The list of names given in this genealogy has a suspicious look. They appear Tike a repetition of tlie same elements. Not only is Shuthelah repeated (4), but there ia ft sUiking ■unilarity between the other names.
pvV of Eran.
pv"? Laadan. rt^iJ^H Eleadah.
"iy'?K Elead. nSn^i? Shuthelah.
nSni and Telah.
wnn Taliath.
|nn Tahan.
132 Becher.
TI31 and Bered-
lai Zabad.
Toh&n (1») <4) and Tahath (3) are without doubt the Tohu
(1 S 11) and the Tahath, Nahath, and Toah (III. 22*^). Sheerah was the reputed builder of Bethhoron, whose name appears in Uizen -sheerah (wh. see) (v."'"). Elishama e, Amniihud (4) appears as the prince of the tribe of Ephraim in Nu l*o, whence it IB easy to see how the pedigree of Joshua was constructed-
VIII. 1. Benjamin: a. Bela (2), Becher (4), Ashbel, Gera Naaman, Ehi, Kosh, Muppiui, Hup- pim, Ard, Gn4U-^
6. Bela (2), Ashbel, Ahiram, Shephupham, Hu- phara, Nu 26^'-.
c. Bela (2), Becher (4), Jediael (5), 1 Ch 7^
d. Bela (2), Ashbel, Aiiarah, jsohah, Kapha, 1 Ch 8^
We have thus four different lists of ss. Benjamin. Bela is
common to all ; Ehi, Rosh, Muppim, and Huppim(li>) are clearly equivalent to Ahiram, Shephupham, and Hupham (l**); cf. the Heb. text, C'2n D'SD C'NT 'HX, with czn c-:^3-c' CTHN. Hence Bosh (1") should be struck out and Ahiram substituted for Ehi (1"X and also probably for Aharah (nnqjt) (l^). On 4021 lXX
reads Benjamin, Bclo, Becher. Ashbel ; Bela, Oerfc, Naaman, Ehi, Rosh, .Muppim. and Hnppim. This corresponds with <^2*i (3) (see below), where Gera, Naaman, and Ard are ss., Bela and Shuppim and Hnppim grandMHis. Hence the ori^'inal teit of Gn 40-1 may have raid Benjamin, Bela, Becher, A.slihel ; Bela, Cera, Naaman, Ahiram, Shephupham, Hurviui, ArdiUoll.tn tooo, SHOT).
In (!<=) Jediael (Vxyn^) appears as the equivalent of Ashbel (?3f *< = ^yO'P'N) either by corniption or substitution. Whether a textuolcorruption or an independent tradition underlies Nohah and Rapha (I'l) it is impossible to determine. The names as Benjamiuites occur only here.
2. Bela (1»^) : a. Ard, Naaman, Nu 26«
b, Ezbon, Uzzi, Uzziel, Jerimoth, Iri (3), 1 Ch
c. Addar, Gera, Abihud, Abishua, Naaman, Ahoah, Gera, Shcphuham, Huram, 1 Ch 8"*
The list (2*') appears to be entirely independent of the others. Tlie list (2*;) corresponds closely with the restored text of On 4621 (see above), since Addar (•l^N)=Ard (*]"|N); Gera and Abihud probably were originally one and the same person, i.e. Gera f. Kliud (cf. Jg 3'*); the secotid Gera is plainly a dittography; Huram (cjin) probably = Iluppim (D'S") : and hence the only additional names are Abishua and Ahoah (ninE*) ; and the latter may be a variation or corruption of Aliiram (d^T**) or Ahnrah (n^rN), repeated in transcription from the previous generation (W).
3. Iri ('2'') : Shuppim, Huppim, 1 Ch 7**.
In the text the name is Ir (v.i2). shuppim and Iluppim seem identical with Shephupham and Hupham, given elsewhere via es. Benjamin (l*") and ss. Bela (2«). Nothing further than their appearance in the genealogical lists is known of these indi- viduals or families. In the text v.^^ appears Uke an appendix (see also (G) below).
4. Becher (1"): Zemirah, Joash, Eliezer, Eli- oenai, Oinri, Jeremoth, Abijah, Anathoth, AJe- meth, 1 Ch 7».
The names of these sa. Becher (4), Joash, Eliezer, Rlioenai, Omri, Jeremoth, and Abijah occur frequently in the OT ; Jere- moth again as a Benjaminite in 1 Ch V tt^^. Anathoth and Alemeth are names of Benjaminite towns (see arts.). Zemimb occurs only in this connexion.
5. Jediael (l*"): BilhaUy Jeush, Benjamin, Eliud, Chenaanah, Zethan, Tarshish, Ahishahar, 1 Ch 7^".
This list (5) is striking in having Benjamin as a subordinate family or personal name, and likewise, in tliis connexi><n, Ehud, elsewhere s. Gera (cf. Jg S'''). Bilhan and Jeush are also Edom- ite names (Gn 30'* !*■ l^- ^), and J'^ush. moreover, that of a Levite or Levitical family (1 Ch 231'J'"), and of a son of Reho- boam (2 Ch 11'^), and again of a Benjaminite (1 Ch &'-^). (For refs. on Jeush as an Arab, name of a deity, see Gesenius- Buhl). Chenaanah (Hji; J^) suggests the incorporation of a Can. family with the Benjamiuites (Be.). In 1 K 22^4 it is the name of the f. Zedekiah the false prophet. Zethan and Ahishahar are found only here. The latter, however, perhaps appears in the cuneiform inscriptions as tlie name of a king of Minnai (see Gesen.-Buhl). Tarshish, besides being the name of the well- known city, stands elsewhere for a precious stone, derived from Tarshish (Ex 2*-0 301^ el al,, RV 'beryl'), and is the name of a Persian prince (Est !'•*).
These Btlaites, Becherites, and Jediaelites (2*") (4) (5) are all called heads of fathers' houses and mighty men of valour, but there is no indication of the period of Israel's pre-ex. history to which they were intended to be assigned (ICh T^-H).
6. Aher: Hushim, 1 Ch 7^=^^
This genealogical fragment is enigmatical. Hushim {C^n) (a Gn 4623 ia a s. Dan. There Dan also stands between Benjamin and Naphtali. The Chronicler has given no genealogy oi Dan unless it is found here, between the genealogy of Benjamin, vv.fr-u, and that of Naphtali, v. is. Hence Dan has been found hidden in AherCinN, 'another'), which occurs nowhere else as a proper name. "The tribe of Dan was believed thus to have been indicated, owing to its opprobrium on account of its idolatry (Jg 18). Its name does not appear with the other tribes "in 1 Ch Q^-^K Cf. also its omission in Rev 7^< (The name Dan, hoivever, does appear in 1 Ch 2^ 12^5 27^, and the genealogy of Zebulun is missing in 1 Ch as well as that of Dan)w If the above hntothesis is accepted, the remainder of v.i2 may be a gloss, Shuppim and Huppim suggested by their similarity to Ilushini as the ss. of Benjamin intended (Dan not bein^; recog- nized in Aher, and these ss. being missed in the preceding w.). Ir (Ti"). then, from the influence of vJ, may have been later developed out of Ard (T^NX which follows Muppim and Huppim in Gn 4621 (gee 1») (Be.)! '