The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Chronicles — Section 55

three of tho patriarch Judo.h's sons are et Tircendens, qui principes fuerunt in JloCtb introduced in the genealogy, o.s Er, Onan, et qui re'l!ersi sunt in Lahem ; hree autem and Shelah; where of Er it is said," He was 'l!Mba lletera. Thus Jokim is turned into evil in the eight of the Lord; and he slew Elimelech, a.nd the men of Chozeba into him;" e.nd where nothing is added of l'llahlon and Chilion of Lhe Book of Ruth, Onan or Shelah. It would cippee.r now that and J11&hubi-lehem into Naomi and Ruth; Shelah gave the nume of the slain brother and the last clause of the verse is equiva- to hie son. R•·specting this Er of Lecah- lent to citing the Dook of Ruth. Ihrrmg- with little doubt the name of a place-and ton (' Genealogies,' i. 179) regarus Jokim as Laada.h, nothing else can be adduced; but Shelah's third son in this enumeration ; and Mareshah ( eh. ii. 42) is the name of a place others regard Jashubi-leliem as his fourth in the Shefelah, given in the same passage son. The preposition ~ prefix:eu to :rnio, with Kailah and Nezib (Josh. xv. 44; see and following the verb, is to be noted. also 2 Chron. xi. 8; xiv. 9). The fine linen Ver. 23 brings us to the last of J Ltdah, and (fl:l) here spoken of is, according to Gese- leaves us to part with the account of the nius, equivalent in this passage nnd ia the tribe in the same obscuritv which has later Hebrew, to the bys~us of the Egyp- lately involved it. The plants and hedgas tians (Exod. xxvi. 31 : 2 Chron. iii. 14), the are probably 11n instance of inopp0rtune 'li.!i from which the Syrian byssus (Ezek. translation of proper names, wh icb should x~;ii. 16), to which y1:i does more strictly rather appear as Nelai,n and Gedara, the apply, is distioguishetl in some other places. former place or people not found elsewhere, lt wo.s of fine texture, costly, and used as but the latter possibly referred to. Josh. xv. 36. the clothing of kings (eh. xv. 27), of priests Agaiu, who they were that were the potters, is (2 Chron. v. 12), and of the very wealthy not clear-whether all of the preceding verse, (Esth. i. 6; viii. 15). Gesenius says that, or the last mentioned. From the lllst clause after Jong research and dispute, micro- it may be probo.bly safely cone! ude<l, tl,o.t scopic investigations in London have con- those designo.ted, whoever they were, were cluued that the threads of the cloth of employed habitually in the service, not byssus are linen, not cotton. Ashbea (]! ;;/\'~) indeed of one king necessarily, but of the fa not yet recognized elsewhere. Jokim. succession of royalty. Passages that mRy Gesenius considers this name (c•p_i•) as a. be taken to throw interesting light upon contracted form of c•~~• (Joi11kim) of Neh. xxvi. this subject are eh. xxvii. 25-31 ; 2 Cl.tron. 10; xxvii. 4; xx:xii. 27-29. xii. 10. Chozeba. The meaning of this Vera. 24--27.-The second of the twelve name is "lying;" not found elsewhere, tribes is now taken, and occupies but smo.11. it is probably the same as the :i•p, a. town space as compared with Judah preceding, in the tribe of Judah (Gen. x.xxviii. 5). or Levi and Benjamin when their turn and that is probably the same as the :i•p~, comes. The comparison of the enumem- of the "valley" list of Judah cities (Josh. tion of the sons of Simeon here with thot xv. 44) and of Micah i. 14, where it is in Gen. xlvi. 10, Exod. vi. 15, is helpful in mentioned in near connection with the detaching the idea that the compiler of llfareshah, which also accompanies it in Chronicles copied direct from Genesis o.nd the above "valley " list. J oash. This name Exouus, or that ho depended exclusively appoore in three forms : 'litSi', ad in the on identical sources of information. That text and 2 Kings xii. 20; 'li~in;, as in comparison shows six names in both of those passages for only five here, and it 2 Kings xii. 1 ; and 'lipi•, 11s in eh. vii. 8. shows also difference in throe of the no.rues, Saraph. This is the word the plural or viz. Jemuel, Zohar, and Jachin, for Nemuel, which gives us our eeraphim (Isa. vi. 2), and Zera, o.nd Jarib. On the other h1md, the is from o root of so mew hat uncertain me'\ning. list of Numb. xxvi. 12 is iu exact agreu- 'fhe different eiguificatious to which the ment with our list here (the omission of root seems to lend itself in the substo.nti ve, Ohad in both being eufficioutly accounted according as it is used in the singular or for by one and the same reason), with tho plur11l,arn startling (see Gesenius,' Lexicon,' exception of J arib here for J achi11 still thcro; sub 1;oce). The apparent moaning of this and this solitary ditferenco m,iy justly bo verse is that there was II tiwo of old, when suspected to be nothing but cin e,irly cor- the above, of whom we co.n ascertain nothing ruption of resh for caph and bet!, for nun elsewhere, ruled over Moab. Jerome, in the (sco Keunicott, • Diss.,' i. 178; Darringtou's Vulgate, ha.a mnde o. stmnge rendczing of • Genenlogies,' i. 55). Ver. 25 con ta ins thrco this verse by translating somo of the proper descents from 0110 of these-Shani. Of 110.rncs, o.ud reading nt lenst one of them, Sh'l.llum, tho first, it mc,.y Lo nott-d th:.t 1 hP first, ns though it were 11 form iu tho there are fourt~cn others of the "'11110 uanrn Ild,rew (c•p:), which it is not: Et qui in tho Old 'festamunt; 1\11<1 of Mibsam •lure fecit solem, virig_ue ll[endacii et Securus and Mishma (whom some call brothers,  4G THE FinST BOOK 01<' THE CIIRONICLES. Lrn. 1v. l-'13,