Knobel, Ritter, and Tristrnm, in his last Timnah. Sometimes called Timnath in book, 'Bible Landa.' The view taken above Scripture (see Jndg. xiv. 1-6), and Tim; corresponds to the minuteness of detail with natba in eh. xix. 43. which the boundary is given. To place Ver. 11.-Ekron. This important Philis- Nephtoah south of Bethlehem and Kirjath- tine city (see eh. xiii. 3) lay close to the jearim at 'Arma would make the boundary northern border of Judah. As a matter of far less distinct. fact, however, the tribe of ,Judah never Ver. 10.-Compaesed. Or, deflected (see succeeded in permanently occupying this ver. 4). This is in accordance with the territory, which only fell under their yoke view taken above. The border line which during the reigns of David and Solomon. ha.:'! run north.west from Jerusalem now The cities of the Philistines were, it is true, bent backwards in a south-westerly direc- most of them captured (Judg. i. 18), but we tion, and followed the ridge towards Cheaa- soon find the Philistines once more in lon (see note on Chesalon). Mount Selr. possession of them (see 1 Sam. v. 8-10). Not the dwelling-place of Esau, afterwards Northward The border turned sharply the cnuntry of the Edomites (Gen. xxxii. 3; northward nntil past Ekron, when it once xxxvi. 8), but a range running south-west- more turned westward until it reached the ward from Kirjath-jearim, part of which is sea. ·a,,. still known as Sairah, or Saris, " auf wel- Ver. 12.-And the coa.st thereof. See chem Saris und Mihsir liegen" (Knobel). eh. xiii. 23. Since Kirjath-jearim means the " city of the Ver. 13.-And unto Ca.leb. This passage, forests," and Seir means ''hairy,'' we may at least from ver. 15, is found with the conjecture that the name was given to the slightest possible variation in Judg. i. It ridge on account of its wooded character. has been argued from the variations that This also is implied by "Mount Jearim." the one passage was not copied from the The side of Mount Jea.rtm. Literally,, the other, but that both were derived from a shoulder (see above, ver. 8). Which is common document. No such conclusion, Chesalon. This is identified with Kesla, a however, co.n be safely drawn from the text. point on the summit of the ridge stretching For first, the present narrative deals exclu- south-west from Kirjath-jearim. The fact sively with this portion of the history of that the border passed northwercl of Chesa- Caleb. That in Judges, down to ver. 12, ]on is a confirmation of the view taken deals more generally with the subject, includ- above. We learn from eh. xix. 41 (cf. ver. ing the exploits of Caleb, nnder the general 33 of this chapter), that the border passed history of the progress of Judah. But from by Zorah and Eshtnol in the Shephelah, the time that the history becomes tbe.t of through a neighbourhood described in Caleb in particular, the agreement be\ween Conder's Handbook as " an open corn the two narratives is verbal, including the country." Beth-shemesh. The "house of very unusual word n:J~, with one or the suu," identified with the modern Ain two most insignificant exceptions. Thus (or fountain of) Shems. It is called Ir- we have •~• ~"i'1::li'1 for •~• mn, we have n•';,l shemesh in eh. xix. 41. It was close to the T T T : II
border of the Philistines, and was the scene for ni•';,l, and we have -l~~p interpolateJ in of the transactions recorded in 1 Sam. vi. Judg. i. 13, o.nd Othniel (or KenQz) is The propinquity to the Philistines appears spoken of as the younger brother of Caleb. to have affected the principles of its inhabi- But unless we hold that it was a se cred tants, and their conduct contmsts most duty of the writer in Judges to reprcduce unfavourably with that of the inhabitants every single word of the narrative in Joshua, of Kirjath-jearim. This was the more dis- there is nothing whatever that ca.n support graceful, in that Beth-shemesh (eh. xxi. 16) the conclusion that the writer in Judges was 11 priestly city, and being inhabited by was not copying the e~lier narrative. ThP. those whose "lips should keep knowledge," variations nre sucl,1 ns would naturally might have been expected to set a beUer happen where a writer was transferring l\ example. It was required to fumish narrative to his pages with 11 desire to give Solomon's household with provisions (1 the exact sense of the original without tying Kings iv. 9), it witnessed the defeat nnd himself to every particular won!. Since capture of Amaziah (2 Kings xiv. 11-13; the use of inverted commas has been intro- 2 Chron. xxv. 21) by Jonsh, king of Israel. duced we can find multitudes of instances It fell into the hands of the Philistines nt where a writer, when professing to quote an- the time of the decay of the Jewish power other accurntely, has introduced far more under Ahnz (2 Chron. xxviii. 18). The variations into his quotation than are to name, like Bnal-Gacl and Ashtaroth-Knr- be found here, where the writer, though 11aim, is worthy of remark, as pointing to the quoting tho Book of Joshua, and quoting it oharo.ote1· of the early PhCllDicio.n worship. correctly, does not say that he is doing so. THE BOOK OF .TOSICtrA: [cH, XV, 1-119: