I Chronicles


I and II Chronicles are the names originally given to the record made by the

appointed historiographers in the kingdoms of Israel and Judah.  In the

Septuagint, these books are called Paralipomena (i.e. things omitted),

which is understood as meaning that they are supplementary to I and II

Kings.  The constant tradition of the Jews is that these books were for the

most part compiled by Ezra.  One of the greatest difficulties connected

with the captivity and return must have been the maintenance of that

genealogical distribution of the lands which yet was a vital point of the

Jewish economy.  To supply this want and that each tribe might secure

the inheritance of its fathers on its return was one object of the author

of these books.  Another difficulty intimately connected with the former

was the maintenance of the temple services at Jerusalem.  Zerubbabel,

and after him Ezra and Nehemiah, labored most earnestly to restore the

worship of God among the people, and to reinfuse something of

national life and spirit into their hearts.  Nothing could more effectually

aid these designs than setting before the people a compendious history

of the kingdom of David, its prosperity under God; the sins that led

to its overthrow; the captivity and return.  These considerations

explain the plan and scope of that historical work which consists of

the two books of the Chronicles. 


I Chronicles contains the sacred history by genealogies from the Creation

to David, including an account of David’s reign.


As regards the materials used by Ezra, they are not difficult to discover.

The genealogies are obviously transcribed from some register, in which

were preserved the genealogies of the tribes and families drawn up at

different times; while the history is mainly drawn from the same

documents as those used in I and II Kings.


The above introduction is taken from: 

A Dictionary of the Bible by William Smith, L.L.D.



DISCLAIMER:  Since I Chronicles is similar to the books of the Kings,

I have not cross-checked references nor looked for errors or mistakes –

I Chronicles will be copied straight out of the Pulpit Commentary,

which is a work that resides in the public domain.  May God bless

the work of those who compiled it – CY – 2010)






                                                I Chronicles 1





1   Adam, Sheth, Enosh,

2   Kenan, Mahalaleel, Jered,

3   Henoch, Methuselah, Lamech,

4   Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.


These verses contain a line of genealogical descents, ten in number, from

Adam to Noah, adding mention of the three sons of the latter. The stride

from Adam to Seth, and the genealogy’s entire obliviousness of Cain and

Abel, are full of suggestion. All of these thirteen names in the Hebrew and

in the Septuagint Version, though not those in the Authorized Version, are

facsimiles of those which occur in Genesis 5. They are not accompanied,

however, here, as they are there, by any chronological attempt. Probably

the main reason of this is that any references of the kind were quite beside

the objects which the compiler of this work had in view. It is, however,

possible that other reasons for this chronological silence may have existed.

The uncertainities attaching to the chronology found in Genesis, as regards

this table, may have been suspected or evident — uncertainties which

afterwards proclaim themselves so loudly in the differences observable

between the Hebrew, Samaritan, and Septuagint versions. Thus the

Hebrew text exhibits the total aggregate of years from Adam to the birth of

Noah, as amounting to one thousand and fifty-six; the Samaritan version to

seven hundred and seven only; and the Septuagint to as many as sixteen

hundred and sixty-two; nevertheless, all three agree in adding five hundred

years onward to the birth of Shem, and another hundred years to the

coming of the Flood. It must be remarked of this first genealogical table,

whether occurring here or in Genesis, that, notwithstanding its finished

appearance, notwithstanding the impression it undoubtedly first makes on

the reader, that it purports to give all the intervening generations from the

first to Shem, it may not be so; nor be intended to convey that impression.

It is held by some that names are omitted, and with them of course the

years which belonged to them. There can be no doubt that this theory

would go far to remove several great difficulties, and that some analogies

might be invoked in support of it, from the important genealogies of the

New Testament. The altogether abrupt opening of this book — a succession

of proper names without any verb or predication — cannot be considered as

even partially compensated by the first sentence of ch. 9., “So all Israel were

reckoned by genealogies; and behold, they are written in the book of the

kings of Israel and Judah.” This verse applies directly to the genealogies of

Israel and the tribes, beginning ch. 2:1, while under any circumstances, we must

look on the first portion of this book as a series of tables, here and there slightly

annotated, and suddenly suspended before the eyes.




5  The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan,

    and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras. 

6  And the sons of Gomer; Ashchenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah. 

7  And the sons of Javan;  Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim.


After the mention of Noah’s three sons, in the order of their age (though

some on slender ground think Ham the youngest), this order, as in

Genesis 10:2, is reversed; and the compiler, beginning with Japheth,

the youngest, apparently with the view of disposing of what his purpose

may not so particularly require, gives the names of seven sons and seven

grandsons, viz. three through Gomer, the eldest son, and four through

Javan, the fourth son. These fourteen names are identical in the

Authorized Version with the list of Genesis 10:2-4. The Septuagint,

though not identical in the spelling of the four names Madai, Tiras,

Tarshish, and Kittim, shows no material differences in the two places. In

the Hebrew, according to the text and edition consulted, very slight

variations are found in the orthography of Tubal (lB;tuw] here for lb;tuw])

and Tarshish (jv;yvir]t"w] here for vyvir]t"w])and in the adoption of Riphath

and Dodanim in this book for Diphath and Rodanim. The names Kittim

and Dodanim look less like names of individuals than of such family, tribe,

or nation as descended from the individual. At the close of this short

enumeration, we have in Genesis the statement, “By these were the isles of

the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their

families, in their nations” (v. 5).  It is evident here also that, whether the compiler

borrowed from the Book of Genesis itself, or from some common source

open to both, his objects are not exactly the same. Time and the present

position and condition of that part of his people for which he was writing

governed him, and dictated the difference. Accordingly we do not pause

here on the colonizings and the fresh seats and habitations of the sons and

grandsons of Japheth. The subject, one of extreme interest, and the threads

of it perhaps not so hopelessly lost as is sometimes thought, belongs to the

place in Genesis from which the above verse is cited. (I highly recommend

The Genesis Record by Henry Morris – CY – 2010)



                                    OF HAM (vs. 8-16)


8 The sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, Put, and Canaan.

9  And the sons of Cush; Seba, and Havilah, and Sabta, and Raamah,

    and Sabtecha. And the sons of Raamah; Sheba, and Dedan.

10  And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be mighty upon the earth.

11 And Mizraim begat Ludim, and Anamim, and Lehabim, and


12 And Pathrusim, and Casluhim, (of whom came the Philistines,)

     and Caphthorim.

13 And Canaan begat Zidon his firstborn, and Heth,

14 The Jebusite also, and the Amorite, and the Girgashite,

15 And the Hivite, and the Arkite, and the Sinite,

16 And the Arvadite, and the Zemarite, and the Hamathite.


 This list consists of four sons of Ham, of six grandsons, including Nimrod,

through Cush, the eldest son of Ham; of seven grandsons through Mizraim,

the second son of Ham; of eleven grandsons through Canaan, the fourth

son of Ham; of two greatgrandsons through Raamah, Cush’s fourth son;

thirty descendants in all. No issue is given of Put, the third son of Hem.

The parallel list is found in Genesis 10:6-20. The names agree in the Authorized

Version, with minute differences, e.g. Put here for Phut there, and so the Philistines

for Philistine, Caphthorim for Caphtorim, Girgashite for Girgasite. They are

similarly in agreement in the Hebrew text of the two places, with minute

differences, e.g. aT;b]s"w] here for hT;b]s"w] there; am;[]r"w] for hm;[]r"w] for

hm;[]r"w] μyyidWl for μyyidWl ˆwOdyxi for ˆdoyxi yqir]["h". However, in

Genesis 10:9-12, the following statements are added to Nimrod’s name: —

“He was a mighty hunter before the Lord: wherefore it is said, Even as

Nimrod the mighty. hunter before the Lord. And the beginning of his kingdom

was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. Out of

that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and

Calah, and Resen between Nineveh and Calah; the same is a great city.”

And again, at the close of the enumeration of sons, grandsons, and greatgrandsons,

follow the statements, “And afterwards were the families of the

Canaanites spread abroad. (I say in my book My One Hundred and One

Favorite Artifacts from the Little River Clovis Complex that I believe

this is a reference to man’s adventures, even into America and the New World

CY – 2010) - And the border of the Canaanites was from Sidon, as thou

comest to Gerar, unto Gaza; as thou goest, unto Sodom, and Gomorrah,

and Admah, and Zeboim, even unto Lasha. These are the sons of Ham,

after their families, after their tongues, in their countries, and

in their nations” (Ibid. vs. 18b-20).  In v. 10 the Septuagint supplies the

word kunhgo<v after gi>gav. Also after this description of Nimrod, it proceeds

to the enumeration of the posterity of Shem, omitting all mention of Ham’s

grandsons through Mizraim and Cainan. Up to that point the names in this book

and Genesis are in agreement in the Septuagint Version. It is evident that some

of the names in this portion of the genealogy are not strictly those of the

individual, but of the tribe or nation which came to be, as, for instance,

Mizraim, Ludim, the Jebusite, the Amorite, and so on.  V. 16 furnishes

us with one illustration of the assertion made above, that the clues to the

ethnological and ethnographical statements of these most ancient records

are not necessarily all hopelessly lost. In the name Zemarite, it is suggested

by Michaelis, that we have allusion to the place Sumra, on the west coast of

Syria, this Sumra being the Siniyra of Pliny (‘Hist. Nat.,’ 5:20), and of the

Spanish geographer of the first century, Pomponius Mela (1. 12). But the place

Zimira, in company with Arpad, is found in the Assyrian inscriptions of Sargon,

B.C. 720, leaving little cause to hesitate in accepting the identification of

Michaelis (Courier’s ‘Handbook to the Bible,’ p. 233). Certainty, however,

cannot be felt on the subject.





17 The sons of Shem; Elam, and Asshur, and Arphaxad, and Lud, and

     Aram, and Uz, and Hul, and Gether, and Meshech.

18 And Arphaxad begat Shelah, and Shelah begat Eber.

19 And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg;

     because in his days the earth was divided: and his brother’s name

     was Joktan.

20 And Joktan begat Almodad, and Sheleph, and Hazarmaveth, and


21 Hadoram also, and Uzal, and Diklah,

22 And Ebal, and Abimael, and Sheba,

23 And Ophir, and Havilah, and Jobab. All these were the sons of


24 Shem, Arphaxad, Shelah,

25 Eber, Peleg, Reu,

26 Serug, Nahor, Terah,

27 Abram; the same is Abraham.


This list is broken in two; it pauses a moment exactly halfway to

Abram, at the name Peleg, to mention Peleg’s brother Joktan and Joktan’s

thirteen sons. Then, repeating the first five names of lineal descent, and

picking up the thread at Peleg, the list gives the remaining five to Abram.

In the first half of this list, we have apparently the names of nine sons of

Shem, but, as Genesis explains, really the names of five sons, and through

Aram, the last of them, the names of four grandsons. Another grandson,

through Arphaxad the third son, follows, and through this grandson two

consecutive lineal descents bring us, in the name Peleg, half-way to Abram.

It is here the lineal table pauses to give Joktan and his thirteen sons. The

names then in this portion of the list are twenty-six in number. In the

Authorized Version they correspond with those in Genesis, except that

Meschech (Ëv,m,w;) here is called Mash (vm"w;) there; Shelah here is spelled

Salah there; and Ebal (lb;y[e) here is written Obal (lb;wO[) there. The

difference between the Hebrew texts justifies the first and last of these

variations in the Authorized Version, but in all other respects those texts

are in entire accord with one another, for this paragraph. The Septuagint

gives very little of this portion of the list. It corresponds, whether with the

Hebrew or the Authorized Version, only as far as to the name Arphaxad,

after which it carries down the line at once to Abram by the remaining

eight names as given in our twenty-fourth to twenty-seventh verses. Nor is

it in agreement with its own version in Genesis, which has points of

important variation with the Hebrew text also. It is then at this break of the

list that, after the names of Joktan’s sons, we have in Genesis these words,

“And their dwelling was from Mesha, as thou goest unto Sephar a mount

of the east. These are the sons of Shem, after their families, after their

tongues, in their lauds, after their nations. These are the families of the sons

of Noah, after their generations, in their nations; and by these were the

nations divided in the earth after the Flood” (Ibid. vs. 30-32). Upon this

follows the account of Babel, in nine long verses, and then a chronological

summary is furnished in lineal descent only from Shem to Abram. It is with the

names in this chronological summary that those in this second part of our list

(vs. 24-27) are found to agree. But any attempt at reproduction of the

chronology found in Genesis is again absent here. At this point a significant

stage of these genealogies is reached. The ever-broadening stream of

population now narrows again. Two thousand years have flown by, then

Abraham appears on the stream and tide of human life. Of that long period

the life of Adam himself spanned nearly the half. So far we learn without

partiality of all his descendants in common. But henceforth, the real, the

distinct purpose of the genealogy becomes apparent, in that the line of the

descendants of Abraham, and that by one family, alone is maintained, and

proves to be a purpose leading by one long straight line to Christ Himself.

With Abraham “the covenant of innoceney,” long forfeited in Adam, is

superseded by the everlasting “covenant of grace,” and we lose sight in

some measure of Adam, the “common father of our flesh,” to think of a

happier parentage found in Abraham, the “common father of the faithful.”




            DESCENDANTS OF ABRAHAM (vs. 28-37)


28 The sons of Abraham; Isaac, and Ishmael.

29 These are their generations: The firstborn of Ishmael, Nebaioth;

then Kedar, and Adbeel, and Mibsam,

30 Mishma, and Dumah, Massa, Hadad, and Tema,

31 Jetur, Naphish, and Kedemah. These are the sons of Ishmael.

32 Now the sons of Keturah, Abraham’s concubine: she bare Zimran,

and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah. And

the sons of Jokshan; Sheba, and Dedan.

33 And the sons of Midian; Ephah, and Epher, and Henoch, and

Abida, and Eldaah. All these are the sons of Keturah.

34 And Abraham begat Isaac. The sons of Isaac; Esau and Israel.

35 The sons of Esau; Eliphaz, Reuel, and Jeush, and Jaalam, and


36 The sons of Eliphaz; Teman, and Omar, Zephi, and Gatam, Kenaz,

and Timna, and Amalek.

37 The sons of Reuel; Nahath, Zerah, Shammah, and Mizzah.


In the first of these verses the new form of the name of Abraham is at once used

in place of the old form. And the names of two of his sons are given, Isaac the

son by Sarah, and Ishmael the son by Hagar, his Egyptian bondwoman. That

these stand in the inverse order of their birth and age requires no explanation. The

distinct and separate mention of these two sons, apart from all the others,

is of course in harmony with Genesis 21:12-13, “In Isaac shall thy seed

be called. And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation,

because he is thy seed.” Although stated in the first place in the order of

importance, and Isaac takes precedence of Ishmael, the name of this latter

and of his posterity are treated of first. To note each clear instance of this

kind will guard us against inferring, in cases not clear, anything positive,

one way or the other, respecting seniority merely from order. The order

either of age or of historic importance may be given in the first instance, to

be immediately reversed in favor of the order which shall enable the writer

to clear out of his way the less important.  Vs. 29-31 contain the list of Ishmael’s

sons, twelve in number. The names in the Authorized Version and in the Hebrew

text are identical respectively with those in Genesis 25:13-15, except that for Hadar

there we read Hadad here. In the Septuagint we have Idouma, Choudan,

Iettar here, for Douma, Choddan, and Ietur there. At the close of this list

in Genesis we have joined on to “these are the sons of Ishmael,” the

clauses, “and these are their names, by their towns, and by their castles;

twelve princes according to their nations. And these are the years of the life

of Ishmael, an hundred and thirty and seven years: and he gave up the

ghost and died; and was gathered unto his people. And they dwelt from

Havilah unto Shur, that is before Egypt, as thou goest toward Assyria: and

he died in the presence of all his brethren” (Ibid. 16-18).   Vs. 32-33,

contain the list of Abraham’s sons by Keturah, here called one of his concubines;

but in Genesis, “a wife,” and apparently not taken by Abraham till after Sarah’s

death (Genesis 25:1-4). The sons are six; the grandsons, two by the son placed

second in order, and five by the son placed fourth in order; in all thirteen names.

But the passage in Genesis gives also three great-grandsons, through the second

grandson. All the thirteen are in the Authorized Version identical in the two places

and in the Hebrew text; but in the Septuagint slight differences occur, as Zembram,

Iexan, Madam, Sobak, Soe, Daidan, Sabai, Opher, Abida, and Eldada

here, for Zombran, Iezan, Madal, Iesbok, Soie, Dedan, Saba, Apheir,

Abeida, and Eldaga there. It is carefully stated in Genesis 25:5-6, after

the enumeration of Keturah’s children, and in spite of her having been

called “wife” in the first verse, that “Abraham gave all that he had unto

Isaac. But unto the sons of the concubines, which Abraham had, Abraham

gave gifts, and sent them away from Isaac his sou, while he yet lived,

eastward, unto the east country.”  Vs. 34-37 lead us on to the descendants

of Isaac, the more important branch of Abraham’s family. It breaks again at

once into two, Esau, the less important, treated of first; and Israel, reserved

till we enter on ch. 2.  Of Esau, the names of five sons are given; and of seven

grandsons by the first in order, and four grandsons by the second in order of these

sons. In Genesis 36:1-5 we have the names of the five sons of Esau, which

correspond in the Authorized Version and in the Hebrew text exactly with

those of this list. We have there in addition the names of their mothers

respectively, who were “daughters of Canaan,” Adah of the Hittites,

mother of the first; Bashamath of the Ishmaelites, mother of the second

(and by these two lines came the seven and four grandsons); and

Aholibamah of the Hivites, mother of the remaining three sons. The names

correspond also in the Septuagint in the two places, with the minute

differences of Eliphaz and Ieoul here, for Eliphas and Ieous there. Then

follow the names of seven grandsons of Esau though his son Eliphaz, of

whom the first five are found and in agreement (Genesis 36:11), with

the exception of Zephi here for Zepho there, both in the Authorized

Version and in the Hebrew text. But the sixth name here, Timna, is

explained in Genesis as the name of a concubine of Eliphaz, by whom he

had the son Amalek, who appears here as the seventh son. There can be no

doubt that we come here upon a transcriber’s error, and it would be easily

amended if we read “and by Timna, Amalek,” vice “and Timna and

Amalek.” If this be the correct account of the matter, the grandsons of

Esau of course count one fewer here. These two names also tally in the

Authorized Version and in the Hebrew text in the two places; while for all

seven names the agreement in the Septuagint is exact, except that we read

Gootham here for Gothom there. There remain, in v. 37, four grandsons

to Esau, by Reuel. Their names agree with Genesis in the Authorized

Version, in the Hebrew text, and in the Septuagint, except that this last

reads Naches here for Nachoth there.



            LIST OF DESCENDANTS OF SEIR (vs. 38-42)


38 And the sons of Seir; Lotan, and Shobal, and Zibeon, and Anah,

     and Dishon, and Ezar, and Dishan.

39 And the sons of Lotan; Hori, and Homam: and Timna was Lotan’s


40 The sons of Shobal; Alian, and Manahath, and Ebal, Shephi, and

     Onam. and the sons of Zibeon; Aiah, and Anah.

41 The sons of Anah; Dishon. And the sons of Dishon; Amram, and

     Eshban, and Ithran, and Cheran.

42 The sons of Ezer; Bilhan, and Zavan, and Jakan. The sons of

     Dishan; Uz, and Aran.


 These verses contain the names of seven sons of Seir and one daughter, and of

grandsons through every one of the seven sons, viz. two through Lotan

the first, five through Shobal the second, two through Zibeon the third,

one through Anah the fourth, four through Dishon the fifth, three through

Ezar the sixth, and two through Dishan the seventh, — twenty-six names

in all, or, including the one daughter, who is introduced as Lotan’s sister,

twenty-seven. The first question which arises is, who Seir was, now first

mentioned here. He is called in Genesis 36:20 Seir the Horite,” and

the only previous mention of the name Seir in that chapter is in v. 8,

“Thus dwelt Esau in mount Seir: Esau is Edom;” while we read in

Genesis 14:6, “The Horites in mount Seir;” in Genesis 32:3, “To

the land of Seir, the country of Edom.” For anything we know of the

person Seir, then, we are confined to these two notices — that in

Genesis 36:20 and the one in our text. The name signifies “rough;” and

whether Seir. the person, took the name from Seir, the place (a mountain

district, reaching from the Dead Sea to the Elanitic Gulf), or vice versa, it

would seem plain that the proper name belonged to the head of the tribe,

which had become located there, and was, of course, not in the line of

Abraham. This tribe, called Horites — Hori being the name of Seir’s eldest

grandson — or Troglodytes, (cavemen) acquired their name from hollowing out

dwellings in the rocks, as at Petra. They were visited evidently by Esau: he

married at least one of his wives from them; and his descendants, the

Edomites, in due time dispossessed and superseded them

(Deuteronomy 2:12). No doubt some were left behind, and contentedly

submitted to the Edomites and became mingled with them. These

considerations put together account for the introduction here of the names

of Seir and his twenty-seven descendants, while the particulars of their

genealogy, so far as here given, would lie easily to hand. The sons of Seir

are called in Genesis also “dukes” (ypeWLa"), a word answered to by the

later “sheikhs;” and they are called “dukes of the Horites,” or “the dukes of

Hori, among their dukes in the land of Seir.” The twenty-six or twenty-seven

names under notice agree in the Authorized Version entirely with

those in Genesis 36:20-27, except that for Homam, Allan, Shephi,

Amram, and Jakan here, we have Hemam, Alvan, Shepho, Hemdan, and

Akau there. Also in the Hebrew the texts agree in the two places as regards

these names, with the same exceptions. But in the Septuagint the names

differ much more in the two places. Thus for Wsa<r, Disa>n (or

Lisa>n),jAlw<n Taibh<l Swfi< Wna>n, Aiq Swna<n Daisw<n jEmerw<n

jAsebw<n, jIeqra<m, and Aka>n here, we have jAsa<r, JRisw<n Gwla<m

Gaibh<l Swfa<r Wma<r jAi>e, jAna> Dhsw<n jAmada< jAsba<n jIqra<n, and

JIouka>m there. When the name of Anah is reached in Genesis, it is added,

“This was that Anah that found the mules [μybiY"h"Ata,, more probably ‘hot

springs,’ as the finder of which Anah is supposed to have been called

Beeri] in the wilderness, as he fed the asses of Zibeon, his father.” And

again, when Dishon is mentioned as the son of Anah, there is added, “And

Aholi-bamah the daughter of Anah.” Note is made of her name, no doubt,

for the same kind of reason as Timna is mentioned above. Aholibamah (i.q.

“Judith, the daughter of Beeri the Hittite,” Genesis 26:34) enjoys notice

inasmuch as she became the wife of Esau; and Timna, as she became the

concubine of Esau’s son Eliphaz, and thereby the mother of Amalek.



            LIST OF KINGS OF EDOM (vs. 43-50)  


43 Now these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom before

     any king reigned over the children of Israel; Bela the son of Beor:

     and the name of his city was Dinhabah.

44 And when Bela was dead, Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah

     reigned in his stead.

45 And when Jobab was dead, Husham of the land of the Temanites

     reigned in his stead.

46 And when Husham was dead, Hadad the son of Bedad, which

     smote Midian in the field of Moab, reigned in his stead: and the

     name of his city was Avith.

47 And when Hadad was dead, Samlah of Masrekah reigned in his


48 And when Samlah was dead, Shaul of Rehoboth by the river

     reigned in his stead.

49 And when Shaul was dead, Baalhanan the son of Achbor reigned

     in his stead.

50 And when Baalhanan was dead, Hadad reigned in his stead: and

     the name of his city was Pai; and his wife’s name was Mehetabel,

     the daughter of Matred, the daughter of Mezahab.


These verses contain a list of kings who reigned in Edom, during a period

expressly notified as anterior to the institution of kings in Israel. Some further

point of practical use than has been yet ascertained may lie in the preservation

of these snatches of Edom’s history. Something surely hangs on the emphatic but

otherwise gratuitous statement, that kings were unknown in Israel when

this line reigned in Edom (v. 43).  It may turn out to cover the fulfillment of some

obscure point of prophecy, or to subserve some important chronological

purpose; but wedged in as it is, it cannot be permitted to count for nothing.

That it stands in identical words in Genesis 36:31 increases not a little

the attention to be paid to it. Kings had been promised to Jacob (Genesis 35:11),

as among his posterity, and had been prophesied of by Moses (Deuteronomy

28:36).  It may have been that Edom, secure in her kings for generations, had

been wont to make her boast of them. in comparison of and in presence of her

neighbors, and the remark may have thence originated. Lastly, it has been

correctly pointed out that the structure of the sentence in the original does

not at all necessitate the suggestion (of which in the English Version there

is confessedly the appearance), that kings had already been in Israel. At

the same time, too great stress must not be laid upon this, for the slight

alteration of translation that would suit the time for Genesis, would throw

it out again for our text here, and yet the words of the original are

identical. These kings are eight in number; the parentage or the land of

each is given. It is to be noticed that the line of royalty is not hereditary,

and that several dukes, or heads of tribes, or princes of districts, rule under

the king. The names, whether of persons or places, agree in the Authorized

Version as they occur here and in Genesis 36:31-39, except that Saul is

here spelt Shaul, and that we have here Hadad and Pai for Hadar and Pan

there. These two differences are occasioned by the Hebrew text, and are

the only differences between the two Hebrew texts, except that μv;wOj here

is given μv;ju there, and that the incorrect spelling here of twyi[} is found

right (tywi[}) in Genesis. The superfluous statement, Hadad died also,

which begins our fifty-first verse, is not found in Genesis. In the Septuagint

the variations between the two places are greater, as well as those from the

Hebrew text in either place. Thus we have Asom, Gethaim, Sebla,

Roboth, Balaennor, Achobor, Adad, here, for Asom, Getthaim, Samada,

Robboth, Ballenon, Achobor, Arad, there. There is also an entire omission

here of the name of the wife of the last king, with those of her mother and

grandmother, all of which are given in the passage of Genesis, as found in

the Hebrew text.   In v. 44 it is not impossible that this Jobab is one with Job.

The allusions in Genesis 36:11 to “Eliphaz the Temanite” have directed

attention to this; and it has been favored by the Septuagint and the Fathers.

In v. 48 -  Rehoboth by the river; i.e. the Euphrates, to distinguish it

probably from “the city Rehoboth” of Genesis 10:11.



            LIST OF ELEVEN DUKES OF EDOM (vs. 51-54)


51 Hadad died also. And the dukes of Edom were; duke Timnah, duke

     Aliah, duke Jetheth,

52 Duke Aholibamah, duke Elah, duke Pinon,

53 Duke Kenaz, duke Teman, duke Mibzar,

54 Duke Magdiel, duke Iram. These are the dukes of Edom.


These, the remaining verses appear to give a list of eleven dukes of Edom,

emphasized apparently as “the dukes of Edom,” as though there were none

before or after them. But see Genesis 36:15, 41, 43, the study of which

can scarcely leave a doubt on the mind that this list is not one of persons

but of places; e.g. “the duke” of the city, or region of “Timnah,” and so on.

The places were dukedoms. The names of these verses, in both Authorized

Version and Hebrew text, are an exact counterpart of those found in

Genesis 36:40-43, except that Aliah here (so Alian, v. 40) stands for

Alvah in Genesis. In the Septuagint we have Golada, Elibamas, and

Babsar here, for Gola, Olibemas, and Mazar there. Thus this first chapter

contains those genealogical tables which concern the patriarchs from Adam

up to Israel, spanning a stretch of some two thousand three hundred years,

and embracing also tables of Edom and certain of the descendants of Edom

up to the period of kings. The chapter contains not a single instance of a

remark that could be described as of a moral, religious, or didactic kind.

Yet not a little is to be learnt sometimes, not a little suggested, from

omission and solemn silence as well as from speech; no more notable

instance of which could perhaps be given, when we take into account time,

place, and circumstances, than that already alluded to in the omissions

involved in the following of the name of Seth upon that of Adam. The

genealogies of this chapter, with their parallels in Genesis, are notable

 also for standing unique in all the world’s writing, and far over all the

world’s mythology, for retracing the pedigree of the wide family of men,

and especially of the now scattered family of the Jew, to its original.

From the time of the close of our Chronicle genealogies, supplemented by the

earliest of the New Testament, no similarly comprehensive but useful,

ambitious but deliberately designed and successfully executed enterprise

has been attempted. And as Matthew Henry has well said, since Christ

came, the Jews have lost all their genealogies, even the most sacred of them,

the building is reared, the scaffold is removed; the Seed is come, the

line that led to Him is broken off.”



"Excerpted text Copyright AGES Library, LLC. All rights reserved.

Materials are reproduced by permission."


This material can be found at:



If this exposition is helpful, please share with others.