1Ch 1:28-42 | KD | STEP | The sons of Abraham. - In only Isaac and Ishmael are so called; Isaac first, as the son of the promise. Then, in , follow the posterity of Ishmael, with the remark that Ishmael was the first-born; in and , the sons of Keturah; and finally in , the two sons of Isaac.

‏ 1 Chronicles 1:28-42

1Ch 1:28 The sons of Abraham. - In 1Ch 1:28 only Isaac and Ishmael are so called; Isaac first, as the son of the promise. Then, in 1Ch 1:29-31, follow the posterity of Ishmael, with the remark that Ishmael was the first-born; in 1Ch 1:32 and 1Ch 1:33, the sons of Keturah; and finally in 1Ch 1:34, the two sons of Isaac. 1Ch 1:29-33

The names of the generations (תּולדות) of Ishmael (Hebr. Yishma'el) correspond to those in Gen 25:12-15, and have been there explained. In 1Ch 1:32. also, the names of the thirteen descendants of Abraham by Keturah, six sons and seven grandsons, agree with Gen 25:1-4 (see commentary on that passage); only the tribes mentioned in Gen 25:3, which were descended from Dedan the grandson of Keturah, are omitted. From this Bertheau wrongly concludes that the chronicler probably did not find these names in his copy of the Pentateuch. The reason of the omission is rather this, that in Genesis the great-grandchildren are not themselves mentioned, but only the tribes descended from the grandchildren, while the chronicler wished to enumerate only the sons and grandsons. Keturah is called פּילגשׁ after Gen 25:6, where Keturah and Hagar are so named. 1Ch 1:34

The two sons of Isaac. Isaac has been already mentioned as a son of Abram, along with Ishmael, in 1Ch 1:28. But here the continuation of the genealogy of Abraham is prefaced by the remark that Abraham begat Isaac, just as in Gen 25:19, where the begetting of Isaac the son of Abraham is introduced with the same remark. Hence the supposition that the registers of the posterity of Abraham by Hagar and Keturah (1Ch 1:28-33) have been derived from Gen 25, already in itself so probable, becomes a certainty. 1Ch 1:35 The posterity of Esau and Seir. - An extract from Gen 36:1-30. 1Ch 1:35. The five sons of Esau are the same who, according to Gen 36:4., were born to him of his three wives in the land of Canaan. יעוּשׁ is another form of יעישׁ, Gen 36:5 (Kethibh). 1Ch 1:36-37

The grandchildren of Esau. In 1Ch 1:36 there are first enumerated five sons of his son Eliphaz, as in Gen 36:11, for צפי is only another form of צפו (Gen.). Next to these five names are ranged in addition ועמלק ותמנע, “Timna and Amalek,” while we learn from Gen 36:12 that Timna was a concubine of Eliphaz, who bore to him Amalek. The addition of the two names Timna and Amalek in the Chronicle thus appears to be merely an abbreviation, which the author might well allow himself, as the posterity of Esau were known to his readers from Genesis. The name Timna, too, by its form (a feminine formation), must have guarded against the idea of some modern exegetes that Timna was also a son of Eliphaz. Thus, then, Esau had through Eliphaz six grandchildren, who in Gen 36:12 are all set down as sons of Adah, the wife of Esau and the mother of Eliphaz. (Vide com. to Gen 36:12, where the change of Timna into a son of Eliphaz is rejected as a misinterpretation.) 1Ch 1:38-42

When Esau with his descendants had settled in Mount Seir, they subdued by degrees the aboriginal inhabitants of the land, and became fused with them into one people. For this reason, in Gen 36:20-30 the tribal princes of the Seirite inhabitants of the land are noticed; and in our chapter also, 1Ch 1:38, the names of these seven שׂעיר בּני, and in 1Ch 1:39-42 of their sons (eighteen men and one woman, Timna), are enumerated, where only Aholibamah the daughter of Anah, also mentioned in Gen 36:25, is omitted. The names correspond, except in a few unimportant points, which have been already discussed in the Commentary on Genesis. The inhabitants of Mount Seir consisted, then, after the immigration of Esau and his descendants, of twenty tribes under a like number of phylarchs, thirteen of whom were Edomite, of the family of Esau, and seven Seirite, who are called in the Chronicle שׂעיר בּני, and in Genesis חרי, Troglodytes, inhabitants of the land, that is, aborigines.

If we glance over the whole posterity of Abraham as they are enumerated in 1Ch 1:28-42, we see that it embraces (a) his sons Ishmael and Isaac, and Isaac’s sons Israel and Esau (together 4 persons); (b) the sons of Ishmael, or the tribes descended from Ishmael (12 names); (c) the sons and grandsons of Keturah (13 persons or chiefs); (d) the thirteen phylarchs descended from Esau; (e) the seven Seirite phylarchs, and eighteen grandsons and a granddaughter of Seir (26 persons). We have thus in all the names of sixty-eight persons, and to them we must add Keturah, and Timna the concubine of Eliphaz, before we get seventy persons. But these seventy must not by any means be reckoned as seventy tribes, which is the result Bertheau arrives at by means of strange calculations and errors in numbers. ^{▼▼That the Chronicle gives no countenance to this view appears from Bertheau’s calculation of the 70 tribes: from Ishmael, 12; from Keturah, 13; from Isaac, 2; from Esau, 5 sons and 7 grandchildren of Eliphaz (Timna, 1Ch 1:36, being included in the number), and 4 grandsons by Reuel - 16 in all; from Seir 7 sons, and from these 20 other descendants, 27 in all, which makes the sum of 70. But the biblical text mentions only 19 other descendants of Seir, so that only 26 persons came from Seir, and the sum is therefore 12 + 13 + 2 + 16 + 26 = 69. But we must also object to other points in Bertheau’s reckoning: (1) the arbitrary change of Timna into a grandchild of Esau; (2) the arbitrary reckoning of Esau and Israel (= Jacob) without Ishmael. Was Esau, apart from his sons, the originator of a people? Had the author of the Chronicle cherished the purpose attributed to him by Bertheau, of bringing the lists of names handed down by tradition to the round or significant number 70, he would certainly in 1Ch 1:33 not have omitted the three peoples descended from Dedan (Gen 25:3), as he might by these names have completed the number 70 without further trouble.}

Upon this conclusion he founds his hypothesis, that as the three branches of the family of Noah are divided into seventy peoples (which, as we have seen before is not the case), so also the three branches of the family of Abraham are divided into seventy tribes; and in this again he finds a remarkable indication “that even in the time of the chronicler, men sought by means of numbers to bring order and consistency into the lists of names handed down by tradition from the ancient times.”