Genesis 10:27
WEB
KJV
BSB
FBV
Related Resources
Cross References
1 Chronicles 1:20-28
20Joktan became the father of Almodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth, Jerah, 21Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah, 22Ebal, Abimael, Sheba, 23Ophir, Havilah, and Jobab. All these were the sons of Joktan. 24Shem, Arpachshad, Shelah, 25Eber, Peleg, Reu, 26Serug, Nahor, Terah, 27Abram (also called Abraham).
28The sons of Abraham: Isaac and Ishmael.
Study
Almodad was an ancestor, region, or tribe in what is now Yemen.
Sheleph was a tribe in Yemen.
Hazarmaveth had a link to Hadramaut in southern Arabia.
Jerah is unknown but might have a connection to Mount Barach.
Hadoram was an Arabian tribe.
Uzal was Sana’a, an ancient capital of Yemen before Islam.
Diklah was a southern Arabian oasis in Mina.
Obal was between Hodeida and Sana’a in southwest Arabia.
Abimael was a Sabaean. These were an ancient people of southern Arabia.
Sheba was in southern Arabia (see 10:7).
Ophir was a region in southern Arabia between Sheba and Havilah. It was famous for gold (Isaiah 13:12).
Havilah: See 10:7.
Jobab might have been Jobebitai in southern Arabia.
Shem had 14 sons through Eber and Joktan. The tower of Babel story connects Joktan to God's judgment there (11:1–9) and connects Peleg to Abram (11:27–12:1).
This section explains where the ancient Near Eastern nations came from. Ham was at the center (10:6–20)while the descendants of Japheth and Shem spread out to the surrounding regions of Greece, Crete, Asia Minor, Mesopotamia, Madai, the Arabian peninsula, and northeast Africa.
The list is selective in focusing on nations important to Israel. The 70 names (seven times ten) indicate completeness (see 46:27; Deuteronomy 32:8). These names represent the whole world, which Abraham's descendants would later bless (Genesis 18:18).
Although Shem is mentioned first in 10:1, he is addressed last in the Table because of his connection to Abram (10:21–31; 11:10–32; 12:1). Although God established the boundaries of all nations (see Deuteronomy 32:8; Amos 9:7; Acts 17:26), Israel was his special creation (a small group of 70 people; Genesis 46:27). God called them to be a blessing to a world of 70 nations (see 12:3).
Section overviews (1)
The fifth account (10:1) in Genesis (see study note on 2:4) unites the Table of Nations (10:2–32) and the Babel story (11:1–9) around the theme of scattering the nations (10:5, 18; 11:4, 8–9). The Table of Nations appears before the Babel story, but the Babel event explains how the nations and languages in that list came to exist.
By placing these events in this order, Genesis connects the filling of the earth with the blessing God gave to Noah and his sons (see 9:1 and study note). It shows that the growth of the nations comes from God’s blessing.
This order also prepares for Abram’s call (12:1–3). Abram’s call shows God’s answer to the problem seen at Babel (11:1–9), where humans were separated from God. Through Abram, God begins to restore that relationship.
Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided--After the flood (Gen 11:10-16) the descendants of Noah settled at pleasure and enjoyed the produce of the undivided soil. But according to divine instruction, made probably through Eber, who seems to have been distinguished for piety or a prophetic character, the earth was divided and his son's name, "Peleg," was given in memory of that event (see Deu 32:8; Act 17:26).
Two things especially are observable in this account of the posterity of Shem: -
I. The description of Shem, Gen 10:21. We have not only his name, Shem, which signifies a name, but two titles to distinguish him by: -
1. He was the father of all the children of Eber. Eber was his great grandson; but why should he be called the father of all his children, rather than of all Arphaxad's, or Salah's, etc.? Probably because Abraham and his seed, God's covenant-people, not only descended from Heber, but from him were called Hebrews; Gen 14:13, Abram the Hebrew. Paul looked upon it as his privilege that he was a Hebrew of the Hebrews, Phi 3:5. Eber himself, we may suppose, was a man eminent for religion in a time of general apostasy, and a great example of piety to his family; and, the holy tongue being commonly called from him the Hebrew, it is probable that he retained it in his family, in the confusion of Babel, as a special token of God's favour to him; and from him the professors of religion were called the children of Eber. Now, when the inspired penman would give Shem an honourable title, he calls him the father of the Hebrews. Though when Moses wrote this, they were a poor despised people, bond-slaves in Egypt, yet, being God's people, it was an honour to a man to be akin to them. As Ham, though he had many sons, is disowned by being called the father of Canaan, on whose seed the curse was entailed (Gen 9:22), so Shem, though he had many sons, is dignified with the title of the father of Eber, on whose seed the blessing was entailed. Note, a family of saints is more truly honourable than a family of nobles, Shem's holy seed than Ham's royal seed, Jacob's twelve patriarchs than Ishmael's twelve princes, Gen 17:20. Goodness is true greatness.
2. He was the brother of Japheth the elder, by which it appears that, though Shem is commonly put first, he was not Noah's first-born, but Japheth was older. But why should this also be put as part of Shem's title and description, that he was the brother of Japheth, since it had been, in effect, said often before? And was he not as much brother to Ham? Probably this was intended to signify the union of the Gentiles with the Jews in the church. The sacred historian had mentioned it as Shem's honour that he was the father of the Hebrews; but, lest Japheth's seed should therefore be looked upon as for ever shut out from the church, he here reminds us that he was the brother of Japheth, not in birth only, but in blessing; for Japheth was to dwell in the tents of Shem. Note, (1.) Those are brethren in the best manner that are so by grace, and that meet in the covenant of God and in the communion of saints. (2.) God, in dispensing his grace, does not go by seniority, but the younger sometimes gets the start of the elder in coming into the church; so the last shall be first and the first last.
II. The reason of the name of Peleg (Gen 10:25): Because in his days (that is, about the time of his birth, when his name was given him), was the earth divided among the children of men that were to inhabit it; either when Noah divided it by an orderly distribution of it, as Joshua divided the land of Canaan by lot, or when, upon their refusal to comply with that division, God, in justice, divided them by the confusion of tongues: whichsoever of these was the occasion, pious Heber saw cause to perpetuate the remembrance of it in the name of his son; and justly may our sons be called by the same name, for in our days, in another sense, is the earth, the church, most wretchedly divided.
Unto Shem also , the father of all the children of Eber. Moses, being about to speak of the sons of Shem, makes a brief introduction, which he had not done in reference to the others. Nor was it without reason; for since this was the race chosen by God, he wished to sever it from other nations by some special mark. This also is the reason why he expressly styles him the father of the sons of Eber,' and the elder brother of Japheth. [320] For the benediction of Shem does not descend to all his grandchildren indiscriminately, but remains in one family. And although the grandchildren themselves of Eber declined from the true worship of God, so that the Lord might justly have disinherited them; yet the benediction was not extinguished, but only buried for a season, until Abraham was called, in honor of whom this singular dignity is ascribed to the race and name of Eber. For the same cause, mention is made of Japheth, in order that the promise may be confirmed, God shall speak gently unto Japheth, that he may dwell in the tents of Shem.' Shem is not here called the brother of Ham, inasmuch as the latter was cut off from the fraternal order, and was debarred his own right. Fraternity remained only between them and Japheth; because, although they were separated, God had engaged that he would cause them to return from this dissension into union. As it respects the name Eber, they who deny it to be a proper name, but deduce it from the word which signifies to pass over, are more than sufficiently refuted by this passage alone.
Footnotes:
[306] For ample information on this interesting subject, which the general plan of Calvin's Commentary scarcely allowed him fully to investigate, the reader cannot do better than consult Dr. Wells' Geography of the Old Testament, chap. 3 From certain expressiones contained in the Mosaic account here given, of the first settlement of nations after the flood, it is clear that the records of the chapter now before us, have reference to the state of things after the confusion of tongues at the building of the Tower of Babel, though the narration of this event occurs in the chapter following; for the settlements are said to be made "according to their languages." But we know that before the attempt to build the tower, the whole earth was of "one language and of one speech;" and therefore the events here placed first, in the order of narration, were subsequent in the order of time. It may be proper here to observe, that according to the division of the earth into three great portions, Europe, Asia, and Africa, speaking generally, Japheth was the progenitor of the Europeans, Shem of the Asiatics, and Ham of the Africans. Yet this line of demarcation is not intended to be accurately drawn. The whole of Lesser Asia, for instance, falls within the province of the sons of Japheth; and Arabia within that of the sons of Ham. -- Ed.
[307] ^"Hic ergo Cyclopicus est furor."
[308] The first relating to the sons of Japheth the elder brother, from verse 2 to verse 6; the second, to the sons of Ham, from verse 6 to verse 21; the third, to the sons of Shem, from 21 to the end. Shem, though generally named first as a mark of Divine favor, is here placed last, because the subsequent history of Moses principally concerns this race; as Calvin properly argues. -- Ed.
[309] Doubtless there is truth in these remarks of Calvin. Yet he seems to carry his objection too far. For it is one of the strongest possible confirmations of the truth of the Mosaic history, that (notwithstanding some inevitable obscurity) there should be such a mass of undeniable evidence still existing, that the world was really divided in the manner here described. Far more nations than Calvin supposed may, with the highest degree of probability, be traced upward to the progenitors whose names are here recorded. See Wells' Geography, Mede's Works, and Bishop Patrick's Commentary. A list of the names, with the supposed corresponding nations, is also given in the Commentary of Professor Bush on this chapter. The following extract from Hengstenberg's Egypt, and the Books of Moses,' also bears upon this point: -- "It has often been asserted that the genealogical table in Genesis 10. cannot be from Moses: since so extended a knowledge of nations lies far beyond the geographical horizon of the Mosaic age. This hypothesis must now be considered as exploded. The new discoveries and investigations in Egypt have shown that they maintained, even from the most ancient times, a vigorous commerce with other nations, and sometimes with very distant nations. . . . But not merely, in general, do the investigations in Egyptian antiquities favor the belief that Moses was the author of the account in this tenth chapter of Genesis. On the Egyptian monuments, those especially which represent the conquests of the ancient Pharaohs over foreign nations, . . . not a few names have been found which correspond with those contained in the chapter before us." The learned author then proceeds to adduce instances in proof of his position, which the reader may consult with advantage. -- See Hengstenberg's Egypt, and the Books of Moses, chap. v2 p. 195 -- Ed.
[310] "tsyd Metaphorice cibus venatione partus, aut quovis modo paratus, praeter panem." -- Schindler. -- Ed
[311] Some translate it, "Against the Lord;" yet, perhaps, the words will hardly bear this rendering. -- Ed.
[312] ^"Qua propter dicetur," etc., "Wherefore it shall be said" In Calvin's text it is, "Idcirco dicitur," "Wherefore it is said."
[313] ^"Ob hoc exivit proverbium, Quasi Nemrod robustus venator eoram Domino." -- Vulgate
[314] Amos 6:2.
[315] ^"Quam hodie Cairum vocant." -- "Babylon was a habitation formed by the Persians, which may with probability be referred to the time of the conquest of Egypt by Cambyses. A quarter retaining the name of Baboul or Babilon, in the city commonly called Old Cairo, which overlooks the Nile at some distance above the Delta, shows its true position." -- D'Anville's Ancient Geography, vol. 2 p. -- Ed
[316] husteron proteron, is when that which really comes last in the order of time, is for some reason put first in the order of narration. -- Ed
[317] A reason why the former of these opinions is to be preferred will be found in a note at page 313, where it is stated that the division of tongues had already taken place, before these nations were settled. -- Ed.
[318] See the marginal reading of the English version -- He went out into Assyria.'
[319] Bishop Lowth's translation of the passage is as follows: -- "Behold the land of the Chaldeans; This people was of no account; (The Assyrian founded it for the inhabitants of the desert; They raised the watch-towers, they set up the palaces thereof;) This people hath reduced her to ruin." See also his note on this passage, which accords with Calvin's supposition, that the prophet referred to some subsequent period of history. -- Ed.
[320] In the English translation it is, The brother of Japheth the elder.' The balance of proof seems to lie in favor of the English translation, and gives the seniority to Japheth. Shem is supposed to be placed first, not on account of his age, but because his was the chosen seed. -- Ed.
Joktan - He had thirteen sons who had their dwelling from Mesha unto Sephar, a mount of the east, which places Calmet supposes to be mount Masius, on the west in Mesopotamia, and the mountains of the Saphirs on the east in Armenia, or of the Tapyrs farther on in Media. In confirmation that all men have been derived from one family, let it be observed that there are many customs and usages, both sacred and civil, which have prevailed in all parts of the world; and that these could owe their origin to nothing but a general institution, which could never have existed, had not mankind been originally of the same blood, and instructed in the same common notions before they were dispersed. Among these usages may be reckoned,
1. The numbering by tens.
2. Their computing time by a cycle of seven days.
3. Their setting apart the seventh day for religious purposes.
4. Their use of sacrifices, propitiatory and eucharistical.
5. The consecration of temples and altars.
6. The institution of sanctuaries or places of refuge, and their privileges.
7. Their giving a tenth part of the produce of their fields, etc., for the use of the altar.
8. The custom of worshipping the Deity bare-footed.
9. Abstinence of the men from all sensual gratifications previously to their offering sacrifice.
10. The order of priesthood and its support.
11. The notion of legal pollutions, defilements, etc.
12. The universal tradition of a general deluge.
13. The universal opinion that the rainbow was a Divine sign, or portent, etc., etc.
See Dodd.
The wisdom and goodness of God are particularly manifested in repeopling the earth by means of three persons, all of the same family, and who had witnessed that awful display of Divine justice in the destruction of the world by the flood, while themselves were preserved in the ark. By this very means the true religion was propagated over the earth; for the sons of Noah would certainly teach their children, not only the precepts delivered to their father by God himself, but also how in his justice he had brought the flood on the world of the ungodly, and by his merciful providence preserved them from the general ruin. It is on this ground alone that we can account for the uniformity and universality of the above traditions, and for the grand outlines of religious truth which are found in every quarter of the world. God has so done his marvellous works that they may be had in everlasting remembrance.
And Hadoram, and Uzal, and Diklah. The posterity of Hadoram, from the likeness of the name and sound, might seem to be the Adramitae of Ptolemy (f), but Bochart (g) thinks they are the Drimati of Pliny (h), who dwelt in the extreme corner of Arabia, to the east, near the Macae, who were at the straits of the Persian Gulf; and he observes, that the extreme promontory of that country was called Corodamum, by transposition of the letters "D" and "R": Uzal gave name to a city which is still so called; for R. Zacuth (i) says, the Jews which dwelt in Yaman, the kingdom of Sheba, call Samea, which is the capital of the kingdom of Yaman, Uzal; and who also relates, that there is a place called Hazarmaveth unto this day, of which see Genesis 10:26 the kingdom in which Uzal is said by him to be was the south part of Arabia Felix, as Yaman signifies, from whence came the queen of the south, Matthew 12:42 and Uzal or Auzal, as the Arabs pronounce it, is the same the Greeks call Ausar, changing "L" into "R"; hence mention is made by Pliny (k) of myrrh of Ausar, in the kingdom of the Gebanites, a people of the Arabs, where was a port by him called Ocila (l), by Ptolemy, Ocelis (m), and by Artemidorus in Strabo, Acila (n), and perhaps was the port of the city Uzal, to the name of which it bears some resemblance: Diklah signifies a palm tree, in the Chaldee or Syriac language, with which kind of trees Arabia abounded, especially the country of the Minaei, as Pliny (o) relates; wherefore Bochart (p) thinks the posterity of Diklah had their seat among them, rather than at Phaenicon or Diklah, so called from the abundance of palm trees that grew there, which was at the entrance into Arabia Felix at the Red sea, of which Diodorus Siculus (q) makes mention; and so Artemidorus in Strabo (r) speaks of a place called Posidium, opposite to the Troglodytes, and where the Arabian Gulf ends, where palm trees grew in a wonderful manner, on the fruit of which people lived, where was a Phaenicon, or continued grove of palm trees; and here is placed by Ptolemy (s) a village called Phaenicon, the same with Diklah.
(f) Ut supra. (Geograph. l. 6. c. 5.) (g) Ut supra, (Phaleg. l. 2.) c. 20. (h) Nat. Hist. l. 6. c. 28. (i) Juchasin, fol. 135. 2.((k) Nat. Hist. l. 12. c. 16. (l) lb. c. 19. (m) Ut supra. (Geograph. l. 6. c. 5). So Plin. Nat. Hist. l. 6. c. 23. (n) Geograph. l. 16. p. 529. (o) Nat. Hist. l. 6. c. 28. (p) Ut supra. (Phaleg. l. 2. c. 22.) (q) Bibliothec. l. 3. p. 175. (r) Geograph. l. 16. p. 34. (s) Ut supra. (Geograph. l. 6. c. 5.)
Among the descendants of Arphaxad, Eber's eldest son received the name of Peleg, because in his days the earth, i.e., the population of the earth, was divided, in consequence of the building of the tower of Babel (Gen 11:8). His brother Joktan is called Kachtan by the Arabians, and is regarded as the father of all the primitive tribes of Arabia. The names of his sons are given in Gen 10:26-29. There are thirteen of them, some of which are still retained in places and districts of Arabia, whilst others are not yet discovered, or are entirely extinct. Nothing certain has been ascertained about Almodad, Jerah, Diklah, Obal, Abimael, and Jobab. Of the rest, Sheleph is identical with Salif or Sulaf (in Ptl. 6, 7, Σαλαπηνοί), an old Arabian tribe, also a district of Yemen. Hazarmaveth (i.e., forecourt of death) is the Arabian Hadhramaut in South-eastern Arabia on the Indian Ocean, whose name Jauhari is derived from the unhealthiness of the climate. Hadoram: the Ἀδραμῖται of Ptol. 6, 7, Atramitae of Plin. 6, 28, on the southern coast of Arabia. Uzal: one of the most important towns of Yemen, south-west of Mareb. Sheba: the Sabaeans, with the capital Saba or Mareb, Mariaba regia (Plin.), whose connection with the Cushite (Gen 10:7) and Abrahamite Sabaeans (Gen 25:3) is quite in obscurity. Ophir has not yet been discovered in Arabia; it is probably to be sought on the Persian Gulf, even if the Ophir of Solomon was not situated there. Havilah appears to answer to Chaulaw of Edrisi, a district between Sanaa and Mecca. But this district, which lies in the heart of Yemen, does not fit the account in Sa1 15:7, nor the statement in Gen 25:18, that Havilah formed the boundary of the territory of the Ishmaelites. These two passages point rather to Χαυλοταῖοι, a place on the border of Arabia Petraea towards Yemen, between the Nabataeans and Hagrites, which Strabo describes as habitable.