1 Chronicles 7:12

Shuppim also, and Huppim, the children of Ir. — Literally, and Shuppim and Huppim sons of Ir; Hushim sons of Aher. The copulative and suggests that “Shuppim and Huppim” are other Benjamite clans thrown in at the end of the account. We have seen (see Note on 1 Chronicles 7:6) that Genesis 46:21 names “Muppim and. Huppim” as sons of Benjamin, and that Numbers 26 has “Snephupham and Hupham” corresponding to the same pair of names. Lastly, 1 Chronicles 8:5 mentions “Shephupham and Huram” among the sons of Bela, son of Benjamin. It is clear that “Muppim” is a mere slip of the pen for “Shuppim,” to which the name Shephupham is really equivalent. From Shephupham, according to Numbers 26, sprang the clan of the “Shuphami” (Shuphamite), as from “Hupham” the clan of the Huphami. Shupham and Hupham are quite natural variants of Shuppim and Huppim. The “Huram” of 1 Chronicles 8:5 is a scribe’s error for “Hupham.” Shuppim and Huppim, called sons of Benjamin in Genesis and Numbers, and sons of Bela in 1 Chronicles 8, are here called “sons of Ir;” 1 Chronicles 7:7 above informs us that Ir or Iri (? the Irite) was a son of Bela. There is no more contradiction here than there would be in calling the same person a son of David, son of Judah, and son of Abraham.

Hushim, the sons of Aher. — The name Hushim (a plural form) recurs at 1 Chronicles 8:8; 1 Chronicles 8:11, as a Benjamite clan. Aher looks like a variant of the Ahiram of Numbers, and the Ahrah of 1 Chronicles 8, and perhaps of the Ehi-Rosh of Genesis. From this it would appear that the whole verse is an appendix to the genealogy of Benjamin. The word Aher, however, happens to mean another, and if the reading were certain (comp. the variants Ahiram, Ahrah, &c), would be very singular as a proper name. The clause has been rendered “Hushim. sons of another;” and this odd expression has been taken to be a veiled reference to the tribe of Dan, whose name is omitted in the present section. Genesis 46:23, “And the sons of Dan, Hushim,” a statement occurring like the present clause between that of the sons of Benjamin and the sons of Naphtali, is cited in support of this view. This last coincidence is certainly remarkable; but the following considerations are decidedly adverse to the view in question: 1. Numbers 26:42 calls the offspring of Dan, Shuham, not Hushim, though there also Dan follows Benjamin. 2. Dan is, indeed, omitted here, but so also is Zebulun, just as Gad and Asher are omitted in 1 Chronicles 27:16; and Naphtali here has only one verse 3. The chronicler’s dislike of the tribe of Dan is probably an unfounded supposition, suggested by some accidental omissions; he has mentioned that tribe by name in 1 Chronicles 2:2; 1 Chronicles 12:35; 1 Chronicles 27:22. If the omission in the present list be neither accidental nor due to imperfect MSS., it may be ascribed to later editors of the book. (Comp. Judges 18 and Revelation 7:5.)