Jerusalem Is Repopulated and the Restored Community Is Ordered in the Land

Neh 11:3-6 The inhabitants of Jerusalem and the other cities . - Neh 11:3 The title reads: “These are the heads of the province who dwelt at Jerusalem; and in the cities of Judah dwelt every one in his possession in their cities, Israel, the priests, the Levites, the Nethinim, and the sons of Solomon’s servants. ” המּדינה is, as in Ezr 2:1, the land of Judah, as a province of the Persian kingdom.

The repetition of ישׁבוּ after יהוּדה בּערי is not to be understood as contrasting those who dwelt in the cities with the dwellers in Jerusalem in the sense of “but in the cities of Judah dwelt,” etc. , but is here a mere pleonasm. Even the enumeration of the different classes of inhabitants: Israel, the priests, etc. , clearly shows that no such contrast is intended; for Israel, the priests, etc.

, dwelt not only in Jerusalem, but also, according to Neh 11:20, in the other cities of Judah. And this is placed beyond all doubt by the contents of the list following; the inhabitants of Jerusalem being enumerated vv. 4-24, and the inhabitants of the other cities of Judah and Benjamin, Neh 11:25-36. If, however, this title refers to the whole of the following list, it cannot, as Rambach and others thought, contain only an enumeration of those who, in consequence of the lot, had taken up their residence at Jerusalem, but must be intended as a list of the population of the whole province of Judah in the times of Ezra and Nehemiah.

It seems strange that the title should announce המּדינה ראשׁי, while in the list of the inhabitants of Jerusalem are given, besides the heads, the numbers of their brethren, i. e. , of the individuals or fathers of families under these heads; and that in the list of the inhabitants of the other cities, only inhabitants of Judah and Benjamin are spoken of. Hence this statement refers a potiori to the heads, including the houses and families belonging to them, while in the case of the other cities it is assumed that the inhabitants of each locality were under a head.

With Neh 11:4 begins the enumeration of the heads dwelling in Jerusalem, with their houses; and the first clause contains a special title, which affirms that (certain) of the children of Judah and of the children of Benjamin dwelt at Jerusalem. On the parallel list of the inhabitants of Jerusalem before the captivity, 1 Chron 9:2-34, and its relation to the present list, see the remarks on 1 Chron 9.

Neh 11:7-9 Of the Benjamites there were two heads of houses: Sallu, and after him Gabbai-Sallai, with nine hundred and twenty-eight fathers of families. Their chief was Joel the son of Zichri, and Jehuda the son of Sennah over the city as second (prefect).

Neh 11:7-9 Of the Benjamites there were two heads of houses: Sallu, and after him Gabbai-Sallai, with nine hundred and twenty-eight fathers of families. Their chief was Joel the son of Zichri, and Jehuda the son of Sennah over the city as second (prefect).

Neh 11:7-9 Of the Benjamites there were two heads of houses: Sallu, and after him Gabbai-Sallai, with nine hundred and twenty-eight fathers of families. Their chief was Joel the son of Zichri, and Jehuda the son of Sennah over the city as second (prefect).

Neh 11:10-14 Of the priests: Jedaiah, Joiarib, and Jachin, three heads of houses, therefore of orders of priests (for בּן before Joiarib probably crept into the text by a clerical error; see rem. on 1Ch 9:10); Seraiah, a descendant of Ahitub, as ruler of the house of God, and their brethren, i. e. , the eight hundred and twenty-two ministering priests belonging to these three orders.

Also Adaiah, of the house or order of Malchiah, and his brethren, two hundred and forty-two fathers of families; and lastly, Amashai, of the order of Immer, with one hundred and twenty-eight brethren, i. e. , priests. And their chief was Zabdiel ben Haggedolim (lxx υἱὸς τῶν μεγάλων). עליהם refers to all the before-named priests. לעבות ראשׁים heads of fathers, i.

e. , of families, Neh 11:13, is striking, for the brethren of Adaiah (אחיו), in number two hundred and forty-two, could not be heads of houses, but only fathers of families. The words seem to have come into the text only by comparing it with 1Ch 9:13. If they were genuine, we should be obliged to understand לעבות ראשׁים of fathers of families, contrary to general usage.

Neh 11:10-14 Of the priests: Jedaiah, Joiarib, and Jachin, three heads of houses, therefore of orders of priests (for בּן before Joiarib probably crept into the text by a clerical error; see rem. on 1Ch 9:10); Seraiah, a descendant of Ahitub, as ruler of the house of God, and their brethren, i. e. , the eight hundred and twenty-two ministering priests belonging to these three orders.

Also Adaiah, of the house or order of Malchiah, and his brethren, two hundred and forty-two fathers of families; and lastly, Amashai, of the order of Immer, with one hundred and twenty-eight brethren, i. e. , priests. And their chief was Zabdiel ben Haggedolim (lxx υἱὸς τῶν μεγάλων). עליהם refers to all the before-named priests. לעבות ראשׁים heads of fathers, i.

e. , of families, Neh 11:13, is striking, for the brethren of Adaiah (אחיו), in number two hundred and forty-two, could not be heads of houses, but only fathers of families. The words seem to have come into the text only by comparing it with 1Ch 9:13. If they were genuine, we should be obliged to understand לעבות ראשׁים of fathers of families, contrary to general usage.

Neh 11:10-14 Of the priests: Jedaiah, Joiarib, and Jachin, three heads of houses, therefore of orders of priests (for בּן before Joiarib probably crept into the text by a clerical error; see rem. on 1Ch 9:10); Seraiah, a descendant of Ahitub, as ruler of the house of God, and their brethren, i. e. , the eight hundred and twenty-two ministering priests belonging to these three orders.

Also Adaiah, of the house or order of Malchiah, and his brethren, two hundred and forty-two fathers of families; and lastly, Amashai, of the order of Immer, with one hundred and twenty-eight brethren, i. e. , priests. And their chief was Zabdiel ben Haggedolim (lxx υἱὸς τῶν μεγάλων). עליהם refers to all the before-named priests. לעבות ראשׁים heads of fathers, i.

e. , of families, Neh 11:13, is striking, for the brethren of Adaiah (אחיו), in number two hundred and forty-two, could not be heads of houses, but only fathers of families. The words seem to have come into the text only by comparing it with 1Ch 9:13. If they were genuine, we should be obliged to understand לעבות ראשׁים of fathers of families, contrary to general usage.

Neh 11:10-14 Of the priests: Jedaiah, Joiarib, and Jachin, three heads of houses, therefore of orders of priests (for בּן before Joiarib probably crept into the text by a clerical error; see rem. on 1Ch 9:10); Seraiah, a descendant of Ahitub, as ruler of the house of God, and their brethren, i. e. , the eight hundred and twenty-two ministering priests belonging to these three orders.

Also Adaiah, of the house or order of Malchiah, and his brethren, two hundred and forty-two fathers of families; and lastly, Amashai, of the order of Immer, with one hundred and twenty-eight brethren, i. e. , priests. And their chief was Zabdiel ben Haggedolim (lxx υἱὸς τῶν μεγάλων). עליהם refers to all the before-named priests. לעבות ראשׁים heads of fathers, i.

e. , of families, Neh 11:13, is striking, for the brethren of Adaiah (אחיו), in number two hundred and forty-two, could not be heads of houses, but only fathers of families. The words seem to have come into the text only by comparing it with 1Ch 9:13. If they were genuine, we should be obliged to understand לעבות ראשׁים of fathers of families, contrary to general usage.

Neh 11:10-14 Of the priests: Jedaiah, Joiarib, and Jachin, three heads of houses, therefore of orders of priests (for בּן before Joiarib probably crept into the text by a clerical error; see rem. on 1Ch 9:10); Seraiah, a descendant of Ahitub, as ruler of the house of God, and their brethren, i. e. , the eight hundred and twenty-two ministering priests belonging to these three orders.

Also Adaiah, of the house or order of Malchiah, and his brethren, two hundred and forty-two fathers of families; and lastly, Amashai, of the order of Immer, with one hundred and twenty-eight brethren, i. e. , priests. And their chief was Zabdiel ben Haggedolim (lxx υἱὸς τῶν μεγάλων). עליהם refers to all the before-named priests. לעבות ראשׁים heads of fathers, i.

e. , of families, Neh 11:13, is striking, for the brethren of Adaiah (אחיו), in number two hundred and forty-two, could not be heads of houses, but only fathers of families. The words seem to have come into the text only by comparing it with 1Ch 9:13. If they were genuine, we should be obliged to understand לעבות ראשׁים of fathers of families, contrary to general usage.

Neh 11:15-19 Of Levites, Shemaiah, a descendant of Bunni, with the members of his house; Shabbethai and Jozabad, “of the heads of the Levites over the outward business of the house of God,” i. e. , two heads of the Levites who had the care of the outward business of the temple, probably charged with the preservation of the building and furniture, and the office of seeing that all things necessary for the temple worship were duly delivered.

The names Shabbethai and Jozabad have already occurred, Neh 8:7, as those of two Levites, and are here also personal names of heads of Levites, as the addition הלויּם מראשׁי informs us. As the office of these two is stated, so also is that of those next following in Neh 11:17; whence it appears that Shemaiah, of whom no such particular is given, was head of the Levites charged with attending on the priests at the sacrificial worship (the האלהים בּית מלאכת, Neh 11:22).

The three named in Neh 11:17, Mattaniah an Asaphite, Bakbukiah, and Abda a Jeduthunite, are the chiefs of the three Levitical orders of singers. Mattaniah is called התּחלּה ראשׁ, head of the beginning, which gives no meaning; and should probably, as in the lxx and Vulgate, be read התּהלּה ראשׁ: head of the songs of praise, - he praised for who praised, i. e.

, sounded the Hodu for prayer; comp. 1Ch 16:5, where Asaph is called the chief of the band of singers. He is followed by Bakbukiah as second, that is, leader of the second band (מאחיו משׁנה like משׁנהוּ, 1Ch 16:5); and Abda the Jeduthunite, as leader of the third. All the Levites in the holy city, i. e. , all who dwelt in Jerusalem, amounted to two hundred and eighty-four individuals or fathers of families.

The number refers only to the three classes named Neh 11:15-17. For the gatekeepers are separately numbered in Neh 11:19 as one hundred and seventy-two, of the families of Akkub and Talmon. Certain special remarks follow in Neh 11:20. - Neh 11:20 states that the rest of the Israelites, priests, and Levites dwelt in all the (other) cities of Judah, each in his inheritance.

These cities are enumerated in Neh 11:25.

Neh 11:15-19 Of Levites, Shemaiah, a descendant of Bunni, with the members of his house; Shabbethai and Jozabad, “of the heads of the Levites over the outward business of the house of God,” i. e. , two heads of the Levites who had the care of the outward business of the temple, probably charged with the preservation of the building and furniture, and the office of seeing that all things necessary for the temple worship were duly delivered.

The names Shabbethai and Jozabad have already occurred, Neh 8:7, as those of two Levites, and are here also personal names of heads of Levites, as the addition הלויּם מראשׁי informs us. As the office of these two is stated, so also is that of those next following in Neh 11:17; whence it appears that Shemaiah, of whom no such particular is given, was head of the Levites charged with attending on the priests at the sacrificial worship (the האלהים בּית מלאכת, Neh 11:22).

The three named in Neh 11:17, Mattaniah an Asaphite, Bakbukiah, and Abda a Jeduthunite, are the chiefs of the three Levitical orders of singers. Mattaniah is called התּחלּה ראשׁ, head of the beginning, which gives no meaning; and should probably, as in the lxx and Vulgate, be read התּהלּה ראשׁ: head of the songs of praise, - he praised for who praised, i. e.

, sounded the Hodu for prayer; comp. 1Ch 16:5, where Asaph is called the chief of the band of singers. He is followed by Bakbukiah as second, that is, leader of the second band (מאחיו משׁנה like משׁנהוּ, 1Ch 16:5); and Abda the Jeduthunite, as leader of the third. All the Levites in the holy city, i. e. , all who dwelt in Jerusalem, amounted to two hundred and eighty-four individuals or fathers of families.

The number refers only to the three classes named Neh 11:15-17. For the gatekeepers are separately numbered in Neh 11:19 as one hundred and seventy-two, of the families of Akkub and Talmon. Certain special remarks follow in Neh 11:20. - Neh 11:20 states that the rest of the Israelites, priests, and Levites dwelt in all the (other) cities of Judah, each in his inheritance.

These cities are enumerated in Neh 11:25.

Neh 11:15-19 Of Levites, Shemaiah, a descendant of Bunni, with the members of his house; Shabbethai and Jozabad, “of the heads of the Levites over the outward business of the house of God,” i. e. , two heads of the Levites who had the care of the outward business of the temple, probably charged with the preservation of the building and furniture, and the office of seeing that all things necessary for the temple worship were duly delivered.

The names Shabbethai and Jozabad have already occurred, Neh 8:7, as those of two Levites, and are here also personal names of heads of Levites, as the addition הלויּם מראשׁי informs us. As the office of these two is stated, so also is that of those next following in Neh 11:17; whence it appears that Shemaiah, of whom no such particular is given, was head of the Levites charged with attending on the priests at the sacrificial worship (the האלהים בּית מלאכת, Neh 11:22).

The three named in Neh 11:17, Mattaniah an Asaphite, Bakbukiah, and Abda a Jeduthunite, are the chiefs of the three Levitical orders of singers. Mattaniah is called התּחלּה ראשׁ, head of the beginning, which gives no meaning; and should probably, as in the lxx and Vulgate, be read התּהלּה ראשׁ: head of the songs of praise, - he praised for who praised, i. e.

, sounded the Hodu for prayer; comp. 1Ch 16:5, where Asaph is called the chief of the band of singers. He is followed by Bakbukiah as second, that is, leader of the second band (מאחיו משׁנה like משׁנהוּ, 1Ch 16:5); and Abda the Jeduthunite, as leader of the third. All the Levites in the holy city, i. e. , all who dwelt in Jerusalem, amounted to two hundred and eighty-four individuals or fathers of families.

The number refers only to the three classes named Neh 11:15-17. For the gatekeepers are separately numbered in Neh 11:19 as one hundred and seventy-two, of the families of Akkub and Talmon. Certain special remarks follow in Neh 11:20. - Neh 11:20 states that the rest of the Israelites, priests, and Levites dwelt in all the (other) cities of Judah, each in his inheritance.

These cities are enumerated in Neh 11:25.

Neh 11:15-19 Of Levites, Shemaiah, a descendant of Bunni, with the members of his house; Shabbethai and Jozabad, “of the heads of the Levites over the outward business of the house of God,” i. e. , two heads of the Levites who had the care of the outward business of the temple, probably charged with the preservation of the building and furniture, and the office of seeing that all things necessary for the temple worship were duly delivered.

The names Shabbethai and Jozabad have already occurred, Neh 8:7, as those of two Levites, and are here also personal names of heads of Levites, as the addition הלויּם מראשׁי informs us. As the office of these two is stated, so also is that of those next following in Neh 11:17; whence it appears that Shemaiah, of whom no such particular is given, was head of the Levites charged with attending on the priests at the sacrificial worship (the האלהים בּית מלאכת, Neh 11:22).

The three named in Neh 11:17, Mattaniah an Asaphite, Bakbukiah, and Abda a Jeduthunite, are the chiefs of the three Levitical orders of singers. Mattaniah is called התּחלּה ראשׁ, head of the beginning, which gives no meaning; and should probably, as in the lxx and Vulgate, be read התּהלּה ראשׁ: head of the songs of praise, - he praised for who praised, i. e.

, sounded the Hodu for prayer; comp. 1Ch 16:5, where Asaph is called the chief of the band of singers. He is followed by Bakbukiah as second, that is, leader of the second band (מאחיו משׁנה like משׁנהוּ, 1Ch 16:5); and Abda the Jeduthunite, as leader of the third. All the Levites in the holy city, i. e. , all who dwelt in Jerusalem, amounted to two hundred and eighty-four individuals or fathers of families.

The number refers only to the three classes named Neh 11:15-17. For the gatekeepers are separately numbered in Neh 11:19 as one hundred and seventy-two, of the families of Akkub and Talmon. Certain special remarks follow in Neh 11:20. - Neh 11:20 states that the rest of the Israelites, priests, and Levites dwelt in all the (other) cities of Judah, each in his inheritance.

These cities are enumerated in Neh 11:25.

Neh 11:15-19 Of Levites, Shemaiah, a descendant of Bunni, with the members of his house; Shabbethai and Jozabad, “of the heads of the Levites over the outward business of the house of God,” i. e. , two heads of the Levites who had the care of the outward business of the temple, probably charged with the preservation of the building and furniture, and the office of seeing that all things necessary for the temple worship were duly delivered.

The names Shabbethai and Jozabad have already occurred, Neh 8:7, as those of two Levites, and are here also personal names of heads of Levites, as the addition הלויּם מראשׁי informs us. As the office of these two is stated, so also is that of those next following in Neh 11:17; whence it appears that Shemaiah, of whom no such particular is given, was head of the Levites charged with attending on the priests at the sacrificial worship (the האלהים בּית מלאכת, Neh 11:22).

The three named in Neh 11:17, Mattaniah an Asaphite, Bakbukiah, and Abda a Jeduthunite, are the chiefs of the three Levitical orders of singers. Mattaniah is called התּחלּה ראשׁ, head of the beginning, which gives no meaning; and should probably, as in the lxx and Vulgate, be read התּהלּה ראשׁ: head of the songs of praise, - he praised for who praised, i. e.

, sounded the Hodu for prayer; comp. 1Ch 16:5, where Asaph is called the chief of the band of singers. He is followed by Bakbukiah as second, that is, leader of the second band (מאחיו משׁנה like משׁנהוּ, 1Ch 16:5); and Abda the Jeduthunite, as leader of the third. All the Levites in the holy city, i. e. , all who dwelt in Jerusalem, amounted to two hundred and eighty-four individuals or fathers of families.

The number refers only to the three classes named Neh 11:15-17. For the gatekeepers are separately numbered in Neh 11:19 as one hundred and seventy-two, of the families of Akkub and Talmon. Certain special remarks follow in Neh 11:20. - Neh 11:20 states that the rest of the Israelites, priests, and Levites dwelt in all the (other) cities of Judah, each in his inheritance.

These cities are enumerated in Neh 11:25.

Neh 11:21 The Nethinim dwelt in Ophel, the southern slope of Mount Moriah; see rem. on Neh 3:26. Their chiefs were Zihah and Gispa. ציחה occurs Ezr 2:43, followed by חשׂוּפא, as head of a division of Levites; whence Bertheau tries, but unsuccessfully, to identify the latter name with גּשׁפּא. For it does not follow that, because a division of Nethinim was descended from Hasupha, that Gishpa, one of the chiefs of those Nethinim who dwelt on Ophel, must be the same individual as this Hasupha.

Neh 11:22-23 And the overseer (chief) of the Levites at Jerusalem was Uzzi, the son of Bani, of the sons of Asaph, the singers, in the business of the house of God. The מלאכה of the house of God was the duty of the Levites of the house of Shemaiah, Neh 11:15. Hence the remark in the present verse is supplementary to Neh 11:15. The chiefs or presidents of the two other divisions of Levites - of those to whom the outward business was entrusted, and of the singers - are named in Neh 11:16 and Neh 11:17; while, in the case of those entrusted with the business of the house of God, Neh 11:15, the chiefs are not named, probably because they were over the singers, the sons of Asaph, who in Neh 11:15 had not as yet been named.

This is therefore done afterwards in Neh 11:22. מלאכת לנגד, coram opere , i. e. , circa ea negotia, quae coram in templo exigenda erant (Burm. in Ramb.) , does not belong to המּשׁררים, but to הלויּם פּקיד: Uzzi was overseer of the Levites in respect of their business in the house of God, i. e. , of those Levites who had the charge of this business. The reason of this is thus given in Neh 11:23 : “for a command of the king was over them, and an ordinance was over the singers concerning the matter of every day.

” עליהם refers to the Levites. “A command of the king was over them” means: the king had commanded them. This command was concerning בּיומו יום דּבר, the matter of every day. The words stand at the end of the verse, because they refer to the two subjects המּלך and אמנה. אמנה is an arrangement depending upon mutual agreement, a treaty, an obligation entered into by agreement; comp.

Neh 10:1. The meaning of the verse is: The every-day matter was laid upon the Levites by the command of the king, upon the singers by an agreement entered into. בּיומו יום דּבר, pensum quotidianum , is correctly explained by Schmid: de rebus necessariis in singulos dies . That we are not to understand thereby the contribution for every day, the rations of food (Ramb.

, Berth.) , but the duty to be done on each day, is obvious from the context, in which not provisions, but the business of the Levites, is spoken of; and Uzzi the Asaphite was placed over the Levites in respect of their business in the house of God, and not in respect of food and drink. The business of the Levites in the house of God was determined by the command of the king; the business of the singers, on the contrary, especially that one of the singers should exercise a supervision over the services of the Levites in worship, was made the matter of an אמנה, an agreement entered into among themselves by the different divisions of Levites.

The king is not David, who once regulated the services of the Levites (1Ch 23:4.) , but the Persian king Artaxerxes, who is mentioned as המּלך in Neh 11:24; and המּלך מצות undoubtedly refers to the full power bestowed by Artaxerxes upon Ezra to order all that concerned the worship of God at Jerusalem; Ezr 7:12.

Neh 11:22-23 And the overseer (chief) of the Levites at Jerusalem was Uzzi, the son of Bani, of the sons of Asaph, the singers, in the business of the house of God. The מלאכה of the house of God was the duty of the Levites of the house of Shemaiah, Neh 11:15. Hence the remark in the present verse is supplementary to Neh 11:15. The chiefs or presidents of the two other divisions of Levites - of those to whom the outward business was entrusted, and of the singers - are named in Neh 11:16 and Neh 11:17; while, in the case of those entrusted with the business of the house of God, Neh 11:15, the chiefs are not named, probably because they were over the singers, the sons of Asaph, who in Neh 11:15 had not as yet been named.

This is therefore done afterwards in Neh 11:22. מלאכת לנגד, coram opere , i. e. , circa ea negotia, quae coram in templo exigenda erant (Burm. in Ramb.) , does not belong to המּשׁררים, but to הלויּם פּקיד: Uzzi was overseer of the Levites in respect of their business in the house of God, i. e. , of those Levites who had the charge of this business. The reason of this is thus given in Neh 11:23 : “for a command of the king was over them, and an ordinance was over the singers concerning the matter of every day.

” עליהם refers to the Levites. “A command of the king was over them” means: the king had commanded them. This command was concerning בּיומו יום דּבר, the matter of every day. The words stand at the end of the verse, because they refer to the two subjects המּלך and אמנה. אמנה is an arrangement depending upon mutual agreement, a treaty, an obligation entered into by agreement; comp.

Neh 10:1. The meaning of the verse is: The every-day matter was laid upon the Levites by the command of the king, upon the singers by an agreement entered into. בּיומו יום דּבר, pensum quotidianum , is correctly explained by Schmid: de rebus necessariis in singulos dies . That we are not to understand thereby the contribution for every day, the rations of food (Ramb.

, Berth.) , but the duty to be done on each day, is obvious from the context, in which not provisions, but the business of the Levites, is spoken of; and Uzzi the Asaphite was placed over the Levites in respect of their business in the house of God, and not in respect of food and drink. The business of the Levites in the house of God was determined by the command of the king; the business of the singers, on the contrary, especially that one of the singers should exercise a supervision over the services of the Levites in worship, was made the matter of an אמנה, an agreement entered into among themselves by the different divisions of Levites.

The king is not David, who once regulated the services of the Levites (1Ch 23:4.) , but the Persian king Artaxerxes, who is mentioned as המּלך in Neh 11:24; and המּלך מצות undoubtedly refers to the full power bestowed by Artaxerxes upon Ezra to order all that concerned the worship of God at Jerusalem; Ezr 7:12.

Neh 11:24 Finally, the official is named who had to transact with the king the affairs of the people, i. e. , of the whole Jewish community in Judah and Jerusalem. Pethahiah, a Jew of the descendants of Zerah, was at the king’s hand in all matters concerning the people. המּלך ליד can scarcely be understood of a royal commissioner at Jerusalem, but certainly designates an official transacting the affairs of the Jewish community at the hand of the king, at his court.

The inhabitants of the towns of Judah and Benjamin . - The heads who, with their houses, inhabited country districts are here no longer enumerated, but only the towns, with their adjacent neighbourhoods, which were inhabited by Jews and Benjamites; and even these are but summarily mentioned.

Neh 11:25-30 The districts inhabited by the children of Judah. “And with respect to the towns in their fields, there dwelt of the sons of Judah in Kirjath-arba and its daughters,” etc. The use of אל as an introductory or emphatic particle is peculiar to this passage, ל ,egassap being elsewhere customary in this sense; comp. Ew. §310, a . אל denotes a respect to something.

חצרים, properly enclosures, signifies, according to Lev 25:31, villages, towns, boroughs, without walls. שׂדות, fields, field boundaries. בּנותיה, the villages and estates belonging to a town; as frequently in the lists of towns in the book of Joshua. Kirjath-arba is Hebron, Gen 23:2. Jekabzeel, like Kabzeel, Jos 15:21. חצריה, its enclosed places, the estates belonging to a town, as in Jos 15:45.

Jeshua, mentioned only here, and unknown. Moladah and Beth-phelet, Jos 15:26-27. Hazar-shual, i. e. , Fox-court, probably to be sought for in the ruins of Thaly; see rem. on Jos 15:28. Beersheba, now Bir es Seba; see rem. on Gen 21:31. Ziklag, at the ancient Asluj, see Jos 15:31. Mekonah, mentioned only here, and unknown. En-rimmon; see rem. on 1Ch 4:32. Zareah, Jarmuth, Zanoah, and Adullam in the plains (see Jos 15:33-35), where were also Lachish and Azekah; see on 2Ch 11:9.

- In Neh 11:30 the whole region then inhabited by Jews is comprised in the words: “And they dwelt from Beer-sheba (the south-western boundary of Canaan) to the valley of Hinnom, in Jerusalem,” through which ran the boundaries of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah (Jos 15:8).

Neh 11:25-30 The districts inhabited by the children of Judah. “And with respect to the towns in their fields, there dwelt of the sons of Judah in Kirjath-arba and its daughters,” etc. The use of אל as an introductory or emphatic particle is peculiar to this passage, ל ,egassap being elsewhere customary in this sense; comp. Ew. §310, a . אל denotes a respect to something.

חצרים, properly enclosures, signifies, according to Lev 25:31, villages, towns, boroughs, without walls. שׂדות, fields, field boundaries. בּנותיה, the villages and estates belonging to a town; as frequently in the lists of towns in the book of Joshua. Kirjath-arba is Hebron, Gen 23:2. Jekabzeel, like Kabzeel, Jos 15:21. חצריה, its enclosed places, the estates belonging to a town, as in Jos 15:45.

Jeshua, mentioned only here, and unknown. Moladah and Beth-phelet, Jos 15:26-27. Hazar-shual, i. e. , Fox-court, probably to be sought for in the ruins of Thaly; see rem. on Jos 15:28. Beersheba, now Bir es Seba; see rem. on Gen 21:31. Ziklag, at the ancient Asluj, see Jos 15:31. Mekonah, mentioned only here, and unknown. En-rimmon; see rem. on 1Ch 4:32. Zareah, Jarmuth, Zanoah, and Adullam in the plains (see Jos 15:33-35), where were also Lachish and Azekah; see on 2Ch 11:9.

- In Neh 11:30 the whole region then inhabited by Jews is comprised in the words: “And they dwelt from Beer-sheba (the south-western boundary of Canaan) to the valley of Hinnom, in Jerusalem,” through which ran the boundaries of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah (Jos 15:8).

Neh 11:25-30 The districts inhabited by the children of Judah. “And with respect to the towns in their fields, there dwelt of the sons of Judah in Kirjath-arba and its daughters,” etc. The use of אל as an introductory or emphatic particle is peculiar to this passage, ל ,egassap being elsewhere customary in this sense; comp. Ew. §310, a . אל denotes a respect to something.

חצרים, properly enclosures, signifies, according to Lev 25:31, villages, towns, boroughs, without walls. שׂדות, fields, field boundaries. בּנותיה, the villages and estates belonging to a town; as frequently in the lists of towns in the book of Joshua. Kirjath-arba is Hebron, Gen 23:2. Jekabzeel, like Kabzeel, Jos 15:21. חצריה, its enclosed places, the estates belonging to a town, as in Jos 15:45.

Jeshua, mentioned only here, and unknown. Moladah and Beth-phelet, Jos 15:26-27. Hazar-shual, i. e. , Fox-court, probably to be sought for in the ruins of Thaly; see rem. on Jos 15:28. Beersheba, now Bir es Seba; see rem. on Gen 21:31. Ziklag, at the ancient Asluj, see Jos 15:31. Mekonah, mentioned only here, and unknown. En-rimmon; see rem. on 1Ch 4:32. Zareah, Jarmuth, Zanoah, and Adullam in the plains (see Jos 15:33-35), where were also Lachish and Azekah; see on 2Ch 11:9.

- In Neh 11:30 the whole region then inhabited by Jews is comprised in the words: “And they dwelt from Beer-sheba (the south-western boundary of Canaan) to the valley of Hinnom, in Jerusalem,” through which ran the boundaries of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah (Jos 15:8).

Neh 11:25-30 The districts inhabited by the children of Judah. “And with respect to the towns in their fields, there dwelt of the sons of Judah in Kirjath-arba and its daughters,” etc. The use of אל as an introductory or emphatic particle is peculiar to this passage, ל ,egassap being elsewhere customary in this sense; comp. Ew. §310, a . אל denotes a respect to something.

חצרים, properly enclosures, signifies, according to Lev 25:31, villages, towns, boroughs, without walls. שׂדות, fields, field boundaries. בּנותיה, the villages and estates belonging to a town; as frequently in the lists of towns in the book of Joshua. Kirjath-arba is Hebron, Gen 23:2. Jekabzeel, like Kabzeel, Jos 15:21. חצריה, its enclosed places, the estates belonging to a town, as in Jos 15:45.

Jeshua, mentioned only here, and unknown. Moladah and Beth-phelet, Jos 15:26-27. Hazar-shual, i. e. , Fox-court, probably to be sought for in the ruins of Thaly; see rem. on Jos 15:28. Beersheba, now Bir es Seba; see rem. on Gen 21:31. Ziklag, at the ancient Asluj, see Jos 15:31. Mekonah, mentioned only here, and unknown. En-rimmon; see rem. on 1Ch 4:32. Zareah, Jarmuth, Zanoah, and Adullam in the plains (see Jos 15:33-35), where were also Lachish and Azekah; see on 2Ch 11:9.

- In Neh 11:30 the whole region then inhabited by Jews is comprised in the words: “And they dwelt from Beer-sheba (the south-western boundary of Canaan) to the valley of Hinnom, in Jerusalem,” through which ran the boundaries of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah (Jos 15:8).

Neh 11:25-30 The districts inhabited by the children of Judah. “And with respect to the towns in their fields, there dwelt of the sons of Judah in Kirjath-arba and its daughters,” etc. The use of אל as an introductory or emphatic particle is peculiar to this passage, ל ,egassap being elsewhere customary in this sense; comp. Ew. §310, a . אל denotes a respect to something.

חצרים, properly enclosures, signifies, according to Lev 25:31, villages, towns, boroughs, without walls. שׂדות, fields, field boundaries. בּנותיה, the villages and estates belonging to a town; as frequently in the lists of towns in the book of Joshua. Kirjath-arba is Hebron, Gen 23:2. Jekabzeel, like Kabzeel, Jos 15:21. חצריה, its enclosed places, the estates belonging to a town, as in Jos 15:45.

Jeshua, mentioned only here, and unknown. Moladah and Beth-phelet, Jos 15:26-27. Hazar-shual, i. e. , Fox-court, probably to be sought for in the ruins of Thaly; see rem. on Jos 15:28. Beersheba, now Bir es Seba; see rem. on Gen 21:31. Ziklag, at the ancient Asluj, see Jos 15:31. Mekonah, mentioned only here, and unknown. En-rimmon; see rem. on 1Ch 4:32. Zareah, Jarmuth, Zanoah, and Adullam in the plains (see Jos 15:33-35), where were also Lachish and Azekah; see on 2Ch 11:9.

- In Neh 11:30 the whole region then inhabited by Jews is comprised in the words: “And they dwelt from Beer-sheba (the south-western boundary of Canaan) to the valley of Hinnom, in Jerusalem,” through which ran the boundaries of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah (Jos 15:8).

Neh 11:25-30 The districts inhabited by the children of Judah. “And with respect to the towns in their fields, there dwelt of the sons of Judah in Kirjath-arba and its daughters,” etc. The use of אל as an introductory or emphatic particle is peculiar to this passage, ל ,egassap being elsewhere customary in this sense; comp. Ew. §310, a . אל denotes a respect to something.

חצרים, properly enclosures, signifies, according to Lev 25:31, villages, towns, boroughs, without walls. שׂדות, fields, field boundaries. בּנותיה, the villages and estates belonging to a town; as frequently in the lists of towns in the book of Joshua. Kirjath-arba is Hebron, Gen 23:2. Jekabzeel, like Kabzeel, Jos 15:21. חצריה, its enclosed places, the estates belonging to a town, as in Jos 15:45.

Jeshua, mentioned only here, and unknown. Moladah and Beth-phelet, Jos 15:26-27. Hazar-shual, i. e. , Fox-court, probably to be sought for in the ruins of Thaly; see rem. on Jos 15:28. Beersheba, now Bir es Seba; see rem. on Gen 21:31. Ziklag, at the ancient Asluj, see Jos 15:31. Mekonah, mentioned only here, and unknown. En-rimmon; see rem. on 1Ch 4:32. Zareah, Jarmuth, Zanoah, and Adullam in the plains (see Jos 15:33-35), where were also Lachish and Azekah; see on 2Ch 11:9.

- In Neh 11:30 the whole region then inhabited by Jews is comprised in the words: “And they dwelt from Beer-sheba (the south-western boundary of Canaan) to the valley of Hinnom, in Jerusalem,” through which ran the boundaries of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah (Jos 15:8).

Neh 11:31-35 The dwellings of the Benjamites. Neh 11:31 The children of Benjamin dwelt from Geba to Michmash, Aija, etc. Geba, according to 2Ki 23:8 and Jos 14:10, the northern boundary of the kingdom of Judah, is the half-ruined village of Jibia in the Wady el Jib, three leagues north of Jerusalem, and three-quarters of a league north-east of Ramah (Er Ram); see on Jos 18:24.

Michmash (מכמשׁ or מכמס), now Mukhmas, sixty-three minutes north-east of Geba, and three and a half leagues north of Jerusalem; see rem. on 1Sa 13:2. Aija (עיּא or עיּת, Isa 10:28), probably one with העי, Jos 7:2; Jos 8:1. , the situation of which is still a matter of dispute, Van de Velde supposing it to be the present Tell el Hadshar, three-quarters of a league south-east of Beitin; while Schegg, on the contrary, places it in the position of the present Tayibeh, six leagues north of Jerusalem (see Delitzsch on Isa.

at Isa 10:28-32, etc. , translation), - a position scarcely according with Isa 10:28. , the road from Tayibeh to Michmash and Geba not leading past Migron (Makhrun), which is not far from Beitin. We therefore abide by the view advocated by Krafft and Strauss, that the ruins of Medinet Chai or Gai, east of Geba, point out the situation of the ancient Ai or Ajja; see rem.

on Jos 7:2. Bethel is the present Beitin; see on Jos 7:2. The position of Nob is not as yet certainly ascertained, important objections existing to its identification with the village el-Isawije, between Anâta and Jerusalem; comp. Valentiner (in the Zeitschrift d. deutsch. morgld. Gesellsch. xii. p. 169), who, on grounds worthy of consideration, transposes Nob to the northern heights before Jerusalem, the road from which leads into the valley of Kidron.

Ananiah (ענניה), a place named only here, is conjectured by Van de Velde (after R. Schwartz), Mem . p. 284, to be the present Beit Hanina (Arab. hnı̂nâ ), east of Nebi Samwil; against which conjecture even the exchange of ע and ח raises objections; comp. Tobler, Topographie , ii. p. 414. Hazor of Benjamin, supposed by Robinson ( Palestine ) to be Tell 'Assur, north of Tayibeh, is much more probably found by Tobler, Topographie , ii.

p. 400, in Khirbet Arsûr, perhaps Assur, Arab. ‛ṣûr , eight minutes eastward of Bir Nebâla (between Rama and Gibeon); comp. Van de Velde, Mem . p. 319. Ramah, now er Râm, two leagues north of Jerusalem; see rem. on Jos 18:25. Githaim, whither the Beerothites fled, 2Sa 4:3, is not yet discovered. Tobler ( dritte Wand . p. 175) considers it very rash to identify it with the village Katanneh in Wady Mansur.

Hadid, Ἀδιδά, see rem. on Ezr 2:33. Zeboim, in a valley of the same name (1Sa 13:18), is not yet discovered. Neballat, mentioned only here, is preserved in Beith Nebala, about two leagues north-east of Ludd (Lydda); comp. Rob. Palestine , and Van de Velde, Mem . p. 336. With respect to Lod and Ono, see rem. on 1Ch 8:12; and on the valley of craftsmen, comp. 1Ch 4:14.

The omission of Jericho, Gibeon, and Mizpah is the more remarkable, inasmuch as inhabitants of these towns are mentioned as taking part in the building of the wall (Neh 3:2, Neh 3:7).

Neh 11:31-35 The dwellings of the Benjamites. Neh 11:31 The children of Benjamin dwelt from Geba to Michmash, Aija, etc. Geba, according to 2Ki 23:8 and Jos 14:10, the northern boundary of the kingdom of Judah, is the half-ruined village of Jibia in the Wady el Jib, three leagues north of Jerusalem, and three-quarters of a league north-east of Ramah (Er Ram); see on Jos 18:24.

Michmash (מכמשׁ or מכמס), now Mukhmas, sixty-three minutes north-east of Geba, and three and a half leagues north of Jerusalem; see rem. on 1Sa 13:2. Aija (עיּא or עיּת, Isa 10:28), probably one with העי, Jos 7:2; Jos 8:1. , the situation of which is still a matter of dispute, Van de Velde supposing it to be the present Tell el Hadshar, three-quarters of a league south-east of Beitin; while Schegg, on the contrary, places it in the position of the present Tayibeh, six leagues north of Jerusalem (see Delitzsch on Isa.

at Isa 10:28-32, etc. , translation), - a position scarcely according with Isa 10:28. , the road from Tayibeh to Michmash and Geba not leading past Migron (Makhrun), which is not far from Beitin. We therefore abide by the view advocated by Krafft and Strauss, that the ruins of Medinet Chai or Gai, east of Geba, point out the situation of the ancient Ai or Ajja; see rem.

on Jos 7:2. Bethel is the present Beitin; see on Jos 7:2. The position of Nob is not as yet certainly ascertained, important objections existing to its identification with the village el-Isawije, between Anâta and Jerusalem; comp. Valentiner (in the Zeitschrift d. deutsch. morgld. Gesellsch. xii. p. 169), who, on grounds worthy of consideration, transposes Nob to the northern heights before Jerusalem, the road from which leads into the valley of Kidron.

Ananiah (ענניה), a place named only here, is conjectured by Van de Velde (after R. Schwartz), Mem . p. 284, to be the present Beit Hanina (Arab. hnı̂nâ ), east of Nebi Samwil; against which conjecture even the exchange of ע and ח raises objections; comp. Tobler, Topographie , ii. p. 414. Hazor of Benjamin, supposed by Robinson ( Palestine ) to be Tell 'Assur, north of Tayibeh, is much more probably found by Tobler, Topographie , ii.

p. 400, in Khirbet Arsûr, perhaps Assur, Arab. ‛ṣûr , eight minutes eastward of Bir Nebâla (between Rama and Gibeon); comp. Van de Velde, Mem . p. 319. Ramah, now er Râm, two leagues north of Jerusalem; see rem. on Jos 18:25. Githaim, whither the Beerothites fled, 2Sa 4:3, is not yet discovered. Tobler ( dritte Wand . p. 175) considers it very rash to identify it with the village Katanneh in Wady Mansur.

Hadid, Ἀδιδά, see rem. on Ezr 2:33. Zeboim, in a valley of the same name (1Sa 13:18), is not yet discovered. Neballat, mentioned only here, is preserved in Beith Nebala, about two leagues north-east of Ludd (Lydda); comp. Rob. Palestine , and Van de Velde, Mem . p. 336. With respect to Lod and Ono, see rem. on 1Ch 8:12; and on the valley of craftsmen, comp. 1Ch 4:14.

The omission of Jericho, Gibeon, and Mizpah is the more remarkable, inasmuch as inhabitants of these towns are mentioned as taking part in the building of the wall (Neh 3:2, Neh 3:7).

Neh 11:31-35 The dwellings of the Benjamites. Neh 11:31 The children of Benjamin dwelt from Geba to Michmash, Aija, etc. Geba, according to 2Ki 23:8 and Jos 14:10, the northern boundary of the kingdom of Judah, is the half-ruined village of Jibia in the Wady el Jib, three leagues north of Jerusalem, and three-quarters of a league north-east of Ramah (Er Ram); see on Jos 18:24.

Michmash (מכמשׁ or מכמס), now Mukhmas, sixty-three minutes north-east of Geba, and three and a half leagues north of Jerusalem; see rem. on 1Sa 13:2. Aija (עיּא or עיּת, Isa 10:28), probably one with העי, Jos 7:2; Jos 8:1. , the situation of which is still a matter of dispute, Van de Velde supposing it to be the present Tell el Hadshar, three-quarters of a league south-east of Beitin; while Schegg, on the contrary, places it in the position of the present Tayibeh, six leagues north of Jerusalem (see Delitzsch on Isa.

at Isa 10:28-32, etc. , translation), - a position scarcely according with Isa 10:28. , the road from Tayibeh to Michmash and Geba not leading past Migron (Makhrun), which is not far from Beitin. We therefore abide by the view advocated by Krafft and Strauss, that the ruins of Medinet Chai or Gai, east of Geba, point out the situation of the ancient Ai or Ajja; see rem.

on Jos 7:2. Bethel is the present Beitin; see on Jos 7:2. The position of Nob is not as yet certainly ascertained, important objections existing to its identification with the village el-Isawije, between Anâta and Jerusalem; comp. Valentiner (in the Zeitschrift d. deutsch. morgld. Gesellsch. xii. p. 169), who, on grounds worthy of consideration, transposes Nob to the northern heights before Jerusalem, the road from which leads into the valley of Kidron.

Ananiah (ענניה), a place named only here, is conjectured by Van de Velde (after R. Schwartz), Mem . p. 284, to be the present Beit Hanina (Arab. hnı̂nâ ), east of Nebi Samwil; against which conjecture even the exchange of ע and ח raises objections; comp. Tobler, Topographie , ii. p. 414. Hazor of Benjamin, supposed by Robinson ( Palestine ) to be Tell 'Assur, north of Tayibeh, is much more probably found by Tobler, Topographie , ii.

p. 400, in Khirbet Arsûr, perhaps Assur, Arab. ‛ṣûr , eight minutes eastward of Bir Nebâla (between Rama and Gibeon); comp. Van de Velde, Mem . p. 319. Ramah, now er Râm, two leagues north of Jerusalem; see rem. on Jos 18:25. Githaim, whither the Beerothites fled, 2Sa 4:3, is not yet discovered. Tobler ( dritte Wand . p. 175) considers it very rash to identify it with the village Katanneh in Wady Mansur.

Hadid, Ἀδιδά, see rem. on Ezr 2:33. Zeboim, in a valley of the same name (1Sa 13:18), is not yet discovered. Neballat, mentioned only here, is preserved in Beith Nebala, about two leagues north-east of Ludd (Lydda); comp. Rob. Palestine , and Van de Velde, Mem . p. 336. With respect to Lod and Ono, see rem. on 1Ch 8:12; and on the valley of craftsmen, comp. 1Ch 4:14.

The omission of Jericho, Gibeon, and Mizpah is the more remarkable, inasmuch as inhabitants of these towns are mentioned as taking part in the building of the wall (Neh 3:2, Neh 3:7).

Neh 11:31-35 The dwellings of the Benjamites. Neh 11:31 The children of Benjamin dwelt from Geba to Michmash, Aija, etc. Geba, according to 2Ki 23:8 and Jos 14:10, the northern boundary of the kingdom of Judah, is the half-ruined village of Jibia in the Wady el Jib, three leagues north of Jerusalem, and three-quarters of a league north-east of Ramah (Er Ram); see on Jos 18:24.

Michmash (מכמשׁ or מכמס), now Mukhmas, sixty-three minutes north-east of Geba, and three and a half leagues north of Jerusalem; see rem. on 1Sa 13:2. Aija (עיּא or עיּת, Isa 10:28), probably one with העי, Jos 7:2; Jos 8:1. , the situation of which is still a matter of dispute, Van de Velde supposing it to be the present Tell el Hadshar, three-quarters of a league south-east of Beitin; while Schegg, on the contrary, places it in the position of the present Tayibeh, six leagues north of Jerusalem (see Delitzsch on Isa.

at Isa 10:28-32, etc. , translation), - a position scarcely according with Isa 10:28. , the road from Tayibeh to Michmash and Geba not leading past Migron (Makhrun), which is not far from Beitin. We therefore abide by the view advocated by Krafft and Strauss, that the ruins of Medinet Chai or Gai, east of Geba, point out the situation of the ancient Ai or Ajja; see rem.

on Jos 7:2. Bethel is the present Beitin; see on Jos 7:2. The position of Nob is not as yet certainly ascertained, important objections existing to its identification with the village el-Isawije, between Anâta and Jerusalem; comp. Valentiner (in the Zeitschrift d. deutsch. morgld. Gesellsch. xii. p. 169), who, on grounds worthy of consideration, transposes Nob to the northern heights before Jerusalem, the road from which leads into the valley of Kidron.

Ananiah (ענניה), a place named only here, is conjectured by Van de Velde (after R. Schwartz), Mem . p. 284, to be the present Beit Hanina (Arab. hnı̂nâ ), east of Nebi Samwil; against which conjecture even the exchange of ע and ח raises objections; comp. Tobler, Topographie , ii. p. 414. Hazor of Benjamin, supposed by Robinson ( Palestine ) to be Tell 'Assur, north of Tayibeh, is much more probably found by Tobler, Topographie , ii.

p. 400, in Khirbet Arsûr, perhaps Assur, Arab. ‛ṣûr , eight minutes eastward of Bir Nebâla (between Rama and Gibeon); comp. Van de Velde, Mem . p. 319. Ramah, now er Râm, two leagues north of Jerusalem; see rem. on Jos 18:25. Githaim, whither the Beerothites fled, 2Sa 4:3, is not yet discovered. Tobler ( dritte Wand . p. 175) considers it very rash to identify it with the village Katanneh in Wady Mansur.

Hadid, Ἀδιδά, see rem. on Ezr 2:33. Zeboim, in a valley of the same name (1Sa 13:18), is not yet discovered. Neballat, mentioned only here, is preserved in Beith Nebala, about two leagues north-east of Ludd (Lydda); comp. Rob. Palestine , and Van de Velde, Mem . p. 336. With respect to Lod and Ono, see rem. on 1Ch 8:12; and on the valley of craftsmen, comp. 1Ch 4:14.

The omission of Jericho, Gibeon, and Mizpah is the more remarkable, inasmuch as inhabitants of these towns are mentioned as taking part in the building of the wall (Neh 3:2, Neh 3:7).

Neh 11:31-35 The dwellings of the Benjamites. Neh 11:31 The children of Benjamin dwelt from Geba to Michmash, Aija, etc. Geba, according to 2Ki 23:8 and Jos 14:10, the northern boundary of the kingdom of Judah, is the half-ruined village of Jibia in the Wady el Jib, three leagues north of Jerusalem, and three-quarters of a league north-east of Ramah (Er Ram); see on Jos 18:24.

Michmash (מכמשׁ or מכמס), now Mukhmas, sixty-three minutes north-east of Geba, and three and a half leagues north of Jerusalem; see rem. on 1Sa 13:2. Aija (עיּא or עיּת, Isa 10:28), probably one with העי, Jos 7:2; Jos 8:1. , the situation of which is still a matter of dispute, Van de Velde supposing it to be the present Tell el Hadshar, three-quarters of a league south-east of Beitin; while Schegg, on the contrary, places it in the position of the present Tayibeh, six leagues north of Jerusalem (see Delitzsch on Isa.

at Isa 10:28-32, etc. , translation), - a position scarcely according with Isa 10:28. , the road from Tayibeh to Michmash and Geba not leading past Migron (Makhrun), which is not far from Beitin. We therefore abide by the view advocated by Krafft and Strauss, that the ruins of Medinet Chai or Gai, east of Geba, point out the situation of the ancient Ai or Ajja; see rem.

on Jos 7:2. Bethel is the present Beitin; see on Jos 7:2. The position of Nob is not as yet certainly ascertained, important objections existing to its identification with the village el-Isawije, between Anâta and Jerusalem; comp. Valentiner (in the Zeitschrift d. deutsch. morgld. Gesellsch. xii. p. 169), who, on grounds worthy of consideration, transposes Nob to the northern heights before Jerusalem, the road from which leads into the valley of Kidron.

Ananiah (ענניה), a place named only here, is conjectured by Van de Velde (after R. Schwartz), Mem . p. 284, to be the present Beit Hanina (Arab. hnı̂nâ ), east of Nebi Samwil; against which conjecture even the exchange of ע and ח raises objections; comp. Tobler, Topographie , ii. p. 414. Hazor of Benjamin, supposed by Robinson ( Palestine ) to be Tell 'Assur, north of Tayibeh, is much more probably found by Tobler, Topographie , ii.

p. 400, in Khirbet Arsûr, perhaps Assur, Arab. ‛ṣûr , eight minutes eastward of Bir Nebâla (between Rama and Gibeon); comp. Van de Velde, Mem . p. 319. Ramah, now er Râm, two leagues north of Jerusalem; see rem. on Jos 18:25. Githaim, whither the Beerothites fled, 2Sa 4:3, is not yet discovered. Tobler ( dritte Wand . p. 175) considers it very rash to identify it with the village Katanneh in Wady Mansur.

Hadid, Ἀδιδά, see rem. on Ezr 2:33. Zeboim, in a valley of the same name (1Sa 13:18), is not yet discovered. Neballat, mentioned only here, is preserved in Beith Nebala, about two leagues north-east of Ludd (Lydda); comp. Rob. Palestine , and Van de Velde, Mem . p. 336. With respect to Lod and Ono, see rem. on 1Ch 8:12; and on the valley of craftsmen, comp. 1Ch 4:14.

The omission of Jericho, Gibeon, and Mizpah is the more remarkable, inasmuch as inhabitants of these towns are mentioned as taking part in the building of the wall (Neh 3:2, Neh 3:7).

Neh 11:36 The enumeration concludes with the remark, “Of the Levites came divisions of Judah to Benjamin,” which can only signify that divisions of Levites who, according to former arrangements, belonged to Judah, now came to Benjamin, i. e. , dwelt among the Benjamites. Lists of Priests and Levites. Dedication of the Wall of Jerusalem - Nehemiah 12:1-43 The list of the inhabitants of the province, Neh 11, is followed by lists of the priests and Levites (Neh 12:1-26).

These different lists are, in point of fact, all connected with the genealogical register of the Israelite population of the whole province, taken by Nehemiah (Neh 7:5) for the purpose of enlarging the population of Jerusalem, though the lists of the orders of priests and Levites in the present chapter were made partly at an earlier, and partly at a subsequent period. It is because of this actual connection that they are inserted in the history of the building of the wall of Jerusalem, which terminates with the narrative of the solemn dedication of the completed wall in vv.

27-43.

Lists of the orders of priests and Levites . - Neh 12:1-9 contain a list of the heads of the priests and Levites who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel and Joshua. The high priests during five generations are next mentioned by name, Neh 12:10, Neh 12:11. Then follow the names of the heads of the priestly houses in the days of Joiakim the high priest; and finally, Neh 12:22-26, the names of the heads of the Levites at the same period, with titles and subscriptions.

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 ראשׁי. 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 מלוּכי ( Chethiv , Neh 12:14) for מלּוּך (Neh 12:2); שׁכניה (Neh 12:3) for שׁבניה (Neh 12:14, Neh 10:6); רחם (Neh 12:3), a transposition of חרם (Neh 12:15, Neh 10:6); מריות (Neh 12:15) instead of מרמות (Neh 12:3, Neh 10:6); עדיא ( Chethiv , Neh 12:16) instead of עדּוא (Neh 12:4); מיּמין (Neh 12:5) for מנימין (Neh 12:17); מועדיה (Neh 12:17) for מעדיה (Neh 12:4), or, according to a different pronunciation, מעזיה (Neh 10:9); סלּי (Neh 12:20) for סלּוּ (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 עזרא, Neh 12:2, Neh 12:13.

Of the names enumerated in Neh 10, Pashur, Malchiah, Obadiah, 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, 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.

Lists of the orders of priests and Levites . - Neh 12:1-9 contain a list of the heads of the priests and Levites who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel and Joshua. The high priests during five generations are next mentioned by name, Neh 12:10, Neh 12:11. Then follow the names of the heads of the priestly houses in the days of Joiakim the high priest; and finally, Neh 12:22-26, the names of the heads of the Levites at the same period, with titles and subscriptions.

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 ראשׁי. 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 מלוּכי ( Chethiv , Neh 12:14) for מלּוּך (Neh 12:2); שׁכניה (Neh 12:3) for שׁבניה (Neh 12:14, Neh 10:6); רחם (Neh 12:3), a transposition of חרם (Neh 12:15, Neh 10:6); מריות (Neh 12:15) instead of מרמות (Neh 12:3, Neh 10:6); עדיא ( Chethiv , Neh 12:16) instead of עדּוא (Neh 12:4); מיּמין (Neh 12:5) for מנימין (Neh 12:17); מועדיה (Neh 12:17) for מעדיה (Neh 12:4), or, according to a different pronunciation, מעזיה (Neh 10:9); סלּי (Neh 12:20) for סלּוּ (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 עזרא, Neh 12:2, Neh 12:13.

Of the names enumerated in Neh 10, Pashur, Malchiah, Obadiah, 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, 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.

Lists of the orders of priests and Levites . - Neh 12:1-9 contain a list of the heads of the priests and Levites who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel and Joshua. The high priests during five generations are next mentioned by name, Neh 12:10, Neh 12:11. Then follow the names of the heads of the priestly houses in the days of Joiakim the high priest; and finally, Neh 12:22-26, the names of the heads of the Levites at the same period, with titles and subscriptions.

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 ראשׁי. 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 מלוּכי ( Chethiv , Neh 12:14) for מלּוּך (Neh 12:2); שׁכניה (Neh 12:3) for שׁבניה (Neh 12:14, Neh 10:6); רחם (Neh 12:3), a transposition of חרם (Neh 12:15, Neh 10:6); מריות (Neh 12:15) instead of מרמות (Neh 12:3, Neh 10:6); עדיא ( Chethiv , Neh 12:16) instead of עדּוא (Neh 12:4); מיּמין (Neh 12:5) for מנימין (Neh 12:17); מועדיה (Neh 12:17) for מעדיה (Neh 12:4), or, according to a different pronunciation, מעזיה (Neh 10:9); סלּי (Neh 12:20) for סלּוּ (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 עזרא, Neh 12:2, Neh 12:13.

Of the names enumerated in Neh 10, Pashur, Malchiah, Obadiah, 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, 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.

Lists of the orders of priests and Levites . - Neh 12:1-9 contain a list of the heads of the priests and Levites who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel and Joshua. The high priests during five generations are next mentioned by name, Neh 12:10, Neh 12:11. Then follow the names of the heads of the priestly houses in the days of Joiakim the high priest; and finally, Neh 12:22-26, the names of the heads of the Levites at the same period, with titles and subscriptions.

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 ראשׁי. 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 מלוּכי ( Chethiv , Neh 12:14) for מלּוּך (Neh 12:2); שׁכניה (Neh 12:3) for שׁבניה (Neh 12:14, Neh 10:6); רחם (Neh 12:3), a transposition of חרם (Neh 12:15, Neh 10:6); מריות (Neh 12:15) instead of מרמות (Neh 12:3, Neh 10:6); עדיא ( Chethiv , Neh 12:16) instead of עדּוא (Neh 12:4); מיּמין (Neh 12:5) for מנימין (Neh 12:17); מועדיה (Neh 12:17) for מעדיה (Neh 12:4), or, according to a different pronunciation, מעזיה (Neh 10:9); סלּי (Neh 12:20) for סלּוּ (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 עזרא, Neh 12:2, Neh 12:13.

Of the names enumerated in Neh 10, Pashur, Malchiah, Obadiah, 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, 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.