Nehemiah 2:14
Context2:14 I passed on to the Gate of the Well and the King’s Pool, where there was not enough room for my animal to pass with me.
Nehemiah 3:23
Context3:23 After them Benjamin and Hasshub worked opposite their house. After them Azariah son of Maaseiah, the son of Ananiah, worked near his house.
Nehemiah 3:26
Context3:26 and the temple servants who were living on Ophel worked 1 up to the area opposite the Water Gate toward the east and the protruding tower.
Nehemiah 3:29-30
Context3:29 After them Zadok son of Immer worked opposite his house, and after him Shemaiah son of Shecaniah, guard at the East Gate, worked. 3:30 After him 2 Hananiah son of Shelemiah, and Hanun, the sixth son of Zalaph, worked on another section. After them Meshullam son of Berechiah worked opposite his quarters.
Nehemiah 4:12
Context4:12 So it happened that the Jews who were living near them came and warned us repeatedly 3 about all the schemes 4 they were plotting 5 against us.
[3:26] 1 tc The Hebrew text lacks the verb “worked.” It is implied, however, and has been supplied in the translation.
[3:30] 1 tc The translation reads אַחֲרָיו (’akharayv, “after him”) with the Qere and many medieval Hebrew
[4:12] 2 tc The MT reads the anomalous מִכָּל־הַמְּקֹמוֹת (mikkol hammÿqomot, “from every place”) but the BHS editors propose כָּל־הַמְּזִמּוֹת (kol hammÿzimmot, “about every scheme”). The initial mem (מ) found in the MT may have been added accidentally due to dittography with the final mem (ם) on the immediately preceding word, and the MT qof (ק) may have arisen due to orthographic confusion with the similar looking zayin (ז). The emendation restores sense to the line in the MT, which makes little sense and features an abrupt change of referents: “Wherever you turn, they will be upon us!” The threat was not against the villagers living nearby but against those repairing the wall, as the following context indicates. See also the following note on the word “plotting.”
[4:12] 3 tc The MT reads תָּשׁוּבוּ (tashuvu, “you turn”) which is awkward contextually. The BHS editors propose emending to חָשְׁבוּ (hashÿvu, “they were plotting”) which harmonizes well with the context. This emendation involves mere orthographic confusion between similar looking ח (khet) and ת (tav), and the resultant dittography of middle vav (ו) in MT. See also the preceding note on the word “schemes.”





