[¹] In chapter ix. 43, Rephaiah.
37. Raphah] In ix. 43, Rephaiah.
Chapter IX.
1–17 (compare Nehemiah xi. 1–19).
The Heads of the Families which dwelt in Jerusalem.
Verses 2–17 contain the lists of the heads of families of Judah (3–6), of Benjamin (7–9), of the priests (10–13), of the Levites (14–16), and of the porters (17), who dwelt in Jerusalem at some period after the Return (compare note on verse 2). A similar list (with some variations which are recorded in their places in the following notes) occurs in Nehemiah xi. 3–19. The partial agreement coupled with the partial divergence of the two lists may be explained by supposing that both are extracts independently made from the same document, and have been inserted, one in Chronicles, the other in Nehemiah, lest the peculiarities of either list should be lost. We may conclude from Nehemiah xi. 1, 2 that both lists represent the population of Jerusalem, after Nehemiah had taken measures for increasing it. Another way of accounting for the divergences in the two lists is to suppose that the present list represents the Jerusalem of a later period than the list in Nehemiah See also verse 17.
¹So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies; and, behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel: and Judah was carried away captive to Babylon for their transgression.
1. in the book of the kings of Israel] See Introduction [§ 5], B (3). The LXX., however, reads “in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah.” With the LXX. reading, all Israel must be taken as subject of the verb was carried away, but of course the phrase must still be taken as meaning an “Israel” = Judah.
²Now the first inhabitants that dwelt in their possessions in their cities were, Israel, the priests, the Levites, and the Nethinim.
2. the first inhabitants] It has been thought that the word “first” here refers to pre-eminence (compare Nehemiah xi. 3), and that the list which follows (verses 4 ff.) is a list of chief men. It is better, however, to take “first” in a temporal sense, meaning “pre-exilic,” and to suppose that the Chronicler or whoever placed this chapter here mistakenly imagined this list to be a pre-exilic register. That it is not really pre-exilic is certain by reason of its vital connection with the post-exilic list in Nehemiah xi. 3–19. The suggestion that the resemblances are due to the continuity of population in Jerusalem before and after the exile is utterly improbable.