19 Next to him repaired Ezer the son of Jeshua, the ruler of Mizpah, another portion, over against the ascent to the armory at the turning (of the wall).
*Minor differences ignored. Grouped by changes, with first version listed as example.
The going up to the armoury - This was either a tower that defended the angle where the two walls met; or the city arsenal, where shields, spears, etc., were kept to arm the people in time of danger.
And next to him repaired Ezer the son of Jeshua, the ruler of Mizpah, another piece over against the going up to the armoury at the (d) turning [of the wall].
(d) Where the weapons and armour of the city lay.
And next to him repaired Ezer, the son of Jeshua, the ruler of Mizpah,.... Either of another Mizpah, or of the other half of Mizpah, Nehemiah 3:15
another piece; or a second piece; one of the two pieces; for another is mentioned in the next verse:
over against the going up to the armoury, at the turning of the wall; the western wall towards the south, near to which was a place where armour was laid up; perhaps the same with the tower of David, to which there is an allusion in Song 4:4.
at the turning of the wall--that is, the wall across the TyropÅon, being a continuation of the first wall, connecting Mount Zion with the temple wall [BARCLAY].
Next to these repaired Ezer the son of Jeshua, the ruler of Mizpah, another piece (on שׁנית מדּה, see rem. on Nehemiah 3:11) opposite the ascent to the armoury of the angle. הנּשׁק or הנּשׁק (in most editions) is probably an abbreviation of בּית־הנּשׁק, arsenal, armoury; and המּקצוע is, notwithstanding the article in הנּשׁק, genitive; for to combine it as an accusative with עלותּ, and read, "the going up of the armoury upon the angle," gives no suitable meaning. The locality itself cannot indeed be more precisely stated. The armoury was probably situate on the east side of Zion, at a place where the wall of the city formed an angle; or it occupied an angle within the city itself, no other buildings adjoining it on the south. The opinion of Bertheau, that the armoury stood where the tower described by Tobler (Dritte Wand. p. 228) stands, viz., about midway between the modern Zion gate and the dung-gate, and of which he says that "its lower strata of stones are undoubtedly of a remoter date than the rebuilding of the wall in the sixteenth century," coincides with the assumption already refuted, that the old wall of the city of David passed, like the southern wall of modern Jerusalem, over Mount Zion.
*More commentary available at chapter level.