The Pulpit Commentary — Ezra — Section 67

EXPOSITION. RENEWAL OF OPPOSITION ON TllE PART sure WOB in the matter (ver. 17). This letter OF THE NEIGHBOURING HEATRE...""I, LETTER Tatnai, in his capacity of satre.p, despatched Wl'tITI'EN BY THEM AND SENT TO DARIUS to the court by special messenger, and so (vers. 3-li). Once more opposition showed left the business to the decision of Darius itself. Tatnai, a high officer, called "go- and his counsellors, without further seeking vernor on this side the river" (ver. 3), per- to influence him. Remark the strong con• haps satrap of Syria, and Shethar-boznai, or trast between this despatch and that of the Sitrabarzanes, a Persian noble probably, at Samaritans. In the Samaritan letter private this time took the lead, and learning that pique and enmity show themselves-Jerusa- the building was ma.king progress, came in lem is "the rebellions and the bad city" person to Jerusalem, and demanded to know (eh. iv. 12), "hurtful unto kings and pro• by what authority the temple and city were vinces" (ibid. ver. 15); its intention to being restored. Zerubbabel seems to have revolt is assumed (ver. 13); the king is answered, " By the authority of a decree of warned that his dominion and revenue are Cyrus, issued in the year that he became in danger (ver. 16); no hint is given of king of Babylon" (ver. 13); whereupon a there having ever been any such docnmont second question was asked, " What a.re the as the decree of Cyrus ; no reference is made names of the men responsible for carrying to Sheshbazzar or the royal commission that on the work!" Zerubbabel answered that he had received; altogether, the case is he was alone responsible, giving his name as stated as strongly as possible against the Sheshbazzar, a.nd declaring himself to be Jews, with great and manifest unfairness. acting under a commission received from Here, on the contrary, where the person who Cyrus (ver. 15), and never revoked. There- takes up the matter is the Persian governor, upon Tatnai and Shethar-boznai seem to a dispassionate tone prevails; no charges are have proposed a cessation of the building made; no abuse uttered ; the letter is con- until reference could be ma.de to Darius and fined to a statement of facts and an inquiry; his plea.sure learnt (ver. 5); but Zernbbabel the Jews are allowed to give their own declined to agree to this, and the work pro- account of their proceedings, nearly half ceeded without intermission (ibid.). Mean- the letter being their statement of their while, a letter was written to Darius, not own case (vers. 11-15); the decree of Cyrus unfairly stating the case, and suggesting is brought into prominence, osserted on the that the state archives should be searched one hand, not denied on the other ; that for the decree ascribed to Cyrus, that it it should be searched for is suggested ; and. might be seen what exactly it was that tho finally there is a simple request that the decree sanctioued, and further that the king king will decla.ro his will in respect of th@ should expressly declare what his own plea- . building. OH, V, 3-17.] THE BOOK OF EZRA. 71