Lange Commentary - 1 Chronicles 2:1 - 2:55

Online Resource Library

Return to PrayerRequest.com | Commentary Index | Bible Index | Search | Prayer Request | Download

Lange Commentary - 1 Chronicles 2:1 - 2:55


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

b. The Sons of Israel, and the Generation of Judah down to David, with David’s Descendants to Elioenai and his Seven Sons.—1Ch_2:1 to 1Ch_4:23

1. The Twelve Sons of Israel and the Descendants of Judah: 1Ch_2:1-41 (with an Appendix relating chiefly to the Posterity of Caleb: 1Ch_2:42-55)

1Ch_2:1 These are the sons of Israel: Reuben, Simeon (Shimon), Levi, and Judah, 2Issachar, and Zebulun. Dan, Joseph and Benjamin, Naphtali, Gad, and Assher. 3The sons of Judah: Er, and Onan, and Shelah; three were born to him of the daughter of Shuah, the Canaanitess; but Er, the first-born of 4Judah, was evil in the eyes of the Lord, and He slew him. And Thamar his daughter-in-law bare him Perez and Zerah: all the sons of Judah were five. 5The sons of Perez: Hezron and Hamul. 6And the sons of Zerah: Zimri, and Ethan, and Heman, Calcol, and Dara: five of them in all. 7And the sons of Carmi: Achar, the troubler of Israel, who transgressed in the accursed thing. 8And the sons of Ethan: Azariah.

9And the sons of Hezron, that were born to him: Jerahmeel, and Ram, and Celubai. 10And Ram begat Amminadab; and Amminadab begat Nahshon, prince of the sons of Judah. 11And Nahshon begat Salma, and Salma begat 12Boaz. And Boaz begat Obed, and Obed begat Jesse. 13And Jesse begat his 14first-born Eliab, and Abinadab the second, and Shima the third. Nathanael 15, 16the fourth, Raddai the fifth. Ozem the sixth, David the seventh. And their sisters, Zeruiah and Abigail: and the sons of Zeruiah: Abishai, and Joab, and Asahel, three. 17And Abigail bare Amasa; and the father of Amasa was Jether the Ishmaelite.

18And Caleb, son of Hezron, begat with Azubah his wife, and with Jerioth; 19and these are her sons: Jesher, and Shobab, and Ardon. And Azubah died; and Caleb took to him Ephrath, and she bare him Hur. 20And Hur begat 21Uri, and Uri begat Bezalel. And afterwards Hezron went in to the daughter of Machir, father of Gilead; and he took her when he was sixty years old, and she bare him Segub. 22And Segub begat Jair, who had twenty and three 23cities in the land of Gilead. And Geshur and Aram took the towns of Jair from them, with Kenath and her daughters, sixty cities. All these are sons 24of Jair, the father of Gilead. And after the death of Hezron, in Calebephrathah, Abiah, Hezron’s wife, bare him Ashur (Ashchur), father of Tekoah.

25And the sons of Jerahmeel, the first-born of Hezron, were Ram, the first- born, 26and Bunah, and Oren, and Azem of Ahijah. And Jarahmeel had another wife, and her name was Atarah; she was the mother of Onam. 27And the sons of Ram, the first-born of Jerahmeel, were Maaz, and Jamin, and Eker. 28And the sons of Onam were Shammai and Jada; and the sons of Shammai: Nadab and Abishur. 29And the name of Abishur’s wife was Abihail, and she bare him Ahban and Molid. 30And the sons of Nadab: Seled and Appaim; and Seled died childless. 31And the sons of Appaim: Ishi; and the sons of Ishi: Sheshan; 32and the sons of Sheshan: Ahlai. And the sons of Jada,brother of Shammai: Jether and Jonathan; and Jether died childless. 33And the sons of Jonathan: Peleth and Zaza. These were the sons of Jerahmeel.

34And Sheshan had no sons, but only daughters. And Sheshan had an Egyptian servant, whose name was Jarha. 35And Sheshan gave his daughter to Jarha his servant to wife; and she bare him Attai. 36And Attai begat Nathan, and Nathan begat Zabad. 37And Zabad begat Ephlal, and Ephlal begat Obed. 38And Obed begat Jehu, and Jehu begat Azariah. 39And Azariah begat Helez, 40and Helez begat Elasah. And Elasah begat Sismai, and Sismai begat Shallum. 41And Shallum begat Jekamiah, and Jekamiah begat Elishama.

Appendix: Three Series of Descendants of Caleb: 1Ch_2:42-55

42And the sons of Caleb, brother of Jerahmeel, were Mesha, his first-born; he was the father of Ziph; and the sons of Mareshah, the father of Hebron. 43, 44And the sons of Hebron: Korah, and Tappuah, and Rekem, and Shema. And Shema begat Raham, father of Jorkeam; and Rekem begat Shammai. 45And the son of Shammai was Maon; and Maon was father of Bethzur.

46And Ephah, Caleb’s concubine, bare Haran, and Moza, and Gazez; and Haran begat Gazez. 47And the sons of Jehdai: Regem, and Jotham, and Geshan, 48and Pelet, and Ephah, and Shaaph. Caleb’s concubine Maacha bare Sheber 49and Tirhanah. And she bare Shaaph the father of Madmannah, Sheva, father of Machbenah, and father of Gibeah; and Caleb’s daughter was Achsah.

50These were the sons of Caleb the Song of Solomon 7 of Hur, first-born of Ephrathah: 51Shobal, father of Kiriath-jearim. Salma, father of Bethlehem, Hareph, father 52of Bethgader. And Shobal, father of Kiriath-jearim, had sons: Haroeh, and the half of Menuhoth. 53And the families of Kiriath-jearim were the Ithrite, and the Puthite, and the Shumathite, and the Mishraite. From these came the Zorathite and the Eshtaolite. 54The sons of Salma: Bethlehem, and the Netophathite, Ataroth of the house of Joab, and half of the Menahathite, the Zorite. 55And the families of the scribes dwelling at Jabez were the Tirathites, Shimathites, Suchathites: these are the Kenites that came from Hammath, father of the house of Rechab.

EXEGETICAL

Preliminary Remark.—The author here begins to enroll his detailed genealogies of the tribes of Israel, extending to the end of 1 Chronicles 8. After premising a list of the 12 sons of Jacob as the general basis of the whole, 1Ch_2:1-2, he begins with the enumeration of the generations and families of the tribe of Judah, which he then pursues in 1 Chronicles 3 and 1Ch_4:1-23, and completes in several parts. No order, regulated by definite historical, geographical, or any systematic principles, lies at the base of this enumeration; he seems rather to have combined into a whole, as far as possible, the more or less fragmentary genealogies of certain branches and families of the house of Judah as they came down to him from antiquity; but this whole is very defective in the unity and homogeneity of its several parts. For of the five immediate descendants of Judah, that founded the tribe of Judah by a numerous posterity, his three sons Shelah, Perez, and Zerah, and his two grandsons Hezron and Hamul, only Zerah (1Ch_2:6-8), Hezron (1Ch_2:9-13), and Shelah (1Ch_4:21-23) have their genealogies given with any fulness; Hamul is entirely passed over, and Perez is only followed out in the line of Hezron. This line (under which the Chronist sums up all that was known of the descendants of Caleb and of the Jephunnite Calebites) is treated with special care and fulness: to it belongs the whole series of the descendants of David till the times after the captivity (1 Chronicles 3), and at least the more considerable part of the genealogical fragments in 1Ch_4:1-23, which serve as a supplement to 1Ch_2:9-55, and of which it is often doubtful which of the members previously named they continue or supplement.

1. The Twelve Sons of Israel: 1Ch_2:1-2.—These are given in an order deviating from Gen_35:23 ff., so that the 6 sons of Leah stand first, then the son of Rachel’s maid, Dan; after that the 2 sons of Rachel, Joseph and Benjamin; and lastly, the 3 remaining sons of the maids (Naphtali, Bilhah’s son; Gad and Asher, Zilpah’s sons). This separation of Dan from his full brother Naphtali is surprising, and can hardly be satisfactorily explained. For if we suppose that Rachel (see Gen_30:3 ff.) regarded Dan, born of her maid Bilhah, as in a sense her own son, and so he is named before Joseph and Benjamin, yet still it is a question, why not also Naphtali, who was likewise born before her own sons. The procedure of the Chronist in regard to Dan is in several respects enigmatical; comp. on 1Ch_7:12. [It is probable that Naphtali was born about the same time with Gad, and is therefore classified with him.—J. G. M.]

2. The Descendants of Judah: 1Ch_2:3-41.—a. The 5 sons of Judah, the 2 sons of Perez, and the descendants of Zerah: 1Ch_2:3-8.

1Ch_2:3-4. The sons of Judah, etc. The five sons of Judah, three legitimate, born of the daughter of Shuah the Canaanite, Er, Onan, and Shelah, and two born in incest of Tamar, his daughter-in-law, Perez and Zerah, are given in accordance with Genesis 38, and in the same order (comp. also Gen_46:12). The author recalls this his source by taking over word for word the remark on Er in Gen_38:7 : “But Er the first-born of Judah was evil in the eyes of the Lord, and He slew him.”

1Ch_2:5. The sons of Perez, etc. (Hezron, perhaps the “blooming, fair;” Hamul, the “forgiven,” or the “tender, weak;” comp. Bibelw. i. p. 432). These occur in two registers of the Pentateuch, the list of the children of Israel who went down to Egypt with Jacob, Gen_46:12, and in that of the families of Judah in the Mosaic age, Num_26:21.

1Ch_2:6-8. And the sons of Zerah. Five such are named: Zimri, Ethan, Heman, Calcol, and Dara. On the first of these names, which might possibly be wrongly written ( æִîøִé for æַáְãִé , Jos_7:1), see under 1Ch_2:7. The four following names, especially if we read for the last, Darda, with a great number of old witnesses (see Crit. Note), agree surprisingly with the four men compared with Solomon in 1Ki_5:11 : Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Calcol, and Darda, the the sons of Mahol. The assumption of an identity of these four wise men with the four younger sons of Zerah is very natural; it has been already asserted by Grotius, Clericus, Lightfoot (Chronol. V. T. p. 24), Hiller (Onom. Sacr.), and others, and recently by Movers (p. 237) and Bertheau, who insisted on the circumstance, that in 1Ki_5:11 contemporaries of Solomon were not intended (no more than in Ezra 14:14, 18:20, contemporaries of Daniel); further, on the probable identity of Zerah with Ezrah the father of Ethan mentioned in 1Ki_5:11 ( àֶæְøַç=æֶøַç ); and lastly, on the statement of the Rabbinical book Seder Olam, which says (p. 52, ed. Meyer) of the sons of Zerah named in our passage: “These were prophets who prophesied in Egypt,” and thus appears to confirm expressly their being of the class of Hakamim. But the argument raised of late, especially by Hengstenberg (Beiträge zur Einl. ii. 61 f., and on Psalms 88), Keil (Apol. Vers. p. 164 ff.; comp. Comment. p. 39 ff.), as well as Bähr (on 1Ki_5:11, Bibelw. 7 p. 30), against the identity of these persons, seems to be more weighty and decisive. For, 1. The variant “Darda” for “Dara” in our passage, however old, appears clearly to have arisen from the endeavour to harmonize; 2. To this endeavour the notice in the Seder Olam owes its origin; 3. That at least near contemporaries of Solomon are named in 1 Kings 5. follows from the manifest and undeniable identity of Ethan the Ezrahite with the so-named composer of Psalms 89, and from the very probable identity of Heman with “Heman the Ezrahite,” the composer of Psa_88:4. If the Ethan and Heman of 1Ki_5:11 be identical with the composers of these Psalms, they are also probably to be regarded as Levites of the family of the sons of Korah (see the superscr. of these Psalms), who are in 1 Chronicles 15, 17, , 19 called masters of song, and belong not to the family of Judah, and might at the most have found admission into it as adoptive sons of Zerah (Hengstenberg, Beiträge zur Einl. ins A. T. ii. 71),—an assumption, however, which is too artificial; 5. The express designation of Calcol and Darda in Kings as “sons of Mahol” makes it difficult to assume their identity with the sons of Zerah, as the latter must be regarded not as immediate sons, but later descendants of Zerah; 6. Of the pre-eminent wisdom of the sons of Zerah, neither the canonical Old Testament nor the apocryphal literature has anything to report; even such passages as Jer_49:7, Bar_3:22 ff. are silent on the subject. The assumption of the identity of these with the names in 1 Kings 5 can only be maintained on the presupposition that åּáְðֵé in our passage means not strictly sons, but later descendants of Zerah (so recently Keil, in Comment. p. 41). But this expedient has its difficulty, and by no means suffices to destroy the force of most of the arguments here adduced against the identity. We must therefore take the surprising coincidence of the names to be accidental, or assume with Movers (Chron. p. 237) that we have in the present passage the peculiar genealogical combination of a later author. For the conjecture of Ewald, that Heman and Ethan, “the two great singers of the tribe of Judah, were taken by the Levitical music schools into their company and family, and therefore were afterwards (in the superscriptions of Psalms 88, 89) reckoned to the tribe of Levi” (Gesch. d. V. Isr. iii. 1, p. 84), is no less artificial than that of Hengstenberg. [But of these considerations, Nos. 1 and 2 contain a mere subjective assumption. No. 3 assumes, without necessity, that the Ethan of 1 Kings 5 and the composer of Psalms 89 are one, since two Ethans may descend from the one patriarch. No. 4 assumes that the composers of Psalms 88, 89 were Levites, whereas the epithet Ezrahite appears to be added expressly to distinguish them from the Levites of those names. No. 5 assumes that Mahol is a proper name, which remains to be proved. No. 6 assumes that the wisdom of Zerah’s sons is not probable, because it is not elsewhere mentioned. This argument of itself has little if any weight. On the other hand, one motive to insert these sons of Zerah in the list was probably their occurrence in 1 Kings 5, and the Chronist, according to his wont, is silent on their wisdom, for the sake of brevity, as it was elsewhere recorded.—J. G. M.]

1Ch_2:7. And the sons of Carmi; Achar; that is, Achar was descended from Carmi. Comp. the oft-recurring use of the plural áְּðֵé , where only one descendant is named (1Ch_2:8; 1Ch_2:30-31; 1Ch_2:42, and Gen_46:23). By Achar, as the addition, “the troubler of Israel” ( òëø , properly “the troubled”), shows, is meant the Achan of the book of Joshua (Jos_7:1 ff., Jos_22:20), whose name must have been known to the author of this book in the by-form Achar, as he puts the valley of Achor in etymological connection with it (Jos_7:26, Jos_15:7). The link that connects Carmi, the father or ancestor of this Achar, with Zerah is wanting; but from Jos_7:1, where he is called a son of Zabdi, the son of Zerah, it is highly probable that he springs from Zimri, the first named of the sons of Zerah, whether Zimri in our passage be an error of the pen for Zabdi, or the reverse, or Zabdi be a son of Zimri, and thus several links of the series from Zerah to Achar have been omitted. On Carmi, comp. also 1Ch_4:1 and Num_26:6, where a family of Reuben bears the name.

1Ch_2:8. And the sons of Ethan: Azariah. This Ethanite Azariah is not otherwise known: no probable reason can be assumed why he only of the sons of Ethan is mentioned.

b. The Descendants of Hezron: 1Ch_2:9-41.—a. His three sons, 1Ch_2:9.—And the sons of Hezron that were born to him. The passive ðåֹìַã stands “for the indefinite active, so that the following accusatives with àֶú depend on the virtual notion of the active ‘one bare him;’ comp. Gen_4:18; Gen_21:5; Gen_46:20, and the sing. ðåֹìַã in a similar position, 1Ch_3:4; 1Ch_26:6” (Berth.). The name Ram is, in the New Testament genealogies of Jesus, Mat_1:3-4, Luk_3:33, Aram; comp. øָí , Job_32:2, with àֲøָí , Gen_22:21. The name ëְּìåּáַé is undoubtedly a by-form of ëָּìֵá , 1Ch_2:18, or, as this name is written in 1Ch_4:11, of ëְּìåּá : it is an adject, gentil., that stands to its stem ëְּìåּá , as öåֹôַé 1Ch_6:11, to öåּó 1Ch_6:20 (Ewald, Lehrb. § 164, c), or as in Greek Ìáíé÷áῖïò (the n. pr. of the well-known Persian sectary) to ÌÜíçò . Accordingly, the celebrated forefather of Bezaleel had of old three names—Caleb, Celub, the Celuban. Comp. underneath on 1Ch_2:18 ff. and on 1Ch_2:40. The three here named, Jerahmeel, Ram, and Celubai, appear to have been actual sons or immediate descendants of Hezron, whereas the sons of Hezron afterwards appended,—Segub, 1Ch_2:21, and Ashur, 1Ch_2:24,—as they are co-ordinated with his later descendants, may possibly be sons in a wider sense. At all events, they did not belong to the aforesaid founders of the three celebrated lines of Hezronites, which are analyzed in the following passage, though in an order different from the present enumeration, the family of Ram being placed first, and that of Jerahmeel transferred to the end (comp. on 1Ch_2:18).

â . The family of Ram, as first of the three Hezronite lines. His precedence is explained by the circumstance that the house of David sprang from him. The posterity of Ram is therefore carried down to David in seven members. The six members to Jesse, the father of David, are found also in the book of Rth_4:19-21; comp. the genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3

1Ch_2:10. Nahshon, prince of the sons of Judah. This distinguishing epithet, which is wanting in Ruth, points to Num_1:7; Num_2:3; Num_7:12, where Nahshon is named as the prince of Judah at the exodus. As this date, according to the most probable interpretation of the number 430, Exo_12:40, is to be placed fully four centuries after the time of Judah, several members must have fallen out between Hezron, the grandson of Judah, and Nahshon, as well as between Nahshon and Jesse, as the series Salma, Boaz, Obed, and Jesse is not sufficient to fill up the interval of 400 years between Moses and David. [If the 430 years count from the call of Abraham, which has not yet been disproved, the exodus was only 210 years after the descent of Judah into Egypt, instead of four centuries.—J. G. M.]

1Ch_2:11. Salma. Instead of ùַׂìְîָà , the book of Ruth has, 1Ch_4:20, ùַׂìְîָä , but in the following verse ùַׂìְîåֹï , which has passed into the New Testament (Luk_3:32, Óáëìþí and so Mat_1:4-5, where Luther has Salma).

1Ch_2:13-15. The seven sons of Jesse. According to 1Sa_17:12 (comp. 1Ch_16:6 ff.), Jesse had 8 sons,—a difference which is most easily explained by the supposition that one of the eight died without posterity, and therefore was not included by later genealogists.—His first-born Eliab. So is the eldest called in the books of Samuel; on the contrary, in 1Ch_27:18 the form Elihu appears to have come into the place of Eliab. The Peshito has in our passage 8 instead of 7 sons of Jesse, of whom it calls the seventh Elihu, the eighth David; the first 6 agree with the Masoretic text.—And Shima the third. The name ùִׁîְòָà , occurring thus in 1Ch_20:7, is in 2Sa_13:3; 2Sa_21:22 in the Keri ùִׁîְòָä on the contrary, in the Kethib of the latter passage ùִׁîְòִé , and in Samuel (1Ch_16:6, 1Ch_17:13) twice ùַׁîָּä . The latter is merely an abbreviated form of ùִׁîִòָä .—The names of the next three brothers occur nowhere else.

1Ch_2:16-17. And their sisters, Zeruiah and Abigail. Both sisters obtained great celebrity through their heroic sons,—Zeruiah, as the mother of Abishai, Joab, and Asahel (1Sa_26:6, 2Sa_2:18; 2Sa_3:39; 2Sa_6:16, etc.), who are always named after their mother, never after their less celebrated father; Abigail, as mother of the commander Amasa, who was involved in Absalom’s rebellion (2Sa_17:25; 2Sa_19:14; 2Sa_20:10), whom she bare to Jether the Ishmaelite. This éֶúֶø is called 2Sa_17:25 éִúְøָà , with the epithet äַéִּùְׂøָòֵìִé , for which, according at least to our passage, the correct form is äַéִּùְׂîְòֵìִé ; for the Israelitish descent of the man would have needed no distinct notice. Abigail herself appears, besides, according to 2Sa_17:25, as a daughter of Nahash and sister of Zeruiah, and therefore not a full, but only a half sister of David.

ã . The family of Caleb, as second of the three Hezronite lines: 1Ch_2:18-24.—The question, how this first list of his descendants is related to the second in 1Ch_2:42-49, Wellhausen (p. 13 seq.) has endeavoured to answer by regarding the Caleb in 1Ch_2:42 as corresponding to the Celubai in 1Ch_2:9, designating the order in which the special genealogies of the three Hezronite lines occurred, by the names Ram (1Ch_2:10 ff.), Jerahmeel (1Ch_2:25 ff.), and Caleb (1Ch_2:42 ff.), and considering the genealogy of Caleb (1Ch_2:18-24) as a later insertion, whereby the Chronist has disfigured the original and normal development of his genealogy of the Hezronites. He holds that, indeed, this insertion itself is again a conglomerate of genealogical fragments of various origin, as appears most clearly from the reference of 1Ch_2:21-23 to Hezron himself, the father of Caleb. Indeed, even 1Ch_2:10-17 are probably an interpolation, whereby the Chronist has endeavoured to extend the pedigree of the Hezronites originally beginning with Jerahmeel (“the first-born of Hezron,” 1Ch_2:25), on the basis of the book of Ruth, the Ram of which (Rth_4:19) appears to him as a son of Hezron and a brother of Jerahmeel and Caleb, whereas he is in truth, according to 1Ch_2:25, a son of Jerahmeel and grandson of Hezron. Accordingly, the old genealogical table before the Chronist had only two lines of Hezronites (Jerahmeelites and Calebites), and his supplementing action had extended this register, so that he first added a Ram son of Hezron, with his posterity (1Ch_2:10-17), different from Ram son of Jerahmeel, and then a second Caleb (1Ch_2:18-24), with many other descendants than those of the younger brother Jerahmeel, 1Ch_2:42 ff. It cannot be denied that many reasons appear to recommend this bold hypothesis. It explains in a satisfactory way the circumstance that the first-born Jerahmeel, whose genealogy we should expect first, appears after those of his two younger brothers, and also the surprising duplication of the names Ram and Caleb. But the hypothesis comes short of absolute certainty in many points which require to be adduced for confirmation. And especially it still remains doubtful which of the different old traditions concerning the descendants of the old prince of Judah, Caleb the companion of Joshua, whether that in 1Ch_2:18 ff., or that in 1Ch_2:42 ff., or that in 1Ch_4:11; 1Ch_4:15 ff., is to be pronounced the oldest and most trustworthy, and whether we are entitled to reject for one of them all the others at once as totally untrustworthy, and containing no element of historical truth. If it were to be assumed that originally there were two persons of this name, a Caleb son of Hezron (2, 1Ch_4:11 ff.) and a Caleb son of Jephunneh (1Ch_4:15 ff.), this duplication would warn us to be so much the more cautious in the reception or rejection of this or that one of the various traditions that are attached to these honourable names: the still greater complexity of the collective genealogies of Caleb would all the more favour the conjecture that each of the series referred to him must be accounted in the one or the other way as authentic, as containing in itself elements of the genuine posterity of Caleb.

1Ch_2:18. Begat with Azubah his wife. äåֹìִéã àֶú , either “begat with” (as elsewhere äåֹìִéã îִï , 1Ch_8:8-9) or “caused to bring forth” (comp. Isa_66:9). The following words, àִùָּׁä åְàֶúÎéְøִéòåֹú , appear to be corrupt. If we translate (with D. Kimchi, Piscat., Osiand., and others), “with Azubah, a wife, and with Jerioth,” two things are strange: the indefinite designation of Azubah as a wife, àִùָּׁä (for which we should expect “his wife,” àִùְׁúּåֹ ), and the circumstance that of the second wife no son is named. If we regard (with Hiller, J. D. Mich.) åְàֶú as explicative, with Azubah a wife, that is, Jerioth, we establish a mode of expression which is without a parallel in our book. It is impossible to render “And Caleb begat Azubah and Jerioth” (B. Striegel). We must either hold àִùָּׁä , which is, moreover, wanting in two mss. (see Crit. Note), with Berth, and Kamph., as a marginal note that has crept into the text, designed to prevent the translation “begat Azubah,” or adopt the reading of the Pesh. and the Vulg., àִùְׁúּåֹ àֶú , which gives the sense, “begat with Azubah his wife Jerioth, and these are her (Jerioth’s) sons.” The latter appears the most satisfactory (comp. Keil). The names of her three sons occur nowhere else in the Old Testament.

1Ch_2:19. And Azubah died, and Caleb took to him Ephrath, namely, to wife. To this second wife of Caleb, whose name in 1Ch_2:50 (comp. 1Ch_4:4) is Ephrathah, belongs Hur, who is also mentioned Exo_31:2 as the grandfather of Bezalel. By this we are scarcely to understand that Ephrathah was properly a local name equivalent to Bethlehem (Gen_36:16; Gen_36:19; Mic_5:1), so that Hur would be designated a descendant of Caleb, born at Bethlehem, or originating thence (an assumption to which Bertheau seems inclined).—On 1Ch_2:20, comp. Exo_31:2; Exo_35:30.

1Ch_2:21. Afterwards Hezron went in to the daughter of Machir. “Afterwards,” åְàַçַø , that is, after the birth of those three sons mentioned 1Ch_2:9, whose mother is not named. The whole notice, extending to 1Ch_2:24, of Hezron’s descendants, born in his old age of the daughter of Machir the Gileadite, and of a son Ashur, born after his death of a third wife Abiah (1Ch_2:24), is undoubtedly surprising, and unsuitable to the present place: the series of Hezron’s sons and their descendants is thereby violently interrupted, and the above-mentioned interpolation theory of Wellhausen has in this case a very strong support. If we hold the present order to be original, we must assume, with Keil, that the here mentioned descendants of Hezron “were somehow more closely connected with the family of Caleb than with that of either Ram or Jerahmeel.” On Machir the first-born of Manasseh, to whom Moses gave the land of Gilead, comp. Gen_1:23; Num_32:40; Deu_3:15. As he is here and 1Ch_2:23 called “father of Gilead,” so is it said Num_26:29 that he begat Gilead. Comp. Num_27:1, from which it follows that, by this paternal relation of Machir to Gilead, more must be meant than the bare notion of a descent of the Israelitish population of Gilead from Machir, and that there must have been a definite person, Gilead, son of Machir and grandfather of Zelophehad. By the designation father of Gilead, the present Machir is distinguished from later persons of the same name; comp. 2Sa_9:4; 2Sa_17:27.

1Ch_2:22. And Segub begat Jair. This Jair, the grandson of Hezron through Segub, belonged on the mother’s side to the tribe of Manasseh, and occurs therefore elsewhere, as Num_32:41, Deu_3:14, as a Manassite. His family, after the conquest of Og king of Bashan under Moses, received the territory of Argob, and gave to the conquered cities which Moses handed over to him the name Havvoth-Jair ( çַåֹּú éָàִéø ), “tent-villages of Jair,” or “life of Jair” (comp. Num_32:41; Deu_3:14; Jos_13:30; 1Ki_4:13), with, which designation the name “Judah on Jordan,” Jos_19:34 (that is, the colony of Jews in Gilead east of the Jordan), is most probably identical; comp. 5. Raumer, PalœJames , 4 th edit. p. 233; Hengstenb. Gesch. des Reichs Gottes im A. T. ii. p. 258; Hoffm. Blicke in die früheste Gesch. des gelobten Landes, i. (1870) p. 114.

1Ch_2:23. And Geshur and Aram, the Geshurites and Aramæans, which is scarcely a hendiadys for “the Aramæans of Geshur,” but rather points to an alliance of the Geshurites with the neighbouring Aramæans. For Geshur (2Sa_3:3; 2Sa_13:37; 2Sa_15:8) was a region in Aram or Syria, lying on the north-west border of Bashan near Hermon and the eastern bank of the Jordan, that in David’s time (comp. on 1Ch_3:2) had a king of its own, and formed at that time an independent kingdom, not subject to Israel,—in the opinion of Hitzig (Gesch. d. Volks Israel, i p. 28 ff.), an Amorite kingdom of Arian (?) origin, though Moses in the distribution of the country had assigned it to Manasseh (Jos_13:13; comp. 1Ch_12:5).—With Kenath and her daughters, sixty cities. So should the àֶúÎ÷ְðָú åâåØ be most probably taken, as a farther district, besides the villages of Jair, which the Geshurites and Aramæans took, and not as an explanatory apposition to these (comp. Berth.). For the preceding statement, that the villages of Jair amounted to twenty-three (1Ch_2:22), is much too definite to allow it to be supposed that the now named sixty daughter towns of Kenath form an inexact repetition of the same designation. Much rather the difference of the two districts: “the villages of Jair” and the “daughters of Kenath,” appears in the clearest manner from Num_32:41-42, according to which, of the two Manassites Jair and Nobah, the former conquered the “Havvoth Jair,” the latter the “Benoth Kenath.” Only in their sum total were these places sixty in number, and only to this sum total does the present ùִׁùִׁéí òִéø apply. Whether, therefore, the group of towns designated by “Kenath” (now Kanwat, on the western slope of Jebel Hauran) and her daughters numbered exactly thirty-seven towns (as Keil thinks), remains uncertain; and the number sixty may very probably be a round number (comp. also Deu_3:12-14; Jos_13:30). On the time when the Geshurites and Aramæans took the sixty towns, nothing can be ascertained from our passage. Certain it is that the later Judge of Israel, Jair (Jdg_10:4), possessed again at least thirty of these towns under the name of Havvoth-Jair, which must have survived to still later times. All these are sons of Jair, not the sixty towns, but the afore-mentioned Segub and Jair and their descendants and correlatives. It may be conjectured that the genealogical source used by the Chronist was originally more full, so that ëָּì àֵìֶּä referred not merely to these two names.

1Ch_2:24. And after the death of Hezron in Caleb-ephrathah. This place, which does not elsewhere occur, might possibly be the same as Ephrathah or Bethlehem-ephrathah (see on 1Ch_2:19); the name of Caleb’s second wife Ephrath might be somehow connected with this her place of abode and death. “In 1Sa_30:14 a part of the south of Judah is called ‘Negeb Caleb,’ because it belonged to the family of Caleb; in analogy with which the town or place, in Which Caleb and his wife Ephrath dwelt, might be called ‘Caleb of Ephrathah,’ if Ephrath had brought it as a dowry to him, as in Jos_15:18 f.” (Keil). Or from the Negeb Caleb, as the southern part of Caleb’s territory, 1Sa_30:14, “possibly the northern part might be distinguished by the more definite name ‘Caleb of Ephrathah,’ that is, of Bethlehem” (Berth.). None of these interpretations of this obscure phrase is perfectly satisfactory; and there is therefore much plausibility in the emendation of Wellhausen, founded on a various reading presented by the Sept. ἦëèå ×áëὲâ åἰò ÅöñáèÜ = áָּà ëָìֵá àֶôְøָúָä ), “And after Hezron’s death Caleb went to Ephrath, the wife of his father Hezron.” Here for áְ is read áָּà ; for àֵùֶׁú , åְàֵùֶׁú and for àָáִéå , àֲáִéָּä —a change which is certainly somewhat radical; but the resulting sense is not improbable (comp. Gen_35:22). As the text stands, here is a third wife of Hezron, called Abiah (comp. 1Ch_2:9; 1Ch_2:21), who bears to him “Ashur, father of Tekoa” (comp. 1Ch_4:5-7), as a fil. postumus after his death. This Ashur (whom Wellhausen is disposed to change into an àִéùׁÎçåּø , and to identify with Hur, Caleb’s son by Ephrath, 1Ch_2:19) is called father of Tekoa, as lord and chieftain of the town Tekoa, the home of the prophet Amos, two hours south of Bethlehem (comp. Jos_15:59), where this place still exists under the name Tekua (comp. Robinson’s Pal. ii. p. 406).

ä . The family of Jerahmeel, the third line of Hezron: 1Ch_2:25-41.—Of Jerahmeel (he whom God pities, whom He loves = èåüöéëïò ) the first-born of Hezron: 1Ch_2:9. As there was a negeb Caleb (1Ch_2:24) and a negeb of the Kenites, so there was a negeb of the Jerahmeelites, 1Sa_27:10; comp. 1Sa_30:29. This is a proof of the strength and power of this line springing from the oldest Hezronites.—Ram the first-born. Wellhausen, perhaps without ground, takes this Ram to be originally identical with the Ram of 1Ch_2:10, the founder of the Ramite family, from which David sprang; comp. on 1Ch_4:21.—And Bunah, and Oren, and Ozem of Ahijah. The last of these names, àֲçִéָּä should not apparently designate a fifth son of Jerahmeel, because in that case the å should not be wanting. It appears rather to be the name of the mother of the four sons, and a îֵ before àֲçִéָּä appears to have fallen out before the í of the foregoing åְàֹöֵí (comp. 1Ch_8:9). This conjecture, thrown out by Jun., Tremell., Clericus, J. H. Mich., J. Lange, and approved by all the moderns, appears the more probable, as in the following verse mention is made of a second wife of Jerahmeel, and the Syr. and the Sept. in our verse have reckoned only four sons, the latter rendering àֲçִéָּä by ἀäåëöὶò áὐôïῦ .

1Ch_2:26. Atarah; she was the mother of Onam, whose family is traced out 1Ch_2:28-33. The name òֲèָøָä appears to signify “crown,” a name not unsuitable for a female, Pro_31:10. Yet it might signify “wall, fort,” as the sing, of òֲèָøåֹú , the city (comp. Num_32:3; Num_32:34 f.; Jos_16:5; Jos_16:7; Jos_18:13; and Wellhausen, p. 25).

1Ch_2:28-30. Onam’s family continues itself in pairs of sons to Abishur and Nadab, his grandsons, and to their sons. On the name “Abihail,” comp. Crit. Note.

Ver, 31. And the sons of Sheshan (descendants; see on 1Ch_2:7), Ahlai. This Ahlai must have been a daughter, not a son, of Sheshan, great-grandson of Nadab, 1Ch_2:29; for (1Ch_2:34) Sheshan had no sons, but only daughters: Ahlai was therefore his heiress; but whether the same daughter who (1Ch_2:35) married the Egyptian Jarha must remain uncertain. The remark of Hiller (Onom. s. p. 736), therefore, on Sheshan: Quicquid habuit liberorum, s. nepotum, sustulit ex unica filia Achlai, is not quite correct.

1Ch_2:33. These were the sons of Jerahmeel. This subscription (going back to 1Ch_2:25) includes 23 descendants of Jerahmeel. It deserves notice, that 23 descendants of Jerahmeel, with the preceding descendants of Judah (from 1Ch_2:3), make up the sum of 70 members of the house of Judah, namely, sons of Judah, 5; of Perez, 2; of Zerah, 5; Carmi, Achar, and Azariah, 3; Ram and his descendants (including the 2 daughters of Jesse, and Jether father of Amasa), 21; Caleb and his descendants, 10; and Jerahmeel and his descendants, 24. This new number 70 of the ancestors of the Jews, made out by Bertheau, loses weight and certainty, because it includes several females, against all genealogical rule reckons the father and mother of Amasa as two members, and excludes the 13 descendants of Sheshan, which sprang from the Egyptian servant Jarha (1Ch_2:34-41), treating them as a mere offshoot (comp. Keil, p. 46). And would not the Chronist, if he had actually wished to represent the posterity of Judah, after the manner of that of his father Israel, Gen_46:28 f., as 70 souls, have overturned this reckoning again by his later additions, and especially the supplements given in 1Ch_4:1-23, and altogether effaced the impression made thereby? Wellhausen’s interpolation theory, even if only approximately true, by no means agrees with this assumption of a tendency in the writer to symbolic numbers in his enumerations in 1Ch_2:3-33.

1Ch_2:34-41. The family of Jarha, the Egyptian servant. This Jarha occurs nowhere else; he may have served Sheshan during the sojourn of Israel in Egypt; for the latter branched off from Judah in the ninth generation, and belonged thus to the time before Moses. Most of the old expositors, perhaps rightly, presume that Jarha, only after he was made a free man and a proselyte by Sheshan (comp. Exo_22:20; Exo_23:9), married his daughter; comp. the law concerning intermarriage between Israelites and Egyptians, Deu_23:8; also David’s Egyptian servant, 1Sa_30:13 ff. Of the 13 here named descendants of Jarha, none occur elsewhere in the history of the Old Testament. Their names, indeed, recur several times, some of them, for example, in 1 Chronicles 3, among the descendants of David; but it is not in the remotest degree probable that any of these belong to the list of the descendants of Jarha.

Appendix to the Genealogy of the House of Judah: Three Series of Descendants of Caleb, with Names chiefly of Geographical Import: 1Ch_2:42-55

a. The first series: Mesha’s posterity: 1Ch_2:42-45.—And the sons of Caleb, brother of Jerahmeel. This introduction leaves no doubt that the same Caleb is meant as in 1Ch_2:18, and that this is an appendix to his genealogy already communicated. Mesha his first-born; he Was the father of Ziph. Though almost all the following names: Ziph, Mareshah, Hebron, appear to be local names, yet Mesha ( îֵéùַׁò ) sounds decidedly like a personal name; comp. the Moabitish king of this name, who has recently become celebrated by his monument of victory (2Ki_3:4). As, on the other hand, Ziph ( æִéó ) appears to be the town adjacent to Hebron which is mentioned Jos_15:55, the same that gave its name to the wilderness of Ziph known to us from the history of David, 1Sa_23:14 ff; 1Sa_25:2, and which Robinson has recognised (1Ch_2:4-17 ff.) in certain ruins on a hill south-east of Hebron, nothing is more natural than to perceive in Mesha the father of Ziph a lord or chieftain, or even the founder, of the town of Ziph (comp. on 1Ch_2:24). By Ziph might also be meant the place mentioned Jos_15:24, pretty far from Hebron in the plain (Shephelah) situated not far from Marash, the ancient Mareshah (so thinks Keil against Bertheau).—And the sons of Mareshah the father of Hebron. Mareshah is scarcely the name of that town mentioned Jos_15:44 and 2Ch_11:8 along with Ziph, which occurs in the times of the Maccabees and the Romans under the name of Marissa, and is preserved in the ruins of Marash in the Shephelah, half an hour south of Beitjibrin (5. Raum. PalœJames 3 d edit. p. 192; Robinson, 2:693; Tobler, Dritte Wanderung, pp. 129, 142). The expression “father of Hebron” makes the reference to this town very improbable; for at no time is any dependence of the ancient Hebron (Num_13:23) on that very remote Mareshah recorded. We must rather, as the reading of the Masoretic text now runs, regard Mareshah as the proper name of some old tribe chief, and hold the Hebron signalized among his sons as most probably a person or tribe distinct from the well-known city Hebron (comp. Num_5:28 and Exo_6:18, where çֶáְøåֹï is likewise a personal name). So, justly perhaps, Wellhausen and Keil, who is, moreover, disposed to consider the text corrupt, and proposes the following emendation (see Crit. Note): “and the sons of Mesha were Abi-Hebron.” This conjecture is supported by the analogy of such compounds as Abidan, Abiezer, Abinadab; the simple Hebron in 1Ch_2:43 might very well be an abbreviated form of Abihebron (comp. En-tappuah, Jos_17:7, with the shorter Tappuah, Jos_16:8). [It is simpler and easier to regard Hebron as a person, named, if you will, after a former Hebron.—J. G. M.]

1Ch_2:43. And the sons of Hebron: Korah, and Tappuah, and Rekem, and Shema. These four names also must rather be names of persons or tribes than of towns. For Korah and Shema occur only as personal names; Rekem once indeed as the name of a city, Jos_18:27, but belonging to Benjamin, and several times as a personal name; in Num_31:8 as the name of a Midianite prince; and 1Ch_7:18 as the name of a descendant of Manasseh. Only Tappuah (“apple”) recurs merely as the name of a city (Jos_12:17; Jos_15:34; Jos_16:8; comp. 1Ch_17:7), which, however, proves nothing for the case in point, and by no means establishes a reference to this or that so-called city.

1Ch_2:44. And Shema begat Raham, father of Jorkeam. for éָøְ÷ְòָí which occurs nowhere else, the Sept. exhibits ’ ÉåêëÜí whence Bertheau concludes that it was originally éָ÷ְãְּòָí , as in Jos_15:56. But this name “Jokdeam’ the Sept. renders by ’ ÉåêäáÜì , and here it reads twice in succession ’ ÉåêëÜí . It exhibits the same also for øֶ÷ֶí , and thereby obscures the original relation of the genealogical data in our passage; some of the four sons of Hebron (1Ch_2:43), first Shema and then the penultimate Rekem, have their genealogy traced. With Shammai the son of this Rekem comp. the so named persons above 1Ch_2:28 and below 1Ch_4:17, and also the celebrated leader of the Pharisees of this name, the antagonist of Hillel in the time of Jesus (Joseph. Anliq. xiv. 9. 4).

1Ch_2:45. And Maon was father of Beth Zur. Both Maon and Bethzur are cities in the hill country of Judea; comp. for the former, which is now called Main, and is pointed out as a castle in ruins, with cisterns, etc., on a hill in Carmel south of Hebron, Jos_15:55; 1Sa_23:24 f., 1Ch_25:2; Robinson, 2:421; for the latter, the site of which is to be sought north of Hebron on the road to Jerusalem, Jos_15:58; 2Ch_11:7; 2 Chronicles 5. Raumer, Pal. p. 163. There is no decisive reason for excluding a reference to these places. Maon the son of Shammai may be regarded as the founder of the city so called (comp. Jdg_10:12, where Maon is the name of a non-lsraelitish tribe, along with Amalek and the Zidonians); Bethzur may then have been founded as a colony from Maon, a genetic relation, which is here expressed in a manner not quite usual by “father of Bethzur” (for above in 1Ch_2:24; 1Ch_2:42, and below in 1Ch_2:50-51, it is not descent of a colony from its mother city, but government of cities by their princes or lords, that is designated in this manner).

b. The second series: posterity of Ephah and Maachah, the two concubines of Caleb: 1Ch_2:46-49.—And Ephah, Caleb’s concubine. The name òֵéôָä , occurring elsewhere (1Ch_2:47; 1Ch_1:33) as a man’s name, seems here, where it designates a secondary wife of Caleb, to point to a non-lsraelitish origin of its possessor, whether she be regarded as a person or a race. Of the latter opinion is Wellhausen, p. 12, who takes this non-lsraelitish gens mingling With the Calebites to belong to Midian; and on the contrary, the second concubine of Caleb, designated as Maachah, 1Ch_2:48, to be a gens belonging to Canaan. Of the three sons of Ephah, Haran and Gazez are not otherwise known. The middle name Moza occurs Jos_18:26 as the name of a city of Benjamin; but this can scarcely be connected with the son of Caleb and Ephah. That Gazez (Sept. ÃåæïõÝ ) is first named as a third son, and then as a grandson of Caleb, may be explained in two ways,—either so that the statement: “and Haran begat Gazez” (which is omitted in the Sept.), be taken as a more exact addition to the foregoing mention of Gazez, or that there were really two descendants of Caleb of the same name, a son and a grandson (uncle and nephew; comp. 1Ch_3:10). The former is the more probable assumption.

1Ch_2:47. And the sons of Jehdai. It is not clear how this Jehdai ( éֶäְãַּé ) is genealogically connected with the foregoing. Hiller in the Onom. s. conjectures without ground that he was one and the same person with Moza, 1Ch_2:46; Jehdai might as well be a second concubine of Caleb. Of the six sons of Jehdai also, of whose names only some (Jotham; comp. Shaaph, 1Ch_2:49) occur elsewhere, we know nothing more.

1Ch_2:48. And Caleb’s concubine Maachah bare Sheber and Tirhanah. Though this name îַֽòֲëָä occurs often (comp. 1Ch_3:2, 1Ch_7:16, 1Ch_8:29, 1Ch_9:43; also the nom. gentilic. äַîַּòֲëָúִé , 2Ki_25:23; 1Ch_4:19), yet nothing certain can be conjectured concerning its present bearer; that she was a Canaanitess is a mere conjecture of Wellhausen. The two sons of Maachah occur nowhere else. The masc. éָìַã (for which some mss. have éָֽìְãָä ; see Crit. Note) may arise from the writer thinking of the father, whom he does not name.

1Ch_2:49. And she bare (besides the two already mentioned) Shaaph, the father of Madinannah. This city of Judah, mentioned Jos_15:31, may be preserved in the present Miniay or Miniah south of Gaza. Its “father” Shaaph, clearly different from him who is so named 1Ch_2:47, may be regarded as its prince or founder (comp. on 1Ch_2:42); even so Sheva (on which name comp. 2Sa_20:25, Keri) in reference to Machbenah, and the unnamed father in reference to Gibeah. Machbenah, belonging no doubt to Judah, is no further known. Joshua also, Jos_15:57, names a Gibeah in the mountains of Judah, whether the same with the village Jeba mentioned by Robinson and Tobler, on a hill in Wady Mussur, remains a question; comp. Keil on Joshua 15.—And Caleb’s daughter was Achsa. This closing notice puts it beyond doubt that the Caleb hitherto (from 1Ch_2:46) spoken of is the same as Caleb the son of Jephunneh and father of Achsa (whom he promised and gave to the conqueror of Debir as a reward, Jos_15:16 ff.; Jdg_1:12). This is Caleb son of Jephunneh, the contemporary of Moses and Joshua; and therefore it seems difficult to identify him at once with the brother of Jerahmeel and son of Hezron mentioned in 1Ch_2:18; 1Ch_2:42 (comp. on 1Ch_2:18). For this Hezronite, a great-grandson of Judah through Perez, appears to have been older than Moses and Joshua; but our passage, as also 1Ch_4:15, refers clearly to that contemporary of Joshua who is mentioned in the books of Joshua and Judges. That this younger Caleb is a descendant of the Hezronite is highly probable, because in the descendants of one and the same stock it is easy for the collateral genealogies to intermingle, as they have done here and in 1Ch_4:15 ff. (comp. besides, the remarks on 1Ch_4:11; 1Ch_4:13; 1Ch_4:15). If we assume accordingly two Calebs, an older, the Hezronite, of whom we read 1Ch_2:9 (under the name Celubai), 18, 42–45, and then again 1Ch_2:50-55, and a younger, whose genealogy is given in our verses (46–49) and in 1Ch_4:15 ff., we do not go so far as some older expositors (even Starke), who assume with a double Caleb a double Achsa, a daughter of the Hezronite Caleb (supposed to be here mentioned), and a daughter of the Jephunnite Caleb (Joshua 15; Judges 1). As little do we approve of Movers’ conjecture (Chron. p. 83), that the words, “and Caleb’s daughter was Achsa,” are a spurious interpolation of a later hand. But Keil’s conjecture, also, that the expression “daughter” denotes here “grand—daughter, descendant,” that it is the Achsah of Jos_15:16 that is here spoken of, but as a later descendant of the old Hezronite Caleb, and not a daughter of the Jephunnite, we cannot accept, as it obviously does violence to the term “daughter.” Finally, we reject also Bertheau’s attempt to admit only one Caleb, and to refer the diversity in the accounts of him here and before to the inexact manner of the genealogical terms that express also geographical relations; as well as Ewald’s opinion, that Caleb in 1Ch_2:42-49 is the Caleb of the book of Joshua; the Caleb in 1Ch_2:9; 1Ch_2:18-20; 1Ch_2:50-55, on the contrary, is a quite different person, whose real name was Celubai. (On the somewhat different, and at all events more probable hypothesis of Wellhausen, see above on 1Ch_2:18.)

c. The third series: posterity of Hur, son of Caleb: 1Ch_2:50-55.—As Hur is doubtless the grandfather of Bezaleel mentioned 1Ch_2:19, we have here again a line going back to Caleb the Hezronite.—These were the sons of Caleb. This introductory sentence, the generality of which does not suit the following statement, giving a genealogy of only one son of Caleb, appears to indicate that the whole section is taken from an originally different connection.—The son of Hur, first-born of Ephrathah (comp. 1Ch_2:19): Shobal. As, after Shobal in the following verse, Salma and Hareph are also named as sons of Hur, it appears more correct to read for áֶּïÎçåּø , with the Sept., the plur. áְּðֵéÎçåּø . In the Masoretic pointing, indeed, the names Salma and Hareph follow Shobal, father of Kiriath-jearim, without close connection by å ; and áֶּïÎçåּã appears in some measure as a superscription. Whether Shobal be the same with the brother of Hur and son of Judah mentioned 1Ch_4:1, must remain doubtful. The town of Kiriath-jearim, of which he is here called the father, that is, founder or chief, is that old Gibeonite town which is otherwise called Kiriath-baal or Baalah (comp. Jos_9:17; Jos_15:9; Jos_15:60), and lay in the north-west corner of Judah, on the border of Benjamin, probably the present Kureyet el Enab (wine town), on the road from Jerusalem to Jaffa (Robinson, 2:588 ff; Keil on Jos_9:17).

1Ch_2:51. Salma, father of Bethlehem. The coincidence of name with the Bethlehemite ancestor of David of the house of Ram mentioned 1Ch_2:17 is perhaps only accidental; comp. on 1Ch_2:54.—Hareph, father of Bethgader, of the same place, which in Jos_12:13 is Geder, and in Jos_15:36 Gederah; comp. 1Ch_12:4; 1Ch_27:28. Keil thinks rather of Gedor ( âְּãåֹø ), Jos_15:58, 1Ch_4:4; 1Ch_12:7, but with less ground. The name Hareph does not occur elsewhere, though çָøִéó , Neh_7:24; Neh_10:20 (comp. äַֽçֲøåּôִé , 1Ch_12:5), may be only a variation of the same name.

1Ch_2:52. Haroeh and the half of Menuhoth. These words, unintelligible to the old translators; äָøֹàֶä çֲöé äַîְּåֻçåֹú , for which the Sept. gives three proper names: ’ Áñáὰ êáὶ Áἰóὶ êáὶ Áììáíßè , and the Vulg. the unmeaning words: qui videbat dimidium requietionum, are obviously corrupt. Let us read after 1Ch_4:2, where a Reaiah son of Shobal occurs, for øְàָéָç äָøֹàֶç (for to regard the former as a mere by-form of øְàָéָä , as many old expositors do, is inadmissible), and for çֲöִé äַîְּðֻçåֹú according to 1Ch_2:54 : åַֽçֲöִé äַîָּð&