Chapter Four

4–1–3. The offer by the Samaritans of participation in the building of the temple and the refusal of the Jews. 4–10. The hostile actions of the Samaritans against the Jews. 11–16. A copy of the letter sent by Rehum and Shimshai to the Persian king. 18–22. The king’s reply. 23–24. The stopping of the work on the temple.

Ezra 4:1. And when the enemies of Judah and Benjamin heard that the exiles were building a temple to the Lord God of Israel; Ezra 4:2. and they came to Zerubbabel and to the chiefs of the families, and said to them: Let us build with you, because like you, we seek your God and have been sacrificing to him since the days of Esarhaddon, king of Syria, who brought us here. “And the enemies of Judah and Benjamin heard.” From verse 2 it is evident that by “enemies of Judah and Benjamin” the writer means the Samaritans. On the origin of the Samaritans see the note to 2 Kgs 17. Learning of the beginning of the construction, the Samaritans wished to take part in it and with a request for this turned to Zerubbabel and to the chiefs of the families. The Samaritans put forward as the motive for their request that they seek the God of the Jews and bring sacrifices to him “since the days of Esarhaddon, king of Syria.” According to the opinion of some researchers, these were indeed the motives of the Samaritan request: the Samaritans wished to serve Jehovah. However, the subsequent behavior of the Samaritans shows that the religious motives they put forward were not sincere and were not the main ones. In their complaints to the Persian king, the Samaritans do not mention religious feelings at all and clearly express their view of the Jerusalem enterprise as a political act. Probably, they themselves expressed a desire to take part in the construction of the temple, chiefly from political motives, intending to take advantage of the patronage that the Persian kings showed to the Jews and to derive benefits from it for themselves. “From the days of Esarhaddon, king of Syria.” By the name of Esarhaddon in this passage, researchers (contrary to our Russian text) understand the Assyrian king Esarhaddon (681–668), who, according to the testimony of the cuneiform inscriptions (Schrader. Keil. Bibl. II, 215), after his victory over the king of Sidon, sent colonies to the Phoenician coast. Some of the colonists could have settled in the Samaritan region, which is why the Samaritans sometimes called themselves Sidonians (Josephus, Antiq. 12:5, 5).

Ezra 4:3. Then Zerubbabel and Jeshua and the other chiefs of the families of Israel said to them: You may not build with us a house for our God; we ourselves alone will build it for the Lord God of Israel, as King Cyrus, king of Persia, commanded us. “You may not build with us a house for our God; we ourselves alone will build it.” Thus, the request of the Samaritans was rejected. There is no basis in the refusal of Zerubbabel and the elders for discerning a display of “cowardly fear” (Ewald) or “Jewish arrogance” (Seineke). The refusal was rather motivated by the desire to preserve the purity of Jewish religion and nationality. Since the Samaritans had a mixed religion, by entering into a union with them, the Jews would have risked being contaminated by syncretism and polytheism. The consciousness of this danger prompted the representatives of the Jewish people to reject the Samaritan proposal, sacrificing the benefits that might have resulted from accepting it.

Ezra 4:4. And the people of the land weakened the hands of the people of Judah and discouraged them from building; Ezra 4:5. and they hired counselors against them to frustrate their purpose, during all the days of Cyrus king of Persia and until the reign of Darius king of Persia. The refusal of the Jews offended the Samaritans and again awakened the enmity that in pre-exile times had penetrated into the relations of the ten-tribe kingdom toward the southern. By bribery and slander, the Samaritans sought to obtain from the Persian government an official prohibition against the building of the temple. Such an official prohibition they apparently did not obtain, because the biblical writers do not mention it (cf. Ezra 5:7-17), and the prophet Haggai attributes the stopping of the temple construction directly to the negligence of the Jews themselves, not to the prohibition of the authorities (ch. I). But nevertheless, the intrigues of the Samaritans weakened the energy of the Jews and, probably, by the time of the accession of Darius Hystaspes to the throne (521–486), the construction of the temple had stopped. Ezra 4:6-23. In verses 6–23 the writer recounts the intrigues of the Samaritans against the Jews during the reign of Ahasuerus and Artaxerxes. Which kings does the writer of 1 Ezra have in mind under these names? Since the first chapters of 1 Ezra concern events of the time of Cyrus, and at the end of chapter IV Darius Hystaspes is mentioned (verse 24), many researchers refer the section of verses 6–23 to the period of Cyrus’s successors and predecessors of Darius Hystaspes, the kings Cambyses and the Pseudo-Smerdis. Under the name of Ahasuerus they understand Cambyses, and under the name of Artaxerxes the Pseudo-Smerdis. But this opinion cannot now be accepted. The Hebrew Ahasuerus corresponds to the Persian Ksajarsa or Khschyarscha and should denote Xerxes. By the name of Artaxerxes, corresponding to the Persian Artakhsarta or Artakschathra, Artaxerxes is named in verse 7. Thus, in verses 6–23 the writer deviates from the chronological order of the narrative and recounts events that occurred later than those described in chapters V-VI, namely during the time of Ezra. There is no need to suppose, as some researchers do, that this occurred through a misunderstanding on the part of the writer, who erroneously referred the document he had at hand to the time between Cyrus and Darius Hystaspes, and in doing so failed to notice that the document deals with obstacles to the building of the city walls, not the building of the temple, of which the narrative is in chapter IV. Having begun to speak of the opposition of the Samaritans to the building of the temple, the writer, apparently, for the sake of supplementing this and to illustrate his speech, points out also the later facts of the opposition of the Samaritans to the Jews, opposition to the building of the walls (see in more detail Christian Reading 1904, no. 12, p. 833 et seq.).

Ezra 4:6. And in the reign of Ahasuerus, at the beginning of his reign, they wrote an accusation against the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem. “They wrote an accusation.” The content of this accusation is not specified by the writer.

Ezra 4:7. And in the days of Artaxerxes, Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of their associates wrote to Artaxerxes king of Persia. The letter was written in Aramaic script and in the Aramaic language. “And in the days of Artaxerxes, Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of their associates” (cf. 1 Esd 2:16). These persons, who belonged to the Samaritan people, apparently sent a second letter.

Ezra 4:8. Rehum the commander and Shimshai the scribe wrote a letter concerning Jerusalem to King Artaxerxes as follows: “Rehum the commander and Shimshai the scribe wrote a letter.” Apparently, this was already a third letter from the Samaritans. The author – Rehum the commander and Shimshai the scribe – were officials serving with the Persian governor in Samaria.

Ezra 4:9. Then Rehum the commander, Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their associates – the Dinaites and Apharsathchites, Tarpelites, Apharsites, Archevites, Babylonians, Susanchites, Dehavites, Elamites, The letter was written not only on behalf of Rehum and Shimshai, but also on behalf of their associates or, more properly, allies. In the names listed below (Dinaites, Apharsathchites, etc.), we must see not the titles of officials of various classes, as some researchers suppose (Bertheau), but the names of tribes, which, however, are little known. The Dinaites were a tribe which, judging from the cuneiform inscriptions, lived on the borders of Cilicia and Cappadocia in the western part of Armenia. The Apharsathchites were perhaps the inhabitants of the Median cities Partakka and Partukka mentioned in the inscriptions of Esarhaddon (Delitzsch, Wo lag das Paradies, p. 327). The Tarpelites were either the Ταπουροι mentioned by Ptolemy, who lived to the east of Elymais, or the Tuplai of the Assyrian inscriptions. The Apharsites were, according to Delitzsch, the inhabitants of the Median region of Parsua. The Archevites were probably the inhabitants of the city of Erech mentioned in Gen 10:10, which lay in the place of present-day Warka, on the left bank of the lower Euphrates, to the southeast of Babylon. The Dehavites were probably the Δάοι of Herodotus (I, 125). The other tribes named in verse 9 are well known from history.

Ezra 4:10. and the rest of the nations whom the great and noble Asnappar brought and settled in the cities of Samaria and the rest of the cities beyond the river, and so forth. “And the rest of the nations whom Asnappar, the great and noble, brought and settled.” Under the name of Asnappar in this passage, researchers (contrary to our Russian text) understand the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal (663–626), who conquered the Susians and penetrated deep into Elam. “Great and noble” is a customary title of Assyrian kings, especially fitting for Ashurbanipal. “And in the rest of the cities beyond the river,” that is, beyond the Euphrates, to the west of it, in Syria and Phoenicia.

Ezra 4:11. And here is a copy of the letter that they sent to him: To King Artaxerxes – your servants, the men who live beyond the river, and so forth. Ezra began his activity in Jerusalem with the prohibition of mixed marriages and the command to send away wives of foreign nations (Ezra 9:12). Such strictness angered the neighboring peoples, and this anger was increased further by those who, not wishing to submit to Ezra’s command, left Judea. The fear of attack by neighbors was the incentive to begin fortifying Jerusalem. But if the construction of the temple was already hateful to the Samaritans, then all the more the fortification of the walls around Jerusalem. Therefore, the Samaritans directed all their efforts to stop the construction, and with this aim they send a complaint, the contents of which are conveyed in verses 12–16.

Ezra 4:12. Let it be known to the king that the Jews who came up from you have come to us in Jerusalem, and they are building the rebellious and evil city, and they are finishing the walls and repairing the foundations. Ezra 4:13. Let it be known now to the king that if this city is rebuilt and the walls are finished, they will not pay tribute, tax, or customs duty, and it will bring loss to the royal treasury. Wishing to arouse the king’s suspicion against the enterprise of the Jews, the Samaritans point out that Jerusalem is a “rebellious and evil city” (verse 12) and that with the restoration of the walls the Jews will not pay tribute, tax, or customs duty, thereby causing loss to the royal treasury.

Ezra 4:14. Since we eat the salt of the palace and it is not fitting for us to witness the king’s dishonor, therefore we send and inform the king; “Since we eat the salt of the palace.” The expression “to eat salt” in the usage of Syriac and Persian languages means, first, to be a guest of another, and second, to be in the service of him. In verse 14 the said expression has the last meaning. Thus, the Samaritans cover their slander with the duty of royal service.

Ezra 4:15. that search may be made in the book of the records of your ancestors – and you will find in the book of records and learn that this city is a rebellious city, harmful to kings and provinces, and that seditions have been made in it from ancient times, on account of which this city was destroyed. Ezra 4:16. We inform the king that if this city is built and its walls are completed, then after this you will have no possession beyond the river. By pointing to the experience of former history, the Samaritans call to the king’s attention the possibility of losing, thanks to the Jews, all the possessions west of the Euphrates. “In the book of the records of your ancestors.” About the existence of court chronicles of Persian kings, mention is also made in Ezra 6:2; Esth 6:1 and in Diodorus Siculus (II,32). “Seditions have been made in it from ancient times, on account of which this city was destroyed.” Apparently, the reference is to the time preceding Persian rule, namely, to the time of Nebuchadnezzar.

Ezra 4:17. The king sent a reply to Rehum the commander, to Shimshai the scribe, and to the rest of their associates who live in Samaria and in the rest of the cities beyond the river: Peace... and so forth. Ezra 4:18. The letter which you sent to us has been plainly read in my presence; Ezra 4:19. and by me a decree has been issued – and search was made, and it was found that this city from of old has lifted itself up against kings, and rebellions and seditions have been made in it, Ezra 4:20. and that there have been mighty kings over Jerusalem who ruled everything beyond the river, and they received from them tribute, taxes, and customs dues. Ezra 4:21. Therefore issue an order that these men be made to cease, and that this city be not rebuilt, until I make a decree. The decree of Artaxerxes, issued in response to the complaint of Rehum and Shimshai. In the memory books, Artaxerxes indeed found that the suspicion of the Jews of seditious designs had basis in the past history of this people, and therefore he sent to his governor in Samaria a command to hinder the construction of the walls of Jerusalem. Such an attitude toward the Jews by Artaxerxes does not contradict what is known about him from other sources (Ezra 7 and Neh 2). According to ancient accounts, Artaxerxes appears as a man who was influenced by his wives and his favorites and one who could easily change his commands (Nöldeke Aufsätze zur Pers. Geschichte p. 56).

Ezra 4:23. As soon as the letter of King Artaxerxes was read before Rehum and Shimshai the scribe and their associates, they went in haste to the Jews in Jerusalem and by force stopped their work. Rehum and Shimshai stopped the construction by force (according to the LXX ἐν ίπποις καὶ δυνάμει, Peshitta: cum magno exercitu). As is evident from Neh 1:2-3, at this time the city wall in some places was torn down, and the gates were burned.

Ezra 4:24. Then the work on the house of God in Jerusalem ceased, and it ceased until the second year of the reign of Darius king of Persia. The writer returns to the interrupted narrative in verses 6–23 about the construction of the temple, and notes the duration of this stoppage. However, the writer does not specify when the construction stopped.