6The sons of Benjamin; Bela, and Becher, and Jediael, three. 7And the sons of Bela; Ezbon, and Uzzi, and Uzziel, and Jerimoth, and Iri, five; heads of fathers' houses, mighty men of valour; and they were reckoned by genealogy twenty and two thousand and thirty and four. 8And the sons of Becher; Zemirah, and Joash, and Eliezer, and Elioenai, and Omri, and Jeremoth, and Abijah, and Anathoth, and Alemeth. All these were the sons of Becher. 9And they were reckoned by genealogy, after their generations, heads of their fathers' houses, mighty men of valour, twenty thousand and two hundred. 10And the sons of Jediael; Bilhan: and the sons of Bilhan; Jeush, and Benjamin, and Ehud, and Chenaanah, and Zethan, and Tarshish, and Ahishahar. 11All these were sons of Jediael,
inevitably or at least most naturally upon the slight initial error whereby "the sons of Zebulun" was corrupted into "Benjamin." The development and details of Curtis' reasoning cannot be set forth except in connection with the Heb. text, and it must therefore suffice here to indicate the one essential point, and to remark that the convincing feature of his hypothesis is that it furnishes a clear and natural explanation of all the difficulties noted above.
6. Bela, and Becher, and Jediael] Contrast viii. 2. Read, following Gen. xlvi. 14, Sered and Elon and Jahleel.
7. the sons of Bela] Contrast viii. 3; and read instead the sons of Sered. These are differently stated in viii. 3—5.
8. Becher] Read Elon.
Anathoth, and Alemeth] both names of places in Benjamin; vi. 60 (45, Heb., "Allemeth"); Jer. i. 1. These are the only place-names in the list, and they are admittedly Benjamite: as to the significance of this fact see note on Ehud, ver. 10.
10. Jediael] or rather Jahleel.
Benjamin, and Ehud] The error in ver. 6 by which this Zebulunite list becomes ostensibly Benjamite must have been very early. When once it had arisen, the tendency to introduce names which were to be expected in a Benjamite genealogy was inevitably strong. This is the ground on which the names Anathoth and Alemeth (ver. 8) are to be explained, as also Shuppim and Huppim (ver. 12). Most clearly, however, is the tendency illustrated by the present verse, where the reading Benjamin and Ehud most probably has its origin in a marginal addition "and Ehud the Benjamite" (from Jud. iii. 15) which was later inserted in the text as two separate names.
Tarshish] It is said of Zebulun in Gen. xlix. 13 that he shall be "a haven for ships," and Tarshish, absolutely unknown as a Hebrew personal name, is regularly used in the O.T. in connection with ships
