Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Chronicles 9:17
And the porters [were], Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, and Ahiman, and their brethren: Shallum [was] the chief;
17 27 (cp. Neh 11:19; 1Ch 26:1-19). Organisation and Duties of the Porters (Doorkeepers)
17. porters ] Render, doorkeepers as in 1Ch 16:38 and 1Ch 26:1 (R.V.). In Solomon’s Temple there were “keepers of the threshold,” three in number (2Ki 25:18), priests in rank ( ibid. 1Ch 12:9).
Shallum Ahiman ] These two names are absent from Neh 11:19 together with the clause Shallum was the chief. This omission of all reference to Shallum must be accidental.
Shallum, Akkub and Talmon ] The three names represent families, not individuals; cp. Ezr 2:41 = Neh 7:45, where the fuller form is given, the children of Shallum, the children of Talmon, the children of Akkub. These names persist in the five lists of porters which refer to post-exilic times; Ezr 2:42 = Neh 7:45; Neh 11:19 = 1Ch 9:17 ( Shallum is to be supplied in Neh. from Chron.); Neh 12:5 ( Meshullam = Shallum). When however the reference is to the days of David the prominent names are Meshelemiah = Shelemiah (= Shallum?), Obed-edom, and Hosah; 1Ch 15:18; 1Ch 15:24; 1Ch 16:38 ; 1Ch 26:1; 1Ch 26:4; 1Ch 26:10.
Ahiman ] Elsewhere in the O.T. this name occurs only among the names of the sons of Anak, and it is probable that the Chronicler (or some scribe) made here an error of transcription, and that Ahiman has arisen from the word aheihem “their brethren” which follows.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Porters; whose office it was to keep all the gates of the temple, that no unclean person or thing might enter into it.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And the porters,…. Or keepers of the gates of the tabernacle:
were Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, and Ahiman, and their brethren; Shallum was the chief; of these four porters, and their brethren.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
“The doorkeepers, Shallum, Akkub, Talmon, Ahiman, and their brethren: Shallum the chief.” The service was so divided among the four just named, that each along with his brethren performed the duty of watching by one of the four sides and chief entrances of the temple (cf. 1Ch 9:24 and 1Ch 9:26), and these four were consequently heads of those divisions of the Levites to whom was committed the duty of the watch. In Neh 11:20, on the contrary, the doorkeepers mentioned are Akkub, Talmon, and their brethren, 172 (men); but the other two chiefs named in the Chronicle are there omitted, while in the Chronicle no number is given. Here the agreement between the two registers ceases. In the Chronicle there follows first of all, in 1Ch 9:18-26, some remarks on the service of the doorkeepers; and then in 1Ch 9:26-32 the duties of the Levites in general are spoken of; and finally, in 1Ch 9:32 and 1Ch 9:34 we have subscriptions. In Nehemiah, on the other hand, we find in 1Ch 9:20 the statement that the remaining Israelites, priests, and Levites dwelt in their cities; and after some statements as to the service of the Levites, the enumeration of these cities is introduced.
In glancing back over the two catalogues, it is seen that the differences are at least as great as the coincidences. But what conclusions are we to deduce from that fact? Bertheau thinks “from this it is certain that both catalogues cannot have been drawn up independently of each other,” and “that both have been derived from one and the same source, which must have been much more complete, and much richer in names, than our present catalogues; cf. Movers, S. 234.” We, however, judge otherwise. The discrepancies are much too great to allow us to refer them to free handling by epitomizers of some hypothetical more detailed catalogue, or to the negligence of copyists. The coincidence, in so far as it actually exists, does not justify us in accepting such far-fetched suppositions, but may be satisfactorily explained in another way. It consists indeed only in this, that in both registers, (1) sons of Judah and Benjamin, priests and Levites, are enumerated; (2) that in each of these four classes of the inhabitants of Jerusalem some names are identical. The first of these coincidences clearly does not in the least prove that the two catalogues are derived from the same source, and treat of the same time; for the four classes enumerated constituted, both before and after the exile, the population of Jerusalem. But neither does the identity of some of the names prove in the slightest degree the identity of the two catalogues, because the names denote, partly classes of inhabitants, and partly heads of fathers’-houses, i.e., of groups of related households, which did not change with each generation, but sometimes continued to exist for centuries; and because, priori, we should expect that those who returned from exile would, as far as it was possible, seek out again the dwelling-places of their pre-exilic ancestors; and that consequently after the exile, on the whole, the same families who had dwelt at Jerusalem before it would again take up their abode there. In this way the identity of the names Jedaiah, Jehoiarib, and Jachin in the two catalogues may be accounted for, as these names do not denote persons, but classes of priests, which existed both before and after the exile. A similar explanation would also apply to the names of the doorkeepers Akkub and Talmon (1Ch 9:17; Neh 11:19), as not merely the priests, but also the other Levites, were divided for the service according to their fathers’-houses into classes which had permanent names (cf. 1 Chron 25 and 26). Of the other names in our register only the following are identical: of the Benjamites, Sallu the son of Meshullam (1Ch 9:7; Neh 11:7); of the priests, Adaiah (1Ch 9:12; Neh 11:12), with almost the same ancestors; and of the Levites, Shemaiah and Mattaniah (1Ch 9:10.; Neh 11:15, Neh 11:17). All the other names are different; and even if among the priests Maasiai (1Ch 9:12) should be identical with Amashai (Neh 11:13), and among the Levites Bakbakkar and Obadiah (1Ch 9:16 and 1Ch 9:15) with Bakbukiah and Abda (Neh 11:17), we cannot identify the sons of Judah, Uthai and Azaiah (1Ch 9:4.), with Athaiah and Maaseiah (Neh 11:4.), for their ancestors are quite different. The similarity or even the identity of names, were it in two or three generations, cannot of itself prove the identity of the persons, as we have already seen, in the genealogy of the line of Aaron 1Ch 6:3.), that, e.g., the series Amariah, Ahitub, and Zadok recurs at various times; cf. 1Ch 6:11. and 1Ch 6:12. Everywhere in the genealogical lines the same names very often recur, as it was the custom to give the children the names of their ancestors; cf. Tob. 1:9, Luk 1:59. Win. bibl. R. W. ii. S. 133; Hvern. Einl. ii. 1, S. 179f. But if, on the one hand, the identity of these names in the two catalogues is not at all a valid proof of the identity of the catalogues, and by no means justifies us in identifying similarly-sounding names by supposing errors of transcription, on the other hand we must hold that the register refers to the pre-exilic population of Jerusalem, both because of the wide discrepancies in all points, and in accordance with the introductory statements in 1Ch 9:2. This interpretation is also demanded by the succeeding remarks in reference to the service of the Levites, since they throughout refer to the pre-exilic time.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
(17) And the porters were, Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, and Ahiman.Comp. Neh. 11:18-19, which sums up thus: All the Levites in the holy city were two hundred fourscore and four. Moreover the porters, Akkub, Talmon, and their brethren that kept the gates, were an hundred seventy and two. Shallum does not appear.
Ahiman may have originated out of the following:
Their brethren.Heb., aheihem. Comp. also Neh. 12:25-26, where we are told that (Mattaniah and Bakbukiah, Obadiah and) Meshullam (i.e., Shallum), Talmon, and Akkub were porters keeping ward at the storehouses of the Temple gates, in the times of Joiakim son of Jeshua son of Jozadak, and of Nehemiah and Ezra. It is clear that the names of the porters likewise represent families or guilds, which had hereditary charge of the Temple gates. In fact, all the Levitical functions appear to have descended in the same families from father to son, like the various civil offices in the Roman empire; and tradition ascribed the entire arrangement to David, the second founder of the national worship. At this point the correspondence with Nehemiah 11 ceases.
Shallum was the chief.This really belongs to 1Ch. 9:18, and introduces a description of the duties of the Levites, which extends over 1Ch. 9:18-34. Translate, Shallum is the chief even unto this day in the kings gate, on the east side. Shallum (recompense) is called Shelemiah (1Ch. 26:14), which, again, is a curtailment of Meshelemiah (Jah recompenseth), 1Ch. 26:1; 1Ch. 9:21 infra. The fact that ShallumMeshelemiahis spoken of as warder in Davids day as well as in the post-exilic age, proves that a guild or clan, not an individual, is in question. The eastern gate was the post of honour (Eze. 46:1-2), and the royal entry. The old name of the Kings Gate would naturally be retained in the restored Temple.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
1Ch 9:17 And the porters [were], Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, and Ahiman, and their brethren: Shallum [was] the chief;
Ver. 17. Shallum was the chief. ] He was overseer of the overseers of the porters.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
porters = gatekeepers. Compare Neh 12:25.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
1Ch 9:17-27
1Ch 9:17-27
“And the porters: Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, and Ahiman, and their brethren (Shallum was their chief), who hitherto waited in the king’s gate eastward: they were the porters for the camp of the children of Levi. And Shallum the son of Kore, the son of Ebiasaph, the son of Korah, and his brethren, of his father’s house, the Korahites, were over the work of the service, keepers of the thresholds of the tent: and their fathers had been over the camp of Jehovah, keepers of the entry. And Phinehas the son of Eleazar was over them in time past, and Jehovah was with him. Zechariah the son of Meshelemiah was porter of the door of the tent of meeting. All these that were chosen to be porters in the thresholds were two hundred and twelve. These were reckoned by genealogy in their villages, whom David and Samuel the seer did ordain in their office of trust. So they and their children had the oversight of the gates of the house of Jehovah, even the house of the tent, by wards. On the four sides were the porters, on the east, west, north, and south. And their brethren, in their villages, were to come in every seven days from time to time with them: for the four chief porters who were Levites were in an office of trust, and were over the chambers and over the treasuries in the house of God, and they lodged round about the house of God, because the charge thereof was upon them; and to them pertained the opening thereof morning by morning.”
E.M. Zerr:
1Ch 9:17-18. The porters were janitors or doorkeepers. These men attended the gate at the east side of the city.
1Ch 9:19. Gates of the tabernacle. We know the tabernacle proper had vanished long before this time, which was after the return from captivity. In describing the work assigned to these men it is based on their former work. Moffatt’s translation throws light on this passage which I will quote: “Were in charge of the service as keepers of the sacred thresholds, as their fathers had been keepers in the sacred camp of the Eternal.”
1Ch 9:20. Phinehas was doorkeeper in early times; now that the people get their liberty to return from the captivity, some others will need to take up the work; that prepares us for the next verse.
1Ch 9:21. Zechariah performed the service that was referred to in preceding verse.
1Ch 9:22. These 212 were admitted to this service after the return because their names were found in the register. This was an official record, having been made under the supervision of David and Samuel the seer, or prophet.
1Ch 9:23. The tabernacle is mentioned again because that had been the institution that originated this kind of service. After the return from Babylonian captivity the same kind of service was rendered for the temple.
1Ch 9:24. This means the four points of the compass. The original word for quarters is literally defined as “winds.” When used to denote directions it is as when we say “the four winds under heaven.”
1Ch 9:25. This means the brethren changed shifts on this service every seven days.
1Ch 9:26. The Levites that were the chief porters or doorkeepers for these four gates had their position as a set office, which means “trust,” and they had also the charge of the treasury. However, they would need some help, so their brethren relieved them by turns at intervals of seven days.
1Ch 9:27. While they were relieved at times of some of the weight of the office, they remained near the temple to supervise the opening of the gates in the morning.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
the porters: 1Ch 23:5, 1Ch 26:1-32, Neh 11:19
Shallum: 1Ch 9:19
Reciprocal: 1Ch 9:31 – Shallum 2Ch 8:14 – the porters 2Ch 34:13 – porters 2Ch 35:15 – the porters Ezr 7:7 – porters