Encyclopaedia Biblica/Belmen-Beth Rapha

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search



(RV Belmaim) is mentioned, in connection with the defensive measures of the Jews against Holo- fernes, in Judith 4 4t. The readings are BeAMAiN [A], BaiA. [B]. &BeA. [vS]; Syr. JJa^^^^^/ (Abel- meholah) ; Vet. Lat. Abelmam. Belmen would thus appear to be the same as the Belmain [EV] (BeABMM [BA], ABeA.[X]. Syr. ilcuOD'^a^^ Vg. Dehna, Vet. Lat. Ahelme) of Judith 7 3. which, obviously, is re- garded as lying near Dothan, and therefore cannot be the Abel-maim of aCh. I64, nor perhaps the Baal- Hamon of Ct. 811. The place meant is probably Ibleam (modern Btr Bel'ameh), a town of strategical importance. In Judith 8 3 this place is probably in- tended by Bai.amo, RV Balamon (/3a\a/xa)v [BXAj, Syr. < o>n\x^ > KiaA), and if we might assume that the translator had a correct text and understood it rightly, we should be justified in restoring ^aXa/noju for fieX/xaiv in 44. Certainly none of the readings in 44 can be accepted as reproducing the original name. T. K. C.

1 , however, not inaptly, finds a reference to the ' bellows of the smith" in Job. 32 19, where D'Vin nUK, 'new bottles,' is rendered (j). xoAict'uis (reading D'w'^^).


or as, following the Greek form, he is called in Baruch In/!, Balthasar, R V Baltasar

(l-VSK'^3, or, less correctly, "1-V'4'J<^3 : BaAtacar i@87Thcod.j_ which is also used as the equivalent of ")-V^?^'Pr5" Belteshazzar,' see Daniel ii. 213), was, according to the Book of Daniel, a son and successor of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. The length of the reign of Belshazzar is not given ; but we read in Dan. 8 1 of ' the third year ' of his reign. In Dan. 530/ [31/] it is stated that he was slain, and that on his death the empire passed into the hands of Darius the Mede. All references to Belshazzar in other authors, including that in the apocryphal Book of Baruch (In/), appear to have been suggested Vjy the passages in Daniel ; and, since it is now recognised that the Book of Daniel was composed in the second century B.C., the narrative is open to question.

Till quite lately it was the fashion to follow Jos. (.-i;//. X. 11 2) in identifying the Belshazzar of Daniel with the last Babylonian king, Na/3odj'5r?Xos, whom Jos. else- where calls ^al36i'i>r]dos (in a citation from Berossus ; see c. Ap. I20) ; in Herod. 177:88 this king appears as \a.vv<i)To<i, and in Abydenus (quoted by Eus. Pr. Ev. 941) as Na/ia'fi5oxos. Against the identification of Belshazzar with Nabonnedus it was urged that the latter, according to Berossus, was not even a relation of Nebuchadrezzar, but ' a certain Bab}lonian ' who usurped the throne in consequence of a revolution ; nor was Nabonnedus slain, like the Belshazzar of Daniel, on the overthrow of the Babylonian empire, but is stated to have been sent to the province of Carmania (the modern Kirman). These objections were so serious that a few writers, in their anxiety to defend the narrative of Daniel, identified Belshazzar with Evil-merodach (2 K. 2527).

The discovery of the Babylonian inscriptions has refuted both of the above-mentioned theories, and has at the same time confirmed the opinion that the narrative in Daniel is unhistorical. An unhistorical narrative, how- ever, is not necessarily a pure fiction, and in this case it appears probable that the author of Daniel made use of a traditional storj'. It is now known that Nabonnedus, the Nabu-naid of the inscriptions, who reigned from 555 to 538 B.C., had a son called Bel-sar-u.sur [i.e., ' Bel, preserve thou the king'), a name of which Belshazzar is evidently a corruption. In a celebrated inscription Nabu-na'id offers up a prayer in behalf of ' Bel-sar-usur, the exalted (or, my first-born) son, the sprout of my body (///. heart)': see Schr. COT 2131, and also A'B Si 96/ Moreover, in certain contract-tablets, dating from the first, third, fifth, seventh, eleventh, and twelfth years of Nabu-na'id, Bel-sar-usur, the son of the king, is expressly named. Several other tablets of the same reign speak of a ' son of the king ' ; but whether in all these cases Bel-sar-u.sur is meant cannot be determined, since Nabu-na'id appears to have had at least one other son."-^ It is, however, generally believed that Bel-sar-usur must be identical with the prince mentioned in an inscription of Cyrus, which informs us that in the seventh, ninth, tenth, and eleventh jears of the reign of Nabu-naid, ' the son of the king ' was at the head of the army in Akkad i.e., Northern Babylonia. Unfortunately, this very important inscription is mutilated, so that we learn nothing of the years twelve to fifteen of Nabii-na'id, and in the account of the sixteenth year only a few words are legible. Of the se\enteenth and last year of Nabu-na'id there is a long account ; but it would seem very doubtful whether ' the son of the king ' is mentioned

1 IPapraa-ap Th. (Aa?mg.) in Dan. 1 7 and in (P* Dan. 226 456 16 thrice 5 i 8 i.]

2 Darius Hvstaspis tells us in one of his inscriiptions (Spiegel, Alipers. Kci'linschr.i'^) \o f. ['81]) that early in his reign a rebellion was raised at Babylon by an impostor who professed to be ' Nabukudra9ara, son of Nabunita' i.e., Nebuchadrezzar, son of Nabfi-na'id. This proves, at least, that at the time in question Nabu-na'id was believed to have had a son named Nebuchadrezzar. See Che., Jew. Rel. Life, Lect. i.

again.* In any case, it is implied that Nabfl-nS'id, not BCl-s;ir-usur, was at this time commander of the army in Akkad (see yVSVA/ 7 i39-'76. A'Z; 3 /> 128-137. and O. E. Hagen, ' Keilschrifturkunden zur Gesch. des Kbnigs Cyrus ' in the /^^^//r.j^fc s//r /^jjyr. [e<l. Delitzsch and HauptJ '2214-225 ['94]). We |x)ssess, moreover, another inscription of Cyrus, describing the con()uest of Babylonia at considerable length and expressly men- tioning King Nabuna'id, but without any reference to a 'son of the king' (see JKAS, new series, 1270-97, A'^ 3 /i 120-127, and lieilrdge sur y^w/. 2 208-215). Hence there is nothing to prove that liC-l-sar-usur played any important i)art at the close of his father's reign, and it is even possible that he may have died some years earlier.

Thus it will be seen that, apart from the similarity of name, the historical prince Bel-sar-usur bears but a very slight resemblance to the Belshazz.ar of Daniel. The one is the son of the usurper Nabuna'id ; the other is the son of Nebuchadrezzar. The one is, at the most, heir to the throne ; the other is actually king, for docu- ments are datefi from the year of his accession (Dan. 7 i 81). Moreover, if the ordinary rendering of Dan. 5 7 1629 be correct, Ifelshazzar is represented as sole king, for a man who can of his own authority make any one he pleases ' third ruler in the kingdom ' must clearly be supreme in the state. Since, however, the word trans lated ' third ruler ' occurs now here else, and is of very doubtful meaning, it would be unsafe to press this argument.

In order to prove that Bel-5ar-usur reigned conjointly with his father, it has sometimes been asserted that king Mardnk-iar- usur, who is mentioned on certain Babylonian tablets, must be identical with Hel-5ar-usur ; but Assyriologists now admit that king Marduk-5ar-usur reigned be/ore Nabuna'id, and identify him with Nergal-5ar-usur (559-555 B.C. : see 7'SBA ti 108, and Tide's B.IO 476 n. [i886-88]). It has likewise been urged that, though Bcl-5ar-usur was not a son of Nebuchadrezzar, he may have been a grandson of Nebuch.'idrezzar through his mother ; but the theory that Nabuna'id married a daughter of Nebuchadrezzar rests upon no evidence whatever.

It remains, therefore, altogether uncertain how the story in Daniel really originated ; but, besides the similarity of the names Belshazzar and Bel-sar-usur, there is at least one reason for thinking that King Bel- shazzar was not invented by the author. Herodotus, as has been mentioned, calls the last Babylonian king Labynetus, representing him as the son of an earlier Labynetus, the famous Nebuchadrezzar. Further, in a Chaldaian legend related by Abydenus, the last king of liibylon seems to have figured as a son of Nebuchad- rezzar (see Schr. ' Die Sage vom W'ahnsinn Nebuchad- nezar's," in the /PT, i88i, pp. 618-629). The date of the historian Abydenus is indeed doubtful ; but he can hardly have borrowed either directly or indirectly from the Book of Daniel, so that the agreement of these three accounts in wrongly describing the last Babylonian king as a son of Nebuchadrezzar must be due to their having followed some popular tradition. See also ASHPENAL, SHAREZER.

a. A. B.


(n'TO) Jobl22it RV. AV 'strength.' See GIRDLE, 3.


(l-'iNti'^^a). See Daniel, ii. 13.


(Is. 10 4 corr. te.xt). See Gebal.


(|5. S f>-\)> ^ Levite, enumerated between Zechariah and Jaaziel (i Ch. ISiSf). 0'- renders ' Zax- vidi leiT^X"; but "ka^ ^o doubt rightly, omits. The name is wanting in the parallel list in i Ch. 152o. Cp Jaazif.i,.

1 ITie passage which Schrader in 1800 translated ' the wife of the king had died' is supposed by Pincbcs to mean ' the son of the king died' (see Smith's >B(-), 1893, article ' Belshazjar '), while Hagen renders 'he [i.e., GulxxruJ slew the .son of the king ' (he is careful, however, to indicate that the word ' son ' is doubtful). It is therefore obvious that no argument can be built upon the clause in question.


(3nr3J<-19. ' >" of Abinadab, so .\\), the name of one of Solomon's prefects, 1 K. 4 II kV AV'i:- (yioy aBinaAaB[A], xinanaA. [L]; 0" is corrupt, btit perhajjs xeiN ANAAan represents the name [Swete reads )(e|^g ana AanJi ; see .Soi.o.mon. Klostermann, however, suggests nyax. 'Abiner'; i and n are easily confounded, and the final 2 in au'SK niay Ije really the pre|x)sition ('in') prefixed to 'all Naphath- dor," or 'all the height of Dor' (I'A'), words which define the extent of the prefecture.


(-in^J-l in Nos. i /. 4/ 11, and n;33 in Nos. 1-3. 6-1 I ; ' Yah hath built up,' 31 [see Bani] ;

BanaiaLc] Ll^AL], Bangac. BeNiAC L*<* '" i <-'i- 16 s]).

I. (i.t:3 ; but in 2 .S. 20 23 1 Ch. 11 22 n'ls) b. Jehoiada. a ' valiant man ' (see Isn-ii.\i, the son OK), only second, on Davids roll of honour, to 'the three." He was a Judahite of Kabzeel, and commanded the so-called Chekktihtks and Pelktiiites (2 S. 818 jSapai \i]. ^avayaias [A], 2O23 1 Ch. I817), and David set him over his bodyguard (nyccD 2 S. 2823). He gave valu- able support to Solomon against AdoNIJAH (i), and after executing the sentence of death on Joab, was appointed to the vacant post of general ( 1 K. 1 32-38 234 [om. 6"] 35 ^avaiov [BA] 44 [om. "]).i Three (or at any rate two) special exploits were assigned to him in popular tradition (2 S. 2;32o/. = i Ch. 11 22/ [Kavaia B]). On the first two see Akiee, i ; a correction of the text is indispensable. The other feat consisted in his slaying a ' Misrite ' (2 S. 23 21) i.e., a man of Musr or Musri (see Mizkaim, 2). This hero is twice mentioned in a list of no value in i Ch. 27 (5/ 34). I-.ach time there is an inaccuracy. In ?. 5 (1<\') Benaiah's father is described (by an obvious confusion of names) as ' the priest ' ; in v. 34 ' Jehoiada son of Benaiah ' takes the place of ' Benaiah son of Jehoiada.' Cp Jehoiada, 2, and see David, 11 (c) i.

2. One of David's thirty, a Pirathonite ; 2 S."233o (i,t:3 ; corruptly tov E<f>paBaLov [B], om. AL); i Ch. II31 27 14 (,TJ3).


3. A Simeonite chief (1 Ch. 436 [om. B]).

4. A Levite singer of the .second grade, one of those who played with psalteries set to Ala.moth (y.v.), 1 Ch. IJ182024 OamifBNAI-Dl.-.s.

5. An overseer in the temple in the time of Hezekiah (2 Ch. 31 > 3)-

6. An ancestor of Jahaziel [^] ; 2 Ch. 2O14 (om. b).

7-10. In list of those with foreign wives (see EzR.\, i. 5 end), viz. 7. One of the b'ne Parosh (17.?'.), Ezral025 (/uoi-aia []) = I Ksd.926, Baanias, RV Bannkas (fiawaiai [BA]). 8. One of the b'ne Pahath-Moab (f.v.), Ezral03o; in || i Esd. V'31 perhaps Naidus (vai&oi [B], vaei. [.\], Pavatav, and ^laSaai [L]). 9. One of the b'ne Bani, Ezra 10 35, in II i Esd.934 MabdaI, RV Mamdai QiatuSau [B], fiavSai [A], Pavaia [L]). 10. One of the b'ne Nebo (^.7'., iv.) (fiavai [L]), Ezral043 = 1 Esd.935 BANAlAsOSai-ai [L]).

II. P'ather of Pelatiah (,f.z>., 4), Ez. 11 1 (i.Tja), v. 13 (,TJ3, 6 ToO pa^awv).


(^pril). Gen. 19 38. See Ammon. 1.


(wH"'), Kz. 27 6t AV. See Ship.


RV Ben-deker (If^V;.'^) ; one of Solomons prefects, in charge of NW. Judah(i K. 49, YIOC PHXAC [H], . . . -xa8[I-]. Y- Aakap [AJI. The name is improbable ; nor is (5s Ben-Rechab any more probable. It is reasonable to hold that, as in other cases, the father of this prefect was an influential officer of the crown. The prefect's real name has certainly dropped* out. Klostermann suggests that we may re- store thus: 'Klihoreph, son of .Shisha the secretary" (v. 3). Ben-dekar is not impossibly a corruption of BenelK>rak [1/. v. ]. The locality suits.


(pn?"":?), a Danite city, the modern Ibn Ihrdk, about an hour SI-',, from Joppa (Josh. 1545: BanaiBakat [B], BanhBarak [AL] :

t In the list given at the end of chap. ii. by "t- he is described as iri Ttfi a.vXa.(t\i<K tai 7ri tov -nKivBtiov , i.e., f3; 2^ of 3 S. 1231, for which, however, i- has fiaic^/So.

bane et harach [Vg.] ; . ^y^Xs')- It appears in Ass. (upon an inscription of Sennacherib) as banaibarka (cp KA 7<-' 172). Jerome mentions a village liareca, which was situated near yVzotus. The name (properly a clan name) may be paraphrased, 'Sons of the storm-god '-^ Rammiin or Rimmon ' (who was sometimes called Rannuan-birku ; see Barak), and is thus of interest as a survival of the old Canaanitish religion.


(ji?!;! *J3), Nu..333i/.t See BEEROTH OF THE CHILDREN OF JAAKAN.



K.4.3 AV'"K- RV, AV

Gkhi;k, i.


(TtH \^. 43, 48 ; yioc AAep [BAL] Y. AAep [A] in 2 K. 1824: aAaA [A] in 2K. I325; jjj,;^), or rather Bir-'idri ; (5 is at least a witness to the letter R at the end of the name.

1. Name.[edit]

The divine name Bir was confounded by a Hebrew scribe with the Aramaic bar, ' son,' and trans- lated into Hebrew as Ben (=(5 vlbs), and DR was miswritten UD ; hence arose the wrong form Ben-hadad. The name in Assyrian is (ilu) IM-'idri, where the ideograph IM is most naturally read Ramman (the .Assyrian thunder-god ; cp En-RIMMON), but may of course be read (and probably was read also) Bir or Bur (cp the name Bir-dadda, and see Bf.dau). The mean- ing is 'Bir is my glory." See Wi. ATUnters. 68^, who controverts Schr. and Del. ; but cp Schr. A'A T^^ 200, Del. Ctihver Bib. Lex.<!~) 97, and Hilprecht, As- syriaca, 76-78.

2. Benhadad I[edit]

The name Ben-hadad is used as a general name for the kings of Damascus in Jer. -19 27 ; but as this passage occurs in a very late oracle, made up of borrowed phrases, the use is of no historical significance. In fact, Amos, from whom the author of Jer. I.e. borrows the phrase ' the palaces of Benhadad,' means most probably by Benhadad (Am. 1 4) the first king of Damascus who bore that name : he sjieaks, in the parallel line, of 'the house of Hazael.' Hazael was certainly a historical person : he was the successor of Benhadad I. (others say Benhadad H.). Consequently, Benhadad in Amos's phrase 'the palaces of Benhadad ' cannot be a merely typical name, as in the imitative passage, Jer. 4927. There are two (some, however, say three) Benhadads in the Books of Kings, just as there are (really) two Hazaels (see H.\zael).

I. Bkn-hadad I., son of Tab-rimmon, was the ally of .^s.'V \_q.v. , i], king of Judah, against Baasha, king of Israel (i K. If)i8^). He was an energetic king, and constantly involved in warfare, not only with Ahab of Israel, whom he appears to have besieged in Samaria (2 K. 6/ ), but also with Shalmaneser II. of Assyria. In 854, at the head of a Syro- Palestinian league which included Israel, he opposed Shalmaneser, not without success. For, though Shalmaneser claims to have been victorious at Karkar (near Hamath), he certainly had to return to .\ssyria to prepare for a more decisive campaign. Again in 849 and in 848 Shalmaneser, though nominally victorious, had to return. Convinced that lie had no ordinary oppxjnent, the Assyrian king entered on his next campaign with a much larger force than before. Bir-"idri, however, had taken his pre- cautions, and again it was only an indecisive victory that was gained by Shalmaneser. On the relations between Benhadad and Ahab, in which there was apparently a change for the advantage of Israel, see Aii.\B, % ^ff. Benhadad is sometimes referred to, not by name, but as 'the king of Syria' ; see i K. '22 2 K. .5 68^ Some unnecessary trouble has been produced ( i ) by the supposition that the period between 'Benhadads' assistance to .\sa and ' Benhadad's ' death (which

1 Pesh. seems to point to the reading pna-Syai ' the lightning Baal.'

  • Cp the obscure name Boanerges.

occurred between 846 and 842) was too long to be assigned to a single king of Damascus, and (2) by the reading of the name of the opponent of .Shalmaneser II. as Dad-'idri, which, again, is supposed to be equivalent to Hadad-ezer. On the first point it is enough to remark (after Wi. )that Tab-rimmon may (Rezon and Hezion not being identical) have been for a long time a contemporary of Baasha and Asa, so that only about forty ye.ars may have elapsed between Benhadad's war with Baasha and his death. On the second point, it may be doubted whether the reading Dad-'idri is tenable;' the equation IM = Ramman (or Bir) appears to have been made out (see alwve) ; and even were it otherwise, it could hardly be held that ' idri is ' the Aramaic form oi ezer' in niimn (Sayce, Crit. and Man. 316), for an y would have made the alteration of 'idri into nn,T impossible. 'Jdru {'idiru), whence 'idri ('my . . .'), seems in fact to be derived from 'adaru, ' to be wide, grand ' (mx ; cp Heb. m,i). On the narra- tive of the death of Benhadad (2 K. 87-15), see Hazaei,.

3. Benhadad II.[edit]

2. Benhadad II. By this king is here me;int, not the contemporary of Ahab (often wrongly so designated), but the son of Hazael (possibly the grandson of Benhadad I.). The oppression of Israel, begun by Hazael, was continued by this lien-hadad

(2K. 133). But was his name really Ben-hadad? Ramman-nirari III. (see Assyria, 32) mentions a king of Damascus named Mari', whom he besieged in his capital, and compelled to pay tribute. This event must have occurred between 806 or 805 and 803. Now Benhadad II. is represented as a contemporary of Jehoahaz, son of Jehu, who probably reigned (see Chronology, 34) from 814-798. It is ditti- cult to suppose that another king named Mari' came between Hazael and Benhadad. More probably Mari', and not Benhadad, is the right name of the son of Hazael. This king may have sought to compensate himself for the blow inflicted by Assyria, by exercising tyranny over Israel. (For a different view of the l^n- hadads see Damascus, 7.) T. K. c.


(7^n"|.'3, 'son [man] of might"), one of Jehoshaphat's commissioners for teaching the Law (2 Ch. 177). The name, however, is suspicious. Beriheau quotes Ben-hesed ('son of lovingkindness '), i K. 4io (MT) ; but the reading there is doubtful (see Bkn- HESED, 3). BAL and Pesh. read ".^^ for "|3 (toii viovsTuiv dvvarQv ; but '- adds t6v vidv aiK) ; cpGray, HPN 65 n. 2. If the story of Jehoshaphat's commis- sion is only ' ideal,' we may surmise that the name Ben- hail is equally unhistorical.


(pn"j3 i.e. 'son of a gracious one' a patronymic ; yiOC 4)&NA [B]. Y- ANAN [A], -nn, [L]), a son of Shimon [q.v-), a Judahite (i Ch. 420).


(lDn"\3, 'son of kindness* ; an im- possible name, see below), the third in the list of Solomon's prefects (i K.4io, AV 'son of Hesed'; YIOC eccoe [B], . . . ecA [A], aa&xci Y'OC exwLBHp] [L])-

1. Prefect of Hebron?[edit]

His prefecture included, at any rate, Socoh ; but which of the different Socohs ? If we look at the sphere

'^'^ ^"^^ prefect whose name precedes his

^^^ ^^^^ southern Socohs mentioned in Joshua, either that in the mountains near Hebron, or that in the Shi5phelah, SW. of Jerusalem. If, on the other hand, we consider the sphere of the two prefects whose names follow his, a northern Socoh, which is possibly referred to in early Egj'ptian name-lists (see

I.Del. (Caki<er Bih. /.f.r.<^) 97) conjectures, as the original form of the name of Henh.idad II., Bin-Addu-'idri, which he interprets ' the son of .^ddu ( = Ramman) . . .' Pinches h.is, in fact, found the names Hin (?) -Addu-natan and Bin(?) -Addu- amar, which occur on tablets of King Nabuna'id. See, however, Wi. A TUntcrs. 69, n. i.

SocoH, a), will be more suitable. The decision must Ik.' in favour of one of the two southern places of the name, ln-causc otherwise the land of Judah will have h.id no ijri'fi'ct. Which of the two southern Socohs, then, is theri^ht one? I'rolwhly that in the rich corn- growing country of the ShC|)hil.ih, lx?cause the prefects had to supply provisions for the court. ' The whole Lind of Hcphcr ' also fell to his lot. There are traces of this name in the N. (Hephkr, i. 2 ; cp Gathhepher, Hapharaini). Hut if this i)refect is the only southern one, we must cxjiect the land of Hcphcr to be some large district (this, indeed, is implied by the whole land'). In i Ch. 4i8 we hear of a Hebcr (lan) who was the father of Socoh. Plainly this Heber is closely connectcxl with Hebron (as the licros eponymus). 3 and B are easily confouiuletl from a phonetic cause : we should, therefore, proUibly re;\d lan {"^K'^JS. ' the whole land of llelKT," or, better, 'of Hebron" (I'lian).

2 Residence at Mareshah ?[edit]

2. His place of residcnc-e is in MT called Arubboth. AimIj in Josli. 1552 (see Klo.)does not help us. *

"'^^'^^ '^"^ ^^^ "' ^^ reading nmy

^^ "^=^- -^"^^l^g""^ phenomena else- 

where suggest that nia should be n'a,

and that it h.is bc-en misplaced. nNn'a (cp ^atup in I'. 8 [I!L], i)orhaps for ' Heth-horon ' ) could, of course, l)e only a nuitilated form of a name. To read Hcthlehem ' would \>c nuich too Ixjld, and Rietogabra (moil. />'(/ Jihrin) would not suit, since the name occurs late, and (as Huhl points out. Pal. 192) the description of the battle of .Mareshah in 2 Ch. 14 9 is opjjosed to the assumption that there was a town on the site of Baeto- gabra in early times. It is quite possible, however, that the neighbouring town of Mareshah had a second name sc;ircely IJelh-gibborim, but perhaps Helh-horim, ' place of caves'* that has lieen corruptefl into Arub- both. Din*n"3 may have been partly mutilated and partly corrupted in the record into nxn"3, whence nmK. especially if c"in was written with the mark of abbrevia- tion ('nn or Sn). The conjecture is geographically plausible. .\t the present day Bet-Jibrin is rightly described as ' the capital of the .Shephelah ' ; ^ this is set forth more fully elsewhere (see El.KUTHEROPOLls). suffice it to remark here that if Het-Jibrin became the ' centre of the district * after the fall of Mareshah, the earlier city cannot have been less important in the time of Solomon. If Taanach and Mcgiddo are mentioned in the record of the prefectures, surely Mareshah, under this or some other name, must have been men- tioned too. Now, Het-Jibrin is only 20 min. N. of Mer'ash (Mareshah).

We have spoken of Iteth-horim as possibly an early name of Mareshah. This designation would harmonise excellently with the natural features of the neighbour- hood of Mareshah and Ha'togabra. The excavation of the caverns which now fill the district must have begun in ancient times. The Christian and Islamic marks and inscriptions which are sometimes found do not oppose this obvious supposition. Sc-e Ei.EUTHEROPOLIS, 2.

3 Real name Ahijah ?[edit]

We now turn to consider Ben-he.sed's real name. Klostermann has made it probable that the first two prefects were descrilied as sons of Zadok, the priest, and Shisha (Shavsha), the secretary, respectively (cp v. 2/.).

It is viT)' possible that non-p should be read isbn-j3. ' son of the secretary, ' and that the prefect was in fact the .\hijah mentioned in v. 3. This is slightly favoured by i-'s (/x)ax> but really rests on internal probability (cp Bii)k.\k). The misreading non^ia is touching, as a

' Beth-horim, 'place of caves,' would naturally come to be explained ' pUice of the Horitcs' (see Eleutheroi-oi.is, S 2); the Horites were no doubt regarded as giants (gibb<")r = yi)<a9 >), like the Anakim. Hebron is called in Targ. Jon. Gen. 232 ' the city of the giants.'

GASm. HG 231.

monument of the sufferings of the later Jews under a Tpn-|J^ '\i, 'an unkindly (cruel) people' Ps. 43i.

T. K. C.


(D5n-]9), Josh. 15818.6; EVsonof

HiN.NO.M ' [i/.V.).

BEN HUR[edit]

AV 'son of Hur' [</.v.]Cy\r\-\^, 'son of Horus'?; B<MU)p[BL]. BCN Yioc copfA], oypHC IJos. Ant. viii. 2 3]), one of Solomon's prefects (i K.4 8); sec Solomon. The prefect's own name is omitted ; probably his father's name also ; for the evidence tends to show that most of the prefects were the sons of famous men. The name of his city also is wanting. Yet the hill-country of Ephraim was not deficient m places of importance. Consetjucntly either Hur or Ben-hur must Ix; incorrect. Either ' Hur ' stands in the place of one of David's and Solomon's heroes, or Berf-hur is a corruption of the name of the prefect's city. 6*'s rendering may seem to protect Ben. But nowhere else in s version of this section is ^^ given instead of vl6s (vl6^ is of course an interpolation) ; if the j3 represented by 0-^ is correct, we m\iz\. suppose that it is a mutilated form of j,-i3, ' priest ' (as -\o in non in v. 10 may be of ib2). In this case, Arariah, son of 2^adok the priest (v. 2), will be the prefect's name, and his city will be nin== Beth-horon. Azariah, therefore, stands first in both lists, which is intrinsic- ally probable. If, however, we follow the ^aiwp of "'-, the prefect's city alone has come down to us ; /Sato)/) may represent Bethhoron. i;n may easily have come from j'nin Horon (abbrev. from Bethhoron). So, j in the main, Klostermaim. T. K. c.


(iy23, 79 (3), 'our son'?; BCNiA/weiN r^X]. Banoymm t-^l -OYIA [I-]). Levitc signatory to the covenant (see EzKA, i. 7), Neh. 10 13 [14].


(Wl^2 often ; but pc; =;3 [sic; sc-e Ba.

note] I S. 9i Kt. ; Names, 48. 73; BeNl&/v\[6]lN

or Bain. [BALJ).

The geiuilic is Benjamlte, 'rD-|3 [i.s. O21I, 'rc'n-a

[Judg.315], al.so 'j'?? in2b. '20i[iS. !i]ami iS.'.i4; perli.ips also in iS.4i2 [cp ; MT p'ja) ; pi. :"; '-.2 [judg. Ii>i6 1 S. 227I ; M[Ml[fl"'l>')atos, [.].e^o-[f]i (HAlV), see i Ch. 27 12 ; in i.S. 227 iffiffvi. l.\]; in i.^.!t4 <pi> has ia<cnn and (Bl- lafiiv; in 2S. 2O1 L has apa\et ; in 2 S. 23 29 (B-^ /Saoiaou; in Ne. 12 34 0l /juafjidi' ; in Zcch. 14 10 ipN* /Scto/xdc.

1. Name[edit]

Though popularly explained as meaning the propitious or sturdy tribe' 'the son of my right hand'- Benjamin was prolxibly at first a geographical name for the people of the southern portion of the highland district called Ephraim (cp the expression <j'0' pjt in the old narrative i S. 9-10 16), just as a district of Gilead (Gad) seems to have been called Safon, 'North' (see Zei'Ho.v ; cp also Teman, Temeni, Yemiti, and on the other hand eih-Shiim).

It is not impossible indeed that this district was already known to the Canaanites as ' the South '; but there is nothing to suggest that it was. Indeed, it is a good deal more probable that the name means ' south of Joseph,' the Hebrews who settled in the highlands of Ephraim being known as ' the house ' or ' sons ' ' of Joseph,' a designation which retained this general sense till quite a late date. The question is rather whether Benjamin, at first a distinct tribe, afterwards became the southern part of Joseph (e.g., by the energy and success of Saul ; as Winckler supposes), or whether it was not rather the southern part of Joseph that, under the influence of forces immediately to be described,

1 Another interpretation was prolalily 'son of da>'s /".r., of old age ' (so in Test. xii. Patr. Hcnj. 1 ; cp Gen. 44 20 ' child of his old age," c'jpj iS')-

2 In the uncertainty how the present text of Judg. 20 16 arose (cp Moore, (!</ ioc), there is perhaps hardly sufficient ground for connecting with this etymology the story of the 700 left- handed warriors. Cp, however, also Ehud, and the story of the Henjamite deserters to David, who could use the bow and the sling with either hand (i Ch. 1'2 2).

came gradually to be distinguished from the rest of the highlanders of Isphraini by the s|x;cial name of Ifen- janiites, 'men of the south," the S. part, as being the smaller (cp i S. 9 21), receiving the distinguishing epithet.

2. Land.[edit]

It is not difficult to conjecture how this would naturally come about. The plateau of Henjaniin. if it is, as we have seen, historically connected with Joseph, is hardly divided physically from Judah. Incleed, although no mean country (ffrei'uiTaros di 6 KXrjpos ovTos Jjv Sid. rrjv rrji yiji dfXT^fiv : Jos. Ani. i. 5 22), it differs materially in its physical features from the northern part of Ephraim, being sterner and less fruitful in fact, more Jud:ean. Moreover, valleys, running down to the Jordan (Suwenit, Kelt) and to the sea (Merj ibn 'OniCr), exposed it to attack from the E. (Moab)and from the W. ( Philistines), while aline of strong Canaanite fortress-cities (Gibeon, etc.) constituted an additional source of danger to its highland peasants. That these southerners had a certain traditional fierce- ness ^ (Blessing of Jacob)- was, accordingly, only a natural result of their position and history. We cannot be surprised, then, that they won the right to a special name and place.

It is thus hardly necessary to assume, with Stade (Z.ITIV I 348 ['81]), some specific attempt or series of attempts to overcome by force the Canaanites of the cities (Jericho, Ai), perhaps under the leadership of the clan of Joshua, in order to account for the origin of a separate tribe : the general situation might be sufficient.

3. Population.[edit]

Mixture of race may, however, have helped to diffcri'iitiate the trilie, although at least the Canaanite p ... elements took a very long time to tjg^Qrng thoroughly amalgamated, as we see from the story of Gibeon (Josh. 9 ; St. GF/ 161), and still more from the hints about Beeroth {^.v., i. ),* which appears to have retained its distinctively Canaan- ite population at least till the time of Saul : indeed, even the radical policy of the latter seems to have been only partly successful (see IsHii.\Ai., i ). If the name Chei'HAK-ii.\.\mmo.\.\i {//!') indicates the presence of immigrants from across the Jordan we must look for the explanation to nuich later times (Josh. 18 24 P). The position of Iknijan-.in on the marches of Joseph, however, doubtless providetl opportunities for mixture also with other tribes.

Benj.-imin is, ?.?-., explicitly brought by E (Gen. 35 18) into connection with a tribe called HiiNONl ('/.r'.), while the first appearance of one or both of them is connected in some way (at least etymologically) with the disappearance of Rachei. (?.r'.). If Simeon really temporarily settled m this neighbourhood before making his way south (cp Israel, 7), it is at least worthy of note that in a Simeonite list we find a clan name, Javin 2 (i Ch. 4 2^), and a place name Bilhah (?'. 29; see Baalah, 2). Nor is It impossible to find suggestions of some connection with Reuben : a famous landmark on the borders of Benjamin is con- nected with his name (though the genuineness of the te.xt is per- haps not bejond question),-* as is also Bilhak (g-z'-), the hand- maid of Rachel. In Bilhan, on the other hand, to which the Chronicler in his first genealogy assigns a prominent place (iCh. Tic), we cannot safely see the remains of a Bilhah clan (see Bii.hah), for the name may liave been taken from the Horite genealogy, as Jeush was taken from the Edomite (below, 9 ii. a). Historical probability is certainly in favour of the idea that, after Dan failed to establish himself, Benjamin eventually spread westwards although some of the apparent actual traces of this are not to be trusted (see Hushim, Gen. 4623 [Danite; see, however, Dan, 8] compared with i Ch. 88 11 [Benjamite] ; AljALoN [i]. Josh. r.42 (Danite] compared with Judg. 1 35 [house of Joseph] i Ch. .S 13 [Benjamite ; see Beriah, 3]). The confused connection with Manasseh, however, that seems to

1 The historical figures belonging to the tribe, too, have a certain passionate vehemence (Saul, etc.).

2 Kor a suggestion of a possible original connection between the metaphor employed in the Blessing and the constellation Lupus right opposite Taurus ( = Joseph), see Zimmern's art. ' Der Jakobssegen u. der Tierkreis,' /^A 3 168 ['92].

3 A late editor may be following trustworthy tradition when he adds CHEPHtRAH in his list (with which cp Ezra 22025 = Neh. 7 25 29= I Esd. 5 17 19).

' Son (j3) of Reuben " may be a corruption of ' stone (pn) of Reuben,' which may be not an alternative name of the stone, but an alternative reading for Bohan (y.f.).

result from the present text of i Ch. "15 compared with v. 12 is perhaps due merely to corruption of the text. (Shupham and Hupham m.iy have had no place in the original system of the Benjamite list, iCh. 76-ii, and being perhaps supplied on the margin [see below, g 9 ii. a] may, by some confusion, have made their way into the te.xt also in Alanasseh, 7'. 15 [cp Be. ati loc.].) What connection with Moab is intended in i Ch. 88 the present condition of the text makes it impossible to divine (the clause may be a gloss; see below, 9 vi.fi). Cp Paiiath-Moab. Nor perhaps can we venture to interpret historically the sugges- tion of the Chronicler with regard to a later transference of clans from Benjamin back to Ephraim (see Beriah, 2, 3). Clan names common to Benjamin and other tribes are not rare.

4. Age.[edit]

The memory of the derivative or at least secondary character of Benjamin still lived in the earlier days of the monarchy, as we see from 2 S. 19 20 [21] (cp also 20 I with 20 21) and (apparently) from Judg. 1 22, ' and seems to lie reflected in the patriarchal story (JE) which tells how, last of all, Benjamin was born in Canaan.- That the differentiation of benjamin was relatively ancient, however, we should be prepared to believe from the fact of the other branches of Joseph being called not brothers but sons.* The reference in the Song of Detorah is too obscure (not to speak of its perplexing connection in some way with Hos. 58) to La of much use as positive evidence ; while the story of Ehud, if it is perhaps hardly necessary, with Winckler {Gesch. 1 138), to regard the single explicit reference to Benjamin as an interiiolation (see below, 5), may perhaps reflect the conditions of an age when no very clear line was drawn between Benjamin and the rest of Josepjh (Judg. 827) the men of the south and the men of the more northern highlands. At all events, by the time of David Benjamin was, owing to the energy of Saul, a distinct political element to be reckoned with, although we must not forget that, e.g. , in the story of the first appearance of Jeroboam, the ' house of Joseph' is an administrative unit (i K. 11 28).

5. Legends[edit]

The peculiar condition of the legends relating to this tribe provokes an attempt to explain it. This must take account of two inconsistent tendencies - a tendency in favour of the tribe (Judg. 3 15 i S. 4 12 i K. 3 4 9 2), and a tendency against it (Judg. 19-21). When we bear in mind the central position of the tribe, and the abundEnce and inportance of sanctuaries within and near its bounds (see below, 6), it cannot surprise us that there were many traditions of incidents in which the tribe played a part. It is, however, remarkable that some of them have no special reference to sanctuaries.

We can hardly suppose this due to contending politiial interests (those of Ephraim and Judah) leading to a sort of diplomatic flattery of the boundary tribe with a view to seem- ing its adhesion just as there evidently was rivalry- of a less peaceable kind (e.g., i K. 15 17 22). A. Bernstein, who worked out this view in great detail in his able, if unequal, essay Ursfirung der Sngen Ton Abraham, I sank u. Jacob, 1871 (see especially 61), does not take account of the stories unfavourable to Benjamin outside of Genesis ; and it seems clear th.at Benjamin was naturally a part of the northern kingdom (i K. 12 21 belongs to a much later date than ?'. 20). The later history of the tribe, especially after the fall of Samaria (see below 7), would go a long way towards accounting not only for the preservation but also for the mixed character of much Benjamin tradition. If we wish any further explanation, it seems reason- able to seek it in a natural interest, friendly or otherwise, in the great tribal hero, the mystericjus Saul and his house.

The interest in the tribe is undeniable.

Israel will run any risk rather than that of losing Benjamin (Gen. 42 38 J); the narrative delights in detailing the various signs of special aflTection on the part of ' Joseph,' and even Judah offers himself as surety for him (Gen. 4.39 J) or, according to E, Reuben the first-born offers his two sons (Gen. 42 37). On the other hand, all the tribes led by Joseph reprove and chastise Benjamin, but relent and find a substitute in Jabesh Gileeid

t St., however, supposes that the account of Benjamin has been lost (Gesch. 1 138).

2 P, however, ignores this (Gen. 81 26).

3 Niildeke (in a private communication) thinks that at an early time 'Benjamin was a powerful tribe, and that the rise of the story of Its late origin (as also Judg. 19-21) is to be accounted for simply as the result of the crippling of its power by David.

  • It has been argued by St. from i K..4i8 [19I that it did not

include Benjamin {/.A TIV 1 115 n.); but could we argue from 4 8 that it did not include Ephraim ?

(Judg. 19-21), a story that is strangely parallel to Joseph's accusing Benjamin (fajsely), the others inlercrdini;, and Juduh offering to become Hubslitule ((ien. 4433). What iiistorical substratum may underlie this (iilicah story we have not the means of determininK. Its laic date and its unlrust worthiness in its present form apiwar in its practically wiping <>ut the trilw that was not so very l<>n after al.le to ^We its first ruler to a united ' Israel ' (see also Itclow, | 7, end, on post-exilic interest in Benjamin).

6 Relitrious position.[edit]

Benjamin was in a sense at the centre of the religious life of the land. What the reliKioiis history of -^^'^'^"*^'^" <"' '* '""^y ^^"'^ been we

can only guess ; but there were sacred ,;ij,j,i;.l)as and trees that l)ore the nantes of Ukuokah (Gen. 358 Judg. 45) and Rachel (Gen. 85 16 ao Jor. 31 15) ;* and Kaniah, CJcba, Gilieah, Mizpeh, Gibeon, (jilgal,* not only were Canajinitish sanctuaries but also continueil to Ix; of iniiwrtance as such in Israel ; indeed, Geba, which (or jjerhaps it was the neighbouring Gibeah) one writer calls ' (Jibeah of God' (1 .S. 10 5), was perhaps selectetl by the Philistines as the site of their n'^sib l)ecause of its sanctity (i S. 13 3 and especi- ally 10 5; cp Saul, 2 . ) as well as because of its strategic position.^

More iin|)ortant still, perhaps, l^thel itself, the famous royal sanctuary (.\m. 713), where, according to the story, Israel encamixxl after crossing the Jordan (see liocHiM), is said by P to have belonged to Benjamin (Josh. 18 22). No doubt the Chronicler afterwards (iCh. 728) assigns it to E]/nraim ; but (though it may well have been a border town with connections on both sides) that is perhaps only because he could not conceive of Benjamin, a trite that he reg.irded as belonging to the southern kingdom, extending so far north. At all events, there was reason enough for the words used of lienjamin in Dt. 33i2 (cp Di. ad loc. and see below, 8),

'The beloved of Y.ihwe, he dwelleth secure; He (i.e., Vahwe) eiicompasst-th him .ill the day, And Ijetween his shoulders'* doth he dwell.'

It seems, therefore, not unfitting that this tribe, martial though it was, should for all time, whatever view we take of the character of .Saul, be associated with two of the greatest names in the history of Hebrew thought and religion, representatives of two of the greatest of religious movements : Jeremiah, who was a native of a Benjamite town, and Paul, who at least lx."lieved that he was sprung from the same tribe (Rom. 11 1 Phil. 35; cp Test. xii. Pair., Renj. ch. 11).

7 Later history.[edit]

Saul's career ended in gloom ; yet his work was not entirely undone. It was, therefore, a matter of course

  • '^"^^ ^^^ '^^" ^^ Henjamin (especially the Fiichrites, see below, 9 ii. ^\, even more than the rest of the house of Joseph, should

dislike being sulxjrdinated to the newly-risen house of Judah (SiiiMKi, I , and should embrace any gootl opportunity to assert their claim (Shkha, ii. i ), and that, along with the rest of the house of Joseph, they should throw in their lot with Jkkoboam ( i ). We have, accordingly, no reason to (|uestion the accuracy of the state- ment in I K. 1220 : ' there was none that followed the house of David, but the tril)e of Judah only,'* (cp Ps. 80 2 [3] and Hos. 58 with We.'s note, and see IsRAF.l,, 28 ; Jericho is regarded as north Israelite in 1 K. 1527 It) 15^). However, as Jeroboam was not a Benjamite, and the capitals of the northern kingdom were always in the northern parts of Josejjh (cp Zarethan II.), Benjamin does not apix^ar to have

1 On the stone of Bohan or Reuben, see alxjve (S 3).

' Baal-tamaralst) was probably a sacred place. On the special importance of f'.il^al in early times, see Cikcumcision, $ 2.

^ \Vi. has even tried to show that Gibeah was l)elieved by some to have been the seat of Israel's famous shrine, the 'ark ' ; but he takes no account of the discussion of Kosters (ThT 27 361-378 ['93] ; cp .\rk, 8 5).

  • Note the Arabic metaphor, WRS, Kin. 46 (foot).
  • We cannot argue from 2 Sam. 24 1 9, for 'Judah' here

means, not, as the Chronicler (i Ch. 21 6)oddly supposed, a tribe, but the southern kingdom (the Chronicler thinks it necessary to try to explain see the attempts of 45hai. to understand him why Benjamin and Levi were not numbered).

really g.iined by this step. In fact, it seems to have eventually gravitated more and more southwards. Indeed, lying on the border between the two king- doms, it was important strategically rather than politic- ally ; and, although we cannot very well follow the details of the process,' sonic of its towns seem to have been, at one time or another, and more or less permanently, incorporated in the southern kingdom. The blow that the northern kingdom receivetl in 722 was favourable to this process, and in another sense the sack of Jerusalem in 586. Thus in Jer. 33 13 the land of Benjamin' is included in an enumeration of the various districts of the territory of Judah- viz. , the Shephelah, Negeb, etc. just as in 2 K. 238 'from Geba to Beersheba,' like 'from Geba to Rimmon ' in Zech. 14 10, stands for the whole land of Judah, and in Jer. t) I Jeremiah's clansmen are living in Jerusalem ; and so, in the century following the rebuilding of the temple, Benjamin is regularly mentioned alongside of Judah, the combination of names appearing often to mean the families that were not taken to Babylon (cp Kosters, Ilcrstel, faisim), and the Jews came to believe that Rehoboam's kingdom had from the first consisted formally of these two tribes (cp Ps. 6827 [28]" Chron. passim, and a late writer in i K. I221 23). Hence we need not Ije surprised at the fulness with which Ik'iijamin, as compared with the other Joseph trilx.'S, is treated in the book of Joshua (Di. 505), or at the fre<|uent and copious Benjamin lists in the Chronicler (see 8/.). Only we mu.st rememter that these tribal distinctions were in later times theoretical ; Simon (2 Mace. 34), Menelaus, and Lysimachus were Ik-njamites ; for the e.xplanation of Mordecais mythic genealogy (Shimei Kish Benjamin) see Esthkr,

8 Late writers geographical statistics[edit]

(a) Although the priestly writer's conception of the frontier of Benjamin is not even self-consistent, Beth-Arabah, a point in Judah's N.

Prt' boundary (Josh. 15 6), being assigned

^' <'" ^'^ ^ J"'^^'^ '^"'^ '^^"^ *^^"'

.^^abah, i) to Benjamin, it can be 

idcinifietl roughly.

From the Jordan near Jericho he makes it pass up to Beth-aven and Bethel (/>V/V/), where it turns S. to .Ataruth- addar (possibly 'Attini) and thence \V. to Bcth-horon the nether (Bn'/'l'r-), returning by Kirjath-jearim and Nephtoah (Li/ta), circling round the south of Jerusalem through the vale of Hinnom and the plateau of Rephaim, and by the spring of Rogel, and finally returning by En-shemesh (//(y-<"/-'--f c/jr/^ir//) and the valley of Achor to the Jordan at Beth-hoglah ('A in-, or t^a^r-llajla).

What led P to fix on this line, the southern stretch of which he repeats with greater fulness in the delineation of Judah (Josh. 155- io|, we cannot say; nor can we say why he inakes the boundan,- run south of Jeru- salem.-* The Blessing of Moses has indeed been taken to imply (Dt. 33 12 ; see above, j5 6) that in the latter part of the eighth century Jerusalem was held to lie inside the boundary' of Benjamin ; but ' by him ' in the first line is probably due to a clerical error, and line 3 is quite indistinct : nothing points specially to Jerusalem.-' Stade ((;/'/ 1 162) proposes Gibeon ; i)er- haps Winckler would suggest (iilx.-ah ; Oort, however ( ThT, 1896, pp. 297-300), pleads vigorously for Bethel, and nothing could be more appropriate in a poem so markedly north- Israelitish. It is pl.iin enough, on the other hand, that Jerusalem is assignctl to Benjamin by P (though he avoids giving the name of the town, speak-

J See the account in GASm. HG. ch. 12.

2 On the other tribes mentioned in this verse see Zebulun, NAPHTALI.

3 .\ccording to the Talmud the Holy of Holies and some other parts of the temple sto<xl on Benjamite soil (.Sanhtiir. 54) ; but the site of the altar, though within Benjamin, was a piece of land that ran into Benjamite territory from Judah (\'oma, 12).

4 Unless Jerusalem may be thought to be implied in the mention of Benjamin before Joseph (Dr. Dl. 389). But on the order of the tribes cp Di.

ing simply of ' the Jebusite ') ; and, if we do not know precisely why he does so, we can at least see that he has a purpose of some kind, for in Judg. I21 it is quite clear that the editor has for the same reason twice substituted ' Benjamin' for the original ' Judah,' which we find in the otherwise identical Josh. I063. VVe must conclude that, whatever conceptions prevailed in later times, in the days when tribal names were really in harmony with geographical facts of one kind or another, Jerusalem was counted to Judah.

(d) Many late lists of Menjamite towns have been preserved. i. The only early one is the rhetorical enumeration of twelve places on the path of the Assyrian invader (Is. 10 28-32).

Of the six names in it which are not mentioned in any of the other lists, two are those of towns the sites of which are known 'with certainty: Michmash {Muji<is) uttd Geuim (,El-Jib).

2. P's list (Josh. I821-28) comprises an eastern and a western group viz., a group of twelve (to which he adds in 21 18 two others) and a group of fourteen towns.

Of these twenty-eight the following sixteen may be regarded as identified, some with certainty, others with a high degree of probability : Jekicho, Hkth-Hogi.ah, Zemakaim, Bethel, Parah, (Ieba, Gibeon, Ramah, Beekoth, Mizpeh, Che-PMIRAH, 'the JEnilSlTE,' GiBEATH, KiRIATH, AnATHOTH,

Almon (see Alemeth).

3. Neh. 1 1 31-35 contains a list of some sixteen towns alleged to be settled by Beiijamites. The list, which may be incompletely preserved, is more and more assigned, by scholars of various schools, to the time of the Chronicler (see Torrey, Comp. and Hist. Value of Ezra-Neh. 42 f. ; Mey. Entsteh. 107, 189) ; at all events, it cannot be early.

Of the eleven new names (unless the Aija of z/. 31 be the Avvim of Josh. I823) not in the Joshu.i lists, four may be re- garded as identified beyond dispute : Hauid, Neballat, Lod (see Lypda), Ono.

4. In the list Xeh. 7 = F.z. 2 = i Esd. 5 (see Ezra, ii. 9), vv. 25-37 2'J-34. -T"! 17^-22 respectively, seem to enumerate places (apparently places where members of ICzras ' congregation ' were resident), mostly within old Beiijamite rather than old Judahite territorj'.

In this list, excluding Xeho (iv.) as being probably merely a transposition of Nob, we have still five other new names, of which, however, some seem to be spurious, and only Netophah and Bkth-Azmaveth (see A/..\iaveih [i.J) can be regarded as identified with any certainty.

Other places perhaps in Benjamite territory are Baal- HAZOR (2 S. 1823) and XoiiAil (see Moore, Judges, 443). I Esd. also adds a Chadi.as and Ammidoi (Chaui-ASAl).

9. Genealogical[edit]

Lists of Benjamite clan or personal names (sometimes, _ of course, including place names) are many.

1 . . " They have mostly, however, suffered much ^ at one stage or another in transmission.

(i. ) P's two (Gen. 46 Nu. 2t>) are, as usual, different versions of the same list.

Thej' probably contain two triplets () Bela Becher Ashbel, and (/') (iERA N'aaman .Ahiram ; and a third triplet, not quite so certain, (f) Sliuphan Hupham Ard.

(ii.) The Chronicler's two (i Ch. 7 and i Ch. 8) are more difficult to understand, l)ut are constructed more or less on the sanife scheme.

(a) In I Ch. 1 6ff. (sons of the first triplet 1 of which, how- ever, Ashbel, ' Man of Baal, 'becomes Jediael, ' Intimateof EI ')2 we have what is of all the lists perhaps the most symmetrical. Certain peculiarities (such as apparent doublets) make it plausible to suppose that the symmetry was once even greater. Abijah, a name that occurs elsewhere in the Chronicler's genealogies only in priestly families,'* should perhaps be read 'the father of (cp ' father of Bethlehem,' i Ch. 44). In that way the two places Anathoth and Alemeth would be assigned to the last-mentioned son of Becher, just as in t>. 12 Shuppim and Huppiin are ascribed

1 Verse i2rt in a sense represents the third triplet, and 12/' has names connected in chap. 8 with the second.

2 Cp "jK-n'. I Ch. '.'7 32 = '?yir'. 2 S. 23 8 (Manjuart in a private communication). We can hardly argue from the Ashbal or AshbOl of the Peshitta th.-it the change of Ashbel to Jediael is due to an accident ; for in the Peshitta i Ch. 76 simply substi- tutes 'the corrupt Genesis list (46 2i)of nine names (with its ' Khi and Rosh Muppim ' for ' Ahiram Shuppim ') for the Chronicler's list of three sons.

3 On the supposed Abijah, wife of Hezron, see Caleb, ii.

to Ir = In the last-mentioned son of Bela. Marquart,^ to whom the detection of this analogy is due, suggests that n'^KI should be read ,133 Kin- If some form of this theory he adopted it will be only natural to look for a name (or names) assigned to the last-mentioned son of Jediael (the remaining branch of Benjamin) and to find it in Hushim the son of A\\cT (v. 12). This will be still more plausible if we may adopt the re.st of Marquart's theor)-, that Aher ^^^t is a miswritten inriK ^1 AhihOr and that Ahishahar, nntJ"nN, isacorruption of the same name(nn'nN). If Uzzi and Uzziel in 71. 7 are a doublet, ' five ' in the same verse is not original. Perhaps Ehud etc., in v. 10 are brothers of Bilhan, the intervening words being a parenthesis.* Whilst v. 12 is thus required to give symmetry to the genealogy, it may nevertheless be in a sense an appendix.

O) Chap. 8 ha-s in parts the appearance of being constructed in a very schematic form (though eflforts to detect a general scheme have not l>een markedly successful), and this seems to warrant the conviction that the present obscurity is due to textual corruption. For remedying that some help can be had from the versions ; but it is not sufficient. Certam suggested emendations (see an article by the present writer in/Q/x 11 102- 114 ['98]) so greatly reduce the disorder that now prevails that there seems to be reason to believe that the genealogy was at one time markedly regular in structure, and that considerable boldness in attempts to restore it is warranted. It has always seemed difficult to explain how the historically important Benja- mite clans the clan of .Saul and .Sheba(viz., Becher), and that of Shimei(viz., Gera) are so sulxjrdinated in this extraordinarily copious list (they appear to be omitted altogether in Nu. 20; see, however, Bechek). It is probable that the subordination is due to corruption of the text. When emended in the way already referred to, i Ch. 81-7^ is reduced to P's three triplets with the .additional statement that Gcra was the father of [EJhl'd (y.r'.) and .Shua[l], or rather, as .\larquart acutely suggests, Shlmei ({t.?'. ; cp (BS'i lafiei]-<Tana<;). What follows is obscure the reconstruction proposed in JQJi!, I.e., Ls in parts not much more than a guess but it seems extremely probable that the names in in'. 1-27, beyond P's three triplets, were originally attributed to Gera through Ahishahar (once corrupted into Shaharaim ; see above, [a]) and Hushim (v. 12 being an intrusive repetition of a later part of the list). Then 7t. 30-38 gave the genealogy of the Bichrites (for ni33,T 1:31, 'and his firstborn,' read n23.T '331 'and the sons of the liichrite'), v. -vib being perhaps a marginal gloss due to some bewildered reader of w. 30-32 (in their new position after the intrusion of v. 2i/. from chap. 9). Marqiiart suggests that these nine verses originally followed the mention of the sons of Bela. For fuller details and other suggestions the reader is referred to the article already cited.' It is difficult to avoid the conviction that some recon- struction is necessary.

(iii. ) In Neh. 11 7/ and iCh. 97-9 we have two versions of a list of Benjamite inhabitants of Jerusalem, the original of which it is quite impossible to restore.

The names are grouped in the form of genealogies of a few persons ; for which, among other reasons, Meyer pronounces the list an invention of the Chronicler (Entstth. , iZg). Kosters, however, suggests that the genealogical form is not original {/fcystfl), and that the authority was a list of Jerusalem Benjamites living in Jerusalem before the arrival of Ezra.

(iv. ) On the list of Benjamite warriors in i Ch. I23-7, see David, 11 (a) iii. On relations of Benjamin to other tribes, see, further, Raciikl, Bilhah, Joseph.

2. A Benjamite, b. Bilhan, i Ch.7iot (see No. t, 9, ii. a)

3. A Levite, of the b'ne Harim, in the list of those with foreign wives, Ezra 1032 (see Ezra, i. g 5, end).

4. A Levite, in the list of wall-builders, Neh. 823 (see Nehe- k'h, 1/., Ezra, ii. g i6[i], 15^/), perhaps the same as No. 3.

In the procession at the dedication of the wall (Ezra, i. 13 J?), Neh. 1234 Oxtafteii' [L]) ; on which see Kosters, Hct

5. In the 13 e), Ne Herstel, 59.


(jp;33 TKr), Jer. 20 2 37x3 387 Zech. 14 10. See JERUSALEM.


(iJ3) is taken as a proper name in i Ch. 24 26/ by EV, in v. 26 by (yioi BoNNi [A], BoNNeiA yioc AYTOY [I-]' K O'"- '< '" ^'- 27 (S)^ has yiOl AYTOY, '^ Y'OC (\y) '^"'^ ^y J*^""- ^""^^ Targ. That the list of the sons of Levi is in a most unsatisfactory state is evident from a comparison with Ex. 617^^ i Ch. 617 [2]^ 29/ [14] and 2321 /. The MT is most obscure, and, according to Kittel, -t. 20-31 are one of the latest additions ; one rendering is to take v. 26/ as follows : ' Of Jaaziah, his (Merari's) son, (even) the sons of Merari through Jaaziah his son,' etc.

1 In a private communication to the present writer.

2 So Marquart. On foreign names in this list see above, f 3.

3 .See now also Marquart's important article on the same subject (JQR *")


(*:iN-{3 ; yioc o^ynhc moy [ADEL],

rightly interpreting the mind of the writer), the first name of BENJAMIN ( 3). given to her new-bom child by the dying Rachel (Gen. 3j 18). Ben-oni must, however, have been an early trill name. We find the clan-names Onam and Onan (bolli in Judah. the former also Horile) ; also a lienjamite city Onu ; nor can the existence of an ancient city calletl Betm-AVKN (Bcth-on?) be tienied. To assume, however, with Prof. Sayce {Fatrianh. Pal. 191/), first that Ileth-el was also called Heth-on, anil next that the names lieth-on and lien-oni imply that the name of the god worshipped at Luz was On, and next that this divine name was derived from On = Heliopolis in Egypt, is purely arbitrary. Cp Hkth-AVKN, Aven (3). T. K. c.


(nnirj?, etym. doubtful, probably corrupt). /(Uii.TH and Ben-Zoheth are mentioned in 1 ( h. 420 [viol ^u>afi [M], vl. ^ux'^O [.A], vl faw^ [L]), among the sons of Ishi of Judaii.


(li??). Num.323. See Raal-mkon.


("lira, possibly miswTitten for AcHBOR ; see Haal-mana.v |i]; Becop [BAI> : WH in 2 Pet. 215]). 1. Father of the Fxlomite king Hki.A [ii. i], Gen. 8632 (B&i(a)P [L])=iCh. I43 (BAicop [A], cn<t)a)p. '. ZipiX)r[L]).

2. Father of Balaam (Nu. 22$, etc., /Satwp [A], except in Dt. 2:34[5] Josh. 1322 Mi.6s; in Josh. 249 [(3A omits]), called HosuK in 2 Pet. 2 15 AV (^offop [Ti. following .\5<cC]; Vg. /iosor; cp the conflate reading Peuiop<Top [N*]). RV Bi:()R ([/Jfojp WH]). In Nu. 2422 gHAFL reads ry /3ewp ((iaiup [A]) for Heb. i];^'?.


(iri3. -scarcely, ' with evil," cp Rir.sha ; these, like oilier names in Gen. 14, may Ijc nmtilated and corrupted forms; BaAAa [-ADL], Bara [I"-]- BaA&C [Jos. Ant. i. q]), king of So<lom, who joinetl the league against Chedorlaomer (Gen. 14 2). See CHEDOR-LAOMER, 2, end.


RV Beracah (nn"!?, 'blessing'; BepxeiA [BX], BapaX'-^ [AL]). a Renjamite, one of David's warriors (i Ch. I23). See David, 11 [a] iii.


(RV Beracah) (pr^V nS-l?, koiAaC eyAoYIAC [HM-l). the scene of tile great thank-Sgiving of Jehoshaphat and his people (2 Ch. 2O26; in 26a 6 av\(j}i' ttjs evXoyia^ [l^A], i) KOiXaj TTJi fv\. [L]). The geographical knowledge of the narrator was evidently good ; but that, of course, does not make his narrative any m<jre historical (see Jkho-SHAPHAt). At no great distance from Tekua there is a broad open wady, on the west side of which are extensive ruins named Bereikiit. Just opposite the ruins the wady itself is called the Wady Bereikut ( Rob. LDR, 275). From the form Bereikut we gather that the true ancient pronunciation was probably Berechoth, ' reservoirs. " T. K. C.


(I'TDna), iCh.624 [39]. RV Bkre- cniAii, 5.


(n\X-J5. 31. ' Yahw6 creates' ; BApAiA [I-]. BepipA' KAI B- [n.\]). I. A Benjamile, assigned to the b'ne .Siii.mki (8) ; i Ch. 821. The name is \>ro\y- ably post-exilic, ' creation' l)eing one of the great exilic and post-exilic religious doctrines.

2. See Bedkiah.


I. An unknown locality in the neighlxjur-hood of Jerusalem, where Bacchides encamjxxl l)efore the battle in which the Jews were defeated and Judas the Maccaliee was slain (Apr. 161 B.C.). The camp of Judas was at FJasa, Eleasa, or Alasa, also imknown, but probably Kh. iCasa between the two lietli-horons on the main road from Sharon to Jerusalem (i Mace. 94/). The liest reading seems to be /Sepea f.ANV] ; but there is MS authority also for Be7/p-fatf and

1 That is ,iyn3 ; cp i Ch. 7 30.

6*17^^0^; Vet. I^t. \vx& Derethiim. Joscphus (/^w/. xii. IO2) has \ir\O^Ou), or, in some .\ISS, Bi/pfT/O. liwald thinks of the mo<lern Bir e/.-/eit, i^ m. NW. from Jufna, or of lieeroth (mod. el Birch).

2. RV BeroBa, Wipoia. [A], -ptvo. [V]), the scene of the death of .Mknelaus, the modern Aleppo (a Mace. 134).

3. B^poto [Ti. WH] (some MSS ^ipp.), now Verri.t, or Kara Verria, in Ixiwer Macedonia, at the fofjt of Mt. Bermios, 5 m. alxjve the left bank of the Haliac- mon (I'istritza). It has a splendid view over the plains of the Haliacmon and the Axius ; plane-trees and abundant streams make it one of the most desirable towns of the district. Yet it did not lie on the main road ; which |x;rhaps accounts for its being chosen as a place of refuge for Paul and .Silas in their midnight escajje from Thessalonica (.\cts 17 10).

A curious parallel is found in Cicero's speech acainst Piso. Un.ihle to face the chorus of complaint at Thessalonica, Piv) ' fled to the out-of-the-way town of Beroea ' (inoppidutn dez'ium Beraam. In Pit. 36).

In the apostolic age Beroea contained a colony of Jews, and a synagogue (.Acts 17 10). They were of a nobler ' spirit (evytviartpoi) than those of Ihessalonica possibly because they did not belong to the purely mercantile class. Not only were many of the Jews them- selves converted, but also not a few of the (ireeks, both men and women [rHiv VAXrjvibojv yvvaiKwv tCip (vaxv- fi6i>uv Kal avSpCiv ovk dXiyoi, .Acts 17 12: the language seems to indicate that the apostle was here dealing with an audience at a higher social level than elsewhere). Paul's .stay here seems to have been of some duration (.several months. Rams. Paul, 234), partly in order to allow him to watch over the converts of Thessalonica, only 50 m. distant ; he may have been still at Ber<x;a when he made those two vain attempts to revisit them to which I Thess. 2 18 alludes, and Timothy may have been sent to them from Bercta, and not from Athens, on the occasion mentioned in i Thess. 82. The apostle was at length obliged to c|uit the town, as the ' Jews of Thessa- lonica' heard of his work and resorteci to their usual tactics of inciting to riot (aaXtvovre^ roi'i 6xXovi, -Acts 71 13). Silas and Timothy were left in Macedonia ; but Paul was escorted by certain of the converts to the sea and as far as .Athens (.Acts 17 14/ ). This hurried de- parture (ei'^^ujs, V. 14) may have been by the road toDium.

The omi.ssion of the h.irbour is noticeable. In other cases the name of the harlwiir is given : so in Actsl425 ]6ii I818. The omission, however, aflfords no proof that the journey to .Athens wa.s performed by land a view which tlerives some colour from the AV ' to go as it were to the sea' (RV 'as far as to ihe sea ').

Possibly one of his escort was that Sopater, son of Pyrrhus, a Beroean, who is mentioned in .Acts 20 4 as ac- companying Paul from Corinth to Macedonia. The Sosipater of Rom. 16 21 is probably another person. We read in .Acts 20 5 that the escort from Corinth preceded Paul to Troas : this may have been partly due to his making a detour in order to revisit Beroea. w. j. w.


(n;3n3. in Nos. 4/ -in:?"?!, 28, ' Yahwe blesses ' = Jeberechiali, BApAx[e]lA [BNA], -X'AC [L]).

1. .Son of Zerubbabel, i Ch. .3 20 (/Sapox;.a [L], -loi (RJ).

2. One of the Lcvites that dwelt in the villages of the Netophathites, iCh. Uie (-x" [H], -xio? [.A], afi. (Lj), not included in || Neh. 11. Probably the same as the doorkeeper for the Ark, I Ch. 1.^23.

3. Father of Meshullam in list of wall-builders (see Nehkmiah, S i/, F.ZRA, ii., i6[i], 15.0, Neh.34 (-xtavlNAJ, om. B), 30 i^pxtid [ HI*], fiapia [A]) ; cp t> 18.

4. Father of the prophet Zech.iriah, Zech. 1 i 7 (fiaftaxiat [BK.AQ]). Omitted in the || Ezra 5 i. On the question of his identity with the Barachias (.AV), or Bakachiah (RV) of Mt. '2335, see Zacharias, 9.

5. Father of Asaph, a singer, i Ch. 24(39l(-AV Bekachiah), 15 17 (-via (Lj).

6. b. Meshillemoth ; one of the chief men of the b'ne Ephraim, temp. Ahaz, 2Ch. '28 12 (Zaxopias [B], Bopaxtof [.A]).


(TI? ; BapaA [AD] ; -pAK [L] ; b^xmd [A'g.]). A place in S. Palestine, or perhaps rather

X. AraV)ia, between which and Kadesh lay Bker- I.AIIAI-Koi [i/.v.] (Gen. 16 14). Three identifications deserve mention. (i) The Targums represent

it by the same word as that given for Shur in v. 7 Onk. by N-i;n Hagra, and Jer. Targ. by KsiSn Hftlusa. The former word, however (cp Ar. ^/Jr, ' a wall, enclosure '), .seems to Ix: meant for a translation of the name Shur, not for an identification of the j^lace. The second name is clearly the I'.lusa of Ptol., which is now probably A'A. A'halasn in the \\'ady '.Xsluj, about 12 m. from Ifeersheba on the way to Ruhailjeh or Rchoboth (see Palmer, PliFQ, 1871, p. 35; Gudrin. ///</d'^, 2 269-273). (2) Eus. and Jer. (05 299 76

1452) identify a certain 'well of judgment' with the village Berdan in the Gerarite country (in which lieer- sheba also is placed). This 'well of judgment" seems like a confused reminiscence of Enmishpat i.e. , Kadesh (Gen. 147). Is this Iterdan the same spot which Jerome (O.S'lOl 3) calls Barad, where, he says, a well of Agar was shown in his day? (3) If, with Rowlands,

we find Bekk-lau.\i-roi (^.7'. )at 'Ain Muweileh, Bercd may be some place in the Wady esh-Sheraif, on the E. side of the Jebel Dalfa'a (see Palmer's map).

T. K. c.


("113). nn Ephraimite clan, 1 Ch. 720 (BapaA [A], pAAM [!>]. om. [B]), apparently called in Nu. 2O35, Iii:(iii:u a well-known Bcnjamite clan name. When we consider the close relation between the two tribes, the occurrence of Becher in Ephraim seems not unnatural (cp Bkriah, 2/.). See, however, BECHER.


(*"}3, prob. =^X2, 76, 'belonging to the well [or to a place called Be'er] ; the name occurs twice in Phoenician ; cABpei [B], BApi [A], BHpei \}A)< an Asherite family-name (i Ch. 736).


(nrna, perhaps 'prominent,' 7 ; cp the play on the name in iCh. 723 with the play on the name Bkka [/.i'.] in Targ. ps. -Jon. ; B&p[e]lA [BAL]).

I. \n Asherite cl.-iii indi\iihi.ilised ; Gen. 4<)i7 Nu. 2644/; ((P, 7'. -2^/. ; in 7'. 28 Bepi 1 1,|, in r'. 29 it is omitted) ; 1 Ch. 7 30 (jSepi-yal [H], 7'. 31 -xa |1!|; gentilic, Berilte, Nu. 2O44 (o /SapcaUlt [H^' vkl F], /Sapm [H*vid], -pat [.\\ /Sepci [L]).

2. An Ephraimite clan-name, in a story of a cattle- lifting raid in i Ch. 721-23 (beginning at ' and Ezer and Elead ' ; v. 23 j3apyaa [B], -pie [L]) ; cp 8 13. Accord- ing to the Chronicler, lieriah was a son of Ephraim, born after his brother had been slain, and he was called Beriah because ' it went evil with his [father's] house ' (note the assonance ,nyi3 nyta)- This notice of the conflict with the men of Gath is enigmatical ; were there family reminiscences of the border strifes of the early Israelites which were recorded in documents distinct from our canonical books and accessible to the Chronicler ?

We. preserves a sceptical attitude (Pra/.W, 214); Bertheau and Kittel, however, think that there is here a genuine tradi- tion, and that, on the destruction of the clans Ezer and Elead, the Ephraimites of the border districts applied for help to the Henjamite clans, Shema and Beriah (i Ch. S 13). .According to S. A. Fries, the basis of this story is an early tradition dealing with a raid made by F^phraimites into Palestine from the land of Goshen 2 in the wider sense which Hommel and he himself give to this term (see Goshen).

It would be unsafe to use these unsuppiorted state- ments of the Chronicler as historical material. See below.

3. A clan of Benjamin ( 9 (ii.) (3)). iCh. 813 {^epiya. [B], ^ap. [A], ^apaa [L]). 16 (;:iap[]iya [BA]), probably to be identified with No. 2. It appears to be

1 Note that in Pepiya (iCh. 730 [B], and 813 [B]), fiafyyaa (i Ch. 723 [B]), and ^apUVya (8 13 [A], 16 [BA]), ^ = soft j; (i.e., Ar. '/"), which is usually represented by a breathing. Eur y = rough u (i.e., Ar. ) see Gaza, Zoar, Ziheon, etc.

2 Pesh. reverses the statement of the MT ; cp Barnes, PesA. Text Chron. xi.

stated that the Bcnjamite clan Beriah was adopted into Ephraim in recognition of the service it had rendered to the imperilled territory. So liertheau ; cp Bennett, Chron. 89. Cp also Ephraim.

4. A Gershonite (Levite) family, i Ch. 23 10/ (Bepia [BL] ; om. A in v. 10). s. A. C.


(Dn2n), appear, through a cor- ruption of the text, in 2 S. 20 14 (MT), where Kloster- mann, Kittel, Biidde, and (with some hesitation) Driver, read DHSan, 'the Bichrites (see BicHRi). The consonants n^a are, in fact, presupposed by the strange rendering of "* {koL Travres) ev x^'PPf'- ' Kal vaaa irdXis). The description of the progress of Sheba (^.v. ii.) now first l)ecomes intelligible.


(nn?), Judg. 946 A\', RV El-berith. See Baal-berith.


(BepNiKH [Ti. \VH] for BepCNlKH, the Macedonianform of c})epeNlKH).cld(-'Stdaughterof Herod Agrippa I. , and sister of the younger Agrippa(.-\cts2;'i 1323 2630). She was married to her uncle Herod, king of Chalcis ; and after his death she lived, not without sus- picion of incest, with her brother Agrippa. She next became the wife of Polemon, king of Cilicia. This connection being soon dissolved, she returned to her brother, and afterwards became the mistress of Ves- pasian and Titus (Jos. ^/. .\ix. 5i; x.\. 72/. ; Tac. I/isi. ii. 8 1 ; Suet. 7'ii. 7 ) ; cp Sch. GVIi., and see Hekodian F.vmii.y, 9.


(H^^? "^"IN'13). 2 K. 20 12 EV ; EV"- MERODACH-BALADAN.


(BepoiA), 2 Mace. 184 RV, AV Berea, 2.


(BHpcoe? [A]), i Esd. 519 = Ezra225, Bekroth.


(nn'nZ), a place mentioned by Ezekiel (47 16; <\BeHpA[Bg], coceHpA[A], BHpa)eV[Q"'sr]) in defining the ideal northern frontier of the Holy Land. It is apparently the same as Beroth.vi [q.-'.). and may be regarded as a lengthened form of BcrOth = Beeroth, 'wells.' As yet it has not been certainly identified. Ewald [Hist. 3 153) connected it with the well-known Berytus (the Bi riitu and Bi'runa of the Amarna letters, the Bi'arutii of the List of Thotnies III. [so W. M. Miiller], and the mod. Beirut) ; but it seems clear that a maritime city would not suit Ezekiel's description. Tomkins would, therefore, place Berothah in the neighbourhood of the rock-hewn inscriptions in the Wddy Brissa, NW. of Baalbec, down which wady a stream is marked in the Carte de IJban as flowing to the Orontes (PEFQ Ap. 1885, p. 108) ; but his philological argument seems unsound. Furrer [ZDP]' 8 34), Socin {Pal.^'\ 369), and v. Riess {Bib. Ail.) have thought of Bercitan, a village not far to the S. of Baalbec ; but this is only a plausible conjecture, and must be judged in connection with Furrer's general theory of the frontier (see HoR, MOUNT ; RiBLAH ; Zidad). Cp .Aram, 6.


(*n'"l3 ; Klo. would read "'n'l3), a town belonging to Hadadezer, king of Zobah, 2S. 88 ("^i- iK TU'V (tcXeKTQv 7r6Xec<;i', perhaps reading n^"i2S from T13 'to separate, select' [so Klo.]), possibly another form of Berothah (see, however, Klo. and the article Tebah). In I Ch. 188 (where (5* has the same trans- lation), which is parallel to 2S. 88, for Berothai we find the name Chun, which must be a corruption, either of the first three letters of Berothai {i.e., nij) in one of the earlier alphabetic stages, or of some other name v^hich the Chronicler found in his copy of the old narrative. ^ For a suggested emendation see Mero.m, end.

K The reading 'nn3 is probably supported by in fiot/i places, and by the (coAAiVrais ( = (K\tKT<ov of (pBAL)of Jos. .'int. vii. 63. The latter's text, however, must have represented a conflate reading, for he reads Maxii<i), which points to psp 'from Gun.'


('n Qn). i Ch. 11 39. Sec BEEROTH.


1. Description.[edit]

The Bervl as a mineral species* includes,

'^si'l the c.nmon bc-ryl. the aciuam.-x-

  • ^ nnc or precious ijeryl, and the enterald.

J he similarity l)etwcen the beryl and the emerald was pointed out by I'liny (37 20); the only points of distinction are the green colour of the emerald and the somewhat sujx^'rior hardness of the beryl (7.5 to 8 in the nuneralogical scale; specific gravity from 2.67 to

If we leave out of account the emerald, the colours of the beryl range from blue through soft sea-green to a pale honey -yellow, and in some cases the stones are entirely colourless. The aciuamarine is so named on account of its bluish -green colour, ' ^ui viridilatem puri maris imitantur' (Pliny, I.e.). The beryl crystal- lises in six-sided prisms with the crystals often deeply striated in a longitudinal direction. The great abun- dance of aquamarine and other forms of l)eryl in modern times has very nmch depreciatetl its value ; but it is still set in bracelets, necklaces, etc., and used for seals.

2 Greek names, etc.[edit]

That the beryl was known to the ancients there can be no doubt. Some of the finest examples of ancient ^^'^'* ^"*^' Koman gem -engraving are '^"."'^. '-'^"'^'l '" '^'O'l (see Kings de- scription of a huge atjuama-.ine intaglio over two inches seiunre, Pirc. Stones, Gems, and I'rec. Mftals, p. 132) : the Romans cut it into six-sided prisms {cylindri) and mounted them as ear-drops. It is also clear from the evidence of Pliny (I.e., beiylli) that, in later times, at least, lx.-ryl was called by the same name as now, though a|xirt from (see below) the name does not appear in any Greek writer till considerably after Pliny's time.- It ajjpears, however, to have lx.'en called also a/jidpaySoi ; Theophrastus seems to know three kinds of smaragtlos, which may well Ixj our true emerald, our aquamarine, and our common Ixjryl (/-(//. 23). In Herodotus, too, smaragdos is the material not only of the gem engraved for the ring of Polycrates (.'i4i), but also of the pillar in the temple of Heracles at Tyre ("244), which cannot have lx;cn of true emerald, as the noble kinds of beryl are never found of large size.

3. Hebrew name.[edit]

The Hebrews must be presumed to have known the beryl. \\'e may perhaps identify it with the shdham ^^^'^'^ ' '^ ^ ^"'^ "^ ^^^^ '^e ornaments

" ^^^ ^'S'^ priest's shoulder (I'.x. 28920 

= 80927) were of shoham, and renders this ff/xdpaydoi. We cannot always trust 's rendering of stone names (see pRiccious Stones) ; but in this case the ideiitiiication seems suitable. We are told that on each j,*c'7/r////-stone were inscribed the names of six of the tribes of Israel, for which purpose a natural hexagonal cylinder of beryl would be admirably fitted if, as has Ix-en suggested, the six names were inscril)ed longi- tudinally on the six faces. The s/i<'ka m-slonvs mounted in ouches of gold were probably therefore beryls pierced or simply mounted at the end with bosses (uindi/ici) of gold, like the Ijeryl cylinders descrilx;d by Pliny.

The importance given to the beryl among the Baby- lonians and the Phtjcnicians (see above) makes it all the more probable that the Hebrews would specially value it. From CJen. 2 12 (later stratum of J ?) it would appear that the shoham was known in Judah before the e.xile, and believed to abound, with good gold and bdellium, in Havil.vh. The Chronicler brings shdham-%x.ox\*is into connection with the construction of the pre-exilic temple (iCh. 292; but the reading m.ny be incorrect, see Ebony, c), while the writer of Job 28 16 classes it with gold of Ophir and other precious substances.

1 On the stone called Rerjl in EV see g 4.

2 The chrysol)erylus, chrysopr.isus, .ind chr>-soUthus of ancient jeweller>' .appear, to some extent at least, to have been names applied 10 different shades of beryl.

4. Etymology[edit]

The etymology of the word shOham (which occurs in Chronicles as a proper name; see Sii)|ia.m) is at present uncertain.

. Ff,ri^. <^e?-KOd. Ukts. .v.) traced it to a root

meaning ' paleness,' an if ' the pale stone,' and versions. "'<= Haupt, connecting it with the Assyrian

j(i////, renders 'pearl.' Delitzsch, however, argues that silnitu mediis a ' dark - coloured [itoticl' (Ats //irji^ZSfi; cyiJ'ar. to/. 130/), and Halfivy tonne, is Assyr siitHlu with Syr. Htm rather than Heb. i/im (A'ei: Cii/., lESi.

P- 479).

Shoham is rendered in the various versions as follows ;

I'Ai. pffpvWiov (as in Targ. (pVlTal, Saad. etc.) in Ex. ys 20 = 3!r3, reproiluced in Kzek.2813 (see PRECIOUS STONES); AtSo? It>|1 a^apaySov in Kx. 29 8'. 27 36 ; A. 6 irpdatvoi (leek- green) in (len. 2 1 2 ; A. (rapSiov in Kx. 3:> 9 ; A. <roo^ ( liA], ow/vov [ I.] in I Ch. -JU 2 ; Si-vx' (as in Aq. al Kx., I heod. and .Syinm. at Kx. and Gen., and V. iDn^chiHus, bm onyx in Ezek.J except in Job) in Job28i6; Pesh. everywhere U^| (hrwi.a) or //. MO'i^ except in iCh. L'9 2 where its text differs; Aq. in Gen. J 12 and Vg. in Job '28 16 sardonyx.

RV"'*.'- adds as an alternative the rendering Hkkvi,,' thus supporting the identification argued for alxjve.

EV follows throughout the usual Vg. rendering, giving every, where 'onyx' (see Onvx), reserving 'beryl' for the Hebrew 'larshish (see Takshish, Stc.nk ok). Jn the N'l", however, beryl ' is naturally the EV rendering of PT)pvAAoi'(Kev. 21 2ot).

\V. K.


(zopzeAAeoc [A]), iEsd.533 AV =

Ezra -261, BARZILLAI, 2.


0P3, <5 52 ; BAcep [E]). The b'ne Hesai, a family of N'ktiiimm in the great post-cxilic list (see EzKA, ii. S 9), Ezra 249 {^^oii^ [a\]) = Neh. 7 -,2 (/ii77<ret [lU], ^a.i.a. [N]) = r Esd. 03' lUsTAl, R\' Hastiiai {(iaffdai [HA], ^((ratp [E]).


(nniO?, ' in the secret of Yah,' 22 ; the form, however, is very im|:>robahle [see HiiZAl.KK.i,] ; read, rather, HHipn, Hasadiah), an Israelite, father of Mcshullani in the list of wall-builders (see Xkiikmiah, I/, Ezra, ii. j;;; 16 [,], ,5^.), Xeh. .'U (BaAia [H]! <\BAei<\[N], BaccoAia[.\"J, BaciAia [L]).

T. K. C.


(XPiStpP, Is. 14 23t ; Pesh. \^^,^^ Vg.

scopa ; nHAoY BapaGron [HXor], n. BaGron [A]K a word occurring nowhtTe else in Hebrew or, in this sense, in any .Semitic dialect.'- ,\ccording to Taliii.I',. A','sh ha-shdnd, 26 b. , the word, though unknown to the Rabbis (who called the article .ira^N), was still in use among the women (cp Jer. Mei^illa, ii. 2). There is not, therefore, any reason to doubt that \'g. and Pesh. are right in understanding something to sweep (awavl with (cp the metaphor in Is. 30 28 [sieve] ; on which see .\(;ki- CLi.TUKE, 10). The Ijcsoni of death is not unknown to mythology (Otto Henne .\m Rhyn, Die Deutahe Volksa^'e,*'-> 411/.); but the figure hardly needs any mythological warrant (Che. ad loc).


(mb'5, Bocop [H.AE], Jos. .-////. vi. 14 6. BACeAoc). a wady (Sn;). mentioned in the account of David's pursuit of the Amalekites, 1 S. 3O9/ 21 {z: 21 fifava [B], ^ex'^p [.A]). It was probably this wady that .Saul ' crossed ' when he chastised the Amalekites (iS. 15s; re.ad hn:^ "'-i!*^ J^'"- ) : a"<J '" the two definitions of the .Amalekite territorv in iS. ir.7 ('and Saul smote the Amalekites, from Ilavilah,' etc.), and 278 (' for those were the inhabitants of the land, which were from old time," etc.), we should probably read ' from the torrent Hesor even to the torrent [land] of Musri.' See Tki.km (i. ). According to CJut^rin (Judee, 2213), it is the modern Wady Ghazza which issuts from the Wady es-Seba' and empties itself into the sea SW. of Gaza. T. k. c.


(npi), a city of Hadadezer, king of Zobah. 2S. 88(MT)=iCh. 188(MT), Tibhath. Pesh., how -

' Omitted (through oversight ?) at Ex. 35q 296 13 E7ek.28i3. 2 In Arab, the root means 'incline (the head),' in Eth. 'set in order.'

ever, reads Tebah, and this is also favoured in 2 S. I.e. by (5 {fiaa-^aK [B], -/3ax [A], (jure^aK [L], where ^a arises from a corrupt repetition of the preceding letter in this translator's Heb. text). Cp Ew. Hist. 8153, and see Tebah.


(Bmtanh [B], Bat. [K]. BAit. [A]), one of the places to which, according to Judith 1 9, Nebuchad- rezzar SL-nt his summons. The BiiTll-ANOTH {q.v.) of Josh. 1559 appears to be meant.


(|03 /.^., ' vale' or ' hollow" ;BATNe [A], BaiBok [B]. BexeA [I-]), an unidentified site in the territory of Asher (Josh. 192s) called BeGBeTCN by Eusebius (05 236 41), who places it 8 R. m. to the E. of Acco.


(n^3. St. constr. of D^?, see BDB) ; the most general term for a dwelling ; used of a tent in Gen. 27 15 33 17, but generally of houses of clay or stone ; also of temples (cp Bajith, Beth-Bamoth [MI, /. 27]). Combinations of Beth with other words are frequent in Hebrew place-names (see Names, 96). In Assyrian, compounds with Bit are used as names of countries : e.g. , Bit-Humri = the kingdom of Israel ; Bit-Yakin {i.e., Babylonia, the country of Merodach-Baladan).

Among other interesting compounds with Beth are Beesh- TERAH CO, Beth-eked, Beth-haggan, Beth-lehem, Beth-meon (see Baal-mhon), Beth-peor.


(BhSaBapa [C^ KT^ UAH]), Jn.128 AV, is the place where John baptized, according to the reading which became widely current through the ad- vocacy of Origen, who could find no Bethany across the Jordan, but found a Bethabara with a tradition connecting it with the Baptist. Origen, however, admitted that the majority of MSS were against him. See Bethany, 2.

Origen was followed by Chrysostom ; Epiphanius, like Arm. (Lagarde), h.is BrjOafipa. In the present text of Origen the form varies between BrjSapa, Baeapa, BijSaiSapa, and Bi)8apa;3a (the latter also in Ncb. syr. hcl.(mg.), a;th. ; see \VH 274); in OS 240 12 lOS 6 we find firjOaafiapa, Bethabara.

The traditional site of the baptism of Jesus is at the Makhadet Hajla (see Betharabah, 2, where, too, it is suggested that we should read Bethabarah in Josh. 18 22). The two monasteries of St. John attest the antiquity of the belief in this site.

Conder suggests the MakhrKJet 'Abara, NE. of Beisan, partly because of the nearness of this ford to Galilee and Nazareth, and partly because the river-bed is here more open, and the banks of the upper valley more retired {PEFQ., 1875, p. 73).

Another suggestion of the same e.\plorer(A, 1877, p. 185)13 philologically weak.

As stated elsewhere (Bethany, 2), the true reading in Jn. 1 28 was probably^77^a<'a/ipa ?.e., Beth-NIMRAH, now Tell-Nimrin, NE. of Jericho.


(n;y T\'^i.e. , ' temple of Anath ' ; in Josh. BAieeAMe[Bl, BMNAeAe[A], BHeANAe[E]; injudg. BAiGANAxiB], -eeNee[BAL], BeeeNeK[A]), an ancient Caiiaanite fortress, with a sanctuary of Anath (cp Beth-ANoth), Josh. I938. It is mentioned unmis- takably by Thotnies III., Seti I., Rameses II., and Rameses III. in the lists of places conquered by these kings (see RP^"-) 552638; Sayce, Pat. Pal. 160, 236, 239 ; W.\1M, As. u. Eur. 193, 195, 220). Accord- ing to Judg. I33, it adjoined Naphtalite territory, but (like Beth-shemesh) remained Canaanitish down to the regal period, subject only to the obligation of furnishing labour for public works. Eus. and Jer. (05 236 45 105 20) inappropriately refer to a village called Batannea, 15 R. m. E. from Cresarea, possessing medicinal springs. But the site now most in favour \4ini//ia, in a valley 6 m. WN'W. from Kedesh is hardly strong enough to have been that of such a fortress as Beth-anath (Buhl, Pal. 232 ; but cp Conder, PEF Mem. 1 200).


(ni3y-n'5 ; BaiGanam [B], -Ganoon [A], BhGapcoG [L])- A town in the hill country of J udah (Josh. I559), towards the eastern border of that region, identified by W. M. Muller with the Bi-t- n-t of the list of places conquered by Shishak {As. u. Eur. 168). If the form Beth-anoth be correct, it may be explained as = Beth-anath, ' house of Anath' {q.v.) ; cp pi:;; (Josh. 21 n) and pjy, jnc' and ['rnc'. To sup- pose a popular etymology ' place of answering' {i.e., of an echo?), with Kampffmeyer {ZDPy I63 ; cp Is. IO30, SBOT). is needless.

But is the form correct ? Conder and Kitchener {PEF j1/(?;. 8311 351) identify Beth-anoth with Beit 'Ainun, 5 m. N. of Hebron, near the sites of IlALHULand Beth- ZUK (cp Betane). This appears reasonable, and sug- gests a doubt whether the ancient name may not have been ji:'V-n'3, Bcth-'emm. It is true that "^ favours Cjy, and * p^j; (. in the first syllable being unex- pressed) ; but the case of Anem (see En-gannim, 2) shows that the absence of both in MT and in the te.xt implied by is not decisive. A spring is men- tioned to the west of the ruins of Beit 'Ainun.

T. K. c.


( BhGan ia [Ti. WH]). i. A small village first referred to in the Gospels, 15 furlongs to the E. of Jerusalem on the road to Jericho (Jn. 11 18 Lk. I929, cp V. i), and commonly identified with the Beth-Hini^of the Talmud. It is no doubt the mod. el- Azariyeh (from Laz.arus or Lazarium the / wrongly taken as the article). El -"Azariyeh lies on a spur SE. of the Mt. of Olives (cp Mk. lli Lk. 1929). Its fig, olive, and almond trees give one at first a pleasant impres- sion ; but a nearer inspection of the few houses is dis- appointing.

There are various romantically interesting spots connected by old tradition with Lazarus (cp the Itin. Hieros. ed. Wessel, 596, the Bordeaux Pilgrim, and OSi'^) 108 3 239 10). The Castle of Lazarus (based on castellum, the Vg. translation of the Gr. KuJjotT)) is a ruined tower, presumably anterior to the time of the Crusaders, and hard by is the tomb of Lazarus ; the house of Simon the Leper also is shown.

2. The Bethany where John baptized (Jn.128, Ti. WH after N*B.A.C*, edd. , R\') is distinguished from the Bethany mentioned above by the designation ' across Jordan' {iripav tov 'lop.); its e.xact situation is un- known. The reading of TR and of AV is Bethabara {q.v. ). Another suggestion is that Bethabara ( ' house of the ford ') and Bethany ( = ,t:i< n'3. ' house of the ship ') are one and the same place (see GASm. 7/(7 542, n. 12).

The analogy of some corrupt OT forms (cp Kishion) suggests, however, that the true reading in the traditional source of Jn.128 would be one combining in the second part of the name the letters N, B, and R such a name as ^ridava^pa. We actually find daivdavajSpa in * Josh. 1827 for the Bethnimrah of the Hebrew text. Now, the site of Beth-nimrah ['/.f.] is well known. It is accessible alike from Jerusalem and from the region of Jericho (cp Mt. 85), and the perennial stream of Nahr Nimrin, which flows into the Jordan, would supply abundance of water. This theory belongs to Sir George Grove ; it has been adopted by Sir C. W. Wilson (Smith's Z>/?,'-' s.z: 'Bethnimrah'), and has strong claims to favourable consideration. Of course, the insertion of the words iripav rod 'lopS. would be a consequence of the faulty reading ^rjdavM. T. K. C.


(nn^yn T\'2. or nnTT n^3 ; once, Josh. 18 18, by a scribe's error [sec ] simply nri"Trn ; Josh. 18 18, BaiGapaBa [BAL]; 156i GaraBaam [B], BhGaraBa [AL], I822 BaiGaBara [B], -araBa [AL]).

I. One of the six cities in the 'wilderness' of Judah (Josh. 156i), mentioned also as on the boundarj' lines of Judah and Benjamin (156 [jSai^apa^a BA ; ^-qdapa^a

1 We may therefore dismiss the interpretation 'place of the wretched one ' (cp the play upon Anathoth, Is. IO30 MT). Beth- Hini is generally explained 'place of unripe fruit' (cp NrnK, ' unripe fruit,' esp. of figs). The Talmud, however, s,-iys that figs ripened better at 15eth-Hini than anywhere else (Neub., Geog-. Talm. 150). If so, these figs may have led to the name Bethhhage i.e., possibly, ' house of young figs ' but the name Beth-Hini remains unexplained. Another form of the name is Beth-oni ('jiK'n'^)-

L] ]8i8) ; see niso Betii-basi. The reference in 18aa must be considered separately (no. 2). The wilderness of Judah in 156i is the deep depression adjoining the Dead Sea, together with the overhanging mountains and the barren country Ixjyond, including probably a district in the neighbourhood of Arad (see Salt, City ok). Heth-arabah may have been the first or principal settlement in that desolate corner of the Arabah or Jordan valley which forms the N. end of the Dead Sea. Though mentioned twice, if not thrice, with lieth- hoglah, it must have been considerably to the S. of that place, for unless, with Knobel, we put it at Kasr Hajla (which seems rather to have been Beth-hoglah), there is no other suitable site for it till we come to the copious fountain of \lin el- Feshkha, near the NW. corner of the Dead Sea (31 43' N., 35 26' Iv ). The name lieth-arabah ('the house, or homestead, in the Arabah ') has, therefore, a special significance (cp that of Bkth-JK.shimoth, q.v.). This indication of the site was made in writing by Robertson Smith. Perhaps, however, it is best to suppose that there were two settlementr one near the fountain (viz., Beth-arabah), the other (see Middin) at the fountain.

2. It will be still casiiT to adopt this identification if we may follow " in reading not 'Beth-arabah' but ' Betli-abarah in Josh. I822. The ford ('ulidrah) referred to in the name (' house or place Ci the ford') might then be the famous Makhadct Hajla near the mouth of the IVdJv el-Kelt, the bathing-place of the pilgrims, where tradition places the baptism of Jesus Christ. Such a Beth-abarah would be more naturally mentioned between Beth-hoglah and Zemaraim than a place situated at ' Ain el- Feshkha. The confusion of the two names was very easy (note the variant Bt;^- opo/ia in Jn. 1 28). Cp Beth-abara. t. k. c.


(Dnn n^2), Josh. 13 27 .'W. RV Betii-

HAK.-\M [q.v.).


("pxanx Jl^? ; eK roy oiKoy lepo- BoAM [B]. . . . toy lepoBoAM [Q*], . . . lepoBAAA [A], TOY lepoBAAA [Q^], Symm. rip oIki^ Touap^erjX), a place cruelly destroyed by 'Shalman' (Hos. 10i4t;

PVj'. Baer JD^C'; caAaman [BAQ]). Robertson Smith in 1881 (EBi^) 12296) favoured an identification of Bcth-arljel with the trans-Jordanic Arbela (see Oi't^) 21472 886), now Irbid, in which case there might be a reference either to Shalmaneser III. or to a Moabite king Shalamanu mentioned in an inscription {KB 20) as a tributary of Tiglath-pileser III. Schrader {KAT^^) 440-442) argues ably for identifying Shalman with the latter king, who very probably made an incursion into Israelite territory. The combination of Beth-arbel with the trans-Jordanic Arbela {Irbid), however, is improb- able : Shalman should be a more important king, and Beth-arbel (if this compound phrase may be accepted) a more important fortress, than Schrader's theory sup- poses. Wellhausen and Kowack think that Shalman may be Shalmaneser IV. the first Shalmaneser known to the Israelites. If so, the latter part of Hos. IO14 will be a later insertion. The reference to Beth-arbel, however, remains a difficulty. Surely the reading must be corrupt.

^ suggests a correction. Read oyaT n-l, and, as a consequence, for jaSp read d^W- The murder of Zechariah, son of Jeroboam II., by Shallum [tj.v., i] is probably referred to (ir, or mp?, points to a fate like that of Sisera ; cp nnr, Jndg. 627). A reader of Hosea justly assumed that Zechariah was not the only person who was murdered, and took the massacre of the royal family to be a fulfilment of the stern prophecy in v. 15, which ends : ' in a storm (lyco. We. ) the king of Israel shall be cut off ' The words ' mother and children were dashed to pieces' may, however, refer to the cruelty of Menahem to the women of Tappuah

[q.v., 2], as related in 2 K. 15i6. If so. the inter- jxjlator combines two striking events which ecjually formed part of the divinely threatenetl judgment u|x)n Israel. See Che. F.xpos. Nov. 1897, p. 364.

For a new but diiricult theory of Hos. 10 14 see Herz, Atiter. J. SeiH. La-ig. 14207/ !'981. The versions give little help except as to ' Arbecl ' ((B"). A preserves a trace of a theor>' that the reference is to the slaying of Zalmuniia hy (iidc<<ii, in which case Ps. 83ii [12] wouUI be p.irallel. SoAa^af {XArj], it is true, docs not .accord wiih this theory ; but .Syro-Hex. points o i'JD^S ; <TaXfi.ava is K*R 's rendering of Z.ilmunna, and has ome authority in Hosea. Vg. gives .Sicut vasta/us est Srtlinana a doino eiiis qui iudicavit Baal. The conclusive exegetical objections to this view need not here be stated. See also Field's Hexapla. t, k. C.


(BAiOACA^coe [A]), i Esd. 5.8 RV.

See .\ZMAVKT1I (l.).


(jINTfa, cp. Benj. 'ben-Oni'), a place to the E. of Bethel near Ai (Josh. 72, ^r)Oaiy [A], pi)Oav [L], from which, indeed, it has been pro- posed, following '"', to eliminate the name, but on insufficient grounds'), and to the \V. of Michma^h (1S.I35; where BAietopcoN [B*!-]. BAiecco- [B^'] are obviously wrong; iS. I423 BAMcoe [B]. ThOayn [or T^ daw, A^"'], BAiecopojN [!-]). The site has not been identified ; 2 but it must have been the last village on the edge of the desert country, for to this it gave the name Wilderness of Beth-aven (Josh. IS 12 (iaieavv [A]; -Ouiv [B] ; -0aovv [L]). All the data point to the neighbourhood of Deir Diudn either that village itself, or Kh. Haiyan, immediately to the S. For the rest see BirniiiL, 4. g. a. s.


(niDjrn'3), Neh.728: sec



(jiL'D ^r? 71*3), Jos. 13. 7. See Baal-meon.


(mj n*2, BaiGhra [BA], -Bhra [L] ; the form of the second part of the name is obscure) is not to be identified with the Bethabara of Jn. 1 28 (Reland) ; it occurs only in the story of Gideon (Judg. 724), who sends to his fellow-tribesmen in the hill country of Ephraim, bidding them cut off the Midianites' retreat by holding against them 'the waters as far as Beth- barah, and (also) the Jordan.' The latter words (p-i'n-riNi) seem to be a gloss on 'the waters' (c'C.-:)- By 'the waters," however, are really meant, not the Jordan, but the streams emptying themselves into the Jordan which the Midianites would have to pass. Beth- barah must have Ijeen situated somewhere in the wady formed by one of these streams, and there are points in the narrative which suggest locating it near the mouth of the Wddy Fdri'ah, between which and the Jordan the Midianites would find then\=elves in a cul-de-sac (Moore).


(BeeSAC I [A], BAiGBAiccei [K]. -Bacc. [NV], -Bag I [V], ^ \i^ [Pesh.], Beth-besscren \\(i\. Lat.]), a fortified city in the desert {iv r^ iprjjjLif}), the ruinous parts {to. Kad-Qprjfxtva) of which Jonathan and Simon repaired, when menaced by Bacchides (i Mace. 96264). The Syriac (see above; cp Vet. Lat.) reads Beth-yashan (cp Jeshanah). This is probably correct ; the corruptions can be easily accounted for. Jos. {Ant. -xiii. I5) calls the place liet'h-alaga {i.e., Beth-hoglah), which is too far from the MS readings, but may be a correct identification, though Beth-arabah also suggests itself G. A. Smith, however, thinks that the second i in Beth-basi may be correct. ' In th; wilder- ness of Judea, E. of Tekoa, there is a Wddy el-Bassah, which name as it stands means " marsh," an impossible term, and therefore probably an echo of an ancient name.'

1 We. supposes SkO'dS cnpo to be a gloss, and pn a con- temptuous distortion of ^k in the manner of Hos. 4.5, etc. {CH laO. So Albers, but not Di. or Bennett, SHOT.

  • Possibly it was early destroyed. This, as Muhlau remarks,

would account for the disparaging transformation of the name Bethel into Beth-aven (Kiehm, /(^(2) 1 213).

r. K. c.


KV Beth-biri (*N12 n*3), i Ch. 431. Set- Hi. ni-i.i:ii.\()rii.

BETH CAR[edit]

(13-IT5 ; BaiGxop [HL], BeAx. [A], [/V\expi| KoppAiooN, Jos. .////. vi. 22 ; jm*' [Targ.]), a place, presumably in the district of Mizpah, to which the Israelites pursued the defeated Philistines (i S. 7 11 [Dt. ]). The phrase 'under lieth-car ' is remarkable. Does it mean ' imder the gates of Ueth-car ' (so We. riiS 68) ? or does it mean ' to the foot of the hill on some part of which lieth-car stood ' ? No such name as IJeth-car is mentioned elsewhere ; hence it is at first sight too bold to identify it (as PJiF, not disapproved by GASm. //(; 224) with 'Ain Karim, thenameof a flourish- ing village a good way to the S. of Nebi Samwil, and W. of Jerusalem. The name Heth-car, however, is self-evidently corrupt, and if we may emend it into ' Heth-haccerem ' the identification with 'Ain K'drim becomes probable (see Bkth-haccekem). Only lA m. to the X. of 'Ain Karim is Der Yasin, not improbably to be identified with the Jashan or Jeshanah of i\ 12 (see Shkn), which need not be the same as the Jeshanah of 2Ch. 1319.

The alternative is to read ' Beth-horon ' (Klo.) ; 3 and n were, from phonetic causes, easily confounded. ' Under Beth-horon ' would be a very intelligible expression; but Beth-horon is certainly too far north. The reading ' Beth-jashan,' quoted from Pesh. (not (P) by G. A. Smith {/fC 22^), is no readwig at all, but a corruption of the text of i S. 7 11, as We. has pointed out. T. K. C.


(jin n-3, 95, 'house of Dagon,' BHeAAr^AiiM [AL]). I. A city of Judah, enumerated in the third group of 'lowland' towns (Josh. 1041, payadirjX [B]). The list is so scattered and irregular that nothing can with certainty be inferred from it as to the site of Heth-dagon ; but Makkedah (i/.v.), which is mentioned in the same verse, must have lain off the mouth of Aijalon (Josh. IO28). Here we find, 6 m. SE. from Joppa, a Beit-Dejan, and, li m. farther S. , Diljun. Each of these has been identified with Beth-dagon (see Rob. /iJ? 8298, Clermont Ganneau, PF.FQ, 1874), and one of them (the former, according to Eriedr. Del. ) is probably the Bit-daganna mentioned in Sennacherib's prism-inscription (col. 2 /. 65 ; KBI^-z). It must be rememlxired, however, that the name occurred in several places through Palestine Beit Dejan nearly 7 m. E. of Ndhlus (see /VrZ-'map), and, according to Jos. {Ant. xiii. 81 BJ\. 2 3), Dagon near Jericho, each on an important trade route from Philistia to the Jordan Valley. There may, then, have been more than one Beth-dagon on the borders of Philistia, and it ought not to be over- looked that neither Dajun nor Beit Dejan lies in the Shej)helah proper. On the doubtful phrase ' land of Dagon ' in Eshmunazar's inscription, and on the god Dagon, see Dagon, i. On Dajun see especially CI. Ganneau, Arch. Res. in Pal. 126/:

2. A locality not yet identified (but cp Conder, Hdbk. to the Bible, 268), on the Iwrder of .\sher (Josh, lit 27 ; /3ai0ye>/ee [B]).

3. The temple of l)agon in Ashdod (i Mace. 10 83, /Sr^dSayuf [_^NC.a cby, ;3oiayo,,. [.N*]). G. A. S.


( Q^n^3^-n'2 ; cp Ass. dublu, ' foundation ' ; but see N.\MKS, 107), a town in Moab mentioned along with Dibon [i] and Xebo [iii.] (Jer.

4822 = 3I22, en oiKON A<mBAa0aim [Hg], e- o- AeBAAeAiM [NA]), evidently the same as Ai.mon-dib- I..^TH.\IM, which also occurs in connection with Dibon (Xu. 3346/.). _ This place (called pSan n^), Mehedeba, and Ba'al Me'on are stated by Mesha on his stele to have been fortified by himself (/. 30).


AV'">.'-, EV 'house of Eden" (n^2 Di*' ; el ANAptON x<^PPAN [BAQF]), an Aramaean city or land, with a ruler of its own, but presumably allied to Damascus (Am. 1 5). No satisfactory identifi- cation of this place has been made. The vocalisation (|njj not py) forbids us to see in it the llapaSfuroi of Strabo and Ptolemy, and equally forbids us to regard it with Wetzstein (Del. /.(*' 702; cp Vg. de domo voluplatis) as a poetical name of Damascus. The view, however, adopted bySchrader {KA T^^ 327)and favoured by "*-"" (see above), that Beth-eden is the Bit-adini of the inscriptions (see Euen), is not less inadmissible, for this is too far to the N. of Damascus, and had, in the time of Amos, long been subject to Assyria (Wi. ATUntcrs. 183; cp XiJld. ZDMG 38326 ['79]). No doubt there were other places called I'.dkn {q.v., ii. ). There is equal uncertainty as to the name Bikath-aven (see AvKN, 3), which corresponds to Beth-eden in the parallel line. T. K. C.


(li^r H'?, EV 'shearing house'; R\"'C- 'house of gathering '),^ where Jehu met Aha- ziah's brethren, is either a place-name or (more probably) the designation of an isolated hou.se used on certain occasions by the shepherds of the district (2 K. 10 12 14 ; BAiGAK&e [B]; but in v. 14 iv ry aK-qvri [B>^'^'"ir]. KaA [AL] ; Pesh. has ' and he was overthrowing the altars that were on the way ' [v. 12], and in v. 14 lay n'3. cp Cod. \'ind. of Vet. Lat. Belhacar).


1 Site[edit]

("^NrT*?, r, 10, always one word [Bii. on Gen. 128 Josh. 72], RV wrongly with a hyphen ; 'house of God' .^., BAiTyAiON (cp B&t-

TOyAlA. Bphhulia); see Idoi..\tkv, 2, MA.SSEBA ; BaiBhA [B.VDEL]; but Gen. 307, BeB. [D] ; gentilic Bethelite, see Hikl). i. A town on the border between Benjamin and Ephraim, W. of the wilderness of Beth-aven (Josh. 18 12 ; on 12i6, where 6-^ omits the clause, and "" has HXa5 for Bethel or Makkedah, see Tai'PUAH, 2), without doubt the present Beitfn (from Beitil, by the common interchange of / and n), a small village (said to have 400 inhabitants), with ruins of early Christian and Crusaders' buildings, about 10 m. N. of Jerusalem. It lies on the back- bone of the central range, a little E. of the watershed, and 2890 ft. above the sea. Erom the village itself the view is confined to the plateau, which, like most of the territory of Benjamin, presents a bleak prospect of gray rocks and very stony fields, relieved by few- trees and a struggling cultivation. A few minutes SE. , however, lies one of the g^eat view-points of Palestine, the Burj-Beitln or Tower of Bethel (probably the ruin of an early Christian monastery), supposed to mark a traditional site of the tent and altar of Abraham 'to the E. of Bethel' (Gen. 128), and of Lot's view of the ' Circle of Jordan ' (183-10).

2 Traditions[edit]

Four good springs " ^ ^'"^ reservoir amply certify the present village as the site of the city, which 'was called Luz at the first' (Gen. 28 19 ; oIko% deov [ADEL]). The sanctuary, "God's house,' the ' place' (as it is called in Gen. 28 n, where it is distinct from the city) which grew famous enough to absorb the city's name in its own, may ha\e Iain either on the site of the Burj-Beitin, or on one of the neigh- bouring slopes, where there is a natural stone circle [PF.FQ, 1881, p. 25s); and the curious formation of the rocks in terraces and ramparts has been taken as the material suggestion of the 'flight of steps' (see Ladder) which Jacob saw in his dream (Gen. 28 10 ff.)."^ There he raised a pillar, or massebah, to Yahwe, and afterwards is said (Gen. 85 1-8) by the same narrator, E (it is J who gives the previous story of Abraham's altar), to have built an altar and called the 'place' (not yet 'city') 'God of Bethel' (for which (P^'"'-, Pesh. , and Vg. read ' Bethel ' ). Here Deborah, Reliecca's

1 Cp the Targ. Nvn nr'JD r*a. ' place of the gathering together of the shepherds.' For 'eked, however, we should perhaps read nSkedun (CliTi), and omit the next word (in zi. 12, not in V. 14) hd-rlfUn (C'J/in) as a gloss ; ndkidlm was a less common word for ' shepherds ' than rd'int.

2 Schlatter (/.ur Topog. 236) infers from Gen. 12 8 Jos. 7 2 (om. A) that the sanctuary lay E. of the town, in Deir Diwan.

foster-mother, died. She was buriwl below the town, beneath an oak called ' the oak of weeping " (see Ai.i.oN- BACUTil, Mui.iiKKKY) : trees, it is proUihle. would not be found on the stony plateau above. The next notice of Helhel is in the JIC narrative of Joshua's conijuests (Jos. 7 J 8912 [om. BAK ; j^r)0<xv L]). in which liethcl is not yet the name of a city (so also the Ueutcrononiist in Jos.'l2g \yt9 [A] : in v. 16 ' IV-thel ' is with 6"'* to Ix; omitted), but is still distinct from Luz (16a ["* does not distinguish them, reading Xoij'a (H in i-. 1, A in v. 3) after /ia<tf7;\j). The later priestly writer, however, makes them the same (18 13, cp 2a {^t\aa.va. [B], /Stj^t/X (.\)] ; in Judg. 1 23 the p,-irenthesis is proljably a gloss).* In Judg. 45 the prophetess Delxirah is said to have sat under the palm-tree of Detxirah l)ctween Ramah and Bethel a statement which the critics who understand the song of Delwrah to imply that she belonged to the tril)e of Issachar su|)pose t'^ have arisen from confusion with the <nhor Delxjrah (see Ukbok.MI). There is no cogent reason, however, for their inference from the song, and while a palm is an unusual, it is not an impossible, tree at the altitude of Bethel : there is one at Jerusalem. In the story of the crime of the Benjamitcs the priestly writing tells of a national gathering before God at Bethel (Judg. 21 2).

3. History.[edit]

In the reconls of the period after tlx' Judges the name Luz does not occur ; we may suppose it by this time to have Ijeen absorljed in that of Bethel, which was still a sanctuary ( i S. 7 16 10_;V The division of the kingdoms brought Bethel .1 new opportunity : its ancient sanctity was taken ad- vantage of by Jerolmam for ptjlitical ends, and he made it one of the two national shrines which he established in North Israel in order that his people might not go over to Jerusalem. In these shrines he set up the golden calves 'Thy God, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt ' ( i K. I229). .A priesthood, not Levitical, was established, and a new altar, pilgrimages, and feasts were ordained (i K. I230/). In the words of .\maziah to Amos, Bethel became a royal and national temple ( ' sanctuary of the king,' ' house of the kingdom,' Am. 7 13)- 2

A later (perhaps post -exilic) narrative records a prophecy as made by a prophet from Judah, by which Jeroboam was judged according to the Deuteronomic standard, and Yahwe's overthrow of Bethel was predicted (i K. 13 ; cp 2 K. 1029). There was no such feeling of guilt or foreljoding of doom, however, among the prophets of the northern kingdom, for we find a company of them settled in liethel, and the place visited by Klijah and Klisha (2 K.22/. 23).

4 Important position[edit]

For a national sanctuary the position was convenient. The present village lies alxjut a furlong off the most '^^*^'>' ' ^^ three parallel branches '"'"^ which the great north road here divides, very near its junction with the road by Michmash to Jericho, and not many miles from the heads of those two other roads which come up from the coast by the lieth-horons, and by (iophna. resfKJctively, to meet the north road just mentioned. That is to say, the main lines of traffic N. to S. and E. to W. crosst>d at the gates of Bethel. Like other ancient sanctuaries, it must have h.ad a market ; its mer- cenariness and wealth are implied by Amos (84, etc.). Moreover, liethel lay upon the natural frontier l)etween the two kingdoms on the plateau between the passes of Beth-horon and Michmash (on the Chronicler's story of its capture by Abij.ah of Judah, see Abij.mi, i ). The prophets Hosea and .\mos appear in opposition to Bethel, not on the ground (taken by the later Deutero- nomists) that it was the seat of a schism, but because of

1 In Judg. 2 I a Bethel ought proliably to be read for liocillM

2 KM r\2^ r-3 K1.T -Ss-P:if?p 'S, AV ' for it is the kings ch.ipel, and it is the king's court ' ; RV ' for it is the king's sanctuarj-, and it is a royal house.'

the superstitious and immoral nature of its cult, even though the object of this was Yahwe himself. They regard it as apostasy from Yahwe (Am. 44, 'Come to Bethel and revolt * ; r> 5 [ySa^TjX t^**], ' .V-ek n.t Bethel, seek Yahwe*), and its crimes culminate (Ant. 7i3) in the silencing of his pro|)het .\mos by its priest Amaziah (sec Amos, 20). It shall, therefore, Ijear the brunt of the impending doom (Am. 814 Hos. IO15 \oIko% tov iffpariX BAQ]). In scorn Amos had said ' Bethel shall Ix'come AVKN ' i.e., vanity, falseness, false worship, idolatry (5 5) : so Hosea calls it Beth-aven (4 15 58 IO5) oftener than he calls it Bethel. The nickname was the readier because of the actual Bktii-.Avkn (i/.v.), which once stood, and perhaps in the eighth centurj- still stootl. in the neighlx)urhood. After the fall of the northern kingdom the heathen colonists naturally adopted the cult of the 'god of the land,' and Bethel retained its importance as a religious centre (2 K. 17 28). Isaiah and Micah do not meiuion Bethel ; it is very doubtful if Jeremiah does .so (Giesebrecht on Jer. 48 13). The frontier of Judah, however, must have been gradually pushe<l N. so as to enclose it, for when Josiah put down ' the high places in the cities of Judah ' he destroyed the altar in Itethel and desecrated the site (2 K. 2'54i5). The city itself must have Inxn inhabited by Jews, for its families are reckoned in the great post-exilic list [sc-e EzR.\, ii. 9, 8c; Ezra 228 {yaiOrjX rB]) = Neh. 732 (/St/^t/X [BN*]) = I Esd. i,2i {fieroXio} [B], i^i/r. [A])]. It was the most northerly site repeopled by Jews ( Neh. 11 31 ; j3ri$r)p j^j^c.a 111;;, inf. . q,,, BX*.A]). ' \Ve hear nothing more of Bethel till it is described as one of the strong places of Judah which Bacchides refortified in 161 B.C. (i M.acc. 950 ; Jos. An/, xiii. 1 3), and then it disappears from OT history.

5. Post-biblical[edit]

In 69 A. I). Vespasian garrisoned Bethel before his advance on Jerusalem (Jos. ^/iv. 99); and circa 132 Hadrian placed a post there to intercept Jewish fugitives (Midrash,

AX/ia//, ii. 3 : Ncub. (,V,y. 7a/m. 115). The Bordeaux Pilgrim (333) gives it as Betthar 12 R. m. 

from Jerusalem. Kohins.m's theory {LBR, 270), that Bethel is therefore the Bether of Hadrian's war, is un- founded. Kuseb. and Jerome call it a vill.ige : the latter adds (under .Xggai) that where Jacob dreamed there was built a church })erhaps part of the ruins at Burj-Beitin. The Crusaders exhibited the rock under the llome of the Rock in Jerusalem as Jacob's Stone ; but the ' Cartulary of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre ' ^ives Bethel as a cas;d'c ceded to that church in 1160, and the site of a tower and chajK:! bi:ilt by Huguesd'Ibelin(Rey, 378). Sec- < .\\ir\n,Ju,/^e, chap. .'.S ; //> M(tu. .'2957; 3057; ; Stanley, .S/'2i7 ; (J.VSiii. //</, chap. xii. and pp. 289^ 298.

(2) A place to which David sent part of the spoil of the .Amalekites (iS. 8027!: probably the ame as BlCTllfl., if we are not with " (and Budde) to read /Sai('<Toip /.(., r>KTii-zrK. G. .\. s.


(pCI'n n'3. 99. 'house in the valley), a place on the boundary of .Asher (Josh. 10 27).

Before Beth-cmek some wortls appear to have dropped out : perhaps they are representeil by s <cai tuTtXevat-rai [ra] opia. (.\fter opio U coiitiiuics (Ta(i>6(u^ai6iJ.( , where (ra.(f^ai seems to be a corruption o( yaiil>9airj\ [-yai it>9ari\], prefixed wrongly to fiaiBfxt ( = Patdf fieit 1 : acraijfla firjOaetifK \.\], croi^a ^OarfitK [L] ; Symm. tit -niy itoiAouSa). The dcscripiinn in ?. t; /. is not cle.ar ; there would seem to be two descriptions of the northern lx)undary (if 'on the left hand," f. 28, means ' northward.' and if the equivalent of <cat tiatK. opia is to be inserted before ' northward ' in v. 27).

Robinson was struck by the resemblance of the name to that of Wmka, 6^ m. NE. of 'Akka (.\crei ; but, as he himself points out (/>'A' 4 103 108), the situ.ation of 'Amka is too far N. of Jefat (Jiphtah-el ?), and, even if this objection lie waived, '.Amka is at any rate too far N. of Kabul (which must be the ancient Cabul).

T. K. C.


(eeOHp [BE], BaiOhr^ [A'), one of the additional cities of Judah in Josh. 15 59

ficu00itp also occurs in i Ch. tJ 59 [A), as a substitute for oTTaf [Bl 1.^., Juttah. of Jerusalem), which stands on the slope of a steep projecting hill between the Wady Hittir and a smaller valley. If we asceiui higher we shall reach a site admirably adapted for a fortress, where there are still some ruins connected by popular legend with the Jews. On the E. side are chambers in the rock and old cisterns. Neubauer (ddog. Talin. 103-114, cp 90) and Gu6rin (///(/. 2387-395) had all but demonstrated that this was the Hether (in'a) or rather lieth-ter (-inn-a). within whose walls Bar Cochba so obstinately resisted the Romans under Julius Severus (A. o. 134-5). The proof has now been completed by the discovery of an inscription stating which divisions of the Roman army were stationed there.' It is, therefore, no longer possible to maintain with Gratz [Hist. 2417) that the Beth-ter of Bar Cochba was identical with the Betthar of the itineraries, which was situated between Antipatris or Diospolis and Cassarea (see ANTIPATRIS, 2, end). See Gibbar. Only two ancient statements respecting the position of Bether need be here quoted. Kus. {/IK 5 6) describes pi.0dr)pa in these terms : TroAiyi/ij nv fif oxvpuiTOLTt}, tcoc 'lepoo'oAu/oicoi' ov <T(j>6Spa iroppta 6ie(rT(i(ra, and the Talm. of Jerus. {Taanith, 48), 'If thou thinkest that Beth-ter [spelt with two n almost always in this section] was near the sea, thou art in error : truly it was 40 m. away from the sea.' t. K. C.


(102 ^"in). Cant. 217 EV, following Vg. {Bether). The word Bether, how- ever, all recent critics agree, is not a proper name : it qualifies the preceding words. Putting aside the old, forced explanations of the phrase, such as ' mountains of ravines' ("NAcgp,^ KoiXw/xdrov i.e., c"in3 'nn ; cp BrniRO.x), and 'mountains of separation ' (between the lovers), one might conjecture that 'Bether' was the Syrian plant malobathron, from which a costly oil was procured, used in the toilet of banqueters (Hor. Od. ii. 77), and also in medicine (Plin. JVH x.xiii. 448). So Symm. (Field, He.v. on Cant. 217), RV^s- ; Wellh. Prol.^*) 399; ET 391. Others emend inn into n"CC3, 'spices,' in conformity with 814 (so Pesh. , Theod. , Meier, Griitz). The best solution, however, has yet to be mentioned : nni is miswritten for [c'ln^a. 'cypresses' ; cp 1 17 (Che.). ' Mountains of cypresses' is an appro- priate term for Lebanon ; cp ' mountains of panthers ' (18). See /(^>A' 10571, and cp Canticles, 15 n.


(BneecAA [codieid]_^.^., xiDH n^B ' house of mercy ' ; Bh6z<\6& [Ti. WH]), the reading of TR in Jn. 52, for whicli the best authorities have Beth/.atha or Rktmsaida. On the topographical question, see Ji:rus.\lem.


('PV'^C ^5 : "* o^"" fX^Me^o" ai^ri^s, i.e.,Tw^'^, 'near her'), an unidentified place in the Shephelah mentioned by Micah (1 n), who foresees the captivity of its noble ones (rS'sj;, emended from inni;!?, 's reading [(JSiVt^s], where MT has irnoy : so Che. , JQR, July '98). It is scarcely the same as Azel (cp Azal).


(TlS n'? ; BAiGr&iAcoN [B], TeA^P f'^]' BHereAAcop [L]), a town, whose 'father' Hareph was of Calebite origin (i Ch. 25it); the genealogy seems to represent post-exilic relations. On the analogy of the other great divisions Shobal abi Kirjath-jearim and Salma abi Bethlehem, Beth-gader was perhaps no unimportant place, and we may possibly identify it with Gedok, i.* It is noticeable that the further divisions of Hareph are not enumerated, as they are in the cases of Shobal and Salma.


("piOi JT*?, ' place of recompense ' ? [cp Gamaliel, ?Xv?p3]; O I KO N r<MMCO A [B],o. fAMCO A A [A], o. -A [Q]. O- -COAB [{<'=]. om. X*). In Moab on the table-land E. of the Jordan (Jer. 4823), identified by

1 C\. Can. Acaii. ties inscr., Comptes rendus, 1894, p. i;?yC

2 The position of Geder, with which it might otherwise be connected, is unknown.

some with Kh. /email, which lies to the east of the well- known DiBON ; according to others, it finds its modern representative in Umm ej-Jemdl, about five hours S. of Bosra.


('pa'?5n H"?). Neh. I229 RV ; see GILGAI., 6 (5).


AV Beth - Haccherem (n^3 D"!3n, 103, ' vineyard place'), is expressly called, not a town, but a ' district' ("Sl/S), near Jerusalem, N'ch. 814 (BhOaxaaa FB], -Oaxxapma [A], -Gakaaa [N], -&v- XARAM [1^])- From Jer. 61 it appears to have included a conspicuous height to the S. of Jerusalem which was usctl as a beacon-station (Baid Oaxo-pf^ [B], BeOd. [K], Br]ea. [Q], BvdOaxap [A].

Jerome (in his comment on the latter passage) says that it was one of the villages which he could see every day with his own eyes from Bethlehem, that it was called Bethacharma, and that it lay on a mountain. Hence, many since Pococke have placed it on the so-called Fureidls or ' Frank Mountain ' (2487 ft. above the sea-level), between Bethlehem and Tekoa, and very near the latter (so even Giesebrecht). Jerome's

we are unable but there is now no name near the ' Frank Mountain' which confirms this theory, and the special fertility which the name Beth-haccerem implies to have characterised the district suggests looking elsewhere. After all, it was rather hasty to infer from Jer. i that Beth-haccerem was bound to be near Tekoa.

Since we have found reason elsewhere (Beth-car) to correct 'Beth-car' in iS. 7ii into Beth-haccerem, and to identify this with the beautiful village of 'Ain Karim, about an hour and a half W. of Jerusalem, it becomes difficult to resist the conclusion that the hill referred to by Jeremiah was the /edel 'AH, at the foot of which lies the village in question. The fruitful olive- groves and vineyards of 'Ain Karim are watered from a superb fountain, and would justify the name Beth- haccerem. The summit of the Jebel 'AH commands a view of the Mediterranean, the Mount of Olives, and part of Jerusalem ( Baed. '^> 112). Condor mentions that tliere are still cairns on the ridge above 'Ain Karim which may have served as beacons {PEFQ, 1881, p. 271). One is 40 ft. high and 130 ft. in diameter, with a flat top measuring 40 ft. across.

Two more references to Beth-haccerem may be indi- cated. In the Mishna treatise, Middoth 3 4, it is stated that the stones for the great altar in the second temple came from the valley of Beth-cerem, which Adler [JQR 8390) identifies with Beth-haccerem and 'Ain Karim ; and among the eleven towns which "al j^^^g (but not MT) in Josh. I559 occurs Karem (Kape/i), which, from the context, can only be 'Ain Karim. Cp Taiichemonite. For another (probable) Beth-carem see Batii-RABrim. t. K. C.


[\IJ\ n^3, domus horti [Vg.], EV 'the garden-house'; better in 6. as a proper name, BAIGAN [B], BAlATfAN [A'^'d- sup ras], BAiecoptON = Beth-horon [L]), a place, apparently to the S. of Jczreel, on the road to which Ahaziah fled in his chariot when he saw Jehoram slain by Jehu (2 K.927). Jenin, the lirst village which one travelling southwards would encounter, may very well be Beth-haggan ( = Beth-hag- gannim, 'place of gardens'), i.e., En-GANNIM (^.z'. , 2). If, however, we hold with (Tonder that Megiddo, which .\haziah reached at last to die was Mujedda' at the foot of Gilboa, a little to the S. of Beisan, it will become natural to identify Beth-haggan with a northern Beit Jenn, between Mt. Tabor and the S. end of the Lake of Gennesaret (Beit Jenn is, in Arabic nomenclature, a favourite name). Against this view of the flight of Ahaziah, see GASm. HG 387, n. i. t. K. C.


See Ei.on-beth-hanan.


AV incorrectly Beth-aram (0*3 D"1in ; oGAprAei, or perhaps -aAcom [B], BhGaram [.AL]), Josh. 1327 (P). For the true form of the name see Beth-haran.


(pn n'3. probably 'house of Hakan,' BaiOap&n [\i]. -AppA [A]. -N [FL]- ^'u 3236 [E\), the corri-ct and ori|;inul pronunciation of the name of the place also called Rktii-makam (cp Gkrsiiom for Ckksmon). Ihe place thus designated was an ancient Amoriie city, foriilied by the conquering Gadites. The site is occupied by the modern Tf/I er- Rameli, which stands up in a wfuly of the same name, between llesbfin and the Jordan, at no great distance from the river. The objection to this raised by Guthe l/.f>l'l' 2-i, n. i) is not decisive.

Rrmich docs inclceiJ imply a form, neth-har3mah ; but this form is vouched for hy the existence of the Aramaic Beth-ramtha (see below). It arose out of ISuth-iiaram (a phonetic modifica- tion of Heth-haran) when the older and correct form of the name had passed out of use, and so the later form, Bclh-haram, came to be misinterpreted. Moreover, Tristram's discovery of a 'conspicuous mound' called Beit Via.rTan(Lan<i 0/ Afoah, 348) has not been vcrilied by subsequent travellers,' though it is still recognised in Itaed.(S) (map of Pera.'a), and the identification (which stands in Di.'s comin.) is retained by von Riess in Bibel- Atlasy^\, on the assumption that licit Harran (or Haram) is nearer to the outlet of the wady than Tell cr-Kumeh.

The really conspicuous mound is surely that of Tell er-Rameh, which is 673 ft. alxsve the sea-level, and certainly marks the site of an ancient town of importance (Conder, /V-.7'M/cw., /,'. I'a!. I238). Such a town was the lieth-ramtha of the Talmud (Xeuhauer, Giog. Talin. 247), the name of which is attested by Josephus, Eusebius, and Jerome.'*

Herod had a palace here (Jos. Ant. xvii. 10 6; B/ ii. 4 2) ; Herod Antipas walled it and called it Julias after the wife of Augustus, at the same time that Herod Pliilip relniilt Belhsaida and gave it the same name after the emperor's d.uighter (Jos. <(/. xviii. 2 I ; />'/ii.!)i). Jerome, however, enables us to correct this statement ((>.V 103 17). Theoldernameof the city was Livias ; the name was chan>;ed to Julias when Livia was received into the gens Julia by the emperor's testament (see Scburer, J/ist. ii. 1 142). Kus. (f '.S' i;34 88) and Theodosius(53o A.i).)also call it Livias; the latter (/)<r ^ttu Terrie ^Vir /. 65) describes it as 12 k. m. from Jericho, near warm springs that were efficacious against leprosy. X. K. C.


once (Josh. 156) AV Beth-hogla (n^jH n'3, 104, 'place of partridge,' cp Hoglah),^ a Hcnjaniite city on the border of Judah (Jos. 156, B(Me<^^^AAA^ [B], -Aa [I>]. -OaAa [A]; I81921, OaAaccan and BeeerMoo [H], BAiOAAAfA [A], BmBapAa {}' -I"'! A in 21]). It is the modern 'Ain (and K.nsr) Hajla, a fine spring and ruin situated be- tween Jericho and the Jordan S. of Gilgal (cp Di. on Gen. In and Raed.W I54)-' Under the form Reth- alaga it is, according to Jos. {Ari(. xiii. 1 5), the place to which Jonathan fled Ixifore Bacchides, i Mace. 863 (but see Bkthbasi). The Onom. erroneously identifies Beth-hoglah with Atad (see Abkl-mizraim, end). The interi^relation ' Betha^la, locus gyri' of Jcr. , according to WKS (AW. SemJ-^ 191, n. i), may rest upon a local tradition of a ritual procession around some sacred object there (cp Ar. hajala, 'hobble, hop') similar perhaps to the Ar. ceremonial fawdf [for which see We. HeidS^"* no).* The form hajla survives also in Ma- khadet Hajla (see Kkth-arahah, 2), a noted bathing- place for pilgrims at the mouth of the Wady el- Kelt (Baed. 169).


1. Site[edit]

(pin D"?, also pin "1 and ph "1, and in C'h. jilin "1\ BAlBcopoaN or Bee. [BAI.]. BeBcopA, BaiO-, -eoopco^ BhS. in Jos. [cp the modern form Beit 'Ur], probably 'the place of the hollow ' or ' hollow way ' ) was the name ofjtwo neighbouring villages, upper Both-horon ('n "1 jivr, Josh. IG5; ^r\du}puv \\S\) and lower I^-th-horon (jinnn 'n "l, josh. I63; but in 2 Ch.85 )V7rn and

J See, r.f., Schick, ZDn'lix ; cp p. 2.

2 Jos. gives the name as prieapatiaOa and firfiapafL^a ; once (Ww/. xvii.106) the text gives i^^aJda. Kus. ((^23487) ^yfi- paft<f>0a, with a fragment.-iry reference to the a<j-<rupioi. Jer. (OS '2b 1 1 ; 103 16), ' Betharam domus sublimium vel montium ' ; quae a Syris dicitur Bethramtha ').

^ The o in Hoglah is not supported, and all the evidence points to the reading ' Haglah."

  • For another explanation see E.n-eglai.m.

pnnnn hence the dual form preserved by upwvtiv^ [B ; but prjdupwv AL], Josh. lOio/. ), near the head and the foot, resjiectively, of the ascent from the Maritime I'lain to the j)lateau of Bcnjamiii. and represented to-day by /W/ 'Or el-Joka and lieit 'Ur et-talit,i (large PEF Surv. Map. Sheet xvii. ).

2. Beth-horon road.[edit]

The road leaves Beit Sira (in which

s"'^ce Uzzen-sheerah : seeSMKRAU). 

'^ above sea-level, on the high plain of Aijalon ; climbs up the .|)ur of the Benjamitc hills in alxsut 50 minutes to the lower Beth- horon, 1240 ft. ; and thence, dro{)ping at fust for a little, ascends the ridge, with the gorges of Wady Selnuln to the S. , and Wady es-Sant and Wady el- 'Imeish to the N., to the uppei Beth-horon, i^ m. from its fellow and 2022 ft. alxive the sea ; and thence, still following the ridge, comes out on the Bcnjamite plateau al>out 4 J m. farther on, to the X. of el- Jib (dibeon), at a height of about 2300 ft. The .iSi'D or ascent to Beth-horon (Josh. 10 10) may Ix; the road towards the up|)er Beth-horon from (jilx;on : it does rise at first from the plateau before descending ; the Tito or descent to the two Beth-horons (Josh. 10 n, ") is the whole road from the edge of the plateau. More probably, the two are the same taken from opposite ends. This Beth-horon road is now no longer the high road from Jerusalem and the watershed to the Maritime Plain ; but it was used as such from the very earliest times to at least the sixteenth century of our era, and indeed forms the most natural, convenient, and least exposed of all the possible descents from the neighlxnir- hood of Jerusalem to the plain of Sharon. The line of it bears many marks of its age and long use. Carried for the most part over the bare rock and rocky debris, it has had steps cut upon it in its sleeper portions, and has remains of Roman pavement. Standing as they do upon mounds, the two Beth-horons command the most difficult passages of this route and form its double key.

3. Military history[edit]

The constancy with which the Beth-horons appear in history is, therefore, easily explicable (they do not occur, however, in either the lists of the conquests of Thotmes III. or the Amarna letters). ^ ^^' According to JE, after Joshua had won for Israel a footing on the Benjamite plateau and made peace with Gibeon, the latter was threatened by the Canaanites. Joshua defeated them at Gibeon, and pursued them all the way down by the Beth-horons (Josh. 10 lojj'! ). In the days of Saul the Philistines must have held the pass from their camp at Michmash (i S. 13i8).'^ Solomon fortified Beth-horon the nether, along with (jezer, on the opposite side of .Vijalon (i K.917 [om. BL, Jos. firfTX(')po- ', in iK.'iss/ ^aidopujd, A]; 2 Ch.85 adds Beth-horon the upper [^aiOixjfujix. BJ). During his son Rehoboam's reign .Shishak or Sosenk of Egypt invaded Judah by the Beth-horon passage, it would appear, for both Ai-yu-ru-u (.Aijalon) and Bi-tj-h-va-ru-n (Beth-horon) occur in his lists of the towns he conquered (Nos. 26 and 24 ; see WMM, As. u. Eur. 166).

In the Syro-Maccabean wars, Seron, a Syrian general, advanced on Judah by IVth-horon ; Judas with a small force met him on the ascent, defeated him, and pursued him out upon the plain (i Mace. 813-24 [^ ?'. 16, /ue^wpwi'j ; Jos. Ant. xii. 7 i). A few years afterwards, Nicanor having retired from Jerusalem upon Beth- horon, Judas attacked and slew him, and routed his army as far as Gczer ( i Mace. 1 39 ff- '< Jos. Aril. xii. IO5). Beth-horon was among the places fortified by Bacchides (i Mace. 9 so [^TjOupuiy, \'*], Jos. Anl. xiii. 1 3). See also Judith44 (fieOwpu [A]).

1 A similar dual (D]yih) is to be read in 2S. 1834 with We., Dr., and Bu. SBOT, following "'s utprnvrtv {optuv i) [.\'d], (rupatfi [I.]).

'i It was probably by the Beth-horons that the Philistines were routed by Saul (i .S. 13 14) and 'from Gibeon south to Gezer,' by David (a S. 5 25).

In 66 A.n. a Roman army under Cestius Gallus, ascending by Beth-horon, had tlicir rear disordered by the Jews, and after a short and futile siege of Jerusalem retreated pell-mell by the same way. Josephus descrilies the difficulties of the ground in a manner that leads us to suppose that the Romans in their haste cannot have kept to the high road by the I!eth-horons, but were swept down the gorges on either side (/>y >' '9)- Perhaps because of this experience, Titus, in his advance upon Jerusalem two years later, took another road ; and Heth-horon is not again mentioned in the military history of Palestine.

4. Population.[edit]

In the division of the land among the tribes of Israel, the border line lictween lienjarnin and l^phraim ran by , .. the lieth-horons (Josh. I635 [I- "-'-5. ^^^jjpy^]_ 18 13/ ) which were counted to Ephraim (Josh. 21 22). They remained part of the N. kingdom ; and we do not re.ad of any Jews settled there in post-exilic times. That is to say, they were held by the Samaritans. Sanballat, one of the chief foes of the lews in Nehemiahs day. is called ' the Hokonite" (Neh. 2io. opw'[]i [B.\]. avpuvei [S^], wpwviTrji [L] 19 I32S, om. BS.V, wpafiT-rji [H^-^"'^], etc.). .Sclilalter {Zr Topog. u. Gesch. Pal. 4, 'War Heth-horon der Wohnort Sanballat's?") seeks to prove that Horonite means 'from Horonaim," the town in S. Moab (Is. 155 Jer. 483534, and Moabite stone), partly on the ground that Sanballat is associated with Tobiah the Ammonite ; but Ammonite may mean ' from Chkphar-Ammoni ' (a town of Benjamin, Josh. I824) ; and Buhl (Gcog. 169) poitits out that s form of Belh-horon 'ilpwvfLV (Josh. 10io[B], cp 2 S. 1334) confirms the possibility of //<irJ// meaning 'from Beth-horon.' By 161 B.C. Beth-horon had become a city of Judoea (i Mace. 95; ]os.Ant. xiii. I3, cp 7i).

5. Post-biblical references.[edit]

According to the T.-ilmud, it w.-is the birthplace of many rabbis (Neul). C\\r_ Taint. 154). Jerome gives it in the itinerary of S. Paula, who came to it from Xicopolis {Kfiit. .v. l\iul.JIu,: op., ed. .Misne, i. 883). There are the ruins of a media;val castle in upper j5^,h.j,ron_ but the substructions in both Tillages are probably more ancient. The name is given by very few medieval travellers (Brocardus, ch. 9 ; Marin. Sanutus, 249), and not at all, it would appear, by the Arab geographers unless the 'Ur.linah mentioned by Yakut, but not located, be the same place. The mediiuval pilgrims went to Jerusalem by Ramleh and the present line of road. In 1801 Dr. Clarke (Tyavels, pt. ii. vol. i. 628) rediscovered the name.

See Rob. A' A' 3 59 ; Gu6rin,y</. 1338,346; Stanley, .9/" 212; GASm. HG 210-213, 254. C. .\. S.


once (Nu. 8849) AV Beth-jesimothiniO^'J^n n*5. BHCiMOye [AL]), is assigned in Joshua (12 5Ac[e]iMcoe [B.A], aicim. [F'], Bne- Ac[e]l/V\. [LJ, 13 20 BAieeACeiNcoe [B]) to the Reubenites (cp Xu. 3349. ^^a y-i<yov ai<n/j.ij0 [BFL], A. M. AC. [A]) ; but probably it was, like most of the neighbouring i)laces, in the possession of the Moabites during a considerable period of the Hebrew monarchy. We know that it was Moabite in the time of Ezekiel (Ezek. 209, oIkov daffi/jLovd [B], 0. ^eOaff. [B>>l^i>"A], o. ^ai^a. [Q*J, 0. jiaid' laa: [Q^]), who speaks of it along with Baal-meon and Kiriathaim as ' the glory of the country. ' .Xs ^-qcntxthd it is mentioned by Josephus (/?/iv. 7 5) as having l>een taken by Placidus ; Eus. writes ^qdaiixovd [0S(-^ 26627) and ^r)da<jinov0 (233 81); Jerome {if>. 103 9), writing liethsimuth, describes it as a village bearing in his day the name himuth, opposite Jericho at a distance of 10 R. m. 'in meridiana plaga, juxta mare mortuum. " The name and description point to the modern Khirbet es-Suweimeh. The name Jeshi- moth may be comjiared with the Jeshimon ' on the face' of which 'the headland of Pisgah looked down ' (Nu. 21 20); for probably this Jeshimon ( = ' desolation ') is not the Jeshimon of Judah, but the barren land off the XE. end of the Dead Sea. With this name Honimel [AHT 197) compares Yasumunu, the name of a Palestinian district mentioned by an early Assyrian king. Cp G.\Sm. //(; 564, n. I.


(n"1?l?7 n*3), Mic. 1 lof RV, AV Al'llR.MI, IIolSK OK.


(niNa? n^3, 93. 104, /.e-.. abode of lions,' Josh. 196, BAGARcae [!] BaiOaA-

Bag [A], BHGAeBACoG [L]), or, simply. Lf.haoth (Josh. ir32. AaBcoc [B], -coG [AE]1. an unidentified site m the Negeb of Judah (Josh. 1632), assigned to Simeon (Josh. 196). The pamllel passage in i Ch. 43' has Bktii-biri ('kts n-a), which has probably arisen from a corruption of the text. For ' and at Beth-biri and at Shaaraim ' C? has Ka.\ oIkov ^paovfiaewpfifi [ B], k. 0. PapovfJL <T. [.A], K. iv tiai0^apifi k. (v ffaapi/i [L].


iDn^'n*? Ru. I19, etc. ; Dn? n*3 iS. 206, etc.; BHGAeCM [I- commonly] some codd. BeGXeeM, BAiGAee\\ [15A]; Jos. BhGXccmh and BhG- AeMA ; gentilic Bethlehemite. *pn?ll"n*3, BhG- AeeMeiTHC. i S. IGiS. etc.) meant, to the Hebrew, house of bread' ; N.\.mks, 10; on a less obvious explanation of H. G. Tomkins, see Elh.\nan, 1, end.

1. Site.[edit]

I. Beth -lehem -judah (nT.i^'a Judg. 17? /^. etc- ) the modern Beit Lahm, 2350 ft. above sea-level. 5 m. _. .S. of Jerusalem (Jos. , 20 stadia, ,////. vii. I24).

^ jjjjjjj Qfj- jj^g j^jgf^ ro^j JO Hebron, on a spur running \\. from the watershed, surrounded by valleys among the most fertile of Juda;a. The site is without springs (the nearest being one 800 yards SE. of the town, and others at Artas i^ m. away), but receives water from an acjueduct from the Pools of Solomon (Conduits, 3) compassing the SE. end of the spur, and from many cisterns of which the greatest are three in front of the great basilica ; there are three others from 12 to 21 ft. deep, on the X., called Biar Da'ud. The immediate neighbourhood is very fertile, bearing, besides wheat and barley, groves of olive and almond, and vineyards. The wine of Bethlehem ('Talhaml') is among the best of Palestine.

2. OT references.[edit]

So great fertility must mean that the site was occupied, in spite of the want of springs, from the earliest times ; but the references to it in Judges as the j^^^^g ^f tj^g Levite who sojourned in Micah's house (17? 9). and of the young woman whom the Benjamites maltreated (19 1/ 18) and in the Book of Ruth are of uncertain date, and into the clear light of history Bethlehem first emerges with David. ' It was his home (i S. 206 28, very early), for the waters of which, when it was occupied by the Philistines, he expressed so great a longing probably as a pledge of his fatherland's enfranchisement that his three captains broke the enemy's lines, and drew water from the cistern ' in the town's gate ' (2 S. 2Zuff., from the same early source), which tradition has identified with the Biar Da' fid (but Gu6rin, /</. 1 i3o#. following Quaresmius, prefers those in front of the basilica). Other references to Bethlehem as David's home are i S. I614 17 12 15 58 (from later strata). .Asahel, brother of Joab, was buried in Bethlehem in his fathers grave (2S. 232). Thus. Joab, like his leader, was a Bethlehemite. Except for a statement of 2 Ch. 116 (*'^ iSat^aeeAi). that Reho- bo.am fortified Bethlehem, the town is not mentioned again till Micah, who describes it if) 2) as still one of the smallest of the townships of Judah, but illustrious as the birthplace of the Messianic king (see Micah, ii. %2b). According to Jer. 41 17. the Jews who in 586 B.C. fled to Egypt rested at Gidroth-chimham (see Chimham), near Bethlehem. The Bethlehemites carried into captivity by Nebuchadrezzar repeopled their town after the return (Ezra22i fiapOaXaifi [B], ^edXai/Ji [.\]\ Neh. 726 Bom., BedWee/x [S], j3ai<TaXeeM [A], cp 7: 6 ; i Esd. 5i7 payed- Xu/jxov [B], ffaidXiVfxuf [A]. ^id\(en [L]). Bethlehem is the scene of the lx:autiful story of Ruth, in connection with which it is necessarj- to note that Moab is clearly visible from about Bethlehem : thus. Ruth in her adopted home must often have had her own fatherland in sight. In the lists of the MT of Joshua (P) Beth- lehem is not given ; but it is added with ten others in the <5"A'- text of l.')59 (/cat e(f>pada, aimj tti \^aid\(eii) : 's reading must be genuine, since the group which it t If it docs so even then : see Davio, g 1 a.

includes is too important to have been omitted from the original.

3. Ephrath.[edit]

The name Kphrathah or Kphrath of this po-ssnge is assif;iiL(l to Ik'thU-hcni also in Mic. 5a[i] (the rca<ling rnhmth '^'-* '"" 'EX ^^ ""' certain ; hut tlu- refer-

^^^^^ ,^ Ilcthlchem is clear), in Ku. 4ii. 

virtually in Ru. I2 (L om. ) in i S. 17ia (U om. ),* and probably also in I's. 1326. Apart from Micah. the documents in which i:phrath[ah] occurs arc proU-ibly so late that we might reasonably suppose that Hethlehem was the earlier name of the town. On the other hand, these documents are proliably based on very early material : Micah (if Mic. fn is his work) takes the name as well known. It is possible to argue from I Ch. 21950 44 (fiaiOXaSfy [B], /3at^Xae/i [A]), that Ephrath[ah| was the name of the whole district in which Ik-thlfhcnt lay.

4. Christian times.[edit]

Bethlehem is not mentioned by Josephus after Solomon's tiiiio, nor in the Books of Maccabxms; which proves how insignilicant it continued to be. As the place conunanded the fertile wadies and water-supply around it, the Philistines had deemed it important enough to occupy this silence is very remarkable. Bethlehem reappears in Mt. 2 I.k. 2 as the birthplace of Jesus, distinguislied still as lirjOXd/j. TTji 'lovoaias ( Mt. 2 1 5, cp 6 8 16), the city of David' (Lk.'24i5 cp Jn.742). I.k. de- scribes the new-l)orn child as having been laid in a manger (X.ABDI.i omit the dertnite article of TA'), ' because tlure was no room for them in the A'Jiii/i ' ; they had retired then ' to a stall or cave where there was rocjm for the mother and a crib for the babje."

It is sij,'nilicant that Bethlehem appears to have been chosen, along with the sites of the crucifi.xion and the resurrection, for special treatment by the Emperor Hadrian. .\s he set up there an image of Jupiter and an image of Venus, so he devastated liethlehem and planted u[xin it a grove sacred to Adonis (jer. l-.pist. ad Pan!., ri8 3). This proves that even before 132 A.D. Bethlehem was the scene of Christian pilgrimage and worship, as the birthplace of Jesus. (The Talmud also admits that from Bethlehem the Messiah must come : Berachoth, 5(1.) .About 150 A.D. Justin .Martyr (/^/'(i/. c. Tryph. 70 78) de.scril)cs the scene of the birth as in a cave near the village. This tradition may be correct : there were many ancient cave -stables in Palestine (Conder, Tent Work, chap. 10), and caves are still used as stables. In 315 A.u. the site of Bethlehem was still 'a wild wood' (Cyr. Jcrus. dttcch. 12 20). Con- stantine cleared it and built a iKisilica. Soon after, in Jerome's time, a cave in the rock near the basilica w.is venerated as the staVjle, and in a neighlx>uring grotto Jerome himself prepared his translation of the Bible. From that day to this the tradition has been constant.

The centre of interest in modern Bethlehem is, there- fore, the large basilica .S. Maria a Pra-sepio, surrounded and fortified by the Latin, the Greek, and the Armenian monasteries. .Although the architecture is mi.xed and of many |x;ri<Kls, the bulk of the church is that built by Constantine. Cp De Vogti<?, Ei,'lises Je la Palestine,

Eutychius (<r/rra 937, ouotecl by Ouirin, 2 i6i).isserts, indeed, that the church is ,i building of Justini.in, who pulled down Con- stantine's as tix) small and raised a grander edifice. Procopius, however, in his Pe .-Jidi/ic. Justin., whilst recording that this emperor built the walls of Bethlehem (6 8), does not mention any basilica there of his construction, a.s, had there been one, he must have done. Probably Justinian only added to Constantine's church, and the building is, therefore, the most ancient church in Palestine and one of the most ancient in the world. The fine mosaics are from the court of the Kmperor Manuel Comnenus (Vr<i 1169 A.I).), and the rafters by Philip of Burgundy (in 1482).

1 In the latter two passages Ephrathite means, of course, ' of Ephrath[.ihr= Bethlehem. It is interesting that in PKF(^, Jan. 1898, .Schick attempts to prove that Ramathaim-rophini, the town of Samuel 'an Ephrathite," was in the neighbourhood of Bethlehem. 'Ephrathite' in i S. 1 1 probably means Ephraimite (cp Jadg. 125 where for 'n"J2K b has E</)pafleiTi) but (S*L Tov Et^patfi).

Under the chancel is the (irotto of the Nativity, called also the Milk-Clrotto and the (Irotto of our I-ady, ' mghAret el halib' and ' mghAret-es-Seiyidc.' Wc have seen the precariousness of the tradition which sanctions it : it is only prolxible that Jesus was Ixirn in a cave, and there is nothing to prove that this was the cave, for the site lay desolate for three centuries.

Among recent works, consult Tobler'* monograph, Ptthldtrnt in J'aliistina, and Palmer, ' I>a jetzige iicthlchcni,' iCDl'V 1789^, with map an<t name-lists.

2. Bethlehem of Zebulun (Josh. 19 15, Battf^oi' [B]), now lieil l.ahm, 7 m. NW. of Nazareth. ' a miserable village among oak woods' (Gudrin, CaliUe, 1 303 ; Rob. liR 8113). In the Talmud it receives the designation .Tns, perhaps a corruption for ,Tn:i:, ' of Nazareth ' (NeuV>auer, G^og. Talm. 189/.) The combination of two names so famous in the Gos|x.-l history is remark- able. Most scholars take this Bethlehem to have Ixhjii the home and burial-place of the judge Ibzan (Judg. 128 10). Joscphus and Jewish tradition assign hint to liethlchcni Judah {Ant. v. 7 13). G. A. S.


(BaiGAcomcon [A]), i Esd. 5i7 = Ezra'Jji, Hkihikhkm, 2.


(nDin?TI'3), 2.S. 2O14. See ABEL-BETH-MAACHAH.


(nbanr^H n'3, 96 .^.. 'the house of chariots') and H A/AK-SfSAlI ("^VH np-ID, i.e. , ' station of horses ' ) are mentioned together in Josh. 195/ (P) in the list of Siineonite towns.

The (P readings are : for Belh-marcal)Oth ; in Josh. 19 5 3ai9- lia\fptP [B], -OapL^apxaaPwO |.\], /3)fla>iaAvaaxa> 1 1-l ; in I Ch. 431, where the Hebrew article is omitted, Pai0fiapttiiui0 [H], -PXa^ (cai f>/fiapia/3u>S [L], -0 ijiap\afiw6 l.\]. For Ha^ir-susah ; in Josh. 1!* 5 <Tap<Tov<Tttf [B], actpaovaifj. [\], .\|<Talp<Tou<rif(I.I ; in I Ch. 4 31, Hazar-susim [see l>el(jw| rjfii(TvtTt<Topafi (B], >)^i<rvf t'wl opan [B^'l>], riiiiavfoxTipi [A], aafpaovai \\.].

The names seem to indicate posts of war-horses and chariots, such as Solomon is said to have established (i K. 919IO26). The two places may possibly be identical respectively with Maumannah and Sansan- N.MI, cities ' in the Ncgcb towards Edom. The latter are the older names ; for Madniannah, at least, appears in i Ch. 249 (which belongs to the list of pre- e.xilic settlements of the Calebites), whilst it is imjKjssible to assign a very early date to i Ch. 431, where lieth- marcabolh and Hazak-.sl-.si.m (cn^O nsn) are mentioned as Simeonite towns ' before the reign of Uavid. ' That the two places actually were regular stations for horses and chariots may be taken for granted ; but it may be questioned whether they were so before jxjst-exilic tunes, when the Persians established post-stations on the route from the Shfiphelah into Egypt (by (iaza to Pelusiuni).' On this view Sansannah may very well be the modern Simsim, a village in an olive-grove on the road from Eleutheropolis to Ciaza (9^ m. NE. from the latter town), and Madniannah may be conjectured to be the mcxlern K'hdn Yunus, 14 m. S\\ . from Gaza (.so Gu(^rin, ///</. 2 230). A'hdn Yi'inits has always lieen an important station. It may te noted that in the time of Micah (1 13) Lachish (about 8 m. from Simsim) also was a chariot city. C|) Makc.XBOTH. w. R. s.


(pI'O n'5), Jer. 4823. See Baal-Mr-oN.


AV 'a place that was afar oft," RV"'*.'- 'the Far House,' (pn")^n n'3, CN OiKtxj Tt)J MAKRAN [BAL], procul a domo). Beih-merhak is either the proper name (so Ges."-", BOB doubtfully), in which case the name is Beth-hammerhak, like lieth- haccerem, or a description (Iav., The., Ke., Kau. US, ' the last house ' ) of the place outside Jerusalem where David waited with his attendants until the people and the body-guard had passed, 2 S. 15 17 (on the text, which is doubtful, see Dr. HPSm. and KIo. ad Av. ).

1 It is evident that chariots went down to Eg>T)t by this way at least as early as the eighth cent. B.C. Cp Gen. 465 Mic. 1 13.


(SiVp n^3), Judg. 96 RV^-; see Jerusaijim.


(H^pj n*2. perhaps ' place of pure water'; cp Ar. tuiviir. Ass. namri, 'transparent'; but sec NlMKIM :iiul XaMKS, 104; Nu. 3236 NAMRAM

[I5l'l. amBran [A], [n]a/w. [1-]: Josh. 1327 bainBan- aBraLISJ. BHeANA/v\pA[l-J, BhGamna [A]), or Niinrah (Nu. 323 namBra [B], -MR- L^'J' amBram [A], mam- Bran [L]). one of the Aniorite cities which were after- wards 'built' by Gad (Nu. 3236), is the ^rjOvafxfipii and Bethaynnaris of Eusebius and Jerome ( OS1j2 43 ; ib. 102 i). a village still extant in their day. about 5 R. m. N. from Livias (Rktii-Hakan. q.v.), the |-ioi n"3 and TD3 n"3 of the Talmud (cp Del. ad loc ), the modern Nimrin, a well-watered oasis on the brink of the Jordan valley some 13^ miles E. of Jordan (cp Baed. /'/.( 162). Beth-nimrah is nowhere mentioned under this name in or outside of Numbers and Joshua, but it is identified by many modern critics with the waters of NiMRiM (q. v. ), and, as stated elsewhere (BETHANY, 2), Beth-nimrah may be the original of the variants Bethany, Bethabara, in J 11. ]28.


(Judith 4 4), RV Beth-horon [q.v.].


or (Neh. II26) Beth-phelet, RV always Bethpelet (t27S"n*5, 'house of escape"), an unknown Calebite town (cp Pelet [i], i Ch. 247), on the Edomite border of Judah, Josh. 1;")27 (Baic})aAaA [B], BAie(t)AAe0 [A], BHe4>eA. [I-]), mentioned in the list of Judahite villages (see Ezk.v, ii. 5 [/'], 15 \i\a) ; Neh. 11 26 (BhBc1)aAt [S'=-^ ">'], BHe(})AAAT [L], om. BS*A). For the gentilic Paltite ('c'^sn), corruptly Pki.onite (i), see Pai.tite.


((*-VSTI5), an unknown point on the border of Issachar, Josh. 192i (BhrCA4)HC [B], BAiect)ACHe [A], BhGcJjacchc [L]). Compare the equally obscure name Happizzkz.


(nWS Jl*?, oiKOC (t)OrwR [BAFL]), a place named in 1)1.829 446 346 Josh. 1820. Injosh.l32o (BAl9cJ)oroOR [BL], Be0- [A]) it is enumerated among the cities of Reuben ; in Dt. 829 446 the ravine (k';) in front of C^ic) it is mentioned as the place where Israel was encamped when the Deuteronomy discourses were delivered ; and in Dt. 346 the same ravine is mentioned as the place of Moses' burial. The exact site is un- certain ; but it seems clear that it cannot have been very far from the Pisgah ridge. Eusebius states (C>5('-' 23378) that Be^<^070/) was near Mouut ^o-^op (cp ' the top, or head, of Peor," nivsn vivtr\, Xu. 2828), opposite to Jericho, 6 m. above Livias [i.e.. Tell er-Rameh ; see Beth-haran) ; and (O^C-' 21847) that Mount ^oywp was opposite to Jericho, on the side of the road leading up from Livias to Heshbon, a part of it being 7 m. from the latter place ( 1 15 1-2). If we may judge from the map in the Survey of E. Palest. , the ascent from Livias to Heshbon would be made naturally either along the Wady Hesban (cp Palmer, Desert of the Exodus, 525/; Tristram, Moab, 346) or along the more circuitous road N. of this, said by Tristram (p. 343) to be the one ordinarily used. The statements of Eusebius, if correct, would thus point to a site near one of these two roads, some four or five miles N. of Neba. The head of Peor' (Nu. 23 28) might be an eminence in the same locality. The opinion that this was the site is supported by the mention, in Josh. 18 20, of Beth- j)eor next to the 'slopes (mt?K) of Pisgah,' i.e., in all probability, the declivities on the S. side of the Wady 'Ayun Musa. The ' ravine in front of Beth- poor' might thus be the Wady Hesbfin. Conder \fRFQ 1882, p. 85/; Heth and Moah,^'^) 146 /) suggests a site farther to the S. e.g., on the crest of a hill above "Ain cl-Minyeh, 8 m. SW. of Neba, com- manding (see Nu. 2328 ; and 242 compared with 25 1)

an extensive view of the lower valley of the Jordan. Peor, however, the spot at which Baal of Peor was worshipped (which can hardly have been far from Beth-peor), would seem (Nu.25i-3) to have been more readily accessible from the plain of Shittim (the (jhOr- es-Seiscbfin) than 'Ain el-Minyeh would be; Nu. 2828 compared with v. \\ makes it probable also that it was less distant from Pisgah ; whilst, as we have seen, what- ever other indications we jx>ssess point to a site N. of the Nebo-Pisgah ridge (the modern Neba, Ras Siaghah), rather than to one S. of it. Until, therefore, it has been shown that there is no eminence in the neighbour- hood of the Wady Hesban conmianding the prospect implied in Nu. 2828 and 242 (ci)25i), it is here that the ancient Beth-peor must be sought. Travellers will perhaps explore this region with the view of ascertaining whether there is such a height. Cp Peor. S. R. d.


(BHe4)ArH [Ti. WH], Bf.thpiiage], a locality near the Mt. of Olives, on a small hill on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho. It is mentioned together with Bethany \(].v., i], and probably lav to the E. of it (Mt. 2I1 Mk.lli Lk.1929). Orige'n in Mt. (vol. xvi. chap. 17) describes it as a place of priests* (c]5 05('-* 188 75). According to various passages of the Talmud, Beth-phage was the name of the district extending from the base of Olivet to the walls of Jerusalem, and, according to the Talm. Bab. {Men. xi. 2, 78 b), Beth-phage was one of the limits of the Sabbatic zone around Jerusalem (cpGEZER), whence CI. Ganneau would identify it with Kefr et-Tur (see PEFQ 1878, p. 60 ; but see Beth-Zur).

The current explanation of the name is a little more plausible than that of Bethany (q.v.). BrjOtpay-r} (the "jxa n'3 of Talm. ) would naturally mean ' place of young figs' ; cp :s in Cant. 2 13 with Delitzsch's note. This, however, may be no more than a popular ety- mology. Nestle (P/ii/. Sac. 1896; cpZlVT, etc. xl. 148) is convinced that the narrative of the barren fig- tree, which in Mt. 21 17-19 Mk. 11 12-14 '^ localised in Bethany, has arisen out of this faulty popular explanation of Beth-phag^. It has often been remarked that there is a startling peculiarity in this narrative as compared with the other evangelical traditions. See also A. Meyer, /esu Muttersprache, 166.

The mediaeval Bethphage was discovered by Guillemot and Clermont-Ganneau in 1877 between the Mount of Olives and Bethany. In his account of this discovery the latter scholar offers the suggestion that the ' Village of the Mount of Olives ' [Kefr et- Tiir), which admittedly stands on the site of some important ancient village, may be the Bethphage of the Gospels and of the Talmud. This view would clear up the Talmudic statement respecting the Sabbatic zone already mentioned. See PEFQ 1878, pp. 51-61.


(t:^S-n^3), Neh. 11 26 AV. See Beth-palet.


(XDVn*?), in an obscure genealogy of Chelub (= Caleb), iCh. 4i2 (BaGraian [B], -pe<})A [A], Bh0RA(})AN [L]). No place of this name is known ; Rapha appears to be a clan-name, unconnected of course with 'Rcphaim.' Rapha [2] appears to occur as a name in Benj.\min ( 9, ii. /3).