Chapter One

1–4. The decree of Cyrus for the liberation of the Jews from Babylonian captivity. 5–6. Donations given to the liberated Jews. 7–11. The delivery of the temple vessels to the Jews. 22–23. The date of the liberation of the Jews from captivity.

Ezra 1:1. In the first year of Cyrus, king of Persia, in fulfillment of the word of the Lord from the mouth of Jeremiah, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus, king of Persia, and he commanded that it be proclaimed throughout his entire kingdom, both orally and in writing: “The first year of Cyrus” was his first year of rule over Babylon and coincides with 538 B.C. (cf. Bolotov, Belshazzar and Darius the Mede. Christian Readings 1896). This was the year of the “fulfillment of the word of the Lord from the mouth of Jeremiah,” that is, the prophecy of Jeremiah about the seventy-year duration of the captivity (Jer 25:11 and Jer 29:10).

Ezra 1:2. Thus says Cyrus, king of Persia: All the kingdoms of the earth has the Lord God of heaven given me, and He has commanded me to build for Him a house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Ezra 1:3. Whoever among you from all His people – may his God be with him – let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and build the house of the Lord God of Israel, that God who is in Jerusalem. Ezra 1:4. And all who remain in all the places where they dwell, let the people of each place help him with silver and gold and other property and livestock, and with freewill offerings for the house of God, which is in Jerusalem. Cyrus’s decree for the liberation of the Jews. The decree about the liberation of the Jews, besides the passage in question, is encountered in the Bible two more times: in 2 Chr 36:22-23 and Ezra 6:3-5; and in the latter place there is given a special version of the decree. Some scholars are inclined to consider Cyrus’s decree a false document fabricated by the author of the book (Meyer 49; Seineke 89, 84). The basis for this is the Judaic character of the decree, expressed in the fact that Cyrus is attributed in the decree with the recognition of Jehovah as the God of heaven, the designation of the Jerusalem temple as the house of God, and so on. But these expressions will be understandable if we assume that Cyrus in his decree took up the Jewish perspective. In a similar manner, in his other decrees he speaks of Babylonian gods as if he recognizes them as true. In a well-known inscription on the Cyrus Cylinder, Cyrus, a worshipper of Ahura-Mazda, calls the Babylonian Marduk the king and lord of the gods, and attributes to his help not only the conquest of Babylon, but also the subjection of the land of Kush and the Medes (Schrader, Keilinschr. Bibliothek, III, 2, S. 1201). As is evident from verses 2–6, Cyrus’s decree granted all Jews the following rights: 1) the return to Palestine (Ezra 1:3); 2) the construction of the temple with subsidy from state funds (Ezra 3:7); 3) the return of the gold and silver vessels taken from the Jerusalem temple by Nebuchadnezzar (Ezra 6:5). Besides, the decree invited all inhabitants of the state (verse 4 “all who remain”) to make donations in favor of the returning settlers. It should be thought that in chapter 1 of the book of Ezra the decree is cited not in full, but in excerpt: from it are taken only the main points concerning the religious and national life of the Jews. How should one explain such a benevolent attitude of the pagan Cyrus toward the Jews? The author of the book of Ezra sees in this attitude of Cyrus toward the Jews a manifestation of divine providence for the chosen people. “The Lord stirred up,” he says, “the spirit of Cyrus, king of Persia” (Ezra 1:1). This divine inspiration, however, need not be represented as a direct inspiration. The medium of this inspiration could have been the natural course of historical events, which in their totality are directed by God. In the opinion of some scholars, the liberation of the Jews was accomplished by Cyrus for political reasons – it was prompted by Cyrus’s desire to secure the southwestern borders of his kingdom by settling loyal Jews in Palestine (Stade), to create a bulwark against Egypt, and a base for the already-contemplated invasion of Egypt (Rosenzweig). Josephus (Antiquities 11:1, 12) indicates that what led Cyrus to the idea of liberating the Jews from captivity was the prophecy of Isaiah about his conquests that had been shown to him.

Ezra 1:5. And the heads of the families of Judah and Benjamin, and the priests and the Levites, everyone whose spirit God had stirred up, rose up to go and build the house of the Lord, which is in Jerusalem. The decree of Cyrus gave all Jews the right to return to Palestine. But not all availed themselves of this right, but only those whose spirit God had stirred up, to go and build the house of the Lord, which is in Jerusalem. Many, as Josephus remarks (Antiquities 11:1, 3), “remained in Babylon, unwilling to abandon what they had acquired.”

Ezra 1:6. And all their neighbors assisted them with vessels of silver, with gold, with other property and livestock, and with costly gifts, beyond any freewill offering for the temple. “All their neighbors.” Apparently, not only Jews (Köhler), but also foreigners (Hitzig). Some analogy noted by the author between the fact recorded here and what took place at the departure from Egypt (Exod 3:22) gives no basis, contrary to the opinion of some authors (Bertholet, Kosters), to consider the fact as invented in imitation of the historian’s account.

Ezra 1:7. And King Cyrus brought out the vessels of the house of the Lord, which Nebuchadnezzar had taken out of Jerusalem and placed in the house of his god, – Besides voluntary donations of “vessels of silver, with gold, with other property and livestock, and with costly gifts” (verse 6), the Jews also received the temple vessels that had once been taken from Jerusalem (cf. 2 Kgs 24:13; Jer 27:16; 2 Kgs 25:14; Jer 52:18; Dan 5:2; Deut 1:8) by Nebuchadnezzar and had been kept in one of the Babylonian temples as trophies of the victory of the pagan gods over Jehovah.

Ezra 1:8. And Cyrus, king of Persia, caused them to be brought out through Mithredates, the treasurer, and he delivered them by count to Sheshbazzar, the prince of Judah. The vessels are handed over to the prince of Judah Sheshbazzar, who in Ezra 1:11 and Ezra 5:14-15 is presented as the leader of the Jews returning under Cyrus, the governor in Palestine, and the founder of the Jerusalem temple. Yet at the same time, in other places in the book of Ezra (Ezra 2:2), in the book of Nehemiah (Neh 7:7), and also by the prophet Haggai (Hag 1:1-14) and Zechariah (Zech 4:9), the leader of the first caravan of Jews, the founder of the house of the Lord (Zech 4:6), and the ruler of Judea (Hag 1:1) is called Zerubbabel, son of Shealtiel. From this arises the question: who was the Sheshbazzar mentioned in Ezra 1:8 and Ezra 5:14-15, and in what relation did he stand to Zerubbabel? Many scholars consider Sheshbazzar to be a different person from Zerubbabel, and believe that he was a Persian official appointed to represent Persian authority in Judea and made prince of the Jews (Stade, Rosenzweig, Smend). After the completion of his mission, Sheshbazzar supposedly was recalled to the Persian court and his position was filled by Zerubbabel. Other scholars, also distinguishing Sheshbazzar from Zerubbabel, are inclined to consider him not a Persian, but a Jew. Thus Meyer (Entstehung I, S. 79), Imbert, Renan (see in Bertholet) identify Sheshbazzar with Shenazzar mentioned in 1 Chr 3:18, the son of Jeconiah; Nickel (Wiedeherst j. G. S. 50) considers Sheshbazzar simply an outstanding Israelite, perhaps a distant relative of the royal house; and Sellin (Serubabel S. 7; Entst II, 239; II, 35) is inclined to see in Sheshbazzar Jeconiah himself. Yet the view of those bibliologists must be recognized as more just, who consider Sheshbazzar the same person as Zerubbabel, wearing thus two names (Ewald, Keil, Kuenen, M. Filaret, Popov). The grounds for this view are as follows: 1) In Ezra 1:8 Sheshbazzar is called “the prince of Judah.” Consequently, he was a Jew and specifically a descendant of David. And in the period of the return of the Jews from captivity, as is evident from Ezra 3:2; Hag 1:14, Zerubbabel was the only descendant of David, with whom therefore Sheshbazzar must be identified. 2) In Ezra 1:11 it is reported of Sheshbazzar that he departed with the settlers from Babylon to Jerusalem, and in Ezra 5:16 that he “laid the foundation of the house of God.” The same activity is attributed in Ezra 2:2; Zech 4:9 to Zerubbabel. Clearly, the biblical writers consider Sheshbazzar and Ezra 2 to be the same person. 3) In Ezra 5:14 Sheshbazzar is called pecha, and in Hag 1:1 this title is attributed to Zerubbabel at the same historical moment. As for the meaning of the stated names, it is not entirely clear. The name Zerubbabel probably comes from the Hebrew zeru and babel and means in Russian translation “born in Babylon.” The name Sheshbazzar (1 Esd 2:12 – Samanasser) is considered either Babylonian – Sin-bal-usur or Samas-bal-usur, Shamash or Sin protects the son – or Persian (Ryssel, Kepper). The custom of giving two names is known also from the book of Daniel.

Ezra 1:9. And here is their number: thirty golden dishes, one thousand silver dishes, twenty-nine knives, Ezra 1:10. thirty golden cups, four hundred ten silver cups, other vessels one thousand: Ezra 1:11. all the vessels of gold and silver, five thousand four hundred. All these Sheshbazzar took with him when the captives went up from Babylon to Jerusalem. The number of vessels (whose Hebrew designations are not entirely clear) returned to the Jews through Mithredates, keeper of the treasures, is indicated here. The total number of vessels in verse 11 is determined by the figure 5400. But if one adds the figures by which in verses 9–10 the individual types of vessels are designated (30+1000+29+30+410+1000), the resulting total is not 5400, but only 2499. In view of such a discrepancy between the sum and the summands, some scholars (Bertheau, Nickel), basing themselves on the testimony of 1 Esd 2:13-14, consider the figures of the individual types of vessels to be erroneous, while others (Keil) presume an error in the designation of the total number of vessels. It is possible, however, to do without assuming errors in the text. In verse 11, it may be thought, the quantity is indicated that was made up not only of the vessels delivered by Mithredates, but also of those that were donated by private individuals. Hence it came to be that the figure of verse 11 does not correspond to the sum of the figures of verses 9–10. * * * so in the text – Editor