Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadMcClintock Biblical Encyclopedia: Palestine
Subjects in this Topic:
(Heb. Pele'sheth, ôְּìֶùֶׁú , Joe_3:4; “Palsestina,” Exo_15:14; Isa_14:29; Isa_14:31) in the Bible means Philistia, “the land of the Philistines;” and so it was understood by our translators. The Heb. word is found, besides the above, only in Psa_60:8; Psa_83:7; Psa_87:4; and Psa_108:9, in all which our translators have rendered it by “Philistia” or “Philistines.” The Sept. has in Exodus Öõëéóôéåßì , but in Isaiah and Joel ἀëëüöõëïé ; the Vulg. in Exodus Philisthiim, in Isaiah Philisthcea, in Joel Palcesthini. (See below.) In the present article it is used in a much wider sense. It is employed in the same sense in which most of the Greek and Roman geographers understood it ( Ðáëáéóôßíç , Palcestina) — as denoting the whole land allotted to the twelve tribes of Israel by Joshua. Some recent writers confine the name to the country west of the Jordan, extending from Dan on the north to Beersheba on the south. Others again appear to extend it northwards as far as the parallel of Hamath, and southward to the borders of Egypt. It is here used, however, to denote the country lying on the east as well as the west side of the Jordan; while, on the other hand, it is confined to the territory actually divided by lot among the Israelites, thus excluding large sections of what is generally known as “The Land of Promise.” Palestine, in fact, is here taken as synonymous with “The Holy Land” — substantially the same land given by Jehovah to his chosen people, and long held by them. The present article is intended-to bring together a general view of the ancient, and especially the Scriptural, information on this subject, and to illustrate it by the mass of elucidation and confirmation which modern exploration has afforded.
I. Situation. — The geographical position of Palestine is peculiar. It is central, and yet almost completely isolated. It commands equal facilities of access to Europe, Africa, and Asia; while, in one point of view. it stands apart from all. The Jews regarded it as the centre of the earth; and apparently to this view the prophet Ezekiel refers when he says, “Thus saith the Lord God, This is Jerusalem: I have set it in the midst of the nations and countries that are round about her” (Eze_5:5). The idea was adopted and perhaps unduly expanded by the rabbins and some of the early Christian fathers. One of the absurd Christian traditions still preserved in Jerusalem is that the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is the physical centre of the earth; and a spot is marked by a circle of marble pavement and a short column under the dome of the Greek Church which is said. to be the exact point as indicated by our Lord himself (Murray's Handbook, p. 164). The main thought, however, in this tradition is, in principle, strictly true. Palestine stood midway between the three greatest ancient nations, Assyria, Egypt, and Greece. It was for many centuries the centre, and the only centre, of religious light and of real civilization, from which all other nations, directly or indirectly, drew their supplies. It is a remarkable fact, which every thoughtful student of history must admit, that during the whole period of Jewish history light — intellectual, moral, and religious — radiated from Palestine, and from it alone. The farther one receded from that land, the more dim the light became; and the nearer one approached, it shone with the purer radiance. The heavenly knowledge communicated in “sundry times and divers manners” through the Jewish patriarchs and prophets was unfolded and perfected by our Lord and his apostles. In their age Palestine became the birthplace of intellectual life and civil and religious liberty. From these have since been developed all the scientific triumphs, all the social progress, and all the moral grandeur and glory of the civilized world. There was a fulness of prophetic meaning in the words of Isaiah which is only now beginning to be rightly understood and appreciated: “Out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people; and they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks” (2, 3, 4).
Palestine is, by the peculiarity of its situation, almost isolated. Connected physically with the great body of the Asiatic continent, it is yet separated from the habitable parts of it by the arid desert of Arabia, which extends from the' eastern border of Syria to the banks of the Euphrates, a distance of nearly three hundred miles. Another desert. not altogether so Wide nor so difficult, sweeps along the southern confines of Palestine, as a barrier against all Egyptian invaders, and in a great measure prevented communication with that nation. The Mediterranean completely shut out the western world. Thus on three of its sides — the east, the south, and the west — was Palestine isolated. Its only direct link of connection with the outer world was Syria on the north; and even there the lofty chains of Lebanon and Hermon confined the channel of communication to one narrow pass, the valley of Coele-Syria. “These,” says Stanley, “were the natural fortifications of that vineyard which was ‘hedged round about' with tower and trench, sea and desert, against the ‘boars of the wood' and ‘the beasts of the field”' (Sin. and Pal. p. 114).
It was not without a wise purpose that the Almighty located his chosen people in such a land. During a long course of ages they were designed to be the sole preservers of a true faith, and the sole guardians of a divine revelation. It was needful, therefore, to separate them geographically from the evil example and baleful influences of heathen nations; and by the munitions of nature to defend them, and that precious record of God's will committed to their custody, from all assaults, physical as well as moral. It has been well said by a recent thoughtful writer, that “the more we learn of its relative position in regard to surrounding countries, and of its own distinctive characteristics, the more clearly is the wisdom of heaven recognised in its special adaptation to the purposes for which it was chosen and consecrated” (Drew, Scripture Lands, p. 2). But when Judaism was at length developed into Christianity — when the grand scheme of redemption was removed by the sufferings and death of the divine Saviour in Palestine from the region of dim prophecy into that of history — then the religion of God was finally severed from its connection, hitherto necessary, with a specific country and a chosen people — it became the religion of mankind. Then Palestine ceased to be God's country, and Israel to be God's people. The isolation of the land hitherto preserved the true faith; the exclusiveness of the people formed an effectual safeguard against the admission of the philosophical speculations and corrupt practices of other nations; but after the resurrection of Christ, and the establishment of the pure, rational, spiritual faith revealed in the N.T. such material defences were no longer requisite. They would have been even prejudicial to the truth. Palestine was the cradle of the religion of God; on reaching full maturity, the cradle was no longer a fitting abode; the world then became its home and sphere of action. At that transition period the position of Palestine appeared as if specially designed to favor and consummate the divine plan, by the ready access it afforded for the messengers of truth to every kingdom of the known world. Before the establishment of Christianity, the sea had become the highway of nations. The Mediterranean, hitherto a barrier, was now the easiest channel of communication; and from the shores of Palestine the Gospel of Jesus was wafted away to the populous shores and crowded cities of the great nations of the West. It is thus that a careful study of the geographical position, the physical aspect, and past history of Palestine is calculated to throw clear light on the development of the divine plan of salvation, and to afford some little insight into the councils of Jehovah. (See below.)
Climate has a great influence upon man. That climate which is best adapted to develop the physical frame, to foster its powers, and to preserve them longest in healthy and manly vigor, is the most conducive to pure morality and intellectual growth. The heat of the tropics begets lassitude and luxurious effeminacy, while the cold of the arctic regions cramps the energies, and tends to check those lofty flights of poetic genius which give such a charm and sweetness to human life. Situated about midway between the equator and the polar circle, Palestine enjoys one of the finest climates in the world. Fresh sea-breezes temper the summer heats; the forests and abundant vegetation which once clothed the land diffused an agreeable moisture through the bright sunny atmosphere; while the hills and mountains made active and constant exercise necessary, and thus gave strength and elasticity to the frame. Palestine has given to the world some of the most distinguished examples of high poetic genius, of profound wisdom, of self-denying patriotism, of undaunted courage, and of bodily strength. The geographical position and physical structure of the land had much to do with this. God in his infinite wisdom and love placed his elect people in the very best position for the development of all that was great and good. Well might the Lord say by the mouth of his prophet, “What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it?” (Isa_5:4). This position of Palestine, too, together with its great variety of surface, enabled it to produce that abundance and diversity of fruits which so greatly contributed to endear it to its proverbially patriotic inhabitants.
II. The Boundaries of Palestine require to be defined with care and minuteness. Much confusion has arisen in Biblical geography from the way in which this subject has been treated, and from the diversity of views which prevails. No two writers agree on all points. The accounts of ancient geographers — Greek, Roman, and Jewish — are unsatisfactory, and sometimes contradictory; and when we come down to more modern times we do not find much improvement. Some authors confound Palestine with “the Land of Promise,” as mentioned in Genesis and Exodus, and with the land defined by Moses in the book of Numbers (Reland, Paloest. p. 113 sq.; Cellarius, Geogr. ii, 464 sq.; Hales, Anal. of Chronology, i, 413; Kitto, Physical Hist. of Pal. p. 28; Jahn, Biblical Antiquities; Encyclop. Britan. art. Palestine, 8th ed.). Others confine the name to the territory west of the Jordan, and reaching from Dan to Beersheba. Even dean Stanley, usually so accurate and so careful in his geographical details, does not express his views with sufficient clearness on this point (Sin. and Pal. p. 111, 114).
1. Boundaries of the Land promised to Abrahan. — The first promises made to Abraham were indefinite. A country was insured to him, but its limits were not stated. The Lord said to him: at Shechem, “Unto thy seed will I give this land” (Gen_12:7); and again, on the heights of Bethel, after Lot had left him, “Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art, northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward; for all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed forever” (Gen_13:14-15). It was a commanding spot, but still that view did not embrace one fourth of Palestine. At length, however, the boundaries were defined; in general terms, it is true, but still with sufficient clearness to indicate the vast extent of territory promised to Abraham's descendants: “In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abraham, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates” (Gen_15:18). “The river of Egypt” was here probably the Nile. It should be observed that the Hebrew word is ðָäָø , river (Sept. ðïôáìüò ), and not ðִçִì , wady, or “torrent-bed,” as in Num_34:5 (Sept. ÷åßìáῤῥïò ), where Wady el-Arish seems to be meant (see Kalisch, Delitzsch, etc., ad loc.). From the banks of the Nile, then, to the Euphrates, the country promised to the patriarch extended. The covenant was. renewed with the Israelites just after their departure from Egypt, and the boundaries of the land were given with more fulness: “I will set thy bounds from the Red Sea even to the sea of the Philistines (the Mediterranean); and from the desert (of Sinai) unto the river” (Euphrates; òãàּäðçø ; Sept. ἕùò ôïῦ ìåãÜëïõ ðïôáìïῦ ÅὐöñÜôïõ ; Exo_23:31).
But this great territory was promised upon certain specific conditions. The people were, on their part, to be faithful to God (Exo_23:22-23). They did not fulfil these conditions, and therefore the whole land was not given to them (see Jos_23:13-16; Jdg_2:20-23). But though the whole land was never occupied by the Israelites, there was a near approach to the possession of it, or the exercise of sovereignty over it, in the days of David, of whom it is recorded: “David smote also Hadadezer, the son of Rehob, king of Zobah, as he went to recover his border at the river Euphrates” (2Sa_8:3). That warlike monarch conquered the kingdoms of Hamath, Zobah, Damascus, Moab, Ammon, Amalek, Philistia, and Edom (2Sa_8:5-14) — the whole country, in fact, from the border of Egypt to the river Euphrates, and from the Arabian desert to the Mediterranean. This was the land given in covenant promise to Abraham; but it was never included under the name Palestine.
2. The land described by Moses in Num_34:1-12 is much more limited in extent than that promised to Abraham. He calls it “the Land of Canaan — the land that shall fall unto you for an inheritance” (Num_34:2). Its boundaries are defined with great precision. On the south the border reached from Kadesh-barnea in the Arabah, on the confines of Edom, across the “wilderness of wandering,” to the torrent of Egypt, doubtless that now known as Wady el-Arish. The word is here ðçì , torrent, and not ðäø , river. This important distinction has been overlooked by Dr. Keith and others (Land of Israel, p. 85 sq.; Bochart, Opera, iii, 764; Shaw, Travels, ii, 45 sq.). The Great Sea was its western border. The northern is thus defined: “And this shall be your north border: from the great sea ye shall point out for you Mount Hor; from Mount Hor ye shall point out your border unto the entrance of Hamath; and the goings forth of the border shall be to Zedad: and the border shall go on to Ziphron, and the goings out of it shall be at Hazar-enan” (Num_34:7-9). The interpretation of this passage has given rise to much controversy. Dr. Keith argues with considerable force and learning that Mount Hor, or, as it is in the Hebrew, Hor ha-Har ( äָäָø äֹø ), is Mount Casius, and that the chasm of the Orontes at Antioch is “the entrance of Hamath” (see Keith's Land of Israel, p. 92-105). Dr. Kitto, on the other hand, following Reland (Paloest. p. 118 sq.), Bochart (Opera, 1, 307), and Cellarius (Geogr. 2, 464 sq,), locates this northern border-line near the parallel of Sidon, making some peak of southern Lebanon Mount Hor, and the lower extremity of the valley of CceleSyria the “entrance of Hamath.” SEE HOR, MOUNT. According to Dr. Porter, however, the “entrance of Hamath” is the entrance from the Great Sea, from the west; and he states that to this day natives sometimes call the opening between the northern end of the Lebanon range and that of Bargylus Bdb Hamah, “The door of Hamath.” Van de Velde appears to make the northern end of Coele-Syria, where that valley opens upon the plain of Hamath, “the entrance of Hamath” (Travels, 2, 470); and Stanley adopts the same view (Sin. and Pal. p. 399). SEE HAMATH.
The east border has some well-known landmarks — Riblah, the Sea of Chinnereth, and the Jordan to the Dead Sea (Num_34:10-12). The line ran down the valley of Coele-Syria and the Jordan, thus excluding the whole kingdom of Damascus, with Bashan, Gilead, and Moab. It would seem, however, that the country east of the Jordan was excluded by Moses, not because he regarded it as beyond the proper boundaries of the land of Israel, but because it had already been apportioned by him to the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh (Gen_32:1-32).
The Israelites were never in actual possession of all this territory, though David extended his conquests beyond it, and Solomon for a time exacted tribute from its various tribes and nations. The southern seaboard, and a large section of the Shephelah, remained in the hands of the warlike Philistines. The Phoenicians held the coast-plain north of Carmel; and the chain of Lebanon, from Zidon northward, continued in possession of the Giblites and other mountain tribes (Jdg_3:1-3). It is worthy of note that the sacred writer, when reckoning up the regions still to be conquered, was guided not by the words of the Abrahamic covenant, but by the description of Moses (Jos_13:2-6). The reason why this whole land was not given to the Israelites is plainly stated: the Lord kept some of the aboriginal inhabitants in it for the purpose of chastising the criminal slothfulness and the thoughtlessness and rebellion of his people (Jdg_3:4; see Masius and Keil, ad loc.). Such, then; is the land described by Moses; but the name Palestine was never given to so extensive a region.
3. The boundaries of the land allotted by Moses and Joshua to the twelve tribes are given in the following passages-those of the land east of the Jordan in Numbers 32 and Jos_13:8-32; on the west side in Joshua 15-19. The south border was identical with that described by Moses (comp. Num_34:3-5; Jos_15:2-4). The west border was also the same; the possessions of the western tribes reaching in every instance to the sea (Jos_15:11; Jos_16:3; Jos_16:8; Jos_17:9-10; Jos_19:29). The north border had Zidon as its landmark on the coast. Thence it was drawn south-east across Lebanon, probably along the line of the ancient Phoenician road by Kulaat esh-Shukif to Ijon and Dan (Jos_19:28; 1Ki_15:20); thence it passed over the southern shoulder of Hermon, and across the plateau of Hauran to the northern end of the mountains of Bashan (Num_32:33; Deu_3:8-14; Jos_12:4-6). The only landmark on the east border is Salcah (Jos_12:5; Jos_13:11; Deu_3:10). From Salcah it appears to have run south-west along the border of the Arabian Midbar to the bank of the river Arnon (Jos_12:1-2). Here it turned westward, and followed the course of that river to the Dead Sea, thus excluding the territory of Moab and Edom. SEE TRIBE.
The country allotted to the tribes was thus considerably smaller than that described by Moses; and it was very much less than that given in covenant promise to Abraham. Even all allotted was never completely conquered and occupied. The Philistines and Phoenicians still possessed their cities along the coast (Jdg_1:19; Jdg_1:31); some of the northern tribes held their mountain fastnesses (Jdg_1:33), and the Geshurites and Maachathites continued in their rocky strongholds in Bashan (Jos_13:13).
4. The land distributed in the prophetic vision of Ezekiel is conterminous on the south, west, and north with that of Moses. Its eastern boundary is different. Its landmarks are Hazar-enan, Hauran, Damascus, Gilead, and “the land of Israel by Jordan” (Gen_47:17-18). The last point is indefinite, but probably it means that section east of the Jordan, in Moab, which was assigned to Reuben. This land, therefore, includes, in addition to that of Moses, the whole kingdom of Damascus, and the possessions of Reuben, Gad, and half Manasseh.
5. Present Limits. — The country to which the name Palestine is now usually given does not exactly correspond with any of these. It is smaller than them all. Its boundaries have never been laid down with geographical precision, but they may be stated approximately as follows: On the south a line drawn from the lower end of the Dead Sea to Beersheba and Gaza; on the west, the Mediterranean; on the north, a line drawn from the mouth of the river Litany to Dan, and thence across the southern foot of Jebel es- Sheik to the plain of Jedun opposite the northern end of the Hauran mountains; on the east, a line running from the northeastern angle through Jerash to Kerak and the Dead Sea. The length of Palestine is thus 130 English miles. Its breadth on the south is 70 miles, and on the north about 40. Its superficial area may be estimated at 7150 square miles. Its southern extremity the end of the Dead Sea, is in lat. N. 31° 5'; and its northern, at the mouth of the Litany, 33° 25'. Its most westerly point, at Gaza, is in long. E. 34° 30'; and its most easterly, at Jerash, 36°. SEE SYRIA.
The eastern shore of the Mediterranean runs in nearly a straight line from Egypt to Asia Minor, and of this line the seaboard of Palestine forms about one third towards, not at, its southern end; Gaza being 50 miles distant from Egypt, while the mouth of the Litany is 250 from Asia Minor. Palestine occupies the whole breadth of the habitable land between the Mediterranean and the Arabian desert. Its boundaries on three sides are therefore natural, and may be said to be impassable — on the west the sea, and on the south and east the desert; not, however, a desert of sand, nor a desert altogether barren, but rather a bleak, dry region, with a thin, flinty soil, yielding some tolerable pasture in spring, though almost bare as a rock in summer and autumn. Nature thus prevented the extension of the Israelitish territory in these directions, and. likewise prevented the close approach of any settled nation; but it left free scope for flocks and herds, and a noble field for the training of an active, hardy race of shepherd warriors, such as David so often led to victory.
On the south-east, Palestine bordered on Edom; but the Dead Sea, the deep valley of the Arabah, and the rugged Wilderness of Judaea, formed natural barriers which prevented all close intercourse. Hostile armies found it difficult to pass them, and a few resolute men could guard the defiles. On the northern border lay the countries of Damascus and Phoenicia, and intercourse with these had a serious effect on the northern tribes. The distinction between Jew and Gentile soon became less sharply defined there than elsewhere. The former lost much of their exclusiveness, and their faith lost proportionably in purity. Idolatry was easily established in the chief places of the northern kingdom, and the borrowed Baalim of Phoenicia became in time the popular deities of the land (1 Kings 18). This fact of itself shows how wise was that providential arrangement which located the people of God in an isolated land, and prevented, by. the barriers of nature, any close intercourse with those irrational systems, and barbarous and often obscene rites, which, under the name of religion, prevailed among the nations of the world.
III. Names. —
1. Palestine. — In the A.V. of the Bible, as seen above, this word occurs only in Joe_3:4 ( âְּìַéìåֹú ôְּìֶùֶׁú ; Sept. Ãáëéëáßá ἀëëïöýëùí , Vulg. terminus Palcesthinoruni): “What have ye to do with me, Tyre, and Zidon, and all the coasts of Palestine?” Here the name is confined to Philistia. In three passages (Exo_15:14; Isa_14:29; Isa_14:31) we have the Latin form Paloestina; but the meaning is the same, and hence the Sept. renders it in one case Öõëéóôéåßì , and in the others ἀëëüöõëïé .
The Hebrew word ôìù probably comes from the Ethiopic root falasa, “to wander,” or “emigrate,” and hence ôìùú will signify “the nation of emigrants” — the Philistines (q.v.) having emigrated from Africa (see Reland, Paloest. p. 73 sq.). The people gave their name to the territory in which they settled on the south-west coast of Palestine. In this sense also Josephus uses the Greek equivalent Ðáëáéóôßíç (Ant. i, 6, 2; ii, 15, 3; 6:1, 1; 13:5, 10). But it would seem that even before his time the Greek name began to be employed in a more extended signification. Herodotus states that all the country from Phoenicia to Egypt is called Palestine (7, 89); and he calls the Jews “Syrians of Palestine” (3, 5, 91). An inscription of Ivalush, king of Assyria (probably the Pul of Scripture), as deciphered by Sir H. Rawlinson, names “Palaztu on the Western Sea,” and distinguishes it from Tyre, Damascus, Samaria, and Edom (Rawlinson, Herod. i, 467). In the same restricted sense it was probably employed — if employed at all — by the ancient Egyptians, in whose records at Karnak the name Pulusatu has been, deciphered in close connection with that of the Shairutana or Sharu, possibly the Sidonians or Syrians (Birch, doubtfully, in Layard, Nineveh, 2, 407, note). The extension of the name doubtless arose from the fact that when the Greeks began to hold commercial intercourse with Phoenicia and south-western Asia, they found the coast from Phoenicia to Egypt in possession of the Philistines; and consequently they applied the name Palcestina loosely to the whole country reaching from the sea to the desert. Josephus uses it in this sense in a few instances (Ant. i, 6, 4; 8, 10, 3; Ap. i, 22); and Philo says, “The country of the Sodomites was a district of the land of Canaan, which the Syrians afterwards called Palestine' (De Abraham. 26; comp. Vita Mosis, 29). The rabbins also gave the name Palestine to all the country occupied by the Jews (Reland, p. 38 sq.). Dion. Cassius states that “anciently the whole country lying between Phoenicia and Egypt was called Palestine. It had also another adopted name, Judaea” (Hist. 37). From this time onward Palestine was the name most usually given to the land of Israel; in some cases it was confined to the country west of the Jordan, but in others it embraced the eastern provinces (see Reland, and authorities quoted by him, p. 39 sq.). By early Christian writers the word was generally, though not uniformly, employed in this sense. Thus Jerome, in one passage: “Terra Judaea, quae nunc appellatur Palsestina” (ad Ezech. 27); but in another, “Philistiim qui nunc Palaestini vosantur” (in Am. i, 6; comp. Isa_14:29). Chrysostom usually calls the Land of Israel Palestine (Reland, p. 40). All ancient writers, therefore, did not use the name in the same sense some applying it to the whole country of the Jews, some restricting it to Philistia (Theodoret, ad Psalms 59; Reland, l.c.). — Consequently, when the name Palestine occurs in classic and early Christian writers, the student of geography will require carefully to examine the context, that he may ascertain whether it is applied to Philistia alone, or to all the land of Israel.
It appears that when our Authorized Version was made, the English name Palestine was considered to be equivalent to Philistia. Thus Milton, with his usual accuracy in such points, mentions Dagon as
“Palestine, in Gath and Ascialon,And Accaron and Gaza’s frontier bounds”
(Par. Lost, i, 464);
and again as
“That twice-battered god of Palestine”
(Hymn on Nat. 199)
where, if any proof be wanted that his meaning is restricted to Philistia, it will be found in the fact that he has previously connected other deities with the other parts of the Holy Land. See also, still more decisively, Samson Ag. 144, 1098. But even without such evidence the passages themselves show how our translators understood the word. Thus in Exo_15:14, “Palestine,” Edom, Moab, and Canaan are mentioned as the nations alarmed at the approach of Israel. In Isa_14:29; Isa_14:31, the prophet warns “Palestine” not to rejoice at the death of king Ahaz, who had subdued it. In Joe_3:4, Phoenicia and “Palestine” are upbraided with cruelties practiced on Judah and Jerusalem (Rennell, Geogr. of Herodot. p. 245 sq.).
Soon after the Christian aera we find the name Palsestina in possession of the country. Ptolemy (A.D. 161) thus applies it (Geogr. v, 16). “The arbitrary divisions of Paiaestina Prima, Secunda, mind Tertia, settled at the end of the 4th or beginning of the 5th century (see the quotations from the Cod. Theodos. in Reland, p. 205), are still observed in the documents of the Eastern Church” (Smith, Dict. of Geogr. 2, 533a). Paltestina Tertia, of which Petra was the capital, was, however, out of the Biblical limits; and the portions of Pernea not comprised in Palalstina Secunda were counted as in Arabia.
2. Canaan ( ëְּðִòִï ; ×áíáÜí ). — This is the oldest, and in the early books of Scripture the most common name of Palestine. It is derived from the son of Ham, by whose family the country was colonized (Gen_9:18; Gen_10:15-19; Josephus, Ant. 1, 6, 2). It is worthy of note, as tending to confirm the accuracy of the early ethnological notices in Genesis, that the ancient Phoenicians called themselves Canaanites (Kenrick's Phoenicia, p. 40; Reland, p. 7). The name Canaan was confined to the district west of the Jordan; the provinces east of the river were always distinguished from it (Num_33:51; Exo_16:35, with Jos_5:12; Jos_22:9-10). Its eastern boundary is thus within that of Palestine; but, on the other hand, it reached on the north to Hamath (Gen_10:18, with 17:8). and probably even farther, for the Arvadite is reckoned among the Canaanites, and the earliest name of Phoenicia was Cna or Cana. SEE PHOENICIA.
Wherever the country promised to the Israelites, or dwelt in by the patriarchs, is mentioned in Scripture, it is called “the land of Canaan” (Exo_6:4; Exo_15:15; Lev_14:34; Deu_32:39; Jos_14:1; Psa_105:11), doubtless in reference to the promise originally made to Abraham (Gen_17:8). SEE CANAAN, LAND OF.
In Amo_2:10 alone it is “the land of the Amorite;” perhaps with a glance at Deu_1:7. A parallel phrase is the “land of the Hittites” (Jos_1:4); a remarkable expression, occurring here only in the Bible, though frequently used in the Egyptian records of Rameses II, in which Cheia or Chita appears to denote the whole country of Lower and Middle Syria (Brugsch, Geogr. Inschrift. 2, 21, etc.).
3. The Land of Promise. — This name originated in the divine promise to Abraham (Gen_13:15). — Its extent and boundaries are given by Moses (Gen_15:18-21; Exo_23:31), and have already been considered. The exact phrase, “Land of Promise,” is not found in the O.T., and only once in the N.T (Heb_11:9, ἡ ãῆ ôῆò ἐðáããåëßáò ), but some analogous expression is often used by the sacred writers; thus in Num_22:11, “The land which I sware unto Abraham” (comp. Deu_34:1-4; Genesis 1, 24; Eze_20:42; Act_7:5). Such appellations were used when the object of the writer was to direct the people's attention to the Abrahamic covenant, either in its certainty or in its fulfilment. It is now frequently employed by writers on Palestine who give special attention to prophecy (for a good account of it, see Reland, p. 18 sq.).
4. The Land of Jehovah. — This name is only found in Hos_9:3 : “They shall not dwell in Jehovah's land.” All the countries of the earth are the Lord's; but it appears, as Reland states (Paloest. p. 16), that in some peculiar way Palestine was especially God's land. Thus an express command was given,” The land shall not be sold forever For the land is mine” (Lev_25:23); and the Psalmist says, “Lord, thou hast been favorable unto thy land” (Psa_85:1); and still more emphatic are the words of Isaiah: “The stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel” (8:8; comp. Joe_1:6; Joe_3:2; Jer_16:18). The object of these and many similar expressions was to show that Jehovah claimed the sole disposal of Palestine. He reserved it for special and holy purposes; and he intended in all coming time to dispose of it, whether miraculously or providentially, for carrying out those purposes, either by the agency of the Jews or of others. It was the only land in which the Lord personally and visibly dwelt; first in the Shekinab glory, and again in the person of Jesus. For this land the Lord always. demanded both a special acknowledgment of lordship and certain stipulated returns to him, as tithes and first-fruits (Reland, p. 16, 17).
5. The Land of Israel ( àֶøֶåֹ éַùְׂøָàֵì ; N.T. ãῆ É᾿óñáήë ). — By this name Palestine was distinguished from all the other countries of the earth. Of course this must not be confounded with the same appellation as applied to the northern kingdom only (2Ch_30:25; Eze_27:17). It began to be used after the establishment of the monarchy. It occurs first in 1Sa_13:19, and is occasionally used in the later books (2Ki_5:2; 2Ki_6:23); but Ezekiel employs it more frequently than all the sacred writers together (though he commonly alters its form slightly, substituting àֲãָîָä for àֶøֶåֹ ), the reason probably being that he compares Palestine with other countries more frequently than any other writer. Matthew, in relating the story of the infant Saviour's return from Egypt, uses the name: “He arose, and took the young child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel” (2:21). The name is found in the apocryphal books (Tob_1:4); in Josephus, who also uses “land of the Hebrews” ( ῾Åâñáßùí ÷ώñá ); and in some of the early Christian fathers (Reland, p. 9). The name is essentially Jewish; it was familiar. to the rabbins, but, in a great measure, unknown to classic writers. It is only applied in the Bible to the country which was actually occupied by the Israelites; and so it was understood by the rabbins, who divided the whole world into two parts, “The land of Israel,” and “the land out of Israel” (Reland, p. 9). In 2Es_14:31, it is called “the land of Sion.”
6. The Land ( äָàָøֶåֹ ; ἡ ãῆ ). — This name is given to Palestine emphatically, by way of distinction, as we call the Word of God the Bible. Thus in Rth_1:1. There was a famine in the land” ( áàøåֹ ); and in Jer_12:11, “The whole land is made desolate” (Jer_50:34); and so also in Luke's Gospel, “When great famine was throughout all the land” (Luk_5:25); and in Mat_27:45, “Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.” This also was a strictly Jewish name (Reland, p. 28 sq.). In Daniel it is called “the glorious land” (Dan_11:41).
7. Judaea. — The use of this name in the Bible and by classic writers requires to be carefully noted. At first, its Hebrew equivalent, àֶøֶåֹ éְäåּãָä , was confined to the possessions of the tribe of Judah (2Ch_9:11). After the captivity of the northern kingdom, the name “Judah” became identified with the Jewish nation; and hence, during the second captivity, éäåã , Judaea, was applied to all Palestine and to all the Israelites. In the same sense it was employed in Josephus, in the N.T., and in classic writers; and it was even made to include the region east of the Jordan (Mat_19:1; Mar_10:1; Josephus, Ant. 9:14,1; 12:4, 11). In the book of Judith it is applied to the portion between the plain of Esdraelon and Samaria (Jdt_11:19), as it is in Luk_23:5; though it is also used in the stricter sense of Judsea proper (Joh_4:3; Joh_7:1), that is, the most southern of the three main divisions west of Jordan. In this narrower sense it is employed throughout 1 Maccabees (see especially 9:50; 10:30, 38; 11:34). It is sometimes (War, i, 1, 1; iii, 3, 5b) difficult to ascertain whether Josephus is using it in its wider or narrower sense. In the narrower sense he certainly does often employ it (Ant. v, 1, 22; War, iii, 3, 4, 5a). Nicolaus of Damascus applied the name to the whole country (Josephus, Ant. i, 7, 2). SEE JUDAEA.
The Roman division of the country hardly coincided with the Biblical one, and it does not appear that the Romans had any distinct name for that which we understand by Palestine. The province of Syria, established by Pompey, of which Scaurus was the first governor (quaestor proprietor) in B.C. 62, seems to have embraced the whole seaboard from the Bay of Issus (Iskanderun) to Egypt, as. far back as it was habitable. that is, up to the desert which forms the background to the whole district. “Judaea” in their phrase appears to have signified so much of this country as intervened between Idumeea on the south and the territories of the numerous free cities on the north and west which were constituted with the establishment of the province — such as Scythopolis, Sebaste, Joppa, Azotus, etc. (Smith, Dict. of Geography, 2, 1077). The district east of the Jordan, lying between it and the desert — at least so much of it as was not covered by the lands of Pella, Gadara, Canatha, Philadelphia, and other free towns — was called Peraea.
8. The Holy Land ( àִãְîִú äִ÷ּãֶֹùׁ ; ἡ ãῆ ἡ ἃãéá ; Terra Sancta). Next to Palestine, this is now the most familiar name of the country. Zechariah is the first who mentions it, “The Lord shall inherit Judah, his portion of the Holy Land” (Zec_2:12). The rabbins constantly use it, and they have detailed, with great minuteness, the constituents of its sanctity. They did not regard it as all equally holy. Judaea ranked first; after it the northern kingdom; and last of all the territory beyond Jordan (Reland, p. 26 sq.). The very dust and stones and air of the land are still considered holy by the poor Jews (Reland, p. 25). The name Ta-netr (i.e. Holy Land), which is found in the inscriptions of Rameses II and Thothmes III, is believed by M. Brugsch to refer to Palestine (ut sup. p. 17). But this is contested by M. de Rouge (Revue Archeologique, Sept. 1861, p. 216). The Phoenicians appear to have applied the title Holy Land to their own country, and possibly also to Palestine, at a very early date (Brugsch, p. 17). If this can be substantiated, it opens a new view to the Biblical student, inasmuch as it would seem to imply that the country had a reputation for sanctity before its connection with the Hebrews. The early Christian writers call it Terra Sancta (Justin Martyr, Triphon; Tertullian, De Resurrectione; comp. Reland, p. 23). During the Middle Ages, and especially in the time of the Crusades, this name became so common as almost to supersede all others. In the present day, it is adopted, along with Palestine, as a geographical term. It was originally, and is now, applied only to the land allotted to the twelve tribes; and some Christian writers appear to confine it to the section west of the Jordan. More usually, however, it is employed in the same sense as Palestine (Reland, p. 21-28). In the long list of Travels and Treatises given by Ritter (Erdkunde, Jordan, p. 31-55), Robinson (B. R. ii, 534-555), and Bonar (Land of Promise, p. 517-535), it predominates far beyond any other appellation. Quaresimus, in his Elucidatio Terrce Sanctoe (i, 9, 10), after enumerating the various names above mentioned, concludes by adducing seven reasons why that which he has embodied in the title of his own work, “though of later date than the rest, yet in excellency and dignity surpasses them all;” closing with the words of pope Urban II addressed to the Council of Clermont: “Quam terram merito Sanctam diximus, in quae non est etiam passus pedis quem non illustraverit et sanctificaverit vel corpus vel umbra Salvatoris, vel gloriosa praesentia Sanctze Dei genitricis, vel amplectendus Apostolorum commeatus, vel martyrum ebibendus sanguis effusus.”
9. The modern name of the country is es-Shemn (Geogr. Works of Sadik Isfahani, in Ibn Haukal's Oriental Geogr. p. 7), corresponding to the ancient Aram, and to our Syria. But this of course includes much more than what we usually call Palestine. The Jews to this day call Palestine by the Chaldee name of Areo-Kedusha, or “Holy Land,” though Jewish maps may be found with “Land of Canaan,” etc., upon them.
IV. Historical Allusions. —
1. Early References. — The earliest notice of Palestine is a latent one, and is contained in these memorable words of Moses: ‘In the Most High's portioning of the nations, In his dispersion of the sons of Adam, He set the bounds of the peoples According to the number of the sons of Israel. For the portion of Jehovah is his people, Jacob the lot of his inheritance” (Deu_32:8-9).
Thus the divine eye rested on Canaan, and it was set apart for Israel from the first; so that all other intermediate possessors were illegitimate tenants of a land assigned by its true owner to another. The ecclesiastics of the third century, however, dreamed a more ambitious dream. They linked Paradise and Palestine together, and record that Adam, shortly after his expulsion, migrated westward (Cain eastward), and deposited his bones, or at least his skull, in one of the hills on which Melchizedek afterwards built his city; from which event the place was called Golgotha, “the place of a skull.” Whatever the fact may be, the thought is not conceived amiss — that the first Adam should dwell in the same land as the second, and lay his body in the same grave. Hebron is made to claim this honor by some; but all these fabulists agree that Adam died in Palestine; and they have determined that .the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is the centre of the earth-- ὀìöáëὸò ãῆò , umbilicus terre; just as the Greeks decided regarding Delphi and Apollo's shrine-” Apollo, qui umbilicum certum terrarum obtines” (see Jerome, De Loc. Hebr.; Pererius Valentinus, On Genesis, 1, 294, 416, where the references to the fathers are given). This legend as to Adam is not altogether of Christian origin. The Jews have a tradition that he died in Palestine, affirming that the four, from whom Kirjath-Arba took its name, were not only four patriarchs — Adam, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob — but four matrons — Eve, Sarah, Rebekah, Leah. The better known and more probable tradition of the Jews is that Melchizedek, king of Salem, was Shem, son of Noah (Jerome, Comm. on Isaiah 41).
2. Pagan Fables. — To Joppa, now Jaffa, there is attached the wild legend of Andromeda, the maiden exposed by her father Cepheus to the sea- monster, and rescued by Perseus. The story of the surf, the rock, the chain, the broken links still visible, has been told not only by Greek poets, bit by Christian annalists or travellers, from Jerome down to Felix Fabri (Pliny, Ovid, Jerome, Fabri's Evagatorium). This Cepheus, according to Pliny, was king of Palestine, though an Ethiopian; according to Ovid, he was son of Phoenix, who gave name to Phoenician Palestine; while according to Tacitus he was king of the Jews — “AEthiopium prolem (he calls them) quos rege Cepheo, metus atque odium mutare sedes pepulit” (Tacit. Hist. v, 2). Pagan memories and myths crowd themselves much more numerously' into the rocks and nooks of the “Holy Land” than we generally know; names, exploits, temples, haunts of gods and goddesses are associated with very many localities along the line of the Phoenician and Philistian shore, from the Gulf of Issus down to the Egyptian seaboard. Palestine was not a blank when Israel entered it. It swarmed with gods; and Joshua's task was not merely to assail hostile forts or armies, but to raze temples whose every stone was obscenity, whose every altar blasphemy. — The “Land of Promise” (like the human spirit) was the haunt of every unclean and hateful idol, before it was the dwelling of the living God. First unclean; then clean; and now unclean again; this is the history of the land. Herodotus speaks of a temple of the celestial Venus at Ascalon, and notes it as the most ancient of all her shrines (Herod. 1, 105; see Rawlinson's Herod. 1, 247); Athenaeus mentions the drowning of Atergatis, or Derceto, the Syrian Venus, in a lake near Ascalon, by Mopsus, a Lydian (Rawlinson's Herod. 1, 364); Lucian refers to this later as the place where sacred fishes were reared, in honor of the sea-born goddess. At the other extremity of the land, or Lebanon, this same Venus was worshipped with vile rites. Byblus, Adonis, Heliopolis were associated with like deities and like worship (see Kenrick, Phoenicia, p. 306, 312). To this region also belong the lustful myths of the Syrian Astarte and, the Greek Europa; the fable of Daedalus (also called Hephaistos or Vulcan), the father of the Phoenician Cabiri, and of Hercules, the tutelary god of Tyre and discoverer of the Tyrian purple, to whom Hiram, the friend of Solomon, built a temple, if Menander, quoted by Josephus, wrote the truth (Joseph Ant. 8:5. 3). Along the sea-coast we find, in disorderly profusion, the legends of the West, the rudiments of the gods of Greece; while in the interior we find the legends of the East, the worn-out relic of the gods of Babylon and Assyria Widely over Palestine had these fables settled down, like so many unclean birds, to preoccupy each crag and cliff, and prevent the entrance of true faith and holy worship. It was as if the idols of Shinar, in their migration to Europe, had been permitted to rest for a season in Judaea before finally settling down on the hills and in the groves of Greece.
Though Palestine was, in the divine purpose, destined for Israel by God, yet Israel was not its first possessor. Other nations, seven in number (if not more), meted it out between them — children of Ham, not of Shem; nay, Jerusalem itself owed its origin to them, “Thy father was an Amorite, thy mother a Hittite” (Eze_16:3). These Canaanites were allowed to occupy it for a season, that they might prepare it for its proper owners. Wells were dug, houses were built, towns were reared, terraces were made, vineyards and olive-yards were planted, the whole land was brought under cultivation, so that. when Israel came he found all things made ready for his occupancy (Deu_6:11; Porter, Five Years in Damascus; Giant Cities of Bashan). The fact is a singular one, unique in the history of nations; and it explains how a people, amounting to between two and three millions, all at once sat down in comfort and plenty in a new territory. They entered the desert with the spoil of Egypt on their hands; they took possession of Canaan with the riches and abundance of seven nations at their disposal.
3. Classical References. — The Egyptian hieroglyphics contain references to the nations of Canaan. The splendor of Karnak under Thotlimies is indebted as much to the Phoenician Arvad as to the southern Cush (Osburnl, Egypt, 2, 284). The paintings of Abu-Simbul tell us how Rameses
“
Ye dividers of Arvad He casts you down,
He hews you in pieces!”
4. The notices of Palestine in Jewish, Christian, Mohammedan, and modern writings are of course innumerable.
IV. Physical Geography. — The superficial conformation of Palestine is simple, peculiar, and in some respects unique, and the leading features which have in all ages characterized it grow out of this permanent configuration.
1. Main Natural Sections. — The entire country divides itself into four longitudinal belts, each reaching from north to south; and these belts are as distinct in their political history as in their physical structure. In fact, a careful study of the physical geography of Palestine — its plains, mountains, valleys, and great natural divisions — affords the best key to its history.
The geographer who travels through the country, or the student who carefully notes one of the best constructed maps, such as Van de Velde's, must observe the strip of plain extending along .the seaboard from the mouth of the Litany to Gaza. Narrow on the north, and interrupted by three bold promontories, it expands gradually towards the south into a broad champaign. Its low elevation and sandy soil make the coast-line tame and almost straight. Were it not for the headland of Carmel, the shore would be a straightline, without bay or promontory.
From the end of Lebanon on the north a mountain range runs through the centre of the country. Its course is not parallel to the coast; the latter tends from N.N.E. to S.S.W.; whereas the mountains run more nearly, though not quite, south, thus leaving a broader margin of plain at the southern extremity. The ridge is intersected near its centre by a cross-belt of plain, connecting the Jordan valley with the coast. This plain is Esdraelon. The sections of the ridge to the north and south of it have very different features. That on the north is picturesque, and in some places grand. The outlines are varied; lofty peaks spring up at intervals, and are separated by winding wooded glens. On the south the general aspect of the ridge is dull and uniform, presenting the appearance of a huge gray wall, as seen from the coast. But in travelling down the road which runs along the broad back of the ridge to Jerusalem and Hebron the eye sees an endless succession of rounded hill-tops, thrown confusedly together, each bare and rocky as its neighbor. South of Hebron these sink into low swelling hills, similar in form, but smaller; and these again gradually melt into the desert plain of et- Tih.
But by far the most remarkable feature of Palestine is the Jordan valley, which runs through the land from north to south, straight as an arrow. There is nothing like it in the world. It is a rent or chasm in the earth's crust, being everywhere below the level of the ocean. This deep valley produces a marked effect on the ridges which border it. Their sides towards the valley are far more abrupt than elsewhere in Palestine; the ravines ‘that descend from them are deeper and wilder; and towards the south, along the shores of the Dead Sea, there is a look of rugged grandeur and desolation such as is seldom met with.: The valley is of nearly uniform breadth, about ten miles from brow to brow, expanding slightly at Tiberias and the Dead Sea, as if greater depth had made some enlargement of the lateral boundaries necessary. This valley forms a very striking feature on every map of Palestine; and it becomes the more striking the more accurately the physical geography of the land is delineated.
The remaining part of Palestine east of the Jordan forms a tract of table- land, to which the central valley gives some remarkable features. Every traveller in Palestine is familiar with the mountain-range — steep, straight, and of nearly uniform elevation — which, from every point in Judaea, Samaria, and Galilee, bounds the view eastward. This, in reality, is not a mountain range; it is the side or bank of the eastern plateau, having itself an elevation of from 2000 to 3000 feet, to which the depression of the Jordan adds another thousand. At only a few places, on the extreme north; and near the centre, do the tops of this ridge rise above the general level of the plateau. The ravines that descend from it are of great depth. At the north- east angle of Palestine is an isolated mountain-ridge, dividing the fertile table-land of Bashan from the arid wastes of Arabia.
Such is an outline of the general features of Palestine. It prepares the way for a detailed examination of the several divisions, and also for a more satisfactory review of the historical geography of the country. Each great physical feature has exercised from the earliest periods, as will be seen, a most important influence upon the people. The chasm of the Jordan effectually divided the east from the west; and the cross-belt of Esdraelon divided almost as effectually the north from the south. The maritime plain gave birth to two nations-one of merchants, another of warriors. It also became, in later ages, the highway between Egypt and Assyria. But the steep sides and rugged passes of the mountains presented such difficulties that few attempted to invade them. The mountain-ridge of Judah and Samaria was thus isolated; it was defended by a double rampart. an outer and an inner. It was the heart and stronghold of the Jewish nation; it was the sanctuary of the Jewish faith; and it was the stage on which most of the events of the national history were enacted.
(1.) The Maritime Plain. — From the bank of the Litany on the north, for a distance of some twenty miles, the plain is a mere strip, nowhere more than two miles wide, and generally much less. The surface is undulating, and intersected by ridges of whitish limestone, which shoot out from Lebanon, and break off in cliffs on the shore. Two of them — Rasei Abiad, “The White Cape,” and Ras en-NakAra, together constituting the ancient “Scala Tyriorum,” “Ladder of Tyre” — rise to a height of from 200 to 300 feet, and drop into the deep sea splendid cliffs of naked rock. Though the plain is here broken, and is now dreary and desolate, its soil, between the rocks, is deep and of wonderful fertility. It is abundantly watered also by copious fountains, and by streams from Lebanon. At the widest and best part of it, on a low promontory and an adjoining island, stood Tyre, a double city.
South of the Ladder of Tyre the features of the plain and the coast undergo a total change. This promontory, in fact, is the real commencement of the maritime plain, and the natural boundary of Palestine and Phoenicia (q.v.). The white cliffs and bold headlands now disappear; the shore is low and Sandy; the plainflat, rich, and loamy, and only a few feet above the sea- level. It spreads out in far reaches of cornfields and pasture-lands several miles inland, the mountains m