3. Supplements to the Genealogy of the House of Judah (leading to the Genealogical Survey of the Twelve Tribes of Israel):1Ch_4:1-23
1Ch_4:1.The sons of Judah: Perez, Hezron, and Carmi, and Hur, and Shobal.
2And Reaiah son of Shobal begat Jahath; and Jahath begat Ahumai and Lahad: these are the families of the Zorathite.
3And these were of the father of Etam: Jezreel, and Ishma, and Idbash; and the name of their sister was Hazelelponi. 4And Penuel the father of Gedor, and Ezer the father of Hushah: these are the sons of Hur the first-born of Ephrathah, the father of Bethlehem.
5And Ashur the father of Tekoah had two wives, Helah and Naarah. 6And Naarah bare him Ahuzzam, and Hepher, and Temeni, and the Ahashtari: these were the sons of Naarah. 7And the sons of Helah: Zereth, Izhar, and Ethnan.
8And Koz begat Anub and Zobebah, and the families of Aharhel the son of Harum. 9And Jabez was honoured above his brethren; and his mother called his name Jabez, saying, Because I bare him with sorrow. 10And Jabez called on the God of Israel, saying, If thou wilt bless me indeed, and enlarge my border, and thy hand be with me, and thou deal without evil, that it grieve me not! And God brought that which he had asked.
11And Celub the brother of Shuhah begat Mehir; he was the father of Eshton. 12And Eshton begat Beth-rapha, and Paseah, and Tehinnah the father of the city Nahash: these are the men of Rechah.
13And the sons of Kenaz: Othniel and Seraiah; and the sons of Othniel: Hathath. 14And Meonothai begat Ophrah: and Seraiah begat Joab father of the valley of the carpenters; for they were carpenters.
15And the sons of Caleb son of Jephunneh: Iru, Elah, and Naam; and the sons of Elah and Kenaz.
16And the sons of Jehalelel: Ziph and Ziphah, Tiria and Asarel.
17And the Song of Solomon 3 of Ezrah: Jether, and Mered, and Epher, and Jalon; and she conceived [and bare] Miriam, and Schammai, and Ishbah father of Eshtemoa. 18And his wife, the Jewess, bare Jered the father of Gedor, and Heber the father of Socho, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah: and these are the sons of Bithiah daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered took.
19And the sons of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Naham: the father of Keilah the Garmite, and Eshtemoa the Maachathite.
20And the sons of Shimon: Amnon and Rinnah, Benhanan and Tulon; and the sons of Ishi: Zoheth and Benzoheth.
21The sons of Shelah son of Judah: Er the father of Lechah, and Ladah the father of Mareshah; and the families of the house of byssus work, of the house of Ashbea. 22And Jokim, and the men of Cozeba, and Joash, and Saraph, who 23ruled over Moab, and Jashubi-lehem: and these are ancient things. These are the potters and the dwellers in Netaim and Gederah; with the king, in his service, they dwelt there.
Preliminary Remark.—This section, unusually rich in obscurities and difficulties, is characterized on the one hand as a supplement to the pedigree of Judah already communicated, embracing numerous fragments of old genealogies; on the other hand, as a transition and introduction to the genealogical and chorographical survey of the twelve tribes except Judah, contained in 1Ch_4:24-27. In common with the latter group of genealogies, it makes frequent reference to the places in the territory of each tribe, and inserts brief historical or archæological notices, which are of considerable value on account of the antiquity of the events recorded (1Ch_4:9-10; 1Ch_4:14; 1Ch_4:21-23). We are reminded of the former notices of the families of Judah in 1 Chronicles 2, not only by the superscription connecting the introductory verse of this chapter, with its enumeration of some of the most eminent descendants of Judah (1Ch_4:1), but also by the abundance of the details communicated concerning many more or less celebrated Jewish families (at all events a proof that the tribe of Judah passed with the author for the most important of all, and that the most special notices concerning it lay before him); as well as by the loose order of the several fragments, in which a similar neglect of the formation of longer lines of generations standing in direct succession to one another betrays itself, as in those supplementary reports concerning various descendants of Caleb at the close of 1 Chronicles 2, and perhaps in the closing verses of 1 Chronicles 3. Nowhere is this fragmentary character of the genealogical notes of our author so striking as in the present section, which presents no less than ten or twelve isolated fragments of lines or genealogical notices, having no visible connection with that which precedes or follows. The whole, in fact, looks almost like a gathering of genealogical pebbles, rolled together from various quarters, and consisting of older and younger parts, that are kept together only by their common connection with the tribe of Judah. That anything here communicated refers to the state of things after the exile, is assumed by Bertheau (p. 36), perhaps without sufficient ground. Yet it cannot be positively asserted that the author (who in 1 Chronicles 3 traced the house of David down to his own late times) here describes only ancient relations, and purposely has not overstepped the limits of the exile.
1. The Superscription:1Ch_4:1.—The sons of Judah: Perez, Hezron, and Carmi, and Hur, and Shobal. These five are called “sons” of Judah, as appears from 1Ch_2:3 ff., only in a wider sense; for Perez only was an actual son of Judah (1Ch_2:5); Hezron was his grandson; Carmi, as the probable grandson of Zerah (1Ch_2:7), was his great-grandson; Hur the son of Caleb, son of Hezron, was his great-great-grandson (1Ch_2:18-19); and Shobal son of Hur was his grandson’s great-grandson (1Ch_2:50). The putting together of these five descendants is highly peculiar, and cannot be satisfactorily explained in its historical grounds. Several of the families founded by them certainly became chief families in the tribe of Judah, but not all; in particular, the prominence of Carmi between names so celebrated as Hezron and Hur is so truly strange, as to justify the suspicion that this name is not genuine, and to favour the hypothesis of Wellhausen (p. 20), that for
is to be read
, Celubai=Caleb (see 1Ch_2:9). If this were the original reading, we should obtain a series of directly succeeding descendants of Judah (Comp. 1Ch_2:3; 1Ch_2:9; 1Ch_2:18 f., 50), and so far as our verse is a superscription for the following, it would merely indicate descendants of Hezron, who is also named in 1 Chronicles 2 as the ancestor of a widely-spread stock of Jewish families. This indication, however, would by no means correspond with the following verses. For only by uncertain conjecture do we think to find in 1Ch_4:5-7 descendants of Hur, in 1Ch_4:11-15 descendants of Caleb, in 1Ch_4:16-23 other Hezronites of different lines (comp. on the respective passages). On the whole, the several groups of our section are strung together without much connection; and that they form no continuous line of descent (by which the line started in 1Ch_4:1, if the proposed emendation be accepted, would be carried forward) is at all events clear and beyond a doubt. The matter, therefore, must rest with the remark of Bertheau: “Why in our passage precisely these five ‘sons’ of Judah are enumerated, while in Gen_45:1 and 1 Chronicles 2 other names occur in a different order, is a question we should only be able to answer if we could state the point of time in the history and development of the tribe of Judah to which our series refers, and were in a position to trace further from other sources the relations of the families of Judah here exhibited. As matters stand, we must be contented with the genera”, remark, that the families designated by our five names were without doubt the prominent families in the time of the author of our series, and are therefore enumerated as sons of Judah. It is surprising, certainly, that in the following pedigree, 1Ch_4:2-20, this arrangement almost entirely disappears, and that in 1Ch_4:21-23 Shelah, sixth ‘son’ of Judah, is introduced by way of appendix.”
2. The Zorathites, a line of descent from Shobal: 1Ch_4:2.—And Reaiah son of Shobal (the son who is probably latent under
, 1Ch_2:52, on which see) begat Jahath.
is no further mentioned as a descendant of Judah through Shobal, but occurs often as a Levite name; comp. 1Ch_6:5; 1Ch_6:28, 1Ch_23:10 ff., 1Ch_24:22, 2Ch_34:12.—His sons also, Ahumai and Lahad, occur nowhere else. On the contrary, the closing notice, “these are the families of the Zorathite,” refers us to well-known ground, in so far as a descent of the inhabitants of Zorah from Shobal (the ancestor of Kiriath-jearim, the mother city of Zorah and Eshtaol) is manifest from 1Ch_2:50-53. The present verse therefore stands plainly in the relation of a supplement to that passage.
3. A Line of Descent from Hur:1Ch_4:3-4.—And these were of the father of Etam. So is it to be amended instead of the unmeaning “and these were Abi Etam” of the Masoretic text, or with the Sept. and Vulg.: “And these were the children of Etam.”
, whether it be an element of a personal name
, or itself denote an old patriarch or family, points at all events to the inhabitants of an old Jewish mountain city not far from Bethlehem and Tekoa (2Ch_11:6), which occurs in the history of Samson (Jdg_15:8). Jezreel also, the first-named son of Etam, occurs Jos_15:56 as a mountain city of Judah; comp. the nom. gentil. “the Jezreelitess” referring to this city, and applied to Ahinoam the wife of David, 1Ch_3:1. On the contrary, Ishma, Idbash, and their sister Hazelelponi are mentioned only here. Whether the name of the last is the name of a family or of an individual (comp. Ew. § 273e) remains doubtful.
1Ch_4:4. And Penuel the father of Gedor. Penuel (
) is here the name of a patriarch of Jewish descent, but in 1Ch_8:25 of a Benjamite. With the city Penuel or Peniel, east of the Jordan and south of Jabbok (Gen_32:31 f., Jdg_8:8; Jdg_8:17, 1Ki_12:25), the name here has no connection. On the contrary, that of his son Gedor occurs also as a name of a town in the tribe of Judah (Jos_15:58; comp. 1Ch_4:39; 1Ch_13:7), and this town, preserved as a ruin in the present Jedur (Robins. ii. 592), is to be referred to the son of Penuel as its father or founder. We meet, indeed, in 1Ch_4:18 with a certain Jered as “father of Gedor,” whence we may conclude that the posterity of both formed the population of this Gedor.—And Ezer the father of Hushah.
occurs elsewhere as a man’s name (1Ch_7:21, 1Ch_12:9), but not in the genealogies of the house of Judah. The site of the town Hushah founded by this Ezer is unknown; but the nom. gentil.
occurs several times, namely, in the Davidic hero Sibbechai, 1Ch_11:28; 1Ch_20:4, 2Sa_23:27.—These are the sons of Hur the firstborn of Ephrathath, the father of Bethlehem. Comp. 1Ch_2:19, and on Hur’s relation to Bethlehem 1Ch_2:51, where more precisely than here Salma the son of Hur is called “father of Bethlehem.” “The circumstance, moreover, that in our verses (3 and 4) other names and persons are enumerated as descendants of Hur than in 1Ch_2:50-55, betokens no difference; for there is no ground for the assumption that in the latter passage all his descendants are given” (Keil). Our passage is thus, like 1Ch_4:2, supplementary to 1Ch_2:50-55, so far as it repeats and confirms some of the names and affinities there mentioned, and adds other new ones.
4. Ashur the father of Tekoa and his descendants:1Ch_4:5-7. According to 1Ch_2:24, this Ashur was a posthumous son of Caleb [?Hezron] by Abiah. That he was properly a son of Caleb, and no other than Hur (
àַùְׁçåּø = çåּø
, that is,
, Ew. § 273b), is a hypothesis of Wellhausen, grounded on several rather forced emendations of the text (p. 14 sq.; comp. above on the p.)
1Ch_4:6. And Naarah bare him Ahuzzam, a son mentioned nowhere else. Why Naarah’s sons are enumerated first, while Helah was named 1Ch_4:5 as the first, and Naarah the second, wife of Ashur, remains uncertain. Hepher the second son of Naarah is at all events different from the Gileadite of this name mentioned 1Ch_11:36 and Num_26:32 f., but might possibly be the patriarch or founder of the district Hepher, 1Ki_4:10, in the south of Judah, not far from Tappuah, where a Canaanitish king resided in early times (Jos_2:17 ).—Temeni (
) or Temani (Southern), the third son, will designate a neighbouring family of the tribe of Judah. Ahashtari, that is, the family of those from Ahashtar, is wholly unknown.
1Ch_4:7. And the sons of Helah: Zereth, Izhar, and Ethnan. These names occur only here. The
of the Keri, instead of the Kethib
, occurs as the name of a son of Simeon, Gen_46:10, and of a Canaanitish king, Gen_23:8 ; but these names have obviously nothing to do with the son of Ashur and Helah.
5. Koz and his descendants, among whom is Jabez: 1Ch_4:8-10. This section wants all genealogical connection with the families already mentioned.—And Koz begat Anub. A Koz (with the art.
occurs afterwards, 1Ch_24:10, as a Levite, and also in Ezr_2:61 and Neh_3:4, in which latter passage, moreover, the Levitical descent is not expressed, so that possibly a Jew descended from this Koz might be meant. In what relation our Koz stands to those before named, whether he belonged to the sons of Ashur (as Glassius, Tremell., Piscator, Starke, etc., think), is quite uncertain. The name of his son
appears, moreover, to he identical with that of the town
, Jos_11:21; Jos_15:50 (a place not far from Debir in the south of Judah); for the Sept. (cod. Alex.) renders it by ’
. If this identification be correct,
, “the grape,” would be the product of
, a “thorn,” and the present genealogical notice thus present an allegorical sense, reminding us of the fable of Jotham (Judges 9), and of Mat_7:16 (comp. Hiller, Hierophyt. i. p. 464).—Zobebah and the families of Aharhel the son of Harum. These are quite unknown.
1Ch_4:9. And Jabez was honoured above his brethren. Jabez here is probably the name of another descendant of Koz; for the
connects the notice of him closely with that which precedes. The town Jabez, the inhabitants of which are mentioned 1Ch_2:55, may perhaps have been founded by him; from which might be surmised a connection of himself and of those named, 1Ch_4:8, with Shobal the son of Hur (1Ch_2:50). But all this is very uncertain.—I bare him with sorrow. This maternal utterance, discovering the fundamental meaning of the name
= “son of sorrow” (comp. the root
, the second and third radicals of which are here transposed), reminds us of similar exclamations of mothers in the patriarchal age as Gen_4:25; Gen_19:37 f., Gen_29:32-35, Gen_33:20. In like manner, the statement that Jabez was “honoured above his brethren,” reminds us of Gen_34:19 (Hamor the son of Shechem). And by the vow of this Jabez to the “God of Israel” (comp. Gen_28:20; Gen_33:20) recorded in 1Ch_4:10, as well as by the new explanation of the name, which is contained in the terms of this vow (a second reference of
to the root
, but with a new turn,
, “that thou grieve me not”), we are carried back to the scenes of Genesis (comp. Gen_17:17 ff; Gen_18:12; Gen_21:6; Gen_26:8, etc.), so that we have here an undoubted primeval historical record. Even the rhetorical clothing of the vow, a mere antecedent clause, with
wanting a consequent, but with clear emphasizing of the
coming in at the end as the point of the whole, reminds us of the ancient style of the Pentateuch; comp. Gen_28:20 ff.; Num_21:2, etc.—And God brought that which he had asked. This statement, occupying the place of consequent to the aposiopesis
, serves to explain the above notice that Jabez was honoured above his brethren, and exhibit him as the lord of a wide domain, and the possessor of the divine blessing. Observe, moreover, the name
used here (as in 1Ch_5:20; 1Ch_5:25-26) instead of
, which occurs elsewhere in these genealogical sections (for example, 1Ch_2:3, 1Chr 5:41, etc.).
6. The Men of Rechah:1Ch_4:11-12.—And Celub the brother of Shuhah begat Mehir. This Celub (
) bears indeed the same name as the famous hero Caleb or Celubai (1Ch_2:9), but is distinguished by the addition “the brother of Shuhah” from his more illustrious namesake, and cannot possibly have passed with our genealogist for the same person (as Wellhausen, p. 20, thinks). The choice of the form
, which stands to
, 1Ch_4:8, to
, while the famous Caleb the son of Jephunneh, 1Ch_4:15, is designated by his usual name, shows that in the view of the writer the owners of the two names are to be kept apart. It is doubtful whether
be a man’s or a woman’s name; its identification with
, 1Ch_4:4, is not admitted (against Starke and other old writers). Mehir the son, and Eshton the grandson, of Celub occur nowhere else.
1Ch_4:12. And Eshton begat Bethrapha, that is, perhaps, the house or family of Rapha, who is otherwise unknown; for neither the Benjamite Rapha (1Ch_8:2) nor the offspring of Rapha (1Ch_20:4-8) can apply here. And the two following descendants of Eshton remain at least uncertain. Paseah might possibly be the ancestor of the “sons of Paseah” introduced among the Nethinim (Ezr_2:49; Neh_7:51); Tehinnah occurs not elsewhere, though perhaps the city Nahash, of which he is the father or founder, may be connected with Nahash the father of Abigail, the step-sister of David (see 1Ch_2:16; 2Sa_17:25).—These are the men of Rechah, the inhabitants perhaps of the town Rechah, a place not elsewhere named.
7. The Descendants of Kenaz:1Ch_4:13-14.—And the sons of Kenaz: Othniel and Seraiah. That Kenaz (
), the “father” of Othniel the judge (Jdg_1:13 ff; Jdg_3:9), sprang from Hezron the grandson of Judah, appears to follow from this, that Caleb the son of Jephunneh is several times designated a Kenizzite (
) and, so placed in a certain genealogical relation to Kenaz. It is to be observed, indeed, that Kenaz, if really father or grandfather, and not a more remote ancestor of Othniel, would have been younger than Caleb or a contemporary of nearly the same age. Caleb and Othniel are usually called “brothers,” on account of their common relation to Kenaz (Jos_15:17; Jdg_1:13); and, indeed, in the latter place Othniel is called the “younger brother” of Caleb (we must therefore translate, with Bachmann, the son of Kenaz, younger brother of Caleb, with which, however, Jos_15:17 would conflict; see Keil, p. 63). Hence appears the possibility that both the companion of Joshua, Caleb the son of Jephunneh (who was eighty-five years old at the conquest of Canaan, Jos_14:10 f.), and Othniel the judge, at least a generation younger (the conqueror of Cushan-rishathaim), stood in a common relation to an otherwise unknown patriarch Kenaz. Of what nature this relation was, whether it was that Caleb, by means of his father Jephunneh, was a grandson of Kenaz (as appears to have been the case, Num_32:12), and that Othniel, either through Jephunneh or some other, was likewise his grandson, or perhaps great-grandson, must remain uncertain. Possibly Kenaz is merely the name of a race external to Israel, belonging in fact to Edom, Gen_36:11, 1Ch_1:36; 1Ch_1:53, to which Caleb became somehow related in the march through the wilderness, and from which also Othniel was descended. Knobel (on Gen_36:11, p. 281) conceives the relationship thus: “The ‘Kenizzite’ is perhaps a surname of Caleb, originating from some Kenizzites having passed into his family during the journey of Moses. After Jephunneh’s death, one of them appears to have married Caleb’s mother, and had by her Othniel. His name being afterwards for gotten, he was designated by the name of his tribe.”—Seraiah, Othniel’s brother, occurs only here; we meet with a later Jew of this name, who returned with Zerubbabel, Ezr_2:2.—And the sons of Othniel: Hathath. On the phrase
before only one name, see 1Ch_2:7. Yet the plural might here possibly refer also to Meonothai as brother of Hathath (1Ch_4:14), if a
had fallen out at the end of our verse, or if the genealogist had presupposed that Meonothai was brother to Hathath, and therefore hastened at once to the statement of his descendants. Othniel’s sons occur nowhere else. The name Meonothai might also be connected with the town Maon (Jos_15:55), or with the Meunim (Ezr_2:50; Neh_7:52).
1Ch_4:14. And Meonothai begat Ophrah. We can scarcely think of Ophrah as the Benjamite town of this name (Jos_18:23; 1Sa_13:17), or even of the home of Gideon in the tribe of Manasseh (Jdg_6:11).—And Seraiah begat Joab father of the valley of the carpenters. This occurs here as a place founded by Joab son of Seraiah (1Ch_4:13), called the “Valley of the carpenters or the craftsmen” (
), and in Neh_11:35; and, indeed, as a place not far from Jerusalem, on the north side. Whether it had received its name after the exile, and whether Joab, the founder of the colony, is to pass for one of those Joabs in Zerubbabel’s time who are mentioned Ezr_2:6, Neh_7:11 (to which hypothesis Berth. seems inclined), must remain doubtful.
8. The Descendants of Caleb the Son of Jephunneh:1Ch_4:15.—That this Jephunnite Caleb is probably the same with him whose genealogy is given 1Ch_2:46-49 (and therefore with the Caleb of Num., Josh., and. Judg.), and different from the Hezronite Celubai or Caleb (1Chr 2:9, 18, 42 ff., 50 ff., perhaps his ancestor [rather descendant]), has been fully shown on 1Ch_2:49.—Iru, Elah, and Naam. These three sons of Caleb occur nowhere else; for the second, Elah, must have been combined with the Edomite prince of the same name mentioned 1Ch_1:52, as Kenaz might be identical with the Kenaz named there, 1 Chronicles 4:53. This Calebite Kenaz cannot be the same as the father of Othniel (1Ch_4:13); rather as grandson or great-grandson, he bore the same name as his ancestor. Why “the sons of Elah” are set down between this Kenaz and Naam in the series of the sons of Caleb we can no longer explain. It is inadmissible, at all events, to translate, with a number of older expositors (including Starke): “and the sons of Elah were (also) Kenaz,” as if
could be anything but the copula. As the words run, Kenaz is appended to the aforementioned descendants of Caleb, of whom the sons of Elah take the fourth place, as the fifth and last; only if a name were fallen out before
(as Keil supposes), could Kenaz be regarded as belonging to the sons of Elah.
9. Jehalelel’s Sons:1Ch_4:16.—Ziph and Ziphah, Tiriah and Asarel. Only the first of these is known, and, indeed, as the supposed father of one of those towns in Judah which are named in Jos_15:24; Jos_15:55. Even of Jehalelel we know nothing more. A quite arbitrary hypothesis of some older scholars makes out of him rather a woman, the supposed second wife of Kenaz, ver 13, whose first wife was (?) Jephunneh.
10. Ezrah’s Posterity:1Ch_4:17-18.—And the sons of Ezrah: Jether, and Mered, and Epher, and Jalon; and she conceived, etc. If the sing.
is to be retained, we may compare such cases as 1Ch_3:19; 1Ch_3:21; 1Ch_3:23, etc.; but see Crit. Note. The here-named Ezrah occurs nowhere else ; he belongs, at all events, to a grey antiquity, as the father of old Jewish towns like Eshtemoa, Socho, Zanoah, etc. It is not clear how he is connected with the foregoing or following families of Judah. Of his four sons, the last, Jalon, occurs only here even in name; the names Jether and Epher occur elsewhere, but in other families (Jether, 1Ch_2:32, comp. 53; and Epher, 1Ch_11:33 and 1Ch_5:24); further notices of them are wanting. On the contrary, the closing sentence of 1Ch_4:18 shows, with respect, to Mered, that probably all the names from 1Ch_4:17 b (“and she conceived,” etc.) denote descendants of this man by two wives, a “Jewess” and a “daughter of Pharaoh.” And as the words
, standing as they now do after the name of the fourth son of Ezrah, and wanting a feminine subject, yield no rational sense, the removal (proposed by Bertheau, and adopted by Kamph., Keil, and others) of that closing sentence: “and these are the sons of Bithiah daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered took,” to our passage after
, commends itself as a very suitable amendment; comp. the Crit. Note.
is then to be taken as a synonym of
(which is given by the Sept. and the Vulg.), and the names Miriam (
, for which, perhaps,
, as in Sept. cod. Vat. or the like, is to be read, as we expect to find a man’s name in the first place), Shammai, and Ishbah then denote the sons born to Mered by Pharaoh’s daughter; whereupon in 1Ch_4:18 the names of those descended from the Jewess are added. We obtain here, accordingly, two lines descending from Mered—one Egyptian, from which (and in particular from Ishbah the third son of Pharaoh’s daughter) the inhabitants of the town Eshtemoa (Sept. ’
), on the mountains of Judah, the present Samua, south of Hebron, drew their origin (comp. Jos_15:15; Jos_21:14, and 1Ch_4:19), and one Jewish, from which three towns of Judah are derived:—1. Gedor, comp. on 1Ch_4:4; 1 Chronicles 2. Socho, perhaps the present Suweikeh, in the lowland south west of Jerusalem, comp. Jos_15:35, 1Sa_17:1, etc.; 3. Zanoah, perhaps the present Sanuah, in the lowland near Zorah, comp. Jos_15:34 (though the other Zanoah on the mountains of Judah, Jos_15:36, the site of which we do not know, might be meant). Of the names of the three “fathers” or founders of these towns, Jekuthiel (
, probably “fear of God”) occurs nowhere else; while Jered (comp. Gen_5:15) and
occur elsewhere, the latter pretty often (Gen_46:17; Num_26:45; Jdg_4:11; Jdg_4:17; 1Ch_8:17).—And these are the sons of Bithiah, etc. These words, in the position which we have assigned to them, are not a subscription for the preceding, but rather an introduction to the following words
. We know nothing more of this daughter of Pharaoh.
may be merely a general phrase for
, an Egyptian; so thinks Hitzig, Gesch. d. V. Isr. p. 64, who, indeed, without right, might thus degrade the Pharaoh’s daughter of the Exodus, the foster-mother of Moses, into a common Egyptian. No less arbitrary is the opposite conjecture of the older Rabbins, and recently of Fürst (Gesch. d. bibl. Liter. i. 319), that this same king’s daughter Thermuthis, the protectress of Moses, is here meant. The name Miriam, at the head of the descendants of this Egyptian, seems to have given rise to this identification with Thermuthis (comp. Wagenseil, Sota, p. 271). The opinion of Osiander, Hiller, J. H. Michaelis, Starke, etc., that we are not to think of an Egyptian here, as Bithiah is a Hebrew name, and Pharaoh the name of a Jew, is also arbitrary, and directly against the phrase
(comp. 2Ch_8:11; 1Ki_9:24).
11. The Sons of the Wife of Hodiah:1Ch_4:19.—And the sons of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Naham. Hodiah (
). as the present St. constr.
, and its occurrence as the name of several Levites after the exile, in the book of Nehemiah (Neh_8:7; Neh_9:5; Neh_10:11), show, is not a woman’s, but a man’s name. We know neither the name of Hodiah’s wife nor her relation to the foregoing; for that
, whose sister she is said to be, is the same as
, Caleb’s son, 1Ch_4:15, no one will seriously assert.—The father of Keilah the Garmite, and Eshtemoa (or perhaps “the father of Eshtemoa;” see Crit. Note) the Maachathite. The two designations, “the Garmite” and “the Maachathite,” are to us equally obscure and unintelligible; the latter may, perhaps, contain an allusion to Maachah the third wife of Caleb, 1Ch_2:48. The situation of Keilah (
), a town in the lowland of Judah (Jos_15:44), has not yet been ascertained. On Eshtemoa, see 1Ch_4:17.
12. Descendants of Shimon and Ishi:1Ch_4:20.—And the sons of Shimon: Amnon, etc. We know not otherwise either Shimon or his four sons, and therefore cannot indicate his place in the genealogy of Judah. That he was a Hezronite, like all the foregoing, is a mere conjecture of Wellhausen (p. 20).—And the sons of Ishi: Zoheth and Benzoheth. The name Ishi was also borne by a Jerahmeelite (1Ch_2:31), the son of Appaim, and by a Simeonite, 1Ch_4:42. Neither, can be meant here, especially as a son Zoheth, not there mentioned, and an anonymous grandson of this Zoheth, are added as descendants.
13. Descendants of Shelah, third son of Judah:1Ch_4:21-23.—The sons of Shelah son of Judah. On this third son of Judah by the Canaanitess Bathshua, see 1Ch_2:3; Gen_38:5. The absence of the copula
, 1Ch_4:1) marks the beginning of a new genealogical series; and, indeed, a series that is of the more importance, because the posterity of Shelah is entirely omitted in 1 Chronicles 2.—Er the father of Lechah, and Ladah the father of Mareshah. This Er is not to be confounded with Shelah’s brother, the first - born of Judah (as Bertheau thinks); rather is this a similar case of uncle and nephew having the same name, as in Ram, for example, 1Ch_2:9; comp. 1Ch_4:25. We know no more of the town Lechah (
) founded by this younger Er; but Mareshah, founded by his brother Ladah, is no doubt the present Marash in the Shephelah; see on 1Ch_2:42.—And the families of the house of byssus work, of the house of Ashbea. This house of byssus work (cotton factory) may have been situated in Egypt, or possibly in Palestine. We know as little of its situation as of the “house of Ashbea” (
,) rendered by Jerome: domus juramenti). For the cultivation of cotton (
, here defectively
) also in Syria and Palestine, comp. Eze_27:16; Pausan. v. 5. 2; Pococke, Morgenl. ii. 88; Robinson, ii. 612, 628, iii. 432.
1Ch_4:22. And Jokim, and the men of Cozeba, etc. The strange rendering of these and the following words in the Vulg. (see Crit. Note) seems to have been occasioned by an old Rabbinical combination of the words
àֲùֶׁø áָּֽòֲìåּ ìְîåֹàָá
with the narrative of the book of Ruth; the
= qui stare fecit solem are accordingly Elimelech, the viri mendacii his sons Mahlon and Chilion, who removed with him to Moab, and married daughters of this land; and in
is indicated their return to Bethlehem, etc. Our passage in reality states a total or partial conquest of Moab, effected in ancient times by several descendants of Shelah, whose names are not otherwise known to us.
appears contracted from
. The men of
might be the inhabitants of
, Gen_38:5 (=
, Jos_15:44), the birthplace of Shelah, in the lowland of Judah. An altogether strange and now inexplicable name occurs at the end,
, “which the punctuators would scarcely have so pronounced, if the pronunciation had not been so handed down to them” (Berth.).—And these are ancient things, that is, not merely “before the exile, in the period of the kings,” as Bertheau thinks (p. 46), who endeavours to convert this notice into an indirect support of his hypothesis, that in 1Ch_4:7-20 the generations and families of Judah after the exile are reported, while 1Ch_4:21-23 form an appendix referring to the period of kings, but certainly without warrant; the words merely bespeak a high age, belonging to the grey foretime, for the traditions concerning Jokim, the men of Cozeba, etc. (comp. Wellhausen, p. 23, n. 1).
1Ch_4:23. These are the potters and the dwellers in Netaim and Gederah.
“these,” appear to refer to the whole descendants of Shelah (with the natural exception of those “byssus workers,” 1Ch_4:21, that could not well be at the same time potters), and not merely those named in 1Ch_4:22 (as Berth.); for this verse has its closing notice in
. It is not known where Netaim (
, “plantings”) was; perhaps it means royal gardens near Jerusalem, or near those pleasure gardens of Solomon in the Wady Urtus at Bethlehem (see on Son_1:1, vol. 13. p. 29 of Bibelw.); comp. also Uzziah’s gardens, 2Ch_26:10. Gederah (
, “fence”) is perhaps the town mentioned Jos_15:36 in the lowland of Judah (the present village Gedera, about an hour south-west of Jabneh; see Keil on 1Ch_12:4).—With the king, in his service, they dwelt there. To what king this alludes is uncertain; probably no single king (as Uzziah, or David, or Solomon) is meant: but the phrase applies to the kings of the house of David in general, who, from the beginning, inherited extensive private domains, where not merely cattle-breeding, tillage, and gardening were pursued, but also handicrafts, as the pottery here mentioned, the cotton-weaving, 1Ch_4:21, and perhaps carpentry, ver 14.
It has been already remarked that Bertheau’s assumption, that 1Ch_4:1-20 of our chapter “presented a description of the generations and families of the tribe of Judah which were living soon after the exile (the time of Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah),” but 1Ch_4:21-23 formed an appendix relating to earlier times, was not well founded, and finds no sufficient support in the assertion, “and these are ancient things.” Comp. the full refutation which Keil (p. 66 ff., note 2) has given to this hypothesis. Neither is the concomitant assumption tenable, that there are exactly twelve families of the house of Judah in 1Ch_4:1-29, and of Judah, too, after the exile, in the days of Zerubbabel; for the families mentioned are not arranged according to the sons and grandsons of Judah in 1Ch_4:1, but are strung together loosely, and without any mark of connection. Instead of twelve, also, a smaller number of families may be brought out by another mode of reckoning; as, for example, Ewald, in a far more arbitrary way indeed than Bertheau, has found twelve families in the whole of our section, including Shelah and his descendants in 1Ch_4:21-23 (Gesch. i. p. 471). Both appear to be merely accidental—the number twelve of the families named, according to Bertheau’s reckoning, and the circumstance that many of the persons and places in our section recur in Ezra and Nehemiah. To the latter circumstance, strongly urged by Bertheau, Keil has justly opposed the no less undeniable fact, that most of the places already occur in Joshua, and very many of the persons in Samuel and Kings, and that, with respect to the geographical coincidences with Ezra and Nehemiah, the historical contents of these books, that were almost exclusively enacted on the soil of Judah, and among Israelites of Jewish extraction, should in great part be taken into account in explanation of this. Comp. also what has been urged above in the Preliminary Remark, p. 53.
c. The Families of Simeon, and the Transjordanic Tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half-Manasseh (till the Deportation of the latter by the Assyrians).—1Ch_4:24 to 1Ch_5:26
1. The Families of Simeon:1Ch_4:24-43
1Ch_4:24.The sons of Simeon were Nemuel, and Jamin, Jarib, Zerah, Shaul. 25Shallum his son, Mibsam his son, Mishma his son. 26And the sons of Mishma: 27Hamuel his son, Zaccur his son, Shimi his son. And Shimi had sixteen sons and six daughters; but his brethren had not many sons: and all their family did not multiply, like the sons of Judah.
28, 29And they dwelt at Beer-sheba, and Moladah, and Hazar-shual. And at Bilhah, and at Ezem, and at Tolad. 30And at Bethuel, and at Hormah, and at 31Ziklag. And at Beth-marcaboth, and at Hazar-susim, and at Beth-biri, and 32at Shaaraim: these were their towns until the reign of David. And their villages, Etam, and Ain, Rimmon, and Tochen, and Ashan, five towns. 33And all their villages that were round these towns unto Baal. This was their habitation, and they had their own genealogy.
34, 35And Meshobab, and Jamlech, and Joshah the son of Amaziah. And Joel, and Jehu the son of Josibiah, the son of Seraiah, the son of Asiel. 36And Elioenai, and Jaakobah, and Jeshohaiah, and Asaiah, and Adiel, and Jesimiel, and Benaiah. 37And Ziza the son of Shiphi, the son of Allon, the son of Jedaiah, 38the son of Shimri, the son of Shemaiah. These are they that entered by name princes in their families; and their father-houses spread greatly. 39And they went to the entrance of Gedor, to the east of the valley, to seek pasturefor their flocks. 40And they found fat and good pasture, and the land was wide on all sides, and quiet, and peaceful; for they were of Ham who dwelt there before. 41And these written by name came in the days of Hezekiah king of Judah, and smote their tents, and the Meunites that were found there, and destroyed them unto this day, and dwelt in their stead; for there42was pasture there for their flocks. And of them, of the sons of Simeon, five hundred men went to mount Seir; and Pelatiah, and Neariah, and Rephaiah, and Uzziel, the sons of Ishi, were at their head. 43And they smote the remnant that had escaped of Amalek, and dwelt there unto this day.
Preliminary Remark.—This account of the tribe of Simeon includes in it a genealogical, a geographical, and a historical section. The first (1Ch_4:24-27) gives the five sons of Simeon, and traces the posterity of the last, Shaul, through a series of generations; the second (1Ch_4:28-33) recounts their dwelling-places till the time of David ; the third (1Ch_4:34-43) contains two migrations or conquests of Simeonite families, one in the time of Hezekiah into a region previously inhabited by Hamites, another without a date to Mount Seir, into a district previously Amalekite. These accounts partake of the same fragmentary character as the sections referring to the following tribes. Comp. moreover, K. H. Graf, Der Stamm Simeon, a contribution to the History of Israel, Meissen 1866, and, with respect to the geography, the great work of the Englishmen E. H. Palmer and T. Drake, The Desert of the Exodus, etc., Cambridge 1871, one of the most valuable publications of the “Palestine Exploration Fund,” with specially valuable contributions to the geography of the south of Palestine. With the conclusion of these inquirers, that the south border of Palestine, in particular of the tribe of Simeon, must be extended much farther than is usually supposed, agrees also Consul Wetzstein, Ueber Kadesh und Palästina’s Südgrenze (Excursus III. in Delitzsch’s Comment on Genesis , 4 th edit.).
1. The Five Sons of Simeon, and the Descendants of Shaul:1Ch_4:25-27.—Nemuel, and Jamin, Jarib, Zerah, Shaul. The list in Num_26:12-14 also names five sons of Simeon, and quite the same as here, except Jarib, who is there Jakin (
), of which it appears to be a corruption. On the contrary, in the older parallels, Gen_46:10, Exo_6:15, six sons of Simeon are enumerated, among whom an Ohad stands in the third place, who is wanting here and in Numbers, perhaps because his posterity had died out so soon as to form no distinct family; and in the first place a Jemuel, who corresponds to the Nemuel of our passage, and in the last a Zohar, instead of the Zerah here before the last. It is plain that we have here equivalent names, as
, candor, is not very remote from
, ortus solis (comp. Mal. 3:20; Luk_1:78), and also
(with whom Hitzig on Pro_30:31, perhaps too boldly, identifies the conjectural king Lemuel of Massa) appears only a by-form of
, day of God. It is uncertain whether we are to regard the forms given in Genesis and Exodus at once as original. It is at least plain, from the agreement of Num_26:12-14 with our passage, that the Chronist has not adopted an arbitrary form of the names, as Gramberg assumes.
1Ch_4:25. Shallum his son, etc. Only of Shaul, the last (perhaps the youngest) of the sons of Simeon, whose mother is called a Canaanitess in the parallel accounts of Genesis and Exodus, are further descendants reported in six succeeding generations, Shallum, Mibsam, Mishma, Hamuel, Zaccur, and Shimi. By the words, “and the sons of Mishma,” at the beginning of 1Ch_4:27, these six generations are divided into two groups, of which, however, the second, only lineal, without any collateral descendants; comp. the plur.
in like cases, as 1Ch_1:41, 1Ch_2:31, 1Ch_3:16; 1Ch_3:22, etc.
1Ch_4:27. And Shimi had sixteen sons and six daughters. This father of a very large and flourishing family is brought into prominence, like Elioenai, 1Ch_3:24; comp. the descendants of Jacob, Jesse, David, Job, and Psa_127:3; Psa_128:3.—But his brethren (the remaining Simeonites, not merely Shimi’s immediate brothers) had not many sons. This is the reason that their whole “family did not multiply like that of Judah.” With this agrees the comparatively small number of the Simeonites in the census under Moses (Num_1:-4), and the way in which this smaller tribe was included in the stronger tribe of Judah in the division of the land, Jos_19:1.
2. The original Dwelling-Places of the Simeonites in the Southern Part of the Land of Judah:1Ch_4:28-33; comp. Jos_19:2-8.—With the names of the Simeonite dwelling-places reported in this old parallel, those here named agree in the main, and in particular with respect to the separation into two groups, one of thirteen, the other of five towns. Only the second group consists there of only four towns (see on 1Ch_4:32), and in the first group, notwithstanding the statement that thirteen towns are reported, 1Ch_4:6, fourteen are actually named; between Beer-sheba and Moladah a Sheba is inserted, a name (
) which appears to be a repetition of the second component of
, occasioned by negligence in copying, but possibly also =
, a town named, Jos_15:26, before Moladah (of the latter opinion is, for example, Keil, on Jos_19:2 and our passage). There are several unessential differences of form or orthography between our passage and Joshua 19, as in the latter
áְּúåּàֵì çֲöַø ñåּñָä
(house of lions) for
(pleasant harbour) for
(two gates). It cannot be shown which of these forms is the more original: some of the deviations may rest on mere errors of transcription, as might so easily happen in places that scarcely ever occur again. Moreover, the book of Joshua (1Ch_15:26-29) repeats the most of them as belonging to the towns of the south of Judah, and certainly with some variations of form (for example,
for Shaaraim, Madmannah for Beth-marcaboth, Sansannah for Hazar - susim). Most of these places are still undiscovered; Beer-sheba survives in Bir-es-Seba ; Moladah probably in the ruins Tel Milh, south of Hebron, on the road to Aila; Hormah, the older name of which was Shephath, in the ruin Sepata, two and a half hours south of Khalasa; Ziklag in Kasluj, east of this Sepata; and Shaaraim in Tell Sheriah, between Beer-sheba and Gaza.—These were their towns until the reign of David, and their villages. With almost all recent expositors,
is certainly to be attached to 1Ch_4:31, for the parallel, Jos_19:6, speaks of “towns and their villages,” and all that are named in 1Ch_4:32 are expressly named “towns.” Moreover, the separation of
from the foregoing, occasioned by the date “until the reign of David,” is already very old; for the old translators agree with the Masoretic text in transferring the word to the following verse. The reason why the date “until the reign of David” was inserted here, and not in 1Ch_4:33 (where it would be less surprising), appears to be this, that the changes occurring from the time of David in the habitations of the Simeonites, consisting in their partial removal by the Jews (comp. 1Ch_4:34 ff.), applied only to the thirteen towns already named, whereas the five towns, with their villages to be named in the following verse, remained still an undiminished possession of the Simeonites. So, justly, Keil, following Rashi and Kimchi, and partly against Bertheau, who assumes as the object of the subscription merely an allusion to Ziklag (comp. 1Sa_27:6), or perhaps to others of the forementioned towns, as belonging from the time of David no longer to the tribe of Simeon, whereas such a limitation of the sense is foreign to the words; and, moreover, Ziklag was severed from Simeon by the Philistines before the reign of David (1Sa_27:6).
1Ch_4:32. Etam, and Ain, Rimmon, and Tochen, and Ashen, five towns. After the thirteen towns, the parallel, Jos_19:7, gives a second group, not a pentapolis, but only a tetrapolis, with the omission of Tochen, and the change of Etam (
) into Ether (
). It is hard to say where the original is to be sought. We are scarcely entitled, with Movers (p. 73) and Bertheau, to charge both texts with inaccuracy, and to affirm that the series of these towns originally ran thus:
so that by an oversight two cities were made out of one En-rimmon (which occurs in Neh_11:29), and by another oversight Tochen fell out of the text of Joshua, and by a third the name
, which is proved to be original by the subsequent mention of such a town in Jos_15:43, has in Chronicles been supplanted by the better known
. Against this conjecture Keil has justly urged: 1. The
are counted as separate cities not merely in Jos_19:7, but also in Jos_15:32, and the union of the two names into an En-rimmon in Nehemiah may be explained simply from the contiguity of the two places (of which Rimmon is discovered in “Rum er Rummanin,” four hours north of Beer-sheba, and Ain appears to have been the name of an old well lying near it), or possibly by a coalescence of the two at a later period; 2. Etam, if it actually came into the text by exchange with the original Ether, should have been, not at the head of the list, but the last but one (where
stands in Jos_19:7); and 3. There were notoriously two Etams, one in the mountains of Judah south of Bethlehem, 2Ch_11:6, and one in the Negeb of Judah on the border of Simeon, which occurs in the history of Samson, Jdg_15:8; Jdg_15:11, and must be the place here meant, where a locality near Ain and Rimmon is intended. This leaves nothing unsolved but the difference of the number, being only four in Joshua, and five here. The hypothesis of Keil, that
is only another name for