the village of the same name, to the south-west of Tell el Kadhy, on the range of mountains which bound the plain towards the west above Lake Huleh (Bibl. Researches, p. 371). In support of this conjecture, he laid the principal stress upon the fact that the direct road to Hamath through the Wady et Teim and the Bekaa commences here. The only circumstance which it is hard to reconcile with this conjecture is, that Beth-rehob is never mentioned in the Old Testament, with the exception of Jdg 18:28, either among the fortified towns of the Canaanites or in the wars of the Israelites with the Syrians and Assyrians, and therefore does not appear to have been a place of such importance as we should naturally be led to suppose from the character of this castle, the very situation of which points to a bold, commanding fortress (see Lynch's Expedition), and where there are still remains of its original foundations built of large square stones, hewn and grooved, and reminding one of the antique and ornamental edifices of Solomon's times (cf. Ritter, Erdkunde, xv. pp. 242ff.). - Hamath is Epiphania on the Orontes, now Hamah (see at Gen 10:18).
After the general statement, that the spies went through the whole land from the southern to the northern frontier, two facts are mentioned in Num 13:22-24, which occurred in connection with their mission, and were of great importance to the whole congregation. These single incidents are linked on, however, in a truly Hebrew style, to what precedes, viz., by an imperfect with Vav consec., just in the same manner in which, in 1Ki 6:9, 1Ki 6:15, the detailed account of the building of the temple is linked on to the previous statement, that Solomon built the temple and finished it;[1] so that the true rendering would be, “now they ascended in the south country and came to Hebron (ויּבא is apparently an error in writing for ויּבאוּ), and there were הענק ולידי, the children of Anak,” three of whom are mentioned by name. These three, who were afterwards expelled by Caleb, when the land was divided and the city of Hebron was given to him for an inheritance (Jos 15:14; [[Bible_(King_James)/Judges|Jdg 1:
- ↑ A comparison of 1 Kings 6, where we cannot possibly suppose that two accounts have been linked together or interwoven, is specially adapted to give us a clear view of the peculiar custom adopted by the Hebrew historians, of placing the end and ultimate result of the events they narrate as much as possible at the head of their narrative, and then proceeding with a minute account of the more important of the attendant circumstances, without paying any regard to the chronological order of the different incidents, or being at all afraid of repetitions, and so to prove how unwarrantable and false are the conclusions of those critics who press such passages into the support of their hypotheses. We have a similar passage in Jos 4:11., where, after relating that when all the people had gone through the Jordan the priests also passed through with the ark of the covenant (Jos 4:11), the historian proceeds in Jos 4:12, Jos 4:13, to describe the crossing of the two tribes and a half; and another in Judg 20, where, at the very commencement (Jdg 20:35), the issue of the whole is related, viz., the defeat of the Benjamites; and then after that there is a minute description in Jdg 20:36-46 of the manner in which it was effected. This style of narrative is also common in the historical works of the Arabs.
