Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/162

 in Sir. 24$25$, but nowhere else in OT. That it was not a familiar name to the Hebrews is shown by the topographical description which follows. On the various speculative identifications, see De. and Di., and p. 64 f. below.—the whole land of Ḥăvîlāh] The phraseology indicates that the name is used with some vagueness, and considerable latitude. In 10$7. 29$ 25$18$ etc., Ḥavilah seems to be a district of Arabia (see p. 202); but we cannot be sure that it bears the same meaning in the mythically coloured geography of this passage.—12. Two other products of the region are specified; but neither helps to an identification of the locality.—bĕdōlaḥ] a substance well known to the Israelites (Nu. 11$7$), is undoubtedly the fragrant but bitter gum called by the Greeks or . Pliny (NH, xii. 35 f.) says the best kind grew in Bactriana, but adds that it was found also in Arabia, India, Media, and Babylonia.—the šōham stone] A highly esteemed

from ?); but everywhere else it is wanting, and [E] omits it here.—12. ] On metheg and hat.-pathach, see G-K. §§ 10 g, 16 e, f; Kön. i. § 10, 6 e  (cf. 1$18$).—] The first instance of this Qrê perpetuum of the Pent., where the regular is found only Gn. 14$2$ 20$5$ 38$25$, Lv. 2$15$ 11$39$ 13$10. 21$ 16$31$ 21$9$, Nu. 5$13f.$. Kön. (Lgb. i. p. 124 ff.) almost alone amongst modern scholars still holds to the opinion that the epicene consonantal form is genuinely archaic; but the verdict of philology and of Hex. criticism seems decisive against that view. It must be a graphic error of some scribe or school of scribes: whether proceeding from the original scrip. def.  or not does not much matter (see Dri. and White's note on Lv. 1$13$ in SBOT, p. 25 f.).—] [E] + .—] Of the ancient Vns. G alone has misunderstood the word, rendering here (red garnet), and in Nu. 11$7$ (the only other occurrence) . S can only be a clerical error. That it is not a gem is proved by the absence of .—] G (leek-*green stone); other Gk. Vns., and so V (onychinus); S , T$O$ . Philology has as yet thrown no light on the word, though a connexion with Bab. sâmtu is probable. Myres (EB, 4808 f.) makes the interesting suggestion that it originally denoted malachite, which is at once striped and green, and that after malachite ceased to be valued tradition wavered between the onyx (striped) and the beryl (green). Petrie, on the other hand (DB, iv. 620), thinks that in early times it was green felspar, afterwards confused with the beryl. It is at least noteworthy that Jen. (KIB, vi. 1, 405) is led on independent grounds to identify sâmtu with malachite. But is malachite found in any