Chapter 3

The names and order of them that builded the wall.

1. Then Eliashib. It is fitting to find Eliashib the high priest setting a right example on this occasion. Later on he became “allied” by marriage to Tobiah (ch. 13:4) and was guilty of profaning the Temple (ch. 13:5). According to the line of high priests given in ch. 12:10, 11, it appears that Eliashib was the son of Joiakim, and the grandson of Jeshua, who had returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Ezra 2:2; 3:2).

The special purpose of this chapter seems to be the rendering of honor where honor was due—the placing on record of the names of the men who nobly came to the front on this important occasion, sacrificed ease to duty, and thereby exposed themselves to a threatened hostile attack (ch. 4:18–20).

With his brethren. That is, the priests in general. That the priests undertook the building of a portion of the eastern wall, in addition to the work here mentioned, is apparent from v. 28.

The sheep gate. This gate seems to have been completely in ruins. It was at the eastern end of the north wall, which here marked the limits of the Temple compound (see The Walls of Jerusalem in Nehemiah’s Day). The sheep market was probably in its neighborhood and gave to the gate its name (see John 5:2).

They sanctified it. This appears to have been a preliminary dedication, distinct from that described in ch. 12:27–43. Having completed the Sheep Gate and the wall extending westward as far as the Tower of Hananeel, the priests anticipated the general dedication by a special one of their own, thus acknowledging the sacred character of the work at the earliest possible moment.

The tower. The towers of Meah (Heb. HammeХah, literally, “the hundred”) and Hananeel, apparently belonged to the Temple fortress (see on ch. 2:8). Since no building activity at the towers is mentioned, they seem to have been intact.

2. The men of Jericho. The portion of the wall next to Eliashib was rebuilt by the citizens of Jericho. That Jericho was part of the restored Judea is apparent from Ezra 2:34.

Zaccur. The sections of the wall listed seem to have been of varying length, and the amount of labor necessary to restore them seems to have varied also. For some sections the delegation from an entire city was responsible, while, as in the case of Zaccur, a single man or a family took charge of another section. Zaccur was a Levite who later signed a special covenant between the people and God (ch. 10:12).

3. The fish gate. This gate was probably near the fish market where the Tyrians sold their fish (ch. 13:16). It seems to have been located in the middle of the northern wall (see also Neh. 12:39; 2 Chron. 33:14; Zeph. 1:10).

The sons of Hassenaah. See on Ezra 2:35.

Locks. Heb. manХulim, translated “locks” in the KJV and “bolts” in the RSV, is of obscure meaning. It has been suggested that this word designates bars, hinges, or straps.

Bars. This word, correctly translated “bars,” appears frequently in the Bible and designates the crossbars by means of which the gates might be bolted from the inside.

4. Meremoth. A member of one of the priestly families that had not been able to establish its identity at the time of Zerubbabel (see Ezra 2:61). He had been a traveling companion of Ezra (Ezra 8:33; cf. Neh. 3:21). Now he built two sections of the wall (Neh. 3:21), and some months later signed the covenant (ch. 10:5).

Meshullam. One of the chief men who accompanied Ezra 13 years earlier on his return from Babylon (Ezra 8:16). He now took the responsibility of building two wall sections (Neh. 3:30), and later signed the covenant of Nehemiah as a tribal head (ch. 10:20). Although he was a loyal supporter of Nehemiah’s cause, Nehemiah complains that he had given his daughter to a son of the enemy, Tobiah (ch. 6:18).

5. The Tekoites. The people of Tekoa, a small town about 5 mi. south of Bethlehem now called TequЖФ. From Tekoa came the “wise woman” whom Joab sent to influence David to bring Absalom home (2 Sam. 14:2, 3). Its small size seems to have been responsible for the fact that it does not appear either in the city and town list of those who returned with Zerubbabel (Ezra 2:20–35) or the census list of Neh. 11:25–36.

Repaired. Few in number, the Tekoites were assigned a wall section that needed repair but not thorough rebuilding. Nevertheless, they seem to have been so full of zeal that they assumed responsibility for repairing also a second section of the wall (v. 27).

The nobles. The upper classes, Хadirim, literally, “exalted ones,” withdrew from the work, as oxen withdraw their necks from the yoke (see Jer. 27:11, 12). They stood aloof, leaving the work to the common people. This is the first case of passive opposition recorded by Nehemiah. Later, other cases are found in his report.

6. Old gate. Heb. shaФar hayyeshanah, meaning literally “the gate of oldness,” or in English simply “the old gate.” Though the Hebrew construction has given rise to many variant translations, there is no need of assuming a textual error, as most translators and commentators have done. Some commentators have suggested that the word for “city” has been lost, and read “the gate of the old city.” But this suggestion is equally unacceptable, since the “old gate” was in a section of the wall that enclosed the latest addition to the city. The LXX translates yeshanah as a proper name, Isana. The Hebrew would then read, the “Yeshanah gate.” The gate may have received its name from the city of Jeshanah, now Burj elРIsaЖneh, northwest of Baal-hazor, which is about 15 mi. north of Jerusalem (2 Chron. 13:19). The “old gate” is usually identified with the “corner gate” of 2 Kings 14:13 and Jer. 31:38, which was situated at the northwest corner of the city wall.

7. The Gibeonite. Gibeon is now ejРJib, 6 mi. (9.6 km.) northwest of Jerusalem.

The Meronothite. The location of Meronoth is unknown. It must have been near Gibeon and Mizpah (see 1 Chron. 27:30).

Mizpah. Probably the site of Tell enРNasbeh, 8 mi. (14.4 km.) north of Jerusalem.

Unto the throne of the governor. The meaning of the phrase thus translated is uncertain. It designates either the region from which the builders of this section of the wall came or the extent of their activity on the wall. According to the first interpretation, these men came from Gibeon, Meronoth, Mizpah, and as far north as the seat of the governor of the province “Beyond the River,” which would mean that some isolated Jews had come from the satrap’s residence at Damascus or Aleppo. According to the second interpretation the “throne of the governor” was the residence of the satrap when he came to Jerusalem on official business. If so, the building must have been in close proximity to the wall.

8. The goldsmiths. The skilled craftsmen, such as goldsmiths and pharmacists, may not have belonged to recognized family or city units, like the other builders, and so were listed separately.

Fortified. Heb. Фazab, perhaps “to prepare.” The LXX renders Фazab, “they left,” an alternative reading also given in the KJV margin. But such a translation of the word in this context would be meaningless, even though Фazab has some such meaning in all other passages where it is found. Most translators have surmised that it was a technical term used in building. In the recently discovered texts of Ras Shamrah a word Фadab is frequently used, with the meaning “to make,” “to prepare,” “to set.” Since in a related Semitic language the letter d can replace the Hebrew z as it also does in Aramaic, there is little doubt that the Фadab of the Ras Shamrah texts is the equivalent of the Фazab of Neh. 3:8, and that the KJV translation is at least approximately correct.

The broad wall. An unknown topographical detail at Jerusalem.

9. The half part of Jerusalem. The city itself does not seem to have been so divided; however, the territory outside the wall was considered as belonging to it, as is implied by the LXX. This surrounding territory was probably divided into two portions, and a ruler was put over each one (see v. 12).

10. Over against his house. The part of the wall repaired by Jedaiah lay in front of his own house, which was probably adjacent to or near the wall. He would naturally take special interest in the restoration of the part of the wall that would ensure him protection. The same expression, or similar expressions, are found in vs. 23, 28–30.

11. The other piece. Literally, “a second piece.” It is implied that the longer sections of the wall were divided between two companies of workmen. But then it seems strange that in none of these instances is a first portion mentioned; the second alone is mentioned (see vs. 19–21, 24, 27, 30). However, in two of the seven cases where a second portion is mentioned, the builders are previously listed as also being engaged on another section of the wall. Perhaps the same was true of the other five instances, though this is not apparent in the record as it stands today.

The tower of the furnaces. Or, “the Tower of the Ovens” (RSV). It is mentioned again in ch. 12:38, and must have been on the western wall, though its exact position cannot be determined.

12. Daughters. Most interpreters prefer the translation, “villages” (see ch. 11:25–31, where the Hebrew word is thus translated). These would be villages over which Shallum ruled as head of half a district. Some commentators, however, accept a literal interpretation, thinking that Shallum’s daughters aided him in the work. This view cannot be rejected on ethical grounds, since it is not uncommon in the East for women to do heavy work.

13. The valley gate. See on ch. 2:13.

Zanoah. This town lay in the vicinity of Beth-shemesh, about 14 mi. (22.4 km.) southwest of Jerusalem as the crow flies. The site is now called Khirbet ZanuЖФ.

A thousand cubits. An important topographical notation giving the distance between the Valley Gate and the Dung Gate as 1,458 ft. (444.4 m.). Some have doubted that one group could repair so large a section and accordingly have interpreted the words as a topographical parenthesis giving the distance between the two gates. But the expression is specific. Probably some parts of the wall were less severely damaged than others, and could therefore be easily repaired.

14. Dung gate. See on ch. 2:13, where the same Hebrew words are rendered “dung port.”

Beth-haccerem. Usually identified with ФAin KaЖrim, 4 mi. (7.2 km.) west of Jerusalem, but recently with Ramoth Rahel, 21/2 mi. (3.2 km.) south of Jerusalem.

15. Gate of the fountain. See on ch. 2:14.

Ruler of part of Mizpah. That is, of the district of Mizpah, as distinguished from the town of Mizpah (see v. 19; see on v. 7).

Siloah. Also spelled Shiloah (Isa. 8:6) and Siloam (John 9:7, 11). There was also a town known as Siloam (Luke 13:4), now SilwaЖn, on the southwestern slopes of the Mt. of Olives. The rock tunnel that still supplies the Pool of Siloam from the spring Gihon in the Kidron Valley was constructed by Hezekiah (see on 2 Kings 20:20). It was in this conduit that the famous Siloam inscription was found (see Vol. II, p. 87, for a translation).

The king’s garden. This lay in the southern part of the Kidron Valley where the inhabitants of SilwaЖn now have their vegetable gardens.

The stairs. Not identified. Since the “City of David” lay on the southeastern hill, a flight of steps from the upper city to the vicinity of the Pool of Siloam in the southern and lowermost part of the walled city must be meant.

16. Nehemiah the son of Azbuk. Not to be confused with the author of the book of Nehemiah.

Beth-zur. A city that became famous in the time of the Maccabees, and now called Khirbet etРTubeiqah. It lies about 4 mi. (6.4 km.) north of Hebron. American expeditions excavated it in 1931 and 1957.

The sepulchres of David. These tombs, situated within the city (Kings 2:10; 11:43; etc.), were still known in the time of the apostles (Acts 2:29), but a knowledge of their exact location has since been lost.

Pool that was made. An artificial pool, otherwise unknown.

House of the mighty. Location unknown. It must have been the military headquarters or the armory.

17. Keilah. Today Khirbet QйЖla, 8 mi. northwest of Hebron. Keilah played an important role in David’s early history (see 1 Sam. 23:1), and lay near the Philistine border.

19. Another piece. See on v. 11. Ezer is not previously mentioned as repairing any portion of the wall, though “the men of … Mizpah” are so listed (v. 7). Ezer apparently either was their leader or replaced the original leader.

The going up. The clause thus introduced was understood by any contemporary of Nehemiah, but is not clear to us. There were probably several armories in Jerusalem (see Isa. 22:8). The one here called “the armoury at the turning [or, of the corner],” was apparently situated at a turn in the eastern wall. Either steps or a pathway led to it from the Kidron Valley.

20. Baruch. Baruch has the high honor of being singled out for special praise. He rapidly accomplished the first task assigned him, mention of which is not made in Nehemiah’s list (see on v. 11), and now undertook a second piece.

Earnestly repaired. Though the construction of the Hebrew is difficult and its rendering somewhat uncertain, the KJV translation seems to be the best that can be made.

The door of the house. Mention of the “door” may imply that Eliashib’s house was too wide to serve satisfactorily as a defining mark. This remark reveals that the residence of the high priest was located south of the Temple near the eastern wall.

21. Meremoth. His first “piece” is mentioned in v. 4. The second “piece” cannot have been very long, since its extent was apparently along only a portion of the high priest’s house.

22. The priests. These men, more specifically identified as men of the “plain,” Heb.kikkar, must have owned property in the lower Jordan valley. Kikkar usually refers to the region near Jericho.

23. Azariah. Azariah was the priest who shared with Ezra the duty of reading and explaining the law (ch. 8:7). He was also a signatory to the solemn covenant of Nehemiah (ch. 10:2). Later he took part in the dedication of the wall (ch. 12:33).

24. Unto the turning. Neither the turn nor the corner here mentioned can be located, but a glance at The Walls of Jerusalem in NehemiahХs Day) shows that the eastern wall was far from running in a straight line, as excavations have revealed.

25. High house. In the Hebrew it is uncertain whether the word translated “high” describes the “tower” or the “house.” Most commentators attach it to the word “tower.” The “king’s high house,” to the south of the Temple area, is probably none other than the old palace of David, which once stood in this quarter of the city, while Solomon’s palace was built on the northeastern hill. David’s palace, like that of Solomon (Jer. 32:2), would naturally have its own prison. From this prison the “prison gate” of ch. 12:39 took its name.

26. In Ophel. Ophel seems to have been the name of the northern section of the eastern hill, that is, the site of David’s City, bordering on the southern limits of the Temple area. Here many of the Temple personnel lived, even as late as the time of Christ.

The water gate. This must have been a gate in the eastern wall which overlooked the spring of Gihon in the Kidron Valley, so named from the fact that water from the spring was carried in through this gate.

The tower that lieth out. This may be the tower whose ruins were excavated by English archeologists from 1923 to 1925, high above the Virgin’s Spring (Gihon) in the Kidron Valley.

27. The Tekoites. See on v. 5.

28. The horse gate. The site of the Horse Gate appears, from 2 Chron. 23:15 as compared with 2 Kings 11:6, not to have been far distant from the Temple and the royal palace, while a comparison of Neh. 3:27 and 28 indicates that it stood in the neighborhood of the wall of Ophel, and might appropriately be regarded as belonging to it. It was probably located at the southeastern corner of the Temple area, on the slopes of Mt. Moriah.

29. Zadok. Probably head of the priestly order of Immer (Ezra 2:37).

Shemaiah. Shemaiah the son of Shechaniah, keeper of the east gate, can hardly be identified with the Shemaiah of 1 Chron. 3:22, a lineal descendant of King David.

The east gate. Probably a Temple gate in the eastern wall, identified by some with the Horse Gate of v. 28. Shemaiah is mentioned as keeper of the east gate and not as repairer of it. It is therefore possible that the gate was intact and needed no repair. Where he worked is not indicated. He was probably one of the priests (see ch. 12:6).

30. Hananiah. Perhaps the priest who took part in the dedication of the wall (ch. 12:41).

Meshullam. See on v. 4.

31. The goldsmith’s son. See on v. 8.

The place of the Nethinims. Since the Nethinims resided in Ophel (v. 26), this “place of the Nethinims” must have been an office building connected with the Temple.

The merchants. The “place” here designated seems not to have been the residence of merchants but a warehouse, perhaps for spices or incense needed in the Temple service.

Miphkad. Heb. miphqad, also translated “enrollment” or “sum” (2 Sam. 24:9; 1 Chron. 21:5) and “commandment” (2 Chron. 31:13). Here it seems to be the name of a specific place in the Temple area, as in Eze. 43:21, where it is rendered “appointed place.” Some commentators have suggested that “the gate Miphkad” was so named because of the fact that it led to the particular part of the Temple area Ezekiel refers to. Inasmuch as this question has not yet been settled, it is preferable to continue the rendering of the name of this gate as in the KJV. It must have been located in the northern part of the eastern Temple wall, and may have been close to the present “Golden Gate” of the Haram eshРSherйЖf.

32. The sheep gate. See on v. 1. The circuit of the wall is completed.

The Walls of Jerusalem in Nehemiah’s Day

additional note on chapter 3

To understand fully the account of Nehemiah’s nocturnal investigation of the ruined walls (ch. 2:13–15), the description of the building of the wall (ch. 3), and the dedication of the wall (ch. 12:27–43), it is necessary to know the topography of Jerusalem.

The Walls of Jerusalem in Nehemiah’s Day shows several hills and valleys in Jerusalem or its immediate vicinity. Flanking Jerusalem on the west is the Valley of Hinnom, from which rises the western hill of the city. Skirting the western hill on the south, the valley turns east to meet the Kidron Valley at the spring En-rogel, now called Job’s, or Nehemiah’s, Fountain (2,000 ft. above sea level). To the east of the western hill, and between it and Mt. Moriah and Mt. Zion, the two eastern hills, is the Tyropoeon (Cheesemakers’) Valley. The name of this valley, not mentioned in the Bible, is given by Josephus. The third main valley is that of the Kidron, which separates the eastern hills of the city from the Mt. of Olives. Midway in this valley lies the perennial spring of the Gihon (2,087 ft.), now called Virgin’s Spring.

The western hill, since medieval times erroneously called Zion, is the highest (2,525 ft.) hill of Jerusalem. The Temple hill, Mt. Moriah, is next highest (2,427 ft.), while the southeastern hill slopes from the Temple hill to 2,082 ft. at its most southern part.

The old view that the City of David was situated on the western hill, reflected in its traditional name Zion, has long since been abandoned. Archeological investigations of the last 75 years have clearly shown that the old fortress of the Jebusites, later the City of David, or Zion, was located on the southeastern hill, and that the Temple lay on the northeastern hill.

Originally the city wall surrounded only the citadel, located on the southeastern hill by the earliest settlers because of its proximity to at least two years water sources, Gihon in the Kidron Valley and En-rogel at the point where the Kidron and Hinnom valley meet. Possibly a third spring, no longer flowing, the “dragon well” of Neh. 2:13, may have been in the Tyropoeon Valley or in the western part of the Hinnom Valley.

Solomon built the Temple on the northeastern hill, Moriah, and in the space between this area and the City of David built his palace. The city thus had an elongated shape. Many scholars have thought that the western hill was included in the city’s defense system at an early date, possibly during Solomon’s reign.

Since 1967 extensive excavations carried out under the direction of Jewish archeologists have greatly increased our knowledge about ancient Jerusalem. Only the discovery of a section of the west western wall by Prof. N. Avigad, mentioned above, is really pertinent to our study here. Most of the findings made during the post-six-day was period concern the Herodian city, the city with which Jesus was familiar during His earthly ministry.

However, part of the wall built by Nehemiah was identified by K. Kenyon during her excavations on the eastern slope of the southeastern hill, just above the Gihon Spring. This discovery shows that at least at this point Nehemiah’s wall did not follow the course of the earlier wall, but was constructed higher up, near the ridge of the hill, and more to the west of the pre-exilic wall. If this was done also in other parts of the city, the size of Nehemiah’s Jerusalem would have been considerably smaller than that of the earlier city.

While the discoveries of N. Avigad and K. Kenyon have provided us with much new and most-helpful information, we are still more or less in the dark about the course of the city walls in Old Testament times as far as details go.

It is certain that the city of David was limited to the southeastern hill and that Solomon extended the city to the north, enclosing most of the area that is now known as the Harram esh-Sherif. On this northern hill, known also as Temple Hill, the Temple and royal palace structures were erected. How far the city was expanded toward the west at that time, if at all, is still not known, although it is certain that after 700 b.c. part of the Western Hill was incorporated in the walled city, and that the city of Jerusalem retained this size until its destruction by Nebuchadnezzar.

Since the size of Nehemiah’s city is uncertain the The Walls of Jerusalem in NehemiahХs Daypresents two possibilities, with two possible locations for the Broad Wall, the Tower of the Furnaces, the Valley Gate, and the Dung Gate. If Nehemiah, in the main, restored Jerusalem to its pre-exilic size, the area enclosed in the west by the wall indicated on the map was included. On the other hand, it is possible that his city, with its small post-exilic population, was limited to the size of Solomon’s. In that case its walls ran approximately a course indicated by the thick pale lines on the map of The Walls of Jerusalem in NehemiahХs Day.

During the excavations carried out by Prof. N. Avigad in 1970 and 1971 a 40-meter-long curved section of the pre-exilic city wall, 7 meters thick, was discovered—marked by a green line on the map of The Walls of Jerusalem in NehemiahХs Day which proves that portions of the Western Hill were incorporated into the pre-exilic city. The excavators have dated this newly discovered portion of the old city wall to about 700 b.c., which, if, correct, would made King Hezekiah its builder. (See Israel Exploration Quarterly, 22 [1972], 193–195.) That this king of Judah was engaged in the building and strengthening of Jerusalem’s fortifications is attested in 2 Chron. 32:5. However, it is not known whether Nehemiah’s walls followed the course of the pre-exilic wall exactly.

The western part of the city, called the Mishneh in the time of Josiah, is referred to in 2 Kings 22:14, RSV. Its construction in the time of King Hezekiah had probably doubted the size of the earlier walled city.

Ellen G. White comments

1    PK 638

5, 28    PK 639

28–305T 342