N. J. D. WHITE.
NEHEMIAH (2;07;).—1. One of the twelve heads of the Jewish community, Ezr 23 (Β Νεέμιος, A -as) =Neh 77 (BA Neewd), 1 Es 58 Nehemias. 2. The son of Azbuk, the ruler of half the district of Beth- zur, who helped to repair the wall of Jerusalem, Neh 38 (Νεεμίας). 3. See the following article.
NEHEMIAH (7:9n;).—Nehemiah is a conspicuous instance of the right man in the right place. It was his privilege to render great service to his nation, for which both his character and his posi- tion fitted him. He was patriotic, courageous, and God-fearing; he knew how to exercise the inflexible will of an autocrat, as well as to be persuasive when that would best accomplish the good end he had in view. Our reliable informa- tion concerning Nehemiah and his times is con- tained almost wholly in the parts of his memoirs which have come down to us.* We may regret that this memoir was not preserved in full, but we _ cannot but rejoice in what we have; for it affords us a picture of this great patriot which is clear and well-proportioned. It gives us no information, however, about his early life or anon except in the heading that he was the son of Hacaliah (Neh 1’).
The first of Chislev, the ninth month (our Dee.), of the 20th yeart of Artaxerxes I. Φ Longimanus, B.C. 445, found Neh. in Susa, the chief city of Elam, and the winter residence of the Persian court
“See Ezra-Nenemian, Book or. Torrey holds that only chs. 1, 2. 333-39 [ας 41-4) are genuine memoirs of Nehemiah. The rest of the he assigns to the Chronicler; and this, with the whole of Ezr as a historical source, he says, ‘has no value whatever’—Comp. and Hist. Value of Ezr.-Neh. 1806 (Beihefte ΓΝ Onder κοῦ iin (ct. 11 and 21) were both in the 20th year of Artaxerxes, Neh. must have reckoned the year from the autumn. Nisan was the first month of the Jewish as well as of the Bab. year. If Neh. reckons in the usual way, his audience with the king (2!) must be placed in the king’s 2lst year, and #0 B.c. 444. On the chronol see Nowack, Heb, Arch. i. 214 ff. ; Berth.-Rys. Kom.? 254; rader, ΚΑΤ, in loo,
t Torrey says that we do not know which Artaxerxes is referred to in Neh. He is inclined to put the compomtion of Neh about the year B.o, 372 (7).
(Del. Paradies, 326). A company of men, amon whom was his brother Hanani, had just return from Jerusalem. Neh. eagerly questioned them about the condition of the city and of the people who with Ezra had been struggling to rebuild the State. Their report was most depressing to the patriot: ‘The remnant which is left from the captivity there in the province are in evil plight and in great reproach ; the wall of Jerus. is broken down, and its gates are burned with fire’ (113).
Does Hanani refer to the destruction of the city by command of Nebuch. in 586 (2 K 25%"), or to a recent catastrophe? In favour of the former view it may be urged that we have no record of either the rebuilding of the walls and the setting up of the gates, or their second destruction. Whatever may be the date of Ezr 45-23 (see Ezr.-NEu., Book oF), it is evident that the rebuilding described there was merely begun, not finished. The enemies of the Jews procured an edict to stop the building, but not to cary the little that was already restored. If such a destruction had taken place, it is singular that it should be mentioned neither by Ezra nor iy the compiler, On the other hand, if the destruction repo. by Hanani had taken place more than a century before, the report would not be unexpected news, and consequently would not make so t an impression upon Nehemiah. It might be urged that he had hoped that measures had been taken to continue the restoration, and was depressed to learn that nothing was being done. But Neh.’s narrative lends no colour to such an interpretation. See, further Stade, ΟΥ̓] ii. 161; Benjamin, Persia (Story of the Nations) 127; Montefiore, Hibbert Lect. 1892, 311; Oheyne, Bamp. Lect 1889, 71, 82, 231 f., JRL 37 ff. ; Gratz, Hist. of the Jews, Eng tr. i. 383.
When Neh. heard the bad news he ‘sat down and wept, and mourned for days, fasting and praying before the God of heaven.’ His prayer, which is full of Deuteronomic expressions (OTJC# 427), acknowledges the sins of the Jewish people, but calls upon God to fulfil His promise in view of the repentance of the people, and to ‘grant his servant (Neh.) mercy before this man,’ i.e. the king (14). The prayer put into Neh.’s mouth by Jose- phus is somewhat different: ‘How long, O Lord, wilt Thou overlook our nation, while it suffers so great miseries, and while we are made the prey and spoil of all men?’ (Ant. ΧΙ. v. 6).
Nehemiah’s position as cupbearer* to the king ensured him an audience; and as the office was a high one with rich emoluments, he had a point of advantage in ether a request, and the means to accomplish his purpose. et it was four months before his wishes were made known to the king. He was waiting a favourable opportunity; and this came only when he was called to serve the wine when ‘no one else was before the king’ (2° acc. to LXX). His agitation was so great when the decisive moment came that his face betrayed him, and he was sore afraid as the king ΤΕΡΙΟΥΠΕΙΝ asked him the cause of his dejection. However, he stated his troubles frankly: ‘ Have I not reason for a dejected countenance, since the city of the graves of my fathers lies in ruins, and its gates are destroyed by fire?’ (2°). Encouraged by the king, he asked acagemtir to go to Jerus. to rebuild the city. As Neh. mentions the fact that the queen was sitting by her lord at the time (2°), she may have exerted her influence in his favour.t+ At all events the king granted his officer a limited leave of absence, gave him letters to the governors of the provinces west of the Euphrates, and to Asaph, the keeper of the royal forest, that Neh. might secure timber for the gates of the citadel of the temple, for the wall of the city, and for the temple itself.t Neh. set out with an armed escort furnished by the king, and on the way delivered the letters to the governors, not to apprise them of