or Northern Egypt: “ tsanemhit, i.e., pars, regio septentrionis.” Lehabim (= Lubim, Nah 3:9) are, according to Josephus, the Δἰβνες or Δύβιες, not the great Libyan tribe ( Phut, v. 6), which Nahum distinguishes from them, but the Libyaegyptii of the ancients. Naphtuchim: in Knobel's opinion, the Middle Egyptians, as the nation of Pthah, the god of Memphis: but Bochart is more probably correct in associating the name with Νέφθυς in Plut. de Is., the northern coast line of Egypt. Pathrusim: inhabitants of Pathros, Παθούρης, Egypt. Petrês, land of the south; i.e., Upper Egypt, the Thebais of the ancients. Casluchim: according to general admission the Colchians, who descended from the Egyptians (Herod. ii. 104), though the connection of the name with Cassiotis is uncertain. “ From thence (i.e., from Casluchim, which is the name of both people and country) proceeded the Philistines.” Philistim, lxx Φυλιστιείμ or Ἀλλόφλοι, lit., emigrants or immigrants from the Ethiopic fallâsa. This is not at variance with Amo 9:7 and Jer 47:4, according to which the Philistines came from Caphtor, so that there is no necessity to transpose the relative clause after Philistim. The two statements may be reconciled on the simple supposition that the Philistian nation was primarily a Casluchian colony, which settled on the south-eastern coast line of the Mediterranean between Gaza (Gen 10:19) and Pelusium, but was afterwards strengthened by immigrants from Caphtor, and extended its territory by pressing out the Avim (Deu 2:23, cf. Jos 13:3). Caphtorim: according to the old Jewish explanation, the Cappadocians; but according to Lakemacher's opinion, which has been revived by Ewald, etc., the Cretans. This is not decisively proved, however, either by the name Cherethites, given to the Philistines in 1Sa 30:14; Zep 2:5, and Eze 25:16, or by the expression “isle of Caphtor” in Jer 47:4.
verses 15-20
From Canaan descended “ Zidon his first-born, and Heth.” Although Zidon occurs in Gen 10:19 and throughout the Old Testament as the name of the oldest capital of the Phoenicians, here it must be regarded as the name of a person, not only because of the apposition “ his first-born,” and the verb ילד, “begat,” but also because the name of a city does not harmonize with the names of the other descendants of Canaan, the analogy of which would lead us to expect the nomen gentile “ Sidonian” (Jdg 3:3, etc.);
