the arc found in the second division from david to and his son as well as in the of it is said v � at wa know from iii that was not ihe son but the of the son of and that three kings occur between and after whom corner i or aa he is called i iii and xiv secondly our says v j ma be at and we find i that son un l of jo was called ji whom came � on and or over arc n ed to whereas the old none however had brothers so that the mention of the brethren of in to ha e originated in an of these two persons � a third relates to lie is called v a son of s in iii he is descended not through but through liis brother in t s and l however is as here the son of � in the last place who is here called the son of is not to bo found amongst the children of lit � was only a derived fi m a son of one of those there men t the and third of may have crept in evil and any great degree of careless w for the � ion of may from the similar sound of the fc t t l � which accounts also for the of the brothers of il the to the old is partly favourable the we liave namely the sion of three known not so ca ity to be set aside it has indeed been held that the of names may here mi o led the author to to instead of to the similar sounding in ihe is but this falls in so with the author s design of the fourteen admitting the double of tiiat wo cannot avoid with that the ht was made on purpose with a view to ii l rom tim expedient of iii l ta r � l oc ti i � t im lo i t t rt in f i id till of to david where the first division presented itself having fourteen members he seems to have wished that those of the following divisions should correspond in number in the whole remaining series the exile offered itself as the natural of separation but as the second division from david to the exile gave him four members therefore he omitted four of the names for what reason these four were chosen would be difficult o at least for the three last mentioned the cause of the s laying so much stress on the fold equal numbers may have been simply that by this of the oriental custom of division into equal sections the might be more easily committed to memory but with this motive a idea was probably combined the question arises whether thia is to be sought in the number which is thrice repeated or whether it in the repetition fourteen is the double of the sacred number seven but it is improbable that it was selected for this because otherwise the seven would scarcely have been so completely lost sight of in the fourteen still more improbable is the conjecture of that the number fourteen was specially chosen as being the value of the name of david for of tliis kind appropriate to the are to be found in no other part of the it is more likely that tlie object of the consisted merely in the repetition of an equal number by retaining the fourteen whidi had first accidentally presented itself since it was a notion of the jews that signal divine of prosperity or at regular thus as fourteen generations between the founder of the holy i e and david the king after god s own heart so fourteen generations must between the re establishment of the kingdom and coming of the son of david the � the most ancient in exhibit the very same as according to the i cap v from adam the first to the second father of men were ten generations so from or rather from liis son the tenth is the of the l this a of hia subject this bed upon which the author of our now stretches now it almost like a philosopher a system � can excite no in his favour it is in vain to appeal to the custom in p f s p g � ia n t s r and tbe from b j also b� compared the by h t from p n ab ad xv in a xv tl rt q de has called to the between these old gen u and of the vith regard to the equality of s c� s op and of lo m similar or � n author as with a declaring ail tht generations daring a space of were where � accident or many arc hu an and want of critical which shake our confidence in the certainly of his of considered separately does not present m defects as that of it has oo of the of in the to act ax a cheek upon neither can it he tested to much extent by a comparison with tjie old testament for from id to line traced by has no with any old testament excepting in two of its members and even with respect lo two la a contradiction between the statement of and that of iii f for the a son of whilst according to the utter he was the son of also one ite as the son of j a d x � not appear amongst the children of in in a u not to be found in the hebrew text jew x xi ff but who was or already in by the in ct tlie original text has this name in first series aa the third adam and thence a to have liim to the in aa the third from 