Nehemiah 3:8

Uzziel… of the goldsmiths R.V. Uzziel …, goldsmiths. The R.V. gives the literal rendering. The meaning of course is that a guild or the guild of goldsmiths, who were represented by Uzziel, undertook the next piece of the wall. The wealth of -the goldsmiths" is shown by the large portion undertaken by the members of their -guild." Cf. Nehemiah 3:31.

Next unto him also R.V. And next unto him.

Hananiah the son ofone of the apothecaries R.V. Hananiah, one of the apothecaries. Marg. - perfumers". The R.V. gives the meaning of the Hebrew, which is literally -Hananiah, a son of the apothecaries or perfumers." This Hananiah, possibly -the son of Shelemiah" mentioned as engaged in restoring another portion of the wall, represented the guild of -perfumers."

The word -apothecary," which appears in the A.V. in Exodus 30:25; Exodus 30:35; Exodus 37:29; 2 Chronicles 16:14; Ecclesiastes 10:1, is not used in the sense of a vendor of medicines. The context in each passage shows that a dealer in ointments, spices, and perfumes is intended. The same word in the feminine is rendered -confectionaries" in 1 Samuel 8:13, where the R.V. marg. -perfumers" is to be preferred.

This was a most important industry in Eastern countries, combining provision for the comforts of the poor and the luxuries of the rich (Song of Solomon 3:6), with the elaborate arts of embalming the dead.

In hot climates the anointing of head or feet with ointment and perfumes was a recognised courtesy offered a distinguished guest (Luke 7:38; Luke 7:46; John 12:3). Anointing with sweet oil was an act of cleansing or purification (Ezekiel 16:9; Ruth 3:3; Jdt 10:3). With women cosmetics constituted a considerable part of personal adornment (Song of Solomon 4:10).

and they fortified Jerusalem unto(R.V. even unto) the broad wall R.V. marg. -Or, left" for -fortified," giving the usual sense of the Hebrew verb.

The LXX. has καὶ κατέλιπον Ἱερουσαλὴμ ἕως τοῦ τείχους τοῦ πλατέος : the Vulgate -dimiserunt Ierusalem usque ad murum plateæ latioris."

The difficulty occasioned by the verb has given rise to very different interpretations of the passage:

(1) The A.V. following ancient Jewish interpretation renders -fortified Jerusalem;" and it appears to be the case that the word occurs in Talmudic Hebrew with a meaning connected with building operations (Buxtorf, sub voce, -pavimentarunt"). But even if this meaning be accepted, it is not easy to account for the occurrence of the words -fortified Jerusalem" in the middle of a description, the whole of which deals with the fortification of Jerusalem.

(2) Accepting the usual rendering -left," the following explanations have been given:

(a) -And they", i.e. the Babylonian troops, at the destruction of Jerusalem, had left this portion untouched. This translation introduces an imaginary subject, i.e. the Babylonians. It fails to explain the introduction of the reference to Jerusalem. It makes -left" equivalent to -left undestroyed."

(b) The Jews who were engaged upon the work of restoration -left untouched" this portion of the wall, which happened not to require rebuilding. This again gives an arbitrary meaning to the word -left," and the mention of -Jerusalem" remains unexplained.

(c) They carried on the fortification at some distance from the dwelling-places of Jerusalem. The city wall extended further north than the houses. The builders -left the city," i.e. the neighbourhood of the houses, in order to complete the circumvallation included in the plan.

(d) -And the Jews had abandoned Jerusalem," i.e. Jerusalem was at this point not occupied by the Jews returned from the Captivity. The northern limit of the inhabited quarter did not extend so far as it had done in the Monarchy.

(e) It is possible that the builders at this point -left" some portion of Jerusalem outsidetheir wall. The circumference of the old city was larger than was now needed. In the course of the restoration of the wall the builders abandoned at some point the old outer wall and the uninhabited portion of Jerusalem which it included.

The exact meaning lies hid in the topographical allusion, which we cannot hope to understand. It seems most natural, (1) that the subject to the verb -left" should be the builders just previously mentioned; (2) that -Jerusalem" should imply the inhabited city. The solution offered by (e) seems to be the most probable. The new circumvallation was, as a rule, larger than the old. Here only where the builders went insideand left the old wall, it is expressly mentioned.

the broad wall The broad wall is mentioned again in chap. Nehemiah 12:38 as between -the tower of the furnaces" and -the gate of Ephraim." The name was probably given to a portion of the wall where the thickness and strength of the structure indicated the strategic importance of this point in the fortifications. It is possible that this was the portion of 400 cubits which Amaziah pulled down (see 2 Kings 14:13; 2 Chronicles 25:23) with the view of rendering Jerusalem defenceless on the N., and that this was the portion which Hezekiah took pains to strengthen and renew (2 Chronicles 32:5).