* 2 3 10<. Read u Wellhausen and Eloatennun— l|^;-nti] te;i 3ia c^'K-nx ijyp 'and tlie king of Moocuh, Uh-tob, and with him (13,000 men),' omittinK the awkward ' with a thuuwmd men.' In the parallel pass-ige (1 Ch IV^-), the Chronicler (fives the «yini. total ai 32,000 men <'•»■ 20,000-l-l'.!,000) : he ohviouBly, tlu-rt-toru, did oot luulude th« extrft tbouaand (lea Klonterm. ■dtoc.).
fact that (according to the present text of 2 S 10'", cf. 8^) lladadezer, king of Zobah, exercised control over the distant Aram;ean tribes living 'beyond the River.' But a comparison of the two accounts of David's wars with the Ammonites and the Ara- m.xans (2 S 8 an<l 10) shows clearly that the account given in 2S 8^" is mainly the work of a later editor, who probably also substituted the phrase ' that were beyond the liiver' (10"*) for the original 'of Damas- cus'* (on the relation of 10"- to ch. 8 .see Samuel,
I. AND II., p. 300). On the ground of its import- ance, therefore, and of the extent of influence, there is no need to place Zobah so far north as the kingdom (or city) of that name mimtioned in the Assyrian tribute — or geograpliical lists (see above). Moreover, a closer examination of the history of the two campaigns makes it more probable that Zobah lay considerably further south. The order in which the Aramaean tribes are mentioned in 2 .S lO"'- (Beth-rehob, Zobah, M.-uicah) is decidedly against the northern theory, for both Beth-rehob and Maacah lay to the S. or S.W. of Damascus, and ajiparently their territories bordered on that of Ammon : we should expect, therefore, to lind the kingdom of Zobah in the same neighbourhood. Hence Winckler (GcvcA. Isr. p. 137 f.) is no doubt right in identifying Zobah, or Aram-zoliah, not with the Assyrian Subiti (or Subutu) lying to the N. of Damascus, but with the place of the same name, S. of Damascus and in the neighbourhood of the Haurfm, mentioned by Assurbanipal in the account of his campaign against the Arabian king Jauta (Rassara-Cvlinder, vol. vii. 11. 110-112 ; see KIB ii. p. 217). Winckler (p. 141 f.) is inclined to go even further and to identifj' Zobah with Beth- rehob, but the evidence which he adduces is scarcely convincing.
It is possible that the editor who is responsible for 2 S 8^'* confused the two Zobahs, for the two cities of Zobah which he mentions, Berothai ( = Berothah, Ezk 47'") and Betah (1 Ch 18" Tiii- HATH, probably the modern Tchnk), were situated N. of Damascus. In addition to the authorities cited, see also Tompkins in PEFSt, April 1885, pp. 108 f., 113. J. F. Stenning.
Z06EBAH (.133!;).— A Judahite, 1 Ch 4" (B 2a,3a0a, A ^u^TjOa, Luc. ^apri^d).
ZOHAR (nni-).— 1. Father of Ephron the Hittite, On 23" 25'" [Zdap]. 2. The name of a Simeonite family, Gn 46'" (A 2dap, D ^ia\). Ex 6'" {:^dap) ; called in Nu 26'" and 1 Ch 4-^ Zerah (in former, BA Zdpa ; in latter, B Zdpcs, A Zdpof, Luc. Zdpa). 3. The name of a Judahite family, according to the ^irS of 1 Ch 4' (in^i ' and Zolinr,' which was followed in AV of IGli). The Kahlbh is ins- which in modern edd. of AV appears as ' Jczoar ' (an iiicori'L-ct transliteratiou of "ic^;) and in RV as ' Izliar' (i.e. "v^y).
ZOHELETH, THE STONE (n'-ntn [jk 'the ser- pent's stone': B AIOt) toS ZueXtfle;, A rbv \l$ov ToO ZuiAfS). — The spot at which Adonijah prepared a sacrificial feast for all those who supported his claims to the throne of David (1 K 1"). The stone was doubtless a mazzrhd, and marked the site of an old Canaanite sanctuary. In ancient times ' living water ' was regardccl as inhabited by jinn, usually in the form of a serpent or dragon ; rf. ' the dragon's well ' (Neb 2") : hence such water was
•This seems more prob. than the siibstitntion of 'Damoaeus* (or 'beyond the Uiver,' which waa 8u^K(^'^te4) in Sahckl, I. a.nd
II. ; see also Uudde, Hichter u. Sam. p. 260, note 3. W'inckler, Getch. /»ru.ls. p. 137 (., indeed, reject* the whole or loui»« as redoctional, argiiin^ with some force that v.ifb really fonns ttie conclusion to vv.8-1* ; but, with the exception of tlio phrase ' beyond the River,' there seems do JustillcatioD tor doubting the geoulDeoeas of Ibe j>ajuia|[a.
S88
ZOHETH
ZOROASTKIAXISM
itself sacred, and the source vhence it issued usually became the site of a temple (see W. R. Smith, US'- 170 f.). The actual position of the stone is somewliat uncertain, and depends on the identification of En-rogel ; the name seems to have been preserved in the modem ez-Zehindeh (see art. En-R(i<;i;l and the authorities there cited). Well- hausen (Skizzcn, iii. 171) suggests that the name Zoheleth may be connected with the Arabic Zti/uil = Saturn. J. F. Stenxi.Ng'.
ZOHETH (n™)._A descendant of Judah, 1 Ch 4=" (B Zwdy, A Zuxie, Luc. ZaiiB).
ZOOLOGY.— See Natural History.
ZOPHAH (n?is).— An Asherite, 1 Ch 7"(B Zuxad, A ^io<pdp, Luc. ^ov(pi)^ (B Xwipas, A Zwtpi, Luc.
ZOPHAI Cs^s).— An ancestor of Samuel, 1 Ch 6=« I") (2oi/(/i(f)i) = ZuPH of v.» m and 1 S 1'.
ZOPHAR (n5"is, 'Zui(pap).—The third in order of Job's three friends, described in the LXX as ' king of the Mina-ans' (Job 2")- Probably the chief of a tribe on the borders of Idumsea.