Ezra, Nehemiah

The three commentaries on Ezra-Nehemiah I rely on (Williamson, Fensham, Blenkinsopp) were all published around the same time, but still hold up quite well. Williamson is the most technical of the three. If you are willing to work with the somewhat annoying WBC format, this is a wonderful commentary, especially the introduction, which is surprisingly short for a technical commentary (roughly 30 pages) but distilled well, avoiding speculative tangents.

offers an excellent interpretation of these books, with thorough discussion of contemporary scholarship

 

There is not only near-consensus on the best commentary on Ezra and Nehemiah, but also near-consensus on the second best–Williamson’s contribution to the WBC. Williamson takes a more scholarly and technical approach than Fensham, making this a little bit more difficult to read. His strength is in word study, background, customs and the like. With Fensham this should make a pretty good one-two punch in understanding and interpreting the text. [Full Review]

Williamson's commentary is a scholarly standard on these books and should be consulted in conjunction with Fensham's work. There is more technical information in Williamson's work, but it is less user friendly due to the cumbersome format of the WBC. [Full Review]

A judicious survey of the historical and major exegetical issues with an awareness of the archaeological component. [Full Review]

A judicious survey of the historical and major exegetical issues with an awareness of the archaeological component. [Full Review]