King James Version

What Does Exodus 28:17 Mean?

And thou shalt set in it settings of stones, even four rows of stones: the first row shall be a sardius, a topaz, and a carbuncle: this shall be the first row. set: Heb. fill in it fillings of stone sardius: or, ruby

Context

15

And thou shalt make the breastplate of judgment with cunning work; after the work of the ephod thou shalt make it; of gold, of blue, and of purple, and of scarlet , and of fine twined linen, shalt thou make it.

16

Foursquare it shall be being doubled; a span shall be the length thereof, and a span shall be the breadth thereof.

17

And thou shalt set in it settings of stones, even four rows of stones: the first row shall be a sardius, a topaz, and a carbuncle: this shall be the first row. set: Heb. fill in it fillings of stone sardius: or, ruby

18

And the second row shall be an emerald, a sapphire, and a diamond.

19

And the third row a ligure, an agate, and an amethyst.

Commentary

Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers
(17-19) **Set in it settings of stones . . . **There is always considerable difficulty in identifying ancient with modern gems, the etymologies of the words being frequently uncertain, the names (where they have survived) having sometimes changed their meaning, and the opinions of early commentators, who might seem to speak with some authority, being discrepant. In the present case, scarcely one of the twelve stones can be said to be determined with certainty. 1. The *ôdem, *identified by the LXX. and the Vulg. With the “sard,” has been regarded as the ruby, the carbuncle, and the carnelian. Etymologically the word means “red,” or “the red stone.” The ruby is certainly wrong, since ancient engravers could not cut it. Either “sard” or “carnelian” is probably intended, both being common in Egypt. 2. The *pitdah *is certainly not the topaz, which could no more be cut than the ruby. If the word is derived, as supposed, from a root meaning “pale,” the chrysolite, which resembles a pale topaz, but is far softer, may be meant. 3. The *bârěketh *is rendered *smaragdus, *“emerald,” by the LXX. and Vulg.; but neither could the emerald be cut by the ancient engravers. The word means “brightly flashing,” which tells us next to nothing. “Beryl” and “a kind of corundum” have been suggested; but neither is particularly sparkling. 4. The *nôphek, *translated ἃυθραξ by the LXX. and Josehus, may well be the “carbuncle,” as is now generally supposed. It cannot, any more than the *ôdem, *be the ruby. 5. The *sappir *one might have supposed by its name to be certainly the “sapphire;” but this, again, is a gem which ancient engravers could not cut. It would seem that here we have one of the cases where the name has been transferred from one stone to another, the modern “lapis lazuli” being the gem which was called “sapphire” by the ancients. 6. The *yahălôm *is certainly not the “diamond,” which is the hardest of all gems. The LXX. and Vulg. translate by “jasper” (ἴασπις*, jaspis*); but this seems really to have been the twelfth stone. Other renderings are mere conjectures, and the *yahălôm *must be regarded as unknown. 7. The *leshem, *rendered “ligure” by the LXX., the Vulgate, Josephus, and our translators, is probably the stone known to the ancients as *lapis ligurius, *but what that stone was is a matter of great uncertainty. It has been regarded as amber, as jacinth, and as tourmaline; but amber does not admit of engraving, while jacinth and tourmaline are pure conjectures. This stone, then, must also be regarded as unknown. 8. The *shevo, *rendered *achates, *“agate,” by the LXX. and the Vulg., is generally allowed to have been that stone, which was well known to the ancients, and widely used for engraving. 9. The *akhlâmâh *was regarded as the amethyst by the LXX., the Vulgate, and Josephus; but it has been suggested that it may have been “malachite” (Knobel); and there is no disproving the suggestion. Still the amethyst, which is easily engraved, and was well known in Egypt, should find a place in the present list, and may well have been intended by the *akhlâmâh. *10. The *tarshish, *by its name, should be a stone brought from Tarshish, which is either Tarsus or Tartessus. Some suppose it to have been the beryl, some the chrysolite, others the turquoise. There are really no sufficient grounds for identifying it with any known gem. 11. The *shôham *has been already discussed (see Note on Exodus 28:9), and identified with the onyx, or the sardonyx. 12. The *yâsh’peh *should, by its name, be the “jasper,” which was one of the stones most used in Egypt, and which could scarcely have been absent from the present list. The LXX., however, translate “onyx,” Josephus and the Vulgate “beryl;” so that here again there is uncertainty. The views of the present writer may be best presented to the reader by means of a table:— 1st Row of Gems . . . 2nd Row . . . 3rd Row . . . 4th Row . . . Odern (the Sard) Nôphck (the Carbuncle) Leshem (uncertain) Tarshish (uncertain) Pitdah (the Chrysolite) Sappir (the Lapis Lazuli) Shevo (the Agate) Shôham (the Onyx or the Sardonyx) Bârĕtketh (uncertain) Yuhâlôm (uncertain) Akhlâmâh (the Amethyst) Yush’peh (the Jasper)

Charles John Ellicott (1819–1905). Public Domain.

Historical Context

This verse is found in the book of Exodus. Understanding the historical and cultural background helps illuminate its meaning for the original audience and for us today.

Theological Significance

Exodus 28:17 contributes to our understanding of God's character and His relationship with humanity. Consider how this verse connects to the broader themes of Scripture.

Cross-References

Verses related to Exodus 28:17

Cross-references from Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Test Your Knowledge