(2) Set thy face against the Ammonites.—It has already been mentioned that the utterances against the four contiguous nations of Ammon, Moab, Edom, and Philistia are all contained in one prophecy, and that this prophecy was evidently spoken after the fall of Jerusalem, and, consequently, after the date of Ezekiel 26:1. The Ammonites, descended from Lot’s incest with his younger daughter, had been for centuries persistent enemies of Israel. They had joined the Moabites in their oppression of Israel under Eglon (Judges 3:13), and in a later attack had been subdued by Jephthah (Judges 11:32-33); they fought with extreme cruelty and insolence against Saul (1 Samuel 11:2-11); they insulted and warred against David (2 Samuel 10:1-6), and were utterly crushed by him (2 Samuel 12:31); their idolatries were favoured by Solomon (1 Kings 11:7); uniting with Moab and Edom, they attacked Judah under Jehoshaphat (2 Chronicles 20:1-25), but utterly failed, and were tributary to his descendant, Uzziah (2 Chronicles 26:8); again they fought with Jotham, and were reduced by him to heavy tribute (2 Chronicles 27:5); and not long before this time they had occupied the vacant cities of Gad (Jeremiah 49:1). Now they had joined Nebuchadnezzar’s army against Judah (2 Kings 24:2). From Ezekiel 25:3 it appears that their hostility arose not only from national jealousy, but from an especial hatred against the Jewish religion (comp. also Psalms 83:7). They are the frequent subject of prophetic denunciation (Isaiah 11:14; Jeremiah 49:1-6; Amos 1:13-15; Zephaniah 2:8-11).

(4) To the men of the east.—Literally, sons of the east, i.e., the various nomadic tribes inhabiting the Eastern deserts, who occupy the country to this day. They are described as its possessors, not its conquerors; the conquest was effected by Nebuchadnezzar. In Ezekiel 21:20-23 he was represented as hesitating whether to attack first Judah or Ammon, and determined to the former by the Divine direction; in this attack some of the Ammonites joined his army, but he nevertheless afterwards carried out his purpose and desolated their country. (See Ezekiel 21:28.)
Palaces.—The word properly means an enclosure for folding cattle. The same word is used in connection with tribes of the desert in Genesis 25:16; Numbers 31:10, and in both is translated castles, a singularly inappropriate sense. It afterwards came to mean a dwelling-place of any kind. The Ammonites and Moabites appear to have practically constituted one nation, the latter being, for the most part, the settled, and the former the nomadic portion. After the conquest of Nebuchadnezzar the Ammonites gradually dwindled away, until lost from history. The Ptolemies founded the city Philadelphia on the site of Rabbah, and there are still extensive ruins there belonging to the period of the Roman occupation; but the Ammonites had no part in either of these successive cities. The place is now utterly without inhabitants, and the most recent traveller says, “Lonely desolation in a rich country was the striking characteristic.”

(5) Rabbah was the only important town belonging to the Ammonites. It has become literally a stable for the camels of the wandering Bedouins. In the parallel clause the “Ammonites” are put for the land which they inhabit.

(6) Clapped thine hands, and stamped with the feet.—See Ezekiel 6:11 and Note there.

(7) For a spoil.—This is the sense of the margin of the Hebrew; its text is represented by our margin, meat or food. The word in the text occurs only here, but a compound of it is found in Daniel 1:5; Daniel 11:26. The figure seems to be the same as that which speaks of devouring the people.
Shalt know that I am the Lord.—This frequent close of the denunciatory prophecies against Israel in the former chapters is here also used at the close of each message in this chapter, and of many of the other prophecies against foreign nations. It refers not to a penitent recognition of the Lord, but to an experience of His wrath so plain that they can no longer refuse to acknowledge His power (see Ezekiel 25:14).

(8) Moab and Seir.—The two nations, here mentioned together, are afterwards treated separately—Moab, Ezekiel 25:8-11, and Edom, Ezekiel 25:12-14. Moab, springing from the same source with Ammon, was closely associated with it in its history and fortune, and is denounced in nearly the same prophecies. It was a more settled and stronger people, and also contributed its quota to the armies of Nebuchadnezzar. Additional prophecies in regard to it may be found in Numbers 24:17 and Isaiah 15, 16, besides those immediately connected with the prophecies expressly against Ammon already cited. The Moabites, so far as they were separated from the Ammonites, lay immediately to the south of them.

(9) Open the side of Moab—i.e., lay it open to the enemy. This is to be done “from the cities,” on which a special emphasis is placed. The cities named were all on the north of the Arnon, and before the time of Moses had been wrested from the Moabites by the Amorites, from whom in turn they were taken by the Israelites, and long formed a part of their territory. In the decay of the power of Israel they were re-conquered by Moab, and are here spoken of, perhaps in view of their being rightfully a possession of Israel, as appropriately the point from which desolation should go out over the whole of Moab.
The glory of the country.—The territory designated by the mention of these three cities is still considered by the Arabs as the best part of the land, and is called Belka. They have a proverb, “Thou canst find no land like Belka.” The sites of all the cities which are alluded to here have been probably identified by existing ruins.

(10) With the Ammonites.—The division between the verses here seriously obscures the sense. The meaning is that God will throw open Moab, as well as Ammon, to the sons of the east, and will give both nations in possession to them, so that Ammon shall be no more remembered, and judgment shall be executed on Moab. They were to be conquered and desolated by Nebuchadnezzar, but possessed by the Bedouins. The Ammonites and Moabites were nations so closely connected together that nearly all which has been said of the one applies to the other.

(12) Edom hath dealt against the house of Judah.—The reason of Edom’s hostility to Israel is expressly said to be revenge. Descended from the elder son, they had never looked complacently on the spiritual superiority given to the descendants of the younger. They showed their hostility from the first in refusing, with a show of violence, a passage to the Israelites through their territory (Numbers 20:18-21); and although they were subdued and made tributary under David and Solomon (2 Samuel 8:14; 1 Kings 9:26), yet in the decline of the Jewish power they availed themselves of every opportunity for hostility (2 Chronicles 28:17, &c). At this time they not only joined the armies of Nebuchadnezzar, but appear to have urged on the conqueror to greater cruelty, and to have themselves waylaid the fugitives to cut them off (Ezekiel 35:5; Psalms 137:7; Amos 1:11; Obadiah 1:11). They also, during the Captivity, took possession of many towns of Judea, including Hebron (Jos., Antt., xii. 8, § 6; B. J., 4:9, § 7), which were re-conquered in the time of the Maccabees. Other prophecies against Edom may be found in Numbers 24:18-19; Isaiah 11:14; Jeremiah 49:7-12; Joel 3:19, besides the extended prophecy of Ezekiel in Ezekiel 35.

(13) From Teman; and they of Dedan.—Teman (a word meaning south) was a southern district of Edom (Jeremiah 49:20-21; Habakkuk 3:3), famed for its wisdom (Jeremiah 49:7; Obadiah 1:8-9). Dedan is frequently mentioned by the prophets, but in such a way that it has not been certainly identified. A better translation would be, From Teman unto Dedan, meaning from one end of the country to the other, they shall fall by the sword.

(14) By the hand of my people Israel.—This points distinctly to the fact that the Divine vengeance on Edom should be accomplished by the hand of the Israelites, a prophecy which was fulfilled when they were conquered by John Hyrcanus, and compelled to submit to circumcision as a mark of absorption into the Jewish people. Subsequently Herod (who was himself of Idumean origin), as king of the Jews, reigned over them, and their name disappeared from history.
Many commentators would see in this prophecy a further intimation of their ultimate conversion and incorporation into the Church; but this seems quite foreign, not only to the scope of this series of prophecies, but especially to the connection, “I will lay my vengeance upon Edom,” and “they shall know my vengeance.”

(15) The Philistines.—The historical books of the Old Testament are almost a continuous record of the hostility of the Philistines. At times they held the greater part of the land of Israel in subjection, and at times were subdued in their turn. Although belonging to another branch of the Hamitic family, their land was included with that of the Canaanites in the territory to be given to the Israelites (Joshua 13:2-3). It was never, however, occupied by them, although the cities were fortified and garrisoned by some of the kings. The land lay along the coast of the Mediterranean, on the highway between Egypt and Assyria and Chaldæa, and consequently, in the struggles of those nations with each other the Philistines were gradually more and more reduced, until they disappeared entirely. Among the many prophecies against them, the following may be especially referred to: Isaiah 14:29-32; Jeremiah 47; Amos 1:6-8; Zephaniah 2:4-7.

(16) Cherethims.—The Cherethim were a portion of the Philistines living on their southern coast (1 Samuel 30:14; Zephaniah 2:5), and are sometimes put for the whole nation. The name is supposed by many to be equivalent to Cretans, and to indicate the origin of the Philistines from the island of Crete; but the etymology is doubtful. The reason for the introduction of their name here was probably a paronomasia in the original, the phrase “I will cut off the Cherethim” reading I will slay the slayers.