StrongerBible

shoham

שֹׁהַם

HebrewH7718onyx

Appears 11 times · tap a cell to see the verses

Gen 2:12Exo 25:7Exo 28:9Exo 28:20Exo 35:9Exo 35:27Exo 39:6Exo 39:131Ch 29:2Job 28:16Ezk 28:13
Root family
Word studyResearch-gradeSHOH-hahmnoun

What shoham means

a costly precious stone, workable enough to be engraved like a seal, whose exact mineral is no longer known

TranslatabilityPartialCertaintyObscure

All eleven times this word appears, it names a costly stone. It is one of the treasures of the land of Havilah in Genesis, one of the materials Israel donates for the sanctuary, one of the twelve stones set in the high priest's breastpiece, the material of the two large engraved stones worn on his shoulders, part of what David stockpiles for the temple, and one of the stones covering the king of Tyre in Ezekiel. In Job 28:16 it stands beside sapphire (סַפִּיר) and the gold of Ophir as one of the most expensive things anyone could name.

Two facts about the stone are firm, and they are almost the only clues to what it was. It was rare and expensive. And it could be cut and engraved: the two stones on the priest's shoulders each carried six tribal names cut into them like a seal, so the stone had to come in pieces that large and had to take fine engraving. Everything else is missing. The Hebrew never gives its color, never describes it, and the word behind the name turns up nowhere else in the language, so there is nothing left to reason from.

The ancient translators were already guessing. The Greek Old Testament renders this one Hebrew word at least six different ways: a leek-green stone in Genesis, "emerald" (σμάραγδος) where the shoulder stones are made, "beryl" (βήρυλλος) in the breastpiece list, "sard" among the donated materials, "onyx" in Job, and in 1 Chronicles 29:2 simply the Hebrew word spelled out in Greek letters. Josephus, a priest who had actually seen the temple garments, called the shoulder stones sardonyx (σαρδόνυξ) and then contradicted himself about the order of the breastpiece stones across his two accounts. The standard Hebrew dictionaries still disagree with each other: one calls the identification doubtful and lists onyx, chrysoprase, beryl, and malachite; another proposes red carnelian; another keeps onyx.

Recent work leaves two serious options, and neither has won:

  • a pale or green stone of a kind actually cut for seals and amulets in the region, such as green feldspar or a green form of chalcedony, which fits the old guess that the name once meant something pale and the Greek renderings that reach for green
  • the traditional onyx or sardonyx, a banded stone, which fits the Latin translation that gave English its "onyx" and the one eyewitness description of the shoulder stones

The strongest argument against onyx is that polished onyx as a worked gem belongs mostly to the later Greek and Roman world. The strongest argument against reading the stone as red is that the red slot in the priest's list already belongs to a different word, the one usually rendered "sardius" (אֹדֶם).

Gen 2:12Exo 25:7Exo 28:9Exo 28:20Exo 35:9Exo 35:27Exo 39:6Exo 39:131Ch 29:2Job 28:16Ezk 28:13

Disputed

Which stone this word actually names.

  • majorityThe stone cannot be identified from the surviving evidence. All that can be established is that it was a costly stone obtainable in pieces large enough to be engraved like a seal, and any confident single-word gloss overstates what is known.; BDB, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (1906), s.v. shoham; John I. Durham, Exodus (Word Biblical Commentary 3; Word, 1987); Cornelis Houtman, Exodus (Historical Commentary on the Old Testament; Peeters)
  • contestedA pale or green stone of a kind demonstrably worked for seals and amulets in the pre-Hellenistic Levant and Egypt, most plausibly green feldspar (amazonite) or a green chalcedony or jasper.; James A. Harrell, James K. Hoffmeier, and Kenton F. Williams, "Hebrew Gemstones in the Old Testament," Bulletin for Biblical Research 27.1 (2017): 1-52; James A. Harrell, "Old Testament Gemstones," Bulletin for Biblical Research 21 (2011)
  • contestedOnyx or sardonyx, a banded chalcedony, following the Vulgate tradition, Josephus's account of the shoulder stones, and comparative Arabic and Egyptian evidence for banded chalcedony.; Ephraim S. Ayil, Identifying the Stones of Classical Hebrew: A Modern Philological Approach (Brill, 2024), ch. 13; David J. A. Clines, ed., Dictionary of Classical Hebrew (Sheffield Phoenix), s.v. shoham
  • minorityRed carnelian, on the strength of the proposed Akkadian connection.; HALOT (Brill, 1994-2000), s.v. shoham
  • minorityBeryl, later specified as aquamarine, following the Greek and Targumic renderings and the reconstructed sense "pale" for the underlying root.; Wilhelm Gesenius, Hebraisches und Aramaisches Handworterbuch uber das Alte Testament, s.v. shoham

What scholars say about shoham

Every standard lexicon flags the identification as insecure, and they conflict with one another: BDB calls the gem "identification dubious" and lists onyx, chrysoprasus, beryl, and malachite, noting a possible loan from Akkadian samtu after Delitzsch; HALOT proposes red carnelian; DCH retains onyx; TWOT, NIDOTTE, and TDOT treat it simply as an unidentified precious stone. Because the presumed root shm is unattested in Hebrew, the older Gesenius tradition reconstructed a sense "to blanch" and inferred a pale green stone, that is, beryl, a reading corroborated by Targum Onkelos (burla), medieval commentators such as Kimhi, and later the Academy of the Hebrew Language, which codified aquamarine. The Akkadian samtu etymology has been undercut by Ephraim Ayil (2024), who assigns samtu to Hebrew odem, carnelian, and treats shoham separately, arguing on comparative Arabic and Egyptian grounds for chalcedony onyx. Versional evidence is now generally read as evidence of ignorance rather than identity: the Septuagint renders the word with prasinos, smaragdos, beryllion, sardion, and onyx, and simply transliterates it (soom) at 1 Chronicles 29:2, while Josephus describes the vestments twice, transposes the stones of the fourth row between his two accounts, and identifies the shoulder stones as sardonyx. Harrell (2011) and Harrell, Hoffmeier, and Williams (2017) reframe the question archaeologically and mineralogically, asking which stones were actually worked and seal-engraved in the Levant, Egypt, and Mesopotamia before the Hellenistic period; on that test beryl, emerald, diamond, sapphire, topaz, and Greco-Roman onyx are largely anachronistic, while green feldspar (amazonite, mined at Gebel Migif and proposed already by Petrie in 1902), malachite, green jasper or chalcedony, and serpentinite emerge as the realistic candidates. Durham and Houtman both concede that the breastpiece terms cannot be translated with any accuracy, and Ayil observes that emery, the hardest abrasive available to ancient engravers, sets an upper bound on the hardness of any stone they could have worked.

Where scholars disagree about shoham

Where the name came from, and whether it was borrowed from Akkadian.

  • minorityThe word is a loan from Akkadian samtu, the standard Mesopotamian term for carnelian, built on samu "red", which would make the stone a red one.; BDB, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (1906), s.v. shoham; HALOT (Brill, 1994-2000), s.v. shoham
  • contestedAkkadian samtu corresponds instead to Hebrew odem, so it lends no support to reading this word as carnelian; the name is better explained from Arabic and Egyptian evidence for banded chalcedony.; Ephraim S. Ayil, Identifying the Stones of Classical Hebrew: A Modern Philological Approach (Brill, 2024), chs. 3 and 13
  • minorityThe name derives from an otherwise unattested root meaning something like "to blanch", pointing to a pale or pale green stone; since the root occurs nowhere else, this remains a reconstruction rather than a demonstrated derivation.; Wilhelm Gesenius, Hebraisches und Aramaisches Handworterbuch uber das Alte Testament, s.v. shoham
In-depth research

This is a research paper, so it may be hard to read without scholarly background. It is useful if you want to dig even deeper into this word.

Sources

  • James A. Harrell, James K. Hoffmeier, and Kenton F. Williams, "Hebrew Gemstones in the Old Testament," Bulletin for Biblical Research 27.1 (2017): 1-52article
  • Ephraim S. Ayil, Identifying the Stones of Classical Hebrew: A Modern Philological Approach (Brill, 2024)monograph
  • James A. Harrell, "Old Testament Gemstones," Bulletin for Biblical Research 21 (2011)article
  • BDB, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (1906), s.v. shohamlexicon
  • HALOT (Brill, 1994-2000), s.v. shohamlexicon
  • David J. A. Clines, ed., Dictionary of Classical Hebrew (Sheffield Phoenix), s.v. shohamlexicon
  • William H. C. Propp, Exodus 19-40 (Anchor Yale Bible 2A; Doubleday, 2006)commentary
  • Cornelis Houtman, Exodus (Historical Commentary on the Old Testament; Peeters)commentary
  • Paul V. Mankowski, Akkadian Loanwords in Biblical Hebrew (Harvard Semitic Studies 47; Eisenbrauns, 2000)monograph
  • Benjamin J. Noonan, Non-Semitic Loanwords in the Hebrew Bible (Eisenbrauns, 2019)monograph

All attested forms of שֹׁהַם

m s absolute

שֹׁהַם, שֹּׁהַם

Exo 25:7, Exo 28:9, Exo 28:20, Exo 35:9, Exo 39:13, 1Ch 29:2, Job 28:16, Ezk 28:13