The interpretation timeline

Neh 2:10

How this passage has been read — the sources, oldest to newest.

From the early Church Fathers to now.

1 Jewish · 2 Reformed · 1 Methodist · 1 Catholic · 1 Lutheran

Neh 2:10 · Douay-Rheims
“And Sanaballat the Horonite, and Tobias the servant, the Ammonite, heard it, and it grieved them exceedingly, that a man was come, who sought the prosperity of the children of Israel.”
Scholastic c. 1100 – 1500
1105
A.D.
Rashi Jewish
1040–1105
“Now Sanballat etc., heard When they heard that I had come to request good for Israel and to build the walls of Jerusalem it displeased them greatly, for they were the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin.”
666 years pass — nothing from this stretch is hosted yet
Post-Reformation c. 1650 – 1900
1771
A.D.
John Gill Reformed
1697–1771
“When Sanballat the Horonite,.... Who either presided at Horonaim, or sprung from thence, a city of Moab, Isa 15:5 and Tobiah the servant, the Ammonite; who was formerly a slave, but now raised, from a low mean estate, to be governor in the land of Ammon, though still a vassal of the king of Persia: heard of it, it grieved them exceedingly that there came a man to seek the welfare of the children of Israel; to which the Moabites and Ammonites were always averse, and ever bore an hatred to Israel, and envied everything that tended to their happiness.”
Source
1832
A.D.
Adam Clarke Methodist
1762–1832
“Sanballat the Horonite - Probably a native of Horonaim, a Moabite by birth, and at this time governor of the Samaritans under the king of Persia. Tobiah the servant - He was an Ammonite; and here, under the Persian king, joint governor with Sanballat. Some suppose that the Sanballat here mentioned was the same who persuaded Alexander to build a temple on Mount Gerizim in favor of the Samaritans. Pelagius thinks there were two governors of this name.”
Source
1849
A.D.
1774–1849
“Horonite, a native, not (Calmet) a petty king (Grotius) of Horonaim, in the country of Moab, Jeremias xlviii. 3. He must have been very old, if he lived till the temple was built at Garizim: (Josephus and Scaliger) but Petau supposes that there were two of the name. — Servant; an officer appointed over the Samaritans, as well as Sanaballat. The Persian monarchs styled all their subjects servants or slaves. (Calmet) — Grieved. Thus unbelievers repine when any one endeavours to propagate the truth, (Haydock) or to establish the Church. (Worthington)”
Source
1871
A.D.
1871
“Sanballat the Horonite--Horonaim being a town in Moab, this person, it is probable, was a Moabite. Tobiah the servant, the Ammonite--The term used indicates him to have been a freed slave, elevated to some official dignity. These were district magistrates under the government of the satrap of Syria; and they seem to have been leaders of the Samaritan faction.”
Source
1875
A.D.
Keil & Delitzsch Lutheran
1861–1875
“When Sanballat the Horonite and Tobiah the Ammonite heard of his coming, it caused them great annoyance (להם ירע is strengthened by גּדולה רעה, as in Jon 4:1) that a man (as Nehemiah expresses himself ironically from their point of view) was come to seek the welfare of the children of Israel. Sanballat is called the Horonite either after his birthplace or place of residence, yet certainly not from Horonaim in Moab, as older expositors imagined (Isa 15:5; Jer 48:34), since he would then have been called a Moabite, but from either the upper or nether Beth-horon, formerly belonging to the tribe of Ephraim (Jos 16:3, Jos 16:5; Jos 18:13), and therefore in the time of Nehemiah certainly appertaining to the region of the Samaritans (Berth.). Tobiah the Ammonite is called העבד, the servant, probably as being a servant or official of the Persian king. These two individuals were undoubtedly influential chiefs of the neighbouring hostile nations of Samaritans and Ammonites, and sought by alliances with Jewish nobles (Neh 6:17; Neh 13:4, Neh 13:28) to frustrate, whether by force or stratagem, the efforts of Ezra and Nehemiah for the internal and external security of Judah. Nehemiah mentions thus early their annoyance at his arrival, by way of hinting beforehand at their subsequent machinations to delay the fortifying of Jerusalem.”
Source
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.