1 Chronicles 7: The Northern Tribes

Leave a comment

We continue our tour of Israel’s genealogical history with the northern tribes: Issachar, Benjamin, Naphtali, Ephraim, and Asher. These get much more of a cursory treatment than we’ve seen previously, likely because of the Chronicler’s dismissive attitude toward the tribes who rebelled against David’s dynasty to form what would eventually become Samaria.

Issachar

The first part of Issachar’s portion corresponds to Genesis 46:13 and Numbers 26:23-25, with some variations. The sons of Issachar are listed as:

  1. Tola
  2. Puah, who is listed as Puvah in both Genesis and Numbers
  3. Jashub, whom the Masoretic Text calls Iob in Genesis
  4. Shimron

In the next generation, Tola’s sons are: Uzzi, Rephaiah, Jeriel, Jahmai, Ibsam, and Shemuel. They are identified as mighty warriors, with 22,600 of them in David’s time.

The line then goes through Tola’s son Uzzi, to Izrahiah. Izrahiah’s sons are: Michael, Obadiah, Jowl, and Isshiah, which the text claims are five, rather than the four we see (1 Chron. 7:3). Along with them (presumably meaning down through their descendants) were 36,000 men ready to fight, “for they had many wives and sons” (1 Chron. 7:4).

Issachar as a whole produced 87,000 mighty warriors.

Benjamin

Benjamin’s inclusion here is a bit weird, since the tribe’s genealogy will be revisited in more detail – getting a whole chapter to itself – in 1 Chron. 8. Some commentaries argue that the Chronicler was simply continuing the source that was used for Issachar, then moved on to a different source later for Benjamin, which would explain why the two version differ so greatly.

Other commentaries argue that a textual corruption or initial error led to this section being misnamed, and that it was originally meant to be Zebulun. This theory is reinforced by the fact that Zebulun is otherwise not represented, and because this coverage of Benjamin occurs where Zebulun “might be expected from the geographical point of view” (New Bible Commentary, p.374).

The problem with the Zebulun theory is , of course, that there are no similarities between the lineage listed here and the ones attributed to Zebulun in Gen. 46:14 and Num. 26:26-27. There are quite a few discrepancies with what we’ve seen so far as Benjamin, but at least there are some points of similarity.

We begin with the sons of Benjamin: Bela, Becher, and Jediael. Jediael is missing from the Gen. 46:21 version, and eight of Benjamin’s sons listed there are missing here. Only Bela is listed in the Num. 26:38-41 version, with the other four sons listed there being absent here.

Bela’s sons: Ezbon, Uzzi, Uzziel, Jerimoth, and Iri, who became the heads of their houses and who are described as mighty warriors. Their number was 22,034. In support of the theory that the Chronicler simply kept copying from whatever source he was using for Issachar, I noticed that the formula is clearly the same between these two sections.

Becher’s sons: Zemirah, Joash, Eliezer, Elioenai, Omri, Jeremoth, Abijah, Anathoth, and Alemeth. They were also mighty warriors, and they numbered 20,200.

Jediael’s sons: Bilhan. Tracing down through Bilhan, we get Jeush, Benjamin, Ehud, Chenaanah, Zethan, Tarshish, and Ahishahar. These, too, were mighty warriors, and their number was 17,200.

At the very end of the section, we get a single verse identifying Shuppim and Huppim as the sons of Ir, and Hushim as the son of Aher. I think. The phrasing is very awkward and likely a corruption. My New Bible Commentary proposes that these may have been intended as a genealogy of Dan, since that tribe doesn’t appear here either (p.374).

Arguing against, we have the fact that the names are rather similar to ones previously connected to Benjamin: Shuppim could be related to Muppim and Huppim appears directly in Gen. 46:21. Then, in Numbers 26:38-41, we get Shephupham and Hupham.

Arguing in favour, we have Hashum listed as the son of Dan in Gen. 46:23, and Shuham in Num. 26:42. On a phonetic basis alone, it seems like a toss up.

Naphtali

If it really is the case that 1 Chron. 7:12 was meant to be a summary of Dan, it wouldn’t have gotten any less of a treatment than Naphtali. Of this tribe, we are told only that the sons of Naphtali are named Jahziel, Guni, Jezer, and Shallum, and that Bilhah (Jacob’s concubine, a slave belonging to his wife Rachel) is their tribal matriarch.

This is notable only because it is the first time the tribal mother is named. Though it is likely just because it was in the Chronicler’s source, rather than for any particular intentional reason. (It is perhaps worth noting that Gen. 46:24-25 specifically mentions Bilhah.)

The names are the same as those found in Gen. 46:24-25 and Num. 26:48-49, with only a spelling variation for Jahziel (Jahzeel) and Shallum (Shillem).

Manasseh

Manasseh’s records are split in half, with the Transjordan portion of the tribe having been covered in 1 Chron. 5:23-26. Here, we get the half from the western bank of the Jordan. Manasseh’s lineage is also discussed in Num. 26:29-33 and Jos. 17:1-13, but there are only passing similarities to this one.

Jacob Blessing His Sons, by Harry Anderson

Jacob Blessing His Sons, by Harry Anderson

Manasseh seems to have found himself an Aramean concubine, which is rather strange. According to James Pate, Manasseh should have spent his whole life in Egypt. “Egypt is far away from Aram: Egypt is to the south of Palestine, whereas Aram (Syria) is to Palestine’s north.” The obvious solution, which Pate points to, is that she came to Egypt through a trade route.

When we get to the genealogy, it’s rather convoluted, and I suspect that we have another instance of corruption. Manasseh, apparently via his Aramean concubine, had two sons: Asriel and Machir. Machir went on to become the father of Gilead, and he seems to have taken a wife from Huppim and one from Shuppim. I think. The phrasing is very odd, and it’s doubly odd to encounter that pair of names again.

Of the mention of Gilead, we can either take that as the literal son of Machir, or as an indication that it is through the descendants of Machir that the location of Gilead would be founded (even though Gilead is named as a literal son who fathers literal children in Num. 26:29-33).

Machir had a sister named Maacah, who was also his wife, or perhaps there are two women named Maacah. It wouldn’t be implausible for him to have married his sister (or half-sister), though. Abraham did it (Gen. 20:12), and Moses hasn’t delivered the laws prohibiting it yet. In any case, Machir and his wife Maacah bore Peresh, and Peresh had a brother by the name of Sheresh (who may or may not have been Maacah’s).

In the middle of this, there is a fragment of a sentence identifying a “second” by the name of Zelophehad who had daughters (1 Chron. 7:15).One possibility that I can see is that Manasseh had one son with a woman who was not Aramean (Asriel), and two sons with woman who was Aramean (Machir and Zelophehad). Zelophehad had only daughters, whereas we shall continue on down Machir’s lineage. Except, of course, that there is a Zelophehad in Num. 26:29-33 who also has only daughters, but he is the son of Hepher, who is the son of Gilead, who is the son of Machir (it is Zelophehad’s daughters who prompt Moses to include women in his inheritance laws in Numbers 27, with an amendment in Numbers 36). That’s the best sense I can make of this passage. 

Back to Machir’s sons, Peresh and Sheresh. One of them – it’s unclear which – fathered Ulam and Rakem. Ulam then fathered Bedan.

Machir also had another sister, by the name of Hammolecheth. She bore Ishhod, Abiezer, and Mahlah.

Someone named Shemida apparently had four sons: Ahian, Shechem, Likhi, and Aniam. This doesn’t jive particularly well with Num. 26:29-33, where Machir is the father of Gilead, and both Shechem and Shemida are the sons of Gilead.

Ephraim

Ephraim’s genealogy appears to be a vertical genealogy, from father to son to grandson and so on, but there are hints that this may not be the case. That, instead, all the names are intended to be Ephraim’s direct sons. For now, I’ll proceed with the assumption that we are dealing with a vertical lineage, beginning with Ephraim:

  1. Shuthelah, who is the only of Ephraim’s descendants to make the list in Num. 26:35-37.
  2. Bered
  3. Tahath
  4. Eleadah
  5. Tahath
  6. Zabad
  7. Shuthelah

From Shuthelah, we get Ezer and Elead. These two were killed by the native Gathites in a failed cattle raid. Here is where things get complicated, as we are told that “Ephraim their father mourned many days” (1 Chron. 7:22).

If Ezer and Elead are meant to be Ephraim’s direct sons, then we have a couple problems. Firstly, it would suggest that all the other names I have listed so far are also Ephraim’s sons. Second, we might ask ourselves what sons of Ephraim were doing in Gath. It’s rather far to go for a cattle raid! James Pate discusses the issue in more detail.

After Ezer and Elead, we move on to another of Ephraim’s sons (this time, the formulation of how he “went in to” his wife makes it quite clear that we are dealing with a literal son), Beriah. Beriah was so named “because evil had befallen his house” (1 Chron. 7:23). Apparently, Beriah can either mean “a gift” or “in evil,” which seems rather ambiguous to me.

Beriah had a daughter, named Sheerah (no, not that one), who built both Lower and Upper Beth-horon, as well as Uzzen-sheerah. If she is historical, it sounds like she might have been a Deborah-like figure, perhaps a local leader or judge.

Down through Beriah’s sons, we get the same problem as above where the grammar lends itself to both vertical and horizontal interpretations. However, since we end with Joshua, it seems likely that this is a vertical lineage. From Beriah, we get:

  1. Rephah
  2. Resheph
  3. Telah
  4. Tahan
  5. Ladan
  6. Ammihud
  7. Elishama
  8. Nun
  9. Joshua

The Joshua who served Moses was also identified as a son of Nun (e.g. Num. 11:28), indicating that this is a lineage of that figure.

We finish up the section with a list of settlements belonging to Ephraim and Manasseh.

Ephraim’s list bears little resemblance, as far as I can tell, to the one found in Jos. 16:5-10. My sources, however, claim that the two lists are generally in agreement. I’m assuming that the territory described must be similar, even if the markers named are different:

  • Bethel
  • Naaran (a Naarah appears in Jos. 16:7)
  • Gezer (Gezer appears in Jos. 16:10)
  • Shechem
  • Ayyah

Manasseh’s list corresponds to Jos. 17:11, and the match is much more comfortable:

  • Beth-shean
  • Taanach
  • Megiddo
  • Dor

Asher

Asher’s genealogy mostly corresponds to those found in Gen. 46:17 and Num. 26:44-46. The sons of Asher are listed as: Imnah, Ishvah, Ishvi, Beriah, and their sister Serah. The only variation here is that Ishvah does not appear in Numbers (though I think it plausible that Ishvah is a duplication of Ishvi that became canon).

In the next generation, we get the sons of Beriah: Heber and Malchiel. Again, this is in agreement.

After that, 1 Chron. 7 gives us new material. Malchiel fathered Birzaith, and Heber fathered Japhlet, Shomer, Hotham, and a daughter, Shua.

Japhlet, in turn, fathered Pasach, Bimhal, and Ashvath, while his brother Shomer (here named Shemer – 1 Chron. 7:32-34) fathered Rohgah, Jehubbah, and Aram.

Another man, here called “his brother” (1 Chron. 35) Helem fathered Zophah, Imna, Shelesh, and Amal. It’s possible that Japhlet and Shemer had another brother who was not listed above, but given the corruption of Shomer/Shemer in the space of just two verses, I think it probable that Helem is a corruption of Hotham (or vice versa).

From there, we get the sons of Zophah: Suah, Harnepher, Shual, Beri, Imrah, Bezer, Hod, Shamma, Shilshah, Ithran, and Beera.

After that, we skip over to someone named Jether, whose sons are Jephunneh, Pispa, and Ara. Then someone named Ulla fathered Arah, Hanniel, and Rizia.

We return to the formula of Issachar and Benjamin to learn that the men of of Asher were mighty warriors, and that they had 26,000 men enrolled by genealogies as ready to fight.

Genesis 38: A Brief Digression With Judah and Tamar

Leave a comment

Just when the action was getting good, we switch over to Joseph’s brother, Judah, for a little story from his nook of the family.

Judah has an Adullamite friend named Hirah. While visiting him, he catches sight of a an unnamed Canaanite woman who was the daughter of Shua. The woman has three sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah.

Enter Tamar

Pun very much intended!

Er marries Tamar. Unfortunately, God had a beef with Er, so he totally smote him. Because that’s the divine way of dealing with people you don’t like.

Incidentally, my study bible describes the murder of Er as: “a divine act, almost demonic in character.” I thought that was funny!

So Er died childless, which means that there won’t be anyone to carry on his name or his line. To solve this problem, Tamar was married to Onan, Er’s brother. Onan’s job was to impregnate Tamar in lieu of Er. Onan isn’t too happy with this charge so he dumps his… er, charge on the ground. Thus was born the sin of onanism, which for some reason refers to masturbation rather than pulling out. Go figure.

God gets upset with Onan, either for “spilling seed” or for disobeying Judah. Once again, God’s way of dealing with his negative feelings is to kill people, so Tamar loses her second husband.

Er still needs offspring and Tamar still needs a husband, so Judah agrees to marry her to his third son, Shelah, once he grows up. But this is all a trick because he thinks that Tamar is bad luck or something, so he sends her to wait indefinitely in her father’s house.

On trickery and disguises

Tamar waits and waits while time keeps on keeping on. Judah’s unnamed wife dies and Shelah grows up. Judah heads off to visit his friend Hirah again, as well as tend his sheep. Tamar hears of this and concocts a dastardly scheme.

The Meeting of Tamar and Judah by Tintoretto, c.1555-1558

The Meeting of Tamar and Judah by Tintoretto, c.1555-1558

She takes off her widow’s clothes and puts on a veil. Then she heads off to “accidentally” encounter Judah.

“When Judah saw her, he thought her to be a harlot, for she had covered her face” (Gen. 38:15). Apparently, the veil was something worn by the sacred/temple prostitutes of the Canaanite goddess Asherah (Matthews, Manners & Customs, p.26). Though Matthews goes on to say that in Mesopotamian custom, a veil symbolised modesty instead – as exemplified by Rebekah in Genesis 24:65. I wonder if this story is found in the Quran as well, and where they fall on the veil detail.

Judah, encountering what he thinks is a prostitute, gets right down to business and says: “Come, let me come in to you” (Gen. 38:16). There’s no beating around the bush with this guy!

Tamar agrees in exchange for a kid (no, not that kind – although, well, yes, that kind). As a deposit, she asks for Judah’s signet, cord, and staff. Then Judah totally gets to “go into her.”

My study bible notes that Tamar would have been disguised as a “cult prostitute,” which was like a regular prostitute except that she was “connected with the worship of the nature gods of fertility.” So Judah not only marries a Canaanite (Isaac would have a cunniption) and frequents prostitutes, but he’s also fraternizing with adherents of other religions!

Payment for services rendered

Once Judah comes back out of her, he heads back to his friend Hirah and asks him to take a kid to the prostitute. Hirah goes, but can’t find any prostitutes in the area. When he asks around, he’s told that there never was a prostitute in that area. When Judah finds out, decides to just let the prostitute keep the deposit “lest we be laughed at” (Gen. 38:23).

All goes swimmingly for three months, and then someone tells Judah that his daughter-in-law, Tamar, has been out prostituting herself and is now pregnant! Judah, taking his cue from God’s book, commands that she be brought out and burned.

Remember that – woman has sex, she gets burned to death.

But Tamar pulls a fast one on all these righteous dudes. She holds out the signet, cord, and staff and says: “By the man to whom these belong, I am with child” (Gen. 38:25).

Judah, to his credit, fesses up and even goes so far as to say that Tamar is “more righteous than I.” Is this because he’s just been exposed as a guy who visits prostitutes? Something that’s a burnable offence for the lady? Of course not! His crime was that he had promised her to Shelah, but hadn’t married them (Gen. 38:26).

So yeah, it’s totally okay now cause they kept it within the family… And Judah hanging out with prostitutes? That’s no big.

Just in case you were curious, Judah “did not lie with her again” (Gen. 38:26).

Twins, again

Tamar has twins. While she’s in labour, a fist sticks out and the midwife ties a red cord around his wrist so that everyone can know that he’s the first-born. But whoops, he retracts his fist and the other twin is born first! But the magic of the red cord can’t be retracted, so these twins are doomed to hate each other. Such is the life of a biblical twin.

It’s just like to point out that babies are pretty squished in there and the birthing process is a process. I’m pretty sure that they can’t just stick a hand out and pull it back in, and then have another kid pull ahead.

In any case, the first fully born is named Perez and the red cord kid is named Zerah.

On abortion

Ebonmuse, over at Daylight Atheism, brings up the point that fetus-Perez and fetus-Zerah are not seen as persons in this story. Judah was perfectly willing to kill a pregnant woman for her crime (such as it was) without consideration for her babies. This is quite a bit different from the later policy in the west to delay the execution until the babies were born.

So according to this passage, there wouldn’t be anything wrong with abortion because fetuses are merely part of the woman’s body and not separate persons worthy of protection. Just a thought…