The sons of Judah: Perez, Hezron, Carmi, Hur, and Shobal. Reaiah the son of Shobal became the father of Jahath; and Jahath became the father of Ahumai and Lahad. These are the families of the Zorathites. These were the sons of the father of Etam: Jezreel, Ishma, and Idbash. The name of their sister was Hazzelelponi. Penuel was the father of Gedor and Ezer the father of Hushah. These are the sons of Hur, the firstborn of Ephrathah, the father of Bethlehem. Ashhur the father of Tekoa had two wives, Helah and Naarah. Naarah bore him Ahuzzam, Hepher, Temeni, and Haahashtari. These were the sons of Naarah. The sons of Helah were Zereth, Izhar, and Ethnan. Hakkoz became the father of Anub, Zobebah, and the families of Aharhel the son of Harum.
Jabez was more honorable than his brothers. His mother named him Jabez, saying, “Because I bore him with sorrow.”
Jabez called on the God of Israel, saying, “Oh that you would bless me indeed, and enlarge my border! May your hand be with me, and may you keep me from evil, that I may not cause pain!” God granted him that which he requested.
Chelub the brother of Shuhah became the father of Mehir, who was the father of Eshton. Eshton became the father of Beth Rapha, Paseah, and Tehinnah the father of Ir Nahash. These are the men of Recah. The sons of Kenaz: Othniel and Seraiah. The sons of Othniel: Hathath. Meonothai became the father of Ophrah: and Seraiah became the father of Joab the father of Ge Harashim; for they were craftsmen. The sons of Caleb the son of Jephunneh: Iru, Elah, and Naam. The son of Elah: Kenaz. The sons of Jehallelel: Ziph, Ziphah, Tiria, and Asarel. The sons of Ezrah: Jether, Mered, Epher, and Jalon; and she bore Miriam, Shammai, and Ishbah the father of Eshtemoa. His wife the Jewess bore Jered the father of Gedor, Heber the father of Soco, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah. These are the sons of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered took. The sons of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Naham, were the father of Keilah the Garmite, and Eshtemoa the Maacathite. The sons of Shimon: Amnon, Rinnah, Ben Hanan, and Tilon. The sons of Ishi: Zoheth, and Ben Zoheth. The sons of Shelah the son of Judah: Er the father of Lecah, Laadah the father of Mareshah, and the families of the house of those who worked fine linen, of the house of Ashbea; and Jokim, and the men of Cozeba, and Joash, and Saraph, who had dominion in Moab, and Jashubilehem. These records are ancient. These were the potters, and the inhabitants of Netaim and Gederah: they lived there with the king for his work. The sons of Simeon: Nemuel, Jamin, Jarib, Zerah, Shaul; Shallum his son, Mibsam his son, and Mishma his son. The sons of Mishma: Hammuel his son, Zaccur his son, Shimei his son. Shimei had sixteen sons and six daughters; but his brothers didn’t have many children, and all their family didn’t multiply like the children of Judah. They lived at Beersheba, Moladah, Hazarshual, at Bilhah, at Ezem, at Tolad, at Bethuel, at Hormah, at Ziklag, at Beth Marcaboth, Hazar Susim, at Beth Biri, and at Shaaraim. These were their cities until David’s reign. Their villages were Etam, Ain, Rimmon, Tochen, and Ashan, five cities; and all their villages that were around the same cities, to Baal. These were their settlements, and they have their genealogy. Meshobab, Jamlech, Joshah the son of Amaziah, Joel, Jehu the son of Joshibiah, the son of Seraiah, the son of Asiel, Elioenai, Jaakobah, Jeshohaiah, Asaiah, Adiel, Jesimiel, Benaiah, and Ziza the son of Shiphi, the son of Allon, the son of Jedaiah, the son of Shimri, the son of Shemaiah— these mentioned by name were princes in their families. Their fathers’ houses increased greatly.
They went to the entrance of Gedor, even to the east side of the valley, to seek pasture for their flocks. They found fat pasture and good, and the land was wide, and quiet, and peaceful; for those who lived there before were descended from Ham. These written by name came in the days of Hezekiah king of Judah, and struck their tents. The Meunim who were found there, and they destroyed them utterly to this day, and lived in their place; because there was pasture there for their flocks. Some of them, even of the sons of Simeon, five hundred men, went to Mount Seir, having for their captains Pelatiah, Neariah, Rephaiah, and Uzziel, the sons of Ishi. They struck the remnant of the Amalekites who escaped, and have lived there to this day.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv1, 4, 9, 10, 14, 15, 18, 22, 23, 24, 28, 31, 39, 43 Meaning, they came of Judah, as nephews and kinsmen:…
Meaning, they came of Judah, as nephews and kinsmen: for only Perez was his natural son.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv1, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, 31, 32, 40, 41, 42, 43 1Ch 4:1 The sons of Judah; Pharez, Hezron, and…
1Ch 4:1 The sons of Judah; Pharez, Hezron, and Carmi, and Hur, and Shobal.
Ver. 1. Carmi.] Alias Chelubai, or Caleb. {1Ch 2:9; 1Ch 2:18}
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 31, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 The sons of Judah, i.e. the posterity; for only…
The sons of Judah, i.e. the posterity; for only Pharez was his immediate son. But they are all mentioned here only to show Shobal’s descent from Judah, of whom he intended to speak more particularly.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On vv1, 11, 24 One reason, no doubt, why Ezra is here most…
One reason, no doubt, why Ezra is here most particular in the register of the tribe of Judah is because it was that tribe which, with its appendages, Simeon, Benjamin, and Levi, made up the kingdom of Judah, which not only long survived the other tribes in Canaan, but in process of time, now when this was written, returned out of captivity, when the generality of the other tribes were lost in the kingdom of Assyria. The most remarkable person in this paragraph is Jabez. It is not said whose son he was, nor does it appear in what age he lived; but, it should seem, he was the founder of one of the families of Aharhel, mentioned Ch1 4:8. Here is,
I. The reason of his name: his mother gave him the name with this reason, Because I bore him with sorrow, Ch1 4:9. All children are borne with sorrow (for the sentence upon the woman is, In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children), but some with much more sorrow than others. Usually the sorrow in bearing is afterwards forgotten for joy that the child is born; but here it seems it was so extraordinary that it was remembered when the child came to be circumcised, and care was taken to perpetuate the remembrance of it while he lived. Perhaps the mother called Habez, as Rachel called her son Benoni, when she was dying of the sorrow. Or, if she recovered it, yet thus she recorded it, 1. That it might be a continual memorandum to herself, to be thankful to God as long as she lived for supporting her under and bringing her through that sorrow. It may be of use to be often reminded of our sorrows, that we may always have such thoughts of things as we had in the day of our affliction, and may learn to rejoice with trembling. 2. That it might likewise be a memorandum to him what this world is into which she bore him, a vale of tears, in which he must expect few days and full of trouble. The sorrow he carried in his name might help to put a seriousness upon his spirit. It might also remind him to love and honour his mother, and labour, in every thing, to be a comfort to her who brought him into the world with so much sorrow. It is piety in children thus to requite their parents, Ti1 5:4.
Read full note →
II. The eminence of his character: He was more honourable than his brethren, qualified above them by the divine grace and dignified above them by the divine providence; they did virtuously, but he excelled them all. Now the sorrow with which his mother bore him was abundantly recompensed. That son which of all her children cost her most dear she was most happy in, and was made glad in proportion to the affliction, Psa 90:15. We are not told upon what account he was more honourable than his brethren, whether because he raised a greater estate, or was preferred to the magistracy, or signalized himself in war; we have most reason to think it was upon the account of his learning and piety, not only because these, above any thing, put honour upon a man, but because we have reason to think that in these Jabez was eminent. 1. In learning, because we find that the families of the scribes dwelt at Jabez (Ch1 2:55), a city which, it is likely, took its name from him. The Jews say that he was a famous doctor of the law and left many disciples behind him. And it should seem, by the mentioning of him so abruptly here, that his name was well known when Ezra wrote this. 2. In piety, because we find here that he was a praying man. His inclination to devotion made him truly honourable, and by prayer he obtained those blessings from God which added much to his honour. The way to be truly great is to be truly good and to pray much.
III. The prayer he made, probably like Solomon's prayer for wisdom, just when he was setting out in the world. He set himself to acknowledge God in all his ways, put himself under the divine blessing and protection, and prospered accordingly. Perhaps these were the heads on which he enlarged in his daily prayers; for this purpose it was his constant practice to pray alone, and with his family, as Daniel. Some think that it was upon some particular occasion, when he was straitened and threatened by his enemies, that he prayed this prayer. Observe,
1. To whom he prayed, not to any of the gods of the Gentiles; no, he called on the God of Israel, the living and true God, who alone can hear and answer prayer, and in prayer had an eye to him as the God of Israel, a God in covenant with his people, the God with whom Jacob wrestled and prevailed and was thence called Israel.
2. What was the nature of his prayer. (1.) As the margin reads it, it was a solemn vow - If thou wilt bless me indeed, etc. and then the sense is imperfect, but may easily be filled up from Jacob's vow, or some such like - then thou shalt be my God. He did not express his promise, but left it to be understood, either because he was afraid to promise in his own strength or because he resolved to devote himself entirely to God. He does, as it were, give God a blank paper, let him write what he pleases: "Lord, if thou wilt bless me and keep me, do what thou wilt with me, I will be at thy command and disposal for ever." (2.) As the text reads it, it was the language of a most ardent and affectionate desire: O that thou wouldst bless me!
3. What was the matter of his prayer. Four things he prayed for: - (1.) That God would bless him indeed: "That, blessing, thou wilt bless me, bless me greatly with manifold and abundant blessings." Perhaps he had an eye to the promise God made to Abraham (Gen 22:17), In blessing, I will bless thee. "Let that blessing of Abraham come upon me." Spiritual blessings are the best blessings, and those are blessed indeed who are blessed with them. God's blessings are real things and produce real effects. We can but wish a blessing: he commands it. Those whom he blesses are blessed indeed. (2.) That he would enlarge his coast, that he would prosper his endeavours for the increase of what fell to his lot either by work or war. That God would enlarge our hearts, and so enlarge our portion in himself and in the heavenly Canaan, ought to be our desire and prayer. (3.) That God's hand might be with him. The prayer of Moses for this tribe of Judah was, That his own hands might be sufficient for him, Deu 33:7; but Jabez expects not that this can be the case, unless he have God's hand with him and the presence of his power. God's hand with us, to lead us, protect us, strengthen us, and to work all our works in us and for us, is indeed a hand sufficient for us, all-sufficient. (4.) That he would keep him from evil, the evil of sin, the evil of trouble, all the evil designs of his enemies, that they might not hurt him, nor grieve him, nor make him a Jabez indeed, a man of sorrow: in the original there is an allusion to his name. Father in heaven, deliver me from evil.
4. What was the success of his prayer: God granted him that which he requested, prospered him remarkably, and gave him success in his undertakings, in his studies, in his worldly business, in his conflicts with the Canaanites, and so he became more honourable than his brethren. God was of old always ready to hear prayer, and his ear is not yet heavy.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 32, 33, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41 The sons of Judah: Pharez,.... The posterity of Judah…
The sons of Judah: Pharez,.... The posterity of Judah in the line of Pharez, for he only is mentioned:
Hezron, and Carmi, and Hur, and Shobal. Hezron was the son of Pharez, and Carmi is supposed to be Chelubai, or Caleb, the son of Hezron; and Hur the son of Caleb; and Shobal was the son of the second Caleb the son of Hur; see Ch1 2:5.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv1, 9, 10, 12, 14, 21, 22, 23, 27, 31, 40 The prosperity of Shobal, ver. 1-4. Of Ashur, ver.…
The prosperity of Shobal, ver. 1-4. Of Ashur, ver. 5-8. The character and prayer of Jabez, ver. 9, 10. The posterity of Chelah and others, ver. 11-20. Of Shelah, ver. 21-23. The posterity, cities and victories of Simeon, ver. 24-43.
The sons - The posterity: for only Pharez was his immediate son. But they are all mentioned here only to shew Shobal's descent from Judah.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv1, 3, 7, 8, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 31, 40, 43 A second genealogy of Judah, 1-23.
CHAPTER IV
A second genealogy of Judah, 1-23.
Read full note →
The account of Jabez, 9, 10.
The genealogy of Simeon, 24-27.
Their cities, 28-31.
Their villages, and where situated, 32, 33.
The heads of families, 34-38.
Where they settled; and what was their occupation, 39-43.
NOTES ON CHAP. IV
Verse 1. The sons of Judah] A genealogy of this tribe has already been given in the second chapter. It is here introduced again, with some variations. Probably there were different copies in the public registers; and the writer of this book, finding that this second one contained some remarkable particulars, thought proper to insert it in this place: and no reader will regret the insertion, when he carefully considers the matter.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 4, 9, 10, 12, 18, 21, 22, 24, 27, 31, 40, 41, 43 1Ch 4:1. The sons of Judah — The posterity:…
1Ch 4:1. The sons of Judah — The posterity: for only Pharez was his immediate son. But they are all mentioned here only to show Shobal’s descent from Judah.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv3, 9, 11, 14, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 31, 33, 38, 39, 41, 43 Read, “These are the sons of the father (i.…
Read, “These are the sons of the father (i. e. chief) of Etam” 2Ch 11:6, a city of Judah, not far from Bethlehem.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 30, 31, 33, 34, 40, 41, 42, 43 Charmi, the great-grandson of Juda, by Zara and Zamri,…
Charmi, the great-grandson of Juda, by Zara and Zamri, Josue vii. 1. --- Junius takes him to be the same with Calubi, (chap. ii.) father of Sobal. This seems to be transcribed from another ancient register of the family of Juda, and designed to shew where the principal men had resided. (Calmet) --- Only the chiefs are specified. (Du Hamel)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v1 3. Supplements to the Genealogy of the House of…
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.
Read full note →
2And Reaiah son of Shobal begat Jahath; and Jahath begat Ahumai and Lahad: these are the families of the Zorathite.
3And these were1 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,2 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]4 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.5
19And the sons of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Naham: the father of Keilah the Garmite, and Eshtemoa6 the Maachathite.
20And the sons of Shimon: Amnon and Rinnah, Benhanan and Tulon;7 and the sons of Ishi: Zoheth and Benzoheth.8
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-lehem9: 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.
EXEGETICAL
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 בַּרְמִי is to be read כּלִבי, 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 הָרֹאֶה, 1Ch_2:52, on which see) begat Jahath.יַחַת 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.” עֵיטָם, whether it be an element of a personal name אֲבִי עֵיטָם, 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 (פְּנוּאֵל) 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.עֵזֶר 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.חוּשָׁתִי 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 (אַשְׁחוּר = חוּר, that is, אִישׁ חוּר, 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 (תֵּימְני) 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 צֹחר of the Keri, instead of the Kethibיִצְחַר, 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. הַקּוֹץ 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 עָנוּב appears, moreover, to he identical with that of the town עֲנָב, 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 ’Ανώβ. If this identification be correct, עָנוּב, “the grape,” would be the product of קוֹץ, 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 וַֽיְהִי 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 יַעְבֵּץ = “son of sorrow” (comp. the root עָצַב, 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 יַעְבֵּץ to the root עצב, but with a new turn, לְבִלְתִּי עָצְבִּי, “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 אִם wanting a consequent, but with clear emphasizing of the עָצְבִּי 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 אִס־בָּרֵךְ תְּבָֽרְכֵנִי, 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 אֱלֹהִים used here (as in 1Ch_5:20; 1Ch_5:25-26) instead of יְהוָֹה, 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 (בְּלוֹּב) 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 כְּלוּב, which stands to כָּלֵב as עָנוּב, 1Ch_4:8, to עָנָב, 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 שׁוּחָה be a man’s or a woman’s name; its identification with חוּשָׁה, 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 (קְנַז), 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 (קְנִזִּי) 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 וּבְנֵי 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 וּמְעוֹנֹתָיhad 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” (חֲרָשִׁים), 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 ו before קְנַז 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 וּקְנַז (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. וּבֶן 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 וַתַּהַר וגו״, 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 וְיָלוֹן, commends itself as a very suitable amendment; comp. the Crit. Note. ותַּהַר is then to be taken as a synonym of וַתֵּלֶד (which is given by the Sept. and the Vulg.), and the names Miriam (מִרְיָם, for which, perhaps, מְרוֹם, 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. ’Εσθεμών or ’Εσθαιμών), 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 (יְקוּתִיאֵל, probably “fear of God”) occurs nowhere else; while Jered (comp. Gen_5:15) and חֶבֶר 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 וַתַּהַר וגו״. We know nothing more of this daughter of Pharaoh. בַּת־פַּרְעֹה may be merely a general phrase for מִצְרִית, 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 בַּת־פַּרְעֹה (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 (הוֹדִיָּה). as the present St. constr.אֵשֶׁת, 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 נַחַם, whose sister she is said to be, is the same as נַעַם, 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 (קְעִילָה), 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 ו before בְּנֵי שֵׁלָה(as before בְּנֵי יְהוּדָה, 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 (לֵכַה) 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” (בֵּית אַשְׁבֵּעַ,) rendered by Jerome: domus juramenti). For the cultivation of cotton (בּוּץ, here defectively בֻּץ) 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 אֲשֶׁר בָּֽעֲלוּ לְמוֹאָב with the narrative of the book of Ruth; the יוֹקִים = 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 ישבי לחם 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. יוֹקִים appears contracted from יוֹיָקִים. The men of כֹּזְבָה might be the inhabitants of כְּזִיב, Gen_38:5 (= אַכְזִיב, Jos_15:44), the birthplace of Shelah, in the lowland of Judah. An altogether strange and now inexplicable name occurs at the end, יָשֻׁבִי לֶחֶם, “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.הֵמָּהִ “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 וְהַדְּבָרִים עַתִּיקִים. It is not known where Netaim (נְטָעִים, “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 (גְּדֵרָה, “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 14.10
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,11 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 Meunites12 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.
EXEGETICAL
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 (יָכִין), 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 צֹחַר, candor, is not very remote from זֶרַח, ortus solis (comp. Mal. 3:20; Luk_1:78), and also נְמוּאֵל (with whom Hitzig on Pro_30:31, perhaps too boldly, identifies the conjectural king Lemuel of Massa) appears only a by-form of יְמוּאֵל, 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. וּבְנֵי 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 (שֶׁבַע) which appears to be a repetition of the second component of בְּאֵר שֶׁבַע, occasioned by negligence in copying, but possibly also = שְׁמָע, 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 בָּלָה for בִּלְהָה, 1Ch_4:29, אֶלְתּוֹלָד for בְּתוּל ,תּוֹלָד for ,בְּתוּאֵל חֲצַר סוּסָה for בֵּית לְבָאוֹת ,חֲצַר סוּסִים (house of lions) for בֵּית בִּיְאִי, and שָׁרוּחֶן (pleasant harbour) for שַֽׁעֲרַיִם (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, בַּֽעֲלָה for Bilhah, כְּסִיל for Bethul, שִׁלְּחִים 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;13 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, וְחַצְרֵיהֶם 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 וחצריהם 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 (עֵיטָם) into Ether (עֶתֶר). 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: תֹּכֶן ,עֶתֶר ,עֵין רִמּוֹן ,עָשַׁן, 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 עֶתֶר, 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 עֵיטָם. Against this conjecture Keil has justly urged: 1. The רִמּוֹן and עַיִן 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 עֶתֶר 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 תֹּכֶן is only another name for עֶתֻר, is not well grounded.
1Ch_4:33. And all their villages that were round these towns unto Baal. The parallel, Jos_19:8, is more full: “and all the villages that were round these towns, unto Baalath-beer, Ramath-negeb.” Hence בַּעַל appears to be an abbreviation of the fuller name בְּאֵר בַּֽעֲלַּת and the group of villages extending to this Baalath-beer (or Bealoth, as it is called Jos_15:24) bore the name Ramath-negeb or Ramah of the south, with which Ramoth-negeb, 1Sa_30:27, is manifestly identical. “An attempt has been recently made to determine the situation of this place, in doing which it is to be observed that Baal or Baalath-beer is not to be counted among the towns of Simeon; for it is only said that the villages of the last-named towns extend to Baal, that is, in the direction and perhaps very near to Baal, so that we are warranted in seeking our Baal in a region somewhat more remote from the towns, if it had otherwise a peculiar character and adaptation to denote the direction in which the territory of Simeon extended. Now Walkott found near Ramet el Khulil, about an hour north of Hebron, a second Ramah, called Ramet el Amleh, and also two heights with old sites. A whole group of places on hills, which can be observed at one glance, and present a grand and peculiar aspect, is here found: there is no doubt that the Ramoth-negeb, 1Sa_30:27, is to be sought here. As there is a remarkable well in Ramet el Khulil, the conjecture arises that here is a Baalath-beer, a well-town; and a confirmation of this conjecture presents itself in the designation of this place by the addition Ramoth-negeb.” So Bertheau, after Roediger (review of Robinson’s Bibl. Sacra, Halle’sche Literaturztg. 1843, No. 111); whereas Keil on Jos_19:8 is inclined to seek Baalath-beer and Ramoth-negeb in a more southerly situation than Ramet el Khulil, which is not far from Hebron; and the best chartographers of the day (Menke in 1 Chronicles 3 of his Bible Atlas, Gotha 1868) place the localities in question south-west of the Dead Sea, on the caravan road leading to Hebron.—This was their habitation, and they had their own genealogy, that is, their own register of families as a separate independent tribe, though they dwelt in the territory of Judah, and were much less in number and extent than this contiguous tribe. On the substantively used infin. הִתְיַחֵשׁ, genealogy (properly, entrance in the register), comp. Introd. § 5.
3. History of the Two Migrations or Conquests of the Simeonites: 1Ch_4:34-43.—a. First expedition, in the time of Hezekiah: 1Ch_4:34-41.—And Meshobab, and Jamlech, and Joshah, etc. These thirteen princes of the tribe of Simeon are only made prominent because they were the leaders of the present expedition, not because the former genealogical series (1Ch_4:24-26) was continued by them. For although of some of them (Joshah, Jehu, and Ziza) the descent for several generations is given, yet the connection of these small genealogical lines with that earlier series is wanting. With the remarkable form יַֽעֲקֹֽבָה, “to Jacob” (reckoned to him), comp. the analogous form יִשְׂרָאֵלָה, 1Ch_25:14, and other examples in Ewald, Lehrb. p. 670, n. 1, 7th edit.
1Ch_4:38. These are they that entered by name princes in their families (not: “these were famous, celebrated princes,” as Luther). A phrase essentially the same occurs in 1Ch_4:41; comp. also 1Ch_12:31; Num_1:17; Ezr_8:25. “Princes of families” are, moreover, not heads of families, but “heads of the houses into which the families were divided” (Keil).—And their father-houses spread greatly, unfolded and branched out into a great multitude. On בֵּית־אָבוֹת, plural of the compound בֵּית־אָב, comp. Ewald, § 270, p. 657, where the same plural is cited from 2Ch_35:5, Num_1:2; Num_1:18; Num_1:20; Num_7:2, etc., and the similar בֵּית בָּמוֹת, high houses, from 1Ki_12:31, 2Ki_17:29; 2Ki_17:32.—And they went to the entrance of Gedor (scarcely “to the west of Gedor,” as Keil, for this would have required the addition of הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ to לִמְבוֹא, to the east of the valley. What valley is uncertain, as the definite article only points to some known valley near Gedor, a place that cannot itself be determined; but the identification of this הַגָּיְא with the valley of the Dead Sea is a very precarious conjecture of Ewald and Bertheau, for the valley of the Dead Sea with its southern continuation bears in the O. T. the standing name of הָעֲרָבָה. Equally uncertain is the conjecture of the same inquirers, and of Kamph., Graf, Mühlau (also of Menke in 1 Chronicles 3. of his Bible Atlas), that גְּדֹר is an error of transcription for גְּרָר (Γεράρ in Sept.; see Crit. Note). A place so far west as Gerar (now Kirbet el Gerar) on the river Gerar can scarcely have been used to mark the border of the Simeonite pasture lands; and the mode of expression is not fitted to indicate the west and east bounding points of the region occupied by the Simeonites (comp. also on 1Ch_4:41). On the other hand, to identify Gedor with the town גְּדוֹר named in Jos_15:58, situated on the mountains of Judah, has its difficulties. for it must also be presumed that the Meunim named in 1Ch_4:41 were the inhabitants of the adjacent hill-town Maon, Jos_15:55; and the region of this hill-town of Judah cannot be that intended here, as the latter is described, 1Ch_4:40, as On all sides (literally “on both sides;” יָדַיִם, as in Gen_34:21) open, and therefore clearly as a plain.
1Ch_4:40. For they were of Ham who dwelt there before. For the phrase, comp. Jdg_18:7; Jdg_18:28. These men of Ham, whom the Simeonites found as inhabitants, peaceable and harmless inhabitants of the country in question, and subdued, may have been Egyptians, Cushites, or Canaanites; most probably they belonged to the last branch of the Hamites, as the region in question is contiguous to Palestine. Hitzig (“The Kingdom of Massa” in Zeller’s Theolog. Jahrbüchern, 1844, p. 269 ff., and on Prov. p. 312) gratuitously supposes the Amalekites to be designated by “the men of Ham” (likewise Hoffmann, Blicke in die früheste Geschichte des heiligen Landes, p. 73): for the history of the second expedition of the Simeonites refers to the Amalekites, 1Ch_4:42-43, and it is a question whether the Amalekites were Hamites (Knobel on Gen_10:13; Gen_10:23, and comp. above on 1Ch_1:36 f.); and the circumstance that these Hamites were nomades does not compel us to think of Amalekites (Ludim, Hyksos?), since many Canaanitish tribes lived as nomades; for example, those of Laish, Judges 18.
1Ch_4:41. Came in the day’s of Hezekiah. Here is a quite definite chronological date, that shows still more positively than the reference to the reign of David in 1Ch_4:31, the high age and the certainty of these notices.—And smote their (the Hamites’) tents, and the Meunites that were found there. The smiting refers first to the tents or dwellings of the Hamites; and then to the Meunites found there, who are therefore foreigners who had come to dwell among the Hamites. מְעוּנִים (for which the Kethib has מְעִינִים and the Sept. Μιναῖοι) are here, as in 2Ch_16:7 (comp. 1Ch_20:1), probably inhabitants of the town Maon near Petra, east of the Wady Musa (Robinson, iii. 127). Their being involved in the fate of the Hamites implies that the scene of the present event lay to the east, though it cannot be further defined. Against the reading proposed by some old expositors (Luther, Starke), וְאֶת־הַמְּעֹנִים, “and the fixed habitations,” in contrast with the forementioned tents, see Bochart, Geogr. Sacra, p. 138.—And destroyed them unto this day, and dwelt in their stead.וַיַּֽחֲרִימֻםad internecionem usque eos exciderunt (J. H. Mich.), deleverunt (Vulg.). Comp. הֶֽחֱרִים ban, extirpate, in 2Ch_20:23; 2Ch_32:14, 2Ki_19:11, Isa_37:11. The term “unto this day” points to the time of composition, not by the Chronist, but by the old historical sources at least before the exile employed by him.
b. Second expedition of the Simeonites against Mount Seir: 1Ch_4:42-43.—And of them, of the sons of Simeon, five hundred men went to Mount Seir. Nothing more precise is stated regarding the time of this expedition; it may have been before or alter that in the time of Hezekiah. And the statement, “of them, of the sons of Simeon,” is quite general, and sets no limit either to the Simeonites named 1Ch_4:34-37 or to those before enumerated, 1Ch_4:24-27. Keil, who exchanges the Ishi of our verse with Shimi, 1Ch_4:27, is arbitrary in thinking only of the latter; and no less so is Bertheau, who refers the words to the part of the Simeonites described 1Ch_4:34 ff. Of the surmise, that the event of our verse is somehow connected with that referred, 1Ch_4:34-41, to the time of Hezekiah, and is to be regarded as in some measure a continuation of it (Ew., Berth., Kamph.), there is not the slightest hint in the text, even if the valley of the present expedition to Mount Seir could be situated in the same direction from the tribe of Simeon as that of the former; see on 1Ch_4:39-40.
1Ch_4:43. And they smote the remnant that had escaped ofAmalek, that is, those Amalekites who escaped annihilation in the victories of Saul and David over this hereditary foe of the Israelites (who were formerly settled, Jdg_5:14; Jdg_12:15, comp. Num_13:29, chiefly in Paran or half-Manasseh east of Jordan; comp. Hitzig, Gesch. d. V. Isr. pp. 26, 104); comp. 1Sa_14:48; 1Sa_15:7; 2Sa_8:12. These who thus escaped had retired into the Idumean mountains, and there intermingled partly with the Edomites (comp. 1Ch_1:36 f.). Here they were now sought out and extirpated by the Simeonites under the sons of Ishi, while the conquerors occupied their seats. From a comparison of the present passage with Mic_1:15; Mic_2:8-10, Isa_21:11; Isa_28:12, etc., which appear to indicate an advance of the Israelites who believed in Jehovah far into the south and south-east in the times of Hezekiah and Isaiah, Hitzig (Das Königreich Massa) has, with the concurrence of Bunsen, Bertheau, etc., developed his hypothesis of the founding of an Israelitish kingdom of Massa east or south-east of Seir (not far from Dumah; comp. Gen. 25:44; 1Ch_1:30) by the colony of Simeonites here mentioned, and has assigned to it as kings, Agur and Lemuel, the authors of the two appendices to the book of Proverbs. Comp. our substantially concurring judgment concerning this hypothesis on Pro_30:1 ff., vol. 12. p. 208 of the Bibelw. The objections urged against this hypothesis by Graf (Der Stamm Simeon, p. 12 ff.) and Mühlau (De prov. Aguri, etc., orig. p. 24 f.) certainly point out much that is not and cannot be proved in it, but are not sufficient to show that it is a mere fancy picture. At all events, the traditions, that in accordance with our passage part of the tribe of Simeon penetrated far into Arabia and founded there an Israelitish colony, are as widespread as they are ancient. Arabian legends even make the tribe of Simeon found the city and the temple of Mecca. See Hoffmann, Blicke, etc., p. 124.
Footnotes:
[1]For וְאֵלֶּה אֲבִי עֵיטָם, which gives no tolerable sense, read with some mss. וְאֵלֵּה בְנֵי אֲבִי עֵיטָם, or with the Sept., Vulg., and some other mss. וְאֵלֶּה בְנֵי עֵיטָם.
[2]So (יִצְחַר) in the Kethib. The Keri וְצֹחַר is designed to gain a name better known (comp. Gen_13:8; Gen_46:10).
[3]For וּבֶן some mss. have וּבְנֵי, which is perhaps to be preferred, as in 1Ch_4:13; 1Ch_4:16; 1Ch_4:19-20.
[4]For וַתַּהַר, “and she conceived,” the Sept., following perhaps another reading, give καὶ ἰγίννησεν ’Ιεθέρ (Vulg.: genuitque Mariam). For מִרְיָם they exhibit Μαιών (cod. Vat. Μαρών).
[5]This closing sentence וְאֵלֶּה … מָרֶד stands here probably in the wrong place, and is to be placed after וְיָלוֹן, 1Ch_4:17; see Exeg. Expos.
[6]Before אֶשְׁתְּמֹעַ (which the Sept. here renders by ’Ιεσθημωή, whereas in 1Ch_4:17 it has ’Εσθεμών [cod. vat. ’Εσθαιμών] וַֽאֲבִי seems to have fallen out, as the parallel אֲבִי קְעִילָה indicates.
[7] Kethib: תּוּלוֹן; Keri: תִּילוֹן.
[8]Before בֶּן־זוֹחֵת, which (not as, for example, בֶּן־חָנָן immediately before) is not a nom. propr., but denotes “son of Zoheth,” the name of this son seems to have fallen out.
[9]Jerome (perhaps on the ground of a somewhat different text, but more probably only following the arbitrary interpretation of an old Jewish Midrash) renders the words from וְיוֹקִים: et qui stare fecit solem, virique mendacii et securus et incendens, qui principes fuerunt in Moab, et qui reversi sunt in Lachem.
[10]Moreover, the engineer of the “Palestine Exploration Fund,” Captain Warren, has recently discovered remain of the pottery of these royal factories in Jerusalem. See our Work in Palestine, London 1873, p. 149.
[11]The Sept gives here Γεράρ, whence גְּדֹר might possibly be an error of transcription for גְּרָר.
[12]So (הַמְּעוּנִים) the Keri, whereas the Kethib gives הַמְּעִינִים, and the Sept. accordingly Μιναίους.
[13]So also Palmer and Drake, p. 303.
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv9, 10, 13, 14, 17, 18, 21, 22, 24, 27, 31, 38 OF JABEZ, AND HIS PRAYER. (Ch1 4:9-20)
OF JABEZ, AND HIS PRAYER. (Ch1 4:9-20)
Jabez--was, as many think, the son of Coz, or Kenaz, and is here eulogized for his sincere and fervent piety, as well, perhaps, as for some public and patriotic works which he performed. The Jewish writers affirm that he was an eminent doctor in the law, whose reputation drew so many scribes around him that a town was called by his name (Ch1 2:55); and to the piety of his character this passage bears ample testimony. The memory of the critical circumstances which marked his birth was perpetuated in his name (compare Gen 35:15); and yet, in the development of his high talents or distinguished worth in later life, his mother must have found a satisfaction and delight that amply compensated for all her early trials. His prayer which is here recorded, and which, like Jacob's, is in the form of a vow (Gen 28:20), seems to have been uttered when he was entering on an important or critical service, for the successful execution of which he placed confidence neither on his own nor his people's prowess, but looked anxiously for the aid and blessing of God. The enterprise was in all probability the expulsion of the Canaanites from the territory he occupied; and as this was a war of extermination, which God Himself had commanded, His blessing could be the more reasonably asked and expected in preserving them from all the evils to which the undertaking might expose him. In these words, "that it may not grieve me," and which might be more literally rendered, "that I may have no more sorrow," there is an allusion to the meaning of his name, Jabez, signifying "grief"; and the import of this petition is, Let me not experience the grief which my name implies, and which my sins may well produce.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv14, 21, 23, 39, 41, 43 14. The father of the valley of Charashim —…
14. The father of the valley of Charashim — That is, father of those who dwelt there, and founder, so to speak, of the institution which gave the place its name. The inhabitants of this valley were craftsmen, and were descended from Joab, the son of Seraiah; so the business of engraving and working in wood and metals was the institution of the place. The location of this valley is unknown, but Neh_11:35, and the Talmud, would seem to place it in the vicinity of Lod, or Lydda.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 39, 40, 41, 43 Ch. 1Ch_4:1-23. A Genealogy of the Tribe of Judah…
Ch. 1Ch_4:1-23. A Genealogy of the Tribe of Judah (cp. 1Ch_2:3 ff.)
1. As Hezron was the son of Perez (ch. 1Ch_2:5) and (if the LXX. be right) Shobal was the son of Hur (1Ch_2:50, note), we have in this verse five, if not six, generations.
Read full note →
Pharez] R.V. Perez.
Carmi] if a descendant of Hezron, then probably not the person mentioned in 1Ch_2:7.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43 (1) The sons of Judah.—Pharez only of these five…
(1) The sons of Judah.—Pharez only of these five was literally a son of Judah, 1Ch_2:3-4. We have, however, seen that all these names, with the possible exception of Carmi, represent great tribal divisions or clans; and as such they are called sons of Judah. For Carmi it is proposed to read the more famous name of Chelubai (1Ch_2:9). This would give a line of direct descendants from Judah to the fifth generation, according to the genealogical presentation of 1Ch_2:4; 1Ch_2:9; 1Ch_2:18-19. But the result thus obtained is of no special value. It has no bearing on the remainder of the section. Moreover, Carmi is mentioned (1Ch_2:7) among the great Judean houses, and might have been prominent in numbers and influence at the unknown period when the original of the present list was drafted.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv1, 3, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 24, 28, 31, 33, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 Vers. 1-23. After the large space given to the…
Vers. 1-23. After the large space given to the "sons of David," of the tribe of Judah, in the previous chapter, this chapter returns for twenty-three verses to group together a few additional ramifications of the same tribe, whose registers were for some reasons, perhaps not very evident, preserved and known. The first verses follow in the direction already indicated in ch. 2., near the end of which we were left with Shobal and Haroeh, probably the same with Reaiah. (the same name as Reaia, 1Ch_5:5, though not the same person)
Vers. 1, 2. The Carrot of ver. 1 is considered to lie doubtful between the Carmi of 1Ch_2:7 or the Chelubai of 1Ch_2:9, in which last alternation the five names of this verse would repeat the line of descent with which chrii, had made us familiar. Even then the object or advantage of repeating the first four of these, so far as what follows is concerned, is not evident. We keep near the close of ch. 2. also in respect of another allusion to the Zorathites, (1Ch_2:53) whose families were replenished by the two sons of Jahath, Ahumai and Lahad, of all of whom this is all we know.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On vv1, 9, 22, 23 The sons of Judah.
1Ch_4:1-43
The sons of Judah.
Read full note →
Survey of the genealogy
I. How great the obscurity of most men!
II. What folly to seek place and power only here!
III. How needful to secure renown hereafter! Rejoice that your names are written in heaven, said the dying Haller, when friends congratulated him on the honour of receiving a visit from the Emperor Joseph II. (James Wolfendale.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On v1 CRITICAL NOTES.] Obscurity often arising from brevity conspicuous in…
CRITICAL NOTES.] Obscurity often arising from brevity conspicuous in this passage. Yet we discern an order in it, indicated in first verse. It contains descendants of Shobal, Hur, Carmi, Hezron, and of Pharez. The section chiefly of local interest, intended to point out founders of some of the towns in the province of Judah [Murphy]. Reaiah conjectured to be same as Haroeh, 1Ch_2:52.
1Ch_4:3-4. Descendants of Hur. Father, i.e., joint founders of Etam, a town on rocky hills of Judah (Jdg_15:8; 2Ch_11:6). Gedor, now Jedur (Jos_15:58). Hushak, of unknown site, but indication of the place (2Sa_23:7; 1Ch_11:29).
Read full note →
1Ch_4:5-10.—Descendants of Ashur (Carmi), posthumous son of Hezron by Abia, called father or chief of Tekoa; with two wives, three children to one, and four to the other. Jabez, 1Ch_4:9, son or maternal kinsman of Ashur, who names the town (1Ch_2:55).
1Ch_4:11-15.—Descendants of Hezron. Chelub, brother of Shuah, to distinguish him from others. The group in 1Ch_4:11-12, unknown. In 1Ch_4:13-15 return to names not quite strange. Even (and) Kenas, 1Ch_4:15, translate as marg. Uknas, or suppose a name (Jehaleel) to have fallen out after Elah.
1Ch_4:16-20.—Descendants of Pharez. From 1Ch_4:17-18, difficult to come to any conclusions. And these, an interesting phrase, indicative of sojourn of these persons in Egypt, when Israel was free, prosperous, and respected. “It was then as becoming for a sovereign of Egypt to give a daughter in marriage to Mered, as at a later period a sister-in-law to Hadad. This Pharaoh may have been the last of the dynasty that preceded the eighteenth” [cf. Murphy].
1Ch_4:21-23.—Descendants of Judah. We have been ascending from Shobal to Hur, to Carmi, to Hezron, to Pharez; now we rise to Judah himself. A list of descendants of his son Shelah hero given [cf. Murphy]. Linen, a staple commodity of Egypt. Ashbea, a descendant of Shelah, had a factory there. 1Ch_4:23, last of Judah, and leave the tribe in obscurity. Some of these potters, and others gardeners.
1Ch_4:24-43.—The sons of Simeon. Classed with Judah, because possessions partly in their territory (Jos_19:1). Differences of particulars in list occasioned by some having more than one name (cf. Gen_46:10; Exo_6:15, and Num_26:12-13). 1Ch_4:27, Shimei distinguished from his brethren by a large family. “Progeny of Simeon here traced to settlement in Canaan.” 1Ch_4:28-33, His territory. Eighteen cities given in Jos_19:2-7. Changes in name took place in time between Joshua and David. 1Ch_4:34-38, Subsequent increase of certain families of Simeon; princes, 1Ch_4:38. “The number of names is thirteen, corresponding to number of cities in first list (1Ch_4:28-31), so that it may be suspected that the princes mentioned were registered chiefs of those cities in time of Hezekiah (see 1Ch_4:41)” [Speak. Com.]. 1Ch_4:39-40, the first migration. Valley into which mountain streams ran to fertilise the land, suitable for Simeonites, quiet and peaceable on account of seclusion and long undisturbed inhabitants. Ham, 1Ch_4:40, on their way to Africa induced by fertility of soil and abundance of water. 1Ch_4:41-43, further migrations. Days of Hez., hence date of Simeonite expedition, before captivity of ten tribes (2Ki_18:8). Rest, 1Ch_4:43, remnant left by Saul’s great slaughter (1Sa_15:7-8), and by David (2Sa_8:12).
HOMILETICS
THE CHIEFS OF JUDAH.—1Ch_4:1-23
Judah the most famous and most important of all tribes. A tribe which survived other tribes, and whose register was specially cared for.
I. Posterity of Shobal (1Ch_4:1-4). From these came the Zorathites (ch. 1Ch_2:53).
II. Posterity of Ashur (1Ch_4:5-10). Ashur, posthumous son of Hezron (ch. 1Ch_2:24), whose mother was probably a daughter of Carmi. If so, he is grandson of Carmi, hence introduction of this name in 1Ch_4:1.
III. Posterity of Chelub (1Ch_4:11-20). Men of Rechah as inhabitants of an unknown place of that name.
IV. Posterity of Shelah (1Ch_4:21-23). Shelah, son of Judah, a family ingenious and industrious above others. Honest labourers are the salt of society; the healthy, luxurious and dissolute, the idle and predatory would corrupt it.
1. Craftsmen (1Ch_4:14). A wise arrangement that men should be fitted for different employments.
2. Weavers (1Ch_4:21). This an ancient and skilful labour. Children excelled and became famous in their business. “He that handleth a matter wisely shall find good.”
3. Rulers in Moab (1Ch_4:22). Entrusted with power for many generations. But this long ago (“ancient things”). A great change. Fathers had dominion then, posterity in servitude now!
4. Potters, and
5. Gardeners (1Ch_4:23). “With the king,” on the king’s property; or preferring to stay with him in Babylon rather than return to their own country. “Unworthy the name of Israelites are those who dwell among plants and hedges rather than go to Canaan.”
JABEZ THE HONOURED NAME.—1Ch_4:9
This a strange description in a catalogue of names. The man worthy of remembrance, an honoured name deserving attention.
I. The circumstances of his birth. Born in sorrow.
1. Sorrow the lot of all (Gen_3:16). Man born to sorrow as sparks fly upward (Job_14:1).
2. This, perhaps, special sorrow, which the mother wished to perpetuate in name. O. T. names significant of qualities and circumstances of life. Benjamin (Ben-oni), son of my sorrow, by Rachael; son of my right hand, by the father.
“I do beseech you,
Chiefly that I might set it on my prayers,
What is your name?” [Shakespeare].
II. The dignity of his Character. “More honourable.” Not a title of position or office as “The Hon.” and “The Right Hon.,” &c.
1. Honourable in himself, literally “a man of weight.” Jews say, a famous doctor of the law who had disciples and founded a city which took his name (ch. 1Ch_2:55). But honourable and upright in personal character and conduct. A man of prayer and fervent piety, whose name is held in everlasting remembrance.
2. More honourable than others. Some think he was exalted above them as judge, signalised in war, or gained larger estates than his brethren. Not richer in material wealth, but in moral worth; more dignified in private life, more distinguished in action and public philanthropy. “The righteous is more excellent than his neighbour.” Seek this honour of character and life, not worldly honour which decays like a flower, but honour from God, perpetual and true.
THE REMARKABLE PRAYER.—1Ch_4:10
Many things deserving attention, which make it a model of thoughtful, earnest, and successful prayer.
I. Its spiritual characteristics. Devotion an expression of spirit, not lips.
1. Its view of God. Right views of God essential. “He that cometh to God must believe that he is,” &c. Not Jehovah, the Almighty, Self-existent, and Eternal; but God of Israel, the covenant God who keeps his word and never forgets his people.
2. Its humble tone, a kind of vow. If thou wilt bless me, thou shalt have my heart and service (Jacob. Gen_28:20), but without thee undone, &c.
3. Its earnest spirit. “Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed.” Language of ardent feeling and intense desire, becoming and needful. “O God, let me not fall from earnestness. Grant me to hate every false way,” cried Thomas Chalmers.
II. Its worthy object. Most personal and direct, straight as an arrow to the point.
1. For personal blessing. “Bless me indeed.” This the beginning, the most needful of all.
2. For successful undertaking. “Enlarge my coast.” Expulsion of Canaanites, or special effort in which he desired to succeed. All success from God. Pray when you enter life, start business, begin some fresh pursuit, take a journey, or enter a new residence.
3. For preservation from danger. “Thine hand with me.” His undertaking risky. He wanted something beside reputation, shields, and soldiers. Wealth, friendship, and human aid, nothing without God. “Uphold me with thy right hand.”
4. For deliverance from evil. Evil of sorrow implied in his name. Deeply impressed with his mother’s conduct. Let it not be. Desired to be joy and help to parents, not a grief. Evil of sin generally. In remembrance of Achan, perhaps. Sin ever brings sorrow, “keep me from evil.” Deliver me from its guilt and consequences. “Let sin have no dominion over me.”
III. Its gracious answer. “God granted him that which he requested.” God preserved in danger, gave success in enterprise, delivered from grief and sin, and exalted him to honour and position. This to magnify his grace, encourage piety and prayer.
“In all thou dost, first let thy prayers ascend,
And to the gods thy labours first commend;
From them implore success, and hope
A prosperous end.” [W. Fleming].
JABEZ THE “HONOURABLE”
According to a worldly standard, this list includes more hon. names than that of Jabez. But in the estimation of heaven, the only reputation that will live must have connection with God. The words we specially emphasise are, “Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my coast!” Some analogies suggested by the sea-coast may teach the following lessons.
I. An enlarged “coast” suggests an expanded horizon. Carnal sympathies and lack of faith limit to narrow visions of divine truths and holy revelations. Our spiritual relations determine whether soul vision commands outlook from a small bay, or toward broad ocean. To the mother of Jabez his entrance into the world was associated with some special suffering, and she named him “sorrowful.” Years rolled on, God by his prophet knighted him and pronounced him “more honourable than his brethren.” Even so now according to our faith will be the significance of our individual history. Let our vision be bounded by time and sense only, and life will be a baptism of grief. Let faith widen our coast, expand our horizon, and all along the coast the lamps of “hope” shall hang, and a “more honourable” name be gained than those who refuse the “faith, which is the substance of things not seen, and by which the elders obtained a good report.”
II. An enlarged “coast” suggests a broader surface. The glory of a coast is its wide sweep of the ocean. There go ships, whose massive keels skim the surface of the waters. There floods lift up their voice, whose swelling waves declare the fulness of its strength. Such in figure is the human soul when possessed and enlarged by the Spirit of God. What sublime possibilities of divine enlargement belong to the heart of man! Sin circumscribes, hems in, and we are “straitened in ourselves.” But the coast may be enlarged; hills of difficulty be removed, and mountains of unbelief levelled, until an expanded horizon sheds calm and enlivening radiance all around, and the renewed soul takes up the language of a renewed earth (Isa_60:4-5).
III. An enlarged “coast” suggests a more extended pathway. Sometimes a narrow strip of land forms the only path when walking on the sea-coast. Then we are in danger of falling, slipping over a precipice; and but for a helping hand many would have thus perished. These words are singularly applicable. Similar are those of the Psalmist, Psa_18:35-36; Psa_119:32 (Pro_4:12). This enlarged pathway will secure two things.
(1) Safety. “Kept” by the divine hand. No other power to keep. In the king’s highway alone is security. This a way of holiness. “A highway shall be there, it shall be called the way of holiness.”
(2) Peace. Jabez not only desires safety, but prays that sin may not “grieve” him. This a fine test of sincerity of prayer and the cleanness of heart. What various motives, prompt obedience to divine laws! What a great gulph of moral disparity between the sayings, Sin hurts me physically, and sin grieves me spiritually! [The Study, 1874].
HOMILETIC HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
1Ch_4:10. The Mighty Hand. Available, ever ready, and always sufficient. A hand of universal control and perpetual activity. “God’s right hand doeth valiantly.”
1Ch_4:13. Othniel’s adventure (cf. Jos_15:15-16; Jdg_1:12-13; Jdg_3:9). The brave man waits not for numbers and applause. Enough for him to know the cause is just, that danger threatens, that action is required.
“Where duty bids, he confidently steers,
Faces a thousand dangers at her call,
And, trusting in his God, surmounts them all.”
1Ch_4:18. The Egyptian convert. Thin passage records a very interesting fact, the marriage of an Egyptian princess to a descendant of Caleb.
1. The marriage must have taken place in the wilderness.
2. The barriers of a different national language and national religion kept the Hebrews separate from the Egyptians; but they did not wholly prevent intimacies, and even occasional intermarriages between private individuals of the two nations.
3. Ere such unions, however, could be sanctioned, the Egyptian party must have renounced idolatry, and this daughter of Pharaoh, as appears from her name, had become a convert to the worship of the God of Israel [Jamieson].
HOMILETICS
THE POSTERITY OF SIMEON.—1Ch_4:24-43
The sons of Simeon are classed with those of Judah, because their possession was partly taken out of the extensive territory of Judah (Jos_19:1).
I. The cities they possessed. The same list given (Jos_19:2-6) with a little difference in spelling; eighteen given. Virtue and self-control better than taking a city (Pro_16:32).
II. The conquests they made. In the days of Hezekiah a generation animated to conquests.
1. Some took Gedor (1Ch_4:39). A place in Arabia, the entrance of Gedor, inhabited by Ham’s posterity.
2. Others took Mount Seir (1Ch_4:42). Smote the remnant of devoted Amalekites and possessed the country. The curse pronounced on Ham and Amalek, though dormant, was not dead. To Simeon the curse (Gen_49:5-7) was a blessing, to the others a terrible reality.
III. The prosperity they enjoyed.
1. Increase of numbers. They increased wonderfully, but not like the children of Judah (1Ch_4:27).
2. Enlargement of boundaries. In possession of limited area, they were forced to seek accommodation elsewhere. They established themselves in the fertile pastures of Gedor (Gerar), which soon proved inadequate, and a new colony settled on Mount Seir. They enjoyed a land of peace and plenty, numerous flocks and quiet habitations. Thank God for fixed homes, but ever guard against the perils of prosperity.
SURVEY OF THE GENEALOGY.—1Ch_4:1-43
I. How great the obscurity of most men! Not many known and prominent here. But obscurity hides not God. We are great if the world gains by our life and example.
II. What folly to seek place and power only here! From place we shall be ejected, and of power we shall be deprived. A family of princes were captives in exile (1Ch_4:22). “Where will ye leave your glory?”
III. How needful to secure renown hereafter! Better to have names written in heaven than rolled in lists of honour and published in daily papers. “Rejoice that your names are written in heaven,” said the dying Haller, when friends congratulated him on the honour of receiving a visit from the Emperor Joseph II.
ORIGIN AND USE OF ARTS AND INVENTIONS.—1Ch_4:14; 1Ch_4:21-23
I. Useful arts emanate from the wisdom and goodness of God. In early history man taught of God in special callings. Human inventions had no existence save in the purpose of God. Proof from reason and scripture. “This also cometh from the Lord of Hosts, who is wonderful in counsel and excellent in working.”
II. Useful arts are beneficial in their tendency. They mitigate human toil and alleviate suffering; prolong human life, increase sources of comfort, and secure universal peace.
III. Therefore all engaged in useful arts promote the welfare of society. It is better to excel in trade than to gain dominions of territory. In the construction of the tabernacle an illustration of this principle. Let us be among the “willing-hearted” and the “wise-hearted,” and contribute our share. “Produce! produce! were it but the pitifullest infinitesimal fraction of a product, produce it in God’s name! ’Tis the utmost thou hast in thee: out with it, then” [Carlyle].
HOMILETIC HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
1Ch_4:32. These cities unto reign of David. In consequence of the sloth or cowardice of the Simeonites, some of the cities within their allotted territory were only nominally theirs, but were never taken from the Philistines until David’s time, when the Simeonites having forfeited all claim to them, he assigned them to his own tribe of Judah [Jamieson]. Hence danger of delay.
1Ch_4:33. Habitations and genealogy; or Homes and Registers.
1Ch_4:38. Princes in Families. Thirteen names corresponding with number of cities in first list (1Ch_4:28-31), so that the princes mentioned were registered chiefs of those cities in the time of Hezekiah (see 1Ch_4:41) [Speak. Com.].
1. Families and kingdoms of divine appointment.
2. Rulers of families and kingdoms represented God and order, justice and truth.
3. Hence subjection needful for order, happiness, and success.
1Ch_4:40. Fat pastures.
1. Prepared by God, natural formation.
2. Discovered by God’s direction. They found, did not create. Application in comfortable homes, favourable situations and spiritual refreshment.
1Ch_4:43. Doom of Amalek. Sin not forgotten, judgment not neglected nor fails in execution. Curses may be dormant but not dead. “Preservation from the sword of Joshua (Exo_17:13), of Saul (1Sa_15:7), and of David (2Sa_8:12) was but a reservation to this utter destruction, which God had solemnly sworn, with hand laid upon his own throne (Exo_17:16)” [Trapp].
1Ch_4:39-43. A fragment of famous history. Learn from this chronicle of events—
1. Expedition first, under thirteen leaders, with many followers, against Hamites and Mehurrim.
2. Expedition second, smaller, but more adventurous. Under four chiefs, a band of 500 smote powerful enemies and possessed their quarters. Be valiant for God spiritually.
ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 4
1Ch_4:9. Honourable. Virtue and honour are such inseparable companions that the heathens would admit no man into the temple of honour who did not pass through the temple of virtue.
“If it be of a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive”
[Shakespeare].
1Ch_4:10. Evil. The greatest evil is sin.
1. In the nature of it, as being contrary to the greatest good, even God.
2. In the effect and consequences of it here and hereafter.
3. Therefore to pray against sin is to pray against all other evils whatever; for the devil, the evil one, cannot hurt us but by sin [Bishop Hopkins].
Be with me. Ora et labora is the legend of the Christian’s faith, and the plan of his life. His fervent prayer begets honest, manly, unshrinking work; his work as it is faithful and it is faithful in proportion as he realises it is for God, throws him back upon prayer [Stevenson].
1Ch_4:14; 1Ch_4:21; 1Ch_4:23. Craftsmen, potters, &c. If all men affected one and the same trade of life or pleasure of recreation, it were not possible they could live one by another; neither could there be any use of commerce, whereby life is maintained. It is good reason we should make a right use of this gracious dispensation of the Almighty, that we should improve our several dispositions and faculties to the advancing of the common stock, and that we should neither encroach upon each other’s profession nor be apt to censure each other’s recreation [Bishop Hall].
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Sermon Bible 1900 · Public Domain On v1 1Ch 4:9-10
1Ch 4:9-10
In what Jabez was "more honourable than his brethren" we are not told. It might be in courage; it might be in learning; it is certain that he was honourable for his piety.
Read full note →
I. Jabez called on the God of Israel. It was the habit of his life; it was the action of each separate day; he was known by this; this lay at the foundation of his courage, his goodness, his success.
II. The prayer of Jabez is (1) earnest; (2) full of desire for God; (3) it is a thorough prayer: he asks no partial blessing.
III. "Enlarge my coast." He prays for more territory to his people and himself—more power, more wealth. These are what we should call earthly and temporal blessings. The best men of the Old Testament did not distinguish between temporal and spiritual, as we do. The thing we have to fear is, not "enlargement" in itself, but possible harm and danger to us in the process—perversion, corruption, the coming in of hurtful elements.
IV. Notice the summing up of the prayer: "and that Thine hand might be with me," etc. So let us seek preservation from evil, inward and outward, by watchfulness, by prayer, by dependence on God, and we need never fear enlargement. Let it go on without limit and without fear if it goes on thus, banked in on either hand by Divine blessing and by Divine care.
A. Raleigh, The Way to the City, p. 190.
References: 1Ch 1:12.—H. Jones, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxix., p. 141. 1—Parker, vol. viii., p. 318. 2—Ibid., p. 323. 3—Ibid., p. 327. 1Ch 4:9, 1Ch 4:10.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xvii., No. 994; H. Melvill, Sermons on Less Prominent Facts, vol. i., p. 297; Homiletic Quarterly, vol. i., p. 255, and vol. ii., p. 524. 1Ch 4:17.—J. M. Neale, Occasional Sermons, p. 116. 1Ch 4:22.—Spurgeon, Evening by Evening, p. 33.
1Ch 4:23
I. Notice how work links men to kings. Here we have potters, gardeners, and hedgers mixed up with the king. The men and women who work, whether with brain or hand, or both, are the people who save the nation from ruin. Is it not so in Christian life and experience? What is a man’s religion worth if it does not teach him to labour? Are we not to work out our own salvation, and that for the best of reasons: "It is God that worketh in us"?
II. Kings need different kinds of workers. God needs us. Not that He could not have done without us, but He has elected to win the world by human instrumentality, and—let it be said with reverence—the interests of God are very greatly bound up with the progress of humanity. There is a sense in which God needs us, and cannot carry out His plans without us.
III. "There they dwelt with the king," willing to stay in his service "all the days of their appointed time." Let us be willing to stay. Heaven will keep. Some day we shall go to dwell with the King in another sense. We shall go from the soot of the pottery and the burning heat of the garden to dwell in "quietness and assurance for ever."
T. Champness, New Coins from Old Gold, p. 193.
References: 1Ch 4:23—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxiv., No. 1400; Ibid., Morning by Morning, p. 155. 4—Parker, vol. viii., p. 331. 1Ch 5:26.—E. H. Plumptre, Expositor, 2nd series, vol. ii., p. 230. 5—Parker, vol. viii., p. 335. 1Ch 6:31.—Ibid., Fountain, May 15th, 1878. 6—Ibid., vol. viii., p. 341. 7-8—Ibid., p. 346. 1Ch 9:22.—Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. x., p. 341. 9—Parker, vol. viii., p. 351. 1Ch 10:9, 1Ch 10:10.—Expositor, 2nd series, vol. vii., p. 309.
The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Alexander MacLaren 1905 · Public Domain On v23 1 Chronicles
1 Chronicles
THE KING’S POTTERS
Read full note →
1Ch 4:23.
In these dry lists of names which abound in Chronicles, we now and then come across points of interest, oases in the desert, which need but to be pondered sympathetically to yield interesting suggestions. Here for example, buried in a dreary genealogical table, is a little touch which repays meditating on. Among the members of the tribe of Judah were a hereditary caste of potters who lived in ‘Netaim and Gederah,’ if we adhere to the Revised Version’s text, or ‘among plantations and hedges’ if we prefer the margin. But they are also described as dwelling ‘with the king.’ That can only mean on the royal estates, for the king himself resided in Jerusalem. He, however, held large domains in the territory of Judah, on some of which these ceramic artists were settled down and followed their calling. They were kept on the royal estates and kept in comfort, not needing to till, but fed and cared for, that they might be free to mould, out of common clay, forms of beauty and ‘vessels meet for the master’s use.’ Surely we may read into the brief statement of the text a meaning of which the writer of it never dreamt, and see in the description of these forgotten artisans, a symbol of our Christian relations to our Lord and of our life’s work.
I. We, too, dwell with the King.
The Davidic king was in Jerusalem, and the potters were ‘among plantations and hedges,’ yet in a real sense they ‘dwelt with the king,’ though some of them might never have seen his face or trod the streets of the sacred city. Perhaps now and then he came to visit them on his outlying domains, but they were always parts of his household. And have we, Christ’s servants, not His gracious parting word: ‘I am with you always’? True, we are not beside Him in the great city, but He is beside us in His outlying domains, and we may be with Him in His glory, if while we still outwardly live among the ‘plantations and hedges’ of this life, we dwell in spirit, by faith and aspiration, with our risen and ascended Lord. If we so ‘dwell with the King,’ He will dwell with us, and fill our humble abode with the radiance of His presence, ‘making that place of His feet glorious.’ That He should be with us is supreme condescension, that we should be with Him is the perfection of exaltation. How low He stoops, how high we can rise! The vigour of our Christian life largely depends on our keeping vivid the consciousness of our communion with Jesus and the sense of His real presence with us. How life’s burdens would be lightened if we faced them all in the strength of the felt nearness of our Lord! How impossible it would be that we should ever feel the dreary sense of solitude, if we felt that unseen, but most real, Presence wrapping us round! It is only when our faith in it has fallen asleep that any earthly good allures, or any earthly evil frightens us. To be sure, in our thrilling consciousness, that we dwell with Jesus is an impenetrable cuirass that blunts the points of all arrows and keeps the breast that wears it unwounded in the fray. The world has no voices which can make themselves heard above that low sovereign whisper: ‘I am with you always, even to the end of the world’-and after the end has come, then we shall be with Him.
But we find in this notice a hint that leads us in yet another direction. They ‘dwelt with the king’ in the sense that they were housed and cared for on his lands. And in like manner, the true conception of the Christian life is that each of us is ‘a sojourner with Thee,’ set down on Christ’s domains, and looked after by Him in regard to provision for outward wants. We have nothing in property, but all is His and held by His gift and to be used for Him. The slave owns nothing. The patch of ground which he cultivates for his food and what grows on it, are his master’ s. These workmen were not slaves, but they were not owners either. And we hold nothing as our own, if we are true to the terms on which it is given us to hold.
So if we rightly appreciate our position as dwelling on the King’s lands, our delusion of possession will vanish, and we shall feel more keenly the pressure of responsibility while we feel less keenly the grip of anxiety. We are for the time being entrusted with a tiny piece of the royal estates. Let us not strut about as if we were owners, nor be for ever afraid that we shall not have enough for our needs. One sometimes comes on a model village close to the gates of some ducal palace, and notes how the lordly owner’s honour prompts its being kept up to a high standard of comfort and beauty. We may be sure that the potters were well lodged and looked after, and that care for their personal wants was shifted from their shoulders to the king’ s. So should ours be. He will not leave His servants to starve. They should not dishonour Him and disturb themselves by worries and cares that would be reasonable only if they had no Provider. He has said, ‘All things are given to Me of My Father,’ and He gives us all that God has given Him.
II. We dwell with the King for His work.
The king’s potters had not to till the land nor do any work but to mould clay into vessels for use and beauty. For that purpose they had their huts and bits of ground assigned them. So with us, Christ has a purpose in His provision for us. We are set down on His domains, and we enjoy His presence and providing in order that, set free from carking cares and low ends, we may, with free and joyous hearts, yield ourselves to His joyful service. The law of our life should be that we please not ourselves, nor consult our own will in choosing our tasks, nor seek our own profit or gratification in doing them, but ever ask of Him: ‘Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do?’ and when the answer comes, as come it will to all who ask with real desire to learn and with real inclination to do His will, that we ‘make haste and delay not, but make haste to keep His commandments.’ The spirit which should animate our active lives is plainly enough taught us in that little word, they ‘dwelt with the king for his work.’
Nor are we to forget that, in a very profound sense, dwelling with the King must go before doing His work. Unless we are living continually under the operation of the stimulus of communion with Jesus, we shall have neither quickness of ear to know what He wishes us to do, nor any resolute concentration of ourselves on our Christ-appointed tasks. The spring of all noble living is communion with noble ideals, and fellowship with Jesus sets men agoing, as nothing else will, in practical lives of obedience to Jesus. Time given to silent, retired meditation on that sweet, sacred bond that knits the believing soul to the redeeming Lord is not lost with reference to active work for Jesus. The meditative and the practical life are not antagonistic, but complementary, Mary and Martha are sisters, though sometimes they differ, and foolish people try to set them against each other.
But we must beware of a common misconception of what the King’s work is. The royal potters did not make only things of beauty, but very common vessels designed for common and ignoble uses. There were vessels of dishonour dried in their kilns as well as vessels ‘meet for the master’s use.’ There is a usual and lamentable narrowing of the term ‘Christian work,’ to certain conventional forms of service, which has done and is doing an immense amount of harm. The King’s work is far wider in scope than teaching in Sunday-schools, or visiting the sick, or any similar acts that are usually labelled with the name. It covers all the common duties of life. A shallow religion tickets some selected items with the name; a robuster, truer conception extends the designation to everything. It is not only when we are definitely trying to bring others into touch with Jesus that we are doing Him service, but we may be equally serving Him in everything. The difference between the king’s work and the poor potters’ own lay not so much in the nature as in the motive of it, and whatever we do for Christ’s sake and with a view to His will is work that He owns, while a regard to self in our motive or in our end decisively strikes any service tainted by it out of the category.
We are to hallow all our deeds by drawing the motive for them from the King and by laying the fruits of them at His feet. Thus, and only thus, will the most ‘secular’ actions be sanctified and the narrowest life be widened to contain a present Christ.
There are subsidiary motives which may legitimately blend with the supreme one. The potters would be stimulated to work hard and with their utmost skill when they thought of how well they were paid in house and store for their work. We have ample reasons for dedicating our whole selves to Jesus when we think of His gift of Himself to us, of His wages beforehand, of His joyful presence with His eye ever on us, marking our purity of motive and our diligence.
There is a final thought that may well stimulate us to put all our skill and effort into our work. The potters’ work went to Jerusalem. It was for the king. What can be too good for him? He will see it, therefore let us put our best into it. And we shall see it too, when we too enter ‘the city of the great King.’ Jars that perhaps were wrought by these very workmen of whom we have been speaking turn up to-day in the excavations in Palestine. So much has perished and they remain, speaking symbols of the solemn truth that nothing human ever dies. Our ‘works do follow us.’ Let us so live that these may be ‘found unto praise and honour and glory’ at the appearing of ‘the King.’
Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. R. Dummelow 1909 · Public Domain On v1 Genealogies (continued)
Genealogies (continued)
This chapter enumerates further descendants of Judah, and the descendants of Simeon.
Read full note →
1. Sons] rather, 'descendants.' Carmi] probably an accidental substitution (from 1Ch_5:3) for Chelubai or Caleb: see 1Ch_2:9, 1Ch_2:18.
2. Reaiah] the Haroeh of 1Ch_2:52, whence the posterity of Shobal is continued.
9. And his mother.. sorrow] better,' though his mother called his name Jabez, saying, Because I bare him with sorrow' (Heb. ozeb). The sorrow implied by his ominous name was averted by his prayer.
17, 18. And she bare] It has been conjectured that the last clause of 1Ch_4:18 (And these are .. Mered took) should be inserted before these words, Bithiah and Jehudijah (or 'the Jewess') being the two wives of Mered. The daughter of Pharaoh] If Pharaoh here means the king of Egypt, Mered must have been a person of distinction. The name Bithiah (lit. 'daughter of Jehovah') suggests that his Egyptian wife at her marriage adopted the religion of her husband.
19. His wife Hodiah] RV 'the wife of Hodiah.'
22. Who had the dominion in Moab] better, 'who married in Moab' (like Mahlon and Chilion, Rth_1:1-4). And Jashubi-lehem] The Vulgate suggests the reading, 'and returned to Beth-lehem.'
23. And those.. hedges] RV 'and the inhabitants of Netaim and Gederah.' Dwelt with the king] i.e. on the royal estate as workmen.
24. The Simeonites are mentioned here because they shared Judah's inheritance (Jos_19:9).
31. Unto the reign of David] The writer seems to be quoting from some account belonging to the time of David, in whose reign a census was taken of the people (2 Samuel 24): cp. 1Ch_7:2.
41. These written byname] probably those enumerated in 1Ch_4:34-37. The habitations] RV 'the Meunim' (who are the Maonites of Jdg_10:12).
43. The rest of the Amalekites] In spite of Saul's destruction of them, as related in 1 Samuel 15, a certain number survived: see 1Sa_27:8; 1Sa_30:1; 2Sa_8:12. Unto this day] The phrase, like the parallel expressions in Kings, refers to the date of the source which the writer is incorporating in his own work.
J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain On vv1, 24 CHAPTER 4:1-23 Additional Genealogies of Judah
CHAPTER 4:1-23 Additional Genealogies of Judah
1. The sons of Judah (1Ch 4:1-8)
Read full note →
2. Jabez more honorable (1Ch 4:9-10)
3. Further descendants of Judah (1Ch 4:11-20)
4. Descendants of Shelah (1Ch 4:21-23)
Hur and Shobal, mentioned in the first verse, were the sons of Caleb the son of Hezron. The families of the Zorathites sprang from Reaiah, the son of Shobal. Jabez is especially mentioned. Jabez means “He causes pain.” “And Jabez called on the God of Israel, saying, Oh that Thou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my coast, and that Thine hand might be with me, and that Thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it may not grieve me! And God granted him that which he requested.” The occasion when this prayer-vow was uttered is not given; probably it was made in connection with the expulsion of the Canaanites from the land and the acquisition of their territory. It was a simple prayer of childlike faith. For blessing, for increase, for companionship and for preservation Jabez cast himself upon the God of Israel, and He granted him his request. Blessing came to Jabez’s soul; his coast was enlarged; the hand of the Lord was with him and kept him from evil. God never disappoints faith.
Then we have mentioned in this chapter the craftsmen; Geharashim (verse 14) means “valley of the craftsmen”; the workers in fine linen (verse 21); and those who were potters (verse 23).
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On vv1, 24 The Posterity of Judah
The Posterity of Judah
v. 1. The sons, the principal descendants, of Judah, in a direct descending line: Pharez, Hezron, and Carmi (or Ohelubai, or Caleb), and Hur, and Shobal. Cf 1Ch 2:3-5; 1Ch 2:18; 1Ch 2:20-50.
Read full note →
v. 2. And Beaiah (or Haroeh), the son of Shobal, to whom the genealogical table had progressed in 1Ch 2:52, begat Jahath; and Jahath begat Ahumai and Lahad. These are the families of the Zorathites, those inhabiting the town of Zorah, 1Ch 2:50-53.
v. 3. And these were of the father of Etam: Jezreel, probably the founder of that mountain city in Judah, and Ishma, and Idbash; and the name of their sister was Hazelel-poni;
v. 4. and Penuel, the father of Gedor, who also founded a town of his name in the tribe of Judah, Jos 15:58, and Ezer, the father of Hushah, founded by him some time after the conquest. These are the sons of Hur, the first-born of Ephratah, the father of Bethlehem.
v. 5. And Ashur, the father, that is, the founder, of Tekoa, 1Ch 2:24, had two wives, Helah and Naarah.
v. 6. And Naarah bare him Ahuzam, and Hepher, from whom the district Hepher in the southern part of Judah probably received its name, 1Ki 4:10, and Temeni, and Haahashtari. These were the sons. of Naarah.
v. 7. And the sons of Helah, named here in the second place, although first above, were Zereth, and Jezoar, and Ethnan.
v. 8. And Coz begat Anub, and Zobebah, and the families of Aharhel, the son of Harum, the reason for this reference to the Levitical family at this point being unknown, 1Ch 24:10.
v. 9. And Jabez, whose city is mentioned 1Ch 2:55, was more honorable than His brethren, distinguished for his sincere and fervent piety as well as for his learning; and his mother called his name Jabez ("son of sorrow"), saying, Because I bare him with sorrow.
v. 10. And Jabez, uttering his prayer in the form of a vow as he was entering upon some important service, called on the God of Israel, saying, Oh, that thou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my coast, extending his boundaries, and that Thine hand might be with me, and that Thou wouldest keep me from evil, literally, "put me from evil," that it may not grieve me, literally, "that I may have no more sorrow! The rhetorical form of the sentence is a vow promising allegiance to the true God. And God granted him that which he requested, answering his prayer and prospering his endeavor, as He does in the case of all prayers made according to His will.
v. 11. And Chelub, the brother of Shuah, thereby distinguished from the more illustrious Caleb, begat Mehir, which was the father of Eshton.
v. 12. And Eshton begat Beth-rapha, and Paseah, and Tehinnah, the father of Irnahash, or the city of Nahash, from which Abigail, the stepsister of David, hailed, 2Sa 17:25. These are the men of Rechah.
v. 13. And the sons of Kenaz, the grandfather of Caleb, whose name was preserved in the family name Kenezite: Othniel, Jos 15:17, and Seraiah; and the sons of Othniel: Hathath.
v. 14. And Meonothai begat Ophrah; and Seraiah begat Joab, the father of the valley of Charashim; for they were craftsmen, carpenters living in a well-known community, as men of the same occupation occupy certain quarters of the Oriental cities to this day.
v. 15. And the sons of Caleb, the son of Jephunneh, such as were not mentioned in the other lists: Iru, Elah, and Naam; and the sons of Elah, even Kenaz, who was given the name of his illustrious ancestor.
v. 16. And the sons of Jehaleleel, a man otherwise not mentioned: Ziph, and Ziphah, Tiria, and Asareel.
v. 17. And the sons of Ezra, who probably lived in Egypt or at the time of the exodus, were Jether, and Mered, and Epher, and Jalon; and she bare Miriam, and Shammai, and Ishbah, the father of Eshtemoa, a town of some note south of Hebron.
v. 18. And his wife Jehudijah, she being the Jewish wife of Mered, bare Jered, the father of Gedor, and Heber, the father of Socho, a city in the lowlands southwest of Jerusalem, and Jekuthiel, the father of Zanoah, another town in Judah, probably near Zorah. And these are the sons of Bithiah, the daughter of Pharaoh, which Mered took, namely, the Miriam, or Merom, Sharomai, and Ishbah mentioned above. So this was a case in which a descendant of Caleb married an Egyptian princess who had become a convert to the Jewish religion.
v. 19. And the sons of his wife Hodiah, or of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Naham, the father of Keilah the Garmite, and Eshtemoa the Maachathite.
v. 20. And the sons of Shimon were Amnon, and Rinnah, Benhanan, and Tilon. And the sons of Ishi were Zoheth and Ben-zoheth. These men are otherwise unknown.
v. 21. The sons of Shelah, the son of Judah, were Er, the father of Lecah, and Laadah, the father of Mareshah, these two towns being located in the extreme southern part of Judah, and the families of the house of them that wrought fine linen, the manufacture of fine linen goods being a hereditary art in this family, from the time of the Egyptian sojourn, of the house of Ashbea,
v. 22. and Jokim, and the men of Chozeba, and Joash, and Saraph, who had the dominion in Moab, having conquered the country, at least in part, at a very early date, and Jashubi-lehem. And these are ancient things, very ancient accounts brought to the notice of the readers in this connection.
v. 23. These were the potters, the reference being to all the children and descendants of Shelah, and those that dwell among plants and hedges, probably the gardeners of the royal gardens near Jerusalem and Bethlehem; there they dwelt with the king for his work, another indication that certain trades remained in the same family from one generation to the next. It seems that the old adage of being a master of one trade and not a jack of many has good Scriptural foundation.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv1, 3, 5, 9, 11, 13, 17, 19, 21, 24, 27, 29, 32, 34, 39, 42 General Information:
General Information:
All of the names in this list except the Zorathites are the names of men. Zorathites is the name of a people group who took their name from the town of Zorah where they lived. (See: How to Translate Names)
Read full note →
translationWords
Judah
descend
clan
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv1, 9, 13, 18, 21, 24, 34, 39, 41 4:1-7 The genealogy of Judah continues, with links back…
4:1-7 The genealogy of Judah continues, with links back to 2:1-55. The connection to Hur, the ancestor of Bethlehem, is provided immediately (4:1-4; see 2:19-20, 51-55).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.