From the early Church Fathers to now.
1 Jewish · 2 Reformed · 1 Methodist · 1 Catholic · 1 Lutheran
“And I passed to the gate of the fountain, and to the king’s aqueduct, and there was no place for the beast on which I rode to pass.”
“And I passed to the Fountain Gate And I wished to pass to those places in the wall of the city and in those breaches, and there was no place in those breaches for riders on animals to pass through because they were so small.”
“Then went I up in the night by the brook,.... The brook Kidron: and viewed the wall; that was on that side: and turned back; did not go quite round the wall, the way perhaps being obstructed with rubbish, and was unpassable or he had not time to do it: and entered by the gate of the valley, and so returned; into the city, the same way he went out of it, Neh 2:13.”
“The gate of the fountain - Of Siloah. The king's pool - Probably the aqueduct made by Hezekiah, to bring the waters of Gihon to the city of David. See Ch2 32:30.”
“Aqueduct, or reservoir, made by Ezechias, 2 Paralipomenon xxxii. 30.”
“Then--that is, after having passed through the gate of the Essenes. I went on to the gate of the fountain--that is, Siloah, from which turning round the fount of Ophel. to the king's pool: but there was no place for the beast that was under me to pass--that is, by the sides of this pool (Solomon's) there being water in the pool, and too much rubbish about it to permit the passage of the beast.”
“"And I went on to the fountain-gate, and to the king's pool, and there was no room for the beast to come through under me." The very name of the fountain-or well-gate points to the foundation of Siloah (see rem. on Neh 3:15); hence it lay on the eastern declivity of Zion, but not in the district or neighbourhood of the present Bb el Mogharibeh, in which tradition finds the ancient dung-gate, but much farther south, in the neighbourhood of the pool of Siloah; see rem. on Neh 3:15. The King's pool is probably the same which Josephus (bell. Jud. v. 4. 2) calls Σολομῶνος κολυμβήθρα, and places east of the spring of Siloah, and which is supposed by Robinson (Palestine, ii. pp. 149, 159) and Thenius (das vorexil. Jerus., appendix to a commentary on the books of the Kings, p. 20) to be the present Fountain of the Virgin. Bertheau, however, on the other hand, rightly objects that the Fountain of the Virgin lying deep in the rock, and now reached by a descent of thirty steps, could not properly be designated a pool. He tries rather to identify the King's pool with the outlet of a canal investigated by Tobler (Topogr. i. p. 91f.), which the latter regards as a conduit for rain-water, fluid impurities, or even the blood of sacrificed animals; but Bertheau as an aqueduct which, perhaps at the place where its entrance is now found, once filled a pool, of which, indeed, no trace has as yet been discovered. But apart from the difficulty of calling the outlet of a canal a pool (Arnold in Herzog's Realencycl. xviii. p. 656), the circumstance, that Tobler could find in neither of the above-described canals any trace of high antiquity, tells against this conjecture. Much more may be said in favour of the view of E. G. Schultz (Jerusalem, p. 58f.), that the half-choked-up pool near Ain Silwan may be the King's pool and Solomon's pool; for travellers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries mention a piscina grandis foras and natatoria Silo at the mouth of the fountain of Siloah (comp. Leyrer in Herzog's Realencycl. xvi. p. 372). See also rem. on Neh 3:15. Here there was no room for the beast to get through, the road being choked up with the ruins of the walls that had been destroyed, so that Nehemiah was obliged to dismount.”
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.