The early decadence of this tribe is implied also in the priestly narrative of the Hexateuch, for while at the nrst census (Nu 1^) Simeon counted 59,300, at tlie second (26") it had fallen to 22,200. Knowing the methods and the motives of the Chronicler, we can of course attach no import- ance to his introducing the tribe of Simeon as numerous in the time of David (1 Ch 12"), especi- ally when we observe tliat el-sewhere even he is compelled to acknowledge its feebleness (1 Ch 4").
The question has been needlessly raised. To which of the two divisions did the tribe of Simeon attach itself at the disruption of the kingdom ? The truth is that long before that event this tribe had ceased to have any independent existence, having been practically absorbed by Judah. The Chron- icler, indeed, perhaps in order to make up the number ten, appears to reckon Simeon as belong- ing to the N. kingdom (2 Ch 15" 34" ; cf. Ezk 4gM. ». a^ j^gy 77J There is probably more founda- tion for the tradition which he has preserved of conquests made by Simeonites in the time of Hezekiah (1 Ch 4»-*S).
The list of the sons of Simeon is given in Gn 46" and Ex 6". A different list appears in 1 Ch 4"'-, which is practically identical with another in Nil 26"'". Simeon's towns are named in .Jos 19^"* and (with the exception of some deviations due prob- ably to copyists' errors) in 1 Ch 4^'-. All these towns are in Jos 15^""- " reckoned to Judah, and to the same tribe are elsewhere reckoned such of them as Ziklag (1 S 27"), Hormah (1 S 30"), and lieersheba (1 K W). This is in perfect harmony with the conclusion already reached, that Simeon was absorbed by Judah ; and this same conclusion
SIMILITUDE
SIMON
519
U strengtiiened by the circumstance that after the return from the Exile there is no mention of Sinieonites, but only of Juilahites as dwelling in any of the above cities (Neh 11-*'-).
In addition to what id contained in the OT, the Pal.-Jewisb literature supplies a multitude of details re^^^rding the tribe of Simeon and it3 eponyn»ou» head (cf. especially Tfnt. of Twttve Patr. and Bk. of JuhilefM). These stories are too manifestly apocryphal to merit serious consideration ; and the basis is not more substantial u|x>n which Dozy {lif l&rtwtu-ten te Mekka) builds his theory that the sanctuary at Mecca was founded by tiinieonites in the time of David. In his important monograph. <Ur Slatitm Sijruon (Meissen, ISCtJ). Graf not only rejects this opinion as wholly devoid of historical support, but subjects to a searching examination the attempt of Movers and Hitzig to discover other OT allusions besides those of the Clironicler to Simeonite conquests and settlements outside Palestine. The words of Mic l^^ *The glorj' of Israel shall come even unto Adullam' have been, stran^'ely enough, connected with the histor>* in 1 Ch 4**-*^. The exegesis by which this result is reached is exceedingly strained, and the iuter]>retation also Involves, what was not the case, that Simeon belonged to the N. kingdom. PIqually unsuccessful is the attempt to prove that it is the Sinieonites of .Mt. Seir who put the question in la 21" ('Watchman, what of the night?'). The title of the oracle, ' Burden of Dumah,' has been sought to be connected with the Dl'mao of Gn 2ji*, mentioned as a family of the Ishmaclites side by side with Mibsam and Mishma, which last are in 1 Ch 425 the names of Sirnt-omte families. The latter circumstance may leijitimately be ur^ed in favour of the proba- bility of large admixtures of Ishniaclite as well as Can. elements in the tribe of Simeon. But none of the localities known to us by the name Dumah will suit the topographical necessities of Ij 21"^, and it is far more probable that non is a textual error for onx (Cheyne in SBOT ; Marti, Jei. ad loe.), or that Dumah (' silence ') is in this instance a symbolical designation of Edoin (Del., Dillm., and many others).
Side by side with Dumah we I5nd in Gn 25t4 Massa, to which Httzig finds a reference in Pr 30' yp. By an emendation of the text he makes the former read, ' Words of Agur, the son of the queen of Massa,' while the latter is rendered ' Words of (to) Lenniel, king of Massa, which his mother taught him.' Hitzig endeavours lo connect Massa with the Simeonite settlement in Ml Seir; but the very most that the e^'idence entitles us to infer is that there may have been an Ishwafdle kingdom of Massa, and that its queen, like the nueen of Sheba, may have had a traditional reputation for wisriom. That this kingdom, however, had any connexion with the Simeonitcs of 1 Cb 442 is not proved, and is on many grounds unlikely.
LrrERATL'RB. — Especially Grafs monograph, d<rr5famTn.9im«m; cf. also his (Juch. BB. d. AT, 221 ; Kuenen, Gemm. Abfiamll. 255 ff. ; Wellh. Compot. d. i/fi.» 312 ff., S.Mf., IJGiSit. ; Stadc, GVI i. 164 ; Ewald, BM. ii. 287 f. ; Oraetz, Gesclt. d. Juden, ir. i. 486 f. ; Kittel, HiH. of Hi-brrwt, ii. 69; the Commentaries of Del., Dillm., Gunkel, and IPilzinger on Genegis, and of Dillm., Driver, Steuernagcl, and Dercholet on Deut. ; see also .Moore, Jmiget, 12, 36, 240 L J. A. SeLBIE.