I chronicles 8 commentaryA

I CHRONICLES 8 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
The Genealogy of Saul the Benjamite
1 Benjamin was the father of Bela his firstborn,
Ashbel the second son, Aharah the third,
BARNES, "The reason of this return to the genealogy of the Benjamites seems to be
the desire to connect the genealogical introduction with the historical body of the work.
As the history is to begin with Saul, the genealogical portion is made to end with an
account of the family of this Benjamite monarch.
CLARKE, "Now Benjamin begat, etc. - See what has been said on the preceding
chapter, 1Ch_7:6 (note).
GILL, "Now Benjamin begat Bela his firstborn,.... See 1Ch_7:6. The genealogy of
the tribe of Benjamin is reviewed, because it joined and kept close with Judah in the
worship of God, went into captivity, and returned out of it with it; and this review is
made chiefly for the sake of Saul, and his posterity, the first king of Israel, who was of it,
and in whose posterity this genealogy ends:
Ashbel the second; supposed to be the same with Jediael, 1Ch_7:6, see Gen_46:21.
and Aharah the third; the same with Aher, 1Ch_7:13, and with Ahiram, Num_26:38.
HENRY 8-32, "There is little or nothing of history in all these verses; we have not
therefore much to observe. 1. As to the difficulties that occur in this and the foregoing
genealogies we need not perplex ourselves. I presume Ezra took them as he found them
1

in the books of the kings of Israel and Judah (Ezr_9:1), according as they were given in
by the several tribes, each observing what method they thought fit. Hence some ascend,
others desecnd; some have numbers affixed, others places; some have historical
remarks intermixed, others have not; some are shorter, others longer; some agree with
other records, others differ; some, it is likely, were torn, erased, and blotted, others more
legible. Those of Dan and Reuben were entirely lost. This holy man wrote as he was
moved by the Holy Ghost; but there was no necessity for the making up of the defects,
no, nor for the rectifying of the mistakes, of these genealogies by inspiration. It was
sufficient that he copied them out as they came into his hand, or so much of them as was
requisite to the present purpose, which was the directing of the returned captives to
settle as nearly as they could with those of their own family, and in the places of their
former residence. We may suppose that many things in these genealogies which to us
seem intricate, abrupt, and perplexed, were plain and easy to them then (who knew how
to fill up the deficiencies) and abundantly answered the intention of the publishing of
them. 2. Many great and mighty nations there were now in being upon earth, and many
illustrious men in them, whose names are buried in perpetual oblivion, while the names
of multitudes of the Israel of God are here carefully preserved in everlasting
remembrance. They are Jasher, Jeshurun - just ones, and the memory of the just is
blessed. Many of these we have reason to fear, came short of everlasting honour (for
even the wicked kings of Judah come into the genealogy), yet the perpetuating of their
names here was a figure of the writing of the names of all God's spiritual Israel in the
Lamb's book of life. 3. This tribe of Benjamin was once brought to a very low ebb, in the
time of the judges, upon the occasion of the iniquity of Gibeah, when only 600 men
escaped the sword of justice; and yet, in these genealogies, it makes as good a figure as
almost any of the tribes: for it is the honour of God to help the weakest and raise up
those that are most diminished and abased. 4. Here is mention of one Ehud (1Ch_8:6),
in the preceding verse of one Gera (1Ch_8:5) and (1Ch_8:8) of one that descended from
him, that begat children in the country of Moab, which inclines me to think it was that
Ehud who was the second of the judges of Israel; for he is said to be the son of Gera and
a Benjamite (Jdg_3:15), and he delivered Israel from the oppression of the Moabites by
killing the king of Moab, which might give him a greater sway in the country of Moab
than we find evidence of in his history and might occasion some of his posterity to settle
there. 5. Here is mention of some of the Benjamites that drove away the inhabitants of
Gath (1Ch_8:13), perhaps those that had slain the Ephraimites (1Ch_7:21) or their
posterity, by way of reprisal: and one of those that did this piece of justice was named
Beriah too, that name in which the memorial of that injury was preserved. 6. Particular
notice is taken of those that dwelt in Jerusalem (1Ch_8:28 and again 1Ch_8:32), that
those whose ancestors had had their residence there might thereby be induced, at their
return from captivity, to settle there too, which, for aught that appears, few were willing
to do, because it was the post of danger: and therefore we find (Neh_11:2) the people
blessed those that willingly offered themselves to dwell at Jerusalem, the greater part
being inclined to prefer the cities of Judah. Those whose godly parents had their
conversation in the new Jerusalem should thereby be engaged to set their faces
thitherward and pursue the way thither, whatever it cost them.
JAMISON, "1Ch_8:1-32. Sons and chief men of Benjamin.
Now Benjamin begat, etc. — This chapter contains some supplementary
2

particulars in addition to what has been already said regarding the tribe of Benjamin
(see on 1Ch_7:6). The names of many of the persons mentioned are different from those
given by Moses - a diversity which may be accounted for in part on grounds formerly
stated, namely, either that the persons had more than one name, or that the word “sons”
is used in a loose sense for grandsons or descendants. But there are other circumstances
to be taken into account in considering the details of this chapter; namely, first, that the
genealogies of the Benjamites were disordered or destroyed by the almost total
extermination of this tribe (Jdg_20:11-48); secondly, that a great number of Benjamites,
born in Assyria, are mentioned here, who returned from the long captivity in Babylon,
and established themselves - some in Jerusalem, others in different parts of Judea.
There were more returned from Babylon of the families belonging to this tribe than to
any other except Judah; and hence many strange names are here introduced; some of
which will be found in the list of the restored exiles (compare Ezr_2:1-70).
K&D, "The families of Benjamin enumerated in this chapter were probably separated
from those in 1Ch_7:6-11, merely on the ground that all the registers which are grouped
together in 1 Chron 7 were taken from another genealogical document than that from
which the registers in our chapter, which form a supplement to the short fragments in
1Ch_7:6-11, have been derived.
1Ch_8:1-2
The sons of Benjamin and Bela. - The manner in which the five sons begotten by
Benjamin are enumerated is remarkable, “Bela his first-born, Ashbel the second,” etc.,
since, according to Gen_46:21, after the first-born Bela, Becher follows as the second
son, and Ashbel is the third; while Aharah, Nohah, and Rapha are not met with there,
quite other names occupying their place. In ‫ח‬ ַ‫ר‬ ְ‫ח‬ ַ‫א‬ we can easily recognise the ‫ם‬ ָ‫יר‬ ִ‫ֲח‬‫א‬ of
Num_26:38, whence the enumeration in 1Ch_8:1. harmonizes with the order in Num_
26:38. It is therefore clear, that in our genealogy only those sons are mentioned who
founded the families of Benjamin. The names ‫ה‬ ָ‫ח‬ ‫נ‬ and ‫א‬ָ‫פ‬ ָ‫ר‬ are nowhere else met with
among the sons of Benjamin; but we may conclude, partly from the agreement of the
first three names with the heads of the families of Benjamin enumerated in Num_26:38,
and partly from the agreement as to the number, which is five in both passages, that
‫ה‬ ָ‫ח‬ ‫נ‬ and ‫א‬ָ‫פ‬ ָ‫ר‬ are intended to correspond to the ‫ם‬ ָ‫פוּפ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ and ‫ם‬ ָ‫חוּפ‬ of Num_26:39. The
only question which then remains is, whether the variation in the names arises from
these two sons of Benjamin having had different names, or from the families which
issued from Shephupham and Hupham having afterwards perhaps received new names
from famous chiefs, instead of the original designations, so that Nohah and Rapha
would be later descendants of Shephupham and Hupham. Even this second supposition
seems possible, since ‫יד‬ ִ‫ל‬ ‫ה‬ in such genealogical registers may denote mediate
procreation. If, e.g., Nohah were a grandson or great-grandson of Shephupham the son
of Benjamin, he might well be introduced in the genealogical lists of the families as
begotten by Benjamin.
BENSON, "1 Chronicles 8:1. Now Benjamin begat Bela — He had spoken
3

something of this tribe before, chap. 1 Chronicles 7:6; but now he treats of it again,
and that more fully and exactly: partly for Saul’s sake, who was of this tribe; and
partly because this tribe adhered to David, and the kingdom of Judah, and went
with Judah into Babylon; and now were returned from thence in greater numbers
than the other tribes, except Judah. Bela his firstborn — So called by Moses: but the
names of the rest vary from those in Moses. Therefore either these were Benjamin’s
grand-children, or the same person had two or more names, which was not unusual.
COFFMAN, ""The very full details given here as contrasted with most of the other
tribes should not be put down as due to the availability of more information, but
should be regarded as a tribute to Benjamin's loyalty to David and his dynasty."[1]
Also it appears that special attention was given to the line of David's friend
Jonathan.
It is impossible to harmonize this with the parallel list in 1 Chronicles 7:6-12; and
some scholars have believed that list to be a "corrupted genealogy of Zebulun and
Dan."[2]
All of the names given thus far in Chronicles belonged to persons of pre-exilic Israel,
"The first verse of the following chapter (1 Chronicles 9:1) states that what has gone
before pertains only to the official register of the families ... when they were exiled.
This clause separates the foregoing from what follows."[3] Payne did not agree with
this interpretation. See further comment under 1 Chronicles 9:1.
"Ono and Lod" (1 Chronicles 8:12). These cities were not mentioned in Joshua as
part of Palestine originally assigned to Benjamin; but, "These places were built
later. There is little doubt that Lod is the Lydda of Acts 9:22."[4]
Curtis and Madsen disagreed with Myers (quoted above) by affirming the lists of
this chapter as post-exilic;[5] but the disagreement of scholars regarding such
questions can be of little interest, since it really makes no difference at all exactly
when the people of any of these lists actually lived.
4

Elmslie in The Interpreter's Bible devoted only sixteen lines to this whole
chapter.[6]
There are many things in this chapter and in the entire O.T. that must forever
remain in the realm of the mysterious and the unknown as far as modern men are
concerned. For example, "Nothing is known about the exile mentioned in 1
Chronicles 8:6. We do not know who exiled whom."[7] It is appropriate to
remember in this connection that "The hidden things belong to God."
ELLICOTT, "The narrative returns to the tribe of Benjamin. The present register
is quite different from that preserved in 1 Chronicles 7:6-12, which, as we have seen,
is an extract from a document drawn up for military purposes. Apparently based on
a topographical register, this new list agrees better than the other with the data of
the Pentateuch (Genesis 46; Numbers 26), allowance being made for the mistakes of
generations of copyists. The chronicler may well have thought the short section of 1
Chronicles 7 too meagre as an account of a tribe which had furnished the first royal
house, and had afterwards inseparably linked its fortunes with those of the
legitimate dynasty. Here, therefore, he supplements his former notice. Perhaps, also,
he returns to Benjamin by way of introduction to the royal genealogy with which
the section concludes. In snort, he begins, as his manner is, at the beginning; and
having to tell of Saul, starts from the tribal patriarch to whom the house of Saul
traced back its long descent.
Verses 1-5
THE SONS OF BENJAMIN AND BELA (1 Chronicles 8:1-5).
(See Notes on 1 Chronicles 7:6-7.)
Bela his first-born.—The Hebrew word for “firstborn” in Genesis 46:21 may have
been turned into the proper name Becher, by an ancient mistake of the scribes. (See
5

Note on 1 Chronicles 7:6.)
Ashbel.—Probably the same as Jediael.
Aharah the same as Ahiram and Ehirosh.
(2) Nohah and Rapha.—These names do not occur in either of the other lists. The
present series agrees with Numbers 26:38 in assigning five sons to Benjamin, of
whom Bela is the first, and Ashbel the second. Further, there is enough likeness
between the name Aharah here and Ahiram there to warrant our assumption of
their original identity. But we cannot hence conclude that the Nohah and Rapha of
our list answer to the Shephupham-Shupham and Hupham of the other. It is more
likely that Nohah and Rapha represent different clans, which were prominent at the
time when the present list was draughted. Rapha reminds us of the valley of
Rephaim, south-west of Jerusalem, 1 Chronicles 11:15.
(3-5) The sons of Bela here are nine, like the sons of the suspected Becher, 1
Chronicles 7:8. But none of the names correspond.
(3) Addar the same as Ard, who in Numbers 26 is eldest son of Bela, but in Genesis
46 apparently his youngest brother.
Gera appears as brother of Bela in Genesis 46:21. The name is repeated in 1
Chronicles 8:5, probably by a scribe’s inadvertence; though there may have been
two great Benjamite houses so designated.
Abihud (4) and Abishua are peculiar to the present list.
Naaman is a son of Bela in Numbers 26, a brother in Genesis 46.
6

Ahoah is peculiar, unless he be identified with the Ehi of Genesis 46.
Shephupham and Huram, younger sons of Bela in the present series, are in Gen.
and Num. his younger brothers Muppim (Shuppim) and Huppim, or Shephupbam
and Hupham. These fluctuations of statement are worth observing, because they
demonstrate the vagueness of terms denoting various degrees of kindred, when used
in describing tribal and clan relationships.
POOLE, "The sons and chief men of Benjamin, 1 Chronicles 8:1-32. The stock of
Saul and Jonathan, 1 Chronicles 8:33-40.
He had spoken something of the tribe of Benjamin before, 1 Chronicles 7:6, but now
he treats of it again, and that more, fully and exactly; partly for Saul’s sake, who
was of this tribe; and partly because this tribe adhered to David and the kingdom of
Judah, and went with Judah into Babylon; and now were returned from thence in
greater numbers than the other tribes, except Judah.
Bela; so called by Moses: but the names of the rest vary from those in Moses; either
because the same person had two several names, as hath been often noted; or
because these were not the immediate sons of Benjamin, but his grandchildren, here
mentioned in their parents’ stead, possibly because they were more eminent than
their parents.
PULPIT, "This chapter carries us back to the tribe of Benjamin, partly dealt with
already (1 Chronicles 7:6-12). The tribe is reverted to for the same kind of reason
that called for our 1 Chronicles 3:1-24. David was so important a character in the
Judah tribe. And Saul, with whom the resume of Chronicle-history begins (1
Chronicles 8:33; 1 Chronicles 9:39; 1 Chronicles 10:1-14.), belongs to the Benjamin
tribe. Thus the genealogy of this tribe forms the perch to the history contained in
this work, and the forty verses of this chapter rehearse the sons and chief men of
Benjamin, with a view to bring into prominence the stock of Saul.
1 Chronicles 8:1, 1 Chronicles 8:2
These verses give five sons to Benjamin. Of the non-appearance of Becher here (1
Chronicles 7:6) and the appearance of Ashbel in his place, also of the non-
7

appearance here of Jediael (1 Chronicles 7:6) and the appearance of Aharah (i.q.
Ahiram, Numbers 26:38) in his place, notice has been taken on 1 Chronicles 7:6-12.
Of the two additions to the sons of Benjamin here, viz. Nohah and Rapha, nothing is
known elsewhere; yet it may be possible to count five families from Numbers 26:38,
Numbers 26:39.
2 Nohah the fourth and Rapha the fifth.
GILL, "Nohah the fourth, and Rapha the fifth. Nohah is supposed by some to be
the same with Becher, 1Ch_7:6 and by others with Naaman, Gen_46:21, as Rapha, the
same with Rosh there.
COKE, "1 Chronicles 8:2. And Rapha the fifth— In Genesis 46:21 ten sons of
Benjamin are reckoned; in the 6th verse of the preceding chapter three only, and
here five. The genealogy here seems to be introduced principally on account of Bela,
and therefore there was no necessity of mentioning it at large. See Houbigant's note
on this and the 6th verse.
3 The sons of Bela were:
Addar, Gera, Abihud,[a]
8

GILL, "The sons of Bela were Addar, and Gera, and Abihud. The first of these
is thought to be the same with Ard, mentioned among the sons of Benjamin, Gen_46:21
but was one of his grandsons, see Num_26:40 as Gera also was.
K&D, "1Ch_8:3-5
The sons of Bela. Of the six names borne by these sons, ‫א‬ ָ‫ֵר‬‫גּ‬ is twice met with; ‫ן‬ ָ‫ֲמ‬‫ע‬ַ‫נ‬ is
found in Gen_46:21 as the son, and in Num_26:40 as grandson of Benjamin; ‫ן‬ָ‫פוּפ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ is
another form of ‫ם‬ ָ‫פוּפ‬ ְ‫,שׁ‬ Num_26:39; and ‫ם‬ ָ‫חוּר‬ may be a transcriber's error for
chuwpaam, Num_26:39, just as ‫ר‬ ָ‫דּ‬ ַ‫א‬ probably stands for ְ‫דּ‬ ְ‫ר‬ ַ‫,א‬ Gen_46:21. The
occurrence of the name Gera would be incomprehensible only if ‫ים‬ִ‫נ‬ ָ‫בּ‬ denoted sons in
the narrower sense of the word; but if ‫ים‬ִ‫נ‬ ָ‫בּ‬ fi tub are sons in the wider sense, i.e.,
descendants who founded fathers'-houses (groups of related households), two cousins
might have the same name. In that case, Addar, Shephuphan, and Huram also may be
different persons from Ard, Shephupham, and Hupham. Abihud and Abishua are met
with as descendants of Benjamin only here, and 'achowach may be connected with ‫ָה‬‫יּ‬ ִ‫ֲח‬‫א‬,
1Ch_8:7.
PULPIT, "1 Chronicles 8:3-5
Nine sons are here assigned to Bela. Genesis (44:41) only finds us clearly three of
them, and these in very different order, viz. Gera, Naaman, and Arel; and Numbers
(Numbers 26:39, Numbers 26:40) finds us only three, viz. Ard, Naaman, and
Shupham. Yet our Huram may correspond with Hupham, and then the four pairs of
names—Shephuphan and Huram, Shupham and Hupham, Shuppim and Huppim,
and Muppim and Huppim—may be interpreted as designating one and the same
couple of persons. The recurrence of the name Gera in verse 5, so close upon the
same name in verse 3, would of course be more remarkable, and point inevitably to
the disordered state of the text, if it were necessary to suppose that these nine
persons were really brothers, as well as called sons of Bela.
4 Abishua, Naaman, Ahoah,
9

GILL 4-5, "And Abishua, and Naaman, and Ahoah, and Gera, and
Shephuphan, and Huram. These were all the sons of Bela; one of the name of
Naaman is reckoned among the sons of Benjamin, Gen_46:21 and from this grandson
the family of the Naamanites are named, Num_26:40, and Ahoah is by some thought to
be the same with Ehi, mentioned in Gen_46:21 as one of Benjamin's sons. Some take the
three last to be the sons of Ehud, spoken of in the next verse; but Shephuphan and
Huram seem to be the same with Shupham and Hupham, Num_26:39.
5 Gera, Shephuphan and Huram.
6 These were the descendants of Ehud, who were
heads of families of those living in Geba and were
deported to Manahath:
BARNES, "And they removed them to Manahath - “They” has no antecedent;
and it is difficult to supply one. Almost all commentators suppose that there has been
some corruption here, from which, however, we may gather that the “sons of Ehud” (or,
perhaps, of Ahoah, 1Ch_8:4) were originally settled at Geba (Jos_18:24 note), but
afterward removed to a place called Manahath, probably a town in the vicinity. Gera
1Ch_8:7 directed the movement.
GILL, "And these are the sons of Ehud,.... Not he that was a judge in Israel, Jdg_
3:15 but perhaps a son of Huram the last mentioned; for not the three last are his sons,
as some think, but the three following in the next verse; what follows being to be read in
a parenthesis:
10

(these are the heads of the fathers of the inhabitants of Geba;) a city in the
tribe of Benjamin, Jos_18:24 namely, those sons of Ehud, after mentioned, were
principal men in that tribe, and chief of the inhabitants of the city of Geba:
and they removed them to Manahath; the name of a country referred to in 1Ch_
2:52 according to Jarchi, which was in the tribe of Judah; Geba being too small, either
the inhabitants of Geba removed them, or they removed themselves, or their fathers
removed them, 1Ch_8:7, or it may be read impersonally, they were removed thither for
the sake of a better habitation; the Targum adds,"to the land of the house of Esau,''to
Edom; which is not likely.
JAMISON, "these are the sons of Ehud — most probably the judge of Israel
(Jdg_3:15). His descendants, who had at first been established in Geba in Benjamin,
emigrated in a body under the direction of Gera (1Ch_8:7) to Manahath, where their
increased numbers would find more ample accommodation. Manahath was within the
territory of Judah.
K&D, "Sons of Ehud. - The descent of Ehud from the sons, grandsons, and
descendants of Benjamin, enumerated in 1Ch_8:1-5, is not given. The names of Ehud's
sons follow only at the end of the 1Ch_8:7, “And he begat Uzza and Ahihud,” while the
intermediate clauses contain historical remarks. These sons were “heads of fathers'-
houses of the inhabitants of Geba,” i.e., Geba of Benjamin (1Sa_13:16), the Levite city,
1Ch_6:45, which still remains as the half-ruinous village Jeba, about three leagues to the
north of Jerusalem; see on Jos_18:24. “And they led them captive to Manahath, viz.,
Naaman and Ahiah and Gera, this man led them captive.” The subject to ‫לוּם‬ְ‫ַג‬‫יּ‬ַ‫ו‬ are the
men mentioned in the following verse, while the ‫הוּא‬ which follows shows that, of the
three above mentioned, the last, Gera, was the author of their captivity. The place
Manahath is not known, but is conjectured to be connected with Hazi-Hammanahti and
Hazi-Hammenuhoth, 1Ch_2:54 and 1Ch_2:52; but we cannot ascertain with certainty
whether the name denotes a city or a district, and the situation of it has not yet been
discovered. Of the hostile collision of these Benjamite families also, no more detailed
accounts have come down to us.
BENSON, "1 Chronicles 8:6. These are the sons of Ehud — These following, 1
Chronicles 8:7, because he here speaks of them who were removed. He describes the
sons of Benjamin by the places of their habitation, without an exact account of their
parents; because their genealogies were broken by that almost total extirpation of
this tribe, Judges 20.
ELLICOTT, " (6) And these are the sons of Ehud.—The Authorised Version makes
11

no distinction between this Ehud and Ehud son of Gera, the famous Benjamite
judge (Judges 3:15). The difference in the Heb. is so slight, that perhaps we may
assume an original identity of the two names. In that case we get a link between the
sons of Ehud and the house of Gera, 1 Chronicles 8:5. Others identify the present
Ehud with the Abihud of 1 Chronicles 8:3, which is possibly correct: (Comp.
Nadab-Abinadab, Dan and Abidan, Numbers 1:11.)
These are the heads of the fathers.—Heads of father-houses, i.e., of groups of
kindred families or clans. The Hebrew text of the rest of this verse, and 1 Chronicles
8:7-8, is unusually obscure, partly owing to the construction, but chiefly because of
the historical allusions which are no longer explicable with any certainty. Most
interpreters assume a parenthesis after the words “and these are the sons of Ehud,”
extending to the words “he removed them,” in 1 Chronicles 8:7.
Uzza and Ahihud are then “the sons of Ehud” referred to in 1 Chronicles 8:6.
Removed them.—Rather, carried them captive, or transported them. The same
expression denotes the Babylonian exile or transportation, and was used in 1
Chronicles 5:26 of the Assyrian removal of the trans-jordanic tribes.
POOLE. " These are the sons; either those three last mentioned; or rather these
following, 1 Chronicles 8:7, because he here speaks of them who were removed, and
they are said to be removed, 1 Chronicles 8:7
He describes the sons of Benjamin by the places of their habitation, without an exact
account of their parents, because their genealogies were broken by that almost total
extirpation of this tribe, Jud 20.
They removed them; either their fathers, or their heads and superiors, removed
them; or they removed themselves; either because they were too numerous for that
place, or because they desired to change their habitation, and hoped it would be for
the better, and judged Manahath a more convenient place.
PULPIT, "1 Chronicles 8:6, 1 Chronicles 8:7
Ehud. We are brought to a halt again by the sudden introduction of this name. Even
if it stand for Abihud (1 Chronicles 8:3) or for Ahoah (1 Chronicles 8:4), why is it
changed in so short an interval? It is impossible to establish order in these verses
except by most gratuitous conjecture. But it may be supposed that the verses say
12

that Ehud's people once belonged to Manahath, that the heads of them removed
them to Geba (Joshua 18:24), and that he himself (query, Ehud? but commonly read
Gera) removed them, and also Naaman, and Ahiah, and Gera (which look very
much like the Naaman, Ahoah, and Gera of 1 Chronicles 8:4, 1 Chronicles 8:5); and
finally that after the removing "he" had two fresh sons, Uzza and Ahihud.
7 Naaman, Ahijah, and Gera, who deported them
and who was the father of Uzza and Ahihud.
GILL, "And Naaman, and Ahiah, and Gera,.... Or, to wit, Naaman, &c. so the
words are to be connected with
these are the sons or Ehud, in the preceding verse:
he removed them; to the above place, that is, either Gera, or rather Ehud, he advised
them, directed and enjoined them to go thither, as being most convenient for them:
and he begat Uzza and Ahihud; after he had removed his other sons.
ELLICOTT, " (7) And Naaman, and Ahiah, and Gera, he removed them.—The
three clans here mentioned are commonly regarded as the authors of the
expatriation of the people of Geba. Of Gera it is specially said “he removed them,”
because Gera was the leading clan of the three. According to this interpretation the
two verses (6-7) may be rendered: “And these are the sons of Ehud. (These are
heads of clans belonging to the inhabitants of Geba, and men carried them away to
Manahath—both Naaman, and Ahijah, and Gera, he it was who carried them
away.) He begat Uzza and Ahihud.” That is to say, Uzza and Ahihud, two chiefs of
clans settled at Geba (1 Chronicles 6:45), were forcibly removed by three other
Benjamite clans to Manahath (see 1 Chronicles 2:52; 1 Chronicles 2:54). ‘Al
manahath might perhaps be rendered “for the sake of peace,” referring to feuds
13

between the clans of Geba.
POOLE, " He removed them; either,
1. Their father; or,
2. Gera last mentioned, who, it seems, was the chief counsellor or promoter of this
work.
Begat Uzza and Ahihud, when he was seated in Manahath.
8 Sons were born to Shaharaim in Moab after he
had divorced his wives Hushim and Baara.
BARNES, "After he had sent them away - Translate it: “after he had divorced his
wives, Hushim and Baara.”
GILL, "And Shaharaim,.... Who was either a son of Ahihud, or rather a brother of
his, another son of Ehud:
begat children in the country of Moab; whither he might go on account of the
famine, as Elimelech did, Rth_1:1, after he had sent them away; which some understand
of those that were removed from Geba to Manahath, 1Ch_8:6, but a different word is
here used; and besides Shaharaim seems to be one of those that were removed. Kimchi
takes Shilhootham, we render "had sent them away", to be the name of his first wife, of
whom he begat children in Moab; but it seems best to render and interpret the words in
connection with what follows: he begat children in Moab:
after he had sent them away; even Hushim and Baara his wives; after he had
divorced them, for some reasons he had, he begat children of another wife, later
mentioned.
14

JAMISON, "Shaharaim begat children in the country of Moab — He had
probably been driven to take refuge in that foreign land on the same calamitous occasion
that forced Elimelech to emigrate thither (Rth_1:1). But, destitute of natural affection,
he forsook or divorced his two wives, and in the land of his sojourn married a third, by
whom he had several sons. But there is another explanation given of the conduct of this
Benjamite polygamist. His children by Hushim are mentioned (1Ch_8:11), while his
other wife is unnoticed. Hence it has been thought probable that it is Baara who is
mentioned under the name of Hodesh, so called because her husband, after long
desertion, returned and cohabited with her as before.
K&D 8-12, "The descendants of Shaharaim. - The descent of Shaharaim from the
sons and grandsons named in 1Ch_8:1-3 is obscure, and the conjecture which connects
him with Ahishahar of 1Ch_7:10 is unsupported. He was the father of a considerable
number of heads of fathers'-houses, whom his two or three wives bore to him. According
to 1Ch_8:8, he begat “in the country of Moab after he had sent them, Hushim and Baara
his wives, away; (1Ch_8:9) there begat he with Hodesh his wife, Jobab,” etc. When and
how Shaharaim, a Benjamite, came into the country of Moab, is not known; all that can
be gathered from our verse is that he must have lived there for a considerable time. ‫ח‬ ְ‫ל‬ ִ‫שׁ‬
is infin. Pi., the “i” being retained, and the Daghesh forte omitted with Sheva (cf. as to
this formation, Ew. §238, d.). ‫ם‬ ָ‫ת‬ֹ‫,א‬ accus. of the pronoun, which, as it precedes its noun,
is in gen. masc., although the names of women follow (cf. for this use of the pronoun,
Ew. §309, c.). ‫ים‬ ִ‫חוּשׁ‬ and ‫ה‬ ָ‫ֲר‬‫ע‬ ַ‫בּ‬ are women, as we learn from the following ‫יו‬ָ‫ָשׁ‬‫נ‬. By this
parenthesis, the beginning of the main sentence has been lost sight of, and the ‫יד‬ ִ‫ל‬ ‫ה‬ is
taken up again in ‫ד‬ֶ‫ל‬ ‫ַיּ‬‫ו‬. As to ‫יד‬ ִ‫ל‬ ‫ה‬ with ‫ן‬ ִ‫,מ‬ cf. the remark on 1Ch_2:8. ‫שׁ‬ ֶ‫ֹד‬‫ח‬ is the third
wife, which he took instead of those he had sent away. The seven names in 1Ch_8:9,
1Ch_8:10 are grouped together as sons or descendants of the last-named wife, by the
concluding remark, “These his sons are heads of fathers'-houses.” Then, further, in 1Ch_
8:11, 1Ch_8:12, the sons and grandsons of the first (divorced) wives, one of whom built
the cities Ono and Lydda, are enumerated; but we have no means of determining
whether the ‫ָה‬‫נ‬ ָ‫בּ‬ ‫הוּא‬ refers to Shemer, the last mentioned, or to Elpaal the father of the
three sons, Eber, and Misham, and Shemer. It would, however, naturally suggest itself,
that the words referred to the first. ‫ד‬ (Lod) is without doubt the city Lydda, where
Peter healed the paralytic (Act_9:32.). It belonged in the Syrian age to Samaria, but it
was added to Judea by the King Demetrius Soter, and given to Jonathan for a possession
(1 Macc. 11:34, cf. with 10:30, 38). In the Jewish was it was destroyed by the Roman
general Cestius (Joseph. de Bell. Jud. ii. 19. 1), but was rebuilt at a later time, and
became the site of a toparchy of Judea. In still later times it was called Diospolis, but is
now a considerable Mohammedan village, lying between Jafa and Jerusalem to the north
of Ramleh, which bears the old name Ludd, by the Arabs pronounced also Lidd. See v.
Raumer, Pal. S. 10; Robins. Pal. sub voce; and Tobler, Dritte Wanderung, S. 69f. Ono is
mentioned elsewhere only in Ezr_2:33; Neh_7:37 and Neh_11:35, along with Lod, and
must have been a place in the neighbourhood of Lydda.
15

ELLICOTT, " (8) And Shaharaim begat children in the country of Moab.—
Shaharaim is apparently out of all connection with the other Benjamite houses. He
has been identified with Ahi-Shahar, 1 Chronicles 7:10, because his name has a
similar meaning, and even with the mysterious Aher (hypothetically Shaher) of 1
Chronicles 7:12. It is simpler to suppose that weeth-Shaharaim, “and Shaharaim,”
has dropped out at the end of 1 Chronicles 8:7 (see Note on 1 Chronicles 8:31).
Expelled from Geba, Shaharaim found a refuge in Moab. (Comp. Ruth 1; 1 Samuel
22:3-4.)
After he had sent them away; Hushim and Baara were his wives.—The Heb. is
certainly corrupt. The easiest correction is to read ‘eth-Hushim instead of ‘otham
Hushim: “and Shaharaim begat in the country of Moab, after divorcing Hushim
and Baara his wives, he begat (1 Chronicles 8:9) of Hodesh his wife, Jobab,” &c.
This is supported by the LXX. The emigration of the clan Shaharaim, from its old
home in Geba of Benjamin is called a divorce, in the figurative style of these
genealogies; just as the amalgamation of clans is marriage. Hushim, in 1 Chronicles
7:12, is a Benjamite clan. In Moab, Shaharaim branched off into seven clans, whose
names are given in 1 Chronicles 8:9-10.
POOLE, " In the country of Moab; whither he had removed himself, either at the
same time when Elimelech did, Ruth 1:1, &c., or upon the same or like occasion.
After he had sent them away; Ehud or Gera last mentioned.
Hushim and Baara were his wives: others join these words with the former, and
render the place thus, after he had sent them (to wit, his sons) away, with Hushim
and Baara his wives, i.e. as he also sent his wives away from him; which may be here
mentioned as a brand upon him, to show that he was without natural affection to his
wives and children. And it seems the more probable that he divorced them, because
we find him married to another wife, 1 Chronicles 8:9.
PULPIT, "1 Chronicles 8:8
Shaharaim. It has been proposed, in the utter obscurity here, to add this name as a
third to Uzza and Ahihud. This may be a way out, but if so, instead of repeating
"and Shaharaim," it might be more natural to keep the former enigmatic
nominative and object to begat, whether Ehud or Gera. There can be little doubt
16

that a copyist's error has given us them ( ‫ם‬ ָ‫ת‬ֹ‫א‬ ) in place of ‫ת‬ ֶ‫,א‬ in the latter part of
this verse, before the names of the wives. The sentence then would translate, "after
his sending away [whether by divorce or not] Hushim and Baara his wives."
9 By his wife Hodesh he had Jobab, Zibia, Mesha,
Malkam,
CLARKE, "He begat of Hodesh his wife - In the preceding verse it is said that
Hushim and Baara were his wives; and here it is said he begat of Hodesh his wife, etc.
And then his children by Hushim are mentioned, but not a word of Baara! It is likely
therefore that Hodesh was another name for Baara, and this is asserted by the Targum:
And he begot of Baara, that is Chodesh, his wife; so called because he espoused her
anew. It is supposed that he had put her away before, and now remarried her.
GILL, "And he begat of Hodesh his wife,.... That is, he, I say, begat, namely,
Shaharaim; the Targum makes this Hodesh to be the same with Baara, called so because
she was newly espoused; but wrongly: the sons begotten of her were the seven following;
Jobab, Zibia, Mesha, Malcham, Jeuz, Shachia, and Mirma. These were his
sons; the sons of Shaharaim by his wife Hodesh:
heads of the fathers; of the houses or families of their father.
K&D 8-12, "The descendants of Shaharaim. - The descent of Shaharaim from the
sons and grandsons named in 1Ch_8:1-3 is obscure, and the conjecture which connects
him with Ahishahar of 1Ch_7:10 is unsupported. He was the father of a considerable
number of heads of fathers'-houses, whom his two or three wives bore to him. According
to 1Ch_8:8, he begat “in the country of Moab after he had sent them, Hushim and Baara
his wives, away; (1Ch_8:9) there begat he with Hodesh his wife, Jobab,” etc. When and
how Shaharaim, a Benjamite, came into the country of Moab, is not known; all that can
be gathered from our verse is that he must have lived there for a considerable time. ‫ח‬ ְ‫ל‬ ִ‫שׁ‬
is infin. Pi., the “i” being retained, and the Daghesh forte omitted with Sheva (cf. as to
17

this formation, Ew. §238, d.). ‫ם‬ ָ‫ת‬ֹ‫,א‬ accus. of the pronoun, which, as it precedes its noun,
is in gen. masc., although the names of women follow (cf. for this use of the pronoun,
Ew. §309, c.). ‫ים‬ ִ‫חוּשׁ‬ and ‫ה‬ ָ‫ֲר‬‫ע‬ ַ‫בּ‬ are women, as we learn from the following ‫יו‬ָ‫ָשׁ‬‫נ‬. By this
parenthesis, the beginning of the main sentence has been lost sight of, and the ‫יד‬ ִ‫ל‬ ‫ה‬ is
taken up again in ‫ד‬ֶ‫ל‬ ‫ַיּ‬‫ו‬. As to ‫יד‬ ִ‫ל‬ ‫ה‬ with ‫ן‬ ִ‫,מ‬ cf. the remark on 1Ch_2:8. ‫שׁ‬ ֶ‫ֹד‬‫ח‬ is the third
wife, which he took instead of those he had sent away. The seven names in 1Ch_8:9,
1Ch_8:10 are grouped together as sons or descendants of the last-named wife, by the
concluding remark, “These his sons are heads of fathers'-houses.” Then, further, in 1Ch_
8:11, 1Ch_8:12, the sons and grandsons of the first (divorced) wives, one of whom built
the cities Ono and Lydda, are enumerated; but we have no means of determining
whether the ‫ָה‬‫נ‬ ָ‫בּ‬ ‫הוּא‬ refers to Shemer, the last mentioned, or to Elpaal the father of the
three sons, Eber, and Misham, and Shemer. It would, however, naturally suggest itself,
that the words referred to the first. ‫ד‬ (Lod) is without doubt the city Lydda, where
Peter healed the paralytic (Act_9:32.). It belonged in the Syrian age to Samaria, but it
was added to Judea by the King Demetrius Soter, and given to Jonathan for a possession
(1 Macc. 11:34, cf. with 10:30, 38). In the Jewish was it was destroyed by the Roman
general Cestius (Joseph. de Bell. Jud. ii. 19. 1), but was rebuilt at a later time, and
became the site of a toparchy of Judea. In still later times it was called Diospolis, but is
now a considerable Mohammedan village, lying between Jafa and Jerusalem to the north
of Ramleh, which bears the old name Ludd, by the Arabs pronounced also Lidd. See v.
Raumer, Pal. S. 10; Robins. Pal. sub voce; and Tobler, Dritte Wanderung, S. 69f. Ono is
mentioned elsewhere only in Ezr_2:33; Neh_7:37 and Neh_11:35, along with Lod, and
must have been a place in the neighbourhood of Lydda.
ELLICOTT, "(9) Hodesh his wife.—The new Moabite wife or settlement of
Shaharaim. The names of two of the sons begotten in Moab have a Moabite cast—
viz., Mesha’, comp. Mesha’ king of Moab, 2 Kings 3:4; and Malcham, comp.
Malcham (Milcom) as a title of the god of Moab and Ammon, Jeremiah 49:1 (Heb.).
PULPOIT, "1 Chronicles 8:9-11
These verses give seven unknown sons of Ehud, Gera, or Shaharaim, as the case
may be, by the wife Hodesh, whom one would have been glad to identify with Baara,
and two unknown sons of the wife Hushim.
18

10 Jeuz, Sakia and Mirmah. These were his sons,
heads of families.
GILL, "And of Hushim he begat Abitub, and Elpaal. Before he sent her away, or
divorced her, 1Ch_8:8.
11 By Hushim he had Abitub and Elpaal.
CLARKE, "Who built Ono, and Lod - The Targum adds, “Which the children of
Israel ravaged and burnt with fire, when they made war on the tribe of Benjamin in
Gibeah.”
GILL, "The sons of Elpaal; Eber, and Misham, and Shamed,.... Besides those in
1Ch_8:14.
who built Ono, and Lod, with the towns thereof; not Shamed, but Elpaal his
father, so the Targum; and the Talmudists say (o), these were walled cities from the days
of Joshua the son of Nun, and were destroyed in the days of the concubine in Gibea, and
Elpaal came and rebuilt them; they were inhabited by the Benjaminites, upon their
return from the Babylonish captivity, Neh_11:35 they were near to each other; according
to a Jewish chronologer (p), it was three miles from the one to the other; Lod is the same
with Lydda, in Act_9:32.
ELLICOTT, "(11) And of Hushim he begat . . .—The offspring of Shaharaim by
Hushim before her divorce; in other words, two offshoots of the clan Shaharaim
settled in the vicinity of Lod or Lydda (1 Chronicles 8:12), which took no part in the
19

emigration to Moab.
12 The sons of Elpaal:
Eber, Misham, Shemed (who built Ono and Lod
with its surrounding villages),
GILL, "The sons of Elpaal; Eber, and Misham, and Shamed,.... Besides those in
1Ch_8:14.
who built Ono, and Lod, with the towns thereof; not Shamed, but Elpaal his
father, so the Targum; and the Talmudists say (o), these were walled cities from the days
of Joshua the son of Nun, and were destroyed in the days of the concubine in Gibea, and
Elpaal came and rebuilt them; they were inhabited by the Benjaminites, upon their
return from the Babylonish captivity, Neh_11:35 they were near to each other; according
to a Jewish chronologer (p), it was three miles from the one to the other; Lod is the same
with Lydda, in Act_9:32.
ELLICOTT, " (12) Shamer, or Shemer, occurred in 1 Chronicles 7:34 as a clan of
Asher.
Who built.Ono and Lod. . . .—Literally, he built Ono and Lod and her daughters.
The clause is a parenthesis referring to Shemer.
Ono, now Kefr Auna, recurs in Ezra 2:33, Nehemiah 7:37; Nehemiah 11:35, but is
not found elsewhere in the Old Testament. It is always coupled with Lod, and must
have been near it.
Lod, the Lydda of Acts 9:32, is now the village of Ludd, north of Ramleh, between
Jaffa and Jerusalem.
20

POOLE, "Of which see Ezra 2:33 Nehemiah 7:37 11:35.
One of the sons of this last-named wife, Hushim, was named Elpaal. From 1
Chronicles 8:12 to 1 Chronicles 8:28 we have a numerous list of his descendants,
evidently in different degrees of relationship, but with the thread picked up
apparently several times, in the persons of the first-mentioned "sons," viz. the five,
Eber, Misham, Shamed, Beriah, Shema (see 1 Chronicles 8:16, 1 Chronicles 8:18, 1
Chronicles 8:21, 1 Chronicles 8:25, 1 Chronicles 8:27).
Ono and Lod. These places are not mentioned in Joshua as originally assigned to
Benjamin. They were obtained or "built" afterwards. They are first mentioned in
this passage, afterwards in Ezra 2:33; Nehemiah 6:2; Nehemiah 7:37; Nehemiah
11:36. Led is, with little doubt, the Lydda of Acts 9:32.
13 and Beriah and Shema, who were heads of
families of those living in Aijalon and who drove
out the inhabitants of Gath.
GILL, "eriah also, and Shema,.... These were sons of Elpaal:
who were heads of the fathers of the inhabitants of Aijalon; which, though in
the tribe of Dan, Jos_19:42 might afterwards come into the possession of Benjamin; or
this may be another place of the same name in Benjamin; or, however, might be
inhabited by Benjaminites, upon the return from captivity, who descended from those
men:
who drove away the inhabitants of Gath; dispossessed them of their city, in
revenge for what they had done to the Ephraimites, 1Ch_7:21.
K&D 13-14, "Heads of fathers'-houses of the tribe of Benjamin, who dwelt partly in
21

Aijalon (1Ch_8:13) and partly in Jerusalem. - Their connection with the heads of
fathers'-houses already mentioned is not clear. The names ‫ע‬ ַ‫מ‬ֶ‫ַשׁ‬‫ו‬ ‫ה‬ָ‫יע‬ ִ‫ר‬ ְ‫בּ‬ might be taken
fore a fuller enumeration of the sons of Elpaal (1Ch_8:12), were it not that the names
enumerated from 1Ch_8:14 or 15 onwards, are at the end of 1Ch_8:16 said to be those of
sons of Beriah; whence we must conclude that with ‫ה‬ָ‫יע‬ ִ‫ר‬ ְ‫,וּב‬ 1Ch_8:13, a new list of
heads of Benjamite fathers'-houses begins. This view is supported by the fact that the
names from 1Ch_8:14 or 1Ch_8:15 to 1Ch_8:27 are divided into five groups of families:
the sons of Beriah (1Ch_8:16), of Elpaal (1Ch_8:18), of Shimhi (1Ch_8:21), of Shashak
(1Ch_8:25), and of Jeroham (1Ch_8:27). But as two of these, Beriah and Shashak, occur
in 1Ch_8:13, 1Ch_8:14, and ‫י‬ ִ‫ע‬ ְ‫מ‬ ִ‫שׁ‬ is probably another form of ‫ע‬ ַ‫מ‬ֶ‫,שׁ‬ Bertheau conjectures
that the last two names, Shashak and Jeroham, are represented by ‫י‬ ְ‫ח‬ ַ‫א‬ and ‫ת‬ ‫מ‬ ֵ‫ר‬ְ‫י‬ dna ַ‫א‬
(1Ch_8:14). ‫ם‬ ַ‫ח‬ֹ‫ר‬ְ‫י‬ and ‫ת‬ ‫מ‬ ֵ‫ר‬ְ‫י‬ may be explained by the supposition of a transcriber's
error, or by one person having two names; but the word ‫י‬ ְ‫ח‬ ַ‫א‬ is rendered by the lxx by ὁ
ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ (= ‫יו‬ ִ‫ה‬ ָ‫;)א‬ and the view that ‫אחיו‬ is a nom. prop. is opposed, as in 1Ch_
8:31, by the fact that the ‫ו‬ cop. is not found before the following ‫ק‬ָ‫שׁ‬ָ‫,שׁ‬ for here,
throughout, the names are all connected with each other by the w cop. Bertheau
therefore conjectures that the text originally ran thus, ‫ק‬ָ‫שׁ‬ָ‫שׁ‬ ְ‫ו‬ ‫יו‬ ִ‫ה‬ ָ‫א‬ ‫ל‬ַ‫ע‬ַ‫פּ‬ ְ‫ֱל‬‫א‬ ְ‫,ו‬ and that the
name Elpaal was dropped out; and that in consequence of that, ‫אחיו‬ had been
punctuated as a nom. prop. These conjectures seem satisfactory, especially as it may be
adduced in their favour that ‫יו‬ ִ‫ה‬ ָ‫א‬ has been added to the name Elpaal to connect the
names in 1Ch_8:15 with the enumeration (1Ch_8:13) interrupted by the parenthetical
remarks. No certainty, however, can be attained in a matter so obscure. If a new series of
groups of families begins with 1Ch_8:13, we should expect an introductory formula, as
in 1Ch_8:6. Beriah and Shema are called heads of the fathers'-houses of the inhabitants
of Aijalon, i.e., heads of the groups of related households inhabiting Aijalon, the present
Jalo to the west of Gibeon (see on Jos_19:42). It is quite consistent with this that their
sons or descendants dwelt in Jerusalem. Next a heroic deed of theirs is related, viz., that
they (in some war or other) turned to flight the inhabitants of Gath (without doubt
Philistines). This remark reminds us of the statement in 1Ch_7:21, that sons of Ephraim
were slain by those born in Gath, because they had gone down to drive away the herds of
the inhabitants. But Bertheau draws an erroneous conclusion from this fact, when he
says that because in both passages the name Beriah occurs, both refer to the same event,
and thereafter attempts by various hypotheses to make the Benjamites mentioned in our
verse into Ephraimites. For the name Beriah is not at all so rare as to allow of our
inferring from that alone that the various persons so called are identical, for Jacob's son
Asher also named one of his sons Beriah; cf. 1Ch_7:30 with Gen_46:17. The notion that
the Benjamites Beriah and Shema defeated those inhabitants of Gath who had slain the
sons of Ephraim (1Ch_7:21) is quite unsupported, as the Philistines lived at war and in
feud with the Israelites for hundreds of years.
ELLICOTT, " (13) Beriah also, and Shema.—After these two names the Masoretic
punctuators have put a stop. Thus 1 Chronicles 8:12-13 give five sons of Elpaal. Or
1 Chronicles 8:13 may be disconnected from 1 Chronicles 8:12, and Beriah and
22

Shema regarded as beginning a new series of Benjamite clans.
Who were heads of the fathers. . . .—Rather, “THEY were heads of the clans of the
inhabitants of Aijalon; THEY put to flight the inhabitants of Gath.” The pronoun is
emphatic in both cases. The clans of Beriah and Shema, who were settled at Ajalon
(Yalo), near Gibeon, appear to have expelled a Gittite population from Ajalon, and
dwelt in their stead. At all events, there is evident allusion to some famous exploit, in
which the two Benjamite houses were more fortunate than the Ephraimites Ezer
and Elead (1 Chronicles 7:21). We must not identify this Benjamite Beriah with the
Ephraimite Beriah of 1 Chronicles 7:23. There was also an Asherite clan of Beriah
(1 Chronicles 7:30).
POOLE, " Aijalon; a place formerly belonging to the tribe of Dan, Joshua 19:42;
but after the return from Babylon possessed by the Benjamites, because both Dan
and the rest of the ten tribes were yet for the generality of them in captivity, and but
few of them returned.
Who drove away the inhabitants of Gath; either,
1. At that time when they made such a slaughter among Ephraim’s children, 1
Chronicles 7:21, and were possibly pursuing their victory till they were driven back
by these Benjamites, who came to the succour of their brethren. Or,
2. Now when they were returned from the captivity, and found the men of Gath
possessed of Aijalon. Or,
3. At some other time not mentioned in Scripture.
PULPIT, "Aijalon. A similar kind of history belongs to this place. It was assigned to
Dan (Joshua 19:40-48). Unsubdued by them ( 1:34-36), the Ephraimites possessed it
awhile (1 Chronicles 6:47-49), until it came to be more like the common property or
care of Benjamin and Judah, situated as it was on their boundary line (1 Samuel
14:31; 2 Chronicles 11:10; 2 Chronicles 28:18).
23

14 Ahio, Shashak, Jeremoth,
GILL, "And Ahio, Shashak, and Jerimoth. These were also sons of Elpaal.
ELLICOTT, "Verses 14-16
(14-16) Apparently nine sons of Beriah. But (1) in 1 Chronicles 8:14, the LXX. reads
ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ instead of Ahio. With different vowels the Hebrew term would
mean this. (2) All the other names in this list are connected by the conjunctive
particle. It is therefore likely that this was once the case with Shashak. (3) 1
Chronicles 8:14-27 give five groups of Benjamite clans—viz., the sons of Beriah, the
sons of Elpaal, the sons of Shimhi, the sons of Shashak, and the sons of Jeroham, all
dwelling in Jerusalem. Apparently, their eponymous heads are named in 1
Chronicles 8:13-14—viz., Beriah (Elpaal? omitted by accident), Shema (the same as
Shimhi; there is no h in the Heb.), Shashak, and Jeremoth (probably the same as
Jeroham).
If this combination hold, the text of 1 Chronicles 8:14 may be thus restored: “And
Elpaal his brother, and Shashak and Jeroham.” Elpaal will then be brother of
Beriah (1 Chronicles 8:13), and perhaps son of Elpaal (1 Chronicles 8:12). Shashak
and Jeremoth-Jeroham, and the six following names, are sons of Beriah.
15 Zebadiah, Arad, Eder,
24

GILL, "And Zebadiah,.... And all that follow in this and the next verse were the sons
of Beriah the son of Elpaal; namely:
Arad, Ader, Michael, Ispah, and Joha.
K&D, "Several of the names of these six sons of Beriah who are mentioned in our
verse occur elsewhere, but nowhere else are they met with as sons of Beriah.
16 Michael, Ishpah and Joha were the sons of
Beriah.
17 Zebadiah, Meshullam, Hizki, Heber,
GILL, "And Zebadiah, and Meshullam,.... These, with those that follow:
Hezeki, Heber, Ishmerai, Jezliah, and Jobab, were the sons of Elpaal
K&D 17-28, "Bertheau would identify three of the sons of Elpaal - Meshullam, Heber,
and Ishmerai - with Misham, Eber, and Shemer, 1Ch_8:12, but without any sufficient
reason; for it is questionable if even the Elpaal whose sons are named in our verses be
the same person as the Elpaal mentioned in 1Ch_8:12. Of these descendants of Elpaal,
also, nothing further is known, and the same may be said of the nine sons of Shimhi,
1Ch_8:19-21; of the eleven sons of Shashak, 1Ch_8:22-25; and of the six sons of
Jeroham, 1Ch_8:26, 1Ch_8:27, although some of these names are met with elsewhere
singly. The concluding remark, 1Ch_8:28, “These are heads of fathers'-houses,” refers,
without doubt, to all the names from 1Ch_8:15 or 1Ch_8:14 to 1Ch_8:27. “According to
their generations - heads” is in apposition to the preceding, as in 1Ch_9:24, but the
meaning of the apposition is doubtful. The word ‫ים‬ ִ‫אשׁ‬ ָ‫ר‬ can hardly be repeated merely
for emphasis, as the old commentators understood it, in harmony with the Vulgate
principes inquam, for why should this word be so emphasized? Bertheau thinks that
“according to their births - heads” is to be taken to mean that those who are enumerated
by name are not the heads living at the time of the preparation of this register, but the
individual families, with the name of their progenitor after whom they were named in
25

the genealogical lists. But how this meaning can be found in the words in question, I at
least cannot understand. Can the individual families be called ‫ת‬ ‫ב‬ ָ‫א‬ ‫י‬ֵ‫אשׁ‬ ָ‫,ר‬ “heads of
fathers'-houses”? The families are the fathers'-houses themselves, i.e., they are made up
of the groups of related households comprehended under the name fathers'-houses.
These groups of related households have, it is true, each of them either head, but cannot
possibly be themselves called heads. The meaning seems rather to be that the persons
named in the family registers, or registers of births, are introduced as heads (of fathers'-
houses); and the reason why this is remarked would seem to be, to prevent those who
are enumerated as the sons of this or that man from being regarded simply as members
of fathers'-houses. The further remark, “these dwelt in Jerusalem,” is manifestly not to
be taken to mean that the heads alone dwelt there, while the households that were
subordinated to them lived elsewhere; for it signifies that they dwelt in Jerusalem with
the households which composed their respective fathers'-houses. That the households
dwelt there also is not stated, merely because the register contains only the names of the
heads.
18 Ishmerai, Izliah and Jobab were the sons of
Elpaal.
19 Jakim, Zikri, Zabdi,
GILL 19-2And Jakim,.... With all the rest in these verses, namely:
Zichri, Zabdi, Elienai, Zilthai, Eliel, Adaiah, Beraiah, and Shimrath, were
the sons of Shimhi, the same with Shema brother of Beriah, and son of Elpaal, 1Ch_
8:13.
(19-21) Nine sons of Shimhi (Shimei being the same as Shema). This is the same
26

Hebrew name as that which at 2 Samuel 16:5 seq. the Authorised Version renders
by Shimei.
20 Elienai, Zillethai, Eliel,
21 Adaiah, Beraiah and Shimrath were the sons of
Shimei.
22 Ishpan, Eber, Eliel,
GILL 22=25, "And Ishpan, and Heber,.... And all that follow to the end of these
verses:
Eliel, Abdon, Zichri, Hanan, Hananiah, Elam, Antothijah, Iphedeiah, and
Penuel, were the sons of Shashak, another son of Elpaal, 1Ch_8:14.
(22-25) Eleven sons of Shashak (1 Chronicles 8:14), followed by six sons of Jeroham
(Jeremoth, 1 Chronicles 8:14) in 1 Chronicles 8:26-27. The recurrence of the same
names in the five groups is noticeable. Thus, a Zichri appears among the sons of
Shimei (1 Chronicles 8:19), among the sons of Shashak (1 Chronicles 8:23), and
among the sons of Jeroham (1 Chronicles 8:27). Of course the name may have been
thus frequent among the Benjamite clans dwelling in Jerusalem. But it is possible to
see in the fact an indication that, at the time when the present register was framed,
some of these houses were no longer able to trace their pedigrees with certainty to
one famous name rather than another.
27

23 Abdon, Zikri, Hanan,
24 Hananiah, Elam, Anthothijah,
25 Iphdeiah and Penuel were the sons of Shashak.
26 Shamsherai, Shehariah, Athaliah,
GILL 26-27, "And Shamsherai,.... Who, with those next mentioned:
Shehariah, Athaliah, Jaresiah, Eliah, and Zichri, were the sons of Jeroham,
who perhaps is the same with Jerimoth, another son of Elpaal, 1Ch_8:14 who makes a
considerable figure in this genealogy. Kimchi observes that it is a tradition (q) that this
Eliah is Elijah the prophet, who was of the seed of Rachel.
27 Jaareshiah, Elijah and Zikri were the sons of
Jeroham.
28 All these were heads of families, chiefs as listed
in their genealogy, and they lived in Jerusalem.
28

BARNES, "These dwelt in Jerusalem - Jerusalem was partly within the limits of
the tribe of Benjamin Jos_18:28; but we do not hear of Benjamites inhabiting it until
after the return from the captivity 1Ch_9:3; Neh_11:4.
CLARKE, "These were heads of the fathers - On the following verses Dr.
Kennicott has labored hard to restore the true reading. See his detailed comparison of
these and their parallel passages in his Hebrew Bible, vol. ii., p. 667.
GILL, "These were heads of the fathers, by their generations, chief men,....
All from 1Ch_8:14, the sons of Elpaal and their sons:
these dwelt in Jerusalem; part of which always belonged to the tribe of Benjamin,
see Jos_15:63.
K&D, "These dwelt in Jerusalem — The ordinary and stated inhabitants of
Jerusalem were Judahites, Benjamites, and Levites. But at the time referred to here, the
chiefs or heads of the principal families who are enumerated (1Ch_8:14-27) established
themselves in the city after their return from the captivity.
BENSON, "1 Chronicles 8:28. Heads of the fathers, &c: these dwelt at Jerusalem —
All these named from 1 Chronicles 8:14 to this place. Particular notice is taken of
these, that others, at their return from captivity, might be induced to settle there too,
which it seems few were willing to do, because it was the post of danger. Many great
and mighty nations were then upon earth, and many illustrious men in them, whose
names are buried in perpetual oblivion, while the names of multitudes of the Israel
of God are here carefully preserved in everlasting remembrance: a figure of God’s
writing the names of his spiritual Israel in the Lamb’s book of life.
ELLICOTT, " (28) These were . . . chief men.—These were: chiefs of clans;
according to their birth-rolls, chiefs. All the names from 1 Chronicles 8:14 to 1
29

Chronicles 8:27 are included in this summation. The repetition of the word “chiefs”
(Heb., heads) is peculiar. The writer can hardly have meant other than to warn his
readers against the idea that the preceding names represent individual members of
single families, whereas, in truth, they are “heads of clans.” (“Heads” in Hebrew
may denote “companies,” or “divisions,” as at Judges 7:16, “And he divided the
three hundred men into three heads.”)
These dwelt in Jerusalem.—This statement contrasts the five branches of Benjamin,
whose sub-divisions have just been enumerated, with the clans that dwelt in Geba
and Manahath (1 Chronicles 8:6), in Moab (1 Chronicles 8:9-10), in Lod and Ono (1
Chronicles 8:12), and in Ajalon (1 Chronicles 8:13), as well as with those who dwelt
in Gibeou. (1 Chronicles 8:29).
PULPIT, "1 Chronicles 8:28
These dwelt in Jerusalem (Joshua 18:28; 1 Chronicles 9:2-9; Nehemiah 11:1-4).
29 Jeiel[b] the father[c] of Gibeon lived in Gibeon.
His wife’s name was Maakah,
CLARKE, "And at Gibeon - This passage to the end of the 38th verse is found with
a little variety in the names, 1Ch_9:35-44.
The rabbins say that Ezra, having found two books that had these passages with a
variety in the names, as they agreed in general, he thought best to insert them both, not
being able to discern which was the best.
His general plan was to collate all the copies he had, and to follow the greater number
when he found them to agree; those which disagreed from the majority were thrown
aside as spurious; and yet, in many cases, probably the rejected copies contained the
true text.
30

If Ezra proceeded as R. Sol. Jarchi says, he had a very imperfect notion of the rules of
true criticism; and it is no wonder that he has left so many faults in his text.
GILL, "And at Gibeon dwelt the father of Gibeon,.... The builder of the city, and
prince of the inhabitants of it, which was in the tribe of Benjamin, Jos_18:25 whose
name was Jehiel, 1Ch_9:35,
(whose wife's name was Maachah;) of which name were many, see 1Ch_2:48.
K&D 29-32, "_ - 1Ch_8:29-38 recur in 1Ch_9:35-44 (see on that passage).
1Ch_8:29-32
The ancestors of Saul. They dwelt mainly in Gibeon, but a branch of them were settled
in Jerusalem, 1Ch_8:32.f. In Gibeon, now El Jib, two hours north-west from Jerusalem
(see on Jos_9:3), dwelt the father of Gibeon, with his wife and his sons. The plural ‫בוּ‬ ְ‫ֽשׁ‬ָ‫י‬
is used because there dwelt there, besides the father of Gibeon, also his wife and his
sons. The father, i.e., the lord and possessor of Gibeon, was called, according to 1Ch_
9:35, Jehiel (‫ל‬ ֵ‫יא‬ ִ‫ע‬ְ‫,י‬ Keth. ‫,)יעואל‬ and his wife Maachah, a not uncommon female name
(see on 1Ch_2:48). The descent of Jehiel from Benjamin is not given. In 1Ch_8:30 eight
names are given as those of his sons, while in 1Ch_9:36. ten are mentioned, the latter
statement being correct; for a comparison of the two passages shows that in our verse
two names have been dropped out, - Ner between Baal and Nadab, and Mikloth at the
end, which must have originally stood in our register also, - for in 1Ch_8:32, 1Ch_8:33
their descendants are mentioned. ‫ר‬ֶ‫ֶכ‬‫ז‬ is called in 1Ch_9:37 ‫ָה‬‫י‬ ְ‫ר‬ַ‫כ‬ְ‫.ז‬ These names are
evidently those of actual sons of Jehiel who were progenitors of fathers'-houses (groups
of related households), but in the case of only two is the race descended from these
further noticed. In 1Ch_8:32 we have that of the youngest Mikloth, who begat Shimeah,
called in 1Ch_9:38 Shimeam. These also (viz., Shimeah and his family) dwelt in
Jerusalem ‫ם‬ ֶ‫יה‬ ֵ‫ֲח‬‫א‬ ‫ֶד‬‫ג‬ֶ‫נ‬, “before their brethren,” i.e., over against them, and ‫ם‬ ֶ‫יה‬ ֵ‫ֲח‬‫א‬ ‫ם‬ ִ‫,ע‬
“with their brethren.” The brethren are the other Benjamites in the first clause, those
dwelling outside of Jerusalem and inhabiting the neighbouring country as far as Gibeon
(1Ch_8:30); in the second, those dwelling in Jerusalem (1Ch_8:28). From this it is clear
that of the descendants of Abi-Gibeon only that branch which was descended from
Mikloth went to Jerusalem.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 29
THE FAMILIES OF GIBEON, ESPECIALLY THE ROYAL HOUSE OF SAUL
(1 Chronicles 8:29-40).
1 Chronicles 8:29-38 recur at 1 Chronicles 9:35-44.
31

(29) At Gibeon dwelt the father of Gibeon.—His name (Jehiel) has been accidentally
omitted. (See 1 Chronicles 9:35.) The verb dwelt is plural, “they dwelt;” a sufficient
indication that the “father of Gibeon” merely represents the original population of
that place under a collective name. Maachah would be a place in the
neighbourhood.
Gibeon.—Now el-Jib, about eight miles north-west of Jerusalem.
POOLE, "The father of Gibeon, i.e. the chief or ruler of the Benjamites dwelling
there.
These verses are occupied with the immediate ancestors and posterity of Saul. And
apparently the same account, minus some of its deficiencies, is repeated in the next
chapter, 1 Chronicles 8:35 -44. The two may be taken together here, and the latter
will help the interpretation of the former.
1 Chronicles 8:29
The father—i.e, the chief—of Gibeon. (For Gibeon, see Joshua 9:3, Joshua 9:7-18;
Joshua 10:2; Joshua 11:19; Nehemiah 7:25; Nehemiah 3:7.) The father of Gibeon (1
Chronicles 9:35) was Jehiel ( ‫ל‬ ֵ‫יא‬ ִ‫ﬠ‬ְ‫י‬ ; Chethiv spells with vau; not ‫ל‬ ֵ‫יא‬ ִ‫ח‬ְ‫י‬,1 Chronicles
15:24). Of Jehiel by this name we do not elsewhere read. And even if it were on
other grounds possible to identify the person with the Abiel of 1 Samuel 9:1 and 1
Samuel 14:51, it is not possible to identify the names. Compare the similar
remarkable omission of the name of the "father of Gibea" (1 Chronicles 2:49), an
omission to be filled very possibly by this same name Jehiel.
30 and his firstborn son was Abdon, followed by
Zur, Kish, Baal, Ner,[d] Nadab,
32

GILL 30-31, "And his firstborn son Abdon,.... That is, Jehiel's, the father or prince
of Gibeon; other sons follow:
Zur, Kish, Baal, Nadab, Gedor, Ahio, and Zacher; called Zechariah, 1Ch_9:37
and between Baal and Nadab, Ner is placed, 1Ch_9:36 and another son is added at the
end of 1Ch_9:37, Mikloth next mentioned.
ELLICOTT, "(30) The sons of Abi-Gibeon—that is, the Benjamite clans of Gibeon.
The name of Ner has fallen out between Baal and Nadab. (Comp. 1 Chronicles
9:36.) That of Baal is interesting. Comp. 1 Chronicles 8:33-34, where we find
Eshbaal and Merib-baal (rather Meri-baal, i.e., “man of Baal”); comp. Merbal in
Herod, vii. 88. It appears from Hosea 2:16 that the title Baal (lord) was once applied
to Jehovah in common, speech: “Thou shalt call me Ishi, and shalt no more call me
Baali.” After the name had become associated with a foreign and idolatrous cultus,
it was discarded in favour of the synonymous Adon (Adonai).
These verses contain the names of eight sons of Jehiel instead of the ten of 1
Chronicles 9:36, 1 Chronicles 9:37. Both of the missing names, however (viz. Ner
after Baal, and Mikloth after Zacher), are introduced in verses immediately
succeeding, where their sons are spoken of. One name, Zacher, also is spelt as
Zechariah in 1 Chronicles 9:37. Both these passages agree in representing Net as the
grandfather of Saul. Not so the two passages in Samuel (1 Samuel 9:1; 1 Samuel
14:51), the first of which writes Abiel in the place of the grandfather instead of
great-grandfather, which, however, need occasion little difficulty; and the second of
which would certainly allow Ner to be grandfather to Saul, but seems to call him
uncle. Even then, if we accept what the passage allows, it is somewhat remarkable
that in the next verse Ner should be signalized as father of Abner rather than of
Kish—a difficulty, however, much less considerable if we accept the suggestion (see
'Speaker's Commentary,' in loc.) to translate verse 51 thus, by the substitution of
the word "sons" for "son:" "And Kish the father of Saul, and Ner the father of
Abner, were sons of Abiel." It must be remembered at the same time that this is not
equivalent to saying that they were necessarily brothers, but only descendants of the
chief of the family, of the Demarch or Phylarch under mention in the genealogy.
33

31 Gedor, Ahio, Zeker
GILL, "And Mikloth begat Shimeah,.... Called Shimeam, 1Ch_9:38.
and these also dwelt with their brethren in Jerusalem, over against them; in
another part of the city, right beside them.
ELLICOTT, " (31) Ahio.—The recurrence of this name here lends some support to
the Authorised Version in 1 Chronicles 8:14.
Zacher.—Heb., Zecher (comp. Shamer-Shemer), the Zechariah of 1 Chronicles 9:37,
which is in fact the full form of the name. Such abbreviations are common. (See 1
Chronicles 5:26, Note.) After Zecher, the phrase and Mikloth has dropped out of the
text, because 1 Chronicles 8:32 begins with the same words. (See 1 Chronicles 9:33.)
32 and Mikloth, who was the father of Shimeah.
They too lived near their relatives in Jerusalem.
BENSON, "1 Chronicles 8:32. These also dwelt with their brethren in Jerusalem —
With those other Benjamites spoken of 1 Chronicles 8:28; over against them — In
some street or part of Jerusalem, which was over against that where their brethren
34

dwelt.
ELLICOTT, " (32) Shimeah is essentially the same word as Shimeam (1 Chronicles
9:38). The latter is a mimmated form (i.e., a more ancient form of the noun, with the
original ending m).
And these also dwelt with their brethren in Jerusalem, over against them.—
Literally, And they also, before their brethren, dwelt in Jerusalem with their
brethren. The verse seems to tell us that of all the stock of Gibeon only the branch of
Mikloth-Shimeah settled in Jerusalem. When, we are not informed. Some think the
reference is to the repeopling of Jerusalem after the Restoration (Nehemiah 11:1).
“Before their brethren.”—Before in Heb. means east, as behind means west. The
clans in question dwelt in Jerusalem, to the east of their fellow-tribesmen in Gibeon.
With their brethren—that is, with the other Benjamite clans settled in Jerusalem (1
Chronicles 8:16-28).
POOLE, " With their brethren, i.e. with those other Benjamites spoken of 1
Chronicles 8:28.
Over against them; in some street or part of Jerusalem, which was over against that
where their brethren dwelt.
33 Ner was the father of Kish, Kish the father of
Saul, and Saul the father of Jonathan, Malki-
Shua, Abinadab and Esh-Baal.[e]
BARNES, "This verse combined with 1Ch_9:35-39, seems to show that the genealogy
35

of Saul was:
Abiel (= Jehiel?)
Ner
Kish Abner
Saul
Rather than that to be inferred from 1Sa_9:1; 1Sa_14:50-51.
In 1Sa_14:49 note, it is concluded that Saul’s second son bore the two names of
“Ishui” and “Abinadab.” But the order of the names here:
(1) Jonathan;
(2) Malchi-shua; and
(3) Abinadab - suggests another explanation, namely, that Ishui, the second son, died
young, and that Abinadab was really the fourth son.
Esh-baal - Previous to the introduction of the Phoenician Baal-worship into Israel by
Ahab, the word “Baal” ‫בעל‬ ba‛al had no bad sense in Hebrew, but was simply an
equivalent of the more ordinary ‫אל‬ 'êl, “God” (1Ch_3:1 note). Hence, there is nothing
strange in the use at this time of the names, “Esh-baal” (“man of God”), “Baal,” “Beel-
iada,” “Merib-baal,” etc. Later on such names became offensive to pious ears, and were
changed for the better, or for the worse, “Beel-iada” becoming “El-iada” (“let God aid”) -
“Esh-baal,” “Ish-bo-sheth” (“man of shame”) - “Merib-baal,” “Mephi-bosheth;” and the
like.
GILL, "And Ner begat Kish,.... Who also is called Abiel, as the Targum here adds; for
Ner had two names, as other Jewish writers likewise say (r), see 1Sa_9:1,
and Kish begat Saul; the first king of Israel, for whose sake chiefly the genealogy of
Benjamin is revised and enlarged in this chapter:
and Saul begat Jonathan, and Malchishua, and Abinadab, and Eshbaal, see
1Sa_31:2. Abinadab is called Ishui, 1Sa_14:49 and Eshbaal is the same with Ishbosheth,
2Sa_2:8, so Baal and Bosheth are used of the same idol of which they are names, Hos_
9:10.
HENRY 33-40, "It is observable that among all the genealogies of the tribes there is no
mention of any of the kings of Israel after the defection from the house of David, much
less of their families; not a word of Jeroboam's house or Baasha's, of Umri's or Jehu's;
for they were all idolaters. But of the family of Saul, which was the royal family before
the elevation of David, we have here a particular account. 1. Before Saul, Kish and Ner
36

only are named, his father and grandfather, 1Ch_8:33. His pedigree is carried higher
1Sa_9:1, only there Kish is said to be the son of Abiel, here of Ner. He was in truth the
son of Ner but the grandson of Abiel, as appears by 1Sa_14:51, where it is said that Ner
was the son of Abiel, and that Abner, who was the son of Ner, was Saul's uncle (that is,
his father's brother); therefore his father was also the son of Ner. It is common in all
languages to put sons for grandsons and other descendents, much more in the scanty
language of the Hebrews. 2. After Saul, divers of his sons are named, but the posterity of
none of them, save Jonathan only, who was blessed with numerous issue and those
honoured with a place in the sacred genealogies for the sake of his sincere kindness to
David. The line of Jonathan is drawn down here for about ten generations. Perhaps
David was, in a particular manner, careful to preserve that, and assigned it a page by
itself, because of the covenant made between his seed and Jonathan's seed forever, 1Sa_
20:15, 1Sa_20:23, 1Sa_20:42. This genealogy ends in Ulam, whose family became
famous in the tribe of Benjamin for the number of its valiant men. Of that one man's
posterity there were, as it should seem, at one time, 150 archers brought into the field of
battle, that were mighty men of valour, 1Ch_8:40. That is taken notice of concerning
them which is more a man's praise than his pomp or wealth is, that they were qualified
to serve their country.
JAMISON, "1Ch_8:33-40. Stock of Saul and Jonathan.
Ner begat Kish — The father of Ner, though not mentioned here, is stated (1Ch_
9:35) to have been Jehiel. Moreover, the father of Kish is said (1Sa_9:1) to have been
Abiel, the son of Zeror, whence it would seem that Abiel and Ner were names of the same
person.
Abinadab — the same as Ishui (1Sa_14:49).
Esh-baal — that is, Ish-bosheth.
K&D, "1Ch_8:33
The family of Ner. Ner begat Kish, and Kish Saul. According to 1Sa_9:1 and 1Sa_14:51,
Kish was a son of Abiel. this statement, on account of which Bertheau proposes to make
alterations in the text, may be reconciled with that in our verses, by the simple
supposition that in our verse intermediate names mentioned in 1Sa_9:1, and probably
others besides, are passed over, and Ner the son of Abi-Gibeon is named only because he
was the progenitor of the line by which Saul was descended from him. Saul (‫אוּל‬ָ‫)שׁ‬ is
King Saul. Only three of his four sons, 1Sa_14:49, are mentioned-those, namely, who fell
with him in the battle against the Philistines, 1Sa_31:2. The second is called, in 1Sa_
14:49, Ishui, but in 1Sa_31:2 Abinadab, as in our register, whence we gather that Ishui is
another name for Abinadab. The fourth, Eshbaal, is the same who is called in 2Sa_2:8,
and elsewhere, Ishbosheth, who was set up as king in opposition to David by Abner (see
on 2Sa_2:8).
ELLICOTT, " (33) The house of Saul It is not said here that Saul’s immediate
37

family was settled at Gibeon. From 1 Samuel 10:26; 1 Samuel 15:34, and 2 Samuel
21:6, we learn that Gibeah, or “Gibeah of Saul,” was the seat of the king. It is
gratuitous to suppose that the chronicler has confounded two different places.
And Ner begat Kish.—1 Samuel 9:1 gives the following pedigree of Kish: Kish son
of Abiel, son of Zeror, son of Bechorath, son of Aphiah; and 1 Samuel 14:51 states
that Kish the father of Saul, and Ner the father of Abner, were sons of Abiel. The
omission of intermediate names is not uncommon in these lists. We may, therefore,
suppose that some members of the genealogical series are here omitted between Ner
and Kish. The father of Abner was, of course, only a namesake of the present Ner,
which is perhaps a clan, not an individual.
Saul begat Jonathan.—So 1 Samuel 14:49; 1 Samuel 31:2; save that the former
passage has Ishui for Abinadab. This seems to be a case of double naming. Others
identify Ishui with Ishbosheth.
Abinadab.—Comp. Nadab, 1 Chronicles 8:30. Both are probably Divine titles,
meaning “the father (i.e., Jehovah) is noble.” Comp. Kammusu Nadbi, “Chemosh is
my prince,” the name of a Moabite king, mentioned by Sennacherib. Ner and Kish
also both occurred in 1 Chronicles 8:30 as Gibeonite clans. Here they (or at least
Kish) may be said to be personal names.
Esh-baal.—2 Samuel 2:8, Ish-bosheth, David’s rival king. Esh-baal (“man of Baal”)
is the true name. Ish-bosheth (“man of shame”) is a sort of euphemism, avoiding the
very mention of an idol. So the Merib-baal (“Baal strives;” rather, perhaps, Meri-
Baal, “man of Baal”) of 1 Chronicles 8:34 appears in 2 Samuel 4:4; 2 Samuel 9:6,
&c, as Mephibosheth, where probably the right reading is Meribbosheth. In like
manner, idols are styled “abominations.” 1 Kings 11:5 : “Milcom the abomination
(i.e., god) of the sons of Ammon,” and elsewhere. Beth-el, the sanctuary of the
golden calf, or rather bullock, is called Beth-aven. The “house of God” is a “house of
wickedness” (Hosea 4:15; Hosea 5:8; Joshua 7:2.) (See Note on 1 Chronicles 8:30.)
38

The number of Saul's children was certainly nine. In addition to the four (1 Samuel
31:2) mentioned here, there was Ishui, probably standing second (1 Samuel 14:49),
and there were two daughters, Merab and Michal (1 Samuel 14:49), and there were
two sons by Rizpah (2 Samuel 21:8), named Armoui and Mephi-bosheth. Esh-baal;
the same with Ishbo-sheth (2 Samuel 2:8; 2 Samuel 3:7-14; 2 Samuel 4:4-12). Merib-
baal; the same with Mephibosheth (2 Samuel 9:12). Micah is, therefore, the great-
grandson of Saul.
34 The son of Jonathan:
Merib-Baal,[f] who was the father of Micah.
CLARKE, "1Ch_8:33-40. Stock of Saul and Jonathan.
Ner begat Kish — The father of Ner, though not mentioned here, is stated (1Ch_
9:35) to have been Jehiel. Moreover, the father of Kish is said (1Sa_9:1) to have been
Abiel, the son of Zeror, whence it would seem that Abiel and Ner were names of the same
person.
Abinadab — the same as Ishui (1Sa_14:49).
Esh-baal — that is, Ish-bosheth.
GILL, "And the son of Jonathan was Meribbaal,.... The same with Mephibosheth,
2Sa_4:4 so Jerubbaal is called Jerubbesheth, Jdg_6:32.
and Meribbaal begat Micah; called his young son in David's time, 2Sa_9:12.
K&D 34-39, "1Ch_8:34-39
Jonathan's sons and grandsons. His son is called here and in 1Ch_9:40 Meribbaal,
while in 2Sa_4:4; 2Sa_9:6; 2Sa_16:1., 2Sa_19:25, he is called Mephibosheth, because
the name “striver with Baal” has been changed into ‫ת‬ ֶ‫שׁ‬ֹ‫ב‬‫י‬ ִ‫פ‬ ְ‫,מ‬ exterminans idolum. This
Meribbaal, who was lame in his feet (cf. 2Sa_4:4), had a son Micha (‫ה‬ָ‫יכ‬ ִ‫,מ‬ in 2Sa_9:12
39

written ‫א‬ָ‫יכ‬ ִ‫,)מ‬ of whom came a numerous race. He had four sons (1Ch_8:35), and the
family of the last-named of these (Ahaz) is traced down, in 1Ch_8:36-40, through ten
generations to the great-grandson of Eshek. First it is traced from Ahaz to Alemeth
(1Ch_8:36); then through Zimri, brother of this latter, to Binea, by ‫יד‬ ִ‫ל‬ ‫;ה‬ then further
by ‫נ‬ ְ‫בּ‬ (hisson) to Azel, of whom in 1Ch_8:38 six sons are enumerated; and finally, in
1Ch_8:39, the sons of his brother Eshek are named, and the sons and grandsons of the
first-born of this latter are then enumerated. The last two verses are wanting after 1Ch_
9:44. The names in the two registers correspond, except at one point, where we cannot
get rid of the discrepancy that for ‫ה‬ ָ‫דּ‬ַ‫ע‬ ‫ח‬ְ‫י‬ (1Ch_8:36) there stands in 1Ch_9:42 ‫ה‬ ָ‫ֲר‬‫ע‬ַ‫י‬
both times, probably through an error of transcription, by which out of the shortened
form ‫ה‬ ָ‫דּ‬ַ‫ע‬ְ‫י‬ there arose ‫,יערה‬ ‫ד‬ and ‫ר‬ being interchanged. Besides this, instead of the
ַ‫ע‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫א‬ ַ‫תּ‬ of 1Ch_8:35, we have in 1Ch_9:41, according to the harder pronunciation of the
gutturals, ַ‫ע‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫ח‬ ַ‫;תּ‬ and for ‫ה‬ָ‫פ‬ ָ‫,ר‬ 1Ch_8:37, we have in 1Ch_9:41 the longer original form
‫ָה‬‫י‬ָ‫פ‬ ְ‫.ר‬ Now since Ahaz, whose posterity is traced down to the tenth generation, was
descended from Jonathan in the third generation, and his grandfather Mephibosheth
was a boy of five years of age at the death of Saul and Jonathan (2Sa_4:4), the grandsons
of Ulam, mentioned in 1Ch_8:40, will be the thirteenth generation of Jonathan's
descendants. Now Jonathan fell along with Saul in the year 1055 b.c., and consequently
this thirteenth generation of Jonathan's descendants lived probably about 700 b.c., i.e.,
about 100 years before the Babylonian exile; for, according to the analogy of the royal
race of David, we cannot reckon more than twenty-five years on an average for each
generation.
(Note: Bertheau holds a contrary opinion to that given in the text, and thinks that
by the numerous sons and grandsons of Ulam the son of Eshek we are brought down
to post-exilic times, seeing that if Saul lived about 1080 b.c., and thirty years are
reckoned to each one of the thirteen generations (Eshek being a descendant of Saul
in the thirteenth generation), Azel and Eshek must have lived about 690 b.c. But this
estimate is too high, for we cannot reckon sixty years to Saul and Jonathan from
1080 onwards, since Jonathan fell along with Saul in 1055, and his son Meribbaal
was then hardly five years old, and must consequently have been born in 1060. For
the following generations, moreover, not more than twenty-five years on an average
should be reckoned. That being the case, the children's children of Ulam's sons, who
were the twelfth generation of Micha's descendants, may have lived from 760 b.c.
onwards, and during this period, from 760 to 700, may have increased to the troop
of blooming grandchildren of Ulam mentioned in 1Ch_8:40. But even supposing
that thirty years should be reckoned for each generation, the last-named generation
of 150 grandsons and great-grandsons of Ulam would have lived in the period from
660 to 600, i.e., before the exile, or at least before the first great deportation of the
people with Jehoiakim in the year 599 b.c.)
40

35 The sons of Micah:
Pithon, Melek, Tarea and Ahaz.
GILL, "And the sons of Micah were, Pithon, and Melech, and Tarea, and
Ahaz. The last but one is called Tahrea, 1Ch_9:41, where Ahaz is left out, though
supplied in our version.
ELLICOTT, " (35) Tarea.—Ta’rea. Tahrea (1 Chronicles 9:41) is a harder
pronunciation of the same name. The name Shime’ah, or Shime’am (1 Chronicles
8:32) appears to be a similar softening of the name Shime’ah (2 Samuel 13:3).
PULPIT, "Tarea; spelt Tahrea in verse 41 of next chapter. Ahaz, the last of the four
names contained in this verse, is supplied in italics, Authorized Version, next
chapter, verse 41.
36 Ahaz was the father of Jehoaddah, Jehoaddah
was the father of Alemeth, Azmaveth and Zimri,
and Zimri was the father of Moza.
GILL, "And Ahaz begat Jehoadah,.... Called Jarah, 1Ch_9:42.
and Jehoadah begat Alemeth, and Azmaveth, and Zimri; and Zimri begat
41

Moza; the same account is given, 1Ch_9:42.
JAMISON, "Jehoadah — or, Jara (1Ch_9:42).
ELLICOTT, " (36) Jehoadah.—Heb., Jeho’addah. 1 Chronicles 9:42 gives Jarah
(Heb., Ja’rah), a mistake arising from the common confusion of the Heb. d and r.
The name there should be read, “Jo’addah,” a contraction of the present form.
Alemeth.—In 1 Chronicles 7:8 a son of Becher; in 1 Chronicles 6:60 a Levitical
town. The name is apparently personal here.
PULPIT, "Jehoadah. The parallel passage in next chapter (verse 42) has Jarah; but
some manuscripts have Jahdah ( ‫ה‬ ָ‫דּ‬ ְ‫ַﬠ‬‫י‬ ), which comes very near our Jehoadah
( ‫ה‬ ָ‫דּ‬ַ‫הוֹﬠ‬ִ‫י‬ ). Zimri. It is possible that this Zimri may rightly be identified with the
usurper Zimri of 1 Kings 20-16:9 .
37 Moza was the father of Binea; Raphah was his
son, Eleasah his son and Azel his son.
GILL, "And Moza begat Binea; Rapha was his son,.... Called Rephaiah, 1Ch_
9:43.
Elasah his son; whose name is Eleasah, 1Ch_9:43.
Azel his son.
PULPIT, "Rapha. This name appears as Rephaiah in next chapter (verse 43).
42

38 Azel had six sons, and these were their names:
Azrikam, Bokeru, Ishmael, Sheariah, Obadiah
and Hanan. All these were the sons of Azel.
GILL, "And Azel had six sons, whose names are these, Azrikam, Bochim,
Ishmael, Sheariah, Obadiah, and Hanan,.... Which make the said number:
all these were the sons of Azel; his family was large.
ELLICOTT, " (38) Bocheru.—Some MSS. read “his firstborn,” with which, with
different points, the LXX. and the Syriac agree. This seems right, as the conjunctive
particle is wanting between Azrikam and the doubtful word, and Bocheru would be
anomalous as a proper name. (See Note on 1 Chronicles 8:40.)
Azel.—A place near Jerusalem was so called (Zechariah 14:5; Micah 1:11).
The genealogy runs on from Micah to Ulam with nothing special to remark upon.
Ulam is twelfth from Saul, while his "sons and sons' sons" (verse 40) are spoken of.
The time of Hezekiah must be reached, therefore, who was thirteenth from David.
The table of next chapter stops with the name Azel (1 Chronicles 9:44), and wears
the appearance of having just missed the last two verses of this chapter.
39 The sons of his brother Eshek:
Ulam his firstborn, Jeush the second son and
43

Eliphelet the third.
GILL, "(1Ch 8:39) And the sons of Eshek his brother were, Ulam his firstborn, Jehush
the second, and Eliphelet the third.
ELLICOTT, "(39) Eshek his brother—that is, the brother of Azel, and son of
Eleasah (1 Chronicles 8:37). The elder line is first developed.
PULPIT, "The name Ulam is found also among the descendants of Gilead, grandson
of Manasseh (1 Chronicles 7:17).
40 The sons of Ulam were brave warriors who
could handle the bow. They had many sons and
grandsons—150 in all.
All these were the descendants of Benjamin.
BARNES, "Sons, and sons’ sons - This genealogy of the house of Saul appears by
the number of the generations to belong probably to the time of Hezekiah (compare
1Ch_4:41). Ulam’s “sons’ sons” are in the 13th generation from Jonathan, as Hezekiah is
in the 13th generation from David.
44

CLARKE, "The sons of Ulam were mighty men of valor - The Targum speaks
honourably of them: “The sons of Ulam were mighty and strong men, subduing by
wisdom their evil concupiscence, as men bend a bow; therefore they had many sons and
grandsons.” Of the six sons of Azel, mentioned 1Ch_8:38, R. S. Jarchi says that their
allegorical expositions were sufficient to load thirteen thousand camels! No doubt these
were reputed to be deeply learned men. There was a time when the allegorizers and
metaphor-men ranked very high among theologians, even in our own enlightened and
critical country. At present they are almost totally out of fashion. May they never recover
their footing! But what a shameful hyperbole is that of Jarchi! The writings of six men a
load for thirteen thousand camels!
GILL, "And the sons of Ulam were mighty men of valour,.... Men of great
fortitude and courage, though their names are not expressed:
archers; skilful in the use of the bow and arrows, as the Benjaminites formerly were
famous for slinging stones:
and had many sons, and sons' sons, an hundred and fifty; so that the posterity
of Jonathan, whose genealogy is drawn down from 1Ch_8:34 hither, were very great;
and greater still, according to the Vulgate Latin version, in which the number is 150,000
in the edition of Sixtus the fifth, and so in most MSS of that version (s).
all these are of the sons of Benjamin; his posterity, whose names are given in this
chapter.
JAMISON, "mighty men of valour, archers — (see on Jdg_20:16). Great
strength as well as skill was requisite in ancient archery, as the bow, which was of steel,
was bent by treading with the feet, and pulling the string with both hands.
K&D, "1Ch_8:40
The sons of Ulam are called valiant heroes and archers, and must have shown the
same capability for war by which the tribe of Benjamin had been distinguished at an
earlier time; cf. Jdg_20:16, and for ‫ת‬ ֶ‫שׁ‬ ֶ‫ק‬ ‫י‬ֵ‫כ‬ ְ‫,דֹּר‬ cf. 1Ch_5:16. The subscription ‫ה‬ֶ‫לּ‬ ֵ‫ל־א‬ָ‫כּ‬ ‫מ‬
refers back to the superscription in 1Ch_8:1, and binds all the names in our chapter
together.
BENSON, "1 Chronicles 8:40. Archers — Hebrew, that tread the bow: for the bows
of steel, which these used, required great strength to bend them; which therefore
they did by treading the bow with their feet, and pulling the string with both their
45

hands.
COKE, "1 Chronicles 8:40. Archers— ‫דרכי‬ ‫קשׁת‬ dorkei kesheth; those who tread the
bow. Hebrew. For their steel bows were so strong, says Bishop Patrick, that they
could not bend them with their arms, but sat down, and pressing them with their
feet, drew the arrow with both hands, that it might fly with the greater force. See
Psalms 37:14.
REFLECTIONS.—1st, The names of some of Benjamin's descendants vary a little
from those in Genesis 46.; but what seems variety and intricacy to us, was, at the
time when this was written, no doubt, well understood. In 1 Chronicles 8:8 after sent
them away, it may best be read, even Hushim and Baara his wives, as divorced. The
Ehud mentioned 1 Chronicles 8:6 seems not to be the judge of that name. Those who
dwelt at Jerusalem are twice mentioned, as an inducement to their posterity to settle
there after their return from Babylon. When we depart from the prison of the body,
happy will it be for those who have a part in the new Jerusalem.
2nd, The family of Saul is here taken notice of. He had several sons; but the line of
Jonathan only is continued for about ten generations to Ulam, whose family was
much increased, and were remarkable for their valour, and their skill in the use of
the bow or sling. The name of a valiant soldier is great, but that of a saint of God
greater.
ELLICOTT, " (40) And the sons of Ulam were mighty men of valour, archers.—The
ancient prowess of the Benjamites is recorded in Judges 20. Their left-handed
slingers were famous. (See also Judges 3:15 seq.)
Archers.—Literally, treaders of the bow (1 Chronicles 5:18). The meaning is that
they drew their bows by resting the foot against them, the bows being large.
Had many sons, and sons’ sons, an hundred and fifty.—What was their date? If we
may assume that no names have been omitted, we are concerned with the fourteenth
46

generation from Jonathan, the friend of David. The era of David has been fixed at
about 1055-1045 B.C. ; so that the great-grandsons of Ulam may have flourished
about 635-625 B.C. (1055 minus 420), in the reign of Josiah. The omission of names,
however, is as possible and as likely in the present series as elsewhere; and it is
obvious that one or two additional members would carry the list past the exile (B.C.
588). There are reasons for believing that the posterity of Ulam really represent a
family of the period of the Return. Their number is favourable to the supposition.
Comp. Ezra 2:18; Ezra 2:21; Ezra 2:23; Ezra 2:27; Ezra 2:30 for families of about
the same dimensions, which returned with Zerubbabel. Further, the reference in 1
Chronicles 8:8-10 to a sojourn of certain Benjamite houses in Moab may be
connected with the mention in Ezra 2:6; Ezra 8:4; Nehemiah 3:11, and elsewhere, of
the “sons of the Pasha of Moab” (Pahath Mo’ab. This word pahath used to be
reckoned among the indications of the late origin of the Chronicle. Now, however, it
is known to be an ancient Semitic term. Comp. the Assyrian pihatu). Ono and Lod
(1 Chronicles 8:12) may be compared with Ezra 2:33, and the singular names Elam
(1 Chronicles 8:24) and Azmaveth (1 Chronicles 8:36), with the “sons of Elam”
(Ezra 2:7), and “the sons of Azmaveth,” or “Beth-azmaveth” (Ezra 2:24; Nehemiah
7:28). The name Bocheru (in 1 Chronicles 8:38) has been classed with Gashmu
(Nehemiah 6:6), but the latter is an Arab, and there is seemingly no MS. authority
for Bocheru. Ishmael (1 Chronicles 8:38) reminds us of “Ishmael son of Nethaniah,
of the seed royal” (2 Kings 25:25), who survived the fall of Jerusalem.
POOLE, "Archers, Heb. that tread the bow; for the bows of steel, which these used,
required great strength to bend them; which therefore they did by treading the bow
with their feet, and pulling the string with both their hands.
Footnotes:
1 Chronicles 8:3 Or Gera the father of Ehud
47

1 Chronicles 8:29 Some Septuagint manuscripts
(see also 9:35); Hebrew does not have Jeiel.
1 Chronicles 8:29 Father may mean civic leader
or military leader.
1 Chronicles 8:30 Some Septuagint manuscripts
(see also 9:36); Hebrew does not have Ner.
1 Chronicles 8:33 Also known as Ish-Bosheth
1 Chronicles 8:34 Also known as Mephibosheth
48

I chronicles 8 commentaryA

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (18)

Similar to I chronicles 8 commentaryA (20)

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

I chronicles 8 commentaryA