1 Chronicles 3. resumes the genealogy of the Hezronite house of Ram, suspended at 1Chronicles 2:17. (1) The nine sons of David (1Chronicles 3:1-9). (2) The Davidic dynasty from Solomon to Zedekiah (1Chronicles 3:10-16). (3) The line of Jechoniah-Jehoiachin, continued apparently to the ninth generation (1Chronicles 3:17-24).

(1-4) The six sons born in Hebron. The sons and mothers agree with those of the parallel passage in Sam., with the one exception of the second son, who is here called Daniel, but in Samuel, Chileab. The LXX. (2Samuel 3:3) has Δαλουια, which may represent Heb. Delaiah (Iah hath freed), though in our 1Chronicles 3:24 that name is spelt Δαλααια, or Δαλαια. In the present passage the Vatican LXX. has Δαμνιήλ, the Alex. Δαλουνια. Perhaps Daniel is a corruption of Delaiah, as this name recurs in the line of David. Chileab may have had a second name (comp. Uzziah-Azariah, Mattaniah-Zedekiah), especially as Chileab appears to be a nickname, meaning “dog.” (Comp. the Latin Canidius, Caninius, as a family name.)

(1) Amnon.—For his story see 2 Samuel 13

Of Ahinoam.—Literally, to Ahin. (1Samuel 25:43).

The second Daniel of Abigail the Carmelitess.—Better, A second, Daniel, to Abigail, &c. Sam. adds, “wife of Nabal the Carmelite.” (See 1 Samuel 25 for her story.)

Maachah . . . Geshur.—See 1Chronicles 2:23.

Adonijah the son of Haggith.—Who would have succeeded his father, and was put to death by Solomon (1 Kings 1, 1Kings 2:19-25).

And there he reigned seven years.—This notice of the time David reigned first in Hebron, the Judean capital, and then in Jerusalem over all Israel, is not read in the parallel section of Samuel; but see 2Samuel 2:11; 2Samuel 5:5 for the same statements.

Shimea (“report”) was a son of Jesse (1Chronicles 2:13). Perhaps, therefore, Shammua (“famous”) is correct here, as in Samuel.

Ammiel and Eliam are transposed forms of the same name, meaning “El is a tribesman” (‘am=gens, el = deus). (Comp. Ahaziah and Jehoahaz, Nethaniah and Jehonathan, and many similar transpositions.) So in Gr. Theodoros and Dorotheos, Philotheos and Theophilos exist side by side.

Elishama.—Spelt Elishua in both of the parallel passsages. (See Note on 1Chronicles 3:5.) The recurrence of Elishama (“God heareth”) in 1Chronicles 3:8 is no argument against the name here.

Eliphelet (“God is deliverance”) also occurs twice, and David may have chosen to give names so expressive of his own peculiar faith and trust to the sons of different wives. (See Psalm 18:2; Psalm 18:6.) This Eliphelet (called Elphalet—Heb., Elpèlet, 1Chronicles 14:5; a by-form, as Abram is of Abiram, or Absalom of Abishalom, or Abshai of Abishai) is omitted in Samuel. So also is Nogah (brightness, i.e., of the Divine Presence, Psalm 18:13—a hymn which is certainly David’s). (Comp. Japhia, “the Shining One.”) Nepheg means “shoot, scion.”

And Tamar (was) their sister.—Not the only one, but the sister whose unhappy fate had made her famous (2 Samuel 13).

A comparison of the above lists of David’s sons with the parallels in Sam. makes it improbable that they were drawn from that source; for (1) the Hebrew text of the chronicle appears, in this instance, to be quite as original as that of Samuel; (2) Some of the names differ, without our being able to pronounce in favour of one or the other text; (3) The form of the lists is different, especially that of the second. The chronicler alone gives the number of the four and nine sons, assigning the former to “Bathshua the daughter of Ammiel,” and arranging the latter in three triads. 1Chronicles 3:9 also is wanting in Samuel.

(10) Rehoboam.—So LXX. Ροβοαμ. Heb., Rĕhab-‘ām (“the Kinsman,” i.e., God hath enlarged).

Abia.—LXX., Αβια; Heb., Abîyāh (Iah is father), of which Abijam (Abîyām) is a mimmated form.

Asa.—Healer.

Jehoshaphat.—Iahweh judgeth.

Ahaziah.—Iah holdeth (Luke 1:54, ἀντελάβετ, “he hath holpen”).

Joash.—(?) Iahweh is a hero. Cf. Ashbel = “man of Bel,” and Exodus 15:3.

Azariah.—Iah helpeth.

Jotham.—Iahweh is perfect.

Hezekiah.—Heb., Hizkiyāhû, “my strength is Iahu.”

Manasseh (?) Perhaps of Egyptian origin.

Josiah.—Iah comforteth.

In this line of fifteen successive monarchs, the usurper Athaliah is omitted between Ahaziah and Joash (1Chronicles 3:11).

The firstborn Johanan (Iahweh bestowed) never ascended the throne of his fathers. He may have died early. He is not to be identified with Jehoahaz, who was two years younger than Jehoiakim (2Kings 23:31; 2Kings 23:36), and therefore could not have been the firstborn of Josiah.

The second Jehoiakim, the third Zedekiah, the fourth Shallum.—The order of succession to the throne after Josiah was this:—First, Shallum (= Jehoahaz, 2Kings 23:30; comp. Jeremiah 22:11); then Jehoiakim (= Eliakim, 2Kings 23:34; Jeremiah 22:18); then Jeconiah, son of Jehoiakini (= Jehoiachin, Jeremiah 22:24); and, lastly, Zedekiah (= Mattaniah, 2Kings 24:17),

The third Zedekiah.—Zedekiah was much younger than Shallum. Shallum was twenty-three when he came to the throne, which he occupied eleven years. Zedekiah succeeded him at the age of twenty-one (2Kings 23:31; 2Kings 24:18). The order of 1Chronicles 3:15 is not wholly determined by seniority any more than by the actual succession. If age were considered, the order would be Jehoiakim, Shallum, Zedekiah; if the actual succession, it would be, Shallum, Jehoiakim, Zedekiah. The order of the text may have been influenced by the two considerations—(1) That Jehoiakim and Zedekiah each enjoyed a reign of eleven years, while Shallum reigned only three months; (2) That Shallum and Zedekiah were full brothers, both being sons of Hamutal, whereas Jehoiakim was born of another of Josiah’s wives, viz., Zebudah.

(17) Assir.—This word means prisoner, captive; literally, bondman. It so occurs in Isaiah 10:2; Isaiah 24:22. Accordingly the verse may be rendered, “And the sons of Jeconiah when captive—Shealtiel (was) his son.” This translation (1) accords with the Masoretic punctuation, which connects the term assir with Jeconiah; and (2) accounts for the double reference to the offspring of Jeconiah, first in 1Chronicles 3:16, “Zedekiah his son,” and then again here. Zedekiah is thus separated from the sons born to Jeconiah in captivity. The strongest apparent objection against such a rendering is that the expression “the sons of Jeconiah the captive” would require the definite article to be prefixed to the word assir. No doubt it would; but then “the sons of Jeconiah the captive” is not what the chronicler intended to say. He has said what he meant—viz., “the sons of Jeconiah when in captivity” or “as a captive.” The Talmudic treatise, Sanhedrin, gives “Assir his son;” but another, the Sedw Olam, does not mention Assir, who is likewise wanting in the genealogy of our Lord (Matthew 1:12; see the Notes there).

Salathiel.—The form in the LXX., Σαλαθιήλ; and Matthew 1:12, Heb., Shealti-el (“request of God”): Haggai 1:12, Shalti-el.

Shenazar—Heb., Shen’azzar; LXX., Σανεσάρ—is a compound Babylonian name, like Belteshazzar (Daniel 1:7), of which the last part means “protect,” and the first is, perhaps, “Sin” (comp. Σαναχάριβος), the moon-god. Such a name as “Sin protect” may well have been given to this Jewish prince at the court of Babylon, just as Daniel and his three companions received idolatrous designations of the same sort from Nebuchadnezzar. This fact seems to support our rendering of the word Assir (1Chronicles 3:17).

Hoshama.—A contraction of Jehoshama (Iahweh hath heard), like Coniah for Jeconiah.

And the sons of Zerubbabel.—The Hebrew received text has “and the son.” This is not to be altered, although some MSS. have the plural. (Comp. 1Chronicles 3:21; 1Chronicles 3:23.) This use of the singular is characteristic of the present genealogical fragment (see 1Chronicles 3:17-18), “And the sons of Jeconiah captive—Salathiel his son, and Malchiram,” &c.

Meshullam, and Hananiah, and Shelomith their sister.—This seems to mean that the three were the offspring of one wife.

The names of the last kings (Shallum, recompense; Zedekiah, Iah is righteousness) were parables of the judgment that should come to pass in Judah. (Comp. Isaiah 10:22 : “A consumption is doomed, overflowing with righteousness.”) Those of the kindred and sons of Zerubbabel indicate the religious hopefulness of his people at the dawn of the restoration. His father is Pedaiah (Iah redeemeth) (see Isaiah 51:11); his son Meshullam (devoted to God) recalls Isaiah 42:19, where the pious remnant of Israel is so designated. The name Ohel, “tent,” is probably an abbreviation of Oholiah, or Oholiab, and refers to the sacred dwelling of Jehovah, which was for ages a tent. (See Isaiah 33:20; Ezekiel 37:27.)

Jushab-hesed (mercy will be restored) is a prophecy of faith in Him who in wrath remembereth mercy (Habakkuk 3:2).

The sons of Rephaiah.—The ancient versions represent here an important various reading. The LXX. have rendered the whole verse thus: “And sons of Anania; Phalettia, and Jesias his son, Raphal his son, Orna his son, Abdia his son (Sechenias his son.)” The Syriac reads: “Sons of Hananiah: Pelatiah and Ushaiah. Arphaia his son, Arnun his son, Ubia his son—viz., Ushaia’s; and his son, viz., Shechaniah’s Shemaiah,” &c. The difference between “sons” and “his son” in Hebrew writing is simply that between y and w. (See Note on 1 Chronicles 1)

This various reading presents a form of genealogy like that which prevails in 1Chronicles 3:10-16, and occurs also in 1Chronicles 3:17, at the beginning of the present section. But it is probable that this reading is really an ancient correction of the Hebrew text, which, as it stands, appears to leave undefined the relation between Hananiah and the four families mentioned in this verse. The truth, however, would seem to be that the expression “the sons of Hananiah” includes not only Pelatiah and Jesaiah, but also the four families named after Rephaiah, Arnan, Obadiah, and Shechaniah (comp. 1Chronicles 2:42, and Note). The four founders of these families were perhaps brothers of Pelatiah and Jesaiah, though not necessarily so; for these families may have been subdivisions of those of Pelatiah and Jesaiah.

Rephaiah.—Iah healeth (Isaiah 30:26; Exodus 15:26). See Note on 1Chronicles 3:20.

Hattush.—Probably the Hattush “of the sons of David, of the sons of Shechaniah,” mentioned by Ezra as one of those who went up with him from Babylon in the second return, 457 B.C. (Ezra 8:2-3). If we have rightly understood 1Chronicles 3:21, Hattush is of the fourth generation after Zerubbabel (Hananiah, Shechaniah, Shemaiah, Hattush), and so might well have been a youthful companion of Ezra.

Six.—As the text gives only five names, one must have been omitted by an oversight.