Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Ezra 4:9
Then [wrote] Rehum the chancellor, and Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their companions; the Dinaites, the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites, the Apharsites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the Susanchites, the Dehavites, [and] the Elamites,
9. then wrote &c.] Although Ezr 4:8 ends with ‘in this sort’, the actual copy of the letter is not given until Ezr 4:11. Ezr 4:9-10 describe more minutely the senders, whose names were perhaps attached to the letter.
Nine of the nationalities from which the Samaritan colonists had been drawn are here mentioned by name; and the existence of many other varieties is implied in Ezr 4:10.
Scholars have been able approximately to identify the names.
the Dinaites ] are probably the ‘Dayani’, a tribe mentioned in the inscriptions of Tiglath-pilesar and other Assyrian kings as inhabiting Western Armenia. If this identification be correct, it illustrates the very different sources from which Samaria had been colonised.
the Apharsathchites ] These have not yet been recognized with any certainty in the inscriptions. Rawlinson identifies with the Apharsachites (Ezr 5:6, Ezr 6:6) and considers the ‘Apharsites’, the second name below, to be an accidental repetition of the same word. He understands ‘the Persians’ to be meant in each case. Other scholars deny that any Assyrian king was ever in a position to have obtained colonists from Persia. Frid. Delitzsch suggests the inhabitants of one of the two great Median towns ‘Partakka’ and ‘Partukka’ mentioned in Esarhaddon’s inscriptions.
the Tarpelites ] Rawlinson identifies with ‘Tuplai’, which name appears in the Inscriptions as equivalent to the Greek , a tribe on the coast of Pontus.
Tripolis in Northern Phoenicia is suggested by another scholar (Hitzig).
the Apharsites ] See above. Identified probably with a Median tribe mentioned in the inscriptions of Sennacherib as dwellers in the district of Parsua.
the Archevites ] The dwellers in Warka, a town S.E. of Babylon, the same as Erech (Gen 10:10).
the Babylonians ] i.e. dwellers in Babylon, in Esarhaddon’s days the capital of the subject province of Babylonia, Nineveh being the capital of the Empire. Possibly inhabitants expelled for insurrection.
the Susanchites ] The dwellers in Susa, one of the capitals of the Persian Empire, mentioned in Neh 1:1, Dan 8:2, and Esther, the chief town of Elam.
the Dehavites ] Rawlinson identifies with the Dai (? Daghestan), a Persian tribe mentioned by Herodotus (i. 125); Frid. Delitzsch, with the dwellers in the town called ‘Du-ua’ mentioned in an Assyrian inscription (747 b.c.).
the Elamites ] dwellers in Elam, ‘the Highlands’ or Elymais, the country lying E. of Babylonia, having Persia on its eastern, Media on its northern frontier.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
These verses form the superscription or address of the letter (Ezr 4:11, etc.) sent to Artaxerxes.
The Dinaites were probably colonists from Dayan, a country often mentioned in the Assyrian inscriptions as bordering on Cilicia and Cappadocia. No satisfactory explanation can be given of the name Apharsathchites (see Ezr 5:6 note). The Tarpelites were colonists from the nation which the Assyrians called Tuplai, the Greeks Tibareni, and the Hebrews generally Tubal. (It is characteristic of the later Hebrew language to insert the letter r (resh) before labials. Compare Darmesek for Dammesek, 2Ch 28:23 margin). The Apharsites were probably the Persians; the Archevites, natives of Erech (Warka) Gen 10:10; the Susanchites, colonists from Shushan or Susa; the Dehavites, colonists from the Persian tribe of the Dai; and the Elamites, colonists from Elam or Elymais, the country of which Susa was the capital.
Ezr 4:10
A snapper was perhaps the official employed by Esar-haddon Ezr 4:2 to settle the colonists in their new country.
On this side the river – literally, beyond the river, a phrase used of Palestine by Ezra, Nehemiah, and in the Book of Kings, as designating the region west of the Euphrates.
And at such a time – Rather, and so forth. The phrase is vague, nearly equivalent to the modern use of et cetaera. It recurs in marginal references.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Several people thus called from the several places of that vast Assyrian empire, from whence they were fetched, and who were united together into one body, and sent as one colony by the Assyrian monarchs into these parts.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
9. the DinaitesThe peoplenamed were the colonists sent by the Babylonian monarch to occupy theterritory of the ten tribes. “The great and noble Asnappar”was Esar-haddon. Immediately after the murder of Sennacherib, theBabylonians, Medes, Armenians, and other tributary people seized theopportunity of throwing off the Assyrian yoke. But Esar-haddonhaving, in the thirtieth year of his reign, recovered Babylon andsubdued the other rebellious dependents, transported numbers of theminto the waste cities of Samaria, most probably as a punishment oftheir revolt [HALES].
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Then wrote Rehum the chancellor, and Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their companions,…. who all signed the letter; namely, the governors of the following nations;
the Dinaites, the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites, the Apharsites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the Susanchites, the Dehavites, and the Elamites; which were colonies from several parts of Chaldea, Media, and Persia, and were settled in the several cities of Samaria, as several of their names plainly show, as from Persia, Erech, Babylon, Shushan, and Elimais; some account for them all, but with uncertainty; according to R. Jose k these were the Samaritans who first were sent out of five nations, to whom the king of Assyria added four more, which together make the nine here mentioned, see 2Ki 17:24.
k Pirke Eliezer, c. 38.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
(9) Then wrote . . .This verse and the following give the general superscription of the letter which the Persian officials wrote for the Samaritans: introduced, however, in a very peculiar manner, and to be followed by another introduction in Ezr. 4:11. Of the names by which the Samaritans think fit to distinguish themselves the Apharsites and Dehavites are Persians; the Babylonians the original races of Babylon, Cuthah and Ava (2Ki. 17:24); the Susanchites are from Susa; the Apharsathchites, probably the Pharathia-kites, a predatory people of Media; the Archevites, inhabitants of Erech (Gen. 10:10). The Dinaites and Tarpelites can be only conjecturally identified.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
9. Of the names here given to the colonists according to the various cities or provinces of the Assyrian empire, the Dinaites, Apharsathchites, Tarpelites, and Apharsites are otherwise unknown. The various conjectures as to their origin are not worth recording. The Archevites were, perhaps, from the Babylonian city Erech. Gen 10:10. The Babylonians were undoubtedly either from the city or province of Babylon. Compare 2Ki 17:24. The Susanchites were evidently from Susa or Shushan, which became the metropolis of the Persian empire, (Neh 1:1; Est 1:2,) but was originally the capital of the land of Elam. The Dehavites are generally thought to be identical with the Davi or Dahi of Herodotus, Strabo, and other classic writers, a Persian nomadic tribe, “whose name,” says Rawlinson, ( Herod., i, p. 338,) “is equivalent to the Latin ‘Rustici,’ and who were spread over the whole country from the Caspian to the Persian Gulf and the Tigris.” The Elamites were natives of the province of which Shushan was the capital, (Dan 8:2,) and which was originally settled by the descendants of Shem. Gen 10:22.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Ezr 4:9 Then [wrote] Rehum the chancellor, and Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their companions; the Dinaites, the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites, the Apharsites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the Susanchites, the Dehavites, [and] the Elamites,
Ver. 9. The Dinaites, the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites ] This was not unity, but conspiracy, of a rabble of rebels against God and his people. So Psa 83:5-6 , &c., “They have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee: the tabernacles of Edom, and the Ishmaelites; of Moab, and the Hagarenes,” &c. A whole legion of devils could agree to enter into one poor man, to vex him; and to act as one in that possession.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Dinaites. Probably from a Persian city. Apharsathchites. A Medo-Persian tribe.
Tarpelites. Probably from east of Elymais.
Apharsites. Of Persian origin.
Archevites. From Babylonia. Compare Gen 10:10.
Susanchites. From the Persian province or city of Shushan, the capital of Elam.
Dehavites = the Dahae of Herodotus (i. 125).
Elamites. From a province of Persia.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
companions: Chal, societies
the Dinaites: 2Ki 17:24, 2Ki 17:30, 2Ki 17:31
Apharsathchites: Ezr 5:6, Ezr 6:6, Apharsachites
Susanchites: Est 1:2, Est 2:3, Dan 8:2
Elamites: Gen 10:22, Isa 21:2, Jer 25:25, Jer 49:34, Eze 32:24, Act 2:9
Reciprocal: Ezr 4:7 – companions Ezr 4:8 – scribe Ezr 4:17 – companions Ezr 4:23 – Rehum Ezr 6:13 – Tatnai Neh 4:2 – the army Isa 23:13 – the Assyrian
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
4:9 Then [wrote] Rehum the chancellor, and Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their companions; the {f} Dinaites, the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites, the Apharsites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the Susanchites, the Dehavites, [and] the Elamites,
(f) These were people whom the Assyrians placed in Samaria instead of the ten tribes.