Nehemiah 3:32

Biblia Hebrica Stuttgartensia (1967/77)

Bible Verse Review
  from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge

the sheep gate: Thus the whole city was surrounded with a wall; for Eliashib began at the sheep gate. Nehemiah 3:1, Nehemiah 12:39, John 5:2

the goldsmiths: The word tzeraphim may denote smiths, or refiners, or persons that worked in metals of any kind; but it is generally understood of those who worked in gold. From the remotest period of the history of the Jews, they had artists in all the elegant and ornamental trades; and it appears that goldsmiths, apothecaries, and merchants were formed into companies in the time of Nehemiah. Nehemiah 3:8, Nehemiah 3:31

Reciprocal: 2 Chronicles 26:9 - the valley gate Zephaniah 1:11 - all the

Gill's Notes on the Bible

And between the going up of the corner unto the sheep gate,.... Where the building first began and where it now ended:

repaired the goldsmiths and the merchants; or druggists; which was done at their expense; and so the wall all round, with the gates of it, were rebuilt and repaired, which was all done in fifty two days, Nehemiah 6:15.

Clarke's Notes on the Bible

Verse Nehemiah 3:32. The goldsmiths and the merchants. — The word הצרפים hatstsorephim may signify smiths, or persons who worked in metals of any kind; but it is generally understood to mean those who worked in gold. I have already observed, that the mention of merchants and goldsmiths shows that these persons were formed into bodies corporate in those ancient times. But these terms are differently rendered in the versions. The Vulgate is the same as ours, which probably our translators copied: aurifices et negociatores. The Syriac is, goldsmiths and druggists. The Arabic, smelters of metal and porters. The Septuagint, in some copies, particularly in the Roman edition, and in the Complutensian, Antwerp, and Paris Polyglots, have οἱ χαλκεις και οἱ μεταβολι, smiths and merchants; but in other copies, particularly the London Polyglot, for μεταβολοι we find ρωποπωλαι seller of shields. And here the learned reader will find a double mistake in the London Polyglot, ῥοποπωλαι for ῥωποπωλαι, and in the Latin version scruta for scuta, neither of which conveys any sense.