Encyclopaedia Biblica/Gideoni-Goshen

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
Encyclopaedia Biblica
Thomas Kelly Cheyne and John Sutherland Black
see Encyclopaedia Biblica for other articles, typographic issues, links to PDF copies, and public domain status



COJTU ; r^AecoNtell [BAFL]), the father of ABIDAN \_q.v.~\, Nu. In (peA- [B]) 222 7 60 ( r A [F], r^AicoNei [B]) 6 5 (peAe- [F]) 10 24 .


(DJ;-|3 ; peAAN [B], [Pesh. ], ultra [? Vg.]), apparently the limit of the pursuit of Benjamin by Israel (Judg. 2045).

Such a place-name is in the abstract possible, but there is no mention of it elsewhere ; hence the guesses Gilead, Gibeon. The text has a strong appearance of corruptness.


i. RV VULTURE (raham DPP, and rdhdmdh HEP!"! [see Dr. Dt. , ad loc. 1 ; the name is derived from the care it bestows on its young, cp Di. Lev. , ad loc.), an unclean bird (Lev. 11 18, KVKVOS [BAFL], Dt. 14i 7 t, Trop<j>vpluv [BL, om. AF 2 ]) identified as the Neophron percnopterus, the white scavenger, or Egyptian or Pharaoh s vulture, belonging to the Vulturidae.

The Neophron percnopterus feeds on offal and the vilest forms of refuse, but does good service to man as a scavenger. Its nests, of sticks and rubbish, are built on rocks, trees, or buildings, often in the suburbs of towns, and are not so inacces sible as is the case with many of its congeners. Whilst they are with the Aarab [Arabs], says Doughty, they lie wheeling upon the wing all day, stooping and hovering at little height above the menzil [camp] (Ar. Des. 1393). Both in Arabia and in Palestine it is a migratory bird, returning from the S. in the spring, and is usually found in pairs. In Egypt the vulture was the sacred symbol of Nekhabit, the goddess of the South (Maspero, Dawn of Civ. 102).

2. ptres, o-is, Lev. 11 13 Dt. 14 12 RV, AV OSSIFRAGE (q.v. ). A. E. S.


For nrUID, minhah, TO-DD, tfrumah, a.vaSi\^a. or apd0f/i<x (Lk. SlsAV), and Siapov, see SACRIFICE; for DKbD masetk, see TAXATION AND TRIBUTE ; for GIFTS, SPIRITUAL (xa/jio-^ara), see SPIRITUAL GIFTS.


(PITS, and [i K.] fim ; v /fV3 to burst forth ).

1. A spring near Jerusalem (i K. 1 333845). From 2 Ch. 3230 8814 it appears that it was to the E. of the city, and that Hezekiah s aqueduct diverted its waters. All our data point to the Virgin s Fountain (see EN- ROGEL, SHILOAH).

I K. 1333845 y[ e ]oi/ [BAL], 2Ch.32 3 o (7[e]iU)X [B], -y[ e ]iooi [AL], 33 14 yiov [B], VOTOV [Ba.bA], yeiwK [L].

2. One of the four rivers of PARADISE [y.v.], Gen. 2 13 (yriuv [ADE], 71. [L]).

3. The Nile, Jer.2:18 <S B *** Q (y^w ; Heb. lintr [<riw/>, Q" -], SHIHOR [i.]), Ecclus. 24 27 RV, AV GEON (yywv [BXA]), and, by crit. emend. Job 40 23^ (see JORDAN, 2 (3)), where read though Gihon overflow. This use of Gihon implies the belief of a later age that the Cush of Gen. 2 13 was the African Ethiopia.


( V73), the son of a priest, a musician in the procession at the dedication of the wall (see EZRA ii. , ), Neh. 12 3 6( r eAu>A<M [K c - an -L], om. BK*A).

1 The difficulty found by critics in Is. 10 26 arises probably from an error in the text (see OKEB AND ZEEB).

2 [It is possible that represents the word by iropfyvpiiav in both passages, for in Lev. 11 18 this word and KVKVOS may have been misplaced.]


(lOH VI, i S. 31 1 8 2 S. 16, peBoye [A], but 3 in || i Ch. lOi, peABoyG [A], 8 ; Op- peABoye [BAL], so Jos. Ant. vi. 14a, etc.; MONS GELBOUE), more rarely GlLBOA ( 73H, rS. 284 2 S. 21 12) ; once, corruptly, MOUNTAINS IN GILBOA ( 33 HPI, 2 S. 1 21 ; cp i S. 31 8 ; T <\ ORH r- t BA ])-

1. The name.[edit]

The name Gilboa, which occurs in MT only in the life of Saul, but should most probably be restored in Judg 7:3 ( Gideon )- and possibly in i K. 20:27 (Benhadad, see below 3 [>]). has no obvious meaning. The early guesses in the Onomasticon (OS 8027 180 53 189 95) are valueless, and the modern explanation a bubbling fountain (see Ges. Lex. < 8 ) is no better. Transposition, however, so often accounts for otherwise inexplicable words (including names) that we may conjecture the name Gilboa, or rather Haggilboa (with the article), to be a corruption (probably designed] of Gibeath Habbaal (Vjan nyn^), hill of the Baal ; cp K.IRJATH-JEAKIM, i. The corruption, if designed, was of course early ; @ knows only Gilboa, and the same name was preserved in the time of Eusebius and Jerome (OS 247 81 129 14) in that of the large village called Gelbus (Gelbu = Gelboe) in the mountains distant 6 R. m. from Scythopolis. At the present day there is a small village called Jelbon, SW. of that other village, called Faku , which has given its name to the mountain range presently to be described, and is very naturally supposed to represent also the old name Gilboa.

2. Geographical meaning.[edit]

What then does the geographical term Mount Gilboa designate? Gilboa (or Haggilboa, the Gilboa ), if the name has been rightly accounted for, belonged originally to one of the elevations in the Gilboa ridge, probably to the highest (Sheikh Burkan), not to the ridge itself. The mountain of Gilboa, however, is a collective term for the entire mountain mass now known as Jebel Faku , which may be best described as a horn-like projection from the hills bounding the plain upon the S. , which first curves round towards the W. for more than three miles, and then runs towards the NW. for five miles further, straight out into the level ground like a peninsula. The greatest height is towards the E. [Sheikh Burkan, 1696 feet above the sea], where the curve merges in the straight line, and where the range looks down upon the valley of the Jordan and the Acropolis of Bethshan, as it starts abruptly from the plain three miles from the foot of the mountains. At the southern commencement of the curve is the village of Jelbon. . . . Three miles NW. of the highest peak, where the peninsula of hills is already well out into the plain, is a second peak, some 1400 feet in height, crowned by the tolerably prosperous- looking village of el-Mezar. Still farther to the NW. are two much lower peaks, between which lies the miserable village of Nuris. NW. again from these peaks, for two miles or a little less, the range falls down into a broken and irregular tableland, narrowing and becoming lower as it goes down into the plain, and bounded by steep, but nowhere inaccessible, stony slopes. The ridge ends in three fingers, as they may be called the two southern ones mere narrow spurs, the northern, which is the true termination of the ridge, somewhat above a mile in breadth. Across this blunt end of the whole peninsula runs the valley which separ ates it from the broad, flat mound, on which Jezreel was built (Miller, Less than the Least of all Lands, 169-170 ['88]).

The ridge of Gilboa, which is the southern boundary or rampart of the Vale of Jezreel, is of bleak and bare aspect, except on the S. side, where it is used as arable and pasture land. Probably, however, it was once wooded ; one might fairly contend that when 28. 1 21 was written (see JASHER, BOOK OF, 2) the ridge was not so conspicuously bare as it is at present. The poet s aim is not to account for an existing pheno menon ; he feels too deeply for that. Gilboa has, at least in parts, its clothing of grass and trees ; he would have Gilboa compelled to sympathise with the mourning Israelites.

3. The 'Gilboa' of Judg. 7:1 and 1 Sam. 28:4 etc.[edit]

We have next to ask, Where are the scenes of the two great events certainly connected with Mount Gilboa to be placed ? the answer can best be given by quoting the two passages which describe the respective encampments of Gideon and Saul,

(a) Gideon and all the warlike force (DV.T TS) that was with him encamped by (or at) the fountain of Harod, while the camp of Midian was to the N. of them, beneath Mount Gilboa, in the Vale (Judg. 7i, emended text; see HAKOD, WELL OF, i ). This was where Gideon collected his force to meet the hordes from the other side of the Jordan. The expression by the fountain of Harod is loose. Gideon s men were separated from the foun tain by a steep and rugged slope ; but they had the command of the fountain. It is on the plain, but so close beneath the hill, so encompassed by rocks, that a small detachment could secure it (Miller, op. cit. 178). A reference to the fountain made it at once plain whereabouts Gideon s force was posted. To have encamped beside Ain Jalud would have been unnatural for mountaineers like the Israelites.

(b) At a later time, we read, the Philistines gathered together all their battalions to Aphek, while the Israelites were encamped by the fountain of Harod which is in Jezreel ( i S. 29 1 , emended text ; see HAROU, WELL OF, 2); or, as another account says, The Philistines mustered, and came to Shunem, and Saul mustered all Israel, and they encamped on Gilboa (i S. 284). We are not to infer that Aphek and Shunem were close together. 1 Aphek was in the N. of the plain of Sharon ; the two statements quoted come from different hands. They are, however, easily reconcilable. The mustering at Aphek was swiftly followed by the arrival of the Philistines at Shunem ; the Israelites ex pected this, and had no occasion to change their posi tion. Soon, however, the Philistines must have found that the} could not attack Saul s position from Shunem ; the Nahr Jalud has too deep a channel, and the ascent from the lakelet below (see HAROD) to the broken plateau above is too steep to permit a hostile attack on warriors drawn up above. An attack would be per fectly feasible, however, if the Philistines went up the far easier slopes and wadies to the S. , which lead to open ground about the village of Nuris, and directly above the Ain Jalud. 2 Thus there is a clear parallelism between the position of the Midianites and that of the Philistines, and between that of Gideon and that of Saul.

Dean Stanley has given a picturesque account of the battle of Gilboa (Jewish Church, 225^; cp Sinai and Pal. 345). According to him, the position occupied by Saul was on the rise of Mount Gilboa, hard by the "spring of Jezreel," the Israelites as usual keeping to the heights, whilst their enemies clung to the plain. The objections to this, however, drawn from close observation of the ground, are very strong.* The chariots of the Philistines could not have pursued the Israelites up that steep and rugged slope. The fighting between Saul and the Philistines must have occurred on the southern slopes of Gilboa.

(c) One more event may perhaps be assigned to this mountain-region viz. , the defeat of Benhadad, king of Syria, by Ahab.

RV, following the received text, states that at the return of the year Benhadad mustered the Syrians, and went up to Aphek, to fight against Israel. And the children of Israel were mustered, and were victualled, and went against them (i K. 2026^C). And were victualled, however, must be wrong; we require, instead, a statement of the mustering-place of the Israelites. 1^3^3^ should perhaps be J737;!;!, in Gilboa ; the error was obviously produced by the following word la^ i ( and went ). This is confirmed by v. yd>, where we read in RV that Ben- hadad fled, and came into the city, into an inner chamber, a rendering which is violently extracted from an obviously cor rupt text. Klo. reads "hns 1\H J V Sy N3IV], . . . and hid himself by the fountain of Harod in Harod, or "I"iri3 J J/n 7J7, "by the fountain in Harod. The difficulty lies in the distance between Aphek in the N. of Sharon (see APHEK, 3 [6]), which is surely meant here (not el- Afuleh), and Mount Gilboa ; but the textual suggestions are extremely plausible, and a mustering of the Philistines at the same Aphek preceded their final attack upon Saul by the southern slopes of Gilboa. Cp, however (for the whole subject of this article), SAUL. T. K. C.

1 Prof. G. A. Smith formerly held that Aphek was somewhere near Jezreel (cp H. P. Smith, Sam. 244) ; now, however, he has come over to the view advocated by WRS (APHEK, 3 (/>), supr. col. 192) that the Aphek in Sharon is that intended (PEFQ, 1895, p. 252).

-i GASm. HG 403 ; cp Miller, Less than the Least of all Lands, 175, i&of.

3 It is inaccurate, however, to represent Stanley as sayins that the battle was on the plain (Miller, 175 ; GASm. 403). See passages referred to above.


Hlta, and, with thearticle, "titan ; r< \A A &A [BAL] 1 ), a trans- Jordanic region frequently referred to.

1. Name.[edit]

The name, which can be explained from the Arabic jal ad, hard, rough, is at first sight not very appropriate, the hills and dales of Gilead being full of natural beauty, and well adapted for cattle (cp Nu. 32 1) and for the flocks of goats which are still fed there (cp Cant. 4 1 ; and see HAIR, i). Upon the whole, Gilead is better provided with water and woodland than any part of W. Palestine. Hence Merrill (Hastings, DD 21746) seems inclined to doubt the correctness of the explanation. The name hard, rough is, however, at once seen to be appropriate when we study the geological formation of the country. The base slopes of the mountain chain of Moab and Gilead consist of sandstone.

2. Geological formation.[edit]

This is covered in part by the more recent white marls, which form the curious peaks of the foothills immediately above the Jordan valley ; but reaches above them to an elevation of 1000 ft. above the Mediterranean on the S., and forms the bed of the Bukei basin, farther E. and 1000 ft. higher. Above this lies the hard, impervious Dolomitic limestone, which appears in the rugged gray hills round the Jabbok, and in Jebel Ajlun, rising on an average 1500 ft. above the sandstone, and forming the bed of the numerous springs. It also dips towards the Jordan valley; and the water from the surface of the plateau, sinking down to the surface of this formation, bursts out of the hill slopes on the W. in perennial brooks. It was from the ruggedness of this hard limestone that Gilead obtained its name. Above this again is the white chalk of the desert plateau, the same found in Samaria and Lower Galilee, with bands of flint or chert in contorted layers or strewn in pebbles on the surface. Where this formation is deep the country is bare and arid, supplied by cisterns and deep wells. Thus the plateau becomes desert, while the hill-slopes abound in streams and springs (Conder, in Smith, >fi) i ngj a ).

3. Hebrew usage.[edit]

The plateau here spoken of is that extensive highland which extends eastward to the Euphrates, where nothing but desert shrubs will grow. On the edge of this region, and rising at most 500 ft. above it, are the long mountain-ranges which from their geological formation deserve the name of Gilead. Rocky as they may be, the higher slopes are covered with pine-trees (Pinus carica, Don. , a species resembling the Aleppo pine), and, as Conder says, mastic-bushes, 2 whilst lower down are beautiful woods of oak trees and carob trees, form ing altogether, with the addition of numerous streams and springs, the most perfect sylvan scenery in Palestine. The wood of Rephaim (so read for wood of Ephraim in 2 S. 186) is still represented by the thick groves of the Jebel Ajlun, with which the woods of es- Salt in S. Gilead alone can compete. Far below the Gilead range lies the Jordan Valley, which is reached by a very steep descent, and a natural division in the range is formed by the river Zerka (Jabbok). The

Hebrew writers, whether they were conscious of the original meaning of Gilead or not, were well aware that the name had properly no narrow or merely local refer- ence. They apply it, when they speak most deliberately, to the whole mountain range between the Yarmuk on the N. and the Arnon on the S. , which was cut into two parts by the great trench of the Zerka or Jabbok (cp Dt. 812 Josh. 1^25 1825). The two parts together are some times called all Gilead (Dt. Sio 1 2 K. 1033), and the general term Gilead is applied to those districts on the E. of the Jordan which were in Israelitish occupation (Nu. 322 9 Josh. 22 9 Judg. 108 20 1 28. 246 i K. 4 19 Am. 1 3 13) ; but also to the northern, or to the southern part alone (see for the one, Dt. 36 815^ Josh. 17 1 5, and for the other, Nu. 32 1 Josh. 1825). The elasticity of the term is strikingly shown by the fact that in Dt. 34 1 i Mace. Szoff. Gilead even includes the region N. of the Jabbok.

1 [In <S occur the following forms : Judg. 104 yaaaS [B*], 108 yaA.aaKTis [AL], 11 5 itrpaijA. [A], I K. 4 13 yaAaafl [B], yaAaait njs [LI, 4 19 ya.5 [L], I Ch. 5 16 yaAaaju. [B], Hos. 12 1 1 (12) yaAyotAois [QVsemel], Am. 1 13 yaAaaSWiTT)? [BAQ*r], -iTiAtov {Qa vicl.], z Mace. 69 yoAaaKrts (A).]

2 Smith s Z>j9(2) 1 1191 ; see also Conder, Heth and Moab, 188. See, however, Post, cited sup. col. 465, with reference to the Balm of Gilead.

4. Gen. 31:17-54.[edit]

We have seen that the term Gilead belongs of right to a large mountainous district, not to a particular mountain. It would be a mistake to infer the contrary from the interesting composite narrative in Gen. 31 17-54. It is true that what is said of Jacob and Laban in v. 25 2 and of Jacob in v. 54 3 implies that a particular mountain, known to the respective writers of these passages, was sometimes called in a special sense ny?jn in, the mountain of (the) Gilead ; but this specialisation merely indicates that the mountain referred to was a conspicuous one in some part of the Gilead range. That the two narrators J and E meant the same part of the Gilead-range can hardly be maintained. They both differ from the original story (see GALEED, i) ; they also differ from one another. When Jacob uttered the fine prayer in 32 g ff. (J) he must have been near some great ford of the Jordan. Probably he was at Succoth, not very far from the ford ecl-Damieh, for the notice in Gen. 8817 has surely been misplaced by the editor of JE, and in J s narrative stood before 324 [s]. 4 It is possible that the Jebel Osha , the highest point in the Jebel Jil ad (N. of es-Salt, and N. of the Zerka) is J s Gilead mountain. E, however, who makes Jacob go, after parting with Laban, to MAHANAIM (q.v. ), presumably localises the meeting of Jacob and Laban near some high point of the Jebel Ajlun. One might think of the Jebel Kafkafa (3430 ft. ) which is to the NE. of Suf and Jerash, close to the great pilgrim road from Damascus to Mecca ; but Suf itself (2720 ft. ) has great claims on our consideration. This is one of the sites where dolmens are to be found. 5 It is probable that by the pillar and the heap of Gen. 31 45 f. the narrators meant some of those primitive stone monu ments, which are specially abundant on the E. of the Jordan.

According to the theory here presented, there should also be such a monument on Jebel Osha . All that we find is a shrine (perhaps 300 years old) containing a long, open trough, said to have been the tomb of Hosea, beside which the Bedouins kill sheep in honour of the prophet. 6 The trough, however, may have been pre ceded by a cairn ; sepulchral cairns are still common among the Arabs, and Absalom's cairn (28.1817) is familiar to readers of the OT. The narrative in Gen. is directed against the attempts of the Aramaeans to possess themselves of Gilead ; the standing-stone (masseba) on E s mountain and the cairn on J s were represented by E and J respectively as having been erected, the former by Laban, the latter by Jacob, as sacred boundary-stones. The masseba, by a slight distortion, was called the Mispah to indicate that Yahwe would keep watch (and interpose) between Laban and Jacob, when occasion for this arose 1 (v. 49). We may certainly infer from this that the place referred to by E was one of those called Mizpah. Possibly it was Ramath-ham-mispeh, which in Josh. 1826 - is described as the N. limit of the territory of Gad, and is elsewhere called ham-mispa (see MIZPAH, 2). The cairn also received a name; it was called Gal'ed i.e. , Heap of Witness, implying a playful etymology of the name Gilead.

1 Gilead is here distinguished both from Bashan and from the tableland of Moab.

2 Jacob is here said (by J) to have pitched his tent on the mountain [of . . .], Laban on the mountain of (the) Gilead.

3 Jacob sacrifices on the mountain ; v. 21 shows that some part of the Gilead range is meant. E is the writer.

4 It was followed probably by a mention of Jacob s crossing of the labbok. Cp Holzinger, ad loc.

5 Conder, Hetk and Moab, z^f.

6 Baed. Pal.P] 163^ ; cp Conder, op. cit. 182. A large tree stands beside the shrine which is one out of the very few sacred domes E. of Jordan.

5. Specialisation of Gilead.[edit]

There is yet another conceivable inference from this singular narrative (when explained as above), against which a caution may be desirable. It might be supposed that when E wrote, the territory known as Gilead began at the Jebel 'Ajlun. The truth is that the Jebel 'Ajlun is the representative of the whole land of Gilead. So at least it must appear to those who approach Gilead from Damascus, and see, looming up beyond the plain of Bashan, the summits of the Jebel Ajlun. On the other hand, to those who come from Moab, the natural representative of Gilead will be the first lofty range to the N. of the plateau of Heshbon i.e., the Jebel Jif ad. How this latter name fixed itself just here is an obscure problem : why is the Yahwist s Gilead mountain preferred to the Elohist s? Problems of this kind, however, are numerous and baffling. Why, for instance, js the highest mountain in this range the Jebel Osha named after the prophet Hosea? It is true, Hosea, according to the MT, speaks of a city of Gilead in 68 (cp 12 n), and has been thought to refer here to some locality in the Jebel Jil ad (see, however, 2). Can this have been known, however, to those who first used the Arabic name ? Surely Hosea has displaced Joshua. Who, then, pre ceded Joshua ? The truth is hidden from us.

6. Called Gerash?[edit]

It would seem as if this specialization of the term Gilead had already occurred by the time of Eusebius and Jerome (see 2) ; and it should also be noticed that 5 m. N. of es-Salt there is a ruin known as Jal'ud, 3 perhaps the Gilead of the Onomasticon. Not impossibly, too, another seemingly recent place-name preserves the memory of a name of Gilead, which though but slightly attested, may be genuinely ancient. The place-name referred to is Gerasa (the famous city of the Decapolis of Peraea), now called Jerash. * According to Neubauer, 5 the Midrash (Samuel, 13) affirms the identity of Gerash and Gilead ; and Sir G. Grove has noticed that the Arabic version of Josh. 208 21 38 [36] gives Ramat al-Jaras for MT s Ramoth in Gilead, and that the Jewish traveller Parchi (circa 1315 A.D. ) also says, Gilead is at present Jerash. 6 That the name Gerasa is derived from the yepovres, or veterans, of Alexander the Great is of course absurd. It reminds us so much of Girzites and Girgashites that one is tempted to sus pect that a tribe called Girzim or Girshim (cp GIRGASH ITES) may have dwelt in Gilead in pre-Israelitish times (cp 2 S. 2g, where Ishbaal reigns over Gilead and over the Girshite ); see GIRZITES. Gerash, like Gilead, may have obtained a specialized reference to a town and a district later ; hence Yakut speaks of the Jerash mountain district (Jebel Jarash), as well as of the ruined city of that name.

1 Verse 49, which, as it stands, is obviously imperfect, must be supplemented from v. 45. Read with Ball, And the pillar which he set up he called " the Mispah," for he said, etc.

2 The two names next mentioned are Betonim (rather Botnim) and MAHANAIM [q.v.}.

3 This name is not to be confounded with Jalud, the name of a river which starts from the Ain Jalud under GILBOA [q.v., 3]. This Jalud is also pronounced Jdlfit, which is the Ar. form of Goliath. Goliath impressed the Moslem mind. Mokaddasi (nth cent. A.D.) calls the citadel of Amman the castle of Goliath.

4 According to Guthe (MDPV, 98, 57^) Jerash, not Jerash, is the popular pronunciation.

Geogr. du Tahn. 250.

6 Zunz, quoted by Grove (Smith, DBM 2 1003). He also states that the Jews derived Gerash from Yegar-sahadutha (Gen. 31 47).

7. Ancient sites.[edit]

If the name of Gerasa is rightly thus accounted for, it still remains to determine what ancient city, if any, once stood upon its site. It is difficult sites indeed to believe that the founders of that magnificent city, the ruins of which still fascinate us, placed it upon a site unconsecrated by the sanctuaries of the past. Both Ramoth-Gilead and Mahanaim have been thought of ; but we have reasons sufficient for accepting neither view. Just an hour W. of Jerash is the wretched but well-situated village of Reimun (Ewald's Ramoth-Gilead), divided by a ridge from Suf (Mizpah?). Turning to the W. , in two hours the traveller comes to Ajlun (Mahanaim ?), nestling at the bifurcation of the valleys, in its gardens and vine yards, with the great castle already spoken of in the neighbourhood ; on either hand are the well-clothed heights of the Jebel Ajlun. A descent, a climb, and again a descent bring us to the Wady Yabis (a plausible claimant to the title of the brook Cherith, were it not for the faultiness of the reading CHERITH [g.v. ]), and to an isolated round-topped hill, strewn with ruins (ed- Deir) but these not ancient Robinson s site for Jabesh-Gilead. If we turn to the N. of the same Wady, we come to Miryamin, Merrill s site for the same famous city. About seven miles off is Pella (Fahl), which enjoys perhaps the finest climate, from an agricultural point of view, that can be found in Syria. l The known history of Pella is a short one ; but it may be noted here that, according to Eusebius (HE%$), the Jewish Christians fled, before the destruction of Jerusalem, to Pella.

And what shall one say of Irbid, the capital of the- district of Ajlun? Doubtless this was an ancient Arbela. Was it, then, the BETH-ARBEL of Hos. 10 14? Our answer will probably be in the negative ; but the site is of strategic importance, and the name implies the antiquity of the place. Es-Salt, too, at present the only capital of the Belka, and the only important place in it though not as strikingly placed as Ajlun, must surely have_been always a centre of population, and the lofty Jebel Osha to the north must always have been crowned by an important sanctuary, surely not, however, Penuel. Where the latter place was, it is not easy to say ; SUCCOTH (i), however, is possibly the modern Tell Der Alia. With more confidence we can identify JOG- BEHAH with Jubeihat, and the JABBOK with the blue river, the Zerka. 2

8. OT. References.[edit]

A passing reference is all that can be given to the interesting genealogies of Gilead (Nu. 2629-33 Josh. 17:1-3 I Ch. 7:14-19); see MACHIR, ASRIEL, HEPHER (ii. , 2), and especially ZELOPHEHAD . The last of these names occurs in a mutilated form as Jidlaph in Gen. 22 22 ; it is probablyidenticalwithSalecah. and as Milcah, themother of Jidlaph, is a corruption of Salecah, we see how mechani cally the genealogies were often filled up. Nor can we here gather up the fragmentary notices of the history of Gilead. The country was the eastern bulwark of Palestine, and was the first district to suffer from Syrian and Assyrian invasions. In sacred legend it is dis tinguished by the passage of Jacob and by the residence of JEPHTHAH [y.v.]. The names of Barzillai, David, Ishbaal, Ahab, Elijah (was he really a Tishbite ? see TISHBITE) also will readily occur to the reader as con nected with Gilead. The clansmen of GAD, whose name is almost treated as synonymous with Gilead (e.g. , Judg. 5 17 i S. 13y), had opportunity for learning resource and courage in the mountains and glens of the rugged land. Cp GAD, 2, PERAEA.

1 Le Strange, in Schumacher, Across the Jordan, 272. Pella is the ^nB of Talm. Jer. (Neub. Gtogr. 274) ; cp GASm. HG 292,. n. 2.

2 On the Jabbok of Gen. 32 22, see JABBOK, 2.

[detailed map of GILEAD AND AMMON goes here].


Parentheses indicating articles that refer to the place-names are in certain cases added to non-biblical names having no biblical equivalent. The alphabetical arrangement usually ignores prefixes: abu ( father of), ain ( spring ), arak ( district ), ayu/i ( springs ), bahr ( sea ), beit ( house ), bildd ( country ), jebel ( mt. ), jisr ( bridge ), kal at ( castle ), kanat ( conduit ), karn ( horn ), kasr ( castle ), khirbet ( ruin ), kom ( mound ), makhddet ( ford ), nahr ( river ), rds ( head ), tell ( mound ), umm ( jnother ), wady ( valley ).

Abel-Meholah, 63 Abel-shittim, 64 Abil, Ci Abila, Ci (ABEL-SHITTIM) W. el-Abyad, 63, 4 Adam, 83 Adamah, 83 wady el- Adeimeh, 64 Ajbehat, C3 (JOGBEHAH) Ajlun, B2 (GlLEAD, 2) jebel Ajlun, BC 2 (GILEAD, 7) wady Ajlun, 62, 3 (CHERITH) el- Al, 4 tell der Alia, B3(GILEAD, 7) Amateh, 83 um(ni) el- Amdan, B2 arak el-Amir, 4 Amman, C4 (ABEL-CHERAMIM) wady Amman, 03, 4 Aqueduct, Cr wady el- Arab, Bi (EPHRON, 2) Arbela, Ci Kh. Atuf, A 2 W. el- Aujeh, AB4 Ayun Musa, 64 wady Ayun Musa, 84 (BETH-PEOR)

Batanah, 64 Beisan, A2 Bethabara, 84 Beth-haran, 84 Beth-jeshimoth, 84 Beth-shean, A2 Betonim, 84 W. el-Bireh, Br Bithron, 82 W. el-Buke, A^ el-Buke a, 3 (GILEAD, 2)

Camon, Bi Casphor, Di

ed-Damieh, 83 Dathema, Di ed-Deir, 82 (JABESH, 2) ed-Delhemiyeh, Bi (DALMANUTHA) Der at, Di

Edrel, Di Edun, Cz Elealeh, 4 Mar Elyas, 82 Arak el-Emir, 84 (HYRCANUS) Ephron 2, Ci Eriha, A4

Fahl or Tabakat Fahl, 82 (JABESH) W. Fajjas, Bi j. Faku, A2 kanat Fir aun, BCr (CONDUITS) W. Fasail, A3

Gadara, B1 Gerasa, C2 kasr wady el-Ghafr, Ci (EPHRON) wady el-Ghafr , C i (EPHRON) W. el-Ghuweir, 84 (DEAD SEA) Mt. Gilboa, A2 Mt. Gilead, 83 Gilgal, A4

ain Hajla, 84 makhadet Hajla, 84 jebel Hakart, 3 tell Hammam, 84 W. el-Hammam, 3 Hammath, Bi el-Hammeh, Br Kh. Hamzeh, C^ Hesban, 4 ain Hesban, C4(HESHBON) wady Hesban, 64 (BETH-PEOR) Heshbon, 4 wady el-Himar, 82 el-Hod, B 4 Humcid B2 W. el-Humr, AB3

W. Ibten Ghazal, 63 Irbid, Ci

Jabbok B3 Jabesh, 82 N. Jalud, A i Jal ud, 83 (GILEAD, 2) Jazer, C3 ain Jenneh, C2 Jerash, C2 (DECAPOLIS) W. Jerash, C 2, 3 jebel Jil ad, 83 (GILEAD, 4) Jericho, Crusaders , A4 Jericho of OT, A4 W. el-Jozeleh, AB3 birket Jiljuliyeh, A4 Jogbehah, 03 wady el-Jorfeh, 84

jebel Kafkafa, 2 (GILEAD, 4) Karawa, 83 Kaukab el-Hawa, Bi Kh. el-Kefrein, B4 (ABEL-SHITTIM) tell el-Kefrein, 64 wady el-Kefrein, 84 (ABEL-SHITTIM) W. el- Kelt, A 84 Kerak/Bi ras umm el-Kharrubeh, A3 W. el-Khashneh, Aa Kumeim, Bi

bahr Lut, 04

Mahas C4 Mahne, D W. el-Malih, 82 jebel el-Mastabeh, C 3 W. Meidan, 84 W. el-Mellaha, AB 4 jebel el-Mi rad, 83 Miryamin, 82 Mizpah ?, C2 jisr el-Mujami , Bi W. Mukelik, B 4 el-Muzeirib, Di

Neba, 84 tell Nimrin, 84 (BETHABARA) W. Nimrin, 84

jebel Osha , 83 (GILEAD, 4)

Pella, 82 (JABESH) Philadelphia, 4

kal at er-Rabad, 82 (EPHRON, 2) Rabbath Ammon, 4 tell er-Rameh, 84 beit er-Ras, Ci (DECAPOLIS, 2) Reiniun, Ca (GILEAD, 7) er-Remtheh, Di (DATHEMA) W. er-Retem, 84 er-Rujeb, 83 (ARGOB) wady er-Rujeb, 83 er-Rumman, 3

tell es-Sa'idiyeh, B2 ain es-Sakut, 82 es-Salt, 83 (MAHANAIM) Samakh, Bi es-Samik, C4 khirbet Sar, 4 (GAZER) karn Sartabeh, A 3 Scythopolis, A2 wady Sha'ib, 84 ain esh-Shamsiyeh, 82 Sheri at el-Kebireh, 81-4 Sheri at el-Menadireh, Br (GOLAN) W. esh-Shomer, Bi W. Shubash, A 2 W. es-Sidr, 83 W. abu Sidreh, 83 wady Sir, 04 (JAZER) Kh. Siyaga, 84 Succoth, 83 Suf, C2 (GILEAD, 7 ) tell es-Sultan, A4 Sumiyeh, 04 Kh. es-Sur, 84 ain Suweimeh, 84 khirbet Suweimeh, 84 (BETH-JESHIMOTH) jebel bilad es-Suwet, Di

Tabakat Fahl, 82 bahr Tabarlyeh, Bi et-Taiyibeh, Br wady et-Taiyibeh, Bi W. abu Tara, 84 Taricheas, Bi Tibneh, 82 et-Turra, Ci

Um Kes, Bi

wady Yabis, 82 OABESH) Yajuz, 03 (JAZER) kom Yajuz, C%

Zarethan, A3 beit Zer a, Cq (JAZER) kal at ez-Zerka, 03 nahr ez-Zerkk, BCDs ras umm Zoka, 82 jebel ez-Zurnleh, Dr (BASHAN)

9. Literature.[edit]

Oliphant, Land o) Gilead ( 80) : graphic descriptions ; Conder, Heth and Moab ( 83); Selah Merrill, East of Jordan ( 81); Schumacher, Across the Jordan ( 86), containing A Ride through Ajlun, by Guy Le Strange ; Tristram, Land of Israel; G. A. Smith, HG ; and Gautier, Au dela dit J ourdainC 1 ) ( 96).

2. A city, mentioned perhaps in Judg. 10 17 and (<5 A1 -) 12?; also in Hos. 68 12n [12]. Ewald (on Hos. II. cc. ) thinks of Mizpeh of Gilead (Judg. Hag), which was the seat of an ancient sanctuary (Judg. 11 n Mizpah ). Buhl (Geogr. 262) thinks of Ramoth, or rather Ramath-Gilead ; Hitzig of Jabesh-Gilead ; Budde (on Judg. 10 17) of the site of the modern Jal ud, N. of es-Salt (see i), which may represent the Gilead mentioned by Eusebius and Jerome (OS 24142, 124 30). But Gilead for Mizpeh of Gilead, or the like, is hardly conceivable, and the passages quoted, except the first, prove to be corrupt.

In Judg. 1017 in Gilead simply covers over the narrator s ignorance ; 11 n supplied Mizpah as the place of encampment <>f the Israelites ; that of the Ammonites could_ not be determined (cp Moore s note). In Judg. 127 the text is mutilated; read probably in his city, in Mizpah of Gilead. In Hos. 68 12 ii [12] iyhl should most probably be ^j jj (cp yaAyaAois 12 ii [12] [Q?] for -yaAaaS [2]). No doubt Hosea might have referred to a second sanctuary in Gilead, and Ruben s res toration of 69 is geographically and historically plausible | (cp Che. Exf>., Jan. 97, p. 47 _/T). But the sanctuaries of P.ethel and Gilgal are much more likely to be referred to than the hypothetical sanctuaries of ADAM [q.v., i.] and Gilead. For C1N3 in v. 7 read probably JIN n 33 in Beth-aven, and read v. 8f. thus Gilgal is a city of those that work wickedness, a hill fortress of evildoers (G jPD flj^). And a company of traitors are her priests ; the way of Yahwe they reject ; they are eager to commit crimes OD 2^,1 K3 ~T1 ,TV13 D"i:3 13m Iby nei). In 12 n [12] JIN VM is a corruption of rTIU hi!?!

JIN ; the prefixed CN is a dittographed JIN (Gra.).

T. K. C.


(always with definite article, ?|73n, except Josh. 5 9 and MT of 1223), the name of several localities in the Holy Land. <& usually renders S^JH by the plural TO. ya\ya\a [BAQFL], as in Josephus and i Mace. So in Josh, (except 1223 146 [B], 167; see below, 6), i S. (except 7 16 Thv yaAyoAa [BA], -rr\v yaAyaA [L] ; 1633 -yaAyaA [BA]), 2 S. 2 K. Am. Hos. (except 9 15 yaAyaA [BAQ], 1- i2fi[na] yaAaaS [BAQ*J). The singular 7<iAyaA occurs in Josh. 146 [B], 187 [AL], Judg. 2 i 819 i S. 15 33 (yaA-yaAa [L]), Hos. 9 15 Mi. 6 5 ; yoAyoA [BA] in Dt. 11 30 (but yoAyo. 1 [F], croAyoA [L]). On josh. 12 23 see below, 6.

1. Name.[edit]

The name means literally the circle i.e. , sacred circle of stones, the form now called cromlech by archaeologists. 1 Except in Galilee, such circles are not found W. of Jordan, where they may have been destroyed from the time of Josiah's reformation onwards ; but many ancient specimens are extant in E. Palestine, similar to those of Western Europe, and Arabs still construct stone circles round graves. For a picture of a gilgal see PEFQ, 82, p. 72 ; and for a plan, Survey of E. Pal. n.

1 For an instance of twelve stones by the side of an altar see Ex. 24 4.

2. Joshua's Gilgal.[edit]

i. The first sanctuary and camp of Israel in W. Palestine. The earliest of the documents of which the Book of Joshua is composed (JE) relates that, after crossing Jordan, Joshua erected twelve stones which he had taken from the bed of the river on the W. bank in the Gilgal (4320), and they became (v. 2i/. , probably Dt. ) a monument of the miraculous passage. This account agrees with the meaning of the name. The same document, however (with its unscientific habit of connecting place-names with events of ancient history), derives Gilgal from the reproach rolled away Gallothi, I have rolled from Israel by Joshua when he re-instituted there the rite of CIRCUMCISION (q. v. , 2), that had been in abeyance during the wanderings in the wilder ness (5g). That the place (mpo, probably meaning sacred place, 5 15) was already so called, and was a centre of Canaanite worship, is apparent both from the narrative quoted, and from Judg. 819 (7oX7oX [BAL]), where for quarries read perhaps graven images ; see QUARRIES. The Priestly Writer, who records the celebration of the passover at Gilgal (Josh. 5 10-12), describes the site as at the east end of the territory of Jericho (419).

In the parallel passage in Josephus (Ant. v. 1 4), Gilgal is given as 10 stadia, or a little over a mile from Jericho i.e., not the OT Jericho at Ain es-Sultan, but the NT site on the W. el- Kelt. Eusebius and Jerome (&' 1215 22 243 94) place Galgala 0'; Golgol ( ohywh) 'to the E. of ancient Jericho,','a desert spot 2 R.m. b m Jericho ' ab illiris regionis mortahbus miro cultn habitus. Theodosius (Dc Situ Term Sanctif 1(5, circa 530 A.D.), sets it at i R. m. from the city ; and later Christian records from a little less than i m. to as much as 5. After the eighth century the name was lost till Robinson heard a rumour of it in 1838 (BR 2 287) ; and in 1865 Zschokke (Topog. der IV. Jordansaue, 28) heard Tell-Jeljul applied to a low mound, a little more than a mile E. of modern Jericho, on the N. bank of the Kelt, with a heap of stones and remains of a wall. Conder (Tent Work, 203 Jf.~) found the form Jiljiiliyeh applied both to some small mounds and to a tank. An Arab graveyard suggests the traditional sanctity of the spot j and associated with it is a legend, derived from the fall of Jericho. There can be little doubt that, whether the name is due to a continuous tradition (which is probable, for Jos. [Ant. v. 14] could hardly have hit on the site otherwise), or is a Christian revival of the fourth century, the neighbourhood, and perhaps the s ery site, is that of the ancient sanctuary and camp of Israel. It should be said that the modern name is not altogether beyond suspicion, Zschokke having asked for it, in various forms, before it was given back to him by the natives (op. cit. 28). Clermont-Ganneau (Arch. Res. 2 37) was assured that the name Jiljuliyeh was only used by the Franks. His excavations revealed nothing decisive, and he says the matter still seems to me extremely doubtful.

The ark and the headquarters of the host remained here during Joshua s invasion of the hill-country, to which more than five roads opened conveniently from Gilgal, 96 106/ois (om. B*A ; 70X70X0, [B b? c? m K-L]) 43 (om. BA ; 70X70X0 [L]) ; there is little reason for supplying another Gilgal for these passages (see below, 5), some of which are perhaps mere glosses (146, Judg. 2 1 all JE or Dt. ). The place of Gilgal in the reverence of the nation was secured for centuries. Even if it were not the sanctuary to which Samuel went yearly in circuit (i S. 7 16 7oX7oX [L], see below, 4) it was certainly that to which he sent Saul before him (108 70X005 [B]), at which Saul was anointed king (11 14 /. ), offered the hasty sacrifices which estranged the prophet, brought to Yahwe the devoted spoil, the hcrem (see BAN, 2 f.) of the Amalekite campaign, and by his refusal to slaughter Agag lost his kingdom (1512-35). (The narratives here are doublets : see W. R. Smith, OTJC& 135 ft ; see SAMUEL ii. ). Under Saul as under Joshua the religious attractions of Gilgal were supported by its military advantages. The Philistines had overrun the central range to the W. ; there was no other place in the land at which Israel could be rallied to attack them ; and Jordan and Gilead lay behind for a refuge (1847). In the following reign Judah assembled at Gilgal to meet David when he came back over Jordan (28. 19 15 [16] 40 [41]) after his flight, and to escort him to the capital.

3. The famous sanctuary?[edit]

At the disruption of the kingdom, Gilgal fell with the rest of the Jordan valley to N. Israel ; but we have now a problem to decide ; whether the famous N. sanctuary of Gilgal was the Gilgal of this site by Jericho, or another Gilgal, which lay on the central range to the N. of Bethel, and was also a place sacred to Yahwe (see 4), or still another which lay near Shechem (see 5). Amos and Hosea, who frequently speak of the great national sanctuary, give us no hint as to where it lay : Am. 44 come to Bethel and transgress at Gilgal multiply transgression ; 5s seek not Bethel, nor come to Gilgal, for Gilgal shall taste the gall of exile (so one must clumsily render the prophet s play upon words hag-gilgal galoh yigleh. ; Hos. 4 15 come not to Gilgal and go not up to Beth-aven ; 9 15 all their evil is in Gilgal, for there I hated them ... I will drive them out of mine house ; 12 n [12] in Gilgal they sacrifice bullocks or to bullocks or (as We. ) to demons.

Apropos of this last verse it is interesting that the Christian fathers should have read Gilgal, sometimes for Bethel, sometimes for Dan, as one of the two places where Jeroboam set up his golden calf (Cyril, Coinin. in J/oseatu, 5 ; [I seud.-] Epiph. De Vit. Profit. 237 ; Ckron. Pose. 161).

Thus, then, we find Gilgal in the eighth century oqual in national regard with Bethel ; where the people zealously worship Yahwe, but do so under heathen fashion with impure rites that provoke his wrath. In an age passionately devoted to the sacred scenes of antiquity, such a kind of sanctuary might well be that ancient Gilgal (now belonging to N. Israel) at which, it was said, the ark had found its first rest in the land, circumcision had been restored, the first king had been anointed, and David himself had been reinstated in the affection of Judah. Beyond these general con siderations, however, there is no proof to offer unless it be found in the facts that the prophets never speak of going up to Gilgal as they do to Bethel, and that the Gilgal known to the writer of Micah6s appears to be the Gilgal on Jordan. We turn now to the rival Gilgals in the hill-country of Ephraim.

4. Gilgal by Bethel?[edit]

2. As early as the time of Eusebius there were 1 certain who suspected a second Gilgal close to Bethel (OS s v 7 aX y aXa )- This suspicion aroused by the list of Samuel's circuit (i S. 7 16) Bethel, Gilgal, Mizpah of which Bethel and Mizpah are both on the central range, and strengthened by the prophets close association of Bethel and Gilgal, in regard to the latter of which, as we have seen, they never use the expression go down, which would have been almost inevitable in the case of a site in the Jordan valley, is raised almost to the pitch of conviction by the narrative of Elijah's last journey (2 K. 2i-8 ; v. i ie/>etx w [ B *]- 7a\7a\a [B abm -AL]). The order given is Gilgal, Bethel, Jericho (<5 B * for Gilgal reads Jericho, but evidently by error ; for variants of B have ya\ya\uv), and it is said (v. 2) that from Gilgal Elijah and Elisha went down to Bethel." 2 This implies a Gilgal on the central range, with at least an apparent descent on Bethel. Such an one has been found in Jiljiliyeh, about 7 m. N. of Bethel, and z\ m. W. of the present high road, between Bethel and Shechem and Samaria. It is now a large village on the summit of a commanding hill 2441 feet above the sea. This is lower than Bethel, which is 2890 feet, but the hill is so bold and isolated that the phrase to go down to Bethel is quite appropriate. The view is one of the grandest in Palestine, from the sea to the hills of Gilead and as far N. as Hermon itself (Robinson, who seems to have been the first traveller to visit it, BR 3 81 ; cp PF.FM Izgo, map, sheet xiv. ). This Gilgal, like Jericho, had its school of the prophets. That it was the same as the Gilgal of 2 K. 4 38 (7a\7a\a [BAL]), Elisha s residence, seems implied by the connection of the latter (v. 42) with BAAL-SHALISHA [q.v.~\, another Samaritan town, also on the western watershed (see further Buhl, Geogr. 171 ; and cp GOURDS, WILD, ad fin.)

If all these facts be held to justify the existence of a sanctuary and prophetic centre at Jiljiliyeh in Elisha s day, then a very strong presumption is established in favour of this being also the Gilgal famous in the time of Amos and Hosea. Moreover Jiljiliyeh is not far from Shiloh [q.v.~\, and the very curious passage in (Pseudo-) Epiphanius quoted above ( 3), which identifies Gilgal as the shrine of the golden calf, adds TJ Iv trrjXuv i. e. , Shiloh. It would go far to explain the disappearance from Israel s history of so ancient a sanctuary as Shiloh, if we could believe that its sanctity had been absorbed by that of the neighbouring Gilgal, which in such a case would have strengthened its claim to be the rival of Bethel. That, however, is only a guess : and the claims of this Samaritan Jiljiliyeh are as inconclusive as those of the Jordan Gilgal. The case between them must still be regarded as open ; nor is it confined to them. There is a third Gilgal which also has strong claims to be regarded as the popular Israelite sanctuary of the eighth century.

1 (B, however, reads simply Ji\dfv or fp\ovra.i [L] (N13) i cp- Schlatter, Zur Topog. 249.

2 In this connection it is interesting that the place-name Ashkaf (i.e., cliffs of) Jiljal occurs at RammOn 3J in. E. of Bethel (PEP Name Lists, p. 225, sheet xiv.).

6. A Gilgal by Gerizim ?[edit]

Dt. ll:10: [Ebal and Gerizim] . . . are they not beyond Jordan, to the west of the road of the sunset, in the land of the Canaanites, who dwell in the Arabah, over against Gilgal, beside the terebinth of Moreh ? As punctuated by the Massoretes the text means that it is Ebal and Gerizim that are opposite Gilgal. Taking the latter to be Gilgal by Jericho, certain Rabbis, followed by Eusebius, Jerome, and a constant Christian tradition, transferred Ebal and Gerizim to the hills immediately behind Jericho. Recent commentators have preferred to alter the punctuation, and taking over against Gilgal as describing the home of the Canaanites in the Arabah, have thought to secure both good grammar and accurate geography (see Driver, ad loc. ). Dillmann, however, preserving the Massoretic punctuation, sup posed some Gilgal near Shechem ; and his hypothesis has been justified by the discovery of a modern place named Juleijil, on the plain of Makhna, i m. E. of the foot of Mt. Gerizim, z\ m. SE. of Shechem and i m. SW. of Salim (PEFM 2238). This suits the data of the passage. The terebinth of Moreh, the Revealer, takes us back to Abraham, who built an altar beside it (Gen. 126). The place therefore was an ancient sanctuary, and further rendered sacred to Hebrew hearts by the worship of their great patriarch.

(The only difficulty in Dt. 11 30 is the clause who dwell in the Arabah. It is very possible that this is a later insertion due to one who supposed that the Gilgal mentioned must be that in the Arabah by Jericho.)

If then there was a Gilgal near Gerizim, sanctified by the worship of the patriarchs (for Jacob had been here as well as Abraham, Gen. 33 18), and by the command of Moses to Israel to celebrate there their entry into the Promised Land, this Gilgal has equal claims with the two others we have already described, to be considered as the popular sanctuary of N. Israel in the ninth and eighth centuries.

These claims have been defended in detail by Schlatter (Zur Topogr. it. Gcsch. Paldstinas, 246^) and accepted by Buhl (Pal. 202_/I). Schlatter makes out a most probable case ; but his argument that the Makhna Juleijil was also the Gilgal where Joshua placed the camp of Israel after the conquest of Ai (9 6 106 15 43, 14 6 yaAyoA [B]) is very doubtful, and his other, that it was the Gilgal of Saul s appointment to the kingdom (i S. 108_^), is quite unsuccessful. Schlatter mistakes the Judaean Carmel for Mt. Carmel. [For another view of the difficult passage Dt. 11 30 see GERIZIM, 2.]

6. Other Gilgals.[edit]

(a) In the list of the Canaanite kings conquered by Israel we find a king of the nations at Gilgal (Josh. 1223 [Dt.]: SjtaS DM3 7|Sa; yweifA TTJS yeAyea [A], yeei r^js yaAeiAeu as [B], yoei/n nfc yAyeA [L]). In harmony with S)'S reading some propose to read king of the nations of Galilee (see GALILEE, i). The king, however, is mentioned between the kings of DOR (q.v., 2) and Tirzah, and Eusebius and Jerome (OS) place a yaAyovAi? 6 R. m. N. of Antipatris ; and this is repre sented to-day either by Jiljulieh, 4 m., or Kilkiliyeh, 6 m. NNE of Kal at Ras-el- Ain, a probable site of ANTIPATRIS (q.v., 2).

(b) In Josh. 167 (P) the border of Judah is said to turn N. from the Oak of Achpr to the Gilgal (yoAyoA [AL], raayaS [B*], TO. ayoS [B h ]) which is over against the ascent of Adummim, the present Tal at ed-Dam on the road from Jericho to Jerusalem. (In the parallel passage, Josh. 18 17 (P), WJfl becomes ni 1 ? 11 ^! GELILOTH, yaAiawfl [B], ayaAAtAwfl i.e., niS Sj.T [A] yaAi- Aa>0 [L]). This is surely the hitherto unidentified Beth-gilgal or [AV] House of Gilgal (W"?? " 3 ; BK*A om., fad ay yoAyaA [ K e.a mg.], /3ai0yoA [L]) which is given in Neh. 12 29 along with the fields of Geba and Azmaveth as being round about Jeru salem. (So, independently, Che. [GALI.IM, 2], who also reads Heth-gilgal for Bath-gallim in Is. 1030.) If placed at the Tal at ed-Dam,Beth-gilgal would lie almost as far E. from the latter as Geba lies N.

(c) On the Gilgal or Galgala of i Mace. 92 see ARBELA. The data undoubtedly suit best the Gilgal on the Makhna Plain, not the Gilgal suggested in 3 of that article. 1 G. A. S.

1 Besides the modern place-names mentioned above the only other in W. Palestine which seems to repeat the ancient Gilgal is Jeljel, about J m. S. of Beisan (PEF Name Lists, 161). It is remarkable that the name has not yet been found E. of Jordan.


(i"!?;i), a town in the highlands of Judah, in the same group with Shamir (=Shaphir), Dehir, and Eshtemoh (Josh. 15 51 XANN&[H], |-HAcoN [A], AANOY [L]), according to MT of 2 S. 15 12 the home of Ahitho- phd(n?jp Witt?; N noAei AYTOY eic [eisi] r^A<\ [BA], CK THC TToAecoc AYTOY THC MGTAAAA^ [L]).

The gentilic is GilonitO, iVa ; 2 S. 15 12 (Se/cui/ei [B], yi\<avan<a [A], yf\fj.uii>a.iov [L]); 2 S. 23 34 (yeAwvetrou [B], yeiAwviT. [A], yoAaoS [L]) = i Ch. 1136 (PELONITE, 37SH a corrupt reading; 1 (^Swvei [BN], 4>eAAwi>i [AL]).

Giloh is probably referred to by Micah in connection with Ophrah and Shaphir, though the paronomasia is dis guised in MT (Micah 1 n). It seems to be represented by Jala, the name now attached to some ruins about 3 m. NW. of Halhul ; the situation of Bet Jala a place NW. of Bethlehem seems too far north.

The text of 2 S. 15 12 is corrupt, but not desperately so. While he offered the sacrifices, if it has any meaning at all, can only refer to the important sacrifices connected with Absalom s assumption of royalty at Hebron. Yet the position of the clause shows that it contains a statement respecting Ahithophel. The scribe must have wrongly deciphered his original. Read, with Klostermann, for D mi.TTW 1na73, DWiT^J ^l?? <when he fled to the Ziphites (see i S. 23 19). This awakens a suspicion that Giloh was not the real name of Ahithophel's home, which may have been rather a place not far to the SW. of Jala, viz. Keilah. It is by no means certain that the translator of had before him H73 or rt7 J- He may have had TFpyp (Ke'ilah) ; and even if he had not, n^ J is an easy phonetic corruption of nS Vp (see KEILAH). David was once in great straits at Keilah ; the citizens were about to deliver him up to Saul, but he sus pected them, and escaped in time (i S. 288-13). Ahithophel may have warned David or Abiathar. With this clue, Kloster mann thus reads the former part of this passage, Absalom had made a league (C?B"1) with Ahithophel the Keilathite (flV*Ppi"li or the Keilanite, ]7ypn), who made possible his escape (i"131?C) from Keilah. We thus understand David's habitual reliance on Ahithophel s counsel, and see how Ahitho phel's son came to be one of David s thirty (see ELIAM, i).

The text of Micah 1 io_/C is also corrupt. It opens, In Gath tell it not, which Nowack regards as an interpolation inserted from 2 S. 1 20, whilst G. A. Smith thinks that the words describe the doom in store for Philistia as well as for the Shephelah of Judah in which Micah s home lay (Twelve Profih. 1383). In support of this G. A. Smith refers to the situation of Shaphir, the modern Sawafir, in the Philistine plain. It is not probable, however, that Micah extends his view beyond his own region, the fate of which alone evokes his sympathy. SAPHIR [g.v.] need not be Sawafir. There is one place known to us, and only one, the name of which suggests a paronomasia fit to form a parallel to In Bochim weep (see BOCHIM), and that is Giloh. Read therefore, l7 Jin-7N il7J3, in Giloh exult not. Cp Che. JQR, July 1898. T. K. C.


Ott?;!), a town in the Shephelah of Judah, mentioned in 2 Ch. 28i8f (rAAezto [B], r&AA&IZ&l [A], r&MZ&l [L]). I* s l h e modern Jimsu, about 3 m. SE. from Lydda.


(i)K p. ! lO > mokes; (2) PIS, pah. See FOWLING, 9.


(fir*. 77 ; i-coiMAe [BA], - N 6o9 [L]). father" of TIBNI (i K. 162i/. f)- Ginath (or rather, Gunath, cp <5) is probably a place- or clan-name.

Klo. compares Guni in Gen. 4624 i Ch. 713; We. (IJGP) jo n.) refers to Shallum b. Jabesh {i.e., the Jabeshite).


RV Ginnethoi (in?]l ; r eNN&6ooe [L]), a priest in Zeriibbabel s band (see EZRA ii. , 66) ; Neh. 124. In Neh. 1 2 iff Ginnethon (pn) is a priestly family temp. Joiakim (see EZRA ii. , 6b, n), which was represented amongst the signatories to the covenant (see EZRA i. , 7).

Other readings in (S are : Neh. 106 [7] rvaroO [B], a.vaTta0 [xl, yaavvaBiav [A], yavaStad [L], 124 ytwifOovi [tf c - a m - SU P-], BN*A om. ; 12 id yavaStaft. [}< c - a nl S- inf -], BN*A om.

1 On the passage see Klo. Sam., ad loc., and cp AHITHOPHEL, end.


Originating perhaps not so much in notions of decency (Gen. 87) as in the necessity of protecting the loins from the extremes of temperature in tropical countries, the girdle forms one of the oldest and most serviceable of all articles of apparel. In Hebrew the commonest terms for girdle are ezor and H&gor.

1. Ezor, I ITK ($uvt\, etc. ), is exactly the Ar. isdr, even the lengthened first vowel corresponding to the long form tzar (Dozy, Diet, de Vet. 32) which seems to be not merely Egyptian, since Payne-Smith has fzdrd from Bar-Bahlul. The izdr, now a large outer wrapper, was originally a loin-cloth or wrapper not covering the upper part of the body, wound round the loins (tied with a knot, Lane, s.v. p. 53) so as to be loosed if trodden on (Frey. Chr. Ar. 72 /. 7, and Einl. in das Stud. etc. 298). This is the dress of the Saracens in Ammianus, and is retained in the ihrdm. Mfzar, now a pair of drawers, is not origin ally different, Ham. 81 and Dozy, op. cit. Bar AH (Hoffm. 5842) explains Syr. mizrdne by maydzir or tabdbln. The latter are the short drawers without legs worn by wrestlers or sailors. It is therefore an inner garment and so different from the hagor (see below, 2). This suits all the passages of OT. From Is. 5 27 we learn that it was easily loosed (halla in Frey. Chr., I.e. ), from Jer. 13 i 2 K. 1 8 that it might be either of linen (cws) or of skin. Elijah s was of the latter material. Like the old Arabs, he wore but two garments, the izdr and the addereth^ (Ar. rida} ; see MANTLE.

The person who wears the izdr has of course no shirt. So the prophet Isaiah (202) has only a waist-wrapper, and this explains Jeremiah s izdr (Jer. 13 i). Hence it is that in Job 12 18 the king who is humiliated is represented as wearing the izdr. In Ezek. 2815 it is a peculiarity of the Chaldeans that they wear for girdle above their garments an izdr, and this is seen on the monuments (Perrot-Chipiez, Art in Chald. etc., 1 fig. 14, 2 figs. 15 116). As the izdr is next the skin, the phrase Is. 11 5 is intelligible, and so the Arabs say huiva minni ma kid" l-izdr , meaning he is my near neighbour (Lane, s.v. ma kid, Fr. Einl., I.e.). Phrases like 7>n VHN ( S. 24) are simply are clothed with. But in Job 38 3 40 7 Jer. 1 17 Q jjiO "UN Q S7n> (in:i3 like a man) is like shadda izdrahu or nii zaraku = skammara, tuck up the cloth so as to leave the legs bare, Ham. 334, 383, n. It is probable, however, that a (short) izdr was the dress of active life (sailor s titbtdn is analogous), like the waist-cloth of the modern East and also of the warrior. In Ham. 334, /. i the warrior is mushammir""- . . . an shaivdhu leaves his sides bare like Ammianus s Saracens, and cp Shanfara /. 62. ITNnn Ps. 93 i simply =15(37. But in Is. 89 it is Hithp. put on your izdr (which in that case is a warlike dress), or is it be a covering and support to one another as in Arabic dzara to back (lit. cover ), and of herbage, ta dzara it grew thick and rank, the stalks supporting each other ? Ham. 657 /. i nasr"" mu azzar " = effective stout help. See also Asds al-Baldgha. ^

From ezor waist-cloth is distinguished :

2. Hagor, -run, nTurj, hdgordh (wi>t), ireplfa/j.a), a belt or girdle worn round the waist outside the dress. In modern times it is usually a coloured shawl, or long piece of figured white muslin. The girdle of the poorer classes is of coarse material , often of leather, with clasps. This leathern girdle is also much used by the Arabs, and by persons of condition when equipped for a journey. It is sometimes ornamented with work in coloured worsted, or silk, or with metal studs, shells, beads, etc.

1 So the Baptist, see Mt. 84 Mk. 16.

2 Elsewhere Robertson Smith sums up thus : The general impression produced by a survey of the usage of the word is that among the Hebrews the ezor ceased to be part of their ordinary dress pretty early, being superseded by the tunic [n^HDi see TUNIC], but that it was used by warriors, by the meanest classes, by prophets and mourners, and that the word (or the cognate word) was also retained in proverbial phrases and similes, just as was the case with the Arabs ( Notes on Hebrew Words, I., JQR, 1892, p. 289^). Cp also, on the ezor of Jeremiah, Che. Life and Times of Jer. 161 (88).

Such, probably, were the girdles worn by the ladies of post- exilic Jerusalem (Is. 3 24), and the eulogy of the virtuous woman describes her (Prov. 31 24) as making a hiigor which Phoenician merchants did not disdain to buy (cp the t,<avi]v Xpv<riji> of Rev. 113 15 e). The warrior used a I.uigor as a sword- belt (2 S. 20s; on text see Comm.; i K. 2s); cp .Tljn "Un 2 K. 821, and 2^n n Judg. 3 16 etc. That other objects also might be carried in it, is suggested by Dt. 23 13 [14] & ; cp Mt. 10 9 Mk. 68l(EV purse ).

3. Mezah, mo, Ps. 109 19 (EV girdle ) ; n lD, m ziuh, Job 122i (for nrc = nrn I AV strength, nig. girdle, RV belt ).

Che. reads in Ps. nrD = *YlTK (cp Lag. Uebers. 177), and in Job nini C, greaves. nip occurs in a doubly corrupt context in Is. 23 10 (AV strength, AVmg. RV girdle ); girdle for restraint is intrinsically improbable. Du., Che. read ihD, haven.

4. Ki&urlm, D "ns ; p (bands) of costly make, worn by women (Is. 820 ffj,Tr\6Kiov, Jer. 232 arrjOoSefffils}. Jewish interpretations vary ; Kimchi and Rashi render headband (so AV ; RV sashes ). The kitturim were richly studded with jewels and were the receptacle of the other ornaments worn by men and women.

5. The priestly abnet, BJUN (Ex. 28439/1 8929 Lev. 87 164 ; all P), was a sash rather than a girdle (fwvi) ; battens [Vg.]; see Lag. Ges. Abh. 39 ). 2 The abnet was of great length, according to Rabbinic tradition 32 cubits long and 4 cubits wide. Josephus (Ant. iii. 72) says that the abnet was four fingers broad, so loosely woven that you would think it was the skin of a serpent. 3 It is embroidered with flowers of scarlet and purple and blue and fine linen ; but the warp is nothing but fine linen. It was wound under the breast, twice round the body, was tied in an ample bow or loop, and the ends reached the ankles. It was thrown over the left shoulder while the priest was officiating. Driver- White (SBOT, Leviticus, 70) summarily describe the abnet as an embroidered loosely woven scarf. The abnet was the only garment in which an intermixture of wool and linen was permitted. The same word is applied to the sashes of high officers in Is. 22 21.

6. On the curious girdle (RV cunningly woven band 2&ri) of the Ephod, see EPHOD, 3.

The NT terms are :

7. ^coi jj (common in OT, cp also irapa.uii>i) 2 S. 18 n) Acts 21 ii Mt. 84 ; see above.

8. crtju.iKi i dia, Acts 19 12, see APRONS.

W. R. S. (l) I. A. S. A. C.


(K>|"}| ; o rep- [BA/JEFL] ; so Jos. ; Judith 5 16 TOYC r^P AV GERGESITES, RV GIRGASHITES), a people of Canaan, Gen. 10 16 (gloss), 15 21 (gloss), Josh. 3 10 (D 2 ), 24 1 1 (D 2 ), Dt. 7 1 Neh. 98 (AV always Gir- gashites except Gen. 10 16, where Girgasite ; RV always Girgashite ). Another form of the name is very probably GIRZITES ( )~u)> which has sometimes been corrupted into PERIZZITES (TIB). In the Table of Peoples the Girgashites have, properly speaking, no place ; it is to the Deuteronomist, who had archaeological tastes, that the resuscitation of the name is due. Apparently for a good reason he places it next on the list of peoples in Dt. 7 1 to that of the Hittites. Whence did he derive it? Probably from the Song of Deborah, where the slaughter of the Kadasoni, or, as he probably read, Kadeshi or Gadeshi, is spoken of (Judg. 52i); the N. or Hittite Kadeshites, see KADESH, 2. n [rj instead of n [d], and the repeated 3 [g] after the i [r] are ordinary errors of scribes. 4 T. K. c.

1 It is enough to mention the analogical use of girdle (EV apron ; but see AV">g-, RVmg.) in Gen. 3 7.

2 Jos. (Ant. iii. 72) transliterates ajScutf (Niese ; al. a/3ai/7}0), and notes that the term in use in his day was e^ctav (cp Targ. on Ex. J j QnX probably the Pers. himyan ; see also NECK LACE.

3 [See picture in Braunius, Vestit. Sacerdot. Hebrcforum.}

4 Phoen. personal names tyjTJ, DE>;n;i are quoted. Are these too derived from Kadesh? The Hittites had allies called Karkis ; but these, as Sayce remarks (Pat. Pal. 51), can hardly have left their name in Palestine. According to W. M. Miiller (As. . Eur. 355), the Barkis were Cilicians. We may compare the development of yepy ecnji dx/ from yepa<r)i a> (see GEKASENES), and the reading of for GESHUKI (see GESHUK, 2) in Dt. 3 14 ()


(^"15 ; for the readings of and of EV see GEZRITES), i S. 278 Kt. There seems to have been a widely extended pre-Israelitish tribe called Girzites or Girshites. In fact, wherever PERIZZITES [q.v. ] or GIRGASHITES is read in the Hebrew text we should probably restore Girzites or Girshites.

It is doubtful whether Geshurites or Girshites is the correct reading in i S. 27 8 (see GESHUR, 2) ; but in 2 S. 29, instead of and over the Ashurites, and over Jezreel, we should most probably read simply and over the Girzites ( Jisrr/Ni), the rest being due to dittography (see Che. Crit. Bib.). Of the Girzites there is another record in the name miscalled Mount Geriz(z)im (the mount of the Girzites), whilst the Girshites are also attested >Y BHn ( > EHJi se HIVITES, i .) in Is. 17 10, and by the two trans-Jordanic places called Gerasa (see GILEAD, 6).

Another (probable) occurrence of the gentilic Geras has escaped notice Boanerges, which seems to the present writer to have come from fiaveyepos = Eh: 33, sons of Gerasa. That the phrase is both misread and misinterpreted need not disturb us ; there are quite as great misinterpretations in Lk. 615 ( Simon, called Zelotes ) and in Acts 436 (see BARNABAS). After mis understanding it, Mk. wrongly ascribed the name to Jesus.

Parallel corruptions are perhaps Kai ai aio; or Kai/avtYijs for icai/aios or ica.ciTr)s = N3p , a man of Cana (but cp CANAN^AN). and KT(capicoT)9 for lepixconjs, a man of Jericho (cp JUDAS ISCARIOT, i). Possibly, too (but see JAIRUS, first note) Tinueus in Bartima:us may be from a place-name Timai (see Nestle, Marg. 91). T. K. C.


RV Gishpa (KBPS), named after ZIHA as an overseer of NETHINIM in Ophel (Neh. 11 2if ; peccJ)A [N c - am - inf -L], om. BX*A). According to Ryssel his name is a corruption of HASUPHA (NBBTI), which follows Ziha in the list in Ezra 243.


pDn nn|), Josh. 19 13 AV, RV GATH-HEPHER (q.v.\


(Dins, peee&iM [BADEL]; probably = Gittam, place of a wine-press ; on form of name see NAMES, 107).

1. An unidentified town in the list of Benjamite villages (EZRA ii., 5 []. 15 [i] a), Neh. 11 33 (yc68itt.

[}<c.a mg. inf. . om . BX*A]).

2. A town where the fugitive Beerothites were received as gerim or protected strangers, apparently in the days of Saul (2 S. 4s). For the key to this incidental notice see ISHBAAL (i). This Gittaim can hardly have been the Benjajnite town. The persecuted Beerothites would surely have fled to the territory of another tribe. There were probably several Gittaims as well as several Gaths. Thenius, Grove (Smith s DB], Klostermann, think the flight was towards Gath (ye66ai. [B], -0/u [A]).

3. Giltaim is also probably the name of a town in or near Edom, Gen. 36 35 (ADEL), i Ch. 1 46 (so <S; A yfOOafJ., but L euifl), where MT Kt. has AVITH (<?.v.). Note that vine yards in Edom are referred to in Nu. 20 17.

4. By a manifest error Gittaim appears in i S. 14 33 where Saul s speech begins, not with the appropriate Ye transgress" (crn;3), but with the difficult iv yee&uft ([BL], A ycOe/1.), In Gittaim. T. K. C.


pniri), 2 S. 6 10. See GATH, i.


Set to the 1 [RV], or, Upon Gittith [AV] ?), un-ep r. Ai7i/wi = nn;!rr?J? [BNAR Syr. Symm.]; pro [or, Ps. 81, in] torcularibus [J] ; en-l T. Arjfoi), Aq. in Pss. 81 84 [Syro-Hex.], but in Ps. 8 un-ep T. -yerSiViSos (so also Theod. in Ps. 8), Ps. 8 81 (om. T. ; u. r. aAAoiouei)<ro/iieVu>i [A]), 84 (headings).

According to Wellhausen we have a twofold question to answer : (i) Is it a mode or key which is denoted by the Gittith ; and, (2) Does Gittith mean belonging to Gath, or belonging to a wine-press ? The latter ques tion must be answered first. No doubt the vintage festi val had special songs of its own (one such may be al luded to in Is. 65 8), and Baethgen thinks the three psalms with the above heading appropriate for such an occasion. If this view of the appropriateness of the psalms be accepted, it becomes plausible to follow those old in- terpreters who read 'on ( = with) the (treading in the) wine-presses'. If it be rejected, there still remains the view that the temple music had borrowed a mode or key or (see Tg. ) instrument from the city of Gath. Philistine influence on the temple music, however, is scarcely credible (see, however, Hitz. , Del.), and in any case Gath had probably been destroyed before the exile.

No theory therefore is in possession of the field, and when we consider the frequent miswriting of these musical headings (see, e.g. , HIGGAION, SHIGGAION, MAHALATH [ii.]), it is as natural as it is easy to read nir^rVy, with string-music. j before j might easily be dropped ; the next stage of development is obvious. Gesenius in 1839 (Thes., s.v.) had already given a kindred solution (ru for rn^ruj}). The question rela tive to the mode or key called the Gittith disappears.



(^HPI), i Ch.ll 34 ; see GUNI, i.


, i S. 278 RV ns- ; AV GEZRITES.


1. Antiquity.[edit]

The art of glass-making, unlike that of pottery, would appear not to have been discovered and practised by different nations independency, but to have spread gradually from a single centre. 1 That the Phoenicians are not to be credited with this invention (Pliny, HN 862665, etc.) is practically certain, since our oldest examples of glass proceed from the countries watered by the Nile, the Tigris, and the Euphrates. From Egypt we have a dusky green glass bead of the queen Hatasu (or rather Ha t-sepsut, see EGYPT, 53), of the middle of the fifteenth century B.C., also a light green opaque jar of Thotmes III. (1500 B.C.), 2 and, ascending higher, an amulet with the name of Nuantef IV., of the eleventh dynasty (circa 2400 B.C.). 2 With this agrees the fact that the most ancient representations of glass-blowing belong probably to the Middle Empire, the alleged earlier cases being capable of a different explanation viz., smelting (Erman, Anc. Eg. 459).

The Assyrians, too, were acquainted with the use of glass (ASSYRIA, 13, cp n. ib. ), and we have one of the most important specimens of their work in the unique transparent glass vase of the time of Sargon (722- 705 B.C.). 2 The recent excavations in Nippur, how ever, appear to permit us to carry back the use of glass to a much earlier date.

According to Peters {Nippur, 2 134) badly broken inscribed axe-heads of a highly ornamental shape of blue glass, coloured with cobalt (brought presumably from China) were found in mounds of the fourteenth century n.c." These and other glass objects found here had been run in moulds, not blown. A small glass bottle was found with the door-sockets of Lugal- kigub-nidudu (circa 4000 H.C. ; op. cit. 160, 374) ; but, in general, the glass objects found at Nippur were of late date, and while glass fragments were very numerous in the later strata, there were few or none in the earlier." The above examples should no doubt be looked upon as exceptions, since the greater part of the glass found belonged to the post- Babylonian period (pp. dt. 373/)-

The use of glass among the Phoenicians begins at a later date. 4 Their acquaintance with it was probably derived from the Egyptians and spread abroad by them in their trading expeditions. To them, also, are pos sibly due the many specimens of coloured beads found in many parts of Europe, Asia, and Africa.

The part played by the Phoenicians in spreading the know ledge of glass as well as certain arts, etc. may need some qualifying in the future (see TRADE AND COMMERCE). In Cyprus, at all events, it would appear that glass was a native production, rather than of Phoenician origin. The art itself was probably derived from Egypt (Ohnefalsch-Richter, Kypros, etc., 416). That Egypt exported glass is well known (cp, e.g., Martial, Ep. 21, 74).

1 A. Nesbitt, art. Glass in EBW.

2 Now in the British Museum.

3 In the same spot were found objects of Euboean magnesite, implying regular intercourse with Greece.

4 The later manufacture of glass in the districts of Beirut, Tyre, and Sidon (see MISREPHOTH-MAI.M) does not therefore concern us.

2. Biblical references.[edit]

From the treatment which glass received in the ancient world it is evident that in Egypt and Babylonia it was held to be a precious thing, a fit offering for the gods. It would therefore, be appropriate to find it mentioned along with precious jewels in the eulogy of wisdom, Job 28 17 (zlkiiklth, jvaia], fj clear [transparency is not implied], AV CRYSTAL, RV Glass ; va\os [BXAC]).

iiaAos originally denoted any transparent stone or stone-like substance (e.g., Herod. 820). On the other hand, some vitreous ornament is undoubtedly referred to in ap-nj/u.a.Ta re At Oipa X UT * (ib. -26 9 ).

In the case of the glassy sea (SaAatrcra iaAtVr), Rev. 46 15 2), and the comparison of the golden streets of the heavenly city to pure glass (vaAos, Rev. 21 1821), the earlier meaning of iiaAos perhaps holds good, although we are reminded of the Arabian legend that Solomon prepared in his palace a glass pavement which the queen of Sheba mistook for water (Qoran, S:ir. 27).

A reference to glass-making has been found in Dt. 33 19 ( the hidden treasures of the sand ) ; 1 but see ZEUULUN.

The colloquial use of glass to denote a mirror of glass, or of any other material, is found in AV of (a) Is. 823 (jV^3, 5ia<pa.!>i) XaKiaviKa), see DRESS, i (2); (l>) i Cor. 13i2 Jas. 123 (Hffoirrpov) ; see further LOOKING-GLASS, MIRROR.

See art. Glass in 7 , A ("), and in Kitto s Bib. Cycl.; also A. Liiwy, PSBA, 8i/ pp. 84-86. s. A. C.


(xplCMA [B a NA]), Ecclus. 38 30. See POTTERY.


(Bj#), Lev. 19g. See AGRICULTURE, 12.


is EV's attempt to render the apparent Hebrew word PINT in Dt. 14 13 (pyy [BAFL]). The error of the scribe was corrected in the mg. , and from the mg. found its way into the text before .TNrrrwi ( and the falcon ). That this view is correct is self-evident, even without the confirmation supplied by the || passage, Lev. 11 14. The word glead <yc gled (AS* glida) is Old English for kite, and has not yet entirely disappeared.

To represent the phenomena of the text we might render, And the bite [read kite ] and the falcon. Tristram (A7//>) thinks that our translator means the Buzzard, and adds that there are three species of Buzzard in Palestine. T. K. C.


i. (KCONtoy [Ti. WH].) Mentioned only once in the Bible (Mt. 23 24).

The gnats or mosquitoes are dipterous insects belonging to the family Culicida^. There are many species ; they breed in swamps and still water, the first two stages, larval and pupal, being aquatic. The female alone inflicts the sting-like prick with its mouth-organs ; the male insect does not leave the neighbourhood of the breeding-place.

RV's strain out a gnat is a return to the old reading of Tyndale, Cranmer, and the Geneva, AV's strain at being probably due to a misprint (see Whitney, Diet. ). Reference is made in this proverb to the scrupulous care exercised by devout Jews (as also in the present day by Singhalese Buddhists) in conformity with Lev. 1123 43 (cp Chullln, f. 67 1). The comparison with the smallest and largest things finds analogy in the Talm. e.g. , Shabb. 77 b, ^sn hy ttnrv nD K, the fear of the gnat is on the elephant ; cp the Ar. proverb, he eats an elephant and is suffocated by a gnat.

2. The word gnat ( like gnats ) occurs also in the RVig- of Is. 51 6. It would be safer to read Q j3 (Weir, Che.), which elsewhere AV renders LICE [q.v.] ; in SBOT (Heb.) 147, however, a bolder correction is suggested (see LOCUST, 2 [4]). In the case of the plague in Ex. 8 i6[i2]^ gnat is possibly more correct. The truvfy (<S s word in Ex. I.e.) is called by Suidas <aov KiaviairiaSes. A. E. S. S. A. C.

1 So Af eg. 6 a interprets in ( sand ) by ,133^ 1T313T1 white glass.


In the second century, and also to some extent even in the third, the Church was engaged in a life-and-death struggle with the Gnostics.

1. Origin of term.[edit]

By Gnostics we are to understand a certain class of Christians of many different schools, bearing a great variety of names, and diffused all over the Hellenistic world all having in common a certain speculative pretentiousness, all laying claim to a special knowledge (gnosis) in contrast to the mere faith of the masses, and all giving effect to their fantastic ideas about the origin of the world and the origin of evil in a peculiar ethic that offended the conscience of the Church. If we could assume Carpocrates and Cerinthus (circa 100 A.D. ) to have been the earliest representatives of the tendency in question, and all the writings of the NT to have been composed within the apostolic age, biblical science as such would have no concern with the Gnostics ; and it is in point of fact true that the name of Gnostic does not occur in the NT, nor is it mentioned in any extant writing earlier than 176 A.D.

However, they who make separations (ol a-rroSi- optfovTs) referred to in the epistle of Jude (v. 19 RV) can only be taken as Gnostics of a libertinistic com plexion ; the emphasis laid in w. 3 20 on the faith once for all delivered to the saints is best explained on this assumption, and still more, their ironical designation as natural or animal ( RV" 1 *- - =\l/vx<-Koi) ; plainly they were in the habit of calling themselves Trvv/j.a.TiKoi, spiritual men, as distinguished from the ordinary run of psychical Christians who rested content with faith merely. So also in 2 Pet. , only - here the author points still more clearly at the Gnostics by his repeated references to the true knowledge (la/. 5 /". 822o3i8). The polemic of the Johannine Epistles has a similar scope ; if the substantive, gnosis, does not occur, the verb to know is met with all the more frequently ; we have known and believed (ijn. 4i6) is intended to express the true knowledge that is in accord with faith as contradistinguished from the knowledge which sets it aside. When the Pastoral Epistles (i Tim. 620) bluntly warn against the oppositions of the gnosis which is falsely so called, the adherents of which have erred, or missed the mark, concerning the faith, it may perhaps be possible to doubt whether the reference is to the Gnostic Marcion, who wrote Anti theses about 140 A.u. , but not to deny reference to the Gnostics altogether. Finally, in the Apocalypse we have at least the reference, in the case of Thyatira 1224), to the false teachers who claim to have known the depths of Satan, a grim characteristic of Gnostic speculation.

2. Gnostic tendencies.[edit]

To all the writings hitherto named as containing allusions to Gnosticism, it might perhaps be possible to attribute a date about the year 100 A.D. or even later, in which case the traditional account of the Gnostic movement as having arisen about the end of the first century would remain unshaken ; on other grounds also the Pastoral Epistles have, in fact, been assigned to the second century. Yet we are none the less compelled by the NT to recognise certain gnosticising tendencies as existing within the apostolic church itself as well as certain extra-Christian and pre-Christian developments bearing a Gnostic character. In the Synoptic Gospels, it is true, the intellectual side of religion is but rarely and exceptionally brought forward : Lk. 11 52 (key of knowledge), Mt. 13 u and parallels (the gift of understanding the mysteries of the kingdom), and Mt. 1127 (the knowledge of the Father [and of the Son] reserved for the chosen ones only) are the leading passages. The Fourth Gospel, however, lays an emphasis, that on this account is all the more striking, upon the capacity to understand. Just as the decisive confession of faith in Christ is (669), we have believed and know that thou art the Holy one of God, so elsewhere knowing and believing are interchangeable expressions with reference to the same objects, and the impression is left that knowing is higher than believing. Thus, for example, to those Jews who had believed the promise is given (831/1 ), If ye abide in my word ... ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. The Gnosti cism of the Fourth Gospel is distinguished from the heretical gnosis only (i) by the contents of the gnosis to which it attaches so high a value in this case identical with the contents of faith ; and (2) by the closeness of the connection between knowledge and faith ; here there is no such distinction as is elsewhere drawn between the disciples who only believe and the disciples who only know, as two separate classes.

3. Paul's use of yivuffKfLv, etc.[edit]

Paul often uses the words for knowing (yivuffKfLv, TriyLvuffKeiv) in their most ordinary sense, as for example in Phi1 - 112 2l 9 22 4 s i Cor. 1437, and, inasmuch as he attributes to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews (Rom. 1 21 2i8) a knowledge of God in contradiction, it is true, to iCor. 121 he is obviously bound to assume in the case of every believer a knowledge of God, of Christ, of the Gospel as in Gal. 4g 2 Cor. 89 13s Phil. 810 (here yivtbaKeiv 6ebv, Xpitrrtiv, etc. ) or 2 Cor. 2 14 46 Phil. 38 Col. 1 9 /. (here 7ci2><7tj, tirL-yvuffis, and the corresponding genitives) without our being thereby entitled to ascribe to him a vein of gnosticism.

In i Cor. 189 12, however, he speaks of knowing without mentioning any particular object, and the sub stantive yvGxns is, in the majority of cases, used ab solutely ; occasionally and exceptionally {e.g. , Rom. 1133) as an attribute of God, mentioned along with his wisdom, but elsewhere as a possession highly to be prized of the man who has become a believer.

As proving that knowledge is here sharply separated from faith it will not do to cite i Cor. 12s f., where we read that to one is given the word of knowledge and to another faith ; for in this passage ITUTTIS, faith, is used in a narrower sense than usual, whilst, according to i Cor. 128 I38,gnosis is one of the charismata that are bestowed only on certain individuals, and i Cor. 87 [cp 8 io/?] declares expressly that all have not know ledge. It is half ironically only that Paul (8 i) declares himself as accepting the proposition that we all have knowledge, since in ? . 2, with manifest allusion to the conceit of the Corinthians, he distinguishes between knowing as one ought to know and a gnosis that, in all essentials, is merely imagined. The circum stance also that in Gal. 4 9 (cp i Cor. 8 3) he speaks of it as the highest object of Christian effort that one should be known of God rather than that one should know God, is not to be under stood as depreciating the high value he elsewhere attaches to gnosis, any more than i Cor. 138/1 12 is to be so taken, where he speaks of all knowledge in the present zeon as only in part, and promises that in the time of perfection it shall, as imperfect, be done away. For the same thing is said of speaking with tongues and of prophecy, and of them also, as well as of ac quaintance with all possible knowledge, he says (13i_/I) that they are of no profit to the man who has not love.

It cannot be by accident merely that, in Paul, gnosis is always met with as the precious possession of the members of the Christian community and never as belonging to unbelievers ; it has its place, in fact, among the charismatic manifestations of the spirit of God, which this same spirit bestows on individuals lor the benefit of all (iCor. 127-11), and as such ranks with prophecy and the gift of miracles ; he who is endowed with knowledge the gnostic, as the expression would have been at a later date belongs to the number of the irvfVfjLaTiKoi, the men of the spirit.

4. Definition.[edit]

We might venture, after Paul, to define gnosis as the result of the instruction which a spiritual man has received from the spirit of God in the things of the spirit down to the very depths of the Godhead (i Cor. 28-i6) in such a manner that, possessed of the God-given teaching, he finds every thing dark in earth and heaven become clear to him and (if only through a glass, in mere outline) he sees that which is true, where others see nothing, or only what is false. Paul himself belonged pre-eminently to the number of such gnostics (2 Cor. 116), and if that piece of knowledge which, as we learn from i Cor. 8, he shared with many Corinthians that idols are nothing, and that consequently, to speak strictly, there can be no such thing as meat offered to idols is of a somewhat elementary character, we must nevertheless remain lost in admiration at the deeper passages in his epistles (e.g. , Rom. 8 and 9-11), in which he expounds the divine plan of salvation at his gnosis, in fact. The deeper understanding of the scripture, which became possible to him as a Christian (as in Gal. 87 42i^T), has the same origin. The gnosis of the individual becomes fruitful for the community only, of course, by the communication of it, whether orally or in writing ; i Cor. 128 accordingly includes the word of knowledge in the list of the charismata ; and it is almost certain that in i Cor. 146 the teaching (SiSctx ?) means the communication of gnosis (cp 1426), and therefore that the teachers (1228) who take the third place, immediately after apostles and prophets, in the enumera tion of those who possess the gifts of the spirit, are to be thought of as Gnostics. Their sharp differentiation from the prophets is somewhat surprising ; in many cases it cannot have been practically possible ; but as Paul in i Cor. 146 gives to prophesying the same position with reference to revelation that he gives to teaching with reference to knowledge, he would seem to have distinguished the word of knowledge from prophecy much in the same way as the latter was dis tinguished from speaking with tongues ; those exercising the last-named gift did so unconsciously, those who prophesied did so in at least enthusiastic exaltation, whilst those who gave the word of knowledge did so in full calm consciousness and with a view to convincing their hearers. Moreover, the contents of prophecy were derived from former revelation and extraordinary ex periences, whilst the word of knowledge proceeded from the continuous instruction of the Holy Spirit, making use of the forms of human thought.

5. Wisdom and Gnosis.[edit]

In i Cor. 128 Paul speaks of a word of wisdom alongside of a word of knowledge, and students have seldom failed to observe the close connection between the two ; in fact, the teaching of 14626 must indude them both. The distinction between them has sometimes been formulated thus : the essential feature of the word of wisdom is that it appeals to the understanding, whilst the character of gnosis essentially consists in intuition, in an illumination by the spirit of God, and in an immediate relation to this spirit (Weizsiicker, Apostolic Age, 2264). Wis dom (ffo<t>ia), however, of which Paul (apart from Col. and Eph. , and apart from the fact that of course he does not deny it to be an attribute of God) almost always speaks in a tone of disfavour the wisdom which, in his view, as the ideal of the Gentiles (i Cor. 122), pro ceeds from the rulers of this present world could never become for his theology a conception of importance comparable with that of gnosis ; in i Cor. 26 ff., what he opposes to the false wisdom as being the divine wisdom which he proclaims is the contents of his own gnosis (w. 8n), and only on polemical and rhetorical grounds is it that he speaks of wisdom, not gnosis (v. 6), as the subject of his discourses.

The unique passage in i Cor. 12s can hardly be taken as im plying, on Paul s part, a deliberate co-ordination of wisdom and knowledge ; probably all that he desired was to mention the gift of teaching as heading the list of the charismata, and this he could have done with perfect clearness by using the expres sion word of knowledge ; but, inasmuch as the Corinthians attached great importance to wisdom, and a section of them had even perhaps chosen to rank themselves among the followers of Apollos as being the man of wisdom, it occurred to Paul that he ought not to allow it to appear as if he did not recognise the word of wisdom of (say) an Apollos as being a charisma also, as well as his own word of knowledge ; and if in 2 Cor. 11 6 he contrasts his rudeness in respect of speech with his mastery in respect of knowledge, it becomes natural to take the word of wisdom of i Cor. 12s as a kind of speech distinguished by correctness and brilliancy of form, as employing the resources of a finished education and training.

6. Summing up.[edit]

To sum up : Paul reckoned gnosis as among the highest gifts of grace belonging to the church of his day ; its possessor was able to solve the riddles of time and eternity which remained insoluble to other believers ; according to i Cor. 26 ft he even held that such pieces of knowledge could be communicated only to such as were perfect, to Christians who, in truth, deserved to be called spiritual men. These opinions Paul shares with the later Gnostics ; it is easily intelligible why they all, and Marcion especially, felt closer affinities with him than with any of the other NT writers ; what separates their gnosticism from his is the preponderance, to a greater or less degree, of heathen elements in their speculation, whilst his own confined itself to working out in a sympathetic, if speculative way, the fundamental ideas of the gospel. That Paul found such speculation indispensable is, however, no personal peculiarity of his ; it was an element in his composition that he had derived from the atmosphere of his time ; under its influence it was that he contributed to make Christianity, from being a religion, into a system of religious and metaphysical thought.

At the same time Paul's epistles, and especially Colossians, show that already at that early date he had to combat certain developments of the spirit that prided itself on knowledge. The false teachers of Colossas (see COLOSSIANS, 6) become intelligible only if we take them as judaizers on the one hand, and gnosticizers on the other, Christians who gave themselves up to fantastic dualistic speculation. A gnosticizing Judaism of this sort they must have imported with them from without ; that is to say, gnosticism already existed in the apostolic age, and it was introduced into the Christian Church by the Jews. But neither had it its ultimate origin in Judaism ; from the strong heathen element it contains we can see that it must have been imported from the heathen religious philosophy, under going manifold modification and accommodation in the process. Respect for gnosis is a pre-Christian, Hellenic phenomenon ; Christianity was no more successful in withdrawing itself from the influence of this predominant tendency of the time than it was in the case of Judaism ; but Paul at so early a date as that of his epistle to Colossse already found, and made use of, the oppor tunity to draw the line beyond which gnosis could not be tolerated as a Christian basis, and succeeding genera tions of the Church only followed in his footsteps, though with increasing earnestness as the danger increased, when they carried on the struggle against Gnostics after the flesh.


Cp F. C. Baur, Die Christ!. Gnosis, 35, and Das Christenthuin u. d. christl. Kirche der 3 crsten Jahrhunderte^, 60 ; R. A. Lipsius, Gnosticismus, in Krsch and Gruber s Kncyc. vol. Ixxi., 60; Mansel, The Gnostic Heresies, 75 , J. B. Lightfoot, Sf. Haiti s Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon, 86 ; M. Fried- laender, Der vorchristliche jiidische Gnosticismus, 98.

A. J.

1. In Dan. 821 glossed by TJ/tPrr (Bev.).


i. dorbhdn, \3~ft (Apen&NON I stimulus], i S. 1821 [also v, 20 d, emended text, see SJBOT], pTli dorbhon (fiovKevTpov), Eccles. 12nt. 2. Malmddh, ID^O (aporpoTrovs), Judg. 831!. 3. Ktvrpov, Acts 26 14 RV. See AGRICULTURE, 4, col. 79.


Jer. 31 39 RV ; AV GOATH.


To supplement the general introductory notes respecting large and small cattle among the Hebrews (given elsewhere ; see CATTLE) some remarks upon the treatment of goats in particular are necessary.

1. Hebrew terms.[edit]

There are several different breeds of the genus Capra in Palestine and adjacent countries ; but it is not possible to distinguish each precisely by its original Hebrew name.

The generic Heb. term, common to all the Semitic family is

(1) fz, IJ? (Ass. enzu, Ar. anz, Syr. ezza \ usually renders <uf , also ept<os Gen. 27 9, etc.), which includes male and female (e.g., Gen. 15 9).

To denote the he-goat (so RV), four words are found :

(2) attud, liny (Ass. atfidu, mentioned as a swift mountain animal), AV rams in Gen. 31 10 12. (5 rpa-yos ; but /cpios Gen. 31 10 12, Ps. 50:9 66:15

(3) saphlr, TSS a late word (Ass. sa.ppa.ru, Syr. scf/iraya), Dan. 856, and (Aram.) Ezra 8 35; D ?V [ J ] * Dan. 853! 2 Cb. 29zi. -rpayos ; but x i M a Ps 2 Ch. 202i. <BBNAL a ] s o read toM-lSS " Neh. 5 18 (MT cnss fowls ).

(4) jrt fr, Typ ( hairy one ), D jytn] i? Gen. 3~3i Ezek. 4322, etc., AV kid of the goats (epov alyuiv), fern, j; nTyj? Lev. 428, etc.

(5) /yi/, trn, Gen. 3035 32 14 [15], rpayos.

The generic terms for the young animal are

(6) gecit, H3 (fem. Cant. 1 8t), <B eptc^os, or, in conjunction with (i) above, D ?yti"|] "13, i S. IGzo Gen. 27 9 16, etc. ; and

(7) stA, DC 1 , used of both goats and sheep (Ex. 12s Dt. 144); cp CATTLE, 2 (6), and see SHEEP.

2. Species.[edit]

The Hebrew terms refer generally to the domesticated goat, Capra hircus, which, it is probable, is descended mainly from the Persian wild goat, C. a-gagrus, though doubtless other strains are mingled in its ancestry. Of the various breeds in Palestine, the chief is the mamber, or Syrian goat, which attains a large size. It is remarkable for its long pendant ears, half as long again as the head, an allusion to which is perhaps found in Am. 3 12. The hair is long, black and silky. Both sexes are generally horned and have short beards. Another breed which is found in some parts of the North of Palestine is the mohair or Angora goat. It is generally white and has long silky hair.

The WILD GOAT (C. ergagrus] extends through Asia Minor and Persia, and in Homer s time was abun dant in Greece. It would be well-known to the Assyrians, although the species occasionally figured is doubtless (so Houghton) the Asiatic ibex- viz., the Capra sinaitica (colloquially called the beden). This animal occurs in the Sinaitic peninsula, in Palestine (but not N. of Lebanon), in Upper Egypt, and in Arabia Petrsea. It is quite distinct from the ibex of other countries, being rather smaller than the Alpine species, and lighter in colour than any of its congeners. It is a shy animal, with a keen scent, and its coloration is so like that of the surrounding rocks, etc. , that it is very difficult to see. It usually goes in small herds of eight or ten, and, when feeding, has a sentry on the look-out for enemies. The flesh is said to be excellent, the horns, which are much smaller in the female than in the male, are often used for knife handles, etc.

The generic Heb. term for the wild goat is ya el (only in pi., ye" Him, D 7jT), to whose fondness for rocky heights allusion is made in iS. 242 Ps. 104 18 (eAa<|>os), Job 39 i (Tpaye Aa^os TreVpas). Like the GAZELLE, the wild or (better) mountain goat is used of a woman (|n fPJT Prov. 5 19, <S B N A TTWAOS), and occurs as a personal name (see JAEL). Another, probably more specific, term is akko, mentioned as a clean animal in Dt. 14 5 (see CLEAN, jf.). The Vss. vary between >iV/(so Targ. Pesh.), and Tpaye Aa<o? (AFL, B om.), which is applied distinctively to the long-haired and bearded goat found in Arabia and on the Phasis.l We may probably identify the animal with the bcden or Syrian ibex (cp above).

It is possible indeed that several of the terms may be mere appellatives, and when we find that the Hebrew ayydl (Cervus, see HART) and avil (Ovis Aries, see SHEEP) are virtually identical, it is natural to infer that the Semites did not always distinguish precisely be tween the CaprincB and the Cetvidcc and Antilopince.

We cannot, therefore, state exactly what animals are meant by the Ass. arnu (cp AKAN, Syr. arna l), dassu (see PvGAKG), ditann, tiiraku (Syr. tarha ; cp TERAH), and burhn (cp Syr. barha), although the probability is that a mountain-goat is referred to in each.

1 See I.iddell and Scott. The gloss s,"6,u/3pos (it.) is no doubt related to the Heb. zenier, see CHAMOIS.

2 In Dt. 144 Pesh. for 101, see CHAMOIS.

3 Tristram in Smith s DBft\ 12006.

3. Breeding.[edit]

Goats form a large part of the wealth of a pastoral community. In hilly and poorly watered regions they are more abundant than the sheep. On the downs of Arabia where no shrubs are to be found, there are no goats. In the rich maritime plains their place is taken by horned cattle, for the luxuriant grasses are too succulent for their taste. 3 They flourish best in the southern wilderness (Edom), and in the hills from Hebron (i S. 202) to the top of Lebanon, and beyond Jordan (Cant. 4i 65 [cp GILEAD, i, HAIR, i], Gen. 8033 /: 32 14 [15]). They have given their name to Ain-Jidy (see EN-GEDi), where they are said still to be found (Thomson, LB 603).

As a rule they are herded with the sheep. 1 The two flocks- keep apart, however, the sheep browsing on the short grass whilst the more agile and independent goat skips along nibbling at the young shoots of trees and shrubs. In this way great damage is done to seedling trees, and the goat is to a large extent respon sible for the absence of trees in Palestine. \Yhen folded together at night, the goats and sheep gather separately, and round the well, while awaiting the filling of the trough, they instinctively classify themselves separately (Tristram, loc. cit.).

The fay if is mentioned in Pr. 8031 as one of the things stately in march (rpdyos riyoijfj.fvos aliroXlov [G BXAC ]), an allusion, doubtless, to the he-goat s habit of leading the flock (cp attud Jer. 503). Hence the latter term is applied to the leaders of the people (Is. 14g Zech. 10s ; cp Jer. 6140 || D <I VK), and Ezekiel (Ezek. 3 7 17) contrasts the weak flock (the poor people) with their leaders, the rams and he-goats (the rich and powerful; cp Dan. 835). It is plain that there is no real affinity between this passage and Mt. 25s2/. where the blessed are separated from the cursed as the shepherd divides the sheep from the kids (tpiQia; RV m - kids). This language does not imply that kids are either less valuable or (see Post in Hastings DB, 2 195 ) less mild and tractable than sheep. 3 On the passage as a whole see SHEEP.

4. Use etc.[edit]

Herds of goats were a valuable possession in more ways than one (cp Prov. 27 26, and see CATTLE, 8). Their hair was woven (J \ ) by the women into curtains, tent coverings, etc. (Ex.3526 Nu. 3l2o etc., see TENT, 3), and Paul's native country Cilicia, in particular, exported goats' hair for this purpose (see CILICIA, 3). The skins might be used to cover the body (see below, and cp DRESS, 8 ; Heb. lls? tv alyeiois Seppacnv), though, in later times, this would rather be the garb of an ascetic. More commonly they were used for bottles. 4 Goats flesh was, of course, eaten (see FOOD, 15). and goats milk (c ?y a^n Prov. 2727) formed one of the main articles of diet (see MILK). Hence a gift or present frequently takes the form of a goat or kid (Judg. 15 1 i S. 10 1 Gen. 8817 Tob. 2 12), and, as at the present day, it is dressed and prepared for the guest by every generous host (Judg. 6 i8f. 13is, cp Lk. 1529).

1 N^30 denotes the fold of the goats (Ps. 50 9) as well as that of the sheep.

2 The flocks of kids (D ly SC-n) in i K. 2027 is a precarious rendering derived from <E5 (iroiVii ia alyiav). Klostermann reads D tt aBE DO ( BE 3), on the bare height, after the manner of kids.

3 See Is. 11 6 Ecclus. 47 3.

4 See BOTTLE, i. This is literally expressed in the Palmyrene ty H ppj (Tadmor, Fiscal Inscr. [137 A.D.], B 2 48).

5. Religion, archaeology, etc.[edit]

The goat was one of the commonest sacrificial victims (Lev. 3 12 Gen. 169), and most frequently comes in connection with the priestly ritual of the sin offering. It was the animal selected on the great DAY OF ATONEMENT to bear away the sins of the people to AZAZEL. Cp SACRIFICE.

The following terms are found: iy (Nu. 1027), C ?y 2 Ch. 292i, TJfc Lev. 4 24, yMTytr Lev. 16 5 /, Nu. 7 16, fem. y rryyst Lev. 56, nNErn HTJUP Lev. 15 2 Ch. 2823. Similarly in the Carthaginian ritual the jj/ and N~U were used as offerings ; cp CfS I. no. 165, //. 7 9.

The so-called Satyrs (see SATYR) must also be referred to in passing. If we may conjecture that there were ancient Hebrew rites wherein worshippers appeared in goat-skins (see DRESS, 8, ISAAC, 4 ; and \VRS Rel. Sem.W, 467) the origin of these /Vww-like objects of veneration becomes more obvious. It may well be that at some early period the goat was regarded in Canaan as a sacred animal (cp GAZELLE, HART).

It was so venerated by certain communities in Egypt, 1 and to some extent among the Greeks. - 2 We know, too, that it filled a prominent place in Babylonian astronomy. :! A. E. s.-s. A. c.


or better (RV) GOAH (Him to Goah 1 ), one of the land-marks of the restored Jerusalem (Jer. 31 39 1)- Read nni??a, to the Hill i.e. , probably to the Hill of God, "hie Mt. of Olives (see Is. 1032, as emended under NOB). Gratz (MGIVJ, 1883, p. 343) thinks of Gibeah of Saul ; but that is too far off. In v. 38 the new wall is traced from the Tower of Hananeel on the the NE. to the corner-gate on the NW. ; in v. 39 from the NW. back to the NE. on the S. side, passing by GAREB [ii] (between the ravine of Hinnom and the Valley of Rephaim) to the Mount of Olives.

Pesh. evidently read nny33 i C P *" ya/Safla, cod. 36 (Field). 0B|(AQ g rendering (KOU. Trepi/cuicAwflijo-eTai icv /cAw ef tKAeKTioi Aiflwy) represents the last clause (nnjn 3D31). anc ^ seems to be a paraphrase of a reading ayaOa (cp j>.;xJ Syr. -Hex.) from yaafla(Aq.). T. K. C.


(33, 2i;i i.e., a. cistern, Ges. ), if the reading be correct, is the name of the place where David's warriors had two encounters with the Philistines (see DAVID, 7 ; ELHANAN, i), 28. 21i8/f In the || passage (i Ch. 20 4 f.) the place is mentioned only once (v. 4), and is given as Gezer (so in 28.; Then. , Ew. , with Jos. Ant. vii. 122) which is plainly a corrup tion of 3ia = 33. The commentaries are just here very meagre ; but we can hardly doubt that the true reading in 2 S. is either nj, Gath (so Grove, Gratz, Klo. ), or (more probably) rairn, REHOBOTH (q.v. ). For the restoration of Gob in 28. 21 16 (We. and others) see ISHBI-BENOB.

All the three encounters mentioned in 2 S. 21 18-21 presumably occurred in the same neighbourhood; <B in v. 18, and MT and <5 together in v. 20, besides the reference in v. 22 (?), support Gath. Ges. naively remarks (T/ies., s.v., 33) that Gob being little known, <S5 substituted other names. The truth is that, though there probably in Talmudic times was a place called 3ip, I(3b (now el-Kiibab, Beed. 3 ) 15),"* there never was any named Gob. Either Gob is a fusion of Gath and Nob, or it is a corruption of Rehoboth. The latter view seems preferable. The ya(0 of <S L in v. 18 is a fusion of Gezer (ycujep), and Gath Cye0). (Some Heb. MSS have 3 j ; so also the Soncino Bible 11488], etc. ; v. 18, yufi [Compl.] ; yafep [HP 246] ; -yap^eA [id. xi. 21)236, 242 etc.]; yefl [HA]; ya.^6 [L]; v. 19, yo/3 [A], po/u [BJ, po|3 [L ; Compl. nisi viafi , cp HP). T. K. C.

1 See Wilk. Anc. g. 8303, and especially Wiedemann, IFerodots Zweites Buck, cap. 46.

- See Frazer, Golden Bough, 1 326 ff., 234^".; Paus. 4 105^

! Jensen, Kosmol. ^t>ff.

4 Neub. Geogr. 76.


(]|S), Cant. 7? [3]. See BASON, i.


See NAMES, 108^


1. Meaning of term.[edit]

pX3). The idea expressed by the verb ^Ni, gaal, is to resume a claim or right, which has lapsed or been forfeited, to reclaim, re-vindicate, redeem, redimo (to buy back ) ; it is thus used in Lev. 2025^ of the redemption of a field or house after it has been sold, in 25:47+. of the redemption of an Israelite who, through poverty, has been obliged to sell himself as a slave to a resident foreigner, and in 27 13 15 etc. , of the redemption of something which has been vowed to Yahwe ; in the first two of these connections, the subst. nVNa, ge ullah, is used similarly, 2524 26 48 etc. In practice, however, a man was seldom able himself to redeem a right which had lapsed, and thus, by ancient custom, the right (and the duty) of doing so devolved upon his family (cp 2548/), and, in particular, upon that member of his family who was most nearly related to him. The consequence was that the term Go'el, properly redeemer, came to denote a man s kinsman, and especially his next -of -kin (<5 ayx.icrTeus, dyx<- ffTevT h* , o a.yxL<jrfv<j3i>} ; see Lev. 2625 Nu. 58 Ruth 220 89 12 4136814 i K. 16 ii (@ BL om. ), where it is rendered so (or similarly) in AV, RV (cp Ruth 813, where the verb to redeem is rendered four times perform or do the part of a kinsman). What has been said is well illustrated by Jer. 827-9, where, Jeremiah s cousin Hanameel wishing to sell some property, the prophet is represented as possessing the right of redemption, which he proceeds to exercise ; and by Ruth 3, where, when Naomi had determined to sell her husband s estate in Bethlehem, her nearest of kin, who has the right to redeem it (<S dyxiffreia), expresses himself unable to do so, and the right devolves upon Boaz, her next nearest kinsman, who accordingly purchases the estate, and takes with it Ruth, Naomi s daughter-in-law, as his wife (812 44-10).

jXJi gA al, to be carefully distinguished from the late verb Ss3i ge et> to defile," occurs chiefly in the later literature, though the antiquity of the ideas and usages of which it is the expression is sufficiently attested by 2 S. 14 n i K. 1(5 ii. In the derived meaning to act as kinsman (2 S. 14 ii i K. 16 n, and esp. Ruth, and the legal codes of DHP) it is generally- rendered by d-yxiorevu) (-Tevnjs, etc.), whereas the other mean ings to redeem, redemption, etc. are expressed by pvojuat (Gen. 48 16 and often [not always] in Is. 40-06), or, more frequently, by AvrpoCjuiai (Avrpooo-is, etc.). On the use of ^NJ n be meta phorical sense of redemption from trouble, exile, death, etc., see BDB s.v. no. 3 (p. 145); in Job 19 25 ^NJ, my vindicator (RVig-) is the vindicator of my innocence, whether (Di., Bu.) as against false accusations, or (Hi., Del., Che. Job and Sol. 288, Du.) as against an unjust death (see 2) ; on the distinction from mS see Dr. on Dt. 1 8.

2. The 'avenger of blood'.[edit]

The principle of which these usages are the expression is the desire to keep the property or, to speak more generally, the rights of the family, intact ; and the go'el had-dam (c~\n VNJ), or 'avenger of blood', is just the embodiment of a parallel application of the same principle. The go'el had-dam is the man who vindicates the rights of one whose blood has been unjustly shed ; by primitive usage the duty of doing this devolves upon the members of the family, or clan (as the case may be), of the murdered man (cp 28. 14?: the whole family is risen against thy handmaid, and they said, Deliver him that smote his brother, etc.) ; and any one of them (as now in Arabia) may find himself called upon to discharge it ; but naturally the responsibility is felt most strongly by the more immediate relatives, and one of these is the avenger of blood, KO.T f^o~xr]v.

The character is one that figures in many primitive or semi-primitive societies. In a completely civilised society the right of punishment for murder, or for other crimes, is assumed by the state : for the revenge which might be inflicted in haste or passion ( Dt. 1 9 6 ) by one prompted by personal feeling, is substituted the judgment of a cool and impartial tribunal. In a primitive community, however, the case is different ; what the manslayer has there to fear is not public prosecution, but the personal vengeance of the relatives of the slain man. Hebrew law is an intermediate stage. Already in the Book of the Covenant (Ex. 21 12-14) there is drawn the distinction (which is not yet found in Homer) between intentional and unintentional homicide, and the importance of the distinction is insisted on in all the Codes (Dt. 19 1-13 Nu. 359-34), where provisions are laid down to prevent homicide, as distinguished from murder, being visited by death. The go el, however, not the state, still executes justice on the murderer (2 S. 14? ii Dt. 19 12 ; and, in P, Nu. 8619 21 27) : on the other hand, his authority is limited ; the altar of Yahwe in Ex., and the cities of refuge in Dt. and P, are appointed as places at which the homicide may be secure from the vengeance of the go el ; restrictions are placed in the way of his acting hastily or in passion (Dt. 1936); according to Josh. 204/1 (D 2 ) the manslayer is to state his case before the elders of the city of refuge, and, if he has satisfied them (it is implied) of its truth, is to be taken under their protection; in Nu. 35 24/. (P) the case between him and the avenger of blood is subject to the decision of the congregation ; and the murderer is to be put to death only on the evidence of more than one witness (Nu. 8630 ; cp the general rule, Dt. 19 15).

3. Practice of blood-revenge.[edit]

The practice of blood - revenge is widely diffused, especially among tribes in a relatively primitive stage of civilisation - it is essentially connected with the family or clan; indeed it is found only where a clan-system is fully developed and clan-sentiment strongly felt. Its aim is to maintain intact the honour and integrity of the clan ; the feeling which prompts it is the esprit de corps of the clan. The duty is felt as a sacred one ; in Australia, for example, for the nearest relative of a murdered man to refuse to avenge his death would be to repudiate a most sacred obligation, and at the same time to incur the taunts and derision of the entire clan. As has been said above, however, it is often a matter not simply between a particular relative of the murdered man and the murderer ; the whole clan, on each side, is implicated, and a remorseless and protracted blood-feud between the two clans may be the consequence of a murder, until the penalty which custom demands has been exacted.

Wherever the practice of blood -revenge exists, the principle underlying it is the same ; though naturally there are many differences in the details of its applica tion, and many special usages and customs arise in connexion with it. The limits of the clan implicated vary, sometimes it is the murderer s more immediate family, sometimes it includes his relations in a wider sense ; in Arabia it is the group called the havy i.e.. the aggregate of kinsmen, living and moving from place to place together, and bearing the same name (WRS Kinship, 22-24, cp 36-39). Very often, again, a iroivfi or -wergild is taken in compensation for a life (cp for instance Horn. //. 18498^!; Tac. Germ. 21 ; and, among the Saxons, Stubbs, Const. Hist, of Kng. 1 53 143 f. 157 161 f. ) ; this was against Hebrew feeling, and is strictly prohibited implicitly in Ex. 21 12 (JE) Lev. 24 17 (H) and Dt. 19 11-13, explicitly in Nu. 8031-33 (P). 1 Where a wergild is accepted, its amount varies amongst different peoples, and also in accordance with the rank, age, or sex of the murdered person. For other varieties of usage in connexion with the institution, it must suffice to refer to A. H. Post, Studien zur Entwickelungsgesch. des Familienrechts "3-137 t 9l ; also WRS, Kinship, 12 ff. 38 47 52^; Rcl. Sem.W 32 f. 272^ 420; PEFQ 97, pp. 128-130. s. K. D.

1 It was permitted only in the case of a man or woman being gored to death by an ox (Ex. 21 v&ff.).

  • Bertholet reads against the land of Magog ( o niilN)

(5 has yiay also in Am. 7 i (/SpoO^o? el? y<ay b /3a(riAeu;), and in Nu. 247 (see AGAG). [B* also has y<ay for Og in three places in Dt. (3 i 13 447). In Ecclus. 48 17 rov ytayl QC] (c o) may be a corruption of ayiayov which appears in c - a ].

4 [In Gen. 102 3130 is probably a corruption of 130, miswritten for 133. In Ezek. 38 2 read j l3O flN SK 1 JS D j; , set thy face towardsthe land of Migdon. Mig(a)don is probably a name of the Babylonian god of the underworld, which, like Beliar or Belial (i.e. Belili, see BELIAL, 3), was adopted as a name of Anti christ (see ARMAGEDDON). In Ezek. I.e. 3 3uon springs out of plJO I JU is a fragment of 31 315. Saim IC C E XT Wtpi.e. Tiras ; Meshech, and Tubal, is a late insertion from Gen. 102, whence also comes 31313, which the scribe substituted for [jlnjc-

In 39 1 a similar emendation is required. 313, in 38 and 30, should always be p-uc- I 1 ai1 JI njISrrS^TINl i s a mere expansion of a miswritten piJB. In 39 1115 313 pen. and in 39 16 ,1310:1 V> may come from pljai.1 i.e. Harmigdon. We now perhaps see

from which source the Apocalyptist drew the name ARMA GEDDON [y.v.], and also where Armageddon was (see Ezek. 39 IT).


GOG and MAGOG[edit]

Magog (SUD ; MAfcor [BADEL]), in Gen. 10a = i Ch. 1 5 (M^OO* [A]), is a son of Japhet. The name, which should be connected in some way with Gog, occurs also in Ezek. 396 (7 W 7 [HQ], 0"e [A]), where Magog is spoken of as exposed to judgment (Gog, Meshech, and Tubal, v. i), and in Ezek. 882 where we have Gog of the land of Magog, 2 mentioned with Meshech and Tubal. Gog (ru ; 70*7 [BAQ]) 3 is to come from the remote part of the N. (8815 392). Meshech and Tubal (see TUBAL), as well as Gomer (386), also point northward. The order of the names would place Magog between Cappadocia and Media, i.e. , in Armenia, or some part of it.

The correctness of the Hebrew text has been doubted. 4 Wi. connects Gog with the gentilic name Gagaya, of the land of Gag, used in Am. Tab. 1 38 as a synonym for barbarian. Others connect it with Ass. Gagu, niler (hazdn) of the land of Sahi, northward from Assyria, in the time of Asur.bini-pal (Schr. KGF I ~ O : KB 2 180 f : Del. Par. Z L ~ : ‘l’iele. Gmdr.362): less probgbiy with Gyge;, king of Lydia (Ass. &&) a contemporary of Ah-bini-pal (E. Meyer GA 1558). The raditional identification with the Scythians (Jos. Jer.) is plausible, but without definite evidence (see further Di. on Gen. 102, Lenorm. I.e.).

For Gog and Magog in eschatology see ANTICHRIST, $ 12, APOCALYPSE, 46, ESCHATOLOGY, 88 (b), and SCYTHIANS.

K. H.


Oljl), in a genealogy of REUBEN, i Ch. 64!

(royr [HA], poor [L]).


(i) AV NATIONS (DflJ ; eGNtoN [ADEL] ; GENTIUM, ffnSt- Gen. 14 i), possibly = Gutium (Kurdistan). See KOA, TIDAL. (2) Josh. 12 23 RV. See GILGAL, 6.


(jVl3 ; THN r & Y Aa>N [BAFL], in Ch. rooA&N), a town in Bashan in the territory of the half- tribe of Manasseh, only mentioned in Dt. 443 Josh. 208

(p?J Kt. ; THN |~wA<\N [AL]) as a city of refuge, and in Josh. 21 27 (|TO Kt. ; T HN fwAAN [AL]) = i Ch. 6 71 [56] (THN TCOAAN [B]), as a Levitical city.

The site is uncertain. Golan was known to Josephus as yav\dvri (Ant. xiii. 15s ; /?/ i. 448); and Eusebius (OS 242) describes it as a large village in Batanaea which gave its name to the surrounding district, Gaulan- itis (cp Schiirer, GJV\ 226 354). Gaulanitis is frequently mentioned in Josephus (e.g. , Ant. xvii. 81 xviii. 46) as part of the tetrarchy of Philip. The ancient name is still heard in the modern Jaulan the name of an adminis trative district, bounded on the W. by the Jordan and the Sea of Galilee, on the S. by the Yarmuk or Sheri at el-Menadireh, on the E. by the Nahr el- Allan, and on the N. by the declivities of Hermon and the Wady el- Ajam. Schumacher (Across the Jordan, 92) thinks that Golan may have been on the site of the present large village, Sahem el-Jaulan, on the W. of Hauran. 17 m. E. of the Sea of Galilee ; the ruins here are extensive, and there is a tradition current among the inhabitants that the place had long ago been the capital of Jaulan, and the seat of government. It is true, Sahem el-Jaulan is about a mile to the E. of the present border of Jaulan ; but we do not know that the ancient Gaulanitis was exactly co-extensive with the Jaulan of to-day. The grounds of the identification are, however, not such as to be conclusive.

The modern Jaulan in its ivcstern part (between the Jordan and the Kukkad) consists of a plateau rising gradually from a height of about 1000 feet above the sea in the S. to upwards of 3000 feet above it in the N. The whole region is volcanic ; and the country is studded with the conical peaks of extinct volcanoes. The N. and middle tracts of this part of Jaulan are stony and wild, abounding in masses of lava which have been emitted from the volcanoes. The soil is of little use agri culturally ; but it is valuable as pasturage ; wherever between the hard basaltic blocks there is a spot of earth, the most luxuri ant grass springs up in winter and spring, affording fodder for the cattle of the Bedouin. Parts of the country are well covered with oaks and other trees ; and there are indications that it was once even better wooded than it is now. The plateau is intersected by deep wadys, mostly running in a SW. direc tion into the Sea of Galilee. The SW. part of this plateau, in the angle formed by the Yarmuk and the Sea of Galilee is, on the other hand, stoneless ; the lava-rock surface gradually dis appears and in its place is a rich dark brown lava soil, such as prevails in Hauran, of extreme fertility, on which wheat and barley flourish in large quantities. Timber is less abundant here than it is farther north. Eastern Jaulan (between the Rukkad and the Allan) is, in the N., covered with a number of volcanic mounds, so that the soil here scarcely repays cultiva tion ; in the S., though the country is still basaltic, the land is richer and less stony, and it is accordingly more cultivated. Kxtensive ruins have been discovered in different parts of Jaulan, dating from Roman times and onwards, which show that it must once have been the home of a thriving population.

Jauliin has been described very fully, with maps, sketches, and particulars respecting ruined sites, etc., by G. Schumacher in The Janldn and Across the Jordan, 1-20, 41-102 (the two last named passages dealing with Eastern Jaulan, between the Rukkad and the Allan). S. K. D.


Golath-maim or Gullath-maim, as also Golath (Gullath)-illith and Golath (Gullath)-tahtuh (josh. 15 1 9 , ovp rfes, nv>>r . Jivpinn 3; judg. ii S JV;>i? 3, jvnnn a, j ; EV springs of water, the upper springs, the lower springs ) are, according to Moore and Budde, proper names. See, however, KEILAH.


The importance of gold in Semitic antiquity is suggested by the number of words for gold in OT Hebrew compared with biblical Greek. xP vff fo an ^ Xpvffiov (the latter also = wrought gold [i Pet. 83] and gold coin) are the only Greek words. Hence in Is. 13 12 Job 3124 and Prov. 25 12, where a second word is wanted, 65 has to represent era by Attfos, Ai tfoj jroXv- reXfy, and ffdpdiov Tro\vre\ts. See also (d).

1. Terms.[edit]

The Hebrew terms are :

(a) 3nt, zdhab, Aram. 3rn, Ar. dhahabu", perhaps the spark ling ; cp 3HS. Note the phrases 1S1D 3J7, refined gold (i K. 10 18), for which 2 Ch. 9 17 has ling 3HI, pure gold (<B in each case \pv<ri<a SoKi/j.ta; but Pesh. reads TfliKO t, gold from Ophir ), and Bins 3HT (\pv<ra Aara), beaten gold, i K. 10 i6/ 2 Ch. 9 15/1 See also UPHAZ.

(b) pin, hdrus, Ass. hurdsu, Phcen. jnn (whence xp v<T > \pva-iov); in Hebrew, mostly poetical (Zech. 9 3 Ps. 68 13 [14] Prov. 3 14 8 10 19 16 16). We find it twice, however, in prose, according to necessary emendations of Gen. 2n f. ! and 23 16. Gen. 2 n/I should run, . . . the whole land of Havilah, where there is the htiriis-go\A, where there is the k&ittdu-StOM, and the slwham (malachite?); see OPHIR, i ; "ONYX ; TOPAZ. The sudden transition to naive wonder( The gold of that land is good ) conceals, in fact, a reference to a kind of gold designated harfis. In Gen. 23 16 hdrus is concealed under lassvher (szz KESITAH). What, then, does hdrus mean ? Noldeke (ZDMG, 1886, p. 728) and Konig (2 a 137) advocate the explanation yellowish ; so BDB, Ges.-Buhl. See Ps. 68 13 [14], pin p"lpT3, with yellowish [or, greenish] gold, and cp BDB, s.v., p-)\ Ps. 68 13 [14], how ever, is corrupt (read n lp 3, with the glory of gold ). pin, harfis, possibly described gold in one of the stages of its production. The hard stone [quartz] was first made brittle by the action of fire, then hoed out ivith iron picks (Aai-ofiiK<3 <Ti8jpu> KaTattovovcri. . . . TVJTUTI <nSr)pais riji /u.ap/uapifou<rai/ TreVpai/ KOTTTOvcnv, Diod. Sic., 3 12).

(c) CHS, kethem, possibly from -\/Cn3, to cover (so Ass., Ar.); same word in Sab.; in Hebrew only, or mostly, poetical (Is. 13 12 Job 28 16 19 31 24 Prov. 25 12 [and perhaps Prov. 25 n, by emendation, see BASKETS, n. i] Lam. 4 i Dan. 10s, but not Ps. 459[io] Cant. 5 n, where the text is corrupt). One of the kinds of gold specified in Egyptian records [New Empire] is the good gold of Katm (Erman). W. M. Miiller gives the forms Kd-ti-ma and, more common, Ktmt (As. u. Eur. 76). Possibly CfiOi kethem (Katlmi), also is the name of a gold- producing place, like Ophir ; in Is. 13 12, as Duhm has seen, T31N, ephir, is a. gloss on DH3- Perhaps in Gen. 1030 mSD mpn in should be read DH3 "in mb, to Soph ir !(;>., OPHIR, q.v.), to the mountains of Kethem. Tg. recognises, at any rate, a special kind of gold.

(d) IS (Talm. K? S ; Tg. NW3), /s, refined gold, probably -IBID 3Ht ( see above, ). Ps. 19 IO[TI] 21 3 [4] Prov. 8 19, \i9ov ri.tii.ov ; Ps. 119 127, roTtd^iov [see TOPAZ] ; Job 28 17 Cant. 5 15 [<riceuj, ^derets], XP 1 " 7 ^ ] , I s - 13 12 J.am. 42, xpvo iop , Cant. On, <cai<f><zf[BA], Ke-KT*].

(e) "VB lK, Ophir, also could be used poetically for TEN 3rtJ Ophir-gold (Job 22 24 ff(u</>eip, also Ps. 45 9 [10]: read in.!). 2

(f) Similarly "1UD, scghor (OWKACKT/UOS), or 11JD (Hoffm., Bu., Duhm) is perhaps used for 1UD 3rn, Job 2815, lit. gold closed up. See the Comm. on i K. 620. Tg. o am; Vg. aurum obrizum. Most probably = Ass. hurdsu sakru, massive or solid gold (Del. Ass. HIVB 499 b). It seems that we should read pn gold for natTN (EV gifts ) in Ps. 72 ic, 1 and 1JO for nnon (EV a round goblet ) in Cant. 7 3 [2] (JQR 11 404 [ 99]).

To these we must not add the phrase 13 pro, Cant. 5 n, EV the most fine gold (the bridegroom s hair), the text being corrupt. 2

1 Sophir may perhaps be simply a corruption of Ophir ; N and D are frequently confounded (e.g., NIT f r D13% s - *! $) The forms o"o)<[e]tp, <ru><^>etpa, o~w(/>r/pa, <ru>^>apa occur in <ES.

3 Vg. s renderings are peculiar. TSIN ODD becomes (Job 28 16) tinctis Indite coloribus (cp in colore, Jer., for cnD3, Dan. 10s); Is. 13 12, jiiumio obrizo, where orizo = Ophir = Ophir gold.

Besides the above there are other terms (Latin, etc.) of strange aspect, which may claim to be mentioned.

1. Does the phrase xP v<ro< * " Ir "pos mean Ophir-gold? or gold- dust (Ass. epru, [a] masses of earth, [b] dust)? Scarcely ; against the latter view see Wi. A T Unters. 146, n. 2. Nor is there much to be said for Sprenger s conjecture (A lie Geogr. von Arab. 56 f.) that both Ophir and ajri/pos describe the reddish colour of the best kind of gold (Ophir, therefore, not originally a place-name).

2. 6{ipvov, Lat. obrussa, no doubt means the test of fire applied to gold in a cupel ; the gold which has passed this test is called aurum obrizunt ; cp Arab, ibriz"*, whence abrazu, cepit aurum purum. But what is the origin of 6/3puoi ?

At any rate, the words just mentioned have a real right to be. That is more than we can say of the Heb. ~\S3, beser, however, commonly explained as gold -ore. 3 It is suspicious, that 1<J3) ore, was altogether unknown to the ancients. There is only one passage in which almost all moderns have found it, and only one more in which one or two have suspected its existence. In both passages the word taken to be ijja is sur rounded by textual corruption, and there can hardly be a doubt that it is itself corrupt. The passages referred to are:

(a) Job 2224/. (1S3, AV gold : RV thy treasure [mg. Heb. ore ]; 1 "JS3, AV thy defence ; RV renders as ni;|). It is necessary here to give the context. Budde renders his somewhat emended text thus : -

And (if thou) layest ore of gold in the dust,
And in the sand by the sea Ophir-gold,
So that the Almighty is thine ore of gold,
And his law is (as) silver unto thee.

A reference to the Hebrew will show that I. 2 is in part happily emended. Still the gist of the passage seems to be misapprehended, and the -^3 of MT is not cleared up. Beer, too, while adopting Budde s reading in i. 2, confesses that the phraseology of v. 24 seems to him very strange. So also, however, is that of v. 25. Nor is Budde's emendation, his law, imin for msyin, plausible. Duhm hardly improves upon Budde. Probably we should read thus,

And thou wilt heap up treasures as the dust,
And as the sand of the sea Ophir-gold,
And Shaddai will be thy diadem (-pn),
And a crown of Ophir-gold (TSIN "WD ) unto thee. 4

(,8) Ps. 68 30 [31], IP^-Sra DSina ; RV trampling under foot the pieces of sik>cr. For this Cheyne (Ps.fl) 393, doubtfully) and Nestle (JBL, 91, p. 151) have read 3 1S33, with (or for) pieces of silver ore ; but the extreme doubtfulness of 1!3 in Job makesit preferable to read 3 1X1N3, with store of silver. On the corrupt inO se e PATHROS. (Duhm is rather disappointing here.)

It does not, in fact, appear that the OT Hebrew has any expression for gold ore. In the margin of Job 286 AV does indeed give gold ore. However, this may only record the impression of the translators that 3ni rnij; would not be good Hebrew for dust of gold. For the same reason probably RV gives in the margin and he winneth lumps of gold ; but the only safe rendering is that of Delitzsch, Dillmann, Hoffmann, and he hath gold-bearing earth. Yet this cannot represent the poet s meaning. No miner is mentioned in the context, and, as Bateson Wright has seen, the parallelism re quires rprhsj;. Probably the verse should run thus,

Its stones are the place of silver,
Its clods are the mine of gold. 5

Thus v. 6 corresponds (as it should) to it. i. Cp SAPPHIRE.

1 In Ezek. 27 15 T\3VK should probably be T.IQb-

2 Gratz (cp Bu.) would read -)ri3 f r CfO , out the best reading seems to be Sci33> like Carmel (see 7 6 [5], HAIR, i). @ s XpvcrtW xai <j>ain Cant. 5n represents 131 DH3 ( see UPHAZ). This became oj^arf (Cod. 253 HP), o<f>ar^ (Cod. 300) i.e., CD3 1S1N (Lag. Mittheil. 2 81). Neither form of text, however, makes a good sense, and the connection of 5na with 7 6ab can scarcely be denied.

3 Abulwalrd derives it from 1^2, to break off, comparing Ar. tibrii" (native gold, whether dust or nugget).

  • See Exp. T., 10 94 / (Nov. 98).
T33K t]03 DipD
TVT-: Ivv I,

2. Sources of Gold.[edit]

The localities mentioned in the OT as sources of gold (Havilah, Ophir, Sheba) are all Arabian 1 ; Arabia was evidently the Eldorado of the Hebrews. Now it is the gold of Ophir, now that of Sheba that rises before the mental eye ; never, for some reason, that of Havilah. Midian, too, appears to have abounded in gold ; the reference in Nu. 3150-54 to the spoil of gold taken from the Midian- ites comes from a very late source (P), but reflects the traditional belief in the Midianitish gold ; Gideon, too, is said in the legend to have won enormous spoil from the conquered Midianites (Judg. 824-27). According to Burton, 2 the land of Midian was evidently worked, and in places well worked in antiquity. There is just one allusion in the OT to the abundance of gold in Palestine in the pre-Israelitish period. Achan is said to have appropriated from the spoil of Jericho 200 shekels of silver and a tongue of gold of 50 shekels weight (Josh. ?2i). One would like to know what the object called a tongue really was. It was hardly a wedge (Jos. Ant. \. 5 10, fta^a ; Vg. regula) ; both here and in Is. 13 12 ( golden wedge for oro) AV must be wrong ; and even RV has been too conservative in its render ing of Josh. I.e. Nor is there evidence for any object of use or ornament called from its shape a tongue either in Hebrew or in Assyrian. 3 It seems a reason able, and it is certainly an easy, conjecture that pc* 1 ? is a corruption of J VK?, a cuirass (see BREASTPLATE [i.]) ; the king of a city like Jericho may well have been sup posed by the late Hebrew narrator to have possessed golden armour. Certainly the quantity of the precious metals demanded as tribute by Thotmes III. and Ram(e)ses III. could have been borne only by a very rich country (see Brugsch, Hist, of Egypt) ; the gold was no doubt brought to Palestine by trading cara vans from Arabia. In the Israelitish period Solomon s golden shields were carried off to Egypt by Sosenk (Shishak). See i K. 14 25 f. Solomon s hunger for gold may indeed have been exaggerated by legend (cp Jos. Ant. viii. 7 3) ; but solid fact lies under the possible exaggeration (see OPHIR).

The Egyptians, however, were not confined to pillag ing highly civilized Syria ; they were in direct relations with gold -producing districts. At Hammamat (see Brugsch, Gesch. Aeg. 596) and at Gebel Allaki, near the country now occupied by the Ababdeh Arabs, and also at another place bearing the same name nearer the Red Sea, there were important gold-mines. An inter esting account of the mines is given in Egyptian records (RP&TSJF. ; Brugsch, of. cit. 530; Erman, Anc. Eg. 463), and the earliest known map, now in the Turin museum, represents the second of these mining districts, which was visited by Theodore Bent. 4 The precious metal was for the most part found in veins of quartz (according to Hoffmann, the B TjWi of Job 289), and Diodorus (3 12) gives a description of the processes employed which throws light on some of the Hebrew terms and phrases relative to gold in the OT. First of all the hard stone was made brittle by fire ; then it was broken up into small pieces which were ground to powder between two flat granite millstones.

1 PARVAIM and UPHAZ \qq.v.} can hardly be mentioned ; these supposed place-names arise from corruptions in the text.

The Land of Midian Revisited ( 79), 1 329. Burton s object was to ascertain the depth from W. to K. of the quartz- formation which had been worked by the ancients. His ex ploration was stopped by the Bedouin.

3 Benzinger (fJA, 190, n. 2) dismisses the rendering bar, and supposes some tongue-shaped object to be meant. We can hardly acquiesce in this.

  • See Chabas, Let inscriptions des Mines (fOr ( 62) ; and cp

Burton, op. cit. 196 ; Bent, Southern A rabia, 323 ff. Prof. de Goeje thinks it probable that the two sets of mines, though several hundred miles apart, may have belonged to the same reef and have been known by the same name.

This powder was washed on inclined tables furnished with one or more cisterns, so that all the earthy matter might be separated [cp Job 28 i, jpi , where they cleanse it ], flowing down the incline with the water. The particles of gold were then collected, and, together with a certain amount of lead, salt, etc. , kept for five days and nights in closed earthen crucibles. By ex posure to the heat they were formed into ingots which, having been extracted, were weighed and laid by for use. (On this description cp Bent, Through Mashona- land, 184; Southern Arabia, 325.) The commonest objects produced were rings (ftp 2 26 ; Erman, 464), or thin bent strips of metal (Maspero, Dawn of Civ. , 324) which were used as a basis of exchange. As distinguished from gold rings, the gold imported by Ha t-sepsut from the land of Punt is called green or 1 fresh ; probably it was in ingots. l At a later time six kinds of gold are specified, mountain gold, good gold, gold of twice, gold of thrice, gold of the weight, and the good gold of Katm (cp i [c\). The wealth of Ram(e)ses III. (the Rampsinitus of Herodotus) must, to judge from the temple inscriptions, have been enor mous. Gold in grains, in bags filled to the weight of 1000 pounds, from the mines of Amamu in the land of Kush, from Edfu, from Ombos, and from Koptos, bars of silver, pyramids of blue and green stones, etc. (Brugsch, Gesch. 596).

Gold (hurasu) was in equal request in Babylonia and Assyria, though AV s rendering in Is. 144 golden city (mrnn) is as impossible as the reading which it represents. Gudea (the very ancient patesi of Lagas) speaks (KB 3 a 37) of having received gold dust from Miluhha (i.e. , the Sinaitic peninsula). Nothing is said of gold coming from Miluhha elsewhere ; probably, however, it was not dug up in Sinai, but brought from Egypt. 2 The greater part of the Babylonian gold doubtless came from Arabia ; but gold entered into the tribute of all the richer conquered peoples ; Hezekiah, for instance, paid thirty talents of gold (2 K. 1814; KAT& 293).

That the art of the Goldsmith (5p l, Neh. 38[BNA m -] TTYRCOTHC [L]3i [< transliterates], 32 x\\K6YC [BXA cp Is. 41?]- XAAKOYPTOC [L], Is. 40 19 466 Jer. 10 914 51i7[AV in Jer. founder ], XPYCOXOOC) was carried to as great a perfection in Nineveh and Babylon as in Egypt does not appear. Merodach-Baladan, the adver sary of Sargon, had a canopy, a sceptre, and a bed of gold (Sarg. Ann. 339 ; cp Del. HWB 27), and gold was much used in architectural decoration. Still there was a Babylonian guild of goldsmiths whose patron was the god Ea. It may be noted here that in Gen. 42o^T no mention is made of a founder of the gold smith s art. Yet there must have been goldsmiths at Jerusalem, though a doubt exists whether goldsmiths in Neh. 3 32 should not rather be money-changers (Perles, Anal. 78). See METALS, and cp HANDI CRAFTS.

For the Golden Calf, see CALF, GOLDEN.

The investigation of the sources of the gold elsewhere than in Egypt, Assyria and Babylonia, and Palestine does not con cern us here. The accounts which Herodotus, Arrian, and Diodorus give of the treasures of the great cities of Asia show that gold-mines in widely separated regions were well-worked (see Smith s Diet. Class. Ant.,s .v. Aurum ; G. F. Hill, Hand book of Greek and Roman Coins, 18-20). T. K. C.

1 Naville, Deir el-Bahari, 1 25.

2 Krall, Griindriss der altorient. Gesch. 48; cp Jensen, ZA, 1895, p. 372-


( r oAro0& [Ti. WH] ; Syr. Jj^o^J, Mt. 27 33 Mk. 15 2 2 (roAroGAN [KB, etc.]) Jn. 19i7t-

The name of a place outside of Jerusalem, where Jesus was crucified. It was without the gate ( Heb 13l2 ) and apparently beside some public thoroughfare (Mt. 27 39) leading to the country (Mk. 152i), but nigh to the city (Jn. 192o). See CROSS, 4.

1. Name.[edit]

The Aramaic form of the name (st. emph. KnSlJ^IJ from K^^IJ I see Onk. Tg. on Ex. 16 16) corresponds to the Hebrew D?-!^, gulgoleth. In the Greek transliteration (except in A) the second ^ of the original word has been dropped in order to facilitate pronunciation (cp Ar. jalajat"", and see Zahn, NT Kinl. 1 i o). Mt., Mk., and Jn. give its interpretation as ic.pa.viov TOTTOS, the place of a skull ; Lk. gives the Greek name only to the place called Kranioti ( 23 33, tTri TOV rcnrov TOV <caAov- nevov Kpaviov), RV The skull or, as it is rendered in AV and RV "k . after the Vg. (Cafoaria), Calvary. Eusebius mentions it as y. upaviov (OS, 175 n), y. Kpavlov (189 i 20263), and y. Kpaviov TOTTOS (li4S 21) ; Jerome gives Golgotha caluariti (OS, (51 22) and G. locus Caluariie (130 25).

According to Jerome (Comment, ad Epkes. 5 14 ; Epist. 46), and Basil (in Canesii Thes.\ia, ~,) there was a tradition that the skull (whence the name) of Adam was preserved in this place ; Epiphanius (contr. Hcer. 146), Ambrose (Epist. 1 1), and others speak of his burial at Golgotha (see Guthe, Grab [das heilige] in P&Eft). Such a tradition only needs to be mentioned. The two explanations that have found most support are (i) that it was so called because the place abounded in skulls (so Jer. Comm. ad Mt. 27 33; cp Jeremy Taylor s description Calvary ... a hill of death and dead bones, polluted and impure . . . ); (2) because for one or more reasons it resembled a skull (so Renan, Vie de Jtsus, 429 ; Brandt, Die Evang. Gesch. 168 ; Meyer, Comm. on Mt. 486 f. [ 98], who compares the German use of Kopf, Scheitel, and Stirn ). 1 To the former explanation serious objections have been raised (see Keim, Jesu von A as. 3 405). The latter sug gestion is, therefore, preferred by most scholars.

Several examples occur in the OT of names suggested by the configuration of the ground (see NAMES, 99). The exist ence of- a small village situated on a hill-top in the neighbour hood of Tyre called el- Jiitneijnieh ( the little skulls ; BR 3 56 58, PEFM 1 94) makes it probable that a similar name was in ancient times applied to any knoll which was thought to resemble a skull.

2. Site.[edit]

Whatever be the explanation of the name, the place intended must have been outside the city wall (so Jn. 19:20, 'night to the city' [cp. Mt. 28:11 Heb. 18:12], and Jn. 19:41, 'near a tomb', new tombs would be outside the city). Further, it was a prominent position (Mk. 1540 Lk. 2849) and near a road (Mt. 27 39 Mk. 1029). These data, however, suit several positions.

The traditional site, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, has lately been proved to lie beyond the second wall (see JERUSALEM, 32, ii.) which was the outside wall at the date of the Crucifixion ; and several rock tombs have been found about it. It was near a road. It therefore may have been the site. The tradition in its favour, however, does not reach behind the fourth century ; and the manner in which the site is said to have been indicated to the Emperor Constantine who removed a temple of Venus, that stood over the spot, and discovered the alleged tomb of Christ and therefore erected the Church of the Resurrection, does not prove that the sanctity of the place was anciently, or even at the time, publicly known (Eus. Vit. Const. 3 25). When we consider the extension of the city over the site, the operations in the siege of Titus, whose principal camps were on this N. side of the city, the devastation of Jerusalem under Hadrian, and the interval before the first attempts of Christians to identify the sites, we can see how precarious the tradition is. The one element of value in it is the statement of Eusebius that a temple of Venus had been erected on the site ; if we may argue from the analogous case of the Temple site, on which a temple to Jove was raised, this temple of Venus is evidence that its site had been regarded by the Christians as sacred. 2

That too, however, is precarious, and by no means strong enough to dispose of rival sites. Other sites for Golgotha have been suggested on several positions to the north of the city. One, first pointed out by Thenius in 1849, and adopted by General Gordon and Colonel Conder, has received recently a great deal of support. It is an eminence above the grotto of Jeremiah, outside the present wall not far from the Damascus gate. Besides suiting the general data of the gospels it is near a road, stands high, and has tombs about it its appearance agrees with Lk. s rendering of the name; it has a strong re- semblance to a skull ; and there is a modern Jewish tradition that it was the place of stoning in ancient times. But neither are these things conclusive, and on the whole we must be con tent to believe that the scene of the greatest event in Jerusalem's history is still unknown. From this, of course, it also follows that the site of Stephen's martyrdom is uncertain.

M. A. C., I ; G. A. S. , 2.

1 The Old English cop, on the other hand, seems to have meant primarily summit, and then head or skull. See Murray, s.v.

2 A resum^ of the voluminous literature on the Holy Sepulchre and a discussion of the claims of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre to occupy the site of our Lord s tomb will be found in the article Sepulchre, the Holy, by A. B. M Grigor in the Ency. Brit.W) This article notes that the existence in the rock on which the church is built of several ancient Jewish tombs may be used as an argument against the site, for Eusebius (T/u of/iania, Lee s transl. , p. 199) emphasises the fact that there was only one cave within it, but had there been many, the miracle of him who overthrew death should have been obscured.


(rr?;l, Ginsb. ; some editions T\*b$ [except 2 5 ] ? 8 : TOAlAO [BAL], also TOAlAA [B] ; in Pss. ro Al<^ [BNR], [AT], roAiAepc [Jos.].

For the ending see AHUZZATH. G-l-y is probably a corruption of g-z-1. 1 Goliath is a pale reflection of those so-called throne-bearers (guzali) who ran over hill and dale at the Deluge (Bab. legend, /. 100), and who are rather = the Anunnaki, those ravaging (^u) evil spirits whom Ramman, Nebo, etc., let loose at the Deluge ; Jastrow (Ret. of Bab, and Ass. 500) renders g^uzall in the Deluge-story the destroyers. It is a title which belongs only to divine beings (see Muss-Arnolt and cp Jensen, Kostn. 389) ; Achish is an analogous name, meaning one rushing forward (from Assyr. akasu).

1. Earlier story.[edit]

A Philistine giant, slain according to i S. 17 by David, but according to an older tradition (2 S. 21 19 ; in (5 B yodo\iav) by ELHANAN (q.v. ). Some details as for example that Goliath was of Gath, that he lived in the time of David, and that the staff of his spear was like a weaver's beam are common to the two stories. The older tradition adds, besides the real name of the slayer of the giant, the statement (v. 22 ; cp ) that Goliath, like his three fellows, was a descendant of the Rephaites (cp Josh. 11 22, where Anakim are said to have remained only in Philistia). It was, in fact, natural, so soon as the four tall Philistine champions had been magnified into giants, to account for their extraordinary stature by making them Rephaites. It is also noteworthy that in 2 S. 21 15-22 the Israelite warriors meet the gigantic Philistines or Rephaites with out the least alarm, whereas in i S. 17 Goliath succeeds in paralysing the entire Israelite army.

2. Later tradition.[edit]

It is certain, however, that this is not presented to us as the object of the giant's appearance. He is called a champion (c :2n ITN, a man of the aer-ai X/ Jil01 < cpjos. Ant. vi. 9 i, eras [j.Ta.l;u TWV . ., ... Trapara^euw), and in his speech he throws out a direct challenge to the warriors of Israel. The latter shrink back in cowardly dismay an unaccountable falling back on the part of the comrades of Jonathan (cp i S. 14), which had to be asserted in order to make room for David. With fine poetic imaginativeness and (as we shall see) religious insight the conqueror provided for the giant in this later offshoot of tradition was no trained warrior (i S. 16 18 belongs to the older story) but a shepherd boy.

In v. 56, indeed, he is called a stripling (C?J?) ; but the same word is applied in i S. 20 22 to one who in v. 35 is described as a little boy (or lad ), and the youthful age of David is sufficiently shown by the scorn expressed by Goliath at his yet unspoiled complexion 2 (v. 42).

The young champion's plan was simple. He would have recourse to his sling the weapon of the light-armed crowd 1 in the army of the Greeks before Troy. 3

He would replenish his shepherd s scrip with some good smooth pebbles from the deep watercourse which like a ravine separates the armies (see ELAH [ii.]). He would then trust to the keenness of his bright eyes and his lightness of foot. The winding up of the drama is described thus (? . 48). And it used to happen, when the Philistine set forward and came on to meet David, that David would haste and run to the battle array to meet the Philistine i.e., whenever Goliath tried to come to close quarters with David, David would run quickly to the front rank of the Israelites to meet his foe under this friendly cover, and when the giant halted for a moment David would run upon him from another side in order to aim at him before he could be protected by the great shield. 4 At last David s opportunity came; Goliath s face was exposed. Then David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slang it, and smote the Philistine in his forehead ; and the stone sank into his forehead, and he fell upon his face to the earth (v. 49). Though sorely wounded Goliath was not dead. So David ran and stood upon the Philistine, triumphing over his foe, like Sanehat in a similar case in the old Egyptian story ; 1 next he drew the giant s sword 2 from its sheath and cut off his head. Then the Philistines saw that the incredible had happened, and took to flight.

1 i.e., guzalu. The only alternative is to derive jv^ from Ass. gugallu, a leader (Scheil, a giant ).

2 See Che. Aids, 102, n. i. 301K in such a connection certainly implies a youthful freshness of colour (cp Cant. 5 10). Compare the description of an Arab shepherd boy quoted from Doughty in Aids, 100, n. 2.

3 //. 13 716 ; cp A. Lang, Horn, and the Epic, yj^f.

4 Cp JAVELIN, 5.

Why did the Philistines flee? Had they not still their well-appointed infantry and their war-chariots ? Had they not still the memory of their former victories ? A Greek poet would have said that a god impelled them behind with mighty hand, and struck terror into their souls ; and indeed it was a religious dread that seized them. They were powerless to resist the fierce Israelites. 3 Meantime, if the view suggested elsewhere (NOB) be correct, David took the head of the Philistine, and brought it to Saul ; but he put his armour in the tent of Yahwe (v. 54).

3. The arms of Goliath.[edit]

Goliath's arms of attack are made of iron ; those of defence, of bronze. Javelin of bronze in i S. 17:6 must be a mistake (see JAVELIN, 5). The sword was afterwards given to David the fugitive by Ahimelech ( i S. 21 9 [10] ; cp 22 10). The tradition said (apparently) that David had deposited it as hallowed spoil in the sanctuary of Nob (or Gibeon). The (reputed) weapons of ancient divine heroes have not infrequently been found in Babylonia, 4 and a sword like that with which a mere shepherd boy had cut off a giant's head would have not less supernatural power than the fairy lance of Gilgames. There may have been stories, in the fuller Odyssey of Hebrew tradition, in which this sword played a part. If so, it is obvious that they have been with good reason passed over.

4. Religious covering.[edit]

The story of David, as edited in the Book of Samuel, is that of a man who fought the wars of Yahwe, and was by his God delivered, and later ages clung with special affection to the story of Goliath, because of its latent religious significance (see Ecclus. 47 2-11, and cp title of Ps. 144 [143] in BNRT).S From the first the idea that God alone gives strength to conquer must have been present to those who told this tale, and it is beyond reasonable doubt that a later writer of the post-Deuteronomic period inserted i S. 17 if>f., to bring the lesson of the tale into clearer view. 6 It is only with an eye to this latent idea that the legend of Goliath can be retained by critically trained teachers and preachers. It has indeed been urged against this changed attitude that the story of Odysseus could be treated in the same way. So it could, provided that there was a genuine, however small, historical kernel in the story, and also that Odysseus held a prominent place in the period of preparation for the coming of Jesus Christ. Such was not the case ; the story of Goliath may therefore remain unchallenged in the repertory of the religious teacher. Nowhere else outside of the NT does the message of encouragement to the humble and exhortation to the weak in faith receive so affecting, so inspiring an expres sion. Such a message could not have been engrafted even on the instructive life of David but for that process of idealisation, which is so characteristic of some Hebrew writers, but often so shocking to modern students.

1 Flinders Petrie, Kgyfitian Tales^ 1 110135.

2 Robertson Smith and Klost. think there was a conflict of traditions, one stating that David (Saul s armour-bearer) drew his own sword to slay Goliath, the other that, having no sword, he used the giant s.

3 Che. Aids, io<)f.

  • Maspero, Dawn of Civ. 642; cp Revue cfAssyriologie,

3 Vff. [94]-

5 Tcj> Aauet S, n-pb? TOV ToAtaS. On the title in Pesh. see SIFPAI. The Greek Psalter also rejoices in a Psalm of David ef<o0e TOV dptfyiov, composed ore efiovo^a.\i]<Tf T<a [n-pbs TOV] roAtaS [-0.6] (cp v. (,/).

6 Verse 46 predicts the slaughter by David, not only of Goliath, but also of the army of the Philistines; and announces as the consequence of this the universal recognition of the divinity of Yahwe (cp Ps. 1847 [48]^ Is. 564; both passages late). In 11. 47 the warriors of Israel are spoken of just as if they were an assembly gathered together for religious instruction (2 Ch. 2014-20 is closely parallel), and the lesson that Yahwe saveth not with sword and spear is precisely that which was so dear to the psalmists of the Second Temple (Ps. 207(8] 44 5 [f>]/.). The second clause of v. 46 reminds us of Ps 79 2, while the phrase fiND JTn(lJVn) occurs elsewhere only in late writings (see Gen. 1 24 / 30 9 2 10 Ezek. 29 5 32 4 34 28 Job 5 22 Ps. 79 2). So Che. Aids, 117; cp Hu. Ri. Sa. 214, who is more definite and satisfactory on this point than We. (Gesc/i.W, 268 ; ET, 266).

5. MT and (s[edit]

The story of David and Goliath has taken the place of another narrative which described the call of the warrior David to the court, and his advancement in the army as the reward of his military talents (see DAVID, i). The narrative, however, whether we take the version given in MT or that in <S, no longer preserves its original form. The former is too long, the latter too short. Robertson Smith, indeed (with whom F. H. Woods, Stud. Dibl. 129, agrees), is of opinion that s)'s text of i S. 17:1-18:5 should be followed. He thinks that whatever the Hebrew text has in addition has been interpolated from some lost history of David which gave quite a different turn to the story of Goliath (see OT/CW T.V.O/. 431 ff.\ When in 1892 Robertson Smith revised his fine volume of Lectures he had before him all the recent examinations of the Goliath-story which advocate a different view of @ B s text, and was not persviaded by the arguments of Wellhausen (who once held the same view as his own), Kamphausen, Stade, Budde, and Kittel. On the other hand, he has not himself persuaded Stade and Budde, who have expressed themselves anew since 1892, and the present writer, in view of the difficulties which beset Robertson Smith s and still more Klostermann s theory (cp Budde, Ri. Sa. 213 /. ), sees no choice but to hold that if we put aside later insertions (such as v. 46 f. , pointed out above), MT represents the one original story of David and Goliath. Some of Robertson Smith s observations are, indeed, not only acute but also correct ; but the roughnesses in the text can be accounted for differently (see Che. Expos., 92 b, p. 156/1 ; and cp Bu. SBOT; Kamphausen, Bemerkungen zur alttest. Textkritik, in the Arbeiten d. Rhein. IViss. Pred.-Vereins, 7 13^). These differences among critics, however, are un important compared with the result on which there is no doubt whatever. The story of Goliath has poetical and religious truth, but not, except in a very minute kernel, the truth of history. Cp REHOBOTH, TAMMUZ.

T. K. c.


(i) (105, |-AMep [BADEL]; Gen. 102/ i Ch. 1 5 / r o. [L] Ezek. 386 r-Q. L BA Q] , Ass. Gimirrai [Schr. KGF, 157^, Del. Par. 2457.]), one of the sons of Japhet, and father of Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah (Gen., Ch. ), mentioned with all his hordes along with Togarmah in the uttermost parts of the north, and all his hordes in Ezekiel (I.e. ). The territory corresponds in general to Cappadocia (which in Armenian is Gamir ( + pl. ending x) Kiepert, Lehrb. d. alt. Geog. 91 Lag. Arm. Stud. 32, 448 ; ubers. 77 ; see also Gimmeri = Cappadocians, Eus. Chron. ed. Migne, 138, and note also ydfiep ^ 08 KainradoKfs, Eus. 2 12). Probably their, earlier home was N. of the Euxine (/ct/x/ue/xot, Herod. 4 uf. ; Strabo, iii. 2 12 7 222 f. ; cp Homer, Od. 11 14 ; see Gelzer, AZ, 75, p. ~i^ff. ; Schr. KGPltft ff.). The Ass. Gimirrai appear in Cappadocia from the time of Esarhaddon (681-668 B.C. ; cp, further, on Gomer, Lenorm. Origines, ii. 1332^;). See CAPPADOCIA. F. B.

(2) bath Diblaim (OvIH P3 "IC3, ri]V yo/uep Ovyarepa Sej3r)Aoi/u. [B], T.y.6. Se/3rjAaein [AQ] ; cp perhaps D nSin 1 JV3, TT dlicov

fiai/SAaflaiV. (e/3. [KA]) [BXAQ] Jer. 4822), Hosea s wife (Hos. 13). There is no reason for supposing that her name, like those of her children (see LO-KUHAMAH, JEZREEL [ii., 2]), has any symbolical import. See HOSEA, 6.

1 For a personal name with this termination cp APPAIM, SHAHARAIM.


(rnbtf). Gen. 13io. In Mt. 10i 5 (fOMOppcoN [Ti. WH]), AV Gomorrha. See SODOM AND GOMORRAH.


See APPLE, 2(3).


("123, Gen. 6i4f), a very uncertain word, as it occurs only once and is unknown to the other Semitic dialects.

1. Versions.[edit]

The ancient versions have various renderings; ADEL i K fuAwi rerpayuii uji (a<nj7rT<ui and KeSpiixav being cited as alternatives of other interpreters), Vg. de /ignis Ittvigatis, Pesh. of juniper wood, and Targ. of cedar wood. Gopher is by some moderns taken to be the name of a tree ; thus Celsius (1 y&ff.) identifies it as the cypress, being misled by the likeness of names. 1 The word may be akin to 1B3> bitumen itself according to Lag. (IDS 295; but see BITUMEN) properly an Aramaic word, for which the Heb. equivalent is IDn and may also, according to the same scholar, be connected with JVTS3, sulphur, for which an Indo-European etymology is offered (see BRIMSTONE). The most plausible suggestion, therefore, is that of a fragrant resinous wood (so Di.); but the entire uncertainty of the word (see below) must be maintained with Lag. (JJebers. 218).

2. Assyriology.[edit]

The ordinary philological means fail us in dealing with the word Gopher. It is natural therefore to have recourse to Assyriology, which accounts (see DELUGE , 13) for the mention of "\S3 (EV pitch ) in Gen. 614. Is it possible that nsj, or some word which explains it, occurred in an early form of the Babylonian Deluge-story ? If so, what can that word have been ? HaleVy and more recently Hommel (Hastings, DB\mb} compare Bab. -Ass. gipdru ; but this means reed, canebrake (Jensen, Kosmol. 170 /. , 325/1 ; but not so Hal6vy), and would have been more suitable in a description of the ark of Moses than in that of Noah, nsr sj; ( gopher-wood ) should mean the timber of some tree used in shipbuilding when J 2 s Hebraised Babylonian authority (see DELUGE, 10) took shape most probably some kind of cedar.

The original Babylonian or Assyrian phrase probably ran fustf (or giiSure erini i.e., beams of cedar ; see the Ass. Lexx.). Overlooking (/S)erzni, the Hebrew translator mistook guXur for a tree-name, and so produced the phrase -ypy^y- Next, a scribe, who saw 133 at the end of the verse, miswrote the second word 133 (3 and & confounded, as in jy^rp f r I^IVi Job 14 10 MT).

If this is correct, the timber used in the ark would be cedar-wood (erinu). Possibly, too, the substitution of a box (nan) for a ship (elippu] arose from a confusion between erinu cedar and erinnu ([ IIN), box, receptacle, in the phrase gusur (gusiire] erini. See Che. ZATW, 1898, p. 1637.

N. M. , i ; T. K. c. , 2.


(flT3), i S. 176 AV m s-. See JAVELIN, 5.


(roprfeliAC [ANY, but KOPHAC. A in i Macc. 4s]), one of the Syrian generals sent by Lysias against Judas the Maccabee. It was his vain attempt to surprise Judas by a night attack that led to the great battle of EMMAUS [y. v. , i], in which the Syrian army was signally defeated (166-165 B.C.). After this, battle was offered to Gorgias, who declined it, and withdrew precipitately into Philistia(i Mace. 4i^). About two years later, being governor of Idumasa, Gorgias was threatened by a small Jewish force under Joseph and Azarias at Jamnia, which he put to flight (i Mace. 5 55^). In the account of the first incident given in 2Macc. 88^, it is NICANOR [</.v., i], not Gorgias, who is represented as being at the head of affairs ; and in 2 Mace. 1232-37 the second incident, so unfortunate for the Jews, only receives passing notice (v. 34), whilst a fuller but somewhat confused account is given of the defeat and flight of Gorgias.

In 2 Macc. 1^32 for Idumaea (i&ou/nai as) we should prob ably, but not certainly, read Jamnia (ia/i/.i eias), with Grotius (cp i Mace. 5 58 1040, and Jos. Ant. xii. 86), and in v. 36 for Esdris we should perhaps read (with 44, 64, etc. of ) Gorgias (see ESDRIS).

1 In the East chests are often made of the wood of Cupressus sempcrvirens, which is delightfully fragrant. In the Middle Ages they were much in request in Italy.


(ropTYNA [NV]- N( \N [A]; in classical writers fOpryNA or fOpTYN). The rival of Cnossus for supremacy in Crete (Strabo, 476, 478 ; Pol. 4ss/). It lies in the fertile valley of the Lethasus, in the plain Messara, midway between the E. and W. extremities of the island. Its only biblical interest is connected with the presence of Jews (i Macc. 1623) in the time of Ptolemy Physcon (139 B.C. ). In that year, as a result of the suc cessful embassy sent by Judas the Maccabee to Rome, the Senate dispatched a circular-letter in favour of the Jews to Gortyna, and to eighteen other autonomous cities and countries. We may perhaps connect their presence with the abortive attempt of Ptolemy Philopator to surround the extensive site of Gortyn with walls (222- 205 B.C.).

The city was the Roman capital of the island. The site is now marked by the poor village of Agiiis Deka. Among its ruins are those of a church dedicated to Titus, the patron saint of Crete ; it dates from the fourth or fifth century (cp Tit. 15). Gortyn lies ten or twelve miles from FAIR HAVENS (Strabo, 478), so that during the long delay there (Acts 27 9) it is possible that Paul visited the city. See Spratt, Travels and Researches in Crete, 2 26 f. W. J. W.


1 Names and other data in OT.[edit]

but in Judith 1 9 AV GESEM ( JB3 ; peceM [BXAL], peceN [e-g-, D, through later (Hexaplaric?) influence l- rarel y recce/v\, recce, etc ; V S Gessen < C P J en 051254 Gesen [ also Gesem, which agrees with Jer. s etymology]), usually in the phrase the land of Goshen (exc. Gen. 4628*1 29), is in J and E the name of the part of Egypt inhabited by the b'ne Israel from Joseph to Moses. P uses instead the phrase land of Rameses, Gen. 47 n, and remark ably enough < in 4628 appends to KO.& ypuuv ir6\Li> ( = mi?3, to Goshen ) the explanatory gloss e/s yrjv pafj.ecra r). The two expressions are synonymous (see, however, JOSEPH ii., 3). The problem is to determine the situation.

In 4634 Goshen is outside of Egypt and not inhabited by Egyptians ; in v. 28 it is between Pharaoh s and Joseph s residence and Palestine; see also Ex. 13 17 as to its situation on the frontier. It is (Gen. 476 n) the best of the land i.e. , for a pastoral population ; cp v. 6 (Pharaoh s cattle pasturing there). It must therefore have been unsuitable for agriculture i.e. , too far E. to be as regularly irrigated as most of Egypt. In Ex. 23/i- a branch of the Nile flows through (?) it, and a royal residence is near or in it.

2. Greek district of 'Arabia'.[edit]

When we turn to (s we get something more definite : in Gen - 45:10 Goshen is called the 'land of Gesem of Arabia' 1 (yr, ytow dpapias). Unfortunately, 'Arabia' is ambiguous.

There was

  • (1)a nomos of Egypt called ^ dpajSi a (in the Revenue Papyrus of Ptolemy II. always connected with the Bubastite nome ; see further Ptol. 4 5 53 ; Strabo, 803 ; Pliny, 69), correctly identified by Brugsch with the 2oth of Lower Egypt in the Egyptian lists ; J but the Greeks
  • (2) gave the name Arabia also to all the land E. of the Nile. The eastern part, indeed, was a distinct nome (see below) called Heroopolites (possibly the Phagroriopolites 2 of Strabo [840] means Arabia ); but by the Greeks
  • (3) the name Arabia was usually extended so as to include it and to reach to the Crocodile Lake (B. et-TimsSh).

The choice between the alternatives seems easy : @ evidently means by Arabia a special district. It can not well be the Arabian nome, however, as we should expect. On the contrary it must mean a more eastern part of the Arabian district ; the Wady et-Tumilat and its western vicinity E. of Bubastus. This is the view of Gen. 4628 f. (see begin, of art.), where @ is still more definite. It takes Goshen to be a city, Hero- opolis ( ! ). The discovery by Naville of this city = Tell el- Maskhuta Pithom ( = ETHAM [y.v.]), accordingly, has determined the centre of the region intended, and con firmed the general assumption of scholars. There is no evidence in the Egyptian inscriptions, however, that that region was ever called Goshen, a name which, as we shall now see, probably represents an Egyptian name for the western nome (next , end).

1 On name and capital see below, 3.

- With Oppert and Brugsch, the present writer derives this name from Pakrur, the name of the ruler of Pisaptu in the Egyptian Arabia under Asur-bani-pal ( A"/> 2 i6o./C). Phagrori- opolis is possibly identical with the capital.

3. Its western (20th) nome, called Keam.[edit]

We have said that the Greek district of Arabia was occupied by two Egyptian nomes, the western of which (the-zoth, already referred to) was by the Greeks specifically called Arabia. This was the earlier occupied. Its position is determined by the fact that it was called that of the god Sapd(u), l whose chief temple 2 was in the city P-( house of )Sapd(u), 3 a name which evidently has survived in the modern Saft (cp Brugsch, AZ 81 16) el-Hennch, 5 or 6 m. E. of Bubastus. Naville 4 has argued that this P-sapd(u) (Saft el-Henneh), another name for which may have been P-kos(?), is the <t>a.Kov(ra., Phacusi(m), of the Tab. Peut., the Phaguse of Geogr. Rav. , the village between Egypt and the Red Sea of Steph. Byz. , because $a.Kovffffa is called by Ptolemy (iv. 653) the capital of the Arabian nome, and Strabo states that at <ba.Kovff<ra the canal to the Red Sea branched off from the Nile.

The definition of the position of 4>aKouera in the Tab. Peut. (36 R. m. from Pelusium), however, suits better the modern Fakus, 16 m. NE. of Saft el-Henneh, which had been supposed to be Phakusa by modern scholars. On the other hand, that the Greeks might repeatedly have confounded P-kosem (P-Sapd[uJ) with a name like Pakos5(?) (Fakus) may be admitted.

However that may be, the identification of P-sapd(u) (Saft el-Henneh) and P-kos(em) is probable. The inscriptions dealing with sacred geography apply the phrase land of Sapdu to a country Ksm(t] of the East 6 (Duem. Geogr. Inschr. 25). Theshrine of Saft (publ. Naville), pi. 6, calls the gods of Saft gods of Ks ," connecting especially Sapdu with this name Ks. Other texts combine Ksm with the nome of Sapdu, indicating by the orthography sometimes a district, sometimes a city. See 4 on the earliest mention. In any case, it is clear that the name Ksm (A s seems only an abbreviation or defective orthography ) referred originally to the land immediately E. of Bubastus.

1 Sapd(u) is mentioned repeatedly as 'lord of the E. and of the Asiatics' (cp Naville, The Shrine ofJa& el flenneh, 5-13 [‘SS]). In his chief temple (see above) he had the name 'vanquisher of the Asiatics (htv mntyiv), as being a god of the frontier district. The present writer cannot follow de Rouge (Duemichen, Naville), who finds in a coin-legend of the nomos Arabia e?rTa *p(cu !), Se/>ti- Ah\*\c \]oi.

~ It was called the place of the nuts-tree (sycomore? lotus tree ?).

3 Mentioned by A3ur-bani-pal as Pisaptu or Saptu, at the gate of the East.

4 Op. cit. 14^, where a full discussion of the name Goshen is given. Earlier treatises, e.g., in Ebers, Durck Gosen zui Sinai, are now obsolete. On Saft see also Daressy, Rec. trav. 20, 76).

8 KCOS or icoo? /3p/3p ( = Ar. Ius, see Peyron, Lex. 71) is hardly Fhakusa as Champollion (fOg. sous les Phar. 2j6, cp Naville) thought. The article / is not pha-, fa-. Lists of bishoprics make the Arabian nome = Fakus, which is in favour of Naville s theory.


k = g in the transcription is regular; but not Egyptian s =

[map of GOSHEN goes here]

4. Also the eastern (8th?)[edit]

The question arises : Was the range of Ksm ( =Goshen 8) extended to the newly colonised territory to the E. of saft? This might have been done by the new settlers and the Palestinians. The sacred Egyptian lists, however, treat this eastern country ^at least after 300 B.C.) as a distinct nomos, the eighth of Lower Egypt, 1 called Eastern. . . ," 2 its capital being Tk(t), Jk*(t), Tko(t] (read T"ko?}, which had the sacred name P-atum. (See SUCCOTH and PITHOM on the question whether these names are identical. )

The principal god was Atum of Heliopolis, dwelling in the temple seat (or house) of (the serpent) Kerli evidently this was the earlier local divinity. The canal flowing through the land was the Ilai-tna (Ifalid),* water, so called from the many crocodiles (Jtehna in the language of the Hatnitic Troglodytes) 4 which have given its name also to the present Timsah-lake. This lake had in ancient times the name fni-serk* Scorpion lake.

If. Consequently the Semitic, or at least non-Egyptian origin of the name, proposed already by Semitic scholars, becomes very probable. The name seems to have been obsolete after 400 B.C., so that s small inaccuracy in making Heroopolis the capital becomes intelligible.

1 On our present knowledge of the material, see Naville, PithontW.

- m? The proposed reading (nefer) of this sign is very A doubtful. The site of the Western . . . to which TJ< this name is opposed, is not quite certainly de termined.


4 See WMM in ll ZKM, >6, P- 3-


7 This was the point selected for attack e.g., by the English army so recently as in the campaign against Arabi. On the history of the fortification, which seems to go back to the first four dynasties, see WMM As. it. Kur. 43-45. The site of it is un known. We should look for it near the Great Black Lake i.e., about the S. end of the Crocodile Lake, according to the earlier passages. The Se-nu/iyf-^ory (I/. 3, 8), however, would place it several hours march from the lake. Griffith has found a passage of dyn. 12 (Kahun-Pap. 2 14), which speaks of the fortification of Sapdu ($) (in) Ksm. Therefore, the wall of the middle empire is to be sought for in the eastern part or near the entrance of the wady.

The eighth nome belonged to the country called n 6 ( aian? see ^fant, Plin. //TV 6 29, as name of the gulf of Suez), which included the desert between the gulf and Heliopolis (also the modern Mokattam-mountain opposite Memphis). This desert region was originally inhabited only by a few Semitic and some Troglodytic nomads ; it was unfit for agriculture, the narrow valley alone being reached by the yearly inundations, and that irregularly. At a very remote time, indeed, the Egyptians had in the Wady et-Tumllat, a strong fortification called the wall of the prince, to guard (against the inroads of the nomads) the most vulnerable spot of the Egyptian frontier ; 7 but the colonisation of the eighth (eastern) nomos seems to have been due entirely to the great king Ram(e)ses or Ra messu II. (in the first twenty years of his reign), who must have improved the irrigation. The chief cities founded by him were : The house of Ram(e)ses with a royal residence and temples of Amon, Suteh, Astart, and Buto, 1 evidently not very far E. , and P-Atuni = Pithom on the site, of modern Tell el-MashfUa. It is very ques tionable whether before Ram(e)ses II. there were in the eastern part of the valley any Egyptian settlements except the fortification mentioned above ; at any rate, it fully deserved the name that it came to bear in later times land of Ram(e)ses (this would hardly apply to the old western district). The position of the land colonised by Rameses was very advantageous. It possessed a healthy desert climate and was most fertile as long as the canal to the Crocodile Lake was kept in order. 2 The extension of the canal of Ram(e)ses 3 to the Red Sea by Necho I. increased the commercial im portance of the district. Quite recently, the repairing of the canal has trebled the population, now 12000, of this district, which forms a part of the modern province esh-Sharkiye. Heroopolis-Patum thus became an im portant place 4 for the trade on the Red Sea, where also the Romans built a fortified camp.

5. The biblical and the Egyptian Goshen.[edit]

Thus we see that Kesm - Goshen and land of Ram(e)ses were with the Egyptians hardly identical. The country of Ram(e)ses could be only the eighth ( eastern ) nome. The application to that (eastern) district, of the (obsolete and rare) name Kesm (vocalise Kosm ?) of the western (20th nome) has not yet been shown on the (later) Egyptian monuments.

The Hebrew story (Nu. 33 $f.) of the Israelites marching two days (Rameses to Succoth, Succoth to Etham) through the whole valley of Tumilat (instead of starting from its eastern end) might suggest to some a mistake of P, JE placing the country of the Israelites between Bubastus, Belbes, and Tell Abu Isleman (cp Naville). The probabilities, however, of such a theory are small ; all sources seem to mean the same part of the country.

Probably Heroopolis had, before the extension of the canal by Necho I., less importance, and the possibility that once also the eastern district had P-sapdu as capital and belonged to the district Ksm is, therefore, not to be denied. It must be confessed that the geographical texts upon which we have to rely date from Ptolemaic times only. The division of the Arabian district may have been different in earlier centuries.

Tradition has been exceptionally- fortunate with the name Goshen; 1 Makrlzi, in particular, identified Goshen with the region between Belbes and the land of the Amalekites. The limitation of Goshen to Sadir, a village NE. of Belbes, by Sa adia (and Abu-sa id) is as strange as the limitation to Fostaf (Old Cairo) by Bar Bahlfil. Modern scholars have, on the contrary, frequently extended Goshen too widely : Ebers, e.g. , included in it the whole eastern delta between the Tanitic branch (cp Targ. Jer. which made Goshen the land of Pelusium ), Heliopolis, and the Bitter Lakes. We can afford to neglect certain hypotheses which date from the period before the decipherment of the hieroglyphics ; for the situation erroneously assumed by Brugsch, see EXODUS, 13. w. M. M.

1 A poetic description of the new city is to be found in papyrus Anastasi, 4 6.

  • Neglect of the canal always led immediately to an

encroachment of the desert upon the narrow cultivable area.

3 The canal was 50 cubits wide (according to Strabo ; 100 ft. according to Pliny [<i 165] ; 50 yards according to traces near Balbes) and 30 ft. deep (according to Pliny ; 16-17 Engl. ft. according to modern traces).

4 The canal was repaired by Darius, Ptolemy II., Trajan whence the name of the province Augustamnica from the Canalis Trajanus.


(|^5; r oco/v\ [BAFL] ; COSHN). i. A land mentioned in Deuteronomistic portions of Joshua among other districts of S. Canaan, Josh. 1041 (yijv y. [AFL]), 11 16 (yrjv y. [BAFL]). It is strange to find the name of Goshen outside the limits of Goshen proper. Hommel (AHT 2277. 237 ; cp Exp. T. 8 15 [Oct. 96]), supposes that as the Israelites in Egypt multiplied, the area allotted to them was extended, and that the strip of country between Egypt and Judah, which still belonged to the Pharaoh, was regarded as an integral part of the land of Goshen. This is obviously a con servative hypothesis (see EXODUS i. , 2 ; MIZRAIM, 2 b}. The text, however, may need criticism. That the MT sometimes misunderstands, or even fails to observe, geographical names, is plain ; we have learned so much from Assyriology. Let us then suppose that Goshen is wrongly vocalised, and should be j^p = wu, and compare the name of the Galilaean town a^fl Pia ( fat soil ), the Gischala of Josephus. Other solutions are open ; we may at any rate presume that this old Hebrew name had a Semitic origin, see 2.

As they now stand, Josh. 10 41 and 11 16 do not convey the same geographical picture. The words in 11 16, all the Negeb and all the land of Goshen (j^ aH) and the Shephelah, suggest that the Goshen lay between the Negeb or southern steppe region and the Shephelah or Lowlands. We might hold that it took in the SW. of the hill-country of Judah. In Josh. 1041, where we read all the land of Goshen as far as Gibeon, we may presume that some words have dropped out after Goshen. Cp NEGEB, g 4.

2. A town in the SW. of the hill-country of Judah, mentioned with Debir, Anab, etc., Josh. 1051 [P], Probably an echo of the old name of a district in the same region (see i). Cp Gesham. T. K. C.

1 The Coptic versions, which simply transliterate, seem, however, to have lost all tradition. Possibly the vocalisation of yecreM disguised the Egyptian name to them. A woman pilgrim of the fourth century places the terra Gesse 16 R. m. from Heroopolis, calling the capital civitas Arabia. She believed Ram(e)ses to be 4 R. m. to the E. of this capital (see Naville, S/irine of S. 19), meaning apparently Saft.