1) The passage lists the six sons that were born to David in Hebron - Amnon, Daniel, Absalom, Adonijah, Shephatiah, and Ithream and their mothers. 2) It then notes that David reigned for 7 years and 6 months in Hebron, and 33 years in Jerusalem. 3) The passage then lists 13 sons that were born to David in Jerusalem - Shimea, Shobab, Nathan, Solomon, Ibhar, Elishama, Eliphelet, Nogah, Nepheg, Japhia, Elishama, Eliada, and Eliphelet.

1. I CHRONICLES 3 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
The Sons of David
1 These were the sons of David born to him in
Hebron:
The firstborn was Amnon the son of Ahinoam of
Jezreel;
the second, Daniel the son of Abigail of Carmel;
BARNES, "The sons of David - The writer returns to the point at which he had left
the posterity of Ram 1Ch_2:9, 1Ch_2:15, and traces out the family of David - the royal
house of the tribe of Judah.
Daniel - See the marginal note and reference.
There are three lists of the sons of David, born in Jerusalem.
2Sa_5:14-16 1Ch_3:5-8 1Ch_14:4-7
1. Shammuah Shimeah* Shammuah
2. Shobab Shobab Shobab
3. Nathan Nathan Nathan
4. Solomon Solomon Solomon
5. Ibhar Ibhar Ibhar
1

2. 6. Elishua Elishama* Elishua
7. a Eliphelet* Elpalet*
8. a Nogah Nogah
9. Nepheg Nepheg Nepheg
10. Japhia Japhia Japhia
11. Elishama Elishama Elishama
12. Eliada Eliada Beeliada*
13. Eliphelet Eliphelet Eliphelet
(Differences are marked with an asterick).
A comparison of the three lists serves to show:
(1) that “Shimeah” and the first “Elishama” in the list of this chapter are corruptions;
(2) that David had really 13 sons born in Jerusalem, of whom two - the first Eliphelet
and Nogah - probably died in their childhood; and
(3) that Eliada, the twelfth son, was also called Beeliada, the term Baal, “lord,” not
having (previous to the introduction of the Baal worship) a bad sense, but being
regarded as an equivalent with El, “God.”
CLARKE, "The second, Daniel - In 2Sa_3:3, this person is called Chileab; he
probably had two names. The Targum says, “The second, Daniel, who was also called
Chileab, because he was in every respect like to his father.” The Targumist refers here to
the import of the word ‫כלאב‬ ke-le-ab, like to the father. Jarchi says the two names were
given to this person because David, having taken Abigail immediately after the death of
Nabal, it could not be ascertained whether this child were the son of David or of Nabal,
therefore David called him ‫דניאל‬ Daniel, God is my Judge, and ‫כלאב‬ Chileab, he who is
like to the father; probably from the striking resemblance he bore to David, his reputed
father. “God is my Judge, I have not fathered another man’s child; this is entirely like
unto myself.
GILL 1-4, "Now these were the sons of David,.... The six following born in
Hebron, who are reckoned in the same order as in 2Sa_3:2, only here the second son is
called Daniel, who there goes by the name of Chileab; he had two names, the reason of
which see there; and here David's wife, Eglah, is said in the Targum to be Michal, Saul's
daughter; see Gill on 2Sa_3:5, to which is added an account of his reign both in Hebron
and Jerusalem, agreeably to 2Sa_5:5.
HENRY 1-9, "We had an account of David's sons, 2Sa_3:2, etc., and 2Sa_5:14, etc. 1.
2

3. He had many sons; and no doubt wrote as he thought, Psa_127:5. Happy is the man that
hath his quiver full of these arrows. 2. Some of them were a grief to him, as Amnon,
Absalom, and Adonijah; and we do not read of any of them that imitated his piety or
devotion except Solomon, and he came far short of it. 3. One of them, which Bath-sheba
bore to him, he called Nathan, probably in honour of Nathan the prophet, who reproved
him for his sin in that matter and was instrumental to bring him to repentance. It seems
he loved him the better for it as long as he lived. It is wisdom to esteem those our best
friends that deal faithfully with us. From this son of David our Lord Jesus descended, as
appears Luk_3:31. 4. Here are two Elishamas, and two Eliphelets, 1Ch_3:6, 1Ch_3:8.
Probably the two former were dead, and therefore David called two more by their names,
which he would not have done if there had been any ill omen in this practice as some
fancy. 5. David had many concubines; but their children are not named, as not worthy of
the honour (1Ch_3:9), the rather because the concubines had dealt treacherously with
David in the affair of Absalom. 6. Of all David's sons Solomon was chosen to succeed
him, perhaps not for any personal merits (his wisdom was God's gift), but so, Father,
because it seemed good unto thee.
JAMISON 1-3, "1Ch_3:1-9. Sons of David.
Now these were the sons of David, which were born unto him in Hebron —
It is of consequence for the proper understanding of events in the domestic history of
David, to bear in mind the place and time of his sons’ birth. The oldest son, born after
his father’s accession to the sovereign authority, is according to Eastern notions, the
proper heir to the throne. And hence the natural aspirations of ambition in Ammon, who
was long unaware of the alienation of the crown, and could not be easily reconciled to
the claims of a younger brother being placed above his own (see on 2Sa_3:1-5).
K&D 1-9, "The sons and descendants of David. - After the enumeration of the chief
families of the two sons of Hezron, Caleb and Jerahmeel, in 1 Chron 2:18-55, the
genealogy of Ram the second son of Hezron, which in 1Ch_2:10-17 was only traced down
to Jesse, the father of the royal race of David, is in 1 Chron 3 again taken up and further
followed out. In 1Ch_3:1-9 all the sons of David are enumerated; in 1Ch_3:10-16, the
line of kings of the house of David from Solomon to Jeconiah and Zedekiah; in 1Ch_
3:17-21, the descendants of Jeconiah to the grandsons of Zerubbabel; and finally, in
1Ch_3:22-24, other descendants of Shechaniah to the fourth generation.
1Ch_3:1-4
The sons of David: (a) Those born in Hebron; (b) those born in Jerusalem. - 1Ch_
3:1-4. The six sons born in Hebron are enumerated also in 2Sa_3:2-5, with mention of
their mother as here: but there the second is called ‫ב‬ ָ‫א‬ ְ‫ל‬ ִ‫;כּ‬ here, on the contrary, ‫ֵאל‬‫יּ‬ִ‫נ‬ ָ‫,דּ‬ -
a difference which cannot well have arisen through an error of a copyist, but is probably
to be explained on the supposition that this son had two different names. In reference to
the others, see on 2 Sam 3. The sing. ‫ל‬ ‫ד‬ַ‫ל‬ ‫נ‬ ‫ר‬ֶ‫ֲשׁ‬‫א‬ after a preceding plural subject is to be
explained as in 1Ch_2:9. ‫י‬ִ‫נ‬ֵ‫,שׁ‬ without the article, for ‫ֵהוּ‬‫נ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫,מ‬ 2Sa_3:3, or ‫ֶה‬‫נ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫מּ‬ ַ‫,ה‬ 1Ch_
3

4. 5:12, is surprising, as all the other numbers have the article; but the enumeration, the
first-born, a second, the third, etc., may be justified without any alteration of the text
being necessary. But the difference between our text and that of 2 Sam. in regard to the
second son, shows that the chronicler did not take the register from 2 Sam 3. The
preposition ְ‫ל‬ before ‫ם‬ ‫ל‬ָ‫שׁ‬ ְ‫ב‬ ַ‫א‬ seems to have come into the text only through a mistake
occasioned by the preceding ‫ל‬ִ‫ַי‬‫ג‬‫י‬ ִ‫ֲב‬‫א‬ַ‫,ל‬ for no reason is apparent for any strong emphasis
which might be implied in the ְ‫ל‬ being placed on the name of Absalom. The addition of
‫תּ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫א‬ to ‫ה‬ָ‫ל‬ְ‫ג‬ֶ‫ע‬ (1Ch_3:3) seems introduced only to conclude the enumeration in a fitting
way, as the descent of Eglah had not been communicated; just as, for a similar reason,
the additional clause “the wife of David” is inserted in 2Sa_3:5, without Eglah being
thereby distinguished above the other wives as the most honoured. The concluding
formula, “six were born to him in Hebron” (1Ch_3:4), is followed by a notice of how long
David reigned in Hebron and in Jerusalem (cf. 2Sa_2:11 and 2Sa_5:5), which is
intended to form a fitting transition to the following list of the sons who were born to
him in Jerusalem.
BENSON, "1 Chronicles 3:1. Daniel — This son is called Chileab, (2 Samuel 3:3,)
but whether he had two names, or there be an error in one of these passages, is not
possible to determine. The other alterations in names, which are found in the
following verses, may be corrected by the parallel passages in Samuel. As the
genealogy of Judah was given first, because the dominion was vested in that tribe,
and the Messiah was to descend from it; so, for similar reasons, the genealogy of
David is particularly recorded.
ELLICOTT, "1 Chronicles 3. resumes the genealogy of the Hezronite house of Ram,
suspended at 1 Chronicles 2:17. (1) The nine sons of David (1 Chronicles 3:1-9). (2)
The Davidic dynasty from Solomon to Zedekiah (1 Chronicles 3:10-16). (3) The line
of Jechoniah-Jehoiachin, continued apparently to the ninth generation (1 Chronicles
3:17-24).
Verse 1
(1) Amnon.—For his story see 2 Samuel 13
4

5. Of Ahinoam.—Literally, to Ahin. (1 Samuel 25:43).
The second Daniel of Abigail the Carmelitess.—Better, A second, Daniel, to Abigail,
&c. Sam. adds, “wife of Nabal the Carmelite.” (See 1 Samuel 25 for her story.)
Verses 1-4
I.—The sons of David.—This section is parallel to 2 Samuel 3:2-5 (comp. 1
Chronicles 3:1-4) and 2 Samuel 5:14-16 (1 Chronicles 3:5-9), with which comp. 1
Chronicles 14:3-7.
(1-4) The six sons born in Hebron. The sons and mothers agree with those of the
parallel passage in Sam., with the one exception of the second son, who is here called
Daniel, but in Samuel, Chileab. The LXX. (2 Samuel 3:3) has δαλουια, which may
represent Heb. Delaiah (Iah hath freed), though in our 1 Chronicles 3:24 that name
is spelt δαλααια, or δαλαια. In the present passage the Vatican LXX. has δαμνιήλ,
the Alex. δαλουνια. Perhaps Daniel is a corruption of Delaiah, as this name recurs in
the line of David. Chileab may have had a second name (comp. Uzziah-Azariah,
Mattaniah-Zedekiah), especially as Chileab appears to be a nickname, meaning
“dog.” (Comp. the Latin Canidius, Caninius, as a family name.)
COFFMAN, ""Now these are the sons of David, that were born unto him in
Hebron: the first-born, Amnon, of Ahinoam the Jezreelitess; the second, Daniel, of
Abigail the Carmelitess; the third, Absalom, of Maacah the daughter of Talmai king
of Geshur; the fourth, Adonijah the son of Haggith; the fifth, Shephatiah of Abital;
the sixth, Ithream of Eglah his wife: six were born unto him in Hebron; and there he
reigned seven years and six months. And in Jerusalem he reigned thirty and three
years; and these were born unto him in Jerusalem: Shimea, and Shobab, and
Nathan, and Solomon, four, of Bathshua the daughter of Ammiel; and Ibhar, and
Elishama, and Eliphelet, and Nogah, and Nepheg, and Japhia, and Elishama, and
Eliada, and Eliphelet, nine. All these were the sons of David, besides the sons of
concubines; and Tamar was their sister."
COKE, "1 Chronicles 3:1. Daniel— In 2 Samuel 3:3 this son is called Chileab.
Probably he had two names. The other alterations in names, which are found in the
5

6. following verses; may be compared with the parallel passages in Samuel. As the
genealogy of Judah was given first, so that of David is particularly mentioned, as the
promise of the Messiah was peculiarly given to him.
PARKER, " Some Strange Names—The Sons of David—Zerubbabel
1 Chronicles 3
Who has not in a foreign hostelry anxiously looked over the visitors" list in the hope
that he might find some familiar name, and so put himself upon the track of a
friendly predecessor in the journey which he is pursuing? Who has not also
wandered through an unknown cemetery, questioning every tombstone, if haply he
might detect some name which would awaken the memories of his youth, or connect
him with the associations of his own locality? So here, having read from the
beginning of the Bible up to this point, we have, so to say, contracted acquaintance
with a great number of persons; and now that a long list of names is put before us
for perusal, what more natural than that we should in the first instance look for the
names which awakened attention in our earliest studies? But the names are very
strange. Nearly all of them are absolutely unknown to us. Think of Ithream, and
Shobab, and Nogah, and Nepheg, and Japhia. These names awaken no interest,
enrich us with no reminiscences, call us back to no trysting-place where we entered
into vow with God or man. These names are, so to say, many variations of
alphabetic symbols, making no appeal either to memory or imagination. Is it
possible that we ourselves may become as unknown to the generations which are to
succeed us? In answering this enquiry we are not addressing an appeal to ambition,
when we say that it lies within our power, so to live as to establish a good and honest
name in at least some limited family circle. It may be that the most of human life is
predestined to be but negative as to influence and renown. But whilst the mountains
are noble, and are so lifted up as to be conspicuous from afar, we must never forget
that the lowlands may acquire fame for civilisation and fruitfulness. Neither must
we forget that there is a false fame, which continually tempts selfish ambition, and
also a holy fame which will not be disclosed until God himself pronounces judgment
upon all the actors in human history.
6

7. The name of Daniel is found in the first verse of this chapter. He is mentioned as a
son of David. So familiar are we with the name of Daniel that we seem to limit it to
one man. There would appear to be in all history but one Daniel great in goodness
and in wisdom. His name has come to be but another word for sagacity and
judgment. We may here remind ourselves that Daniel the son of David is called
Chileab in the Book of Samuel. If names may be taken as indicative of character
then we come upon the strange thought that Daniel was nicknamed "dog," that
being the literal rendering of the word Chileab. Was the name deserved? Is this but
a mark of contempt on the part of every speaker? It is possible to have two names
and for the alias to be utterly undeserved. We are not to suppose that a man is bad
because his contemporaries have pronounced judgment against him. Many a man is
called mean, timid, cunning, selfish, calculating, ambitious and the like by those who
only see certain aspects of character and are unable to determine the balance and
effect of all his faculties and dispositions. We should beware of the easy and foolish
cleverness which can invent nicknames. This teaching might be remembered with
advantage alike in private and public circles. Even religious men have not been slow
to misname one another by giving undue prominence to single characteristics and
withdrawing the general line of gift and purpose from public criticism. It may seem
but a commonplace to say that Daniel was not a "dog" simply because he was so
described by malignant or perverted wit. Think of men"s best names. Look out for
men"s strongest and noblest qualities. Leave all nicknames and flippant
depreciation to those who, having outlived their own character, seek to bring others
into some degradation. Take some of the names of David"s sons as given in the fifth
verse of this chapter. The sons in question were born to David in the city of
Jerusalem. As we read their names they convey no meaning to us, but as defined
etymologically we may get a new aspect of part at least of the king"s household.
Ibhar, signifies "God chooseth;" Elishama, "God heareth;" Eliphelet, "God is
deliverance;" Eliada, "God knoweth." Keeping in mind the well-established fact
that in Oriental countries, it was customary to mark family history by the names of
the children, we can but be struck with the deep religiousness of the family record
now before us. There is no trace of atheism made by the hand of David in all his
family register. In every child David sees some new revelation of God. Every son
was an historical mark. Every life was a new phase of providence. Blessed is the
man who need not look beyond his own house for signs and proofs of the manifold
and never-ceasing goodness of God. Is it not true that even in our own land and
time, religious memories or providential events are brought up by the name of every
child? One brings up the memory of great darkness, another of peculiar pain,
another recalls the brightest morning that ever dawned, and another stands at the
beginning of a course of providences, brilliant in their glory and deeply pathetic in
inexpressible tenderness. In this sense, no child comes into the world as a solitary
7

8. visitor. Each birth is the heading of a new chapter, and each chapter falls naturally
out of the one which immediately preceded it. Shame be on those who can receive
providences without noting them, who can allow God to pour out the whole heaven
upon earth, and yet set up no sign of adoring gratitude. It was not so with David. If
faults many and great, and never to be excused, marred the harmony and dignity of
his character, yet never did he forget that God was his Shepherd and that to God all
praises evermore belong.
We come upon the same view in looking at the names of the kings of the house of
David. These names are found in verses ten to sixteen. Take examples: Rehoboam
literally means "the kinsman," and that term must be understood as giving the idea
"God hath enlarged," that Isaiah , has added to the number of the family and so
multiplied all domestic incidents, resources and securities; Abia, signifies "God is
Father;" Jehoshaphat, "God judgeth;" Joram (Jehoram), "God is high;" Amaziah
points to strength; Azariah points to help; Jotham indicates perfectness; and
Hezekiah signifies "God is my strength." We have often had occasion to point out
the irony of names. Whilst in our case there may be no irony of a nominal kind, that
is to say, no discrepancy between our names and our actions, yet there may be
palpable irony of a circumstantial kind; for example, a man may be surrounded by
wealth and yet may be known for his meanness, so that the poor receive nothing
from his table, nor are the weak assisted by his hands. The wealthy man who is
mean is a self-contradiction. Others of us may have the privilege of living in
Christian families, yet in our spirit and thought we may belong to the coldest
paganism. The family altar may be but a pile of stones, and the family repute for
Christian consecration may be but a concealment of the deepest worldliness of
thought and desire. In this direction we may discover what may be termed many
unconscious hypocrisies. The member of a Christian family might not consciously
use the Christian repute of the household for the cover of an unsympathetic heart.
The irony as we have said may be purely circumstantial. Yet even here there should
be some attempt made to behold claims of honesty. The man who is mean should
never make a bid to be regarded by the public as a generous person. The man who is
profoundly worldly in every aspiration and arrangement should not use a Christian
pedestal as a mere convenience enabling him to take a wider outlook or to exercise a
larger influence.
In verses nineteen and twenty, we come upon a name with which we are familiar,
Zerubbabel—this was the famous prince who, with Joshua the high priest, led the
8

9. first colony of restored exiles from Babylon to Canaan under the edict of Cyrus.
This occurred some five centuries before the birth of Christ. The name of
Zerubbabel"s father was Pedaiah, which signifies "God hath redeemed." The name
of the father would seem to have been an inspiration to the son. For truly he was a
redeemer and leader of his people. Thus all the names of the kindred and sons of
Zerubbabel indicate the religious hopefulness of the people at the dawn of the
restoration. All this matter connected with the signification of names is notable,
because it points to the greatest incident of all, which we find in the person of the
Son of God, who was called Jesus, because he should save his people from their sins.
It will be found that all hints of this kind discoverable in the Old Testament, which
seem to have little or no value in their own immediate connection, are in reality
parts of the living line which terminates in Jesus Christ, and then in him takes a new
departure in the direction of all Christian service and heroism.
PULPIT, "1 Chronicles 3:1-9
The whole of this chapter is occupied with the descendants of David: the first nine
verses of it with his own sons, classified according to the place of their birth, Hebron
or Jerusalem; the remaining verses with the line of kings of his house to Jeconiah
and Zedekiah (1 Chronicles 3:16), the grandsons of Zerubbabel (1 Chronicles 3:21),
and descendants of Shechaniah (1 Chronicles 3:24). To the seven years and six
months (2 Samuel 2:11) of David's reign at Hebron six sons belong, each of a
different mother. To the thirty and throe years (2 Samuel 5:5; 1 Kings 2:11) of his
reign at Jerusalem belong other thirteen sons, viz. four of one mother, Bethshua,
and nine of other mothers, whose names are not given. The list of the six Hebron
sons, with their mothers, is nearly identical with that of 2 Samuel 3:2-5, although the
differences, slight as they are, would of the two indicate our list here rather as not
copied than copied thence. The only noticeable difference, however, is in the name
of the second son, announced here as Daniel, instead of Chileab, while the
Septuagint has δαλουία. This, together with the circumstance that one word would,
as regards the Hebrew characters, comparatively easily convert into the other.
renders it probable that it is merely a corrupt text or text obscure at this point
which has occasioned the difference. The meaning of the name Daniel, put side by
side with what we read in 1 Samuel 24:15, 1 Samuel 25:39, suggests strongly that it
is the right name of the two. It was a name likely to be given by David to his first
child by Abigail. Additional suspicion is thrown on the name Chileab through the
three last letters of it, "leab," constituting also the three first of the very next word,"
9

10. of Abigail" ( ‫ל‬ִ‫ַי‬‫נ‬ִ‫בי‬ ְ‫ַא‬‫ל‬ ) which looks very much like the over-haste of the pen
uncorrected. It is remarkable that the Syriac and Arabic versions translate "Caleb,"
both here and in the parallel passage. For the sons born in Jerusalem we have all
three parallel lists at command, and the variations are rather greater. The other two
lists are in 2 Samuel 16-5:14 ; 1 Chronicles 7-14:4 . The first of these omits Eliphelet
and Nogah (possibly they died young or without issue), and the latter calls Eliphelet
Elpalet ( ‫ֶט‬‫ל‬ֶ‫פ‬ְ‫ל‬ ֶ‫א‬ ). Again, Shimeah and Elishama in our passage must yield, overruled
by the consent of the other two, to Shammuah and Elishua. Again, it is to be noticed
that the name Eliada (God ( ‫ל‬ ֶ‫א‬ ) knoweth), on occasion of its latest occurence (1
Chronicles 14:7), appears as Beeliada (the Lord ( ‫ל‬ַ‫ﬠ‬ַ‫ב‬ ) knoweth), preserving therein
probably its earlier form, viz. that used before a settled bad sense had come to be
attached to the word Baal (see 'Speaker's Commentary,' in loc.).
TRAPP, "1 Chronicles 3:1 Now these were the sons of David, which were born unto
him in Hebron; the firstborn Amnon, of Ahinoam the Jezreelitess; the second
Daniel, of Abigail the Carmelitess:
Ver. 1. Which were born unto him in Hebron.] During the time of his exile, we read
not of any child he had: and so he had the less to care for.
The second, Daniel.] Alias Chileab. See 2 Samuel 3:3.
BI 1-9, "Now these are the sons of David.
A family record
As we read their names they convey no meaning to us, but as defined etymologically we
may get a new aspect of part at least of the king’s household. Ibhar signifies “God
chooseth”; Elishama, “God heareth”; Eliphelet, “God is deliverance”; Eliada, “God
knoweth.” Keeping in mind the well-established feet that in Oriental countries it was
customary to mark family history by the names of the children, we can but be struck
with the deep religiousness of the family record now before us. In every child David sees
some new manifestation of God. Every son was an historical landmark, Every life was a
new phase of providence. Blessed is the man who need not look beyond his own house
for signs and proofs of the manifold and never-ceasing goodness of God. (J. Parker, D.
D.)
Significance of Hebrew names
A name is to us a matter of convenience; to the Hebrews it was a solemn and sacred
10

11. thing. Our names are short and simple, and generally meaningless. Bible names are
thought-fossils, rich in memories of the past. We often designate our streets by the
letters of the alphabet, we distinguish our houses by Arabic numerals, and in large
bodies of men we distinguish one from another by placing numbers on their caps or
badges. The number on the house has nothing to do with the size or location of the
dwelling; the number on the cap or badge tells nothing of the brain or heart beneath. But
the old Hebrews would have thought it sacrilegious to give names in such careless
fashion. Their names of places were often given altar solemn thought and prayer.
Historical records were few. The name must contain the history of the past and embody
the sublimest hopes of the future. The name Bethel, or “House of God,” recalled to every
Jew the night when Jacob slept on his stony pillow, and the word Meribah, or
“bitterness,” commemorated in the mind of every Jewish boy the murmuring and
rebellion in the wilderness. (W. P. Faunce.)
2 the third, Absalom the son of Maakah daughter
of Talmai king of Geshur;
the fourth, Adonijah the son of Haggith;
CLARKE, "By Eglah his wide - The Targum, Jarchi, and others, maintain that this
was Michal, the daughter of Saul; but this does not well agree with 2Sa_6:23 : Michal
had no child to the day of her death. Yet she might have had a child before the time that
is mentioned above.
ELLICOTT, " (2) Absalom.—David’s favourite and rebellious son (2 Samuel
15-19). The common Heb. text has “to Absalom;” but a number of MSS. and all the
old versions read Absalom. Rabbi D. Kimchi gives the characteristic explanation
that L-ABSHALOM alludes to LO-ABSHALOM, “not Absalom”—that is, not a
“father of peace,” but a rebel.
Maachah . . . Geshur.—See 1 Chronicles 2:23.
11

12. Adonijah the son of Haggith.—Who would have succeeded his father, and was put
to death by Solomon (1 Kings 1, 1 Kings 2:19-25).
3 the fifth, Shephatiah the son of Abital;
and the sixth, Ithream, by his wife Eglah.
BARNES, "Bathshua, the daughter of Ammiel - Both names are here given in
an unusual form, but it may be doubted whether in either case there has been any
corruption. In “Bathshua,” for “Bathsheba,” a ‫ו‬ (v) replaces the ‫ב‬ (b) of the earlier
writer, “w” and “b” having nearly the same sound. In “Ammiel,” for “Eliam,” the two
elements which form the name are inverted, as in Jehoiachin =Jechoniah, and the like.
CLARKE, "Shimea, and Shobab - Solomon is mentioned last, though he was the
eldest of these four sons, because the genealogy was to be continued from him. Bath-
shua ‫שוע‬ ‫בת‬ is the same as Bath-sheba, ‫שבע‬ ‫בת‬ the ‫ו‬ vau being put by mistake in the
former for ‫ב‬ beth in the latter.
GILL 5-8, "And these were born unto him in Jerusalem,.... Whose names follow,
in all nine; there are but seven mentioned in 2Sa_5:14 the reason of which see in the
notes there; See Gill on 2Sa_5:14. See Gill on 2Sa_5:15. See Gill on 2Sa_5:16. it may be
observed that Bathsheba is here called Bathshua, and her father Ammiel, whose name is
Eliam in 2Sa_11:3, names of much the same signification.
JAMISON, "four, of Bath-shua the daughter of Ammiel — or, “Bath-sheba”
(2Sa_11:3), and there her father is called “Eliam.” Of course Solomon was not her “only
son,” but he is called so (Pro_4:3) from the distinguished affection of which he was the
object; and though the oldest, he is named the last of Bath-sheba’s children.
12

13. BENSON, "1 Chronicles 3:3. By Eglah his wife — Eglah is generally thought by the
Jews to be Michal, Saul’s daughter; who, some think, is peculiarly called his wife,
because she was his only legal wife, according to the divine institution: all the rest he
took according to the custom then reigning. See on 2 Samuel 3:5.
ELLICOTT, "(3) Eglah (heifer) his wife.—Eglah is not marked out as principal
wife of David. The expression “his wife” is added simply to balance the clause, to
make up for the absence of details respecting her connexions, such as are given in
the case of some of the other wives. Jewish expositors have groundlessly identified
Eglah with Michal, daughter of Saul (1 Samuel 18:20).
TRAPP, "1 Chronicles 3:3 The fifth, Shephatiah of Abital: the sixth, Ithream by
Eglah his wife.
Ver. 3. By Eglah his wife.] Alias Michal, Saul’s daughter, as some hold, his first and
chief wife. See 2 Samuel 3:5.
4 These six were born to David in Hebron, where
he reigned seven years and six months.
David reigned in Jerusalem thirty-three years,
ELLICOTT, " (4) These six were born unto him in Hebron.—Literally, Six were
born. 2 Samuel 3:5 : “These were born.”
And there he reigned seven years.—This notice of the time David reigned first in
Hebron, the Judean capital, and then in Jerusalem over all Israel, is not read in the
parallel section of Samuel; but see 2 Samuel 2:11; 2 Samuel 5:5 for the same
statements.
13

14. 5 and these were the children born to him there:
Shammua,[a] Shobab, Nathan and Solomon.
These four were by Bathsheba[b] daughter of
Ammiel.
BARNES, "Bathshua, the daughter of Ammiel - Both names are here given in
an unusual form, but it may be doubted whether in either case there has been any
corruption. In “Bathshua,” for “Bathsheba,” a ‫ו‬ (v) replaces the ‫ב‬ (b) of the earlier
writer, “w” and “b” having nearly the same sound. In “Ammiel,” for “Eliam,” the two
elements which form the name are inverted, as in Jehoiachin =Jechoniah, and the like.
CLARKE, "Shimea, and Shobab - Solomon is mentioned last, though he was the
eldest of these four sons, because the genealogy was to be continued from him. Bath-
shua ‫שוע‬ ‫בת‬ is the same as Bath-sheba, ‫שבע‬ ‫בת‬ the ‫ו‬ vau being put by mistake in the
former for ‫ב‬ beth in the latter.
GILL 5-8,"And these were born unto him in Jerusalem,.... Whose names follow,
in all nine; there are but seven mentioned in 2Sa_5:14 the reason of which see in the
notes there; See Gill on 2Sa_5:14. See Gill on 2Sa_5:15. See Gill on 2Sa_5:16. it may be
observed that Bathsheba is here called Bathshua, and her father Ammiel, whose name is
Eliam in 2Sa_11:3, names of much the same signification.
JAMISON, "four, of Bath-shua the daughter of Ammiel — or, “Bath-sheba”
(2Sa_11:3), and there her father is called “Eliam.” Of course Solomon was not her “only
son,” but he is called so (Pro_4:3) from the distinguished affection of which he was the
object; and though the oldest, he is named the last of Bath-sheba’s children.
K&D, "1Ch_3:5-9
In Jerusalem thirteen other sons were born to him, of whom four were the children of
14

15. Bathsheba. The thirteen names are again enumerated in the history of David, in 1Ch_
14:7-11, which in the parallel passage, 2Sa_5:14-16, only eleven are mentioned, the two
last being omitted (see on the passage). Some of the names are somewhat differently
given in these passages, owing the differences of pronunciation and form: ‫ה‬ָ‫ע‬ ְ‫מ‬ ִ‫שׁ‬ is in
both places ַ‫מוּע‬ַ‫;שׁ‬ ‫ע‬ ָ‫מ‬ָ‫ישׁ‬ ִ‫ֱל‬‫א‬, between Ibhar and Eliphalet, is in 1 Chron 14 more correctly
written ַ‫ישׁוּע‬ ִ‫ֱל‬‫א‬. Elishama is clearly a transcriber's error, occasioned by one of the
following sons bearing this name. ‫ט‬ֶ‫ל‬ֶ‫יפ‬ ִ‫ֱל‬‫א‬, shortened in 1Ch_14:6 into ‫ט‬ֶ‫ל‬ֶ‫פּ‬ ְ‫ל‬ ֶ‫,א‬ and ‫ָה‬‫ג‬ ‫,נ‬
are wanting in 2Sa_5:15, probably because they died early. ‫ע‬ ָ‫ָד‬‫י‬ ְ‫ל‬ ֶ‫,א‬ 1Ch_3:8, 2Sa_5:16,
appears in 1Ch_14:7 as ‫ע‬ ָ‫ָד‬‫י‬ ְ‫ל‬ֶ‫ע‬ ְ‫;בּ‬ the mother also of the four first named, ַ‫שׁוּע‬ ְ‫ת‬ ַ‫,בּ‬ the
daughter of Ammiel, is elsewhere always ‫ע‬ ַ‫ב‬ֶ‫ת־שׁ‬ ַ‫,בּ‬ e.g., 2Sa_11:3, and 1Ki_1:11, 1Ki_1:15,
etc.; and her father, Eliam (2Sa_11:3). ַ‫שׁוּע‬ ְ‫ת‬ ַ‫בּ‬ has been derived from ‫ָע‬‫ו‬ֶ‫שׁ‬ ְ‫ת‬ ַ‫,בּ‬ and ‫ָע‬‫ו‬ֶ‫שׁ‬ ְ‫ת‬ ַ‫בּ‬
is softened from ‫ע‬ ַ‫ב‬ֶ‫שׁ‬ ְ‫ת‬ ַ‫;בּ‬ but ‫ם‬ָ‫יע‬ ִ‫ֱל‬‫א‬ has arisen by transposition of the two parts of the
name ‫ל‬ ֵ‫יא‬ ִ‫מּ‬ַ‫,ע‬ or Ammiel has been altered to Eliam. Besides these, David had also sons by
concubines, whose names, however, are nowhere met with. Of David's daughters only
Tamar is mentioned as “their sister,” i.e., sister of the before-mentioned sons, because
she had become known in history through Amnon's crime (2 Sam 13).
BENSON, "1 Chronicles 3:5. Of Bath-shua, the daugher of Ammiel — In 2 Samuel
11:3, she is called Bath-sheba, as she is through the whole Scripture, and her father
Eliam. Solomon was the eldest of these four sons; but is mentioned last, because the
discourse was to return to his genealogy, 1 Chronicles 3:10.
ELLICOTT, " (5-8) The thirteen sons born in Jerusalem. See 2 Samuel 5:14-16, and
1 Chronicles 14:4-7, where this list is repeated with some variations (1 Chronicles
3:5). The four sons of Bath-sheba, called here Bath-shua, a weakened form, if not a
copyist’s error. By a similar change the Elishama of 1 Chronicles 3:6 appears in
Samuel as Elishua.
Shimea (“report”) was a son of Jesse (1 Chronicles 2:13). Perhaps, therefore,
Shammua (“famous”) is correct here, as in Samuel.
Ammiel and Eliam are transposed forms of the same name, meaning “El is a
tribesman” (‘am=gens, el = deus). (Comp. Ahaziah and Jehoahaz, Nethaniah and
Jehonathan, and many similar transpositions.) So in Gr. Theodoros and Dorotheos,
Philotheos and Theophilos exist side by side.
15

16. PULPIT, "1 Chronicles 3:5
In this verse we have the form Bathshua for the familiar name Bathsheba, i.e. ‫ת־‬ַ‫ב‬
‫ַע‬‫וּ‬‫שׁ‬ for ‫ע‬ַ‫ב‬ ֶ‫ת־שׁ‬ַ‫,ב‬ in which latter word ‫ע‬ַ‫ב‬ ֶ‫שׁ‬ is a shorter form of ‫ה‬ָ‫בוּﬠ‬ ְ‫.שׁ‬ In the same
verse we have ‫ל‬ ֵ‫יא‬ ִ‫מּ‬ַ‫ﬠ‬ here for ‫ם‬ָ‫יﬠ‬ִ‫ל‬ֱ‫א‬ in 2 Samuel 11:3. The former name occurs often,
e.g. Numbers 13:12; 2 Samuel 9:4, 2 Samuel 9:5; 2 Samuel 17:27; 1 Chronicles 26:5.
The component parts of both words are the same, but their order is different—the
meaning of the one perhaps "the people of God;" of the other, "the God of the
people."
TRAPP, "1 Chronicles 3:5 And these were born unto him in Jerusalem; Shimea,
and Shobab, and Nathan, and Solomon, four, of Bathshua the daughter of Ammiel:
Ver. 5. And Solomon, four.] Not fourth: for he was the eldest of the four, and
therefore the only beloved in the sight of his mother. [Proverbs 4:3]
6 There were also Ibhar, Elishua,[c] Eliphelet,
CLARKE, "Elishama, and Eliphelet - In this and the eighth verse these two
names occur twice; some think this is a mistake, but others suppose that two persons of
these names died young, and that the next born received the name of the deceased. - See
Jarchi.
JAMISON, "Elishama and Eliphelet — Two sons of the same name are twice
mentioned (1Ch_3:8). They were the children of different mothers, and had probably
some title or epithet appended by which the one was distinguished from the other. Or, it
might be, that the former two were dead, and their names had been given to sons
afterwards born to preserve their memories.
16

17. ELLICOTT, " (6) Ibhar.—“He” (i.e., God) “chooseth.”
Elishama.—Spelt Elishua in both of the parallel passsages. (See Note on 1
Chronicles 3:5.) The recurrence of Elishama (“God heareth”) in 1 Chronicles 3:8 is
no argument against the name here.
Eliphelet (“God is deliverance”) also occurs twice, and David may have chosen to
give names so expressive of his own peculiar faith and trust to the sons of different
wives. (See Psalms 18:2; Psalms 18:6.) This Eliphelet (called Elphalet—Heb.,
Elpèlet, 1 Chronicles 14:5; a by-form, as Abram is of Abiram, or Absalom of
Abishalom, or Abshai of Abishai) is omitted in Samuel. So also is Nogah (brightness,
i.e., of the Divine Presence, Psalms 18:13—a hymn which is certainly David’s).
(Comp. Japhia, “the Shining One.”) Nepheg means “shoot, scion.”
TRAPP, "1 Chronicles 3:6 Ibhar also, and Elishama, and Eliphelet,
Ver. 6. And Elishama, and Eliphelet.] David had two Elishama’s and two
Eliphelet’s: either because by different wives, or because these two were dead before
the other were born.
7 Nogah, Nepheg, Japhia,
8 Elishama, Eliada and Eliphelet—nine in all.
CLARKE, "Nine - There are thirteen if we count the four sons of Bath-sheba, and
17

18. nine without them; and in the second book of Samuel there are eleven, reckoning the
above four, and without them only seven. In the book of Samuel probably only those
who were alive were reckoned, while the author of the Chronicles comprises those also
who were dead in this enumeration. Jarchi supposes that the duplicate Elishama and
Eliphelet are those which increase the regular number seven to nine; and that the dead
without posterity, as well as the living, are mentioned to increase the number of David’s
descendants; for, says he, the whole book is written for the honor of David and his seed.
JAMISON, "nine — The number of David’s sons born after his removal to
Jerusalem, was eleven (2Sa_5:14), but only nine are mentioned here: two of them being
omitted, either in consequence of their early deaths or because they left no issue.
BENSON, "1 Chronicles 3:8. Elishama and Eliphelet — These two names are
mentioned before, 1 Chronicles 3:6. It is supposed that the two children so called
had died in their infancy; and therefore David preserved their memory by giving
their names unto two others, who were born afterward, and lived longer. Nine —
Besides the four born of Bath-sheba, 1 Chronicles 3:5. There are only seven
mentioned 2 Samuel 5:16, those two, who died early, being there omitted.
ELLICOTT, "(8) Eliada.—(“God knoweth”) The Beeliada (“Lord knoweth”) of 1
Chronicles 14:7 is probably more ancient, though Samuel also has Eliada. God was
of old called Baal as well as El; and the former title was only discarded because it
tended to foster a confusion between the degrading cultus of the Canaanite Baals,
and the true religion of Israel. So it came to pass in later times that men were
unwilling to write or speak the very name of Baal, and in names compounded
therewith they substituted either El or Iah as here; or the word bosheth (shame) as
in Ishbosheth instead of Eshbaal, Jerubbesheth instead of Jerubbaal.
TRAPP, "1 Chronicles 3:8 And Elishama, and Eliada, and Eliphelet, nine.
Ver. 8. And Elishama.] See 1 Chronicles 3:6.
9 All these were the sons of David, besides his sons
18

19. by his concubines. And Tamar was their sister.
CLARKE, "And Tamar their sister - This is the only daughter of David whose
name is on record; and yet he is said to have had both Sons and Daughters, 2Sa_5:13.
GILL,"These were all the sons of David,.... By his wives:
beside the sons of the concubines; who are not reckoned, and how many they were
is not known; he had ten concubines at least, 2Sa_15:16 and 2Sa_20:3.
And Tamar their sister; not the sister of the sons of the concubines, but of his other
sons, and only of Absalom by the mother's side, of whom see 2Sa_13:1.
ELLICOTT, " (9) Sons of the concubines.—David’s concubines (pilagshim,
πλλακαί) are mentioned several times in Samuel (e.g., 2 Samuel 12:11), but their
sons here only. However repugnant to modern ideas, it was and is part of the state
of an Oriental potentate to possess a harem of many wives.
And Tamar (was) their sister.—Not the only one, but the sister whose unhappy fate
had made her famous (2 Samuel 13).
A comparison of the above lists of David’s sons with the parallels in Sam. makes it
improbable that they were drawn from that source; for (1) the Hebrew text of the
chronicle appears, in this instance, to be quite as original as that of Samuel; (2)
Some of the names differ, without our being able to pronounce in favour of one or
the other text; (3) The form of the lists is different, especially that of the second. The
chronicler alone gives the number of the four and nine sons, assigning the former to
“Bathshua the daughter of Ammiel,” and arranging the latter in three triads. 1
Chronicles 3:9 also is wanting in Samuel.
19

20. PULPIT, "1 Chronicles 3:9
This verse plainly adds concubines, perhaps the ten spoken of in 2 Samuel 15:16, to
the number of the mothers of the foregoing sons. The mention of only one daughter
of David, viz. Tamar, follows the manifest ordinary rule, that daughters are not
recorded at all, except for one of two reasons—either that through a daughter the
line was saved, or that the daughter had from some special reason made a place for
herself in history.
TRAPP, "1 Chronicles 3:9 [These were] all the sons of David, beside the sons of the
concubines, and Tamar their sister.
Ver. 9. And Tamar their sister.] She was David’s only daughter, as Dinah also was
Jacob’s; whose grief therefore was the greater for the violation of them.
The Kings of Judah
10 Solomon’s son was Rehoboam,
Abijah his son,
Asa his son,
20

21. Jehoshaphat his son,
BARNES, "Abia - Rather, “Abijah,” as in 2 Chr. 11–14, where the Hebrew word is
exactly the same.
GILL 10-14, "And Solomon's son was Rehoboam,.... From hence to the end of the
fourteenth verse, David's successors are reckoned, according to the order of their reign,
unto Josiah and his sons:
Solomon, Rehoboam, Abia, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Joram, Ahaziah, Joash,
Amaziah, Azariah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, Josiah, in all
sixteen.
HENRY 10-24, "David having nineteen sons, we may suppose them to have raised
many noble families in Israel whom we never hear of in the history. But the scripture
gives us an account only of the descendants of Solomon here, and of Nathan, Lu. 3. The
rest had the honour to be the sons of David; but these only had the honour to be related
to the Messiah. The sons of Nathan were his fathers as man, the sons of Solomon his
predecessors as king. We have here, 1. The great and celebrated names by which the line
of David is drawn down to the captivity, the kings of Judah in a lineal succession, the
history of whom we have had at large in the two books of Kings and shall meet with
again in the second book of Chronicles. Seldom has a crown gone in a direct line from
father to son for seventeen descents together, as here. This was the recompence of
David's piety. About the time of the captivity the lineal descent was interrupted, and the
crown went from one brother to another and from a nephew to an uncle, which was a
presage of the eclipsing of the glory of that house. 2. The less famous, and most of them
very obscure, names, in which the house of David subsisted after the captivity. The only
famous man of that house that we meet with at their return from captivity was
Zerubbabel, elsewhere called the son of Salathiel, but appearing here to be his grandson
(1Ch_3:17-19), which is usual in scripture. Belshazzar is called Nebuchadnezzar's son,
but was his grandson. Salathiel is said to be the son of Jeconiah because adopted by him,
and because, as some think, he succeeded him in the dignity to which he was restored by
Evil-merodach. Otherwise Jeconiah was written childless: he was the signet God plucked
from his right hand (Jer_22:24), and in his room Zerubbabel was placed, and therefore
God saith to him (Hag_2:23), I will make thee as a signet. The posterity of Zerubbabel
here bear not the same names that they do in the genealogies (Mt. 1, or Lu. 3), but those
no doubt were taken from the then herald's office, the public registers which the priests
kept of all the families of Judah, especially that of David. The last person named in this
21

22. chapter is Anani, of whom bishop Patrick says that the Targum adds these words, He is
the king Messiah, who is to be revealed, and some of the Jewish writers give this reason,
because it is said (Dan_7:13), the son of man came gnim gnanani - with the clouds of
heaven. The reason indeed is very foreign and far-fetched; but that learned man thinks it
may be made use of as an evidence that their minds were always full of the thoughts of
the Messiah and that they expected it would not be very long after the days of
Zerubbabel before the set time of his approach would come.
JAMISON, "1Ch_3:10-16. His line to Zedekiah.
Solomon’s son was Rehoboam, etc. — David’s line is here drawn down to the
captivity, through a succession of good and bad, but still influential and celebrated,
monarchs. It has rarely happened that a crown has been transmitted from father to son,
in lineal descent, for seventeen reigns. But this was the promised reward of David’s
piety. There is, indeed, observable some vacillation towards the close of this period - the
crown passing from one brother to another, an even from uncle to nephew - a sure sign
of disorderly times and a disjointed government.
K&D 10-16, "The kings of the house of David from Solomon till the exile. - Until
Josiah the individual kings are mentioned in their order, each with the addition ‫נ‬ ְ‫,בּ‬ son
of the preceding, 1Ch_3:10-14; the only omission being that of the usurper Athaliah,
because she did not belong to the posterity of David. But in 1Ch_3:15 four sons of Josiah
are mentioned, not “in order to allow of a halt in the long line of David's descendants
after Josiah the great reformer” (Berth.), but because with Josiah the regular succession
to the throne in the house of David ceased. For the younger son Jehoahaz, who was
made king after his father's death by the people, was soon dethroned by Pharaoh-Necho,
and led away captive to Egypt; and of the other sons Jehoiakim was set up by Pharaoh,
and Zedekiah by Nebuchadnezzar, so that both were only vassals of heathen lords of the
land, and the independent kingship of David came properly to an end with the death of
Josiah. Johanan, the first-born of the sons of Josiah, is not to be identified with
Jehoahaz, whom the people raised to the throne. For, in the first place, it appears from
the statement as to the ages of Jehoahaz and Jehoiakim in 2Ki_23:31, 2Ki_23:36; 2Ch_
36:2, 2Ch_36:5, that Jehoahaz was two years younger than Jehoiakim, and consequently
was not the first-born. In Jer_22:11 it is expressly declared that Shallum, the fourth son
of Josiah, was king of Judah instead of his father, and was led away into captivity, and
never saw his native land again, as history narrates of Jehoahaz. From this it would
appear that Shallum took, as king, the name Jehoahaz. Johanan, the first-born, is not
met with again in history, either because he died early, or because nothing remarkable
could be told of him. Jehoiakim was called Eliakim before he was raised to the throne
(2Ki_23:24). Zedekiah was at first Mattaniah (2Ki_24:17). Zedekiah, on his ascending
the throne, was younger than Shallum, and that event occurred eleven years after the
accession of Shallum = Jehoahaz. Zedekiah was only twenty-one years old, while
Jehoahaz had become king in his twenty-third year. But in our genealogy Zedekiah is
introduced after Jehoiakim, and before Shallum, because, on the one hand, Jehoiakim
and Zedekiah had occupied the throne for a longer period, each having been eleven years
king; and on the other, Zedekiah and Shallum were sons of Hamutal (2Ki_23:31; 2Ki_
22

23. 24:18), while Jehoiakim was the son of Zebudah (2Ki_23:36). According to age, they
should have followed each other in this order - Johanan, Jehoiakim, Shallum, and
Zedekiah; and in respect to their kingship, Shallum should have stood before Jehoiakim.
But in both cases those born of the same mother, Hamutal, would have been separated.
To avoid this, apparently, Shallum has been enumerated in the fourth place, along with
his full brother Zedekiah. In 1Ch_3:6 it is remarkable that a son of Jehoiakim's son
Jeconiah is mentioned, named Zedekiah, while the sons of Jeconiah follow only in 1Ch_
3:17 and 1Ch_3:18. Jeconiah (cf. Jer_24:1; shortened Coniah, Jer_22:24, Jer_22:28,
and Jer_37:1) is called, as kings, in 2Ki_24:8. and 2Ch_36:9, Jehoiachin, another form
of the name, but having the same signification, “Jahve founds or establishes.” Zedekiah
can only be a son of Jeconiah, for the ‫נ‬ ְ‫בּ‬ which is added constantly denotes that the
person so called is the son of his predecessor. Many commentators, certainly, were of
opinion that Zedekiah was the same person as the brother of Jehoiakim mentioned in
1Ch_3:15 under the name Zidkijahu, and who is here introduced as son of Jeconiah,
because he was the successor of Jeconiah on the throne. For this view support was
sought in a reference to 1Ch_3:10., in which all Solomon's successors in the kingship are
enumerated in order with ‫נ‬ ְ‫.בּ‬ But all the kings who succeeded each other from Solomon
to Josiah were also, without exception, sons of their predecessors; so that there ‫נ‬ ְ‫בּ‬
throughout denotes a proper son, while King Zedekiah, on the contrary, was not the son,
but an uncle of Jeconiah (Jehoiachin). We must therefore hold ‫ָה‬‫יּ‬ ִ‫ק‬ ְ‫ד‬ ִ‫צ‬ for a literal son of
Jeconiah, and that so much the more, because the name ‫ָה‬‫יּ‬ ִ‫ק‬ ְ‫ד‬ ִ‫צ‬ differs also from
‫ָהוּ‬‫יּ‬ ִ‫ק‬ ְ‫ד‬ ִ‫,צ‬ as the name of the king is constantly written in 2Ki_24:17. and in 2Ch_36:10.
But mention is made of this Zedekiah in 1Ch_3:16 apart from the other sons of Jeconiah
(1Ch_3:17 and 1Ch_3:18), perhaps because he was not led away captive into exile with
the others, but died in Judah before the breaking up of the kingdom.
ELLICOTT, " II.—The kings of the house of David, as otherwise known from the
books of Kings (1 Chronicles 3:10-16).
(10) Rehoboam.—So LXX. ροβοαμ. Heb., Rĕhab-‘âm (“the Kinsman,” i.e., God hath
enlarged).
Abia.—LXX., αβια; Heb., Abîyâh (Iah is father), of which Abijam (Abîyâm) is a
mimmated form.
Asa.—Healer.
Jehoshaphat.—Iahweh judgeth.
COFFMAN, ""And Solomon's son was Rehoboam, Abijah his son, Asa his son,
Jehoshaphat his son, Joram his son, Ahaziah his son, Joash his son, Amaziah his
23

24. son, Azariah his son, Jotham his son, Ahaz his son, Hezekiah his son, Manasseh his
son, Amon his son, Josiah his son. And the sons of Josiah: the first-born Johanan,
the second Jehoiakim, the third Zedekiah, the fourth Shallum. And the sons of
Jehoiakim: Jeconiah his son, Zedekiah his son. And the sons of Jeconiah, the
captive: Shealtiel his son, and Malchiram, and Pedaiah, and Shenazzar, Jekamiah,
Hoshama, and Nedabiah. And the sons of Pedaiah: Zerubbabel, and Shimei. And
the sons of Zerubbabel: Meshullam and Hananiah; and Shelomith was their sister;
and Ashubah, and Ohel, and Berechiah, and Hasachiah, and Jushab-hesed. And the
sons of Hananiah: Pelatiah, and Jeshaiah; the sons of Rephaiah, the sons of Arnan,
the sons of Obadiah, the sons of Shecaniah. And the sons of Shecaniah: Shemaiah.
And the sons of Shemaiah: Hattash, and Igal, amd Bariah, and Neariah, and
Shaphat, six. And the sons of Neariah: Elioenai, and Hizkiah, and Azrikam, three.
And the sons of Elioenai: Hodaviah, and Eliashib, and Pelaiah, and Akkub, and
Johanan, and Delaiah, and Anani, seven."
"Bathshua" (1 Chronicles 3:5). This is obviously just another name for Bathsheba.
The Septuagint (LXX) and the Vulgate render the word Bathsheba. Elmslie noted
that, "This name is only a variant of the name Bathsheba."[1] Judging from the
order of Bathsheba's sons as listed here, Solomon was the youngest; and one may
wonder if David selected him because he himself was the youngest of Jesse's sons.
The appearance in this chapter of two sons of David named Elishama and two
named Eliphelet was explained by Cook as, "Due to a corruption of the text in the
first Elishama and to a confusion of the first Eliphelet with Elpelet (1 Chronicles
14:5)."[2] The real marvel is that there are so few such problems in lists which are
as old as these. Perhaps an even better explanation is that of DeHoff: "It is generally
supposed that the first two of those named Elishama and Eliphelet died in infancy
and that the names were repeated for children born later."[3]
"And the sons of Shemaiah" (1 Chronicles 3:22). These five words are the second
phrase in 1 Chronicles 3:22; and they apparently interrupt the enumeration of
Shecaniah's six sons. Elmslie stated that they should be omitted.[4] Shemaiah would
then be properly numbered among Shecaniah's six sons.
24

25. "Most of these genealogies are incomplete with many breaks in the lists; but the
main line is there."[5] The line of the Davidic dynasty as well as other significant
genealogies pertaining to the religious history of Israel, is here. "These genealogies
are thundering proof that the Bible is history and not myth or legend."[6]
PULPIT, "1 Chronicles 3:10-16
The line of royal descent from David, is now rapidly carried down in these verses—
first, as far as good King Josiah, sixteen generations in all (omitting, quite
consistently, Athalia, who reigned by her own usurpation for six years on the death
of her son Azariah); and then, by four successions (viz. two brothers, sons of Josiah,
and a grandson and great-grandson of Josiah), to the Captivity.
1 Chronicles 3:10
Though the Authorized Version has Abia the Hebrew word is ‫ָה‬‫יּ‬ ִ‫ב‬ֲ‫א‬ both here and in
2 Chronicles 13:1, 23 (or Authorized Version, 2 Chronicles 14:1), in both of which
passages, as also elsewhere, our Authorized Version has Abijah. Another form is
Abijam ( ‫ָם‬‫יּ‬ ִ‫ב‬ֲ‫א‬ ), as in 1 Kings 14:31 and elsewhere. A corrupt form ( ‫ָחוּ‬‫יּ‬ ִ‫ב‬ֲ‫א‬ ) is found
in 2 Chronicles 13:20. We have the name in the New Testament genealogy (Matthew
1:7, Matthew 1:8).
TRAPP, "1 Chronicles 3:10 And Solomon’s son [was] Rehoboam, Abia his son, Asa
his son, Jehoshaphat his son,
Ver. 10. Abia his son, Asa his son.] These Books of Chronicles pursue the genealogy
and history of the kings of Judah only: and yet are more sparing in relating the sins
of David and Solomon. Those things which are here set down in this chapter were
chiefly written in reference to the genealogy of Christ.
25

26. 11 Jehoram[d] his son,
Ahaziah his son,
Joash his son,
BARNES, "Ahaziah - Called “Jehoahaz” by a transposition of the elements
composing the name, and “Azariah,” probably by a transcriber’s error (see marginal
notes and references).
ELLICOTT, " (11) Joram—Jehorain. Iahweh is high.
Ahaziah.—Iah holdeth (Luke 1:54, ἀ ντελά βετ, “he hath holpen”).
Joash.—(?) Iahweh is a hero. Cf. Ashbel = “man of Bel,” and Exodus 15:3.
12 Amaziah his son,
Azariah his son,
Jotham his son,
26

27. BARNES, "Azariah - Elsewhere in Chronicles called uniformly “Uzziah” (2Ch_26:1,
2Ch_26:3,2Ch_26:9, 2Ch_26:11, etc.), but called indifferently “Azariah” and “Uzziah” in
Kings (“Azariah” in 2Ki_14:21; 2Ki_15:1, 2Ki_15:6,2Ki_15:17, 2Ki_15:23, 2Ki_15:27,
etc.; “Uzziah” in 2Ki_15:13, 2Ki_15:32, 2Ki_15:34).
ELLICOTT, " (12) Amaziah.—Iah is strong.
Azariah.—Iah helpeth.
Jotham.—Iahweh is perfect.
PULPIT, "Azariah. This name is found in 2 Chronicles 26:1; 2 Chronicles 27:2, as
Uzziah; but in the Second Book of Kings it is found sometimes as Uzziah and
sometimes as Azariah in the very same chapter (cf. 2 Kings 15:13 and 2 Kings 15:17,
2 Kings 15:23 and 2 Kings 15:32, and see Gesenius, 'Lexicon,' sub voce). We have
the name as Azariah in Matthew 1:8, Matthew 1:9.
13 Ahaz his son,
Hezekiah his son,
Manasseh his son,
27

28. ELLICOTT, " (13) Ahaz.—Abbreviation of Jehoahaz, which = Ahaziah.
Hezekiah.—Heb., Hizkiyâhû, “my strength is Iahu.”
Manasseh (?) Perhaps of Egyptian origin.
14 Amon his son,
Josiah his son.
ELLICOTT, " (14) Amon.—Probably the Egyptian sun-god Amen or Amun.
Josiah.—Iah comforteth.
In this line of fifteen successive monarchs, the usurper Athaliah is omitted between
Ahaziah and Joash (1 Chronicles 3:11).
15 The sons of Josiah:
28

29. Johanan the firstborn,
Jehoiakim the second son,
Zedekiah the third,
Shallum the fourth.
BARNES, "Of the sons of Josiah, Johanan, “the first-born,” who is mentioned in this
place only, must, it would seem, have died before his father, or with him at Megiddo;
and Shallum (also called Jehoahaz, marginal note and reference) was considerably older
than Zedekiah, and was consequently the third, and not the fourth, son. He is perhaps
assigned the fourth place here by way of intentional degradation. Compare Jer_
22:10-12; Eze_19:3-4.
GILL,"And the sons of Josiah were, the firstborn Johanan,.... Of whom we
nowhere else read; he probably died before his father Josiah:
the second Jehoiakim: whose name was Eliakim, changed for the former by the king
of Egypt, when, he deposed his younger brother, and set him on the throne, 2Ki_23:24.
the third Zedekiah; whose name was Mattaniah, but changed by the king of Babylon,
when he placed him on the throne in the room of his brother's son, 2Ki_24:17,
the fourth Shallum: the same with Jehoahaz, who was first made king in the room of
his father; but reigning so short a time, and making so mean a figure, is mentioned last,
see Jer_22:11.
JAMISON, "Zedekiah — called the son of Josiah (compare Jer_1:3; Jer_37:1), but
in 2Ch_36:19 he is described as the brother of Jehoiachin, who was the son of
29

30. Jehoiakim, and consequently the grandson of Josiah. Words expressive of affinity or
relationship are used with great latitude in the Hebrew.
Shallum — No king of this name is mentioned in the history of Josiah’s sons (2Ki_
14:1-29; 2Ki_23:1-37), but there is a notice of Shallum the son of Josiah (Jer_22:11),
who reigned in the stead of his father, and who is generally supposed to be Jehoahaz, a
younger son, here called the fourth, of Josiah.
BENSON, "1 Chronicles 3:15. The firstborn Johanan — This Johanan is thought by
many to be the same with Jehoahaz, who succeeded Josiah in the throne. But it
seems more probable, as he is not mentioned in the book of Kings nor elsewhere in
the Scriptures, that he died before his father. The fourth Shallum — Of whom, at
least under that name, there is no mention in the history of the reign of Josiah’s sons
in 2 Kings: but in Jeremiah 22:11 there is mention of Shallum the son of Josiah,
king of Judah, who reigned instead of Josiah his father; whom most conceive to be
the same, who is otherwise called Jehoahaz, 2 Kings 23. And this seems most
probable, 1st, From that phrase, He reigned instead of Josiah, which implies that he
immediately succeeded his father, otherwise he would have been said to have
reigned instead of his brother, as Zedekiah is said to have reigned instead of
Jehoiachin, 2 Kings 24:17. 2d, From the order of that discourse of Jeremiah, which
was directed to Zedekiah, and his servants, and people, and whom he admonisheth
by the examples of the kings his predecessors, and of the sentence of God concerning
each of them, and that in the order in which they reigned; of Shallum, 2 Kings
24:11, &c.; of Jehoiakim, 2 Kings 24:18, &c.; of Jechoniah or Coniah, Jeremiah
22:28. 3d, From the nature of that prophecy, Jeremiah 22:11-12, delivered
concerning Shallum, which perfectly agrees to Jehoahaz, who was carried captive,
not so far as Babylon, but only to Egypt, a very near country; whence the people
hoped that he would speedily and easily return, or be re-established in his throne by
the king of Egypt, in opposition to the king of Babylon. 4th, Because Jehoahaz was
one of Josiah’s younger sons, (2 Kings 23:31; 2 Kings 23:36,) and this Shallum is
here called his fourth son.
ELLICOTT, " (15) And the sons of Josiah.—The regular succession by
primogeniture ceases with Josiah.
The firstborn Johanan (Iahweh bestowed) never ascended the throne of his fathers.
He may have died early. He is not to be identified with Jehoahaz, who was two years
younger than Jehoiakim (2 Kings 23:31; 2 Kings 23:36), and therefore could not
30

31. have been the firstborn of Josiah.
The second Jehoiakim, the third Zedekiah, the fourth Shallum.—The order of
succession to the throne after Josiah was this:—First, Shallum (= Jehoahaz, 2 Kings
23:30; comp. Jeremiah 22:11); then Jehoiakim (= Eliakim, 2 Kings 23:34; Jeremiah
22:18); then Jeconiah, son of Jehoiakini (= Jehoiachin, Jeremiah 22:24); and, lastly,
Zedekiah (= Mattaniah, 2 Kings 24:17),
The third Zedekiah.—Zedekiah was much younger than Shallum. Shallum was
twenty-three when he came to the throne, which he occupied eleven years. Zedekiah
succeeded him at the age of twenty-one (2 Kings 23:31; 2 Kings 24:18). The order of
1 Chronicles 3:15 is not wholly determined by seniority any more than by the actual
succession. If age were considered, the order would be Jehoiakim, Shallum,
Zedekiah; if the actual succession, it would be, Shallum, Jehoiakim, Zedekiah. The
order of the text may have been influenced by the two considerations—(1) That
Jehoiakim and Zedekiah each enjoyed a reign of eleven years, while Shallum
reigned only three months; (2) That Shallum and Zedekiah were full brothers, both
being sons of Hamutal, whereas Jehoiakim was born of another of Josiah’s wives,
viz., Zebudah.
PULPIT, "The first thing to be observed in this verse is that, though it lays stress on
the mention of the name of Josiah's firstborn of four sons as Johanan, this is the
only mention of him. Some, however, have taken the Jehoahaz of 2 Kings 23:30 for
him. Next, that Jehoiakim was not the original name of the next brother, but a name
slightly altered by Pharaoh-Necho from Eliakim (2 Kings 23:34). If the dates of 2
Kings 23:31, 2 Kings 23:34, 2 Kings 23:36, be correct, there is no doubt that, though
Jehoiakim, i.e. Eliakim, reigned after Jehoahaz, yet he was the elder, and is in his
right place in the present passage. Next, that Shallum (Jeremiah 20:11) is another
name of the Jehoa-haz of 2 Kings 23:30, 2 Kings 23:31, 2 Kings 23:34, and several
other places. It is possible that he finds the last place amid the four brothers of this
verse because of his probable usurpation of the throne, in violation of the right of
his elder brother, Jehoiakim, and the early fall he met with in consequence. Lastly,
that the fourth brother, Zedekiah, whose name (2 Kings 24:17) was originally
Mattha-niah, was put on the throne by the King of Babylon, and reigned eleven
years in Jerusalem (2 Kings 24:18) after that his nephew Jehoiachin (who could
have no son old enough to succeed) was (2 Kings 24:12, 2 Kings 24:15, 2 Kings
31

32. 24:17) carried captive to Babylon.
TRAPP, "1 Chronicles 3:15 And the sons of Josiah [were], the firstborn Johanan,
the second Jehoiakim, the third Zedekiah, the fourth Shallum.
Ver. 15. Johanan.] Alias Jehoahaz, [2 Kings 23:30] alias Shallum. [Jeremiah 22:11]
See on 2 Kings 23:31. Some think that Johanan was a distinct son from Jehoahaz:
and conjecture that he was slain in battle together with his father Josiah.
16 The successors of Jehoiakim:
Jehoiachin[e] his son,
and Zedekiah.
GILL,"And the sons of Jehoiakim; Jeconiah his son, Zedekiah his son. This is
not the Zedekiah mentioned in the preceding verse; for he was not the son but the uncle
of Jeconiah, unless he should be called his son because he succeeded him in the
kingdom; but he seems to be another of that name, nowhere else mentioned, and not the
son of Jeconiah in any sense; he is not reckoned among them in the following verses, but
of Jehoiakim.
32

33. BENSON, "1 Chronicles 3:16. Zedekiah his son — This was another Zedekiah. How
seldom has a crown gone in a direct line, from father to son, as it did here, for
seventeen generations! This was the recompense of David’s piety. About the
captivity, the lineal descent was interrupted, and the crown went from a nephew to
an uncle, a presage of the glory’s departing from that house.
ELLICOTT, " (16) Jeconiah (Iah establish !)= Jehoiachin (Iahweh establisheth) =
Coniah (Jeremiah 22:24; Jeremiah 22:28—an abbreviation of Jeconiah), was
carried captive to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 24:15), and Zedekiah his
father’s brother, became king in his stead. Hence the supposition that “Zedekiah his
son” means “Zedekiah his successor” on the throne. (Comp. margin.) But (1) the
phrase “his son” has its natural sense throughout the preceding list; and (2) there
really is nothing against the apparent statement of the text that Jeconiah the king
had a son named Zedekiah, after his great-uncle. As, like Johanan (1 Chronicles
3:15), he did not come to the throne, this younger Zedekiah is not mentioned
elsewhere. (See 1 Chronicles 3:17, Note.)
PULPIT, "Of the above four brothers, sons of Josiah, the second, Jehoiakim, or
Eliakim, had a son called Jeconiah, or Jehoiachin—essentially the same word. He
was eighteen years of age when he succeeded his father (2 Kings 24:8). A touching
glimpse is given of him in Jeremiah 52:31. His name is shortened to Coniah in
Jeremiah 22:24 and Jeremiah 37:1, though elsewhere in the same prophet, Jeconiah,
and in one place (Jeremiah 52:31), Jehoiachin. The name of Zedekiah occasions
difficulty in this verse. In the first instance, following the examples of Jeremiah
37:10-14, we should presume that this Zedekiah is set forth as a son of Jeconiah, and
as it is not said that he reigned after Jeconiah (for it was undoubtedly Jeconiah's
uncle Zedekiah who reigned after him), we need only have read it as a statement of
one of his sons. Against this, however, there are two tolerably decisive
considerations; for, first, the verse opens confessedly by offering us sons of
Jehoiakim, and these two, Jeconiah and Zedekiah, will fulfil the promise of that
plural; and again, the seventeenth verse enters upon the formal enumeration of sons
to Jeconiah. The question, therefore, returns—Who was this Zedekiah, son of
Jehoiakim? Some consider him identical with the Zedekiah of the previous verse,
and that "his son" means here "his successor." This undoes fewer difficulties than it
makes. If the text be not corrupt, the likeliest solution is to suppose that this
Zedekiah of Jeremiah 37:16 is an otherwise unknown brother of Jeconiah, and son
33

34. of Jehoiakim.
TRAPP, "1 Chronicles 3:16 And the sons of Jehoiakim: Jeconiah his son, Zedekiah
his son.
Ver. 16. Zedekiah his son.] Not his natural son, as being his uncle, but his legal son,
that is, his successor.
The Royal Line After the Exile
17 The descendants of Jehoiachin the captive:
Shealtiel his son,
BARNES, "Assir - Perhaps born in the captivity, and therefore so named, who either
(died young, or was made a eunuch (Isa_39:7; compare Jer_22:30). After Assir’s
decease, or mutilation, the line of Solomon became extinct, and according to the
principles of the Jewish law Num_27:8-11 the inheritance passed to the next of kin, who
were Salathiel and his brethren, descendants from David by the line of Nathan. Luke in
calling Salathiel “the son of Neri” Luk_3:27, gives his real, or natural, descent; since no
genealogy would assign to the true son and heir of a king any inferior and private
parentage. Hence, “Malchiram,” etc., i. e. not Salathiel only, but his brothers also were
reckoned “sons” of Jeconiah.
CLARKE, "The sons of Jeconiah - Jeremiah has said (Jer_22:30) that Jeconiah,
or, as he calls him, Coniah, should be childless; but this must refer to his posterity being
deprived of the throne, and indeed thus the prophet interprets it himself: For no man of
his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.
Assir - Salathiel was not the son of Assir, but of Jeconiah, Mat_1:12. Who then was
34

35. Assir? Possibly nobody; for as the Hebrew ‫אסר‬ assir signifies a prisoner, it may be
considered as an epithet of Jeconiah, who we know was a very long time prisoner in
Babylon. See 2Ki_24:15 and Calmet.
GILL,"And the sons of Jeconiah,.... For though he was pronounced childless, Jer_
22:30, that respects not his having no children in any sense, but none to succeed him in
the kingdom:
Assir; which signifies bound, or a prisoner, because, as Kimchi thinks, he was born in a
prison, his father then being a captive in Babylon; but rather it refers to Jeconiah
himself, and is an appellation of him, and to be rendered:
the sons of Jeconiah the captive: which agrees best with the Hebrew accents:
Salathiel his son; the same that is called Shealtiel, Hag_1:1 who was both the proper
son of Jeconiah, and who succeeded him, as some think, in the honour and dignity the
king of Babylon raised him to.
JAMISON, "1Ch_3:17-24. Successors of Jeconiah.
the sons of Jeconiah; Assir — rather, “Jeconiah the prisoner,” or “captive.” This
record of his condition was added to show that Salathiel was born during the captivity in
Babylon (compare Mat_1:12). Jeconiah was written childless (Jer_22:30), a prediction
which (as the words that follow explain) meant that this unfortunate monarch should
have no son succeeding him on the throne.
K&D 17-24, "The descendants of the captive and exiled Jeconiah, and other
families. - 1Ch_3:17. In the list of the son of Jeconiah it is doubtful if ‫ר‬ ִ‫סּ‬ ַ‫א‬ be the name of
a son, or should be considered, as it is by Luther and others, an appellative, “prisoner,”
in apposition to ‫ָה‬‫י‬ְ‫נ‬ָ‫כ‬ְ‫,י‬ “the sons of Jeconiah, the captive, is Shealtiel” (A. V. Salathiel).
The reasons which have been advanced in favour of this latter interpretation are: the
lack of the conjunction with ‫ל‬ ֵ‫יא‬ ִ‫תּ‬ ְ‫ל‬ ַ‫א‬ ְ‫;שׁ‬ the position of ‫נ‬ ְ‫בּ‬ after ‫,שׁאלת‬ not after ‫ר‬ ִ‫סּ‬ ַ‫;א‬ and
the circumstance that Assir is nowhere to be met with, either in Mat_1:12 or in Seder
olam zuta, as an intervening member of the family between Jeconiah and Shealtiel
(Berth.). But none of these reasons is decisive. The want of the conjunction proves
absolutely nothing, for in 1Ch_3:18 also, the last three names are grouped together
without a conjunction; and the position of ‫נ‬ ְ‫בּ‬ after ‫שׁאלת‬ is just as strange, whether
Shealtiel be the first named son or the second, for in 1Ch_3:18 other sons of Jeconiah
follow, and the peculiarity of it can only be accounted for on the supposition that the
case of Shealtiel differs from that of the remaining sons. The omission of Assir in the
genealogies in Matthew and the Seder olam also proves nothing, for in the genealogies
intermediate members are often passed over. Against the appellative interpretation of
35

36. the word, on the contrary, the want of the article is decisive; as apposition to ‫ָה‬‫י‬ִ‫נ‬ָ‫כ‬ְ‫,י‬ it
should have the article. But besides this, according to the genealogy of Jesus in Luk_
3:27, Shealtiel is a son of Neri, a descendant of David, of the lineage of Nathan, not of
Solomon; and according to Hag_1:1, Hag_1:12; Ezr_3:2; Ezr_5:2, and Mat_1:12,
Zerubbabel is son of Shealtiel; while, according to 1Ch_3:18 and 1Ch_3:19 of our
chapter, he is a son of Pedaiah, a brother of Shealtiel. These divergent statements may be
reconciled by the following combination. The discrepancy in regard to the enumeration
of Shealtiel among the sons of Jeconiah, a descendant of Solomon, and the statement
that he was descended from Neri, a descendant of Nathan, Solomon's brother, is
removed by the supposition that Jeconiah, besides the Zedekiah mentioned in 1Ch_3:16,
who died childless, had another son, viz., Assir, who left only a daughter, who then,
according to the law as to heiresses (Num_27:8; Num_36:8.), married a man belonging
to a family of her paternal tribe, viz., Neri, of the family of David, in the line of Nathan,
and that from this marriage sprang Shealtiel, Malchiram, and the other sons (properly
grandsons) of Jeconiah mentioned in 1Ch_3:18. If we suppose the eldest of these,
Shealtiel, to come into the inheritance of his maternal grandfather, he would be legally
regarded as his legitimate son. In our genealogy, therefore, along with the childless
Assir, Shealtiel is introduced as a descendant of Jeconiah, while in Luke he is called,
according to his actual descent, a son of Neri. The other discrepancy in respect to the
descendants of Zerubbabel is to be explained, as has been already shown on Hag_1:1, by
the law of Levirate marriage, and by the supposition that Shealtiel died without any male
descendants, leaving his wife a widow. In such a case, according to the law (Deu_
25:5-10, cf. Mat_22:24-28), it became the duty of one of the brothers of the deceased to
marry his brother's widow, that he might raise up seed, i.e., posterity, to the deceased
brother; and the first son born of this marriage would be legally incorporated with the
family of the deceased, and registered as his son. After Shealtiel's death, his second
brother Pedaiah fulfilled this Levirate duty, and begat, in his marriage with his sister-in-
law, Zerubbabel, who was now regarded, in all that related to laws of heritage, as
Shealtiel's son, and propagated his race as his heir. According to this right of heritage,
Zerubbabel is called in the passages quoted from Haggai and Ezra, as also in the
genealogy in Matthew, the son of Shealtiel. The ‫נ‬ ְ‫בּ‬ seems to hint at this peculiar position
of Shealtiel with reference to the proper descendants of Jeconiah, helping to remind us
that he was son of Jeconiah not by natural birth, but only because of his right of heritage
only, on his mother's side. As to the orthography of the name ‫,שׁאלתיאל‬ see on Hag_1:1.
The six persons named in 1Ch_3:18 are not sons of Shealtiel, as Kimchi, Hiller, and
others, and latterly Hitzig also, on Hag_1:1, believe, but his brothers, as the cop. ‫ו‬ before
‫ם‬ ָ‫יר‬ ִ‫פּ‬ ְ‫ל‬ ַ‫מ‬ requires. The supposition just mentioned is only an attempt, irreconcilable with
the words of the text, to form a series, thus: Shealtiel, Pedaiah his son, Zerubbabel his
son, - so as to get rid of the differences between our verse and Hag_1:1; Ezr_3:2. In 1Ch_
3:19 and 1Ch_3:20, sons and grandsons of Pedaiah are registered. Nothing further is
known of the Bne Jeconiah mentioned in 1Ch_3:18. Pedaiah's son Zerubbabel is
unquestionably the prince of Judah who returned to Jerusalem in the reign of Cyrus in
the year 536, at the head of a great host of exiles, and superintended their settlement
anew in the land of their fathers (Ezra 1-6). Of Shimei nothing further is known. In 1Ch_
3:19 and 1Ch_3:20, the sons of Zerubbabel are mentioned, and in 1Ch_3:21 two
grandsons are named. Instead of the singular ‫ן‬ ֶ‫וּב‬ some MSS have ‫ֵי‬‫נ‬ ְ‫,וּב‬ and the old
versions also have the plural. This is correct according to the sense, although ‫ן‬ ֶ‫וּב‬ cannot
36

37. be objected to on critical grounds, and may be explained by the writer's having had
mainly in view the one son who continued the line of descendants. By the mention of
their sister after the first two names, the sons of Zerubbabel are divided into two groups,
probably as the descendants of different mothers. How Shelomith had gained such fame
as to be received into the family register, we do not know. Those mentioned in 1Ch_3:20
are brought together in one group by the number “five.” ‫ד‬ ֶ‫ס‬ ֶ‫ח‬ ‫ב‬ַ‫,יוּשׁ‬ “grace is restored,” is
one name. The grandsons of Zerubbabel, Pelatiah and Jesaiah, were without doubt
contemporaries of Ezra, who returned to Jerusalem from Babylon seventy-eight years
after Zerubbabel.
After these grandsons of Zerubbabel, there are ranged in 1Ch_3:21, without any
copula whatever, four families, the sons of Rephaiah, the sons of Arnan, etc.; and of the
last named of these, the sons of Shecaniah, four generations of descendants are
enumerated in 1Ch_3:22-24, without any hint as to the genealogical connection of
Shecaniah with the grandsons of Zerubbabel. The assertion of more modern critics,
Ewald, Bertheau, and others, that Shecaniah was a brother or a son of Pelatiah or
Jesaiah, and that Zerubbabel's family is traced down through six generations, owes its
origin to the wish to gain support for the opinion that the Chronicle was composed long
after Ezra, and is without any foundation. The argument of Bertheau, that “since the
sons of Rephaiah, etc., run parallel with the preceding names Pelatiah and Jesaiah, and
since the continuation of the list in 1Ch_3:22 is connected with the last mentioned
Shecaniah, we cannot but believe that Pelatiah, Jesaiah, Rephaiah, Arnan, Obadiah, and
Shecaniah are, without exception, sons of Hananiah,” would be well founded if, and only
if, the names Rephaiah, Arnan, etc., stood in our verse, instead of the sons of Rephaiah,
the sons of Arnan, etc., for Pelatiah and Jesaiah are not parallel with the sons of Arnan.
Pelatiah and Jesaiah may perhaps be sons of Hananiah, but not the sons of Rephaiah,
Arnan, etc. These would be grandsons of Hananiah, on the assumption that Rephaiah,
Arnan, etc., were brothers of Pelatiah and Jesaiah, and sons of Hananiah. But for this
assumption there is no tenable ground; it would be justified only if our present
Masoretic text could lay claim to infallibility. Only on the ground of a belief in this
infallibility of the traditional text could we explain to ourselves, as Bertheau does, the
ranging of the sons of Rephaiah, the sons of Arnan, etc., along with Pelatiah and Jesaiah,
called sons of Hananiah, by supposing that Rephaiah, Arnan, Obadiah, and Shecaniah
are not named as individuals, but are mentioned together with their families, because
they were the progenitors of famous races, while Pelatiah and Jesaiah either had no
descendants at all, or none at least who were at all renowned. The text, as we have it, in
which the sons of Rephaiah, etc., follow the names of the grandsons of Zerubbabel
without a conjunction, and in which the words ‫ָה‬‫י‬ְ‫נ‬ַ‫כ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ‫ֵי‬‫נ‬ ְ‫,וּב‬ and a statement of the names
of one of these ‫ים‬ִ‫נ‬ ָ‫בּ‬ and his further descendants, follow the immediately preceding
‫ָה‬‫י‬ְ‫נ‬ַ‫כ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ‫ֵי‬‫נ‬ ְ‫,בּ‬ has no meaning, and is clearly corrupt, as has been recognised by Heidegger,
Vitringa, Carpzov, and others. Owing, however, to want of information from other
sources regarding these families and their connection with the descendants of
Zerubbabel, we have no means whatever of restoring the original text. The sons of
Rephaiah, the sons of Arnan, etc., were, it may be supposed, branches of the family of
David, whose descent or connection with Zerubbabel is for us unascertainable. The list
from ‫ָה‬‫י‬ָ‫פ‬ ְ‫ר‬ ‫ֵי‬‫נ‬ ְ‫,בּ‬ 1Ch_3:21, to the end of the chapter, is a genealogical fragment, which
has perhaps come into the text of the Chronicle at a later time.
(Note: Yet at a very early time, for the lxx had before them our present text, and
37

38. sought to make sense of it by expressing the four times recurring ‫ֵי‬‫נ‬ ְ‫,בּ‬ 1Ch_3:21, by
the singular ‫נ‬ ְ‫בּ‬ in every case, as follows: καὶ Ἰεσίας υἱὸς αὐτοῦ, Ῥαφὰλ υἱὸς αὐτοῦ,
Ὀρνὰ υἱὸς αὐτοῦ, etc.; according to which, between Hananiah and Shecaniah seven
consecutive generations would be enumerated, and Zerubbabel's family traced down
through eleven generations. So also Vulg. and Syr.)
Many of the names which this fragment contains are met with singly in genealogies of
other tribes, but nowhere in a connection from which we might drawn conclusions as to
the origin of the families here enumerated, and the age in which they lived. Bertheau,
indeed, thinks “we may in any case hold Hattush, 1Ch_3:22, for the descendant of David
of the same name mentioned in Ezr_8:2, who lived at the time of Ezra;” but he has
apparently forgotten that, according to his interpretation of our verse, Hattush would be
a great-grandson of Zerubbabel, who, even if he were then born, could not possibly have
been a man and the head of a family at the time of his supposed return from Babylon
with Ezra, seventy-eight years after the return of his great-grandfather to Palestine.
Other men too, even priests, have borne the name Hattush; cf. Neh_3:10; Neh_10:5;
Neh_12:2. There returned, moreover, from Babylon with Ezra sons of Shecaniah (Ezr_
8:3), who may as justly be identified with the sons of Shecaniah mentioned in 1Ch_3:22
of our chapter as forefathers or ancestors of Hattush, as the Hattush here is identified
with the Hattush of Ezr_8:2. But from the fact that, in the genealogy of Jesus, Matt 1,
not a single one of the names of descendants of Zerubbabel there enumerated coincides
with the names given in our verses, we may conclude that the descendants of Shecaniah
enumerated in 1Ch_3:22-24 did not descend from Zerubbabel in a direct line.
Intermediate members are, it is true, often omitted in genealogical lists; but who would
maintain that in Matthew seven, or, according to the other interpretation of our verse,
nine, consecutive members have been at one bound overleapt? This weighty
consideration, which has been brought forward by Clericus, is passed over in silence by
the defenders of the opinion that our verses contain a continuation of the genealogy of
Zerubbabel. The only other remark to be made about this fragment is, that in 1Ch_3:22
the number of the sons of Shecaniah is given as six, while only five names are
mentioned, and that consequently a name must have fallen out by mistake in
transcribing. Nothing further can be said of these families, as they are otherwise quite
unknown.
BENSON, "1 Chronicles 3:17. The sons of Jeconiah, Assir — The word ‫,אסר‬ Assir,
means captive, or prisoner, and does not appear to be a person’s name here, but to
be added to signify that Jeconiah begat his son Salathiel when he was a captive in
Babylon, according to Matthew 1:12 .
ELLICOTT, " III.—The posterity of Jeconiah after the exile (1 Chronicles 3:17-24).
This section is peculiar to the chronicle.
38

39. (17) Assir.—This word means prisoner, captive; literally, bondman. It so occurs in
Isaiah 10:2; Isaiah 24:22. Accordingly the verse may be rendered, “And the sons of
Jeconiah when captive—Shealtiel (was) his son.” This translation (1) accords with
the Masoretic punctuation, which connects the term assir with Jeconiah; and (2)
accounts for the double reference to the offspring of Jeconiah, first in 1 Chronicles
3:16, “Zedekiah his son,” and then again here. Zedekiah is thus separated from the
sons born to Jeconiah in captivity. The strongest apparent objection against such a
rendering is that the expression “the sons of Jeconiah the captive” would require the
definite article to be prefixed to the word assir. No doubt it would; but then “the
sons of Jeconiah the captive” is not what the chronicler intended to say. He has said
what he meant—viz., “the sons of Jeconiah when in captivity” or “as a captive.” The
Talmudic treatise, Sanhedrin, gives “Assir his son;” but another, the Sedw Olam,
does not mention Assir, who is likewise wanting in the genealogy of our Lord
(Matthew 1:12; see the Notes there).
Salathiel.—The form in the LXX., σαλαθιήλ; and Matthew 1:12, Heb., Shealti-el
(“request of God”): Haggai 1:12, Shalti-el.
PULPIT, "1 Chronicles 3:17-24
These verses contain a line of descent brought down to a point not merely posterior
to the Exile, but possibly reaching to the time of Alexander. This line, however,
through Solomon is lost so soon as the first name, that of Assir, is passed; Salathiel
(Authorized Version)or Shealtiel, being descended from David, not through
Solomon, but through Nathan, whole brother to Solomon. This Assir is not known
from any parallel passage; and Luther, Starke, Bertheau, and others, followed by
Zoekler (in Lange, 'Comm. O.T.') translate the name as captive, applying it to
Jeconiah. Not all their reasons, however, for this, outweigh one which must be
pronounced against it, viz. the absence of the article. The Septuagint and Vulgate
versions agree with our own. The greater probability might be that Assir derived his
name from being born after Jeconiah was in captivity, and such passages as Isaiah
39:7, Jeremiah 22:30, may throw some light upon the extinction of Solomon's line
here, and the transfer of the succession (comp. Numbers 27:11, and see interesting
note on the present place in 'Speaker's Commentary'). Salathiel is the Authorized
Version incorrect rendering of the Hebrew Shealtiel. In Matthew 1:12 it is said,
"And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel;" and in Luke
39

40. 3:27, "Salathiel, which was the son of Neri." Now, Neri was in the direct line of
Nathan. There seems only one way of reconciling these statements—and the method
removes similar difficulties in other places also—viz, to distinguish between the
descent natural and the descent royal, and then acknowledge that the former was
swallowed up, where necessary, of the latter. One as decisive instance of this kind as
that before us is most useful to rule other cases. (For an important allusion to the
house and family of Nathan's descendants, as well known at the time, see Zechariah
12:12—a passage probably dating a few years previous to the destruction of
Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar.),
TRAPP, "1 Chronicles 3:17 And the sons of Jeconiah; Assir, Salathiel his son,
Ver. 17. And the sons of Jeconiah.] Natural sons Jeconiah had, [Jeremiah 22:28] but
because none of them succeeded him in the kingdom, therefore he is said to be
written childless. [Jeremiah 22:30]
Assir, Salathiel his son.] Salathiel might be called Assir, that is, one in bonds;
because Jeconiah begat him in his bonds. See the like, Exodus 2:22.
18 Malkiram, Pedaiah, Shenazzar, Jekamiah,
Hoshama and Nedabiah.
CLARKE, "Malchiram also - Calmet supposes we should read here, And the sons
of Salathiel were Malchiram and Pedaiah, etc.
GILL,"Malchiram also,.... That is, was a son of Jeconiah as well as Salathiel, and so
the rest that follow:
40

41. and Pedaiah, and Shenazar, Jecamiah, Hoshama, and Nedabiah; Kimchi says
these were the sons of Salathiel; but I rather think they were the sons of Jeconiah, and
brethren of Salathiel, because of what follows.
JAMISON, "Malchiram also — As far as Jeconiah, everything is plain; but there is
reason to suspect that the text in the subsequent verses has been dislocated and
disarranged. The object of the sacred historian is to trace the royal line through
Zerubbabel; yet, according to the present reading, the genealogical stem cannot be
drawn from Jeconiah downwards. The following arrangement of the text is given as
removing all difficulties [Davidson, Hermeneutics]: - 1Ch_3:17. And the sons of
Jeconiah the captive, Salathiel (Shealtiel, Ezr_3:2; Neh_12:1; Hag_1:12, Hag_1:14;
Hag_2:2) his son. 1Ch_3:18. And the sons of Salathiel; Zerubbabel and Shimei; and the
sons of Zerubbabel; Meshullam, Hananiah, and Shelomith their sister. 1Ch_3:19. And
Hashubah, and Ohel, and Berechiah, and Hasadiah, Jushab-hezed. 1Ch_3:20. And
Malchiram, and Rephaiah, and Shenazar, Jecamiah, Hoshama, and Nedabiah. 1Ch_3:21.
The sons of Hananiah; Pelatiah and Jesaiah; the sons of Rephaiah; his son Arnan, his
son Obadiah, his son Shecaniah.
BENSON, "Verse 18-19
1 Chronicles 3:18-19. Malchiram also, and Pedaiah — These were the sons of
Salathiel: and there is therefore something to be supplied, to make the sense of this
verse plain; namely, The sons of Salathiel were Malchiram, &c. The sons of
Pedaiah, Zerubbabel, &c. — But, Luke 3:27, Zerubbabel is called the son of
Salathiel; and therefore he must have been the son of Pedaiah only by adoption; or
else Salathiel dying without children, Pedaiah begat Zerubbabel of his wife, and so
raised up seed to his brother. Thus Zerubbabel was the son of Pedaiah, because
begotten by him, and yet the son of Salathiel, because begotten of his wife to be his
heir. Shelomith their sister — Sister to the last two named sons of Zerubbabel,
namely, by both parents; and therefore named before the other five, (1 Chronicles
3:20,) who were her brethren by the father, but not by the mother.
ELLICOTT, " (18) Malchiram also, and Pedaiah.—According to our present
Hebrew text these six persons, arranged as two trios, are sons of Jeconiah, and
brothers of Shealtiel.
Shenazar—Heb., Shen’azzar; LXX., σανεσάρ—is a compound Babylonian name,
like Belteshazzar (Daniel 1:7), of which the last part means “protect,” and the first
is, perhaps, “Sin” (comp. σαναχάριβος), the moon-god. Such a name as “Sin
41

42. protect” may well have been given to this Jewish prince at the court of Babylon, just
as Daniel and his three companions received idolatrous designations of the same sort
from Nebuchadnezzar. This fact seems to support our rendering of the word Assir
(1 Chronicles 3:17).
Hoshama.—A contraction of Jehoshama (Iahweh hath heard), like Coniah for
Jeconiah.
PULPIT, "Of the name Malchiram and five following, it must be left still doubtful
whose sons they were—whether of Jeconiah (comp. again 2 Kings 24:12, 2 Kings
24:15; Jeremiah 22:30) or of Neri as possibly brothers of Salathiel, or of neither of
these. The first of these suppositions seems almost untenable, the second seems
unlikely enough, and the exceeding prevalence of a corrupt text would strongly
favour the third supposition. At the same time, it may be observed that 1 Chronicles
3:19 proves that the names must belong to the royal succession, and indicates that,
whoever Salathiel was in such aspect, that Pedaiah was, who becomes father of
Zerubbabel. The verses that follow are thought by Eichhorn, Dahler, Keil, and some
others to be an interpolation of later date, chiefly on account of the point to which
the genealogy is brought.
TRAPP, "1 Chronicles 3:18 Malchiram also, and Pedaiah, and Shenazar, Jecamiah,
Hoshama, and Nedabiah.
Ver. 18. Malchiram also.] It is doubtful whether these were the sons of Jeconiah, or
of Salathiel.
19 The sons of Pedaiah:
42

43. Zerubbabel and Shimei.
The sons of Zerubbabel:
Meshullam and Hananiah.
Shelomith was their sister.
BARNES, "Zerubbabel, elsewhere always called “the son of Salathiel,” was only
Salathiel’s heir and legal son, being naturally his nephew, the son of his brother,
Pedaiah.
CLARKE, "The sons of Pedaiah - Houbigant thinks these words should be
omitted. Pedaiah is wanting in the Arabic and Syriac. If this be omitted, Zerubbabel will
appear to be the son of Salathiel, according to Mat_1:12, and not the son of Pedaiah, as
here stated.
GILL19-24, "And the sons of Pedaiah were, Zerubbabel and Shimei,.... Here
arises a difficulty, since elsewhere Zerubbabel is said to be the son of Shealtiel, Hag_1:1
some think this is not the same Zerubbabel here as there; so Grotius (u); but I see no
reason for that; but this difficulty may be removed by observing, that if Pedaiah was a
son of Salathiel, as Kimchi thinks, then Zerubbabel, being his grandson, may be called
his son, as grandsons are sometimes called sons in Scripture; or rather, Salathiel, having
no children, adopted Zerubbabel, his brother's son, and made him successor in the
government; so that he was the son of Pedaiah by birth, and of Salathiel by adoption; or
else Salathiel dying without children, his brother Pedaiah, according to the law, married
his widow, and by her had Zerubbabel, who was the proper son of Pedaiah, and the legal
43

44. son of Salathiel:
and the sons of Zerubbabel; Meshullam: who is called Abiud, Mat_1:13 another
son of his, with their father, is mentioned in this verse, and five more in the next. From
hence to the end of the chapter, the genealogy is carried on from the captivity of
Babylon, out of which Zerubbabel came, to the coming of Christ; and if Ezra was the
writer of this book, as is generally thought, who was contemporary with Zerubbabel, this
account must be written by another hand: and it may be observed, that it is carried on in
the same number of generations as in Matthew; and here it stands thus:
Zerubbabel, Hananiah, Jesaiah, Rephaiah, Arnan, Obadiah, Shecaniah,
Shemaiah, Neariah, Elioenai, Anani; in Matthew thus, "Zerubbabel, Abiud,
Eliakim, Azor, Sadoc, Achim, Eliud, Eleazar, Matthan, Jacob, Joseph"; the difference in
names may be accounted for by their having two names; and it is remarkable that the
Targum makes Anani to be the King Messiah, who was to be revealed; which, though it
makes one generation less to his time, yet plainly shows that the Jews expected the
Messiah to come at the end of this genealogy, and about the time Jesus the true Messiah
did. Anani is reckoned by other Jews a name of the Messiah, who is said to come in the
clouds of heaven, which "Anani" signifies; see Gill on Dan_7:13.
ELLICOTT, " (19) And the sons of Pedaiah were, Zerubbabel, and Shimei.—
Zerubbabel, the famous prince who, with Joshua the high priest, led the first colony
of restored exiles from Babylon to Canaan, under the edict of Cyrus (B.C. cir. 536).
Zerubbabel (LXX., σοροβάβελ), means born at Babel. His father is appropriately
named Pedaiah (Iah hath redeemed). Zerubbabel is called son of Shealtiel (Haggai
1:1, &c.; Ezra 3:2; Ezra 5:2—part of the chronicle it should be remembered;
Matthew 1:12). Hence some expositors, ancient and modern, have assumed that the
six persons named in 1 Chronicles 3:18, including Pedaiah, the father of
Zerubbabel, were sons, not brothers of Salathiel (Shealtiel). In this way they bring
Zerubbabel into the direct line of descent from Shealtiel. But our Hebrew text,
though peculiar, can hardly mean this. It makes Zerubbabel the son of Pedaiah, and
nephew of Shealtiel. If Zerubbabel, for reasons unknown, became adopted son and
heir of Shealtiel, his uncle, the seemingly discordant statements of the different
passages before us are all reconciled; while that of our text is the more exact.
And the sons of Zerubbabel.—The Hebrew received text has “and the son.” This is
not to be altered, although some MSS. have the plural. (Comp. 1 Chronicles 3:21; 1
Chronicles 3:23.) This use of the singular is characteristic of the present
genealogical fragment (see 1 Chronicles 3:17-18), “And the sons of Jeconiah
captive—Salathiel his son, and Malchiram,” &c.
44

45. Meshullam, and Hananiah, and Shelomith their sister.—This seems to mean that the
three were the offspring of one wife.
PULPIT, "1 Chronicles 3:19
Pedaiah is now given as the father of Zeraubabel and Shimei. Of the latter of these
nothing else is known, unless Lord Hervey's theory below be correct. The former is
a great name—its derivation perhaps doubtful. Strictly it signifies "scattered to
Babylon," but (Gesenius, 'Lexicon') if the initial part of the word be strengthened
into ‫ַע‬‫וּ‬‫ְר‬‫ז‬, the signification might be "born in Babylon." We have in this name
another instance of the treatment just commented on with regard to the name
Salathiel in Luke 3:28 . Zerubbabel is elsewhere invariably described as son of
Salathiel, or Shealtiel; but as the genealogy of St. Luke gives the natural descent of
Salathiel as from Neri, so does our genealogy in this one place give us the natural
descent of Zerubbabel as from Pedaiah, one of Salathiel's brothers; while all other
passages (e.g. Ezra 3:8; Haggai 1:12; Matthew 1:12; Luke 3:27)give us that for
which the genealogical table is chiefly designed, viz. the matter of succession,
according to which Zerubbabel would be-shown as son, i.e. link of succession,
following on Shealtiel.
1 Chronicles 3:19
Meshullam. Though this name recurs, and very frequently, in Chronicles, Ezra, and
Nehemiah, yet the person here denoted by it—son of Zerubbabel—is found here
only. Hananiah, 1.q. Joanna of Luke 3:27, the names being the same, but with the
component parts transposed, as in instances already given above. In the Gospel,
Hananiah appears as grandson of Zorobabel, Rhesa intervening. Shelomith. This
person is mentioned here only. The word, though evidently a feminine form, is
found for the name of a man, chief of the Izarhites (1 Chronicles 23:18), but very
possibly by a mere clerical error, as the true form is given in the very next chapter
(1 Chronicles 24:22) for the same character, viz. ‫וֹת‬ֹ‫למ‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ .
45

46. 20 There were also five others:
Hashubah, Ohel, Berekiah, Hasadiah and Jushab-
Hesed.
ELLICOTT, " (20) These five sons form a second group of Zerubbabel’s children,
probably by another wife. The v of union seems to have fallen out before the last
name, Jushab-hesed.
The names of the last kings (Shallum, recompense; Zedekiah, Iah is righteousness)
were parables of the judgment that should come to pass in Judah. (Comp. Isaiah
10:22 : “A consumption is doomed, overflowing with righteousness.”) Those of the
kindred and sons of Zerubbabel indicate the religious hopefulness of his people at
the dawn of the restoration. His father is Pedaiah (Iah redeemeth) (see Isaiah
51:11); his son Meshullam (devoted to God) recalls Isaiah 42:19, where the pious
remnant of Israel is so designated. The name Ohel, “tent,” is probably an
abbreviation of Oholiah, or Oholiab, and refers to the sacred dwelling of Jehovah,
which was for ages a tent. (See Isaiah 33:20; Ezekiel 37:27.)
Jushab-hesed (mercy will be restored) is a prophecy of faith in Him who in wrath
remembereth mercy (Habakkuk 3:2).
PULPIT, "The five additional names of this verse must presumably stand apart
from the two sons and one daughter of the preceding verse, for some reason. What
that reason may be is not known. Perhaps the most natural supposition is that their
46

47. mother was not the same. The meaning of some of the names, as especially of the
last, Jushab-hesed, i.e. "Loving-kindness is returned," has led Bertheau and others
to the conjecture that they may be separated as children born to Zerubbabel, one of
the leaders of the return from captivity, after that return. This seems plausible,
except for the consideration that, the more plausible it is, the more we might expect
the explanation itself to have been notified.
21 The descendants of Hananiah:
Pelatiah and Jeshaiah, and the sons of Rephaiah,
of Arnan, of Obadiah and of Shekaniah.
BENSON, "Verse 21-22
1 Chronicles 3:21-22. The sons of Shechaniah — All these, both parents and their
sons blended together, are mentioned as the sons of Hananiah, and branches of the
royal stock. Six — Including the father. But the Hebrew word, shisha, which is
rendered six, may be the proper name of one of the sons of Shemaiah. As the family
of David was the most considerable of any of the tribe of Judah, the genealogy of his
descendants was preserved with great care and exactness; and is here recorded in
part, to assist us in tracing the descent of our Lord Jesus Christ from him, that we
might have that proof, among others, of his being the true Messiah.
ELLICOTT, " (21) And the sons of Hananiah; Pelatiah, and Jesaiah.—Heb., son;
but some MSS. and all the versions read sons. Pelatiah means Iah is deliverance.
Jesaiah is the same name as Isaiah, meaning Iah is salvation.
47

48. The sons of Rephaiah.—The ancient versions represent here an important various
reading. The LXX. have rendered the whole verse thus: “And sons of Anania;
Phalettia, and Jesias his son, Raphal his son, Orna his son, Abdia his son (Sechenias
his son.)” The Syriac reads: “Sons of Hananiah: Pelatiah and Ushaiah. Arphaia his
son, Arnun his son, Ubia his son—viz., Ushaia’s; and his son, viz., Shechaniah’s
Shemaiah,” &c. The difference between “sons” and “his son” in Hebrew writing is
simply that between y and w. (See Note on 1 Chronicles 1)
This various reading presents a form of genealogy like that which prevails in 1
Chronicles 3:10-16, and occurs also in 1 Chronicles 3:17, at the beginning of the
present section. But it is probable that this reading is really an ancient correction of
the Hebrew text, which, as it stands, appears to leave undefined the relation between
Hananiah and the four families mentioned in this verse. The truth, however, would
seem to be that the expression “the sons of Hananiah” includes not only Pelatiah
and Jesaiah, but also the four families named after Rephaiah, Arnan, Obadiah, and
Shechaniah (comp. 1 Chronicles 2:42, and Note). The four founders of these families
were perhaps brothers of Pelatiah and Jesaiah, though not necessarily so; for these
families may have been subdivisions of those of Pelatiah and Jesaiah.
Rephaiah.—Iah healeth (Isaiah 30:26; Exodus 15:26). See Note on 1 Chronicles
3:20.
PULPIT, "The Hebrew text, followed by the Vulgate, not followed by the
Septuagint, reads here ‫ָח‬‫י‬ְ‫ַנ‬‫נ‬ֲ‫ה‬‫ן־א‬ֶ‫וּב‬ . Yet some manuscripts have the plural "sons,"
from which comes our Authorized Version. The indication is important. It is doubly
interesting, as the only indication in our Hebrew text that tends to give confirmation
to the very noteworthy differences of the Septuagint Version. For although this last,
apparently somewhat perversely, begins its version with "sons," which plural does
not so well suit its sequel, instead of the "son" of our Hebrew text, which would suit
it, yet it proceeds with a translation which must have been obtained from another
text, such text again suiting properly the singular'—"son"—of our Hebrew. The
form of its translation is analogous to that marked in the words of 1 Chronicles
3:10-14. "The sons [sic son] of Ananiah, Pelatiah, and Jesaiah his son, Rephaiah his
son, Arnan his son, Obadiah his son, Shechaniah his son," making six (presumably)
consecutive generations. This, therefore, is the reading which (if correct) might
carry down the genealogy to the times of Alexander the Great, and indeed to a time
48

49. a quarter of a century later. And in doing so, it would certify this entry as of later
date than probably any other of the canon! If we reject this position and reading, we
have to get over the term, repeated several times, the sons of. To do this, Bertheau
suggests that the intention of our passage was, from the name Rephaiah inclusive,
not to mention the individual four brothers' names, but to mention them as four
distinguished families among the posterity of David—an attempt at explanation
certainly not satisfactory. The conclusion of the matter is, that in this twenty-first
verse we have difficulties in either alternative, not satisfactorily explained. Either we
have the names in all of six brothers, being "sons of Hananiah"—the last four of
whom are styled, not by their individual names, but as heads of families; or we have
six lineal descendants from Hananiah. If this last supposition were correct, calculate
a royal succession at the lowest average (say something under twenty years), and the
genealogy, including what follows in the remaining verses of the chapter, will bring
us, as above, to a date that covers the whole life of Alexander the Great.
TRAPP, "1 Chronicles 3:21 And the sons of Hananiah; Pelatiah, and Jesaiah: the
sons of Rephaiah, the sons of Arnan, the sons of Obadiah, the sons of Shechaniah.
Ver. 21. And the sons of Hananiah.] It is thought that these were the families of the
blood royal, after the captivity. And some do here hence gather, that these Books of
Chronicles were last written of all the Old Testament: by the Hebrews they are
placed last.
22 The descendants of Shekaniah:
Shemaiah and his sons:
Hattush, Igal, Bariah, Neariah and Shaphat—six
in all.
49

50. BARNES, "Six - There are only five names in the Hebrew text. The Syriac anti Arabic
versions supply “Azariah” between Neariah and Shaphat.
The question of the proper arrangement of the genealogy of the descendants of
Zerubbabel 1Ch_3:19-24 is important in its bearing on the interesting point of the time
at which the canon of the Old Testament was closed. Assuming the average of a
generation to be 20 years in the East, the genealogy of the present chapter, drawn out
according to the Hebrew text, does not descend below about 410 B.C., and thus falls
within the probable lifetime of Nehemiah.
If, further, we regard it as most probable that Ezra died before 431 B.C., and that this
passage in question was not wholly written by him, this does not disprove the theory (see
the introduction to Chronicles), that Ezra was the author of Chronicles. Deuteronomy is
by Moses, though the last chapter cannot be from his hand. The “dukes of Edom” might
he an insertion into the text of Genesis Gen_36:40-43 without the authorship of the
remainder of the work being affected by it. So here; Nehemiah, or Malachi, may have
carried on the descent of the “sons of David” as far as it had reached in their time,
adding to the account given by Ezra one, or at the most two verses.
CLARKE, "The sons of Shemaiah - six - Five only are found in the text, and the
versions give us no assistance; neither do the MSS. correct the place. If the father be not
here included with his sons, some name must be lost out of the text.
ELLICOTT, " (22) The sons of Shechaniah; Shemaiah.—See Note on 1 Chronicles
1:41.
Hattush.—Probably the Hattush “of the sons of David, of the sons of Shechaniah,”
mentioned by Ezra as one of those who went up with him from Babylon in the
second return, 457 B.C. (Ezra 8:2-3). If we have rightly understood 1 Chronicles
3:21, Hattush is of the fourth generation after Zerubbabel (Hananiah, Shechaniah,
Shemaiah, Hattush), and so might well have been a youthful companion of Ezra.
Six.—As the text gives only five names, one must have been omitted by an oversight.
50

51. COKE, ". Six— Five. Houbigant. See Calmet.
REFLECTIONS.—For seventeen descents, the crown of Judah went from father to
son in a direct line. Just before the captivity, the lineal descent was interrupted.
Jeconiah, Assir the captive, 1 Chronicles 5:17. (not a descendant of his, but Jeconiah
himself), though he was written childless respecting the succession to the throne, yet
seems to have had several children in Babylon, 1 Chronicles 3:17-18. Zerubbabel,
here said to be the son of Pedaiah, is elsewhere called the son of Salathiel: either his
grandson, if Pedaiah was Salathiel's son, or if his brother, as it seems more
probable, Pedaiah, as next of kin, might, on his dying childless, marry his widow,
and raise up seed to his brother, which seems the best solution of the difficulty.
There is an observable difference between the descendants of Zerubbabel here, and
in St. Matthew, which may be accounted for by the same person frequently having
more names than one.
PULPIT, "In the obscurity that obtains on the subject, there is one somewhat bright
star of light in a succeeding name, Hattush, to which this verse leads us. This verse
purports to help on the line of genealogy by a contribution of two descents, the
effective names being Shemaiah and Neariah, the line coming to its close by aid of
two other effective names, Elioenai and (say) Hodaiah, contained in the last two
verses of the chapter. Although one manifest error in 1 Chronicles 3:22 (involved in
the number "six" when only five sons have been read) betokens the insecurity of the
text, yet the summary measures of the ingenious Lord A. C. Hervey can scarcely be
warranted, when he wishes first to omit altogether the words and the sons of
Shecaniah; Shemaiah; and next, to regard Shemaiah as Shimei, the brother of
Zerub-babel, and, as matter of course, those who followed as the descendants of this
brother of Zerubbabel, instead of Zerubbabel himself. Now, a passage in the Book
of Ezra helps us much here. Ezra mentions, as one of those of the "sons of David"
who went up with him from .Babylon to Jerusalem (Ezra 8:2, Ezra 8:3), Hattush,
"of the sons of Shechaniah." There is not only nothing to prevent this Hattush being
the same as the elder brother of Neariah, who comes fourth in succession from
Zerubbabel, but at the above-mentioned average of twenty years the dates will
admirably synchronize—the last date of Zerubbabel being about B.C. 520, and that
of Neariah B.C. 440; while the date of Ezra's journey was B.C. 458. This coincidence
of names and dates must not be regarded as con-elusive; but, pending further
discovery, it strongly disfavours the idea of the names of verse 21 constituting a
succession, and it keeps well in check the rate of succeeding generations, bringing
the last member of the succession to a date that may be harmonized with others
which have for the most part held their ground. That in verse 22 only five names are
51

52. given for what are summed up as "six," must lead to the supposition that one has
dropped out; and since no known manuscript of the Hebrew text, nor the
Septuagint or Vulgate versions supplies us with the missing name, the Syriac and
Arabic versions, which supply the name Azariah between Neariah and Shaphat,
must be viewed with some suspicion. Igeal is, in the Hebrew, a word ( ‫ל‬ֱ‫א‬ ִ‫יג‬ ) identical
with the Igal of Numbers 13:7; 2 Samuel 23:36—Septuagint in the latter passages
ἰλαὰλ or ἰγάλ, but in the present place ἰωὴλ. Of the other persons in this verse little
or nothing else is known.
TRAPP, "1 Chronicles 3:22 And the sons of Shechaniah; Shemaiah: and the sons of
Shemaiah; Hattush, and Igeal, and Bariah, and Neariah, and Shaphat, six.
Ver. 22. Neariah, and Shaphat, six,] sc., Reckoned together with their father
Shemalah.
23 The sons of Neariah:
Elioenai, Hizkiah and Azrikam—three in all.
ELLICOTT, " (23) Elioenai—unto Iah (are) mine eyes, Psalms 123:1-2—is an
expansion of the same idea. (Comp. also Psalms 25:15.) An Elioenai went up with
Ezra (Ezra 8:4).
PULPIT, "None of the names in this or the following verse assists as yet in throwing
any light upon the questions that arise in this fragment of genealogy. Lord A. C.
Hervey would identify Hodaiah (1 Chronicles 3:24) with Abiud (Matthew 1:13) and
with Juda (Luke 3:26), and quotes, for very just confirmation of the possibility so
far as the mere names are concerned, Ezra 3:9; Nehemiah 11:9; compared with
52

53. Ezra 2:40; 1 Chronicles 9:7. His investigations on the comparison of the genealogies
of this chapter with those of Matthew 1:9 and Luke 3:9, are well worthy of
attention, and may be found in his work above referred to, and in his articles of
Smith's 'Bible Dictionary.'
24 The sons of Elioenai:
Hodaviah, Eliashib, Pelaiah, Akkub, Johanan,
Delaiah and Anani—seven in all.
CLARKE, "And Anani - “This is the King Messiah who is to be revealed.” - T. Jarchi
says the same, and refers to Dan_7:13 : Behold, one like the Son of man came with the
clouds (‫ענני‬ ananey) of heaven. For this application of the word he gives a fanciful
reason, not worthy to be repeated. The Syriac and Arabic omit several names in this
table, and make only twenty-three verses in the chapter: but such differences are
frequent in the books of Chronicles.
ELLICOTT, " (24) The sons of Elioenai . . . Hodaiah.—These sons of Elioenai are
the sixth generation from Zerubbabel (536-515 B.C. ), that is to say, they were living
about 345 B.C. , under Artaxerxes Ochus. If the reading of the LXX. in 1 Chronicles
3:21 be correct, their date is four generations later, or about 225 B.C. The result is
to bring down the date of the chronicle a century lower than the best critics
approve. (See Introduction.)
Footnotes:
53

54. 1 Chronicles 3:5 Hebrew Shimea, a variant of
Shammua
1 Chronicles 3:5 One Hebrew manuscript and
Vulgate (see also Septuagint and 2 Samuel 11:3);
most Hebrew manuscripts Bathshua
1 Chronicles 3:6 Two Hebrew manuscripts (see
also 2 Samuel 5:15 and 1 Chron. 14:5); most
Hebrew manuscripts Elishama
1 Chronicles 3:11 Hebrew Joram, a variant of
Jehoram
1 Chronicles 3:16 Hebrew Jeconiah, a variant
of Jehoiachin; also in verse 17
54