How does Martin Luther conduct an exegesis, or if he fails to, uses Nehemiah?

Wotcher! Luther is perhaps the most prolific German thinker. Kant, Hegel, Marx… their corpus pales in the face of Luther. Also, unlike Luther, they weren't concerned with the canon-texts of Western Christianity as received. Nehemiah seems a problematic and deeply engaging "half-book" to me. The crux of the first exile and the second temple. The crux of empire versus refoundation of the Temple. Nehemiah's complex relationship with the state, and his inability to enter the temple. The significance of the text emphasised by name lists. It seems like a link between Kings/Chronicles and second temple texts. As someone without faith, who has only the text, when I read Nehemiah I **know** that my reading is deficient from lack of study and context. But I also assume that major critics of the text have said something awesome. And Luther is just such an expansive critic who was deeply dedicated to the value of the text. What does Luther himself in his works expound in exegesis of Nehemiah, or, if he does not conduct an exegesis, where does Nehemiah fit in within Luther's side comments? Luther is a major reader whose impressions of a central text I find critically interesting. And sadly, given my lack of scholarly training, I can't conduct an adequate search myself.