Ezra 8:10

Of the sons of Shechaniah, of the sons of Pharosh,.... Who is so described, to distinguish him from another Shechaniah, Ezra 8:5 , Zechariah: and with him were reckoned by genealogy, of the males an hundred and fifty; males only were reckoned, not women and children; though that there were such that went up is clear from Ezra 8:21, from hence to the end of Ezra 8:14 an account is given of the number of the males that went up with Ezra, who were chiefly, if not altogether, sons of those that went up with Zerubbabel; such of them as were left there behind, and now returned, at least a great number of them, see Ezra 2:1, it is particularly remarked of the sons of Adonikam, Ezra 8:13, that they were the last of them; not that they were the last that came in to go with Ezra, or were backward and dilatory, but the last with respect to the first of his sons that were gone before, and seem with them to be the whole of his family; the number of all that went up under their respective heads amounts to 1496.

Punctuate as follows: Ezra 8:2. ... of the sons of David, Hattush of the sons of Shechaniah. Ezra 8:3. Of the sons of Pharosh, Zechariah .... Hattush, the descendant of David, was the grandson of Shechaniah (see marginal reference). Most of these names Ezra 8:2-14 occur also as those of heads of families in the list of the Jews who returned with Zerubbabel Ezra 2:3-15. The Septuagint and Syriac versions supply omissions in Ezra 8:5, Ezra 8:10.

CHAPTER 8 Ezr 8:1-14. Ezra's Companions from Babylon. 1. this is the genealogy of them that went up with me from Babylon—The number given here amounts to 1754. But this is the register of adult males only, and as there were women and children also (Ezr 8:21), the whole caravan may be considered as comprising between six thousand and seven thousand.

10 . Here, as in Ezra 8:5 , the name of the representative is not given, while the name of the house Shelomith does not occur in the other lists. 1Es 8:36 gives “Of the sons of Banid, Assalimoth son of Josaphias”, which is here supported by the LXX. ( ἀπὸ τῶν υἱῶν Βαανί , Σελιμοὺθ υἱὸς Ἰωσεφία ). This shows the original reading to have been in all probability “of the sons of Bani (cf. Ezra 2:10 ) Shelomith the son of Josiphiah”.

Twelve lay houses are named both in the present text and in 1 Esdr. 8:30-40. In ten cases the names of the races, which are uniformly introduced with מבּני, are identical in both texts, viz., Parosh, Pahath-Moab, Adin, Elam, Shephatiah, Joab, Bebai, Azgad, Adonikam, and Bigvai. On the other hand, it appears surprising, 1st, that in the first house mentioned, before the name זכריה, besides "of the sons of Parosh," we have also שׁכניה מבּני ( Ezra 8:3 ), while before all the other names we find only "of the sons of" one individual; 2ndly, that in Ezra 8:5 , after שׁכניה בּני, instead of a name of the head of a house, only Ben Jahaziel follows; 3rdly, that in Ezra 8:10 also, after שׁלומית וּמבּני, we have merely Ben Josiphiah, the names themselves being apparently omitted in these two last cases. This conjecture is corroborated by a comparison with the lxx and 1 Esdr. 8, which shows, moreover, that it is not the personal name of the head of the house, but the name of the race, which has been lost. For מבני שׁכניה בן יחזיאל, Ezra 8:5 , we find in the lxx ἀπὸ τῶν υἱῶν Ζαθόης Ζεχενίας υἱὸς Ἀζιήλ, and in 1 Esdr. 8:32, ἐκ τῶν υἱῶν Ζαθόης Σεχενίας Ἰεζήλου; and for ומבני שׁלומית בן יוספיה, Ezra 8:10 , in the lxx καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν υἱῶν Βαανί Σελιμοὺθ υἱὸς Ἰωσεφία, and in 1 Esdr. 8:36, ἐκ τῶν υἱῶν Βανίας Σαλιμὼθ Ἰωσαφίου. In Ζαθόης and Βαανί (Βανίας) we recognise זתּוּא and בּני of Ezra 2:8 and Ezra 2:10 .

Hence the text of Ezra 8:5 needs emendation, and should run שׁכניה זתּוּא מבּני, and that of Ezra 8:10 , שׁלומית בני וּמבּני. It is more difficult to decide concerning שׁכניה מבּני of Ezra 8:3 , though undoubtedly we have here too a corruption of the text. For, first, there is no other instance in the whole list of the sons of two men being cited before the proper name of the house; and then, too, the absence of the ו copulative before מבּני פ is opposed to the notion that the house of Zechariah was formed by a union of the sons of Shecaniah and Parosh, since in this case the and could not be omitted. It is true that we have in the lxx ἀπὸ υἱῶν Σαχανία καὶ ἀπὸ υἱῶν Φόρος; but in this case the καὶ is certainly derived from the translator, who was thus seeking to make sense of the words. In 1 Esdr. 8 we read Δαττοὺς τοῦ Σεχευίου; and Δαττοὺς corresponding with חטּוּשׁ, the words בני שׁכניה (or בן) are taken into the preceding verse. This treatment of the words Bertheau considers correct, because Hattush in 1 Chronicles 3:22 is reckoned among the descendants of Shecaniah. This conjecture is, however, a very doubtful one.