Biblical Geography and History

by Charles Foster Kent

The Approach to the Jordan. About the middle of the twelfth century B.C. the Hebrew tribes from Egypt crossed the Jordan into Canaan. They probably approached the river by the main highway which to-day skirts the northern side of Mount Nebo,^[(72)] crossing the Wady Heshban, and entering the Jordan Valley where the Wady Kefrein broadens into the meadow on which still stands a group of acacias, the Valley of Shittim (Acacias), of the Hebrew narratives. After the late spring and summer freshets the lower Jordan may be forded at two points. One is at the shallow place where the Wady Kelt pours its waters and mud into the Jordan. The other is six or seven miles farther north, just below the point where the Wady Nimrin comes down from the highlands of Gilead. Probably the Hebrews crossed by this northern ford.

Crossing the Jordan. The older biblical account of the crossing states that it took place in the time of harvest, when the Jordan was overflowing its banks. The statement which follows is unintelligible except as it is explained by the unique characteristics of this strange river: "Its waters rose up in a heap, a great way off at Adam, the city that is beside Zarethan, and those that went down toward the Sea of the Arabah, the Salt Sea, were wholly cut off" (Josh. 3:16b). Like the Missouri River in America, the Jordan frequently changes its course. At certain points higher up the river, especially where the Samaritan hills come down close to its shores and the Jabbok pours in its waters from the east, the river sometimes undermines the clay banks, with the result that it is temporarily dammed up, leaving the bed below comparatively dry. The name of the town Adam, where its waters "rose up in a heap," means red earth. It is probably represented by the Tell ed-Damieh which stands near the famous Damieh ford, just below the point where the Jabbok enters the Jordan. A reliable Moslem historian records that in the year 1257 A.D. the Sultan Bibers found it necessary to send workmen to repair the foundation of the bridge (Jisr Damieh) at this point, in order to save the retreating Moslem army. The task seemed impossible because of the spring floods, which were then on; but to their amazement, when they arrived at the bridge the men found the river-bed empty. By working rapidly they were able to complete the repairs before the waters again rushed down. Naturally they regarded this remarkable phenomenon as a special divine interposition, although the historian does not fail to state that the immediate cause was a huge landslide a little farther up the river. This later analogy certainly throws much light upon the great event, which like the exodus, made a profound impression upon the faith of the Hebrews.

Strategic Importance of Jericho. Six miles across the white terraces that rise from the bed of the Jordan close to the foot-hills of the western plateau, which here projects far out into the valley, lay the ancient Canaanite town of Jericho.^[(72)] It stood on an eminence a few feet above the level of the plain. The old city is to-day but a deserted egg-shaped mound about one thousand one hundred feet long and five hundred wide, with three smaller mounds on the top. The total area of the ruin is about twelve acres. The average height of the mound is about forty feet above the plain. Immediately below it to the east is the 'Ain es-Sultan, known in Hebrew times as the fountain of Elisha. To the south the Valley of Achor, through which runs the perennial stream of the Kelt, comes down from the heights of southern Samaria. Immediately back of the ancient city ran the road over the heights past Michmash and Ai to join the central northern highway through Judea and Samaria. Jericho, therefore, not only commanded the two southern fords of the Jordan, but was also the key to the highways, which led to northern and southern Israel. Before it stretched broad, rich fields, which could be easily irrigated by the streams which came down from the western hills.

Results of Recent Excavations. Recent excavations have disclosed the extent and strength of this old Canaanite city. Long stretches of the ancient wall^[(73)] have been laid bare, both in the northern and southern ends of the mound. This wall is remarkably well-preserved and of excellent workmanship.^[(74)] On the native rock was first placed a filling of loam and rock and on this was built a wall of rubble, sixteen feet high and six to eight feet thick, bulging outward. The spaces between the stones, which were very large at the bottom, were carefully filled with smaller stones. On top of this foundation wall was a supplemental wall of burnt brick, six or seven feet in thickness, averaging even now in its ruined condition about eight feet in height. As a result, the city was practically impregnable. At the northern end of the mound was a citadel, made of unburnt bricks, three stories high, with a stone staircase leading to the top. It takes little imagination to picture the imposing character of this old Canaanite city, small in area, but guarded by walls from twenty-five to thirty-five feet in height and of a thickness that surpassed those of many a mediæval fortress.

TERRITORIAL DIVISION OF CANAAN AFTER THE FINAL SETTLEMENT OF THE HEBREW TRIBES.
L.L. Poates Engr'g Co., N.Y.

Capture of Jericho. These excavations both confirm and supplement the biblical account of the conquest of Jericho. The walls are better preserved than those of any other Canaanite city thus far uncovered, indicating, as the oldest Hebrew narrative implies, that the city was captured by stratagem rather than by siege, or as the later tradition suggests as the result of a miracle. The story of the spies in the first chapter of Joshua shows that the Hebrews had friends within the city itself. The probabilities are that, while they were marching around the Canaanite stronghold and thus distracting the attention of its defenders, at a preconcerted signal the gates were suddenly opened and the Hebrews rushed in and captured the city. The character of the ruins suggest that the old Canaanite city was abandoned for several centuries and that the top of the mound was cultivated, thus confirming the statement of the biblical historian that the city was entirely destroyed. Later a small Israelite town, dating from about 700 B.C., was built on the southeastern side of the mound. This may represent the rebuilding of the city in the days of Ahab, as recorded in I Kings 16:34.

Evidence That the Hebrews Were Still Nomads. This complete destruction of Jericho after its capture by the Hebrews is significant. The city was the natural key to the west-Jordan country and therefore its chief defence against invaders from the east. Their abandonment of this outpost indicates that the Hebrews were still nomads, simply intent upon seizing the upland valleys, where they could pasture their flocks, rather than agriculturists, ready to settle down on the plains and able to perfect the conquest of the land.

Roads Leading Westward from Jericho. From Jericho three main roads led up to the central plateau of Palestine. The one followed a ridge directly west from Jericho,^[(75)] running at first a little north of the deep, narrow, rocky channel of the Wady Kelt.^[(25)] The second road led up over the steep, barren, waterless wilderness of Judea, through difficult passes to Jerusalem. It offered many obstacles and no attractions to the invaders. A third road turned to the southwest, leaving the Jordan valley opposite the northern end of the Dead Sea, crossing the deep gorge of the Kidron in the vicinity of the present Greek convent of Mar Saba. Thence it ran directly on through Bethlehem to join the great central highway southward to Hebron.

Conquests in the South. This rocky trail may well have been the route followed by the tribes of Judah and Simeon, when, according to the ancient narrative in the first chapter of Judges, they went up to the conquest of Canaan. Apparently they did not attempt to capture the stronghold of Jerusalem, which remained in the hands of the Jebusites until the days of David. The town of Bezek, which they first conquered, has not yet been identified. It would naturally be looked for at Bethlehem or at the stronghold of Bethzur farther south. The text is clearly corrupt and possibly the original reading contains the name of one or the other of these southern cities. The most important acquisition of the Judahites was the city of Hebron in the south. This ancient town lay in a shallow valley and was protected by no natural defences.^[(76)] Allying themselves with certain Arab tribes, they extended their conquests far out into the borders of the South Country. The situation of Debir is still in doubt. It is usually identified with Dhaheriyeh, southwest of Hebron, where the hills of Judah descend to the wild South Country. In its vicinity are certain springs, which correspond to those assigned to one of the clans of the Calebites. To the southeast, with the aid of the Kenites, the Judahites succeeded in conquering the border fortress of Arad, seventeen miles southeast of Hebron. It stood at the head of the Wady Seyal, which runs up in the direction of the Dead Sea past the later fortress of Masada. Here dwelt the semi-nomadic Kenites. The Simeonites, with the aid of the Judahites, also captured the city of Hormah, far out in the South Country, and in this wild region, in closer touch with the tribes of the desert than with the Hebrew tribes of the north, they lived their free, nomadic life.