Annotations Upon the Historical Books Part 2, 1 Chronicles · Chapter 4
CHAP. IIII.
Verſ. 1. THe ſonnes of Judah; Pharez, Hezron, &c.] That is, the poſterity of Judah: for onelyonly Pharez was Judahs ſonne immediately, and Hezron was the ſonne of Pharez, and Carmi called alſo Chelubai and Caleb was the ſonne of Hezron, chap. 2.9, 18. and Hur was the ſonne of Carmi or Caleb, chap. 2.19. and Shobal was the ſonne of Caleb, the ſonne of Hur, chap. 2.50. and Reaiah, or Haroe, chap. 2.52. was the ſonne of Shobal; and becauſe this Shobals poſterity were here to be more fully expreſſed, verſ. 2. therefore in the firſt verſe it is ſhewen briefly, how he was lineally deſcended from Judah; from hence unto the tenth chapter the families of all the ſeverall tribes are expreſſed beſides Zebulon and Dan; and Dan ſome ſay is omitted, becauſe there was but one family of that tribe, to wit, the family of Huſhim, Gen. 46.23. But why the genealogies of theſe two tribes are omitted, I conceive we cannot certainly ſay; yet ſee what is noted afterwards, chap. 7.6.
Verſ. 3. And theſe were of the father of Etam, &c.] It is not expreſſed who was this father of Etam, that is, this father of the inhabitants of Etam; onelyonly by the laſt words of the fourth verſe it is clear, that both he and his ſonnes were of the poſterity of Hur, and perhaps by Shobal the ſonne of Caleb, the ſonne of Hur, as thoſe were, mentioned in the former verſes; for in the latter end of the fourth verſe, with reference to that which went before, it is ſaid, Theſe are the ſonnes of Hur the firſt-born of Ephratah, that is, the firſt born of Caleb by his wife Ephratah, chap. 2.19. the father of Beth-lehem for he was the grandfather of Salmah, who was the father of the inhabitants of Beth-lehem, chap. 2.50, 51.
Verſ. 5. And Aſhur the father of Tekoa, had two wives, &c.] This Aſhur was the poſthumus ſonne of Hezron, born of his wife Abiah after Hezron was dead, chap. 2.24.
Verſ. 8. And Coz begat Anub, and Zobebah, and the families of Aharhel, &c.] It is not expreſſed here who was the father of this Coz; but by the joyning of theſe words to thoſe that went before, it may ſeem that he was the ſonne of Helah or Ethnan, the laſt mentioned in the former verſe, and ſo of the poſterity of Aſhur.
Verſ. 9. And Jabez was more honourable then his brethren, &c.] Jabez is here mentioned as the father of one of the forenamed families of Aharhel.
Verſ. 11. And Chelub the brother of Shuah, begat Mehir, &c.] This Chelub is, (as I conceive) added as another head of the families of Aharhel, mentioned verſ. 8.
Verſ. 12. Theſe are the men of Recah.] That is, theſe ſonnes of Chelub were the inhabitants of Rechah.
Verſ. 13. And the ſonnes of Kenaz; Othniel, &c.] It is not expreſſed whoſe ſonne Kenaz was, but probably it may be thought by the adding of this to that which went before, that he was the ſonne of Chelub, verſ. 11.
Verſ. 14. And Meonothai begat Ophrah.] Who was alſo (as it ſeems) the ſonne of Othniel, as was alſo Hathath, mentioned in the former verſe.
And Seraiah begat Joab, the father of the valley of Charaſhim, &c.] Or craftsmen; which ſtood in the confines of Judah and Benjamin. See Neh. 11.31 35.
Verſ. 15. And the ſonnes of Caleb the ſonne of Jephunneh, &c.] Who was the ſonne of Kenaz, or at leaſt of his poſterity, and therefore called the Kenezite, Numb. 32.12.
Verſ. 16. And the ſonnes of Jehaleleel; Ziph, and Zipha, Tyria, and Aſareel.] And Jehaleleel was alſo it ſeems the ſonne of Kenaz, mentioned the laſt in the foregoing verſe.
Verſ. 17. And the ſonnes of Ezra were, Jether, &c.] The ſonne (as it ſeems) of Aſareel.
And ſhe bare Miriam, &c.] To wit, the wife of Ezra.
Verſ. 18. And his wife Jehudijah bare Jered, &c.] This was a ſecond wife of Ezra.
And theſe are the ſonnes of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh, which Mered took, &c.] The ſonnes of Ezra being named, here we have next expreſſed the ſonnes of Mered, who was one of Ezra's ſonnes, verſ. 17. He had it ſeems alſo two wives, the firſt Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh, as here it is expreſſed; the ſecond Hodiah the ſiſter of Maham, verſ. 19. and by theſe Mered had the father of Keilah the Garmite, and Eſhtemoa the Maachathite, verſ. 19. This I conceive is the plaineſt expoſition of this intricate place.
Verſ. 20. And the ſonnes of Shimon were, Amnon, and Rinnah, Ben-hanan, and Tilon.] It is not expreſſed whoſe ſonne this Shimon was, onelyonly it is generally thought that he is reckoned as one of Chelubs poſterity, mentioned verſ. 11.
And the ſonnes of Iſhi were, Zoheth, and Ben-zoeth.] This Iſhi was happely the ſonne of Filan before mentioned.
Verſ. 22. Who had the dominion in Moab, &c.] It ſeems that in the times when the Moabites were tributaries to the kings of Judah, theſe ſonnes of Shelah before mentioned, were by their appointment governours in Moab.
Verſ. 23. Theſe were the potters and thoſe that dwelt amongst plants and hedges: there they dwelt with the king for his work.] That is, of theſe ſonnes of Shelah came alſo thoſe that were potters, and thoſe that dwelt amongſt plants and hedges; that is, thoſe that were gardiners and husbandmen to the kings of Judah.
Verſ. 24. The ſonnes of Simeon were, Nemuel, &c.] Becauſe the tribe of Simeon had their inheritance aſſigned them within the inheritance of the children of Judah, Joſh. 19.1. therefore is their genealogy here joyned with Judahs. Here are but five ſonnes of Simeon mentioned, whereas Gen. 46.10. there are ſix mentioned, which may be, becauſe happely one of them never came to be reckoned, as the head of a family; yea happely died without iſſue: nor need we be troubled that their names are not the ſame, ſince the Iſraelites had uſually two or three ſeverall names.
Verſ. 31. Theſe were their cities, unto the reigne of David.] Either this is added, becauſe there was in the cities of Simeon ſome alteration in Davids time, to wit, becauſe one of theſe cities, namely Ziklag, having been in the poſſeſſion of the Philiſtines, was by Achiſh given to David, and thenceforth being a part of the crown land of the kings of Judah, it was ordinarily reckoned one of Judahs cities; or elſe onelyonly to expreſſe, that even unto Davids time (not excluding the times following) they were eſteemed the inheritance of Simeon, as here is ſaid. Yet ſome underſtand this clauſe thus; Theſe were their cities, unto the reigne of David, that is, ſo long as the kingdome of Judah remained in Davids poſterity, to wit, untill the captivity of Babylon.
Verſ. 32. And their villages were, &c.] That is, their towns or cities unwalled.
Verſ. 34. And Meſhobab, and Jamlech, &c.] Theſe are mentioned becauſe they were in their time great men, and becauſe of that particular exploit they did, verſ. 39, 40, &c. though it be not expreſſed from which of his ſonnes they deſcended.
Verſ. 41. And theſe written by name, came in the dayes of Hezekiah king of Judah, and ſmote their tents, &c.] To wit, the tents of the children of Ham; that is, the Canaanites that dwelt there before, verſ. 40. and ſo the poſterity of Simeon dwelt in their room. This muſt needs be done in the beginning of Hezekiahs reigne, for in the ſixth yeare of his reigne, the ten tribes were carried away captive, 2. Kings 18.10, 11. And at the end of three years they took it: even in the ſixth yeare of Hezekiah (that is the ninth yeare of Hoſhea king of Iſrael) Samaria was taken. And the king of Aſſyria did carry away Iſrael unto Aſſyria. So that it ſeems they did not long enjoy theſe their new conqueſts, unleſſe happely this new colony of the tribe of Simeon, were part of that ſmall remnant of the ten tribes that were not carried away (and that happely becauſe they dwelt farre up in the kingdome of Judah) but remained in the land even in the dayes of Joſiah, Hezekiahs grandchild; whence is that. 2. Chron. 24 9. And when they came to Hilkiah the high Prieſt, they delivered the money that was brought into the houſe of God, which the Levites that kept the doore had gathered of the hand of Manaſſeh, and Ephraim, and of all the remnant of Iſrael, and of all Judah and Benjamin, and they returned to Jeruſalem.