Every week, one Greek or Hebrew word changes how you read a familiar passage. Subscribe free →
BibleWord.ai iconBibleWord.ai

Attributed commentary excerpt

John Gill's Exposition on Genesis 10:14

A historical reference excerpt for this verse. Read it alongside the biblical text and other available sources.

Exposition of the Old and New Testament
John Gill (1697–1771) · 18th-century historical commentary
Source: BibleWord.ai's local reference edition of this named work.
And Pathrusim, etc.] These are other descendants of Mizraim, the name of whose father very probably was Pathros, from whom the country of Pathros was called, and which is not only spoken of in Scripture along with Egypt, but as a part of it, (<231111>Isaiah 11:11) (<244401>Jeremiah 44:1 <262914> Ezekiel 29:14) and these Pathrusim were doubtless the inhabitants of it; which, as Bochart f659 has shown, is no other than Thebais, or the upper Egypt. Hillerus f660 takes the word to be compounded of tap and µyswr, and renders it the corner of the Rosians, and makes it to be the same with the bay of Issus, where was a colony of Egypt, called Cilicians; but the former is more probable. And Casluhim; these also were the posterity of Mizraim, by another son of his, from whence they had their name: according to Hillerus f661, they are the Solymi, a people near the Lycians and Pisidians, that came out of Egypt, and settled in those parts; but it is much more likely that they were, as Junius f662 observes, the inhabitants of Casiotis, a country mentioned by Ptolemy f663 in lower Egypt, at the entrance of it, where stood Mount Casius: but Bochart f664 is of opinion that they are the Colchi, the inhabitants of the country now called Mingrelia, and which, though at a distance from Egypt, the ancient inhabitants came from thence, as appears from several ancient authors of good credit, as the above learned writer shows. Out of whom came Philistim, or the Philistines, a people often spoken of in Scripture: these sprung from the Casluhim, or were a branch of that people; according to Ben Melech they sprung both from them and from the Pathrusim; for Jarchi says they changed wives with one another, and so the Philistines sprung from them both; or these were a colony that departed from them, and settled elsewhere, as the Philistines did in the land of Canaan, from whence that part of it which they inhabited was called Palestine: and, if the Casluhim dwelt in Casiotis, at the entrance of Egypt, as before observed, they lay near the land of Canaan, and could easily pass into it. Some think this clause refers not to what goes before, but to what follows after, and Caphtorim, and read the whole verse thus: “and Pathrusim, and Casluhim, and Caphtorim, out of whom came Philistim”; that is, they came out of the Caphtorim. What has led to such a transposition of the words in the text is (<300907>Amos 9:7) “and the Philistines from Caphtor”: but though they are said to he brought from a place called Caphtor, yet did not spring from the Caphtorim: to me it rather seems, that the two latter were brothers, and both sprung from the Casluhim; since the words may be rendered without a parenthesis: “and Caluhim, out of whom came Philistim and Caphtorim”; though perhaps it may be best of all to consider the two last as the same, and the words may be read, “out of whom came Philistim, even”, or that is, “the Caphtorim”; for the Philistines, in the times of Jeremiah, are said to be the remnant of the country of Caphtor, (<244704>Jeremiah 47:4) and as in Amos the Philistines are said to come out of Caphtor, in (<050223>Deuteronomy 2:23) they are called Caphtorim, that came out of Caphtor, who destroyed the Avim, which dwelt in Hazerim, even unto Azzah, or Gaza, afterwards a principal city of the Philistines: for then, and not before their settlement in the land of Canaan, were they so called; for the word Philistim signifies strangers, people of another country; and the Septu…

This public page shows a contextual excerpt from the locally available source text.

How to use this source
This excerpt is attributed to its named commentary. It is included as a historical study resource and should be evaluated in light of Scripture and other relevant evidence.