Abstract
In 2 Sam. 10.6 the relationship between 9< > (=> and 3H J is ambiguous, and the order of items in its military list is peculiar. Also, numbers and referents in 2 Sam. 10.6 do not seem to agree with those in the parallel passage, 1 Chron. 19.7. Furthermore, the expression 3H J is rendered as a proper name in various manuscripts and ancient versions. This article proposes a solution to all the above problems: namely, that (1) the expression J,= is erroneously written after 9< > (=>, and (2) 3H J may be the ethnic qualifier for 9< > (=>, both expressions referring to the same individual.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.