---

The Table of Priestly-Code.

1a. Superscription.—Shēm, Ḥām, and Yepheth] compare 5³² (Priestly-Code), 9¹⁸ (Yahwist).

On the original sense of the names only vague conjectures can be reported. שֵׁם is supposed by some to be the Hebrew word for ‘name,’ applied by the Israelites to themselves in the first instance as בְּנֵי שֵׁם = ‘men of name’ or ‘distinction’—the titled or noble race (compare ὀνομαστός): “perhaps nothing more than the ruling caste in opposition to the aborigines.” So Wellhausen (Die Composition des Hexateuchs und der historischen Bücher des Alten Testaments² 14), who compares the name ‘Aryan,’ and contrasts בני בלי שם (Job 30⁸); compare Budde Die biblische Urgeschichte 328 f.; al. Gunkel (73) mentions a speculation of Jensen that שׁם is the Babylonian šumu, in the sense of ‘eldest son,’ who perpetuates the father’s name.

חָם must, at a certain stage of tradition, have supplanted the earlier כְּנַעַן as the name of Noah’s third son (page 182). The change is easily explicable from the extension of geographical knowledge, which made it impossible any longer to regard the father of the Canaanites as the ancestor of one-third of the human race; but the origin of the name has still to be accounted for. As a Hebrew word it might mean ‘hot’ (Joshua 9¹², Job 37¹⁷): hence it has been taken to denote the hot lands of the south (Lepsius, al.; compare Jubilees viii. 30: “the land of Ham is hot”). Again, since in some late Psalms (78⁵¹ 105^23. 27 106²²) חם is a poetic designation of Egypt, it has been plausibly connected with the native keme or chemi = ‘black,’ with reference to the black soil of the Nile valley (Bochart, Ebers, Budde, 323 ff.).¹ A less probable theory is that of Glaser, cited by Hommel (The Ancient Hebrew Tradition as illustrated by the Monuments, 48), who identifies it with Egyptian ‛amu, a collective name for the neighbouring Semitic nomads, derived by Müller (Asien und Europa nach altägyptischen Denkmälern, 123 ff.) from their distinctive primitive weapon, the boomerang.

יֶפֶת is connected in 9²⁷ with √ פתה, and no better etymology has been proposed. Cheyne (Encyclopædia Biblica, ii. 2330) compares the theophorous personal name Yapti-‛Addu in Tel-Amarna Tablets, and thinks it a modification of יִפְתַּח־אֵל, ‘God opens.’ But the form פתה (pitû) with the probable sense of ‘open’ also occurs in the Tablet (Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, v. 290 [last line]). The derivation from √ יפה (beautiful), favoured by Budde (358 ff.), in allusion to the beauty of the Phœnician cities, is very improbable. The resemblance to the Greek Iapetos was pointed out by Buttmann, and is undoubtedly striking. Ἰάπετος was the father of Prometheus, and therefore (through Deukalion) of post-diluvian mankind. The identification is approved by Weizsäcker (Roscher’s Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie ii. 55 ff.), who holds that Ἰάπετος, having no Greek etymology, may be borrowed from the Semites (compare Lenormant ii. 173–193). See, further, Meyer Die Israeliten und ihre Nachbarstämme, 221.

A curiously complicated astro-mythical solution is advanced by Winckler in Mittheilungen der vorderasiatischen Gesellschaft, vi. 170 ff.

2–5. The Japhetic or Northern Peoples: fourteen in number, chiefly concentrated in Asia Minor and Armenia, but extending on either side to the Caspian and the shores of the Atlantic. It will be seen that though the enumeration is not ethnological in principle, yet most of the peoples named do belong to the same great Indo-Germanic family.

Japheth.

1. Gomer.

2. Ashkenaz.

3. Riphath.

4. Togarmah.

5. Magog.

6. Madai.

7. Javan.

8. Elishah.

9. Tarshish.

10. Kittim.

11. Rodanim.

12. Tubal.

13. Meshech.

14. Tiras.

(1) גֹּמֶר (LXX Γαμερ): named along with Togarmah as a confederate of Gog in Ezekiel 38⁶, is identified with the Galatians by Joshua, but is really the Gamir of the Assyrian inscription, the Cimmerians of the Greeks. The earliest reference to the Κιμμέριοι (Odyssey xi. 13 ff.) reveals them as a northern people, dwelling on the shores of the Northern Sea. Their irruption into Asia Minor, by way of the Caucasus, is circumstantially narrated by Herodotus (i. 15, 103, iv. 11 f.), whose account is in its main features confirmed by the Assyrian monuments. There the Gimirrai first appear towards the end of the reign of Sargon, attacking the old kingdom of Urarṭu (see Johns, Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archæology, xvii. 223 f., 226). Thence they seem to have moved westwards into Asia Minor, where (in the reign of Sennacherib) they overthrew the Phrygian Empire, and later (under Asshur-bani-pal, circa 657) the Lydian Empire of Gyges (Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, ii. 173–7). This last effort seems to have exhausted their strength, and soon afterwards they vanish from history.¹ A trace of their shortlived ascendancy remained in Gamir, the Armenian name for Cappadocia;² but the probability is that the land was named after the people, and not vice versâ; and it is not safe to assume that by גֹּמֶר Priestly-Code meant Cappadocia. It is more likely that the name is primarily ethnic, and denotes the common stock of which the three following peoples were branches.

(2) אַשְׁכְּנַז (Ἀσχαναζ): Jeremiah 51²⁷, after Ararat and Minni.¹ It has been usual (Bochart, al.) to connect the name with the Ascania of Iliad ii. 863, xiii. 793; and to suppose this was a region of Phrygia and Bithynia indicated by a river, two lakes, and other localities bearing the old name.² Recent Assyriologists, however, find in it the Ašguza³ of the monuments,—a branch of the Indo-Germanic invaders who settled in the vicinity of lake Urumia, and are probably identical with the Scythians of Herodotus i. 103, 106. Since they are first mentioned by Esarhaddon, they might readily appear to a Hebrew writer to be a younger people than the Cimmerians. See Winckler ll.cc.; Das Alte Testament im Lichte des alten Orients², 259 f.

(3) רִיפַת (Ῥιφαθ, Ἐριφαθ: but 1 Chronicles 1⁶ דִּיפַת): otherwise unknown. According to Josephus, it denotes the Paphlagonians. Bochart and Lagarde (Gesammelte Abhandlungen 255) put it further west, near the Bosphorus, on the ground of a remote resemblance in name to the river Ῥήβαζ and the district Ῥηβαντία. Cheyne (Encyclopædia Biblica, 4114) favours the transposition of Halevy (פירת), and compares Bit Burutaš, mentioned by Sargon along with the Muški and Tabali (Schrader Keilinschriften und Geschichtsforschung, 176).

(4) תֹּגַרְמָה (Θεργαμα, Θοργαμα) = בית תוגרמה, Ezekiel 38⁶ 27¹⁴: in the latter passage as a region exporting horses and mules. Josephus identifies with the Phrygians. The name is traditionally associated with Armenia, Thorgom being regarded as the mythical ancestor of the Armenians; but that legend is probably derived from LXX of this passage (Lagarde Gesammelte Abhandlungen 255 ff.; Symmicta i. 105). The suggested Assyriological equivalent Til-Garimmu (Delitzsch Wo lag das Paradies? 246; Das Alte Testament im Lichte des alten Orients², 260; al.), a city on the frontier of the Tabali mentioned by Sargon and Sennacherib, is not convincing; even though the Til- should be a fictitious Assyrian etymology (Lenormant Les Origines de l’histoire² ii. 410).

(5) מָגוֹג (Μαγωγ): Ezekiel 38² 39⁶. The generally accepted identification with the Scythians dates from Joshua and Jeremiah, but perhaps reflects only a vague impression that the name is a comprehensive designation of the barbarous races of the north, somewhat like the Umman-manda of the Assyrians. In one of the Tel-Amarna letters (Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, v. 5), a land Ga-ga is alluded to in a similar manner. But how the author differentiated Magog from the Cimmerians and Medes, etc., does not appear. The name מגוג is altogether obscure. That it is derived from גּוֹג = Gyges, king of Lydia (Meyer Geschichte des Alterthums¹, i. page 558), is most improbable; and the suggestion that it is a corruption of Assyrian Mât Gôg (Mât Gagaia),¹ must also be received with some caution.

(6) מָדַי (Μαδαι): the common Hebrew name for Media and the Medes; 2 Kings 17⁶ 18¹¹, Isaiah 13¹⁷ 21², Jeremiah 25²⁵ 51^11. 28, Esther 1^{3. 14. 18 f.} 10², Daniel 8²⁰ 9¹ [11¹] (Assyrian Madai). The formation of the Median Empire must have taken place about the middle of the 7th century, but the existence of the people in their later seats (East of the Zagros mountains and South of the Caspian Sea) appears to be traceable in the monuments back to the 9th century. They are thus the earliest branch of the Aryan family to make their mark in Asiatic history. See Meyer Geschichte des Alterthums¹, i. § 422 ff.; Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament³, 100 ff.; Das Alte Testament im Lichte des alten Orients², 254.

(7) יָוָן (Ἰωυαν) is the Greek Ἰάϝων-ονες, and denotes primarily the Greek settlements in Asia Minor, which were mainly Ionian: Ezekiel 27¹³, Isaiah 66¹⁹. After Alexander the Great it was extended to the Hellenes generally: Joel 4⁶, Zechariah 9¹³, Daniel 8²¹ 10²⁰ 11². In Assyrian Yamanai is said to be used but once (by Sargon, Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, ii. 43); but the Persian Yauna occurs, with the same double reference, from the time of Darius (compare Æschylus The Persians 176, 562). Whether the word here includes the European Greeks cannot be positively determined.¹—The ‘sons’ of Javan are (verse ⁴) to be sought along the Mediterranean, and probably at spots known to the Hebrew as commercial colonies of the Phœnicians (on which see Meyer Encyclopædia Biblica, 3736 f.). Very few of them, however, can be confidently identified.

(8) אֱלִישָׁה (Ἐλισα, Ἐλισσα) is mentioned only in Ezekiel 27⁷ (אִיֵּי א׳) as a place supplying Tyre with purple. The older verbal identifications with the Αἰολεῖς (Josephus, Jerome; so Delitzsch), Ἑλλάς (Targum^Jonathan), Ἠλίς, etc., are valueless; and modern opinion is greatly divided. Some favour Carthage, because of Elissa, the name of the legendary foundress of the city (Stade, Winckler, Jeremias, al.); others (Dillmann al.) southern Italy with Sicily.¹ The most attractive solution is that first proposed by Conder (Palestine Exploration Fund: Quarterly Statements., 1892, 45; compare 1904, 170), and widely accepted, that the Alašia of the Tel-Amarna Tablets is meant (see Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, v. 80–92). This is now generally recognised as the name of Cyprus, of which the Tyrian purple was a product:² see below on כתּים. Jensen now (Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, vi. 1, 507) places אלישה beyond the Pillars of Hercules on the African coast, and connects it with the Elysium of the Greeks.

(9) תַּרְשִׁישׁ (Θαρσις) is identified (since Bochart) with Ταρτησσός (Tartesos), the Phœnician mining and trading station in the South of Spain;¹ and no other theory is nearly so plausible. The Old Testament Tarshish was rich in minerals (Jeremiah 10⁹, Ezekiel 27¹²), was a Tyrian colony (Isaiah 23^1. 6. 10), and a remote coast-land reached by sea (Isaiah 66¹⁹, Jonah 1³ 4², Psalms 72¹⁰); and to distinguish the Tarshish of these passages from that of Genesis 10 (Delitzsch, Jastrow, al.), or to consider the latter a doublet of תירס (Cheyne, Müller), are but counsels of despair. The chief rival theory is Tarsus in Cilicia (Josephus, Jerome, al.); but this in Semitic is תרז (Tarzi). Compare Winckler Altorientalische Forschungen, i. 445 f.; Müller, Orientalische Litteraturzeitung iii. 291.

(10) כִּתִּים (Κητιοι, Κιτιοι)] compare Jeremiah 2¹⁰, Ezekiel 27⁶, Isaiah 23^1. 12, Daniel 11³⁰, 1 Maccabees 1¹ 8⁵, Numbers 24²⁴. Against the prevalent view that it denotes primarily the island of Cyprus, so called from its chief city Κίτιον (Larnaka), Winckler (Altorientalische Forschungen, ii. 422¹; compare Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament³, 128) argues that neither the island nor its capital¹ is so named in any ancient document, and that the older biblical references demand a site further West. The application to the Macedonians (1 Maccabees) he describes as one of those false identifications common in the Egypt of the Ptolemaic period. His argument is endorsed by Müller (Orientalische Litteraturzeitung iii. 288) and Jeremias (Das Alte Testament im Lichte des alten Orients², 261): they suggest South Italy, mainly on the authority of Daniel 11³⁰. The question is obviously bound up with the identity of אלישה—Alašia (v.s.).

(11) דֹּדָנִים or רוֹדָנִים (The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch LXX [Ῥοδιοι] and 1 Chronicles 1⁷)] a name omitted by Josephus. If LXX be right, the Rhodians are doubtless meant (compare Iliad ii. 654 f.): the singular is perhaps disguised in the corrupt דדן of Ezekiel 27¹⁵ (compare LXX). The Massoretic Text has been explained of the Dardanians (Targum^Jonathan, Delitzsch, al.), “properly a people of Asia Minor, not far from the Lycians” (Cheyne Encyclopædia Biblica, 1123). Winckler (l.c.) proposes דרנים, the Dorians; and Müller ד(ו)ננים, Egyptian Da-nô-na = Tel-Amarna Tablets, Da-nu-na (Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, v. 277), on the West coast of Asia Minor.

(12) תֻּבַל (Θοβελ)] and

(13) מֶשֶׁךְ (Μοσοχ)] are mentioned together in Ezekiel 27¹³ (as exporting slaves and copper), 32²⁶ (a warlike people of antiquity), 38^2 f. 39¹ (in the army of Gog), Isaiah 66¹⁹ (LXX); משך alone in Psalms 120⁵. Josephus arbitrarily identifies them with the Iberians and Cappadocians respectively; but since Bochart no one has questioned their identity with the Τιβαρηνοί and Μόσχοι, first mentioned in Herodotus iii. 94 as belonging to the 19th satrapy of Darius, and again (vii. 78) as furnishing a contingent to the host of Xerxes (compare Strabo, XI. ii. 14, 16). Equally obvious is their identity with the Tabali and Muški of the Assyrian Monuments, where the latter appear as early as Tiglath-pileser I. (circa 1100), and the former under Shalmaneser II. (circa 838),—both as formidable military states. In Sargon’s inscriptions they appear together;¹ and during this whole period their territory evidently extended much further South and West than in Græco-Roman times. These stubborn little nationalities, which so tenaciously maintained their identity, are regarded by Winckler and Jeremias as remnants of the old Hittite population which were gradually driven (probably by the Cimmerian invasion) to the mountainous district South-east of the Black Sea.

(14) תִּירָס (Θειρας)] not mentioned elsewhere, was almost unanimously taken by the ancients (Jerome, Targum^Jonathan, Jerome, etc.; and so Bochartus, al.) to be the Thracians (Θρᾶκ-ες); but the superficial resemblance vanishes when the nominative ending ς is removed. Tuch was the first to suggest the Τυρσ-ηνιοί, a race of Pelasgian pirates, who left many traces of their ancient prowess in the islands and coasts of the Ægean, and who were doubtless identical with the E-trus-cans of Italy.¹ This brilliant conjecture has since been confirmed by the discovery of the name Turuša amongst the seafaring peoples who invaded Egypt in the reign of Merneptah (Meyer Geschichte des Alterthums¹, i. § 260; W. M. Müller, Asien und Europa nach altägyptischen Denkmälern, 356 ff.).

---

5. The subscription to the first division of the Table is not quite in order. We miss the formula אלה בני יפת (compare verses ^20. 31), which is here necessary to the sense, and must be inserted, not (with Wellhausen) at the beginning of the verse, but immediately before בארצתם. The clause מאלה—הגוים is then seen to belong to verse ⁴, and to mean that the Mediterranean coasts were peopled from the four centres just named as occupied by sons of Javan. Although these places were probably all at one time Phœnician colonies, it is not to be inferred that the writer confused the Ionians with Phœnicians. He may be thinking of the native population of regions known to Israel through the Phœnicians, or of the Mycenean Greeks, whose colonising enterprise is now believed to be of earlier date than the Phœnician (Meyer Encyclopædia Biblica, 3736 f.).—נפרדו] construed like נפצה in 9¹⁹ (Yahwist); contrast 10³².—איי הגוים] only again Zephaniah 2¹¹. Should we read איי הים (Isaiah 11¹¹ 24¹⁵, Esther 10¹)? אִי (for אֱוִי, perhaps from √ ’awaʸ, “betake oneself”) seems to be a seafarer’s word denoting the place one makes for (for shelter, etc.); hence both “coast” and “island” (the latter also in Phœnician). In Hebrew the plural came to be used of distant lands in general (Isaiah 41^1. 5 42⁴ 51⁵ etc., Jeremiah 31¹⁰ etc.)

---

6, 7, 20. The Hamitic or Southern Group: in Africa and South Arabia, but including the Canaanites of Palestine.

Ḥam.

(1) כּוּשׁ (LXX Χους, but elsewhere, Αἰθίοπ-ες, -ία)] the land and people South of Egypt (Nubia),—the Ethiopians of the Greeks, the Kôš of the Egyptian monuments:¹ compare Isaiah 18¹, Jeremiah 13²³, Ezekiel 29¹⁰, Zephaniah 3¹⁰ etc. Assyrian Kusu occurs repeatedly in the same sense on inscriptions of Esarhaddon and Asshurbanipal; and only four passages of Esarhaddon are claimed by Winckler for the hypothesis of a south Arabian Kusu (Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament³, 144). There is no reason to doubt that in this verse the African Kush is meant. That the ‘sons’ of Kush include Arabian peoples is quite naturally explained by the assumption that the writer believed these Arabs to be of African descent. As a matter of fact, intercourse, involving intermixture of blood, has at all times been common between the two shores of the Red Sea; and indeed the opinion that Africa was the original cradle of the Semites has still a measure of scientific support (see Barton, A Sketch of Semitic Origins¹, 6 ff., 24).—See, further, on verse ⁸ (page 207 f.).

(2) מִצְרַים (Μεσραιν)] the Hebrew form of the common Semitic name of Egypt (Tel-Amarna Tablets, Miṣṣari, Miṣri, Mašri, Mizirri; Assyrian [from 8th and 7th century] Muṣur; Babylonian Miṣir; Syrian (‡ Syriac word); Arabic Miṣr). Etymology and meaning are uncertain: Hommel’s suggestion (Geschichte Babyloniens und Assyriens 530; compare Winckler Altorientalische Forschungen, i. 25) that it is an Assyrian appellative = ‘frontier,’ is little probable. The dual form of Hebrew is usually explained by the constant distinction in the native inscriptions between Upper and Lower Egypt, though מצרַיִם is found in connexions (Isaiah 11¹¹, Jeremiah 44¹⁵) which limit it to Lower Egypt; and many scholars now deny that the termination is a real dual (Meyer Geschichte des Alterthums, i. § 42, An.; Jensen Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft, xlviii. 439).—On the vexed question of a North Arabian Muṣri, it is unnecessary to enter here. There may be passages of Old Testament where that view is plausible, but this is not one of them; and the idea of a wholesale confusion between Egypt and Arabia on the part of Old Testament writers is a nightmare which it is high time to be quit of.

(3) פּוּט (Φουδ, but elsewhere Λιβυες)] mentioned 6 times (including LXX of Isaiah 66¹⁹) in Old Testament, as a warlike people furnishing auxiliaries to Egypt (Nahum 3⁹, Jeremiah 46⁹, Ezekiel 30⁵) or Tyre (Ezekiel 27¹⁰) or the host of Gog (38⁵), and frequently associated with כּוּשׁ and לוּד. The prevalent view has been that the Lybians, on the North coast of Africa West of Egypt, are meant (LXX, Josephus al.), although Nahum 3⁹ and probably Ezekiel 30⁵ (LXX) show that the two peoples were distinguished. Another identification, first proposed by Ebers, has recently been strongly advocated: viz. with the Pwnt of Egyptian monuments, comprising ‘the whole African coast of the Red Sea’ (W. M. Müller, Asien und Europa nach altägyptischen Denkmälern, 114 ff., and A Dictionary of the Bible, iv. 176 f.; Jeremias 263 f.). The only serious objection to this theory is the order in which the name occurs, which suggests a place further north than Egypt (Jensen Zeitschrift für Assyriologie, x. 325 ff.).

(4) כְּנַעַן (Χανααν)] the eponym of the pre-Israelitish inhabitants of Palestine, is primarily a geographical designation. The etymology is doubtful; but the sense ‘lowland’ has still the best claim to acceptance (see, however, Moore, Proceedings [Journal] of the American Oriental Society, 1890, lxvii ff.). In Egyptian monuments the name, in the form pa-Ka-n-‛sand-land is the article), is applied to the strip of coast from Phœnicia to the neighbourhood of Gaza; but the ethnographic derivative extends to the inhabitants of all Western Syria (Müller, Asien und Europa nach altägyptischen Denkmälern, 205 ff.). Similarly in Tel-Amarna Tablets Kinaḫḫi, Kinaḫna, etc., stand for Palestine proper (Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament³, 181), or (according to Jastrow Encyclopædia Biblica, 641) the northern part of the seacoast.—The fact that Canaan, in spite of its geographical situation and the close affinity of its language with Hebrew, is reckoned to the Hamites is not to be explained by the tradition (Herodotus i. 1, vii. 89, etc.) that the Phœnicians came originally from the Red Sea; for that probably implies no more than that they were connected with the Babylonians (Ἐρυθρὴ Θάλασσα = the Persian Gulf). Neither is it altogether natural to suppose that Canaan is thus placed because it had for a long time been a political dependency of Egypt: in that case, as Dillmann observes, we should have expected Canaan to figure as a son of Mizraim. The belief that Canaan and Israel belonged to entirely different branches of the human family is rooted in the circumstances that gave rise to the blessing and curse of Noah in chapter 9. When, with the extension of geographical knowledge, it became necessary to assign the Canaanites to a larger group (page 187 above), it was inevitable that they should find their place as remote from the Hebrews as possible.

Of the descendants of Kush (verse ⁷) a large proportion—all, indeed, that can be safely identified—are found in Arabia. Whether this means that Kushites had crossed the Red Sea, or that Arabia and Africa were supposed to be a continuous continent, in which the Red Sea formed an inland lake (Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament³, 137, 144), it is perhaps impossible to decide.

(5) סְבָא (Σαβα)] Isaiah 43³ 45¹⁴, Psalms 72¹⁰; usually taken to be Meröe¹ (between Berber and Khartoum). The tall stature attributed to the people in Isaiah 45¹⁴ (but compare 18^2. 7) is in favour of this view; but it has nothing else to recommend it. Dillmann al. prefer the Saba referred to by Strabo (XVI. iv. 8, 10; compare Ptolemy, iv. 7. 7 f.) on the African side of the Red Sea (South of Suakim). Jeremias (Das Alte Testament im Lichte des alten Orients², 265) considers the word as the more correct variant to שׁבא (see below).

(6) חֲוִילָה (Εὑ[ε]ιλα[τ])] often (since Bochart) explained as ‘sand-land’ (from חוֹל); named in verse ²⁹ (Yahwist) as a Joḳṭanite people, and in 25¹⁸ (also Yahwist) as the eastern limit of the Ishmaelite Arabs. It seems impossible to harmonise these indications. The last is probably the most ancient, and points to a district in North Arabia, not too far to the East. We may conjecture that the name is derived from the large tract of loose red sand (nefūd) which stretches North of Teima and South of el-Ǧōf. This is precisely where we should look for the Χαυλοταῖοι whom Eratosthenes (Strabo, XVI. iv. 2) mentions (next to the Nabateans) as the second of three tribes on the route from Egypt to Babylon; and Pliny (vi. 157) gives Domata (= Dûmāh = el-Ǧōf: see page 353) as a town of the Avalitæ. The name might easily be extended to other sandy regions of Arabia, (perhaps especially to the great sand desert in the southern interior): of some more southerly district it must be used both here and verse ²⁹ (see Meyer Die Israeliten und ihre Nachbarstämme, 325 f.). To distinguish further the Cushite from the Joktanite ח׳, and to identify the former with the Ἀβαλῖται, etc., on the African coast near Bab-el-mandeb, is quite unnecessary. On the other hand, it is impossible to place either of these so far Nprth as the head of the Persian Gulf (Glaser) or the East-North-east part of the Syrian desert (Friedrich Delitzsch). Nothing can be made of Genesis 2¹¹; and in 1 Samuel 15⁷ (the only other occurrence) the text is probably corrupt.

(7) סַבְתָּה (Σαβαθα)] not identified. Possibly Σάβατα, Sabota, the capital of Ḥaḍramaut (see on verse ²⁶) (Strabo, XVI. iv. 2; Pliny, Naturalis Historia, vi. 155, xii. 63),—though in Sabæan this is written שבות (see Osiander, Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft, xix. 253; Hommel Süd-arabische Chrestomathie 119); or the Σάφθα of Ptolemy vi. 7. 30, an inland town lying (according to Glaser, 252) West of El-Ḳaṭīf.

(8) רַעְמָה (Ῥεγμα or Ῥεγχμα)] coupled with שׁבא (? and חוילה) in Ezekiel 27²² as a tribe trading in spices, precious stones, and gold. It is doubtless the רעֿמה (Raǧmat) of a Minæan inscription,¹ which speaks of an attack by the hosts of Saba and Ḥaulân on a Minæan caravan en route between Ma‛ân and Ra‛mat. This again may be connected with the Ῥαμμανῖται of Strabo (XVI. iv. 24) North of Ḥaḍramaut. The identification with the Ῥεγ[α]μα πόλις (a seaport on the Persian Gulf) of Ptolemy vi. 7. 14 (Bochartus al.; so Glaser) is difficult because of its remoteness from Sheba and Dedan (v.i.), and also because this appears on the inscription as Rǧmt (Glaser, 252).

(9) סַבְתְּכָא (Σαβακαθα)] unknown. Σαμυδάκη in Carmania¹ (Ptolemy. vi. 8. 7 f., 11) is unsuitable both geographically and phonetically. Jeremias suggests that the word is a duplicate of סַבְתָּה.

(10) שְׁבָא (Σαβα)] (properly, as inscriptions show, סבא: see Number 5 above) is assigned in verse ²⁹ to the Joḳṭanites, and in 25³ to the Ḳetureans. It is the Old Testament name of the people known to the classical geographers as Sabæans, the founders of a great commercial state in South-west Arabia, with its metropolis at Marib (Mariaba), some 45 miles due East of San’a, the present capital of Yemen (Strabo, XVI. iv. 2, 19; Pliny, Naturalis Historia, vi. 154 f., etc.). “They were the centre of an old South Arabian civilisation, regarding the former existence of which the Sabæan inscriptions and architectural monuments supply ample evidence” (Dillmann 182). Their history is still obscure. The native inscriptions commence about 700 B.C.; and, a little earlier, Sabæan princes (not kings)¹ appear on Assyrian monuments as paying tribute to Tiglath-pileser IV. (B.C. 738) and Sargon (B.C. 715).² It would seem that about that time (probably with the help of the Assyrians) they overthrew the older Minæan Empire, and established themselves on its ruins. Unlike their precursors, however, they do not appear to have consolidated their power in North Arabia, though their inscriptions have been found as far North as el-Ǧōf. To the Hebrews, Sheba was a ‘far country’ (Jeremiah 6²⁰, Joel 4⁸), famous for gold, frankincense, and precious stones (1 Kings 10^1 ff., Isaiah 60⁶, Jeremiah 6²⁰, Ezekiel 27²², Psalms 72¹⁵): in all these passages, as well as Psalms 72¹⁰, Job 6¹⁹, the reference to the southern Sabæans is clear. On the other hand, the association with Dedan (25³, Ezekiel 38¹³ and here) favours a more northern locality; in Job 1¹⁵ they appear as Bedouin of the northern desert; and the Assyrian references appear to imply a northerly situation. Since it is undesirable to assume the existence of two separate peoples, it is tempting to suppose that the passage last quoted preserve the tradition of an earlier time, before the conquest of the Minæans had led to a settlement in Yemen. Verse ²⁸ (Yahwist), however, presupposes the southern settlement.³

(11) דְּדָן (Δαδαν, Δεδαν; but elsewhere Δαιδαν, etc.)] a merchant tribe mentioned along with Sheba in 25³ (= 1 Chronicles 1³²) and Ezekiel 38¹³; with Tema (the modern Teima, c. 230 miles North of Medina) in Isaiah 21¹³, Jeremiah 25²³, and LXX of Genesis 25³; and in Jeremiah 49⁸, Ezekiel 25¹³ as a neighbour of Edom. All this points to a region in the North of Arabia; and as the only other reference (Ezekiel 27²⁰)—in 27¹⁵ the text is corrupt—is consistent with this, there is no need to postulate another Dedan on the Persian Gulf (Bochartus al.) or anywhere else. Glaser (397) very suitably locates the Dedanites “in the neighbourhood of Khaibar, el-Ola, El-Hiǧr, extending perhaps beyond Teima,”—a region intersected by the trade-routes from all parts of Arabia (see the map in Encyclopædia Biblica, iv. 5160); and where the name is probably perpetuated in the ruins of Daidan, West of Teima (Dillmann). The name occurs both in Minæan and Sabæan inscriptions (Glaser, 397 ff.; Müller, Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft, xxx. 122), but not in the Greek or Roman geographers.—The older tradition of Yahwist (25³) recognises a closer kinship of the Israelites with Sheba and Dedan, by making them sons of Joḳshan and descendants of Abraham through Ḳeturah (v. ad loc.). (An intermediate stage seems represented by 10^25–29, where South Arabia is assigned to the descendants of ‛Eber). Priestly-Code follows the steps of 25³ by bracketing the two tribes as sons of Ra‛mah: whether he knew them as comparatively recent offshoots of the Kushite stock is not so certain.

22, 23, 31. The Shemitic or Eastern Group.—With the doubtful exception of לוּד (see below) the nations here mentioned all lie on the East of Palestine, and are probably arranged in geographical order from South-east to North-west, till they join hands with the Japhethites.

Shem.

(1) עֵילָם (Αἰλαμ)] Assyrian Elamtu,¹ the name of “the great plain East of the lower Tigris and North of the Persian Gulf, together with the mountainous region enclosing it on the North and East” (Delitzsch Wo lag das Paradies? 320), corresponding to the later Elymäis or Susiana. The district round Susa was in very early times (after 3000 B.C.) inhabited by Semitic settlers ruled by viceroys of the Babylonian kings; about 2280 the Anzanite element (of a different race and speaking a different language) gained the upper hand, and even established a suzerainty over Babylonia. From that time onwards Elam was a powerful monarchy, playing an important part in the politics of the Euphrates valley, till it was finally destroyed by Assurbanipal.² The reason for including this non-Semitic race among the sons of Shem is no doubt geographical or political. The other Old Testament references are Genesis 14^1. 9, Isaiah 11¹² 21² 22⁶, Jeremiah 25²⁵ 49^34 ff., Ezekiel 32²⁴, Daniel 8².

(2) אַשּׁוּר] Assyria. See below on verse ¹¹ (page 211).

(3) אַרְפַּכְשֶׂד (Ἀρφαξαδ)] identified by Bochartus with the Ἀῤῥαπαχῖτις which Ptolemy (vi. 1. 2) describes as the province of Assyria next to Armenia,—the mountainous region round the sources of the Upper Zab, between lakes Van and Urumia, still called in Kurdish Albâk. This name appears in Assyrian as Arapḫa (Arbaḫa, etc.),¹ and on Egyptian monuments of the 18th dynasty as ’Ararpaḫa (Müller, Asien und Europa nach altägyptischen Denkmälern, 278 f.). Geographically nothing could be more suitable than this identification: the difficulty is that the last syllable שׁד is left unaccounted for. Josephus recognised in the last three letters the name of the Chaldeans (כֶּשֶׂד),² and several attempts have been made to explain the first element of the word in accordance with this hint. (a) The best is perhaps that of Cheyne (Encyclopædia Biblica, 318),³ resolving the word into two proper names: ארפך or ארפח (= Assyrian Arbaḫa) and כֶּשֶׂד,—the latter here introducing a second trio of sons of Shem. On this view the Arpakšad of verse ²⁴ 11^10 ff. must be an error (for כשׂד?) caused by the textual corruption here. (b) An older conjecture, approved by Gesenius (Thesaurus philologicus criticus Linguæ Hebrææ et Chaldææ Veteris Testamenti), Knobel, al., compares the ארפ with Arabic ’urfat (= ‘boundary’),⁴ Ethiopian arfat (= ‘wall’); ארף כשד would thus be the ‘wall (or boundary) of Kesed.’ (c) Hommel The Ancient Hebrew Tradition as illustrated by the Monuments, 212, 294–8) takes the middle syllable pa to be the Egyptian article, reading ’Ur-pa-Kesed = Ur of the Chaldees (11²⁸),—an improbable suggestion. (d) Delitzsch. (Wo lag das Paradies? 255 f.) and Jensen (Zeitschrift für Assyriologie, xv. 256) interpret the word as arba-kišādu = ‘[Land of the] four quarters (or shores),’ after the analogy of a common designation of Babylonia in royal titles.—These theories are partly prompted by the observation that otherwise Chaldea is passed over in the Table of Priestly-Code,—a surprising omission, no doubt, but perhaps susceptible of other explanations. The question is complicated by the mention of an Aramean Kesed in 22²². The difficulty of identifying that tribe with the Chaldeans in the South of Babylonia is admitted by Driver (page 223); and if there was another Kesed near Ḥarran, the fact must be taken account of in speculating about the meaning of Arpakšad.

(4) לוּד (The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch לד, LXX Λουδ)] usually understood of the Lydians (Josephus, Bochartus, al.), but it has never been satisfactorily explained how a people in the extreme West of Asia Minor comes to be numbered among the Shemites. An African people, such as appears to be contemplated in verse ¹³, would be equally out of place here. A suggestion of Jensen’s deserves consideration: that לוד is the Lubdu,—a province lying “between the upper Tigris and the Euphrates, North of Mt. Masius and its western extension,”—mentioned in Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, i. 4 (line 9 from below, read Lu-up-di), 177 (along with Arrapḫa), 199. See Winckler Altorientalische Forschungen, ii. 47; Streck, Zeitschrift für Assyriologie, xiv. 168; Jeremias 276. In the remaining references (Isaiah 66¹⁹, Jeremiah 46⁹, Ezekiel 27¹⁰ 30⁵), the Lydians of Asia Minor might be meant,—in the last three as mercenaries in the service of Egypt or Tyre.

(5) אֲרָם (Ἀραμ, Ἀραμων)] a collective designation of the Semitic peoples speaking ‘Aramaic’ dialects,¹ so far as known to the Hebrews (Nöldeke Encyclopædia Biblica, 276 ff.). The actual diffusion of that family of Semites was wider than appears from the Old Testament, which uses the name only of the districts to the North-east of Palestine (Damascus especially) and Mesopotamia (Aram-Naharaim, Paddan-Aram): these, however, were really the chief centres of Aramæan culture and influence. In Assyrian the Armaiu (Aramu, Arimu, Arumu) are first named by Tiglath-pileser I. (circa 1100) as dwelling in the steppes of Mesopotamia (Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, i. 33); and Shalmaneser II. (circa 857) encountered them in the same region (ib. 165). But if Winckler be right (Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament³, 28 f., 36), they are referred to under the name Aḫlāmi from a much earlier date (Tel-Amarna Tablets; Ramman-nirari I. [circa 1325]; Ašur-rîš-îši [circa 1150]: see Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, v. 387, i. 5, 13). Hence Winckler regards the second half of the 2nd millennium B.C. as the period during which the Aramæan nomads became settled and civilised peoples in Mesopotamia and Syria.

In 1 Chronicles 1¹⁷ the words ובני ארם (verse ²³) are omitted, the four following names being treated as sons of Shem:

(6) עוּץ (Ὠς, Οὐζ)] is doubtless the same tribe which in 22²¹ (Ὠξ, Ὠζ) is classed as the firstborn of Naḥor: therefore presumably somewhere North-east of Palestine in the direction of Ḥarran. The conjectural identifications are hardly worth repeating. The other Biblical occurrences of the name are difficult to harmonise. The Uz of Job 1¹ (Αὐσιτις), and the Ḥorite tribe mentioned in Genesis 36²⁰, point to a South-east situation, bordering on or comprised in Edom; and this would also suit Lamentations 4²¹, Jeremiah 25²⁰ (הָעוּץ!), though in both these passages the reading is doubtful. It is suggested by William Robertson Smith (Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia², 61) and Wellhausen (Reste arabischen Heidentums 146) that the name is identical with that of the Arabian god ‛Auḍ; and by the former scholar that the Old Testament עוּץ denotes a number of scattered tribes worshipping that deity (similarly Budde Das Buch Hiob ix.–xi.; but, on the other side, see Nöldeke Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft, xl. 183 f.).

(7) חוּל (Οὑλ)] Delitzsch (Wo lag das Paradies? 259) identifies with a district in the neighbourhood of Mt. Masius mentioned by Asshur-nasir-pal. The word (ḥu-li-ia), however, is there read by Peiser as an appellative = ‘desert’ (Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, i. 86 f., 110 f.); and no other conjecture is even plausible.

(8) גֶּתֶר is quite unknown.

(9) מַשׁ (The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch משא, LXX Μοσοχ, in accord with 1 Chronicles 1¹⁷ Massoretic Text מֵשֶׁךְ)] perhaps connected with Mons Masius,—τὸ Μάσιον ὄρος of Ptolemy (v. 18. 2) and Strabo (XI. xiv. 2),—a mountain range North of Nisibis now called Ṭûr-‛Abdîn or Ḳeraǧa Dagh (Bochartus, Delitzsch Wo lag das Paradies? 259, Dillmann, al.). The uncertainty of the text and the fact that the Assyrian monuments use a different name render the identification precarious. Jensen (Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, vi. 1, 567) suggests the mountain Māšu of Gilgameš IX. ii. 1 f., which he supposes to be Lebanon and Anti-Libanus. The Mât Maš of Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, ii. 221, which has been adduced as a parallel, ought, it now appears, to be read mad-bar (Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament³, 191²; compare Jensen Zeitschrift für Assyriologie, x. 364).

31, 32. Priestly-Code’s closing formula for the Shemites (³¹); and his subscription to the whole Table (³²).