And, in fact, there are biblical data which, when considered carefully, appear to support the S. site. To say nothing of Dt 34', just referred to, it is observable that Zo'ar is alwaj'S spoken of as a Monb- ite town, and never claimed as an Israelite or (Jos 13""-') Reubenite town, as it naturally would be if it lay at the N. end of the Sea; Ezk. also (16") describes Sodom as being on the ' right ' {i.e. the south) of Jems. (Samaria being on its ' left,' or north), which shows that he did not picture it at the N. end of the sea (which is due E. of Jerusalem). The S. site is accepted by the great majority of recent authorities, as Knob., Del., Keil, Dillm. (on Gn 19-"), Riehm, H\\B; Sociu, ZBl'V, 1880, p. 81 ; Buhl, (li'ogi: 371 f., 274; G. A. Smith, Exjto)., Dec. lS9(i, p. 413. HGHL 678 (cf. 505-H); Clermont- Canneau, PEFSt. 1880, p. 20 ; Blaiickenhoru, ZI)J' V. 1896, p. 54f. (who gives further particulars).
On the singular argument by which Homniel {AIIT 1U5-8) seeks to show that Bela' (Gn 14^ ^) is nieiitiuned in A>.syr. under the name Malhi, Malf/u, etc., see Johns (in the Expogitor, Aug.. 1.S1I8, pp. 15t'-60),*who shows that it reals upon a series of niiHreadings and niiRunderstandings.
The site of Zo'ar carries with it the site of the other 'cities of the Kikkar,' which (Gn 19) may have formed a group by themselves, but cannot have been at any great distance from Zo'ar. Pro- vided, therefore, it may be assumed (see SiDDIM, Vale of) that in Abraham's time what is now the shallow S. part of the Dead Sea was the ' Vale of Siddim,' and the morass es-Sebkha a fertile plain (like the present GhOr es-Satiyeh), it may reasonably be supposed that the other four cities were situated on this plain ; an earthquake, how-
ZOBAH
ZOHKLETII, THE STOXE 987
e^er, took place, producing on the one hand an eruption of petroleum, which, ijjniting, destroj-ed the four cities (Tristram. L. of Lir. 353 f.; Dawson, Egypt and Syria, p. 125 fT.), and on the other hand a subsidence of the soil, which caused the ' Vale of Siddim ' to be covered by the waters of the Dead Sea, and the plain on which the four cities were situateii to become the saline morass, now called esSebkha (cf. the descriptions of the site of the overthro\vn cities, 0129", Zeph 2' ; Is 13-«, Jer 49" =5i3«). S. R. Driver.
ZOBAH (k;'is or njSx ; Sou^d [A in 2 S 8" and S in 1 Ch 19* Zii^i). — One of the numerous kingdoms into which the Aramitans on the north and north- east of Palestine were divided. Apart from tlie short notice of the wars of Saul (1 S 14"), which is probably the work of a later editor (see Samukl, I. AND II.), the first mention of Zoliah or Aram-zobah occurs in the reign of David in connexion with his war against Hanun, king of the Ammonites (2 S 8"- lu"). In the fuller and more accurate account of this campaign, given in 2 S 10"-, it is stated that the Ammonites hired the Syrians (or Aramaeans) of BETii-ni:iion and of Zobah^ together with Ish-tob, king of Maacah,* to assist them in repelling the expected Lnva-sion of the Israelites. Despite this important reinforcement, the ATiiiiion- ites failed to withstand the Israelites under Joab and Abishai, and both they and their allies were forced to take refuge in flight. The Aramoeans, hoH-eviT. seem to liave rf-alized that a wider issue than that of the temporary support of Amnifpn was involved in their struggle with the newly de- veloped kinj;dom of Israel ; for, owing to the en- forced inactivity of the two great empires of Egj'pt and Assyria, it was obvious that the supremacy (for the time being) over northern Palestine would rest with the stronger of the two riv.-il dynasties of Aram and Israel. Hence we lind Iladadezcr, king of Zobah, making further and more strenuous eft'orts to overwhelm the Israelite kingdom. To this end he assembled all the forces at his command, and with the aid of the powerful kingdom of Damascus (followinfj' 2S 8° rather than 10'": see below) again took the held. The opposing armies met at Hclam ; but the Israelites, this time under the command of David himself, once more proved victorious, and coniTiellud the Syrians to accept terms of peace. It would appear from I K 11^'- that this battle had an imiMMiant bearing on the history of Syria ; for, according to the notice there preserved, a certain Itezon, son of Eliada, took advantage of the defeat of lladadezer to desert. Accompanied by a troop of men he lied to Damascus, where he set up a king- dom, and became 'an adversary to Israel all the days of Solomon.'
It cannot be denied that, at first sight, the im- pression of Zobah conveyed by the biblic:il narra- tive is that of a large and powerful kingdom in the north of Palestine, exercising sovereign sway over all the Aram.'ean tribes. Hence the majority of scholars, until recently, have placed it vagiiclj' between Damascus and Ilamath, the nearest ajiproach to a delinite site being that of Niildeke, who assiOTis it to the neighbourhood of Emesa. As regards its site, this im[)ression is conlirmed by the Assyrian monuments (Schrader, KGF p. 122, KAT' y. 182f., art. 'Zobah' in Uiehm's NWJI; Fr. Del. Par. p. 279 f.); but the idea of its im- portance seems to be derived very largely from the