As regards population, the evidence of ruins shows that it was much larger in Roman and Byzantine times—and probably in the 12th cent. —than it is now. The numbers stated on Assyr. texts would indicate a population exceeding 200,000 souls in the southern mountains in B.C. 701; and the Syrian forces opposing the Assyrians in B.C. 850 are said to have numbered 80,000, repre- senting a population of at least 400,000 souls. It cannot be said (but see Buhl, Die Soc. Verhéltn. α΄. Isr. p. 52) that Palestine was incapable of holding a population of 6,500,000 souls (cf. 2S 24°), though the question of numbers is rendered difficult by textual alterations.* At the present time the population of Western Palestine is esti- mated to be not more than about 600,000 ; but the country fully cultivated would support ten times
* Instances of these variations in numbers are not confined to the Genesee of Gn 111028, which differs so greatly in the Heb. Sam. and LXX VSS, or 1 Καὶ 61, where the LXX differs by forty years. In 1S 135 the Peshitta reads 3000 for 30,000. In 2S 84 the LXX has 7000 for 700, and in 1 K 5 20,000 for 20. In_1Ch 1120.21 the Peshitta has 80 for 3; in 2Oh 34 the LXX A (agreeing more nearly with 1 K 62) reads 20 for 120; and
in Ezk ast BA have 20,000 for 10,000 (Q): to say nothing of minor differences as to the regnal years. The numbers in some parts of the OT have evidently been miscopied or altered, and some- times largely increased. The difficulties as to numbers may
thus in some cases be due to the state of the text. See, further ΝΌΜΒΕΕ, p. 5624,
PALESTINE
PALESTINE
that number. According to Ex 1257 38%, Nu 1“, the Hebrews at the Exodus were about three millions.
v. BrBLE GEoGRAPHY.—The geography of Pales- tine forms an important element in the OT, and no book therein can be noticed on which this study does not throw some light. The Bible geography is to some extent illustrated by monumental in- formation. The lists of Thothmes ΠΙ., about B.c. 1600, include 119 towns in Palestine; others of Brent importance are noticed in the Tel el-Amarna etters, about B.C. 1450; others in the time of Ramses I1., about B.C. 1330. Shishak gives a list of 133 towns in all parts of Palestine about B.c. 935 and Sennacherib mentions others in B.c. 701. About 90 cities noticed in the Bible are thus monumentally known, between B.C. 1600 and 700. Those earliest noticed have Aram. rather than Heb. names, and were named by the Canaanites before the Exodus. The Hebrews seem very rarely to have altered the name of any oye though alter- native names sometimes occur. Θ may consider generally the outline of the topography during the various ages—the Patriarchal, that of the Con-
uest, that of the Kingdom, that following the
aptivity, and that of the Greek and Roman age down to the Ist cent. A.D.—with a briefer refer- ence to later topographical records.
Study of the topography is not seriously affected by textual discrepancies between the Hebrew and the Versions. The most important addition is in Jos (15°), where 11 cities are noticed by the LXX and not in the Heb., viz. Tekoa, Ephratah, Peor (Faghtr), Etam (‘Ain ‘Atdn), Kulon (Kolo- nia), Tatam, Sores (Sarts), Karem (Ain Kdrim), Galem (Beit Jala), Bether (Bittir), and Manocho (Malhah), said to belong to Judah. The mention of Kolonia seems to show that this is a very late addition, and the cities lie, not in Judah but in Benjamin, except Tekoa, Ephratah, and Etam. There are other textual differences where the Heb. text seems to be the less probable. Zoan (Pesh. Gn 13°) is better than Zoar, and the addition of Seir (Pesh. Gn 36°) supplies a gap: ‘at Jazer’ (LXX Νὰ 21") is better than ‘was strong.’ In Sam. Beth-jashan for Shen (Pesh. 1S 7") points to Jeshanah (‘Ain Sinia) for this site, and Gibeah (indicated by LXX) is apparently the meaning of ‘the high place’ (1S 10). Gath (LXX Bin 1 5 17°) is also preferable to ‘the valley.’ Ezel (1S 20", cf. v. in Pesh. and LXX) disappears as a proper name, and Hareth (now Khards) becomes a city instead of a ‘wood’ (LXX of 1S 22°). Maon is also more probable than Paran (LXX of 1 S 251), and Bethzur than Bethel (LXX B of 1S 30%), as is Carmel for Racal (LXX B in v.”). Geshur for Ashurites (Pesh. and Vale. 2S 29) is probable ; and Tibhath for Betah (Luc. MareSdx, 2S 85) is certainly correct; while Edom for Aram (after same VSS in vy.™ 18) agrees with the notice of the Valley of Salt and with the succeeding verses. Gath (Pesh. and LXX in 258 21) is better than the unknown Gob, and ‘the Hittites to Kadesh’ (Lucianic text) is an important improvement on Tahtim-hodshi (2S 24°), as is Ai for Gaza (MSS of 1 Ch 73). Geshur for Asshur (Ps 83°) is a prob- able emendation (so Lagarde, but see Duhm ad foc.), and Baal-hermon (Ca 8") for Baal-hamon (so Gritz, but see Budde, ad loc.). Gibeah (Pesh. Jer 31) is better than the unknown Goath, and Accho (indicated by LXX) takes the place (so Reland δέ al., but see iene ad loc.) at Gs all’ (Mic 110), In the few remaining cases of textual differences affecting topography, the Heb. text seems to be pre- ferable.