Ezra 4:10

and the rest of the nations Implying that the number was not nearly exhausted by these ninenames.

whom the great and noble Asnappar R.V. Osnappar. This name is nowhere else mentioned in the O.T. Who this Osnappar was, has been much disputed. Some have identified him with Esarhaddon, conjecturing that this was either another name or an honorific title. Others have supposed him to be a general commanding Esarhaddon's armies. But the name nowhere occurs in the Inscriptions as a second name or as a title of Esarhaddon, even if it were probable that having been called Esarhaddon in Ezra 4:2 he should here be called by a different name or title without any explanatory word. No general appears of this name. And the manner of the allusion presupposes his royal dignity. Moreover, neither Esarhaddon nor any general of his invaded Elam.

Scholars now begin to accept the ingenious and most probable suggestion that -Osnappar" is the Aramaic attempt to reproduce the name of Assur-bani-pal, the great Assyrian king. He was the only Assyrian king who captured Susa and could carry off -Susanchites"; no king so fully deserved the titles of -great and noble"; this name (-Assur the father of the son") by a strong contraction of the middle word, is not so far removed from the sound of -Osnappar", especially if the final -1" of -pal" is changed to -r" (cf. -Pôrus" for -Pul", or -Babiru" for -Babilu"), and the -r" of -Assur" is weakened to -n" (cf. Nebuchad rezzar and Nebuchad nezzar) = Assun … par.

Assur-bani-pal reigned 42 years (668 626). The records of his brilliant and successful reign have recently been deciphered (G. Smith's Assurbanipal, p. 187). His arms were everywhere victorious. The severest contest in which he was engaged was with his own brother Sassumukem, governor of Babylon, who rebelled against him. The rebel's death and the capture of Babylon (646) ended the struggle. But this fact in conjunction with his great conquest of Elam explains the joint mention of Babylonians, Susanchites and Elamites among the colonists, whom he transplanted into Samaritan territory.

It appears then that Assur-bani-pal by introducing his colonists into Samaria was the author of the fourth colonization. It would be wasted labour to try to identify the nationalities of Ezra 4:9 with the names recorded in 2 Kings 17:24 in connexion with a different colonization.

in the cities of Samaria R.V. - in the city of Samaria". The word in the Aramaic is singular, cf. Ezra 4:17. The other cities are covered by the next phrase.

and the restthat are on this side the river R.V. and in the rest of the country beyond the river. In these words two things deserve to be noted. (1) The words -beyond the river" clearly indicate the country W. of the Euphrates. The names of the nationalities who send the letter are presented in the light in which they would appear to the receiver, i.e. the king, at Susa to the E. of the Euphrates. The phrase -The country beyond the river" (the Abhar-Nahara) was a recognised geographical name for the Syrian satrapy. (2) The wideness of the expression -in the rest of the country" may be compared with the version given in 1EEsther 2:17 where -the Dinaites, &c." are compressed into -the judges that are in Cœlesyria and Phœnice". The word -judges" is a mistranslation. But the mention of Cœlesyria and Phœnica corresponds with the indefinite language used in this verse. It is not impossible that the letter of accusation against the Jews may have been the joint production of many communities throughout the satrapy of Syria, who felt themselves aggrieved at privileges accorded to the Jews, or imperilled by the revival of their strength.

and at such a time R.V. and so forth. The A.V. regarded this word as a brief way of expressing the date of the letter. The LXX. omitted it. The Vulgate rendered it as a salutation -in pace". It signifies the suppression of matter that is unimportant = -et cætera".