After the flood, God ordered the spread of the nations through the sons of Noah, preserving humanity, structuring the world’s peoples, and advancing the line through which His redemptive purposes would continue.
The Nations Spread from Noah’s Sons Under God’s Preserving Order
After the flood, God ordered the spread of the nations through the sons of Noah, preserving humanity, structuring the world’s peoples, and advancing the line through which His redemptive purposes would continue.
Reading a chapter
What this page is: Each chapter page shows the big idea, the argument flow, key original-language terms, doctrine connections, and passage units, all in one place.
How to use it: Start with the Overview tab to get the chapter's main point. Then move to Passages to study individual units, or Language to trace key terms.
Going deeper: The Doctrines and Motifs tabs show how this chapter connects to the broader biblical story.
After the flood, God ordered the spread of the nations through the sons of Noah, preserving humanity, structuring the world’s peoples, and advancing the line through which His redemptive purposes would continue.
Genesis 10 teaches that human diversity among peoples, lands, languages, and clans does not arise outside God’s providence, but within His sovereign ordering of post-flood history. The chapter stresses repeated patterns of clans, languages, lands, and nations, showing that the world’s peoples are neither random nor independent of divine oversight. This is crucial because Scripture presents the nations not as outside God’s concern, but as part of the stage on which His covenantal and redemptive purposes unfold.
The chapter also demonstrates that all peoples share a common origin in Noah’s sons, which undercuts any idea of ultimate human separateness at the level of creaturely identity. Yet Genesis 10 is not flattening. It distinguishes peoples and traces lines with theological significance. Ham’s line includes peoples and territories that will later stand in significant tension with Israel.
The extended note on Nimrod introduces themes of power, kingdom-building, and Babel-associated human ambition. Shem’s line, meanwhile, receives careful treatment because it carries forward the narrowing trajectory of the seed promise. Thus Genesis 10 holds together universal humanity, differentiated nations, providential geography, and the covenantal narrowing that will soon focus on Abram.
The chapter provides the world map of early biblical theology.
Genesis 10, often called the Table of Nations, stands as one of the most important genealogical chapters in Scripture for understanding the post-flood world. Following the covenantal stabilization of creation in Genesis 9, this chapter traces how the earth was populated through the descendants of Noah’s sons, Japheth, Ham, and Shem. Within Genesis 1–11, it serves as a bridge between the preservation of one household through the flood and the dispersion realities that will be further explained in Genesis 11 with Babel.
The chapter is not merely ethnographic cataloging. It is theological geography and covenant-aware genealogy. It demonstrates that all nations arise from a common post-flood human source under God’s sovereign ordering. At the same time, it begins to identify lines, territories, and peoples that will become highly significant throughout the rest of the biblical storyline, especially in relation to Israel, the nations, and the unfolding seed promise through Shem.
The chapter opens by identifying this record as the generations of the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
The descendants of Japheth are listed, spreading into coastlands and regions associated with many distant peoples.
The descendants of Ham are traced, including Cush, Egypt, Put, and Canaan; special attention is given to Nimrod, kingdom-building, and the Canaanite territories.
The descendants of Shem are listed, including Eber and the line that will become central for later covenant history.
The chapter concludes by summarizing that from these clans and nations the peoples of the earth spread abroad after the flood.
- 10:1: The chapter opens by identifying this record as the generations of the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
- 10:2–5: The descendants of Japheth are listed, spreading into coastlands and regions associated with many distant peoples.
- 10:6–20: The descendants of Ham are traced, including Cush, Egypt, Put, and Canaan · special attention is given to Nimrod, kingdom-building, and the Canaanite territories.
- 10:21–31: The descendants of Shem are listed, including Eber and the line that will become central for later covenant history.
- 10:32: The chapter concludes by summarizing that from these clans and nations the peoples of the earth spread abroad after the flood.
Theological Focus
- Providence
- Nations
- Genealogy
- Common Humanity
- Covenantal Narrowing
- Post-Flood Order
- Kingdom Development
- Seed-Line Preservation
- Anthropology
- Covenant Theology
- Biblical Theology
- Missiological Foundations
- Christology Preparation
Covenant Significance
Genesis 10 is covenantally significant because it provides the global backdrop against which God’s particular covenant dealings will unfold. Before Genesis narrows toward Abram in chapter 12, this chapter shows the breadth of humanity as descended from Noah. It explains how the world of nations comes into being and situates Shem’s line within that wider world.
The covenant story is therefore not tribal in origin, but arises within the context of God’s sovereign relation to all peoples. Genesis 10 helps establish that the particular covenant line exists for purposes that ultimately stand in relation to the nations.
Canonical Connections
Genesis 10 is covenantally significant because it provides the global backdrop against which God’s particular covenant dealings will unfold. Before Genesis narrows toward Abram in chapter 12, this chapter shows the breadth of humanity as descended from Noah. It explains how the world of nations comes into being and situates Shem’s line within that wider world.
The covenant story is therefore not tribal in origin, but arises within the context of God’s sovereign relation to all peoples. Genesis 10 helps establish that the particular covenant line exists for purposes that ultimately stand in relation to the nations.
Genesis 9:18-19
Genesis 11:1-9
Deuteronomy 32:8
1 Chronicles 1:5-23
Psalm 67:1-7
Genesis 9:18-29
Genesis 11:1-9
Genesis 11:10-26
Acts 17:24-31
Cross References
Genesis 10 does not present the gospel directly, but it prepares essential categories for it. The world after the flood is populated by many nations, yet all share a common origin. At the same time, the biblical line of promise is being preserved through Shem. This means the gospel will later come through a particular line into a universal human world. In the fullness of Scripture, Jesus Christ comes not as a tribal savior for one isolated people only, but as the promised seed whose saving significance reaches the nations descended from this very table.
Primary Emphasis
Genesis 10 contributes to Christology by preserving the historical and genealogical stage through which the promised seed will come into the world. The nations are spread out, but the line through Shem is retained and distinguished, preparing for the later descent toward Abram, David, and ultimately Christ. The chapter also contributes to the universal scope of Christ’s significance, because the one who comes through the narrowed line of promise comes into a world already understood as populated by many peoples descending from one humanity.
Thus Genesis 10 supports both the particularity of Christ’s line and the universality of His relevance to the nations.
Chapter Contribution
Genesis 10 teaches that human diversity among peoples, lands, languages, and clans does not arise outside God’s providence, but within His sovereign ordering of post-flood history. The chapter stresses repeated patterns of clans, languages, lands, and nations, showing that the world’s peoples are neither random nor independent of divine oversight. This is crucial because Scripture presents the nations not as outside God’s concern, but as part of the stage on which His covenantal and redemptive purposes unfold.
The chapter also demonstrates that all peoples share a common origin in Noah’s sons, which undercuts any idea of ultimate human separateness at the level of creaturely identity. Yet Genesis 10 is not flattening. It distinguishes peoples and traces lines with theological significance. Ham’s line includes peoples and territories that will later stand in significant tension with Israel.
The extended note on Nimrod introduces themes of power, kingdom-building, and Babel-associated human ambition. Shem’s line, meanwhile, receives careful treatment because it carries forward the narrowing trajectory of the seed promise. Thus Genesis 10 holds together universal humanity, differentiated nations, providential geography, and the covenantal narrowing that will soon focus on Abram.
The chapter provides the world map of early biblical theology.
All humanity descends from a single origin under God.
God preserves a specific lineage through which His redemptive plan unfolds.
God governs the rise and spread of all peoples and nations.
God ordains distinctions among peoples, languages, and lands.
God directs the development and placement of nations.
Sense generations, account, descendants
Definition generations, account, descendants
Why it matters This term frames the chapter as a theological record of post-flood human development, not as a random name list.
Sense nation, people
Definition nation, people
Why it matters The repeated nation language shows that the peoples of the earth arise under God’s providential order and become central to biblical history.
Sense clan, family
Definition clan, family
Why it matters The clan language underscores that the nations arise through ordered familial structures, not chaotic emergence.
Sense language, tongue
Definition language, tongue
Why it matters The mention of languages anticipates the Babel account and shows that linguistic diversity belongs to the structured spread of peoples.
Sense land, earth
Definition land, earth
Why it matters The lands of the nations matter in biblical theology because geography is part of how God orders the world and stages covenant history.
Sense Nimrod
Definition Nimrod
Why it matters Nimrod introduces the themes of human power, kingdom-building, and Babel-associated centralization that will become morally charged in Genesis 11 and beyond.
Sense mighty man, strong one
Definition mighty man, strong one
Why it matters The mightiness associated with Nimrod shows how human strength and dominion can become prominent features of post-flood society.
Sense kingdom
Definition kingdom
Why it matters The kingdom language associated with Nimrod introduces organized political power as a major feature of human development after the flood.
Sense Shem
Definition Shem
Why it matters Shem’s line bears special significance for the later narrowing of the covenantal story toward Abram and the promised seed.
Cross-language bridge 1 link · View in lexicon
Sense Eber
Definition Eber
Why it matters The mention of Eber is important because His line becomes central to the later genealogical narrowing toward Abram.
Cross-language bridge 1 link · View in lexicon
Sense Peleg
Definition Peleg
Why it matters The naming note connected to Peleg anticipates the division themes related to the dispersal of humanity.
Cross-language bridge 1 link · View in lexicon
Lexicon data: MorphGNT Strong's Dictionary XML (CC0) · Open Scriptures Hebrew Bible (CC BY 4.0) · Open Scriptures Hebrew Lexicon (CC BY 4.0) · STEPBible Data (CC BY 4.0) · Full details
C.F. Keil & F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament (1861–91) — public domain
- Genesis 10 quietly warns that the development of peoples, territories, and kingdoms can unfold in ways later associated with pride, opposition, and rebellion, especially where human power clusters around self-exalting ambitions.
- Treating Genesis 10 as a useless list of names rather than a theological map of the post-flood world.
- Reading the nations material as though it were merely about ethnicity, while ignoring its role in biblical theology, covenant history, and redemptive geography.
- Missing the significance of Nimrod and kingdom-building as anticipatory material for Babel and later patterns of imperial opposition.
- Ignoring the repeated emphasis on clans, languages, lands, and nations, which reveals careful providential structuring of the world.
- Failing to see that the chapter sets up both the universality of humanity and the narrowing of the promised line through Shem.
- Assuming genealogies are spiritually sterile when in fact they often establish the very framework for the unfolding story of redemption.
- Do You see the nations of the earth as outside God’s concern, or as part of the world He sovereignly orders and addresses?
- How does Genesis 10 deepen Your understanding that all peoples share a common human origin under God?
- What does the emergence of kingdoms and centers of power teach You about the danger of human greatness detached from submission to God?
- Are You learning to read seemingly ordinary biblical genealogies as part of the larger redemptive storyline?
- How does the distinction of Shem’s line prepare You to appreciate the deliberate movement of Scripture toward God’s promised Deliverer?
- Teach Genesis 10 to help believers see that biblical faith is not detached from history, geography, and peoples, but is deeply rooted in them.
- Use the chapter to affirm the unity of the human race and the dignity of all peoples as descending from a common origin under God.
- Help the church understand that the nations matter to God long before the Great Commission is stated explicitly in the New Testament.
- Warn against admiration of power, empire, and human greatness when these are detached from humble submission to the Lord.
- Show that God’s redemptive work unfolds in real history, through real families, places, and peoples, not in abstraction.
- Encourage patient, careful reading of genealogies, because they often carry massive theological significance for the biblical storyline.
Genesis 10 does not present the gospel directly, but it prepares essential categories for it. The world after the flood is populated by many nations, yet all share a common origin. At the same time, the biblical line of promise is being preserved through Shem. This means the gospel will later come through a particular line into a universal human world. In the fullness of Scripture, Jesus Christ comes not as a tribal savior for one isolated people only, but as the promised seed whose saving significance reaches the nations descended from this very table.
Genesis 10 does not present the gospel directly, but it prepares essential categories for it. The world after the flood is populated by many nations, yet all share a common origin. At the same time, the biblical line of promise is being preserved through Shem. This means the gospel will later come through a particular line into a universal human world. In the fullness of Scripture, Jesus Christ comes not as a tribal savior for one isolated people only, but as the promised seed whose saving significance reaches the nations descended from this very table.
Genesis 10 does not present the gospel directly, but it prepares essential categories for it. The world after the flood is populated by many nations, yet all share a common origin. At the same time, the biblical line of promise is being preserved through Shem. This means the gospel will later come through a particular line into a universal human world. In the fullness of Scripture, Jesus Christ comes not as a tribal savior for one isolated people only, but as the promised seed whose saving significance reaches the nations descended from this very table.
Genesis 10 does not present the gospel directly, but it prepares essential categories for it. The world after the flood is populated by many nations, yet all share a common origin. At the same time, the biblical line of promise is being preserved through Shem. This means the gospel will later come through a particular line into a universal human world. In the fullness of Scripture, Jesus Christ comes not as a tribal savior for one isolated people only, but as the promised seed whose saving significance reaches the nations descended from this very table.
Genesis 10 does not present the gospel directly, but it prepares essential categories for it. The world after the flood is populated by many nations, yet all share a common origin. At the same time, the biblical line of promise is being preserved through Shem. This means the gospel will later come through a particular line into a universal human world. In the fullness of Scripture, Jesus Christ comes not as a tribal savior for one isolated people only, but as the promised seed whose saving significance reaches the nations descended from this very table.
Moderate
- The chapter teaches through genealogical and geographical structure rather than direct command
- Its implied force urges readers to see the nations under God’s sovereignty and the covenant line within world history
The Biblical World
Chapter At A Glance
Genesis 10 is covenantally significant because it provides the global backdrop against which God’s particular covenant dealings will unfold. Before Genesis narrows toward Abram in chapter 12, this chapter shows the breadth of humanity as descended from Noah. It explains how the world of nations comes into being and situates Shem’s line within that wider world.
The covenant story is therefore not tribal in origin, but arises within the context of God’s sovereign relation to all peoples. Genesis 10 helps establish that the particular covenant line exists for purposes that ultimately stand in relation to the nations.
Genesis 10 does not present the gospel directly, but it prepares essential categories for it. The world after the flood is populated by many nations, yet all share a common origin. At the same time, the biblical line of promise is being preserved through Shem. This means the gospel will later come through a particular line into a universal human world. In the fullness of Scripture, Jesus Christ comes not as a tribal savior for one isolated people only, but as the promised seed whose saving significance reaches the nations descended from this very table.
Focus Points
- Providence
- Nations
- Genealogy
- Common Humanity
- Covenantal Narrowing
- Post-Flood Order
- Kingdom Development
- Seed-Line Preservation
- Anthropology
- Covenant Theology
- Biblical Theology
- Missiological Foundations
- Christology Preparation
Cross References
Passages
Chapter opening: Genesis 10:1-32
Gen 10:1-5 Of the sons of Noah, all that is handed down is the pedigree of the nations, or the list of the tribes which sprang from them (Gen 10), and the account of the confusion of tongues, together with the dispersion of men over the face of the earth (Gen 11:1-9); two events that were closely related to one another, and of the greatest importance to the history of the human race and of the kingdom of God. The genealogy traces the origin of the tribes which were scattered over the earth; the confusion of tongues shows the cause of the division of the one human race into many different tribes with peculiar languages.
The genealogy of the tribes is not an ethnographical myth, nor the attempt of an ancient Hebrew to trace the connection of his own people with the other nations of the earth by means of uncertain traditions and subjective combinations, but a historical record of the Genesis of the nations, founded upon a tradition handed down from the fathers, which, to judge from its contents, belongs to the time of Abraham (cf. Hävernick’s Introduction to Pentateuch , pp.
118ff. transl.) , and was inserted by Moses in the early history of the kingdom of God on account of its universal importance in connection with sacred history. For it not only indicates the place of the family which was chosen as the recipient of divine revelation among the rest of the nations, but traces the origin of the entire world, with the prophetical intention of showing that the nations, although they were quickly suffered to walk in their own ways (Act 14:16), were not intended to be for ever excluded from the counsels of eternal love.
In this respect the genealogies prepare the way for the promise of the blessing, which was one day to spread from the chosen family to all the families of the earth (Gen 12:2-3). - The historical character of the genealogy is best attested by the contents themselves, since no trace can be detected, either of any pre-eminence given to the Shemites, or of an intention to fill up gaps by conjecture or invention.
It gives just as much as had been handed down with regard to the origin of the different tribes. Hence the great diversity in the lists of the descendants of the different sons of Noah. Some are brought down only to the second, others to the third or fourth generation, and some even further; and whilst in several instances the founder of a tribe is named, in others we have only the tribes themselves; and in some cases we are unable to determine whether the names given denote the founder or the tribe.
In many instances, too, on account of the defects and the unreliable character of the accounts handed down to us from different ancient sources with regard to the origin of the tribes, there are names which cannot be identified with absolute certainty. Descendants of Japhet. - In Gen 10:1 the names of the three sons are introduced according to their relative ages, to give completeness and finish to the Tholedoth ; but in the genealogy itself Japhet is mentioned first and Shem last, according to the plan of the book of Genesis as already explained in the introduction.
In Gen 10:2 seven sons of Japhet are given. The names, indeed, afterwards occur as those of tribes; but here undoubtedly they are intended to denote the tribe-fathers, and may without hesitation be so regarded. For even if in later times many nations received their names from the lands of which they took possession, this cannot be regarded as a universal rule, since unquestionably the natural rule in the derivation of the names would be for the tribe to be called after its ancestor, and for the countries to receive their names from their earliest inhabitants.
Gomer is most probably the tribe of the Cimmerians , who dwelt, according to Herodotus , on the Maeotis, in the Taurian Chersonesus, and from whom are descended the Cumri or Cymry in Wales and Brittany, whose relation to the Germanic Cimbri is still in obscurity. Magog is connected by Josephus with the Scythians on the Sea of Asof and in the Caucasus; but Kiepert associates the name with Macija or Maka , and applies it to Scythian nomad tribes which forced themselves in between the Arian or Arianized Medes, Kurds, and Armenians.
Madai are the Medes, called Mada on the arrow-headed inscriptions. Javan corresponds to the Greek Ἰάων, from whom the Ionians (Ἰάονος) are derived, the parent tribe of the Greeks (in Sanskrit Javana , old Persian Junâ ). Tubal and Meshech are undoubtedly the Tibareni and Moschi , the former of whom are placed by Herodotus upon the east of the Thermodon , the latter between the sources of the Phasis and Cyrus.
Tiras: according to Josephus, the Thracians , whom Herodotus calls the most numerous tribe next to the Indian. As they are here placed by the side of Meshech, so we also find on the old Egyptian monuments Mashuash and Tuirash , and upon the Assyrian Tubal and Misek ( Rawlinson ).
Gen 10:1-5 Of the sons of Noah, all that is handed down is the pedigree of the nations, or the list of the tribes which sprang from them (Gen 10), and the account of the confusion of tongues, together with the dispersion of men over the face of the earth (Gen 11:1-9); two events that were closely related to one another, and of the greatest importance to the history of the human race and of the kingdom of God. The genealogy traces the origin of the tribes which were scattered over the earth; the confusion of tongues shows the cause of the division of the one human race into many different tribes with peculiar languages.
The genealogy of the tribes is not an ethnographical myth, nor the attempt of an ancient Hebrew to trace the connection of his own people with the other nations of the earth by means of uncertain traditions and subjective combinations, but a historical record of the Genesis of the nations, founded upon a tradition handed down from the fathers, which, to judge from its contents, belongs to the time of Abraham (cf. Hävernick’s Introduction to Pentateuch , pp.
118ff. transl.) , and was inserted by Moses in the early history of the kingdom of God on account of its universal importance in connection with sacred history. For it not only indicates the place of the family which was chosen as the recipient of divine revelation among the rest of the nations, but traces the origin of the entire world, with the prophetical intention of showing that the nations, although they were quickly suffered to walk in their own ways (Act 14:16), were not intended to be for ever excluded from the counsels of eternal love.
In this respect the genealogies prepare the way for the promise of the blessing, which was one day to spread from the chosen family to all the families of the earth (Gen 12:2-3). - The historical character of the genealogy is best attested by the contents themselves, since no trace can be detected, either of any pre-eminence given to the Shemites, or of an intention to fill up gaps by conjecture or invention.
It gives just as much as had been handed down with regard to the origin of the different tribes. Hence the great diversity in the lists of the descendants of the different sons of Noah. Some are brought down only to the second, others to the third or fourth generation, and some even further; and whilst in several instances the founder of a tribe is named, in others we have only the tribes themselves; and in some cases we are unable to determine whether the names given denote the founder or the tribe.
In many instances, too, on account of the defects and the unreliable character of the accounts handed down to us from different ancient sources with regard to the origin of the tribes, there are names which cannot be identified with absolute certainty. Descendants of Japhet. - In Gen 10:1 the names of the three sons are introduced according to their relative ages, to give completeness and finish to the Tholedoth ; but in the genealogy itself Japhet is mentioned first and Shem last, according to the plan of the book of Genesis as already explained in the introduction.
In Gen 10:2 seven sons of Japhet are given. The names, indeed, afterwards occur as those of tribes; but here undoubtedly they are intended to denote the tribe-fathers, and may without hesitation be so regarded. For even if in later times many nations received their names from the lands of which they took possession, this cannot be regarded as a universal rule, since unquestionably the natural rule in the derivation of the names would be for the tribe to be called after its ancestor, and for the countries to receive their names from their earliest inhabitants.
Gomer is most probably the tribe of the Cimmerians , who dwelt, according to Herodotus , on the Maeotis, in the Taurian Chersonesus, and from whom are descended the Cumri or Cymry in Wales and Brittany, whose relation to the Germanic Cimbri is still in obscurity. Magog is connected by Josephus with the Scythians on the Sea of Asof and in the Caucasus; but Kiepert associates the name with Macija or Maka , and applies it to Scythian nomad tribes which forced themselves in between the Arian or Arianized Medes, Kurds, and Armenians.
Madai are the Medes, called Mada on the arrow-headed inscriptions. Javan corresponds to the Greek Ἰάων, from whom the Ionians (Ἰάονος) are derived, the parent tribe of the Greeks (in Sanskrit Javana , old Persian Junâ ). Tubal and Meshech are undoubtedly the Tibareni and Moschi , the former of whom are placed by Herodotus upon the east of the Thermodon , the latter between the sources of the Phasis and Cyrus.
Tiras: according to Josephus, the Thracians , whom Herodotus calls the most numerous tribe next to the Indian. As they are here placed by the side of Meshech, so we also find on the old Egyptian monuments Mashuash and Tuirash , and upon the Assyrian Tubal and Misek ( Rawlinson ).
Gen 10:1-5 Of the sons of Noah, all that is handed down is the pedigree of the nations, or the list of the tribes which sprang from them (Gen 10), and the account of the confusion of tongues, together with the dispersion of men over the face of the earth (Gen 11:1-9); two events that were closely related to one another, and of the greatest importance to the history of the human race and of the kingdom of God. The genealogy traces the origin of the tribes which were scattered over the earth; the confusion of tongues shows the cause of the division of the one human race into many different tribes with peculiar languages.
The genealogy of the tribes is not an ethnographical myth, nor the attempt of an ancient Hebrew to trace the connection of his own people with the other nations of the earth by means of uncertain traditions and subjective combinations, but a historical record of the Genesis of the nations, founded upon a tradition handed down from the fathers, which, to judge from its contents, belongs to the time of Abraham (cf. Hävernick’s Introduction to Pentateuch , pp.
118ff. transl.) , and was inserted by Moses in the early history of the kingdom of God on account of its universal importance in connection with sacred history. For it not only indicates the place of the family which was chosen as the recipient of divine revelation among the rest of the nations, but traces the origin of the entire world, with the prophetical intention of showing that the nations, although they were quickly suffered to walk in their own ways (Act 14:16), were not intended to be for ever excluded from the counsels of eternal love.
In this respect the genealogies prepare the way for the promise of the blessing, which was one day to spread from the chosen family to all the families of the earth (Gen 12:2-3). - The historical character of the genealogy is best attested by the contents themselves, since no trace can be detected, either of any pre-eminence given to the Shemites, or of an intention to fill up gaps by conjecture or invention.
It gives just as much as had been handed down with regard to the origin of the different tribes. Hence the great diversity in the lists of the descendants of the different sons of Noah. Some are brought down only to the second, others to the third or fourth generation, and some even further; and whilst in several instances the founder of a tribe is named, in others we have only the tribes themselves; and in some cases we are unable to determine whether the names given denote the founder or the tribe.
In many instances, too, on account of the defects and the unreliable character of the accounts handed down to us from different ancient sources with regard to the origin of the tribes, there are names which cannot be identified with absolute certainty. Descendants of Japhet. - In Gen 10:1 the names of the three sons are introduced according to their relative ages, to give completeness and finish to the Tholedoth ; but in the genealogy itself Japhet is mentioned first and Shem last, according to the plan of the book of Genesis as already explained in the introduction.
In Gen 10:2 seven sons of Japhet are given. The names, indeed, afterwards occur as those of tribes; but here undoubtedly they are intended to denote the tribe-fathers, and may without hesitation be so regarded. For even if in later times many nations received their names from the lands of which they took possession, this cannot be regarded as a universal rule, since unquestionably the natural rule in the derivation of the names would be for the tribe to be called after its ancestor, and for the countries to receive their names from their earliest inhabitants.
Gomer is most probably the tribe of the Cimmerians , who dwelt, according to Herodotus , on the Maeotis, in the Taurian Chersonesus, and from whom are descended the Cumri or Cymry in Wales and Brittany, whose relation to the Germanic Cimbri is still in obscurity. Magog is connected by Josephus with the Scythians on the Sea of Asof and in the Caucasus; but Kiepert associates the name with Macija or Maka , and applies it to Scythian nomad tribes which forced themselves in between the Arian or Arianized Medes, Kurds, and Armenians.
Madai are the Medes, called Mada on the arrow-headed inscriptions. Javan corresponds to the Greek Ἰάων, from whom the Ionians (Ἰάονος) are derived, the parent tribe of the Greeks (in Sanskrit Javana , old Persian Junâ ). Tubal and Meshech are undoubtedly the Tibareni and Moschi , the former of whom are placed by Herodotus upon the east of the Thermodon , the latter between the sources of the Phasis and Cyrus.
Tiras: according to Josephus, the Thracians , whom Herodotus calls the most numerous tribe next to the Indian. As they are here placed by the side of Meshech, so we also find on the old Egyptian monuments Mashuash and Tuirash , and upon the Assyrian Tubal and Misek ( Rawlinson ).
Gen 10:1-5 Of the sons of Noah, all that is handed down is the pedigree of the nations, or the list of the tribes which sprang from them (Gen 10), and the account of the confusion of tongues, together with the dispersion of men over the face of the earth (Gen 11:1-9); two events that were closely related to one another, and of the greatest importance to the history of the human race and of the kingdom of God. The genealogy traces the origin of the tribes which were scattered over the earth; the confusion of tongues shows the cause of the division of the one human race into many different tribes with peculiar languages.
The genealogy of the tribes is not an ethnographical myth, nor the attempt of an ancient Hebrew to trace the connection of his own people with the other nations of the earth by means of uncertain traditions and subjective combinations, but a historical record of the Genesis of the nations, founded upon a tradition handed down from the fathers, which, to judge from its contents, belongs to the time of Abraham (cf. Hävernick’s Introduction to Pentateuch , pp.
118ff. transl.) , and was inserted by Moses in the early history of the kingdom of God on account of its universal importance in connection with sacred history. For it not only indicates the place of the family which was chosen as the recipient of divine revelation among the rest of the nations, but traces the origin of the entire world, with the prophetical intention of showing that the nations, although they were quickly suffered to walk in their own ways (Act 14:16), were not intended to be for ever excluded from the counsels of eternal love.
In this respect the genealogies prepare the way for the promise of the blessing, which was one day to spread from the chosen family to all the families of the earth (Gen 12:2-3). - The historical character of the genealogy is best attested by the contents themselves, since no trace can be detected, either of any pre-eminence given to the Shemites, or of an intention to fill up gaps by conjecture or invention.
It gives just as much as had been handed down with regard to the origin of the different tribes. Hence the great diversity in the lists of the descendants of the different sons of Noah. Some are brought down only to the second, others to the third or fourth generation, and some even further; and whilst in several instances the founder of a tribe is named, in others we have only the tribes themselves; and in some cases we are unable to determine whether the names given denote the founder or the tribe.
In many instances, too, on account of the defects and the unreliable character of the accounts handed down to us from different ancient sources with regard to the origin of the tribes, there are names which cannot be identified with absolute certainty. Descendants of Japhet. - In Gen 10:1 the names of the three sons are introduced according to their relative ages, to give completeness and finish to the Tholedoth ; but in the genealogy itself Japhet is mentioned first and Shem last, according to the plan of the book of Genesis as already explained in the introduction.
In Gen 10:2 seven sons of Japhet are given. The names, indeed, afterwards occur as those of tribes; but here undoubtedly they are intended to denote the tribe-fathers, and may without hesitation be so regarded. For even if in later times many nations received their names from the lands of which they took possession, this cannot be regarded as a universal rule, since unquestionably the natural rule in the derivation of the names would be for the tribe to be called after its ancestor, and for the countries to receive their names from their earliest inhabitants.
Gomer is most probably the tribe of the Cimmerians , who dwelt, according to Herodotus , on the Maeotis, in the Taurian Chersonesus, and from whom are descended the Cumri or Cymry in Wales and Brittany, whose relation to the Germanic Cimbri is still in obscurity. Magog is connected by Josephus with the Scythians on the Sea of Asof and in the Caucasus; but Kiepert associates the name with Macija or Maka , and applies it to Scythian nomad tribes which forced themselves in between the Arian or Arianized Medes, Kurds, and Armenians.
Madai are the Medes, called Mada on the arrow-headed inscriptions. Javan corresponds to the Greek Ἰάων, from whom the Ionians (Ἰάονος) are derived, the parent tribe of the Greeks (in Sanskrit Javana , old Persian Junâ ). Tubal and Meshech are undoubtedly the Tibareni and Moschi , the former of whom are placed by Herodotus upon the east of the Thermodon , the latter between the sources of the Phasis and Cyrus.
Tiras: according to Josephus, the Thracians , whom Herodotus calls the most numerous tribe next to the Indian. As they are here placed by the side of Meshech, so we also find on the old Egyptian monuments Mashuash and Tuirash , and upon the Assyrian Tubal and Misek ( Rawlinson ).
Gen 10:1-5 Of the sons of Noah, all that is handed down is the pedigree of the nations, or the list of the tribes which sprang from them (Gen 10), and the account of the confusion of tongues, together with the dispersion of men over the face of the earth (Gen 11:1-9); two events that were closely related to one another, and of the greatest importance to the history of the human race and of the kingdom of God. The genealogy traces the origin of the tribes which were scattered over the earth; the confusion of tongues shows the cause of the division of the one human race into many different tribes with peculiar languages.
The genealogy of the tribes is not an ethnographical myth, nor the attempt of an ancient Hebrew to trace the connection of his own people with the other nations of the earth by means of uncertain traditions and subjective combinations, but a historical record of the Genesis of the nations, founded upon a tradition handed down from the fathers, which, to judge from its contents, belongs to the time of Abraham (cf. Hävernick’s Introduction to Pentateuch , pp.
118ff. transl.) , and was inserted by Moses in the early history of the kingdom of God on account of its universal importance in connection with sacred history. For it not only indicates the place of the family which was chosen as the recipient of divine revelation among the rest of the nations, but traces the origin of the entire world, with the prophetical intention of showing that the nations, although they were quickly suffered to walk in their own ways (Act 14:16), were not intended to be for ever excluded from the counsels of eternal love.
In this respect the genealogies prepare the way for the promise of the blessing, which was one day to spread from the chosen family to all the families of the earth (Gen 12:2-3). - The historical character of the genealogy is best attested by the contents themselves, since no trace can be detected, either of any pre-eminence given to the Shemites, or of an intention to fill up gaps by conjecture or invention.
It gives just as much as had been handed down with regard to the origin of the different tribes. Hence the great diversity in the lists of the descendants of the different sons of Noah. Some are brought down only to the second, others to the third or fourth generation, and some even further; and whilst in several instances the founder of a tribe is named, in others we have only the tribes themselves; and in some cases we are unable to determine whether the names given denote the founder or the tribe.
In many instances, too, on account of the defects and the unreliable character of the accounts handed down to us from different ancient sources with regard to the origin of the tribes, there are names which cannot be identified with absolute certainty. Descendants of Japhet. - In Gen 10:1 the names of the three sons are introduced according to their relative ages, to give completeness and finish to the Tholedoth ; but in the genealogy itself Japhet is mentioned first and Shem last, according to the plan of the book of Genesis as already explained in the introduction.
In Gen 10:2 seven sons of Japhet are given. The names, indeed, afterwards occur as those of tribes; but here undoubtedly they are intended to denote the tribe-fathers, and may without hesitation be so regarded. For even if in later times many nations received their names from the lands of which they took possession, this cannot be regarded as a universal rule, since unquestionably the natural rule in the derivation of the names would be for the tribe to be called after its ancestor, and for the countries to receive their names from their earliest inhabitants.
Gomer is most probably the tribe of the Cimmerians , who dwelt, according to Herodotus , on the Maeotis, in the Taurian Chersonesus, and from whom are descended the Cumri or Cymry in Wales and Brittany, whose relation to the Germanic Cimbri is still in obscurity. Magog is connected by Josephus with the Scythians on the Sea of Asof and in the Caucasus; but Kiepert associates the name with Macija or Maka , and applies it to Scythian nomad tribes which forced themselves in between the Arian or Arianized Medes, Kurds, and Armenians.
Madai are the Medes, called Mada on the arrow-headed inscriptions. Javan corresponds to the Greek Ἰάων, from whom the Ionians (Ἰάονος) are derived, the parent tribe of the Greeks (in Sanskrit Javana , old Persian Junâ ). Tubal and Meshech are undoubtedly the Tibareni and Moschi , the former of whom are placed by Herodotus upon the east of the Thermodon , the latter between the sources of the Phasis and Cyrus.
Tiras: according to Josephus, the Thracians , whom Herodotus calls the most numerous tribe next to the Indian. As they are here placed by the side of Meshech, so we also find on the old Egyptian monuments Mashuash and Tuirash , and upon the Assyrian Tubal and Misek ( Rawlinson ).
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:6-20 Descendants of Ham. - Cush: the Ethiopians of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability, settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled with Shemites, and adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land to the people, referring, however, not to the double strip , i.
e. , the two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile, but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the country which differ considerably in their climate and general condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any Semitic derivation; for the term מצור in Isa 19:6, etc. , is not to be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a significant play upon the word.
The old Egyptian name is Kemi (Copt. Chêmi, Kême), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile, but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham , and to regard as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants. Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old Egypt. Phet ; Copt.
Phaiat ), who were spread over Northern Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome a river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of Phut ; cf. Bochart , Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan , see Gen 9:25.
Gen 10:21-22 Descendants of Shem. - Gen 10:21. For the construction, vid. , Gen 4:26. Shem is called the father of all the sons of Eber , because two tribes sprang from Eber through Peleg and Joktan, viz. , the Abrahamides, and also the Arabian tribe of the Joktanides (Gen 4:26.) - On the expression, “ the brother of Japhet הגּדול,” see Gen 9:24. The names of the five sons of Shem occur elsewhere as the names of the tribes and countries; at the same time, as there is no proof that in any single instance the name was transferred from the country to its earliest inhabitants, no well-grounded objection can be offered to the assumption, which the analogy of the other descendants of Shem renders probable, that they were originally the names of individuals.
As the name of a people, Elam denotes the Elymaeans , who stretched from the Persian Gulf to the Caspian Sea, but who are first met with as Persians no longer speaking a Semitic language. Asshur: the Assyrians who settled in the country of Assyria , Ἀτουρία, to the east of the Tigris, but who afterwards spread in the direction of Asia Minor. Arphaxad: the inhabitants of Ἀῤῥαπαχῖχτις in northern Assyria.
The explanation given of the name, viz. , “fortress of the Chaldeans” ( Ewald ), “highland of the Chaldeans” ( Knobel ), “territory of the Chaldeans” ( Dietrich ), are very questionable. Lud: the Lydians of Asia Minor, whose connection with the Assyrians is confirmed by the names of the ancestors of their kings. Aram: the ancestor of the Aramaeans of Syria and Mesopotamia.
Gen 10:21-22 Descendants of Shem. - Gen 10:21. For the construction, vid. , Gen 4:26. Shem is called the father of all the sons of Eber , because two tribes sprang from Eber through Peleg and Joktan, viz. , the Abrahamides, and also the Arabian tribe of the Joktanides (Gen 4:26.) - On the expression, “ the brother of Japhet הגּדול,” see Gen 9:24. The names of the five sons of Shem occur elsewhere as the names of the tribes and countries; at the same time, as there is no proof that in any single instance the name was transferred from the country to its earliest inhabitants, no well-grounded objection can be offered to the assumption, which the analogy of the other descendants of Shem renders probable, that they were originally the names of individuals.
As the name of a people, Elam denotes the Elymaeans , who stretched from the Persian Gulf to the Caspian Sea, but who are first met with as Persians no longer speaking a Semitic language. Asshur: the Assyrians who settled in the country of Assyria , Ἀτουρία, to the east of the Tigris, but who afterwards spread in the direction of Asia Minor. Arphaxad: the inhabitants of Ἀῤῥαπαχῖχτις in northern Assyria.
The explanation given of the name, viz. , “fortress of the Chaldeans” ( Ewald ), “highland of the Chaldeans” ( Knobel ), “territory of the Chaldeans” ( Dietrich ), are very questionable. Lud: the Lydians of Asia Minor, whose connection with the Assyrians is confirmed by the names of the ancestors of their kings. Aram: the ancestor of the Aramaeans of Syria and Mesopotamia.
Gen 10:23-24 Descendants of Aram. Uz: a name which occurs among the Nahorides (Gen 22:21) and Horites (Gen 36:28), and which is associated with the Αἰσῖται of Ptolemy, in Arabia deserta towards Babylon; this is favoured by the fact that Uz , the country of Job, is called by the lxx χώρα Αὐσῖτις, although the notion that these Aesites were an Aramaean tribe, afterwards mixed up with Nahorides and Horites, is mere conjecture.
Hul: Delitzsch associates this with Cheli ( Cheri ), the old Egyptian name for the Syrians, and the Hylatae who dwelt near the Emesenes (Plin. 5, 19). Gether he connects with the name give in the Arabian legends to the ancestor of the tribes Themûd and Ghadis . Mash: for which we find Meshech in 1Ch 1:17, a tribe mentioned in Psa 120:5 along with Kedar, and since the time of Bochart generally associated with the πορος Μάσιον above Nisibis .
Gen 10:23-24 Descendants of Aram. Uz: a name which occurs among the Nahorides (Gen 22:21) and Horites (Gen 36:28), and which is associated with the Αἰσῖται of Ptolemy, in Arabia deserta towards Babylon; this is favoured by the fact that Uz , the country of Job, is called by the lxx χώρα Αὐσῖτις, although the notion that these Aesites were an Aramaean tribe, afterwards mixed up with Nahorides and Horites, is mere conjecture.
Hul: Delitzsch associates this with Cheli ( Cheri ), the old Egyptian name for the Syrians, and the Hylatae who dwelt near the Emesenes (Plin. 5, 19). Gether he connects with the name give in the Arabian legends to the ancestor of the tribes Themûd and Ghadis . Mash: for which we find Meshech in 1Ch 1:17, a tribe mentioned in Psa 120:5 along with Kedar, and since the time of Bochart generally associated with the πορος Μάσιον above Nisibis .
Gen 10:25-29 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 1Sa 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.
Gen 10:25-29 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 1Sa 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.
Gen 10:25-29 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 1Sa 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.
Gen 10:25-29 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 1Sa 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.
Gen 10:25-29 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 1Sa 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.
Gen 10:30-31 The settlements of these Joktanides lay “ from Mesha towards Sephar the mountain of the East, ” Mesha is still unknown: according to Gesenius, it is Mesene on the Persian Gulf, and in Knobel's opinion, it is the valley of Bisha or Beishe in the north of Yemen; but both are very improbable. Sepher is supposed by Mesnel to be the ancient Himyaritish capital, Shafâr , on the Indian Ocean; and the mountain of the East , the mountain of incense, which is situated still farther to the east.
- The genealogy of the Shemites closes with Gen 10:31, and the entire genealogy of the nations with Gen 10:32. According to the Jewish Midrash, there are seventy tribes, with as many different languages; but this number can only be arrived at by reckoning Nimrod among the Hamites, and not only placing Peleg among the Shemites, but taking his ancestors Salah and Eber to be names of separate tribes.
By this we obtain for Japhet 14, for Ham 31, and for Shem 25, - in all 70 names. The Rabbins, on the other hand, reckon 14 Japhetic, 30 Hamitic, and 26 Semitic nations; whilst the fathers make 72 in all. But as these calculations are perfectly arbitrary, and the number 70 is nowhere given or hinted at, we can neither regard it as intended, nor discover in it “the number of the divinely appointed varieties of the human race,” or “of the cosmical development,” even if the seventy disciples (Luk 10:1) were meant to answer to the seventy nations whom the Jews supposed to exist upon the earth.
Gen 10:30-31 The settlements of these Joktanides lay “ from Mesha towards Sephar the mountain of the East, ” Mesha is still unknown: according to Gesenius, it is Mesene on the Persian Gulf, and in Knobel's opinion, it is the valley of Bisha or Beishe in the north of Yemen; but both are very improbable. Sepher is supposed by Mesnel to be the ancient Himyaritish capital, Shafâr , on the Indian Ocean; and the mountain of the East , the mountain of incense, which is situated still farther to the east.
- The genealogy of the Shemites closes with Gen 10:31, and the entire genealogy of the nations with Gen 10:32. According to the Jewish Midrash, there are seventy tribes, with as many different languages; but this number can only be arrived at by reckoning Nimrod among the Hamites, and not only placing Peleg among the Shemites, but taking his ancestors Salah and Eber to be names of separate tribes.
By this we obtain for Japhet 14, for Ham 31, and for Shem 25, - in all 70 names. The Rabbins, on the other hand, reckon 14 Japhetic, 30 Hamitic, and 26 Semitic nations; whilst the fathers make 72 in all. But as these calculations are perfectly arbitrary, and the number 70 is nowhere given or hinted at, we can neither regard it as intended, nor discover in it “the number of the divinely appointed varieties of the human race,” or “of the cosmical development,” even if the seventy disciples (Luk 10:1) were meant to answer to the seventy nations whom the Jews supposed to exist upon the earth.