah, however, returned to the king at Babylon, in the thirty-second year of Artaxerxes, and remained there some time, the abuses which had been abolished were again allowed by the people. During Nehemiah's absence, Eliashib the priest prepared a chamber in the fore-court of the temple, as a dwelling for his son-in-law Tobiah the Ammonite. The delivery of their dues to the Levites (the first-fruits and tenths) was omitted, and the Sabbath desecrated by field-work and by buying and selling in Jerusalem; Jews married Ashdodite, Ammonitish, and Moabitish wives; even a son of the high priest Joiada allying himself by marriage with Sanballat the Horonite. All these illegal acts were energetically opposed by Nehemiah at his return to Jerusalem, when he strove both to purify the congregation from foreigners, and to restore the appointments of the law with respect to divine worship (13:4-31).

The narration of these events and of the proceedings of Nehemiah in the last section of this book, is introduced by a brief summary (in Neh 12:44-13:3) of what was done for the ordering of divine worship, and for the separation of Israel from strangers; and this

introduction is so annexed to what precedes, not only by the formula ההוא _Neh) 4 ום12:33 and Neh_13:1), but also by its contents, that it might be regarded as a summary of what Nehemiah had effected during his first stay at Jerusalem. It is not till the

connective הGמ and before this” (Neh_13:4), with which the recital of what“ ,ולפניoccurred during Nehemiah's absence from Jerusalem, in the thirty-second year of Artaxerxes, beings, that we perceive that this description of the restored legal appointments relates not only to the time before the thirty-second year of Artaxerxes, but applies also to that of Nehemiah's second stay at Jerusalem, and bears only the appearance of an introduction, being in fact a brief summary of all that Nehemiah effected both before and after the thirty-second year of Artaxerxes. This is a form of statement which, is to be explained by the circumstance that Nehemiah did not compile this narrative of his operations till the evening of his days.

Neh_12:44

The reformations in worship and in social life effected by Nehemiah. - Neh_12:44-47. Appointments concerning divine worship. Neh_12:44. And at that time were certain appointed over the chambers of store-places for the heave-offerings, the first-fruits, and the tenths, to gather into them, according to the fields of the cities, the portions

appointed by the law for the priests and Levites. Though the definition of time ההוא 4 ום

corresponds with the ההוא of Neh_12:43, it is nevertheless used in a more general 4 וםsense, and does not refer, as in Neh_12:43, to the day of the dedication of the wall, but

only declares that what follows belongs chiefly to the time hitherto spoken of. יום means, not merely a day of twelve or twenty-four hours, but very frequently stands for the time generally speaking at which anything occurs, or certum quoddam temporis spatium;

and it is only from the context that we can perceive whether יום is used in its narrower or

more extended meaning. Hence ההוא is often used in the historical and prophetical 4 ום

books, de die, or de tempore modo memorato, in contradistinction to הGה the time ,ה וםpresent to the narrator; comp. 1Sa_27:6; 1Sa_30:25, and the discussion in Gesen. Thes. p. 369. That the expression refers in the present verse not to any particular day, but to the time in question generally, is obvious from the whole statement, Neh_12:44-47.

לאוצרות are not chambers for the treasures, i.e., treasure-chambers; but both here נשכות

and Neh_13:12, אוצרות signify places where stores are kept, magazines; hence: these are chambers for store-places for the heave-offerings, etc.; comp. Neh_10:38-39. With

respect to נשכות, see rem. on Neh_3:30. הערים ,according to the fields of the cities ,לשדיaccording to the delivery of the tenth of the crop from the fields of the different cities. These contributions necessitated the appointment of individuals to have the care of the store-chambers; “for Judah rejoiced in the priests and the Levites who were ministering,” and therefore contributed willingly and abundantly “the portions of the

law,” i.e., the portions prescribed in the law. The form מנאות is exchanged for מניות, Neh_

12:47 and Neh_13:10. האמדים is a shorter expression for יהוה לפני Deu_10:8 ,האמדים : standing before the Lord, i.e., ministering.

PETT, "Verse 44

The Establishment Of The Temple Treasury, And The Chambers To Contain The

Heave-offerings, Firstfruits and Tithes That Were Offered To YHWH, Their

Restoration, And The Exclusion Of All Who Religiously Defiled Jerusalem

(�ehemiah 12:44 to �ehemiah 13:14).

Equally of importance with the celebrations over the completion of the wall, were

the arrangements made to ensure that Jerusalem continued to be the holy city, set

apart to YHWH, purified from all that religiously defiled, and fulfilling its function

as the YHWH’s earthy dwellingplace, and as the store-city of all that specifically

belonged to YHWH (that which had been set apart for Him and given to Him in

accordance with the Law). To the mundane mind the building of the wall of

Jerusalem had made it a defensible city suitable to be the capital of Judah, and thus

an achievement in itself, but to the religious mind what the wall indicated was a new

beginning of Jerusalem as ‘the holy city’ which was the centre of true Yahwism.

This portion (�ehemiah 12:44 to �ehemiah 13:14) is distinguished by being

fashioned on a clear chiastic pattern, as follows:

A Appointment of men over the treasure and store chambers (�ehemiah 12:44 a).

B The store chambers were for the treasures, heave-offerings, firstfruits and tithes

(�ehemiah 12:44 b).

C All Judah rejoiced over the priests, and over the Levites who waited (before God)

and gave them their portions as every day required (�ehemiah 12:44 c-47).

D In accordance with the Law of YHWH concerning the Moabites and Ammonites

all who were religiously tainted were separated from Israel (�ehemiah 13:1-3).

E Eliashib who was the priest who was appointed over the chambers, provided a

chamber for Tobiah the Ammonite, a chamber which had previously been used for

the storage of those things which had been given to God (�ehemiah 13:4-5).

F All this happened when �ehemiah was away from Jerusalem, having returned to

the king’s court, probably at this stage stationed at Babylon (�ehemiah 13:6).

E �ehemiah learns what Eliashib had done in providing Tobiah with a chamber in

the courts of the house of God (�ehemiah 13:7).

D Tobiah the Ammonite was cast out of the Temple chambers which were cleansed

and restored to their proper use (�ehemiah 13:8-9).

C The portions of the Levites had not been given to them with the result that the

house of God was forsaken by its servants who no longer waited before God

(�ehemiah 13:10-11),

B All Judah brought the tithes to the treasuries (�ehemiah 13:12).

A Appointment of men over the treasuries (�ehemiah 13:13-14).

�ote that in A men were appointed over the treasure and store chambers, and in the

parallel men were appointed over the treasury. In B the store chambers were for

various things including the tithes, and in the parallel all Judah brought tithes to the

treasury. In C the portions were given to the priests and Levites as every day

required, and in the parallel their portions were not given to the Levites. In D all

who were religiously tainted, including the Ammonites, were separated from Israel,

and in the parallel Tobiah the Ammonite was cast out of the Temple chambers

which had to be cleansed. In E Eliashib provided a chamber for Tobiah, ad in the

parallel �ehemiah learned of it. Centrally all this happened whilst �ehemiah was

away from Jerusalem

Verses 44-47

Men Appointed Over The Storage Chambers In The Temple And Arrangements

Are Made For The Gathering Of The Offerings And Tithes For The Sustenance Of

The God-ordained Priests And Levites (�ehemiah 12:44-47).

In recognition of the new status of Jerusalem, and as a continuation of their

expressions of thanksgiving towards God, a new impetus was given to the gathering

of offerings and tithes for the priests and Levites. This is not to be seen as just an

idea that was tacked on. It was central to the expectancy of the renewal of the

Kingdom. It was seen as vitally important that in the holy city, where YHWH

reigned in splendour, (whilst very much not being limited to that city, for it was

recognised that ‘even the heaven of heavens could not contain Him’ (Psalms 93-99; 1

Kings 8:27)), those set apart to God’s holy purposes and service should be fully

provided for in accordance with the Law of Moses, so that they could give their full

time to His service. And we should note that significantly there is here a deliberate

reference back to the times of David, thereby emphasising that this was all to be

seen as an important part of the reconstitution of the Davidic Kingdom, with

David’s city at its head.

The connection with the previous celebrations is clearly brought out by the opening

words, ‘on that day, at that time’ (beyom). The emphasis is on the fact that what is

now to be described was to be seen as springing directly out of the loyalty and

dedication to God revealed in those celebrations (compare also �ehemiah 13:1).

This emphasis on the tithes and offerings as an important evidence of loyalty to

God, and as a precursor to future blessing from God, is heavily underlined in the

nearly contemporary prophecy of Malachi, which may even have been written at

this time. There the prophet, in expectation of great things to come, calls on God’s

people to renew their loyalty to God and pay Him His dues. Indeed he makes clear

that without this there could be no glorious future (Malachi 3:7-12). One of the signs

of God’s evident working is that His people become generous with their material

things, all of which belong to God. Thus this establishment of tithes and offerings

was all a part of the expression of their loyalty, and an ensuring of the ministry of

the priests and Levites chosen by God for that purpose, thus ensuring the continual

holiness of the city and its eschatological future.

Analysis Of �ehemiah 12:44-47.

· Men appointed over the Temple store-chambers in order to gather the heave

offerings and tithes (44a).

· Judah rejoiced for the priest and the Levites who stood (before YHWH), and

kept the charge of God, and the charge of purification, and the charge of the singers

and gatekeepers according to the commandment of David and Solomon (45)

· For in the days of David and Asaph there were chief singers and songs of

praise and thanksgiving to God (46).

· The portions for the singers and gatekeeper, and the tithes for the Levites

and priests, were set apart as required (47).

�ehemiah 12:44

‘And at that time (or ‘on that day’) were men appointed over the chambers for the

treasures, for the heave-offerings, for the first-fruits, and for the tithes, to gather

into them, according to the fields of the cities, the portions appointed by the law for

the priests and Levites: for Judah rejoiced for the priests and for the Levites who

stood (before YHWH).’

Beyom (on that day, at that time’) is not necessarily intended to be seen as precise.

‘Yom’ could equally mean ‘day’ or ‘duration of time’, although it may be that the

celebrations immediately precipitated the actions described. But it is unlikely that

they commenced at the end of that very busy day. Rather they would take time to

implement. Compare also �ehemiah 13:1. Indeed the later beyamim ‘in those days’

suggests that these time frames are vague and approximate. The aim of these

connecting phrases is in order to demonstrate what follows as an essential part of

the purifying of the renewed Jerusalem.

So it was as a consequence of the initial religious purifying of Jerusalem that men

were appointed (by the people of Judah) to oversee the Temple treasury, and to

watch over the gathering of the heave-offerings, the firstfruits and the tithes. The

idea is that what was God’s should be gathered efficiently and should be kept holy.

For men to be over the treasury and the store-chambers was not new. Consider for

example those described in Ezra 8:33. See also �ehemiah 10:38. But this would

appear to have in mind a new initiative taken in order to ensure efficiency in the

service of God.

‘To gather into them, according to the fields of the cities, the portions appointed--.’

It is apparent from this that they were given the responsibility of gathering in the

tithes in a systematic manner, for these were the portions appointed by the Law for

the priests and Levites. We have no indication anywhere of how systematically his

had been done in the past, but at times when tithing was practised it must have

required a great deal of expended time for the Levites to gather in the tithes from

every farm, and ensure that they received the correct proportion, and as �ehemiah

10:38 indicates this was overseen by the priests. Thus it was a regular procedure.

But now this was done happily because the whole of Judah were rejoicing in their

God-chosen representatives before YHWH. There was renewed hope for the future,

and the contribution of the Levites was seen as being of great importance.

Thus one of the firstfruits of the revival was a renewed activity of setting apart of

the chambers in the Temple for their holy purpose. But sadly, as spirituality waned,

and when �ehemiah’s eagle eye was not present, those very chambers would be

taken over and utilised for another, quite unholy purpose (�ehemiah 13:4-5),

something which a returning �ehemiah had to remedy. The purity of Jerusalem had

to be maintained, and it was this that �ehemiah saw as his main accomplishment

(�ehemiah 13:30-31).

The heave-offerings, the firstfruits and the tithes were the portions appointed by the

Law for the maintenance of the God-chosen priests and Levites. It was as a direct

result of these that they were able to carry on their full-time ministry, and they were

essential for that purpose. That is why they were so important in maintaining the

holiness of the holy city.

The ‘heave-offerings’ were that part of the offerings which was ‘heaved’ or ‘waved’

before YHWH as His portion, and thus available only to be partaken of by the

priests. The ‘firstfruits’ were that portion of produce set apart as YHWH’s in

recognition that they held the land from Him. That too was partaken of by the

priests. ‘The tithes’ were one tenth of all produce (both of animals and of grain)

which was to be set apart, both for the Levites, and for the poor, with a tenth of a

tenth being made available to the priests.

‘For Judah rejoiced for the priests and for the Levites who stood (before YHWH).’

It is significant that the same word (‘rejoiced’) is used of Judah’s attitude towards

the priests and Levites as was used of their celebrating the completion of the wall

(compare �ehemiah 12:43). Both were occasions of great joy. They were exultant

that the holy city had been established with a holy priesthood. For the phrase ‘stood

before YHWH’ see Deuteronomy 10:8; Deuteronomy 18:7; Ezekiel 44:15; 2

Chronicles 29:11.

COFFMA�, "Verse 44

REGULATIO�S REGARDI�G RELIGIOUS DUTIES OF THE PEOPLE

"On that day, men were appointed over the chambers for the stores, the

contributions, the first-fruits, and the tithes, to gather into them the portions

required by the law for the priests and for the Levites according to the fields of the

towns; for Judah rejoiced over the priests and the Levites who ministered. And they

performed the service of their God and the service of purification, as did the singers

and gatekeepers according to the command of David and his son Solomon. For as in

the days of David and Asaph of old there was a chief of the singers, and there were

songs of praise and thanksgiving to God. And all Israel in the days of Zerubbabel

and in the days of �ehemiah gave the daily portions for the singers and the

gatekeepers; and they set apart that which was for the Levites; and the Levites set

apart that which was for the sons of Aaron."

"Men were appointed over the chambers for the stores ... the tithes ... to gather

them" (�ehemiah 12:44). Bringing tithes into Jerusalem was no doubt an arduous

and constant work; and it is no wonder the duty was neglected. Here we learn that

men were appointed to collect them from outlying areas and to deliver them to the

storehouses in the temple. This no doubt pleased the vast majority of the people.

�ehemiah, in this paragraph, used the third person; but that does not mean another

author nor that mythical chronicler. "The solemnity was terminated with the

offering of great sacrifices and a general festival of rejoicing. In all that sacrificing,

�ehemiah, the governor, was naturally superceded as the man in charge by Ezra the

priest; and therefore �ehemiah related the close of the proceedings objectively,

using the third person, as he had done in describing the preparations (�ehemiah

12:27), only using the first person when speaking of what was appointed by himself

or his position."[15] Biblical authors (and other ancient historians) very often used

the third person in their writings; even Paul did so (2 Corinthians 12:2-4).

This last paragraph emphasizes the widespread cooperation of the people with the

priests and the Levites. Israel considered their national safety as dependent upon

the faithful observance of all the religious ceremonies and ordinances by the priests

and Levites. By stressing that fact that this was being done, "The author,"

according to Cook, "Is comparing the religious activity and strictness of �ehemiah's

time with that which had prevailed under Zerubbabel (described in Ezra 6:16-22),

with the implication that the intermediate period had been a time of laxity."[16]

BE�SO�, "�ehemiah 12:44. For the offerings — Such as they had lately engaged

themselves to give, or other voluntary or prescribed offerings. To gather out of the

fields the portions of the law — That is, the aforesaid first-fruits and tithes, and

other things, which God, by his law, appointed for them. For Judah rejoiced for the

priests, &c. — For the eminent gifts and graces which they observed in many of

them; for the great benefit which they had now received by their ministry; and for

the competent provision which hereby was made for them, that so they might wholly

wait upon their office. The sure way for ministers to gain an interest in the

affections of their people is, to wait on their ministry, to spend their whole time, and

thought, and strength therein.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:44.[F�1]At that time.—Evidently the time of the

dedication. Some.—Heb. “men.” The treasures (or stores) comprised the three sorts

enumerated, to wit, the first-fruits, the tithes, and the free-will offerings. Out of the

fields.—Rather, according to the fields.The portions of the law,i.e. the portions

appointed by the law (as in margin). For Judah rejoiced for the priests and Levites

that waited.—Rather, for Judah rejoiced in the priests and Levites who stood at

their posts. The people gladly gave the prescribed offerings for the priests and

Levites, so that there was no sense of burden upon them, nor any friction between

the Levites and the people.

PULPIT, "�EHEMIAH'S ARRA�GEME�TS FOR THE TEMPLE SERVICE,

A�D APPOI�TME�T OF OFFICERS (�ehemiah 12:44-47).

The good resolutions of the people at the time of the renewal of the covenant

(�ehemiah 10:28-39) would have borne comparatively little fruit had they not been

seconded and rendered effective by formal action on the part of the civil authority.

The people, in the first flush of their zeal, had bound themselves to undertake the

conveyance of the tithes, firstfruits, and free-will offerings from the country districts

to Jerusalem, and the deposition of them in the temple treasuries (�ehemiah 10:37-

39). But in practice this was found too great a burthen (�ehemiah 13:10). �ehemiah

therefore appointed special officers to collect the tithes and other dues throughout

the entire territory, and to bring them to Jerusalem, and lay them up in the proper

chambers (�ehemiah 12:44). Over the chambers he appointed treasurers, whose

duty it was, not only to collect the ecclesiastical dues, but also to distribute the

proceeds among the individuals entitled to share in them (�ehemiah 13:13). Having

in this way provided for the sustenance of the clerical body, he was able to insist on

their regular performance of all their duties; and the success of his arrangements

was such, that under him the temple service was restored, not merely to the

condition established by Zerubbabel (�ehemiah 12:47), but to one not markedly

different from that which had been attained in the time of David and Asaph (ibid.

verse 46). The priests, Levites, singers, and porters respectively performed their

duties to his satisfaction, purifying themselves, and taking the service in their turns,

"according to the commandment of David and Solomon" (ibid. verse 45).

�ehemiah 12:44

At that time. Literally, "On that day;" but a certain latitude must be allowed to the

expression. The chambers for the treasures. On these adjuncts of the temple, see the

comment on �ehemiah 10:37. The "treasures" themselves consisted chiefly of tithes

(including corn, wine, and oil), firstfruits, and free-will offerings. They also included

frankincense (�ehemiah 13:5), and probably other spices. The portions of the law.

i.e. the proportion of the produce required by the law to be set apart for sacred uses.

These were to be gathered by the officers out of the fields of the cities, that is, out of

the portions of cultivable soil attached to each provincial town (�ehemiah 11:25).

For Judah rejoiced. The general satisfaction of the people with their spiritual guides

led them to increase their contributions beyond the requirements of the law; whence

there was at this time special need of treasurers and treasuries—abundant

occupation for the one, and abundant material requiring to be stored in the other.

45 They performed the service of their God and the service of purification, as did also the musicians and gatekeepers, according to the commands of David and his son Solomon.

BAR�ES, "The ward of the purification - The observances with respect to purification. Compare 1Ch_23:28.

GILL, "And both the singers and the porters kept the ward of their God, and the ward of their purification,.... The singers kept their turns in course in the temple, and were not wanting to officiate on all occasions, besides morning and evening services; and the porters they diligently kept the gates of the temple, that no impure person or thing in a ceremonial sense entered:

according to the commandment of David, and Solomon his son; who made very good rules and orders relative to the better and more regular performance of service by them; see 1Ch_25:1.

JAMISO�, "the singers and the porters kept ... the ward of the purification— that is, took care that no unclean person was allowed to enter within the precincts of the sacred building. This was the official duty of the porters (2Ch_23:19), with whom, owing to the pressure of circumstances, it was deemed expedient that the singers should be associated as assistants.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:45

‘And they kept the charge of their God, and the charge of the purification, and (the

charge of) the singers and the gatekeepers, according to the commandment of David,

and of Solomon his son.’

The ‘they’ here possibly refers to those appointed over the store-chambers, who

would of course be priests and Levites, or it may refer to the priests and Levites

generally. They gladly kept God’s charge, faithfully fulfilling their responsibilities

in order to fulfil God’s Law, including His charge concerning offerings and

sacrifices and other methods of purification, and His charge concerning the singers

and gatekeepers in accordance with the requirements laid down by David, and his

son Solomon, for which see 1 Chronicles 23-26. This is especially significant in that,

once �ehemiah was absent at the court of the Persian king, the people failed to

completely fulfil this responsibility (�ehemiah 13:10), and had to be called into line.

In 1 Chronicles 23:28 the ‘purifying of holy things’ was seen very much as an

important part of the service of ‘the sons of Levi’.

Many would translate as ‘as did the singers and the gatekeepers’, including them as

fulfilling their responsibility with regard to ‘the charge of God’.

BE�SO�, "�ehemiah 12:45. Both the singers and the porters kept the ward of their

God — That ward or charge which God had prescribed them. And, in particular,

the charge of purification, of taking care that no unclean person or thing should

enter into the house or courts of the Lord. Or, the meaning may be, the singers sung

orderly in their courses, as they were appointed, and thereby kept the ward of their

God; and the porters kept the ward of the purification, that is, duly observed the

orders about it, in preventing the temple from being defiled by any unclean person

or thing. According to the commandment of David and of Solomon his son — Who

had regulated all things belonging to the duty of these persons.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:45. The singers and the porters formed two important

bodies of Levites. They kept the ward, that Isaiah, performed their appointed

duties. The verse is improperly divided in the E. V. It should read, And they (the

priests and Levites of �ehemiah 12:44) kept the ward of their God and the ward of

the purification, and so did also the singers and the porters keep their ward. The

priests and Levites attended to their duties of public worship and purifying, and the

singers and porters observed their appropriate functions.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:45

This verse is wrongly translated in the A. V. It should be rendered, as in the Vulgate

and the Septuagint—"And they (i.e. the priests and Levites) maintained the ward of

their God, and the ward of the purification, and the singers, and the porters (i.e. the

institutions of singers and porters), according to the ordinance of David and of

Solomon his son." Maintaining the ward of their God is serving regularly in the

temple at the times appointed; maintaining the ward of the purification is observing

the rules for the purifying of the holy things which had been laid down by David (1

Chronicles 23:28).

46 For long ago, in the days of David and Asaph, there had been directors for the musicians and for the songs of praise and thanksgiving to God.

GILL, "For in the days of David and Asaph of old there were chief of the singers,.... Persons appointed over the rest to instruct them, and see that they did their work aright, as besides Asaph, Haman, and Jeduthun, and their sons, 1Ch_25:2

and songs of praise and thanksgiving unto God; such were made by them, some under divine inspiration, which bear the names of David and Asaph, as may be observed in the book of Psalms.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:46

‘For in the days of David and Asaph of old there was a chief of the singers, and a

song of praise and thanksgiving unto God.’

Here the writer stresses that there were indeed in David’s day, and in the days of

Asaph his choirmaster, a chief of singers and ‘a song or praise and thanksgiving’

that is there was a choir that sang praises to God. There being a ‘song of praise’

after mention of a chief singer, is demonstrative of this latter fact. The song of praise

would arise from his choir. The double emphasis on David suggests that very much

in mind was the fact that they were continuing on with the ministry of the kingdom.

�ow that Jerusalem was once more the holy city they were hoping for a new David

to arise, to lift God’s people to new heights.

BE�SO�, "�ehemiah 12:46. For in the days of David, &c. — This verse gives the

reason why the Levites and the singers performed their duty so accurately; because,

from the time of David, who constituted their orders and offices, there were

overseers appointed, who presided over them, and were careful both to instruct

them in their duty, and keep them to it.

LA�GE, "�ehemiah 12:46-47. The wav before “Asaph” is generally supposed an

error, and the verse is read “for in the days of David, Asaph of old was chief.” This

will explain the singular “chief,” (the plural K’ri being unsupported). But still it is

difficult to see why Asaph’s headship should be mentioned just here. It may be

suggested that the Masorites are wrong, and that the 46 th and 47 th verses (Silluk

being removed) should run together, “all Israel” being subject in both, anticipated

in �ehemiah 12:46, from �ehemiah 12:47, thus: for in the days of David and Asaph,

of old, chief of the singers and songs of praise and thanksgiving unto God,—and all

Israel in the days of Zerubbabel and in the days of �ehemiah gave, etc. From

David’s day to �ehemiah’s the care of Israel for the Levitical singers and porters

was marked.

Sanctified,i.e, Brought as consecrated or dedicated. As in 1 Chronicles 26:28.

The Levites brought as dedicated to the priests the tithe of that which was dedicated

to them. ( �umbers 18:26.)

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:46

For in the days of David. This verse is exegetical of the clause in �ehemiah 12:45,

"according to the commandment of David." The writer justifies his reference to that

"commandment' by reminding his readers that the whole musical service—the

singers , themselves, and their "chiefs," together with the "songs of praise" and the

"thanksgiving songs—had descended to the Jews of his day from David and Asaph.

47 So in the days of Zerubbabel and of �ehemiah, all Israel contributed the daily portions for the musicians and the gatekeepers. They also set aside the portion for the other Levites, and the Levites set aside the portion for the descendants of Aaron.

BAR�ES, "The intention is to compare the religious activity and strictness of Nehemiah’s time with that which had prevailed under Zerubbabel, as described by Ezra Ezr_6:16, Ezr_6:22. It is implied that the intermediate period had been a time of laxity.

They sanctified holy things ... - i. e, “the people paid their tithes regularly to the Levites, and the Levites paid the tithe of the tithes to the priests.”

CLARKE, "All Israel - gave the portions of the singers - The singers and the porters were supported by the people at large; and each of these had their portions served out to them daily.

And they sanctified - unto the Levites - The things which were provided for sacred uses were delivered by the people to the Levites, and the Levites presented them to the priests.

The children of Aaron - This may refer principally to the tithes which the people brought to the Levites; the tithe or tenth of which the Levites gave to the priests. The presenting these tithes is termed sanctifying them; that is, dedicating them to those sacred or ecclesiastical uses for which they were designed: this is a very general meaning of the word sanctify in Scripture.

GILL, "And all Israel in the days of Zerubbabel, and in the days of Nehemiah, gave the portions of the singers and the porters every day his portion,.... While these two men governed they did their duty, and punctually paid the Levites their dues at the proper season:

and they sanctified holy things unto the Levites; set them apart for their use, and brought them to them, their offerings, firstfruits, and tithes: and the Levites sanctified them unto the children of Aaron; the Levites set apart the tenth part of the tithes, and delivered them to the priests, and so each had what belonged to them.

JAMISO�, "all Israel ... sanctified holy things unto the Levites,— etc. The people, selecting the tithes and first-fruits, devoted them to the use of the Levites, to whom they belonged by appointment of the law. The Levites acted in the same way with the tithes due from them to the priests. Thus all classes of the people displayed a conscientious fidelity in paying the dues to the temple and the servants of God who were appointed to minister in it.

PETT, "�ehemiah 12:47

‘And all Israel in the days of Zerubbabel, and in the days of �ehemiah, gave the

portions of the singers and the gatekeepers, as every day required: and they set

apart that which was for the Levites; and the Levites set apart that which was for

the sons of Aaron.’

He then stresses that from the very moment of the return from captivity to the

present time, even if only spasmodically when a leader with impetus arose (in the

days of Zerubbabel and in the days of �ehemiah), the due portions were given to the

singers/musicians and the gatekeepers, in accordance with their requirements, and

tithes were set apart for the Levites, who in their turn set aside a tenth of the tithes

for the priests. There is a deliberate portrayal of the ideal prior to our learning what

happened when the people were left unsupervised by a godly leader. But as no

credit for this could specifically be given to �ehemiah there is no prayer from

�ehemiah that God will remember what he has done.

BE�SO�, "�ehemiah 12:47. They sanctified holy things unto the Levites — They

set apart the first-fruits and tithes from their own share, and devoted them to the

use of the Levites. And so did the Levites by the tithe of tithes. Thus they all

conscientiously paid their dues, and did not profane those things which God had

sanctified, nor take them unto their own common use. When what is contributed for

the support of religion is given with an eye to God, it is sanctified, and will cause the

blessing to rest upon the house, and all that is therein.

PULPIT, "�ehemiah 12:47

In the days of Zerubbabel, and in the days of �ehemiah. i.e. "In the days of

�ehemiah, no less than in those of Zerubbabel." Gave the portions. Paid their tithes,

and other dues, regularly, so that the portions were forthcoming. Every day his

portion. Compare �ehemiah 11:23. They sanctified holy things unto the Levites.

They, i.e. the people, "set apart" for the Levites all that the law required; and the

Levites set apart for the priests their due share—"the tithe of the tithe" (�umbers

18:26).

LA�GE, "HISTORICAL A�D ETHICAL

1. Both the Heb. hanukkah and the Greek enkainia define a “dedication” as the

initiation or beginning of a new thing. There is no notion of consecration in the

word. There is no grace conferred or new nature implanted. Even in the dedication

of the temple, it was only the Lord’s miraculous presence which consecrated the

place. The dedication of the walls of Jerusalem by �ehemiah and his brethren was

simply a joyful religious celebration of the work achieved under the gracious

providence of God. The priests indeed purified the walls, but so they purified the

people. Everything Jewish was purified; so that this purification is no distinct part

of the dedication. The primal element in the dedication was joy, exhibited in music,

vocal and instrumental, and in thanksgiving. There was a formal recognition of

God’s mercy and loving-kindness by the assembled people.

2. The culminating point in the day’s observance was certainly when the two

processions, after each passing over half the wall, met at the temple and united their

praises with new emphasis, while “great sacrifices” were offered on the brazen altar.

The high position of the temple would add much to the imposing character of this

service.

3. The ministers of religion were not considered as useless, “non-producing” men by

the godly Jews. Even the singers were reckoned worthy of a public support. It is a

low, materialistic philosophy that cannot see the moral importance of leaders and

teachers of religion in a community, and that without them material accumulation

will only expedite national destruction.

HOMILETICAL A�D PRACTICAL

�ehemiah 12:1-26. It was without doubt a matter of piety that in the time after the

exile, they restored more and more the old classes of priests and Levites which had

existed before the exile. It was a necessity for the congregation, which deserved all

consideration, to have again an equally manifold-numbered, complete equipment

for the establishment of the beautiful service of the Lord, as before the exile. It was

also for the priests and Levites themselves most important and wholesome that they

should find themselves together again in the old divisions, and should also

acknowledge their venerable ancestors as their heads. Who can estimate the blessing

there Isaiah, when descendants remain conscious that they are preceded by many

and ancient ancestors in piety and the service of God, when in families piety too

becomes a matter of tradition, when the children know that parents and grand-

parents have prayed for them, and particularly for their spiritual prosperity, and

when they feel themselves called upon by this to pray again in turn for their

children and grandchildren. It was an enviable time when in the Christian church

likewise there were Aaronic families, when the children received an impulse from

the example of parents and ancestors to devote themselves to the service of the word,

and when the parents knew no higher joy than to see their children advancing to the

same high office which their fathers had occupied. The first condition of a proper,

worthy exercise of the office, which shall be rich in blessing, is indeed the pouring

out of the Spirit, and the Spirit breathes where He listeth, but even in the Christian

church the ordained ways hold an important position by the side of extraordinary

ones. In connection with the fact that the number of the priests’ classes was about

the same as before the exile, Beda’s remark is applicable: “Sic sæpe sancta ecclesia

ex detriments suis majora recepit incrementa, cum uno per incuriam lapso in

peccatum plures exemplo ejus territi ad persistendum in castitate fidei fiunt

cautiores. Sæpe idem ipsi, qui peccaverunt, majores post actam pænitentiam

bonorum operum fruclus ferre incipiunt, quam ante incursum peccati ferre

consuerant. Sæpe ab hæreticis ecclesia vastata, postquam instantia catholicorum

doctorum lucem veritatis recepit, plures ad cognoscendam tuendamque rationem

recuperantes ejusdem veritatis filios procreavit. �eque enim unquam beati patres

Athanasius, Ambrosius, Hilarius, Augustinus, et ceteri tales tot et tam magnificos in

sanctam scripturam tractatus conderent, si non contra fidem rectam tam

multifarius hæreticorum fuisset error ortus.”

�ehemiah 12:27-43. The feast of dedication1. Whose part is it? The congregation’s,

to which God has anew given protection and power against its enemies, but also the

individual believer’s, when the Lord has secured to him his position, and has even

enclosed it with a wall2. How is it to be celebrated? In that we purify ourselves from

all that displeases the Lord, that we thankfully consecrate His gifts, that Isaiah, put

them at His service, that we rejoice in them as a proof of the grace that desires our

salvation, and thereby cause our faith to be strengthened, etc. 3. What blessing has

it? It appropriates thus truly God’s gifts to us, and enkindles thus our zeal to honor

God with new desire by consecration, devotion, and homage.—Beda: Facta autem

civitas sancta dedicatur, cum, completo in fine sæculi numero electorum, ecclesia

universaliter in cœlis ad visionem sui conditoris introducitur.—How must the

congregation celebrate the feast of dedication? 1. With joyful thanks, that the power

and salvation of the Lord has surrounded them as a wall for their protection against

the world, and for their separation from the same2. With firm trust, that the Lord

will still farther protect them3. With the sincere vow to hold themselves separate

from the world, and to live to the Lord. True joy1. Its right, the God who has given

us life, wishes also that it shall move joyfully; the God who always anew overwhelms

us with favors, wishes that they should fulfil their mission, that Isaiah, make us

happy, in the end holy2. Its occasion is God’s grace, which has strengthened,

protected, assured, or elevated our lower or higher life. The chief sites in Jerusalem

testified to this, and in the Christian church, yes, indeed, in our lives, all the heights

testify thereof3. Its kind—it raises itself to God, is a joy in Him, that Isaiah, becomes

a service to God and our neighbor.—Bede: Requiruntur et Levitœ spirituales, hoc

Esther, assumpti in sortem regni de omnibus locis suis, quando mittet filius hominis

angelos suos et congregabit electos suos a quatuor ventis, a summo terræ usque ad

summum cœli. Faciunt illi dedicationem in lætitia, cantico, gratiarum actione, atque

in organis musicorum variis, cum in perceptione œternœ vitœ invicem gaudebunt.—

Starke: Dedications shall take place with praise and thanks, singing and praying,

not with sins and wantonness. That should be the delight and joy of our hearts when

we see that the city of God, that Isaiah, the Christian church, is protected by God

within by the defence of faithful authorities. ( Psalm 58:2.) Christian joy, at the

proper time, does not displease God.

�ehemiah 12:44-47. What is also needful: 1. That there should be teachers and

servants in the church2. That they should perform their service without being

hindered in it by lower cares3. That the congregation should joyfully supply them

with what is necessary for their support.—Bede: Hujus autem capituli nobis

expositio allegorica in promptu est; quia dominus statuit eos, qui evangelium

annuntiant, de evangelio vivere. Sed væ illis sacerdotibus ac ministris sanctorum,

qui sumptus quidem cum gaudio debitos sumere a populo delectantur, sed nihil pro

ejusdem populi student salute laborare, non aliquid sacri ducatus ei recte vivendo

præbere, non de suavitate regni cœlestis ei quippiam dulce prædicando canere, sed

nec januam ei supernœ civitatis aperire, municipatum in cœlis habendo, verum

potius occludere perverse agendo probantur.—Starke: It is God’s will and

command that with the treasure of the godly word and for the maintenance of the

same, we should make a provision that churches, schools, and those who serve in

them may be supported. ( 1 Chronicles 27:20; 2 Chronicles 24:8; 2 Chronicles 31:4;

2 Chronicles 34:9.)